A couple of weeks ago, I was watching Rush Limbaugh on the Haney Project. Limbaugh said that he "hates exercising for the sake of it."
And it shows - I'd say he's about 50 or 60 pounds overweight, all gathered in at his belly, where it normally goes on men.
But for all his overweight, he still has no problem making fat jokes about women. (He called one of his shots a little "Oprah" - a little fat. Why not call it a little "Rush" - same difference.) But of course, guys don't see anything hypocritical in them being a hundred pounds overweight, and yet criticizing women for the way they look. To the average guy (there are exceptions, but we're talking average) it doesn't matter what he looks like, it only matters what women look like, because they of course were put on earth to cater to men. (And too many women buy into this mindset, and however fat there husbands or boyfriends are, take to heart the man's criticisms of their bulging ankles or tubby tummy or whatever.)
My own view of exercise for the sake of it - exercise is fun. It feels good, it gives you a sense of accomplishment - and finally, it means you're fit.
When I was 13 or so, I read a book called Tarzan and the Lost Safari. This was around 1975. A small tourist plane crashes in the jungles of Africa, and these pampered American and British tourists are faced with the prospect of walking miles and miles and miles to reach civilization. And one of the female characters says, "This will be easy. I walk a mile every day." Suffice it to say after the first day of trying to walk ten miles and collapsing after the second mile - they are in a jungle with no paths, after all - she's in tears and realizes she's in a heckuva lot of trouble.
It's at this point that I vowed that if I were ever in a plane crash in the wilds of Africa, I'd be able to walk more than 10 miles in a single day, and I immediately set out to do so. Of course I very shortly learned that I found walking very boring - it takes so long to get anywhere - so I took up biking instead.
Same difference - it took me a while to work up to biking 20 miles a day, but I did so.
So at this point in my life, while I'm not likely to have to try to walk out of an African jungle, you never know what might turn up. You might be trying to park in a mall during Christmas time or during a sale and the nearest spot is a mile away. Can you walk that mile, or are you going to waste time and gas driving around until finally someone close by leaves their spot and allows you to drive in? IT's so much easier just to get out and walk that distance!
I live in Cheyenne and in this area there are snowstorms that can trap your car on a road. Of course the sensible thing is to stay with your car, but let's say you decide to get out and try to walk to town or whatever. Through drifts three feet deep! You'll soon wish you'd been biking or walking 20 miles a day.
Im today's technological world, with cell phones and such like, the average person probably won't ever have to walk more than 5 minutes if they don't feel like it. And yeah, that contributes to the USA's "obesity problem" - if you want to call it that. We simply don't need to be as physically active as we once were.
Only people who enjoy being physically active get out there and do it....and not enough people seem to enjoy it.
Because they've never tried it.
Take myself. I bike 20 miles a day (except when its raining or in the winter time obviusly.) I keep a daily journal and record my progress - have I biked up such-and-such-a-hill without having to huff and puff, or even to stop and walk all the way up it. Have I shaved 5 to 10 minutes off the time it normally takes me to bike 20 miles? If so, that's an accomplishment,and I feel good about it, and about myself. The fitness aspect is almost secondary - it's the feeling of accomplishment and achieving a goal that I like best of all.
So why not go out and rent a pair of cross country skis and give it a try? Or snowshoes. (And no, you'd never catch me on those things, but we're all different!) Downhill skiing - which I have done and like - as long as I'm on a bunny hill or as near as makes no difference - is also fun, and can help strengthen your legs.
If you hate cold weather as much as I, scope out a health club or YMCA. (Don't pay an arm and a leg for your membership, or enter into long-term contracts, though.) You can walk around a track, listening to music, or bike while watching TV, and they'll have weight machines and perhaps even free weights. There's a health club chain called Curves, designed specifically for women...check that out if you're too initimidated by the combination of your present weight/prying men's eyes at your Y - although be aware that probably no one will even notice you - they are all there to get fit themselves!
And come summer, get on that bike and go biking!
Monday, January 31, 2011
Friday, January 28, 2011
What to Do If Your Family Is Sabotaging your Weight Loss Efforts
This is a sensitive area. There's thousands of anorexic women who believe their families are "sabotaging" their weight loss efforts, when all they're really trying to do is keep the woman alive.
But there are also lots of perfectly mentally healthy women - and guys - who want to lose a few pounds, and need to lose a few pounds, but are sabotaged by their families.
Studies have shown that overweight parents typically have overweight kids. (Now, I'm not really a fan of "studies". THey find 100 people out of a million - hardly a decent sample size.) But in a way this is understandable.
In the first place, these kinds of parents are usually very large boned and large framed, and eat accordingly, and the kids are also large framed.
Or you've got parents who grew up poor and always hungry, and now that they've got money, they want to eat a lof of food, and expect their kids to eat a lot of food too.
Whatever the reason, how can you get your parents, or family - whoever is sabotaging your efforts - help you to lose weight - and maintain your new weight once you've achieved it, which is more difficult to do!
Like losing weight itself, you've got to do it gradually. If you are a teenageer and your mom insists on dumping more food on your plate than you want...or cooking foods that are way too greasy or full of calories... explain that you're changing your eating habits and need her help. Appeal to her as a mom - or to your dad, if you're a teen living with a single dad.
Do you find it impossible to resist fresh baked cookies...and does your mom/dad insist on making fresh-baked cookies on a regular basis?
Well, then its time to exercise your will power muscles.
They can get stronger as time goes on!
But there are also lots of perfectly mentally healthy women - and guys - who want to lose a few pounds, and need to lose a few pounds, but are sabotaged by their families.
Studies have shown that overweight parents typically have overweight kids. (Now, I'm not really a fan of "studies". THey find 100 people out of a million - hardly a decent sample size.) But in a way this is understandable.
In the first place, these kinds of parents are usually very large boned and large framed, and eat accordingly, and the kids are also large framed.
Or you've got parents who grew up poor and always hungry, and now that they've got money, they want to eat a lof of food, and expect their kids to eat a lot of food too.
Whatever the reason, how can you get your parents, or family - whoever is sabotaging your efforts - help you to lose weight - and maintain your new weight once you've achieved it, which is more difficult to do!
Like losing weight itself, you've got to do it gradually. If you are a teenageer and your mom insists on dumping more food on your plate than you want...or cooking foods that are way too greasy or full of calories... explain that you're changing your eating habits and need her help. Appeal to her as a mom - or to your dad, if you're a teen living with a single dad.
Do you find it impossible to resist fresh baked cookies...and does your mom/dad insist on making fresh-baked cookies on a regular basis?
Well, then its time to exercise your will power muscles.
They can get stronger as time goes on!
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Keep Your Home at 50 Degrees and Lose Weight
Do you ever wonder why problems that have plagued the world for centuries continue to plague the world? I think it's because we give millions of dollars to researchers to research totally useless projects, instad of spending that money on things that could actually help people.
When I say we, I mean the taxpayer, of whatever country they live in.
Take the taxpayers of Britain, for example, whose taxes probably went to fund the research of a certain professor at the University of London who concluded that "indoor heating contributes to obesity."
Access to home indoor heating may be contributing to the obesity problem in the United States, the United Kingdom and other developed countries, according to a new study.
This is just flat-out stupid.
What causes obesity? Eating too much and exercising too little. It's that simple.
Why do people eat too much? Well, because most people live in civilized countries where food is easily accessible, so there's a lot of it in the house.
I suppose it is true that since we live in warm houses, and have TVs to watch, and books to read, we dont' spend all our time hunting for food or playing gaes to amuse ourselves....so we eat.
Then there's a little thing called metabolism. Look around you at people - young people, typically men - who gorge themselves and never gain an ounce. That's because they have fast metabolisms, as opposed to slow metabolisms.
What does indoor heating have to do with it, in the sense of, what good is this study? Are they going to recommend that everyone's furnaces be turned off in winter, and that air conditioning go full blast in summer? Well, those who want us to cut down on our energy use will certainly love the first suggestion, but they'll be very angry over the second.
It just boggles my mind that someone, or a group of people, would actually think this is worth studying. Some things are just common sense and self-evident. Yes, if you live in a warm house and can buy your food at a supermarket, you have easier access to food, and if you eat too much you'll gain weight. Big surprise.
The question is..should those people in third world countries who are desperately trying to get to this level of technology, so that they don't have to spend every waking moment of their lives watching themselves starve to death because they don't have enough food, or safe drinking water - should they be allowed to have any technology at all? Obviously not - it leads to obesity. Let 'em continue to live as they have been doing. Might be a miserable way to live, but at least they won't be fat!
When I say we, I mean the taxpayer, of whatever country they live in.
Take the taxpayers of Britain, for example, whose taxes probably went to fund the research of a certain professor at the University of London who concluded that "indoor heating contributes to obesity."
Access to home indoor heating may be contributing to the obesity problem in the United States, the United Kingdom and other developed countries, according to a new study.
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7022184255?Indoor%20heating%20may%20contribute%20to%20obesity#The University College London researchers said in a statement that reduced exposure to cold may impact the body’s ability to maintain a healthy weight.
They said indoor heating minimizes the need for energy expenditure to stay warm and reduces the body’s capacity to produce heat.
As more people in the developed world have indoor heating, the population is spending more time exposed to milder temperatures. This could also lead to the loss of the type of fat that burns energy and produces heat – known as adipose, or brown fat.
This could also be making us heavier, the researchers said.
“Increased time spent indoors, widespread access to central heating and air conditioning, and increased expectations of thermal comfort all contribute to restricting the range of temperatures we experience in daily life and reduce the time our bodies spend under mild thermal stress – meaning we burn less energy,” lead researcher Dr. Fiona Johnson said in a statement.
A report on the study is published in the journal Obesity Reviews.
This is just flat-out stupid.
What causes obesity? Eating too much and exercising too little. It's that simple.
Why do people eat too much? Well, because most people live in civilized countries where food is easily accessible, so there's a lot of it in the house.
I suppose it is true that since we live in warm houses, and have TVs to watch, and books to read, we dont' spend all our time hunting for food or playing gaes to amuse ourselves....so we eat.
Then there's a little thing called metabolism. Look around you at people - young people, typically men - who gorge themselves and never gain an ounce. That's because they have fast metabolisms, as opposed to slow metabolisms.
What does indoor heating have to do with it, in the sense of, what good is this study? Are they going to recommend that everyone's furnaces be turned off in winter, and that air conditioning go full blast in summer? Well, those who want us to cut down on our energy use will certainly love the first suggestion, but they'll be very angry over the second.
It just boggles my mind that someone, or a group of people, would actually think this is worth studying. Some things are just common sense and self-evident. Yes, if you live in a warm house and can buy your food at a supermarket, you have easier access to food, and if you eat too much you'll gain weight. Big surprise.
The question is..should those people in third world countries who are desperately trying to get to this level of technology, so that they don't have to spend every waking moment of their lives watching themselves starve to death because they don't have enough food, or safe drinking water - should they be allowed to have any technology at all? Obviously not - it leads to obesity. Let 'em continue to live as they have been doing. Might be a miserable way to live, but at least they won't be fat!
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Weight Training Wednesday
It's Wednesday, so today you'll do a few weight training exercises. You don't need to spend a lot of time doing this - typically you should be done in a half hour.
My regime (alternating arm and leg exercises to give the muscles a chance to rest)
Dumbbell curls
Leg extensions
Dumbbell side raises
Leg curls
Overarm French curls (really firms the triceps! No widow's wags (underarm flab) for me!)
Leg pulls up to chest
After you've completed one set, go back and repeat again. You do ten repetitions of each exercise (or move up to 15 if so inclinded) and when you repeat the set, do as many of each as you can, up to 10.
Then have a glass of water, and enjoy the feeling of having put your muscles through a workout.
My regime (alternating arm and leg exercises to give the muscles a chance to rest)
Dumbbell curls
Leg extensions
Dumbbell side raises
Leg curls
Overarm French curls (really firms the triceps! No widow's wags (underarm flab) for me!)
Leg pulls up to chest
After you've completed one set, go back and repeat again. You do ten repetitions of each exercise (or move up to 15 if so inclinded) and when you repeat the set, do as many of each as you can, up to 10.
Then have a glass of water, and enjoy the feeling of having put your muscles through a workout.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Government/Coporate America to the Rescue
A rant
I am usually a week behind on newspaper news - they pile up over the week and I go through them on Sundays - so it wasn't until last night that I read the news that "Walmart Wants to Slim us Down."
"Wal-mart said Tuesday it will re-formulate thousands of store-brand products to reduce sodium and sugar and push its suppliers to do the same."
And you know what that means. "Either take out all your sodium and sugar from this product, or we wont' carry you on your shelves. THere's lots of fish in the sea and we dont' need you."
So companies will be forced to bow down to corporate America - which is being forced to bow down to the government.
And I find that really, really frightening.
Of course, I'm torn. There is too much sodium and sugar in kids drinks. But if companies want that, it's their perogative - it's up to the consumer to not buy their product. And if the consumer doesn't buy their product, then they can make the decision to reduce the sugar, sodium, etc. To be forced to change their recipes because of a dictat from the government (and you know Walmart is only doing this in hopes of getting government concessions on the whole union issue) is just... outrageous.
State governments - the nanny states - are also getting involved. In New York resteraunt chefs are being banned from putting salt in food, and I believe that stricture is in place in all of California as well. Again, the states don't have that right. If a chef wants to put salt on the food he or she cooks, that's his or her damn business. If a restaurant customer doesn't want any salt, let them put in a special request. Stop harming the many for the sake of a few.
And, its Monday
A new day at work. Remember its also weight training day. If you've been skipping your weight training, today's the day to get started back with it. If you've been weight training on a regular basis, probably time to add a couple extra repetitions to each of your exercises.
I am usually a week behind on newspaper news - they pile up over the week and I go through them on Sundays - so it wasn't until last night that I read the news that "Walmart Wants to Slim us Down."
"Wal-mart said Tuesday it will re-formulate thousands of store-brand products to reduce sodium and sugar and push its suppliers to do the same."
And you know what that means. "Either take out all your sodium and sugar from this product, or we wont' carry you on your shelves. THere's lots of fish in the sea and we dont' need you."
So companies will be forced to bow down to corporate America - which is being forced to bow down to the government.
And I find that really, really frightening.
Of course, I'm torn. There is too much sodium and sugar in kids drinks. But if companies want that, it's their perogative - it's up to the consumer to not buy their product. And if the consumer doesn't buy their product, then they can make the decision to reduce the sugar, sodium, etc. To be forced to change their recipes because of a dictat from the government (and you know Walmart is only doing this in hopes of getting government concessions on the whole union issue) is just... outrageous.
State governments - the nanny states - are also getting involved. In New York resteraunt chefs are being banned from putting salt in food, and I believe that stricture is in place in all of California as well. Again, the states don't have that right. If a chef wants to put salt on the food he or she cooks, that's his or her damn business. If a restaurant customer doesn't want any salt, let them put in a special request. Stop harming the many for the sake of a few.
And, its Monday
A new day at work. Remember its also weight training day. If you've been skipping your weight training, today's the day to get started back with it. If you've been weight training on a regular basis, probably time to add a couple extra repetitions to each of your exercises.
Saturday, January 22, 2011
How Long Do You Stay Full?
There's an old axiom about Chinese food... you can eat a lot, and then feel hungry just 2 hours later.
Well...what foods do you eat, that give you a full sensation for the longest amount of time?
This is where your journal ends.
Presumably you eat dinner each night at the same time. Record this time in your journal, record everything that you eat, and make note of the results.
Do you feel comfortably full? (You never want to stuff yourself, of course.)
How long does this feeling of fullness last?
Keep this part of your journal for a week or even two, and try a variety of foods. (Always more difficult if you're cookig for a lot of family members, I know.) Are there any foods you eat that keep you feeling fuller, longer? ANd are there any taht leave you full, but ten minutes or so later you're hungry again?
Note that when you do eat, you should always eat slowly. You are not only savoring the tastes of your meal, but you're also allowing your digestive juices to get to work, which will give you a sensation of feeling full quicker than if you just stuff down a lot of food without even tasting it, just to be eating something!
Well...what foods do you eat, that give you a full sensation for the longest amount of time?
This is where your journal ends.
Presumably you eat dinner each night at the same time. Record this time in your journal, record everything that you eat, and make note of the results.
Do you feel comfortably full? (You never want to stuff yourself, of course.)
How long does this feeling of fullness last?
Keep this part of your journal for a week or even two, and try a variety of foods. (Always more difficult if you're cookig for a lot of family members, I know.) Are there any foods you eat that keep you feeling fuller, longer? ANd are there any taht leave you full, but ten minutes or so later you're hungry again?
Note that when you do eat, you should always eat slowly. You are not only savoring the tastes of your meal, but you're also allowing your digestive juices to get to work, which will give you a sensation of feeling full quicker than if you just stuff down a lot of food without even tasting it, just to be eating something!
Friday, January 21, 2011
Evaluation Day
If you've been reading this blog since Jan 1, I recommended that you not step on a scale for at least two weeks after starting your new eating and exercising program.
Let's choose today as an evaluation day. Step on your scale. If you've been following this program for 20 days - reducing your food intake by half-a-portion, and exercising, you should either still weigh the same, or have lost a pound or two.
Why might you weigh the same?
Because since you've been exercising, flab has turned to fat, and muscle weighs more than fat. (But, in proper proportion, it looks better. i.e., nicely muscled as one gets by normal exercise, not bulging muscles one gets by consuming supplemnets and working out 3 hours a day.)
And once you gain muscle, remember that muscle burns calories faster than fat does, so from now on, the weight will melt away a bit faster - albeit, again, only about 2 pounds a week - at the most.
But with this program you're not really so concerned about weight loss but about fitness gained. The one follows the other.
So take today to evaluate yourself realistically. If you have lost no weight, or at most only a pound, you are on the right track.
If you've gained weight, how much weight have you gained? If its more than 5 pounds, than chances are that you are not following this program. By cutting down a half portion of what you normally eat (three spoons of mashed potatoes instead of four, half a piece of pie instead of a whole piece, carrots for a midnight snack instead of cookies), you should not be gaining weight - except perhaps a pound or two of muscle weight. Any more than that - and you haven't been cutting back on your portions! [If you have, and you've still gained over 5 pounds - without consuming supplements or workig out 3 hours a day, consult a doctor.)
Now, have you been able to cut back on your portions? Or do those hunger pains - or worse - cravings - still hit? Been there, done that. I'll address how to eliminate cravings in future posts.
Let's choose today as an evaluation day. Step on your scale. If you've been following this program for 20 days - reducing your food intake by half-a-portion, and exercising, you should either still weigh the same, or have lost a pound or two.
Why might you weigh the same?
Because since you've been exercising, flab has turned to fat, and muscle weighs more than fat. (But, in proper proportion, it looks better. i.e., nicely muscled as one gets by normal exercise, not bulging muscles one gets by consuming supplemnets and working out 3 hours a day.)
And once you gain muscle, remember that muscle burns calories faster than fat does, so from now on, the weight will melt away a bit faster - albeit, again, only about 2 pounds a week - at the most.
But with this program you're not really so concerned about weight loss but about fitness gained. The one follows the other.
So take today to evaluate yourself realistically. If you have lost no weight, or at most only a pound, you are on the right track.
If you've gained weight, how much weight have you gained? If its more than 5 pounds, than chances are that you are not following this program. By cutting down a half portion of what you normally eat (three spoons of mashed potatoes instead of four, half a piece of pie instead of a whole piece, carrots for a midnight snack instead of cookies), you should not be gaining weight - except perhaps a pound or two of muscle weight. Any more than that - and you haven't been cutting back on your portions! [If you have, and you've still gained over 5 pounds - without consuming supplements or workig out 3 hours a day, consult a doctor.)
Now, have you been able to cut back on your portions? Or do those hunger pains - or worse - cravings - still hit? Been there, done that. I'll address how to eliminate cravings in future posts.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Tennis, Anyone?
I've been watching a bit of the Australian Open. I dont' have time to watch all the matches...even if I liked any of the participants, but my favorite Lindsay Davenport is on the sidelines...
I've yet to see Venus Williams and her extremely short "dress", but I know it's raised a lot of eyebrows among commentators who wonder why she finds it necessary to bare her buns... (and I sincerely hope her fellow tennis players don't follow her lead and shorten their already extremely short dresses by another 4 inches. Have some respect for yourself, ladies, you already provide more than enough eye candy!)
But, it's interesting to watch them play and see the strategies they use. Some women hit the ball right back to their opponent constantly, so that its a question of the two women just slugging it out...others hit the ball from left court to right court and back again, causing their opponent to run and run, and by the third set, if there is one, the opponent is all worn out and the strategian is the victor.
But can the average player - like me and you - translate this strategy to the tennis court. I try to hit the ball from side to side, but more often than not it just goes right back to my opponent, who doesn't have to move a step. It's only on the return of serve that I can provide such directionality (I've got a wicked backhand) or at any time that I am standing still. But if I'm on the run, the ball goes right back to my opponent - the worst time for it to do it!
I enjoy tennis. I'm not a fast runner, but I've got quick reflexes, so I can start running quicker than someone else, even though it may take me longer to get to the ball. Also, I've got large breasts, which is why I hate to jog, but the running around on a tennis court lasts only for a minute or two, so it's not that bad. Playing an hour's worth of tennis is pretty good exercise.
I've never played raquetball - I find the echoing sound of the ball in the little room disturbing, but that's another sport to consider.
Swimming, of course - doesn't matter how big your breasts are there, or how heavy you are, everyone can swim.
I've only golfed a few times but intend to get into it more now that I've moved to Cheyenne. It's strictly a summer and fall game here, but it's kind of fun. Unfortunately rules state that you have to drive a cart, so you don't get as much exercise as you otherwise would, but there's always the walking around looking for your ball, and so on, which can add up by the end of a 9-hole game, and especially by the end of an 18-hole game.
Then there's teams sports. Depending where you live, see if there isn't an adult softball - or baseball league - there. Or even flag football. Why not? (And if there isn't, why not form one yourself?)
I've blogged before about rock climbing, that's not for me...but when it's easy to get on top of hte rock so that I can rappel down it..I would enjoy that. THere are places in Wyoming to do this, so that's another plan for summer.
I've got a 13 year old nephew, whom I now live near, who has these "Gazinga" foam swords, and he and I bout a bit. That is really fun. I did some fencing when I was young, and if we were fencing with real swords, I'd beat the kid, but because these foam-covered swords are so unwieldy, he can generally "hit" me because it's too hard to bring the sword back into line to deflect his "blade." But it's fun, and if you're interested in fencing, but don't have a fencing club anywhere near, I'd suggest going to your local Walmart or Sams and getting these Gazinga things. (PLus read a book on fencing so you know the proper footwork and strategy!)
(It's been 2 years since my nephew got these swords...just checked the Walmart site and they don't seem to carry them anymore, but check out:
http://budk.com/results.aspx?k=foam+sword&sourcecode=GONBBK&gclid=CKjd2MaKyqYCFQEGbAodWCXWGw
These are not children's playthings, these are sturdy, heavy duty hard foam over sturdy plastic swords, so that you can hit hard and long (though don't go crazy with them...)
I've yet to see Venus Williams and her extremely short "dress", but I know it's raised a lot of eyebrows among commentators who wonder why she finds it necessary to bare her buns... (and I sincerely hope her fellow tennis players don't follow her lead and shorten their already extremely short dresses by another 4 inches. Have some respect for yourself, ladies, you already provide more than enough eye candy!)
But, it's interesting to watch them play and see the strategies they use. Some women hit the ball right back to their opponent constantly, so that its a question of the two women just slugging it out...others hit the ball from left court to right court and back again, causing their opponent to run and run, and by the third set, if there is one, the opponent is all worn out and the strategian is the victor.
But can the average player - like me and you - translate this strategy to the tennis court. I try to hit the ball from side to side, but more often than not it just goes right back to my opponent, who doesn't have to move a step. It's only on the return of serve that I can provide such directionality (I've got a wicked backhand) or at any time that I am standing still. But if I'm on the run, the ball goes right back to my opponent - the worst time for it to do it!
I enjoy tennis. I'm not a fast runner, but I've got quick reflexes, so I can start running quicker than someone else, even though it may take me longer to get to the ball. Also, I've got large breasts, which is why I hate to jog, but the running around on a tennis court lasts only for a minute or two, so it's not that bad. Playing an hour's worth of tennis is pretty good exercise.
I've never played raquetball - I find the echoing sound of the ball in the little room disturbing, but that's another sport to consider.
Swimming, of course - doesn't matter how big your breasts are there, or how heavy you are, everyone can swim.
I've only golfed a few times but intend to get into it more now that I've moved to Cheyenne. It's strictly a summer and fall game here, but it's kind of fun. Unfortunately rules state that you have to drive a cart, so you don't get as much exercise as you otherwise would, but there's always the walking around looking for your ball, and so on, which can add up by the end of a 9-hole game, and especially by the end of an 18-hole game.
Then there's teams sports. Depending where you live, see if there isn't an adult softball - or baseball league - there. Or even flag football. Why not? (And if there isn't, why not form one yourself?)
I've blogged before about rock climbing, that's not for me...but when it's easy to get on top of hte rock so that I can rappel down it..I would enjoy that. THere are places in Wyoming to do this, so that's another plan for summer.
I've got a 13 year old nephew, whom I now live near, who has these "Gazinga" foam swords, and he and I bout a bit. That is really fun. I did some fencing when I was young, and if we were fencing with real swords, I'd beat the kid, but because these foam-covered swords are so unwieldy, he can generally "hit" me because it's too hard to bring the sword back into line to deflect his "blade." But it's fun, and if you're interested in fencing, but don't have a fencing club anywhere near, I'd suggest going to your local Walmart or Sams and getting these Gazinga things. (PLus read a book on fencing so you know the proper footwork and strategy!)
(It's been 2 years since my nephew got these swords...just checked the Walmart site and they don't seem to carry them anymore, but check out:
http://budk.com/results.aspx?k=foam+sword&sourcecode=GONBBK&gclid=CKjd2MaKyqYCFQEGbAodWCXWGw
These are not children's playthings, these are sturdy, heavy duty hard foam over sturdy plastic swords, so that you can hit hard and long (though don't go crazy with them...)
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Swimming - Good and good for you
A couple of days ago, in my debunking of that ridiculous study about exercise harming women's brains as they grow older, I wrote, "Since when is swimming a strenuous sport?"
Swimming isn't what I call a strenuous sport = that's a game like football or soccer where there's constant contact and the danger of injuries - in particular brain injuries.
That's not to saw that swimming can't give you an excellent workout. As with any other physical activity, you can play slow or hard. You can swim ten laps in ten minutes, or you can swim it in thirty. Obviously, the faster you swim, or walk, or bike, the faster your heart rate is and the more calories you burn.
Swimming is one of the best physical activities in which to participate. If you're very large, you may find it difficult to walk very long, and of course running is out of the question. But get into a pool and the water takes all that weight off your legs, and allows you to run in place and do other exercises, as well as, of course, swim. Many YMCAs have programs for large people, so you needn't feel self-conscious to show up at a pool and face the cruelty of other people - although typically people who swim in YMCA pools are better behaved than those who show up at public pools.
Swimming exercises your entire leg and your entire arm. If you do the breast stroke, it can also help your pectoral muscles, to keep your breasts from sagging in old age (and none of us want that!)
Truth to tell, I do find swimming laps boring. Solution? Listen to music.
Check out this method for waterproofing your IPOD.
http://triathlons.thefuntimesguide.com/2009/04/swimming_mp3_player.php
Swimming isn't what I call a strenuous sport = that's a game like football or soccer where there's constant contact and the danger of injuries - in particular brain injuries.
That's not to saw that swimming can't give you an excellent workout. As with any other physical activity, you can play slow or hard. You can swim ten laps in ten minutes, or you can swim it in thirty. Obviously, the faster you swim, or walk, or bike, the faster your heart rate is and the more calories you burn.
Swimming is one of the best physical activities in which to participate. If you're very large, you may find it difficult to walk very long, and of course running is out of the question. But get into a pool and the water takes all that weight off your legs, and allows you to run in place and do other exercises, as well as, of course, swim. Many YMCAs have programs for large people, so you needn't feel self-conscious to show up at a pool and face the cruelty of other people - although typically people who swim in YMCA pools are better behaved than those who show up at public pools.
Swimming exercises your entire leg and your entire arm. If you do the breast stroke, it can also help your pectoral muscles, to keep your breasts from sagging in old age (and none of us want that!)
Truth to tell, I do find swimming laps boring. Solution? Listen to music.
Check out this method for waterproofing your IPOD.
http://triathlons.thefuntimesguide.com/2009/04/swimming_mp3_player.php
Monday, January 17, 2011
Educate Yourself: In Defense of Food, An Eater's Manifesto
Once or twice a week I'll post info - book description and table of contents - that you might like to read.
The book below is not one that will really help you lose/maintain weight, but it's got a lot of interesting stuff to say. It's for education only. They do mention an interesting new complex: Orthorexia nrevosa: An unhealthy obsession with healthy eating."
"A few years ago, Rozin sshowed a group of Americans the words "chocolate cake" and recorded theirword associations. "Guilt" was the top response. If that strikes youy as unexceptional, consider the response of the French eaters: "Celebration."
Americans -in particular women - feel guilty when they eat, or if they're even just 5 pound overweight, ad that just ain't right! [Frankly, the media is to blame, and the people who buy into that media. In the 1930s, several German actresses tried to get their start in American films - Marlene Dietrich being the most famous. They couldn't make a dent until they lost a lot of weight and glamorized up a bit, the way the media wanted American women to look, so as to sell cosmetics, weight loss products, etc.]
[The book below advocates cutting out pre-prepared meals - TV dinners, and snack foods, and giving up the microwave entirely. (When food takes less time to prepair, we eat more of it.) Of course this just puts more guilt on women...the ones who want to have a career and a family too and don't have time to spend three hours cooking a meal...but that's the topic for another post. I don't necessarily advocate the book below, I just present it as information for you to decide.)]
In Defense of Food, An Eater's Manifesto, by Michael Pollan
The Penguin Press, 2008
Food. There's plenty of it around, and we all love to eat it. So why should anyone need to defend it?
Because most of what we're consuming today is not food, and how we're consuming it - in the car, in front of the TV, and increasingly alone-is not really eating. Instead of food, we're consuming "edible foodlike substances"-no longer the products of nature but of food science. Many of them come packaged with health claims that should be our first clue they are anything but healthy. In the so-called Western diet, food has been replaced by nutrients, and common sense by confusion. The result is what Michael Pollan calls the American paradox: The more we worry about nutrition, the less healthy we seem to become.
But if real food-the sort of food our great grandmothers would recognize as food-stands in need of defense, from whom does it need defending? From the food industry on one side and nutritional science on the other. Both stand to gain much from widespread confusion about what to eat, a question that for most of human history people have been able to answer without expert help. Yet the professionalization of eating has failed to make Americans healthier. Thirty years of official nutritional advice has only made us sicker and fatter while ruining countless number of meals.
Pollan proposes a new (and vvery old) answer to the question of what we should eat that comes down to seven simple but liberating words: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. By urging us to once again eat food, he challenges the prevailing nutrient-by-nutrient approach-what he calls nutritionism-and proposes an alternative way of eating that is informed by the traditions and ecology of real, well-grown, and unprocessed food. Our personal health, he argues, cannot be divorced from the health of the food chains of which we are apart.
In Defense of Food shows us how, despite the daunting dietary landscape Americans confront in the modern supermarket, we can escape the Western diet and, by doing so, most of the chronic diseases that diet causes. We can relearn which foods are healthy, develop simple ways to moderate our appetites, and return eating to its proper context-out of the car and back to the table. Michael Pollan's bracing and eloquent manifesto shows how we can start making thoughtful food choices that will enrich our lives, enlarge our sense of what it means to be healthy, and bring pleasure back to eating.
Table of Contents
Introduction: An Eater's Manifesto
I. The Age of Nutritionism
1. From foods to nutrients
2. Nutritionism defined
3. Nutritionism goes to market
4. Food science's golden age
5. The melting of the lipid hypothesis
6. Eat right, get fatter
7. Beyond the pleasure principle
8. The proof in the low-fat pudding
9. Bad science
10. Nutritionism's children
II. The Western diet and diseases of civilization
1. The aborigine in all of us
2. The elephant in the room
3. The Industrialization of eating: what we do know:
-From whole foods to refined
-From complexity to simplicity
-From quality to quantity
-From leaves to seeds
-From food culture to food science
III. GEtting over Nutritionism
1. Escape from the Western diet
2. Eat food: food defined
3. Mostly plants: What to eat
4. Not too much: How to eat
Acknowledgments
Sources
Resources
Index
The book below is not one that will really help you lose/maintain weight, but it's got a lot of interesting stuff to say. It's for education only. They do mention an interesting new complex: Orthorexia nrevosa: An unhealthy obsession with healthy eating."
"A few years ago, Rozin sshowed a group of Americans the words "chocolate cake" and recorded theirword associations. "Guilt" was the top response. If that strikes youy as unexceptional, consider the response of the French eaters: "Celebration."
Americans -in particular women - feel guilty when they eat, or if they're even just 5 pound overweight, ad that just ain't right! [Frankly, the media is to blame, and the people who buy into that media. In the 1930s, several German actresses tried to get their start in American films - Marlene Dietrich being the most famous. They couldn't make a dent until they lost a lot of weight and glamorized up a bit, the way the media wanted American women to look, so as to sell cosmetics, weight loss products, etc.]
[The book below advocates cutting out pre-prepared meals - TV dinners, and snack foods, and giving up the microwave entirely. (When food takes less time to prepair, we eat more of it.) Of course this just puts more guilt on women...the ones who want to have a career and a family too and don't have time to spend three hours cooking a meal...but that's the topic for another post. I don't necessarily advocate the book below, I just present it as information for you to decide.)]
In Defense of Food, An Eater's Manifesto, by Michael Pollan
The Penguin Press, 2008
Food. There's plenty of it around, and we all love to eat it. So why should anyone need to defend it?
Because most of what we're consuming today is not food, and how we're consuming it - in the car, in front of the TV, and increasingly alone-is not really eating. Instead of food, we're consuming "edible foodlike substances"-no longer the products of nature but of food science. Many of them come packaged with health claims that should be our first clue they are anything but healthy. In the so-called Western diet, food has been replaced by nutrients, and common sense by confusion. The result is what Michael Pollan calls the American paradox: The more we worry about nutrition, the less healthy we seem to become.
But if real food-the sort of food our great grandmothers would recognize as food-stands in need of defense, from whom does it need defending? From the food industry on one side and nutritional science on the other. Both stand to gain much from widespread confusion about what to eat, a question that for most of human history people have been able to answer without expert help. Yet the professionalization of eating has failed to make Americans healthier. Thirty years of official nutritional advice has only made us sicker and fatter while ruining countless number of meals.
Pollan proposes a new (and vvery old) answer to the question of what we should eat that comes down to seven simple but liberating words: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. By urging us to once again eat food, he challenges the prevailing nutrient-by-nutrient approach-what he calls nutritionism-and proposes an alternative way of eating that is informed by the traditions and ecology of real, well-grown, and unprocessed food. Our personal health, he argues, cannot be divorced from the health of the food chains of which we are apart.
In Defense of Food shows us how, despite the daunting dietary landscape Americans confront in the modern supermarket, we can escape the Western diet and, by doing so, most of the chronic diseases that diet causes. We can relearn which foods are healthy, develop simple ways to moderate our appetites, and return eating to its proper context-out of the car and back to the table. Michael Pollan's bracing and eloquent manifesto shows how we can start making thoughtful food choices that will enrich our lives, enlarge our sense of what it means to be healthy, and bring pleasure back to eating.
Table of Contents
Introduction: An Eater's Manifesto
I. The Age of Nutritionism
1. From foods to nutrients
2. Nutritionism defined
3. Nutritionism goes to market
4. Food science's golden age
5. The melting of the lipid hypothesis
6. Eat right, get fatter
7. Beyond the pleasure principle
8. The proof in the low-fat pudding
9. Bad science
10. Nutritionism's children
II. The Western diet and diseases of civilization
1. The aborigine in all of us
2. The elephant in the room
3. The Industrialization of eating: what we do know:
-From whole foods to refined
-From complexity to simplicity
-From quality to quantity
-From leaves to seeds
-From food culture to food science
III. GEtting over Nutritionism
1. Escape from the Western diet
2. Eat food: food defined
3. Mostly plants: What to eat
4. Not too much: How to eat
Acknowledgments
Sources
Resources
Index
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Don't be fooled by stupid headlines
Before I share this garbage article, let's point out a few things. "Strenuous exercise" hurts some men as well. In the case of guys who play soccer or football, their quality of life in later years is seriously degraded - soccer players because of concussions, football players because of the pounding their bodies take.
Secondly, this study was from 90 women. 90! And from a study of 90 women the conclusion is "Women's exercise linked to lower cognitive skill."
Forgive the language, but bullshit.
The study took place in Canada, and there are millions of women in Canada. There's millions of women in the US. Are you trying to tell me that based on the statistics of 90 whole women, women should now be afraid to do "strenuous exercise"? I don't think so.
Having said that... in soccer, the "header" really should be out. That particular activity does have demonstrated repercussions for everybody, male and female, who plays the sport, because each time you hit a soccer ball with your head, your brain gets sloshed about violently.
Anyway, here' the joke of an article. No articles reporting studies should even be reported unless they'd tested over a thousand women. THen there'd perhaps be one less "ha" on my "ha ha ha ha ha, what garbage."
(Oh, and the photo accompanying this article? The caption is "Swimming herself stupid". Since when is swimming a strenuous activity?
Women's exercise linked to lower cognitive skill
WOMEN who habitually take strenuous exercise might be at risk of damaging their cognitive function later in life.
Strenuous exercise is known to reduce oestrogen levels in women and girls. This can delay the start of menstruation, and can lead to irregular periods in adult women. Low levels of oestrogen in premenopausal women have been linked to impaired mental function in later life.
Mary Tierney at the University of Toronto, Canada, reasoned that strenuous exercise might therefore lead to impaired cognition in later life. She asked 90 healthy post-menopausal women to report their life-long exercise habits, and then tested their cognitive ability. The results, which will be reported in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, showed a statistically significant decrease in performance in various cognitive tasks in women who said that they exercised strenuously compared with those that had exercised moderately.
The overall benefits of regular exercise are well established, but Tierney says the possible impact of strenuous exercise on cognition should be investigated further to see if it is significant.
Secondly, this study was from 90 women. 90! And from a study of 90 women the conclusion is "Women's exercise linked to lower cognitive skill."
Forgive the language, but bullshit.
The study took place in Canada, and there are millions of women in Canada. There's millions of women in the US. Are you trying to tell me that based on the statistics of 90 whole women, women should now be afraid to do "strenuous exercise"? I don't think so.
Having said that... in soccer, the "header" really should be out. That particular activity does have demonstrated repercussions for everybody, male and female, who plays the sport, because each time you hit a soccer ball with your head, your brain gets sloshed about violently.
Anyway, here' the joke of an article. No articles reporting studies should even be reported unless they'd tested over a thousand women. THen there'd perhaps be one less "ha" on my "ha ha ha ha ha, what garbage."
(Oh, and the photo accompanying this article? The caption is "Swimming herself stupid". Since when is swimming a strenuous activity?
Women's exercise linked to lower cognitive skill
WOMEN who habitually take strenuous exercise might be at risk of damaging their cognitive function later in life.
Strenuous exercise is known to reduce oestrogen levels in women and girls. This can delay the start of menstruation, and can lead to irregular periods in adult women. Low levels of oestrogen in premenopausal women have been linked to impaired mental function in later life.
Mary Tierney at the University of Toronto, Canada, reasoned that strenuous exercise might therefore lead to impaired cognition in later life. She asked 90 healthy post-menopausal women to report their life-long exercise habits, and then tested their cognitive ability. The results, which will be reported in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, showed a statistically significant decrease in performance in various cognitive tasks in women who said that they exercised strenuously compared with those that had exercised moderately.
The overall benefits of regular exercise are well established, but Tierney says the possible impact of strenuous exercise on cognition should be investigated further to see if it is significant.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Weekend Activiities
From Monday through Friday, your day is perhaps easy to get through, "new eating plan-wise."
That's because your day is probably pretty full and regimented - you go to work, you work from 9 to 5, you come home, there's family things to do, and so on.
But how do you fill the time on the weekends? 8 hours normally spent at work, and now you have to be at home. What do you do?
Well, the best thing is to make weekends regimented as well. Well, "regimented" has bad connotations. "Ordered" perhaps?
In any event, you've got time on the weekends to go for a long bike ride, to read a book while munching on carrots, for playing tennis, for going to your local Y for a swim, and so on.
But these activities should not be duties. Find an activity that you like, so that it will be a pleasure to participate in them.
That's because your day is probably pretty full and regimented - you go to work, you work from 9 to 5, you come home, there's family things to do, and so on.
But how do you fill the time on the weekends? 8 hours normally spent at work, and now you have to be at home. What do you do?
Well, the best thing is to make weekends regimented as well. Well, "regimented" has bad connotations. "Ordered" perhaps?
In any event, you've got time on the weekends to go for a long bike ride, to read a book while munching on carrots, for playing tennis, for going to your local Y for a swim, and so on.
But these activities should not be duties. Find an activity that you like, so that it will be a pleasure to participate in them.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Don't be one of those who fall and can't get up
I'm sure you've all seen the commercial where an elderly woman has fallen, and is unable to get back to her feet. Fortunately she has .... a Medic ALert radio, I think (it's been some time since I've seen the commercial). "I've fallen and I can't get up," she calls, and someone on the other end of the line sends help right away.
Well, fallig is something that afflict elderly people, and more often than not, they can't get up. My mother, for example.
I've posted here about my mother before. At age 40 or so she was diagnosed with high blood pressure. She got pills, took them for a couple of days perhaps, then stopped taking them because she didn't like the way they made her feel. So she tried healing herself naturally - the power of positive thinking, and so on. (I think she also bought a lot of books on healing oneself naturally, but truth to tell I don't think she really implemented any of the solutions in those books - cutting out certain foods, etc. I think she had the books on her shelves and just hoped they'd work by osmosis)
Long story short, about 10 years ago she got congestive heart failure, and had to go to the hospital to get all this liquid pumped out of her system. (She hated going to the doctor so much that she'd never told my dad the issues she was having - for example open sores on her buttocks where the water was trying to get out, and since they had separate rooms, he never knew, until finally one day she couldn't get out of bed.)
Long story short, she's lived for 10 years with congestive heart failure, so instead of taking one, high blood pressure pill, she now takes 6 pills a day, and the side-effects dull her mind and give her about a couple of hours of sharp thinking a day. After that all she can do is read or watch TV, original thought is just too hard.
She has few pleasures, one of those is food, and so she is now about 150 pounds over weight. And if she falls...(she now walks with a cane) she can't get up, and it takes the combined effort of my father and myself to get her up.
Which is a long way around the subject, which is one reason to stay fit - weight in proportion to height, and weight training on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, is so that when you're in your 70s, you'll have less chance of not being able to get up once you fall.
Of course with women there's also the problem of osteoroporosis or brittle bone disease, but consuming calcium will help with that, as will selective weight training.
So, today is Friday, it's a weight training day.
It's also the 14th of Jan, so if you started your "new life" on Jan 1, you can step on your scale either today or tomorrow. Chances are you will weight exactly what you did on Jan 1, but by now, if you've been cutting back your food portions even ever so slightly, and exercising every other day, your body should now be in that caloric imbalance state where the weight will start to come off. Slowly. Remember, 2 pounds a week weight loss is the healthiest target to aim for.
And above all, it is health we want. If you do not have health, you do not have anything.
Well, fallig is something that afflict elderly people, and more often than not, they can't get up. My mother, for example.
I've posted here about my mother before. At age 40 or so she was diagnosed with high blood pressure. She got pills, took them for a couple of days perhaps, then stopped taking them because she didn't like the way they made her feel. So she tried healing herself naturally - the power of positive thinking, and so on. (I think she also bought a lot of books on healing oneself naturally, but truth to tell I don't think she really implemented any of the solutions in those books - cutting out certain foods, etc. I think she had the books on her shelves and just hoped they'd work by osmosis)
Long story short, about 10 years ago she got congestive heart failure, and had to go to the hospital to get all this liquid pumped out of her system. (She hated going to the doctor so much that she'd never told my dad the issues she was having - for example open sores on her buttocks where the water was trying to get out, and since they had separate rooms, he never knew, until finally one day she couldn't get out of bed.)
Long story short, she's lived for 10 years with congestive heart failure, so instead of taking one, high blood pressure pill, she now takes 6 pills a day, and the side-effects dull her mind and give her about a couple of hours of sharp thinking a day. After that all she can do is read or watch TV, original thought is just too hard.
She has few pleasures, one of those is food, and so she is now about 150 pounds over weight. And if she falls...(she now walks with a cane) she can't get up, and it takes the combined effort of my father and myself to get her up.
Which is a long way around the subject, which is one reason to stay fit - weight in proportion to height, and weight training on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, is so that when you're in your 70s, you'll have less chance of not being able to get up once you fall.
Of course with women there's also the problem of osteoroporosis or brittle bone disease, but consuming calcium will help with that, as will selective weight training.
So, today is Friday, it's a weight training day.
It's also the 14th of Jan, so if you started your "new life" on Jan 1, you can step on your scale either today or tomorrow. Chances are you will weight exactly what you did on Jan 1, but by now, if you've been cutting back your food portions even ever so slightly, and exercising every other day, your body should now be in that caloric imbalance state where the weight will start to come off. Slowly. Remember, 2 pounds a week weight loss is the healthiest target to aim for.
And above all, it is health we want. If you do not have health, you do not have anything.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
People: Ginnifer Goodwin Reacts to Uproar over Her Weight Watchers History
An interesting article...
I wish she'd said exactly how much she weighed at age 9...also would like to know how tall she was then and how tall she is now.
Neverthleless, despite the fact that I've never even heard of this woman (I'm not au courant on any actors or actresses who weren't active in the 60s, 70s and 80s) she certainly sounds like she's got the right secret.
Ginnifer Goodwin Reacts to Uproar over Her Weight Watchers History
I wish she'd said exactly how much she weighed at age 9...also would like to know how tall she was then and how tall she is now.
Neverthleless, despite the fact that I've never even heard of this woman (I'm not au courant on any actors or actresses who weren't active in the 60s, 70s and 80s) she certainly sounds like she's got the right secret.
Ginnifer Goodwin Reacts to Uproar over Her Weight Watchers History
Ginnifer Goodwin has never tried to keep secret the method behind her svelte figure – but when the Big Love star revealed publicly last month that she's been on Weight Watchers for much of her life, she was taken aback by the uproar.
In fact, the actress, 32 – who doesn't attend Weight Watchers meetings, but is a member of the group online – maintains that she's never been on an actual diet.
"I was so shocked when it was this whole, 'Ginny's been on a diet since she was 9 years old!' I was like 'No!' I've never had body issues, I've never had an eating disorder," she tells PEOPLE. "I've never had to go on a diet and that's because of Weight Watchers."
Goodwin, however, says she was an overweight child, which led her to the program. "I began to identify myself as fat." Goodwin says. "At 9 years old I weighed about 10 lbs. less than what my weight is at 32. I needed to get help."
"I ended up going to my mother crying,"she recalls. "With the counseling of my family doctor, my mother ended up turning to Weight Watchers and their children's program. I went to weekly meetings, got counseling and would exercise with my peers who were my size. It was the first time I saw a proper children's portion size, and it wasn't two burgers, it was one."
Takes Time
Losing the weight, recalls Goodwin, "was extremely easy to accomplish." But she adds, "It takes time because you lose the weight slowly. It's a healthy way to do it."
And she's kept the weight off with ease over the years. "You don't have to go through that horrible yo-yo cycle of binging," she says. "I've always been able to satisfy my cravings; it's just a matter of balancing."
It saddens her to see her peers struggle with weight. "I pulled an actress friend aside and I said, 'I get it. I get what it is that you're trying to do, but there's being healthfully skinny and then there's starting to look like a scary alien cat,' " she says.
Goodwin has a not-so-flattering name for the diet secrets of some of the rich and famous. "I call it the 'Cocaine and Cigarettes Diet' in Hollywood," says the actress, who also doesn’t believe in a low-carb diet as a permanent solution. "I see girls who haven't had a carbohydrate in three years. The second you go back to eating right, you're going to put that weight on. You eat one piece of bread and you are screwed, lady!"
Goodwin, who became engaged to actor Joey Kern last month, concedes that she has lost weight since getting to Hollywood.
"At lunch the last day [of shooting Big Love] they showed the pilot and I was shocked at how much rounder I looked. We shot the pilot almost a decade ago when I was just out of college," she says. "I think it took me a long time to lose more baby-fat. And yes, living in L.A., you exercise a lot more because it is gorgeous year round. I do a lot of hiking. I can see that my habits have changed."
In the end, Goodwin credits her mother for her healthy approach to life. She looks back to the day when she told her mom she was fat. "Her reaction was not, 'Oh, I'll help you get skinny," says Goodwin. "My mother's reaction was, 'Why don't we all go and learn a little more about our health."
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Write the Story of Your Life
I'm currently reading a book called Defining the Wind, by Scott Huler. It's a book about Huler's desire/obsession to find out about the life of Francis Beaufort, a British scientist in the 1800s who is responsible for the Beaufort Wind Scale among many other things.
And frankly, I find Huler's prose about Beaufort's life very inspirational, and I'll be sharing some of it here. Beaufort was a man who "liked to know where he was." He spent his teenage years on sailing ships, and when docked in foreign parts, would draw maps, make measurements, and so on, both to occupy his time (no TV or radio way back then!) and also because he "liked to know where he was."
I want you to want to know where you are, every day of your life, also.
I hesitate to suggest this in one sense, because I don't want you to become so obsessed with your weight that you'll step on the scale every morning, noon and night and record it. That's going a bit overboard.
What I do want you to do, is just to record what you do every day. Write down what you eat and drink, and how you feel after you consume it. This is knowlege that you can use in the future.
I've offered this example before, I'll offer it again. This was something I learned myself, many years ago, when I worked in an office. I'd come to work feeling fine, not having had breakfast because i didn't eat breakfast. I'd have a chocolate-covered donut for breakfast, and about five to ten minutes later I'd develop a headache.
Why?
Well, it was my body trying to digest all that sugar early in the morning. The blood went from my head to my stomach to work on that sugar. Result - headache. Similarly, young kids who eat sugary cereals and then go to school where they cna't sit still don't need to be put on Ritalin, they need the sugary cereal replaced by something that isn't sugary. Peanut butter sandwiches, for example.
Your body is your temple, and you need to know everything about it. I'd even suggest taking courses on anatomy, physiology, and so on, so that you know your body both intuitively but also knowledgeably. [But beware the catch-22. Medical students often start thinking that they've got the diseases they read about in their books, psychiatry students start trying to psycho-analyze their family members, etc. Don't fall into that trap.)
Know yourself - try to understand other people.
And frankly, I find Huler's prose about Beaufort's life very inspirational, and I'll be sharing some of it here. Beaufort was a man who "liked to know where he was." He spent his teenage years on sailing ships, and when docked in foreign parts, would draw maps, make measurements, and so on, both to occupy his time (no TV or radio way back then!) and also because he "liked to know where he was."
I want you to want to know where you are, every day of your life, also.
I hesitate to suggest this in one sense, because I don't want you to become so obsessed with your weight that you'll step on the scale every morning, noon and night and record it. That's going a bit overboard.
What I do want you to do, is just to record what you do every day. Write down what you eat and drink, and how you feel after you consume it. This is knowlege that you can use in the future.
I've offered this example before, I'll offer it again. This was something I learned myself, many years ago, when I worked in an office. I'd come to work feeling fine, not having had breakfast because i didn't eat breakfast. I'd have a chocolate-covered donut for breakfast, and about five to ten minutes later I'd develop a headache.
Why?
Well, it was my body trying to digest all that sugar early in the morning. The blood went from my head to my stomach to work on that sugar. Result - headache. Similarly, young kids who eat sugary cereals and then go to school where they cna't sit still don't need to be put on Ritalin, they need the sugary cereal replaced by something that isn't sugary. Peanut butter sandwiches, for example.
Your body is your temple, and you need to know everything about it. I'd even suggest taking courses on anatomy, physiology, and so on, so that you know your body both intuitively but also knowledgeably. [But beware the catch-22. Medical students often start thinking that they've got the diseases they read about in their books, psychiatry students start trying to psycho-analyze their family members, etc. Don't fall into that trap.)
Know yourself - try to understand other people.
Prime Example of Male Hypocrisy
I listen to Rush Limbaugh on a regular basis. I think he's a male chauvanist, but in other ways I agree with much of what he says.
But...there's no denying that he doesn't think much of women. Hilary CLinton, in my opinion, is a lousy politician, but you can convey this by criticizing her politics, not by commenting on her hair, her voice, how much she's aged, ya da ya da... stuff that is never said about a male politician. (Well, Rush does get in some shots about the "Breck girl" - John Edwards because of his perfectly coiffed hair, but usually when he's criticizing male politicians its their politics he criticizes, he does not refer to them as "screeching", for example...but let a female politician say something with which he disagrees, and those subtle little put-downs come into play.
So, I was watching the Haney Project tonight, first episode of the Rush Limbaugh series. And Limbaugh is about 100 pounds overweight, maybe more.
Of course they've got the obligatory beautiful and slender woman in revealing clothing - Haney's wife, wearing shorts up to here, and next week, the skimpiest of bikinis...not quite sure why that's there except to provide eye candy for the guys, as I guess they don't think women are going to watch this.
[Well, let me just say this, pals, some women are watching it and we want eye candy too, eye candy that is most definitely not provided by Rush or Haney.]
So anyway, Rush is hitting a shot, looks at it go, and says, "That's a little bit Oprah."
Haney doesn't know what this means.
"It was a little bit fat," explains Rush.
Now, I know that Rush deliberately says certain things to get the media riled up, but this was really a bit silly. Don't get the media riled up when the riposte is so obvious, as in this case. Oprah at her heaviest never weighed as much as Limbaugh does now.
But that's the double standard. A guy can have a paunch, and he'll honestly believe that he's still irresistable to women. But let his wife or girlfriend develop a paunch, and he'll be on her immediately to lose weight!
Anyway, just felt like ranting.
But...there's no denying that he doesn't think much of women. Hilary CLinton, in my opinion, is a lousy politician, but you can convey this by criticizing her politics, not by commenting on her hair, her voice, how much she's aged, ya da ya da... stuff that is never said about a male politician. (Well, Rush does get in some shots about the "Breck girl" - John Edwards because of his perfectly coiffed hair, but usually when he's criticizing male politicians its their politics he criticizes, he does not refer to them as "screeching", for example...but let a female politician say something with which he disagrees, and those subtle little put-downs come into play.
So, I was watching the Haney Project tonight, first episode of the Rush Limbaugh series. And Limbaugh is about 100 pounds overweight, maybe more.
Of course they've got the obligatory beautiful and slender woman in revealing clothing - Haney's wife, wearing shorts up to here, and next week, the skimpiest of bikinis...not quite sure why that's there except to provide eye candy for the guys, as I guess they don't think women are going to watch this.
[Well, let me just say this, pals, some women are watching it and we want eye candy too, eye candy that is most definitely not provided by Rush or Haney.]
So anyway, Rush is hitting a shot, looks at it go, and says, "That's a little bit Oprah."
Haney doesn't know what this means.
"It was a little bit fat," explains Rush.
Now, I know that Rush deliberately says certain things to get the media riled up, but this was really a bit silly. Don't get the media riled up when the riposte is so obvious, as in this case. Oprah at her heaviest never weighed as much as Limbaugh does now.
But that's the double standard. A guy can have a paunch, and he'll honestly believe that he's still irresistable to women. But let his wife or girlfriend develop a paunch, and he'll be on her immediately to lose weight!
Anyway, just felt like ranting.
Monday, January 10, 2011
Welcome to the 10th day of the rest of your life
It's January 10... 10 days since you made your new year's resolutions...how are they working out for you?
Were you going to exercise every single day? And have you now missed a day? That's alright. There's no need to abandon a resolution because, in early days, you skipped a day.
Have you given up chocolate? Successfully? If so, more power to you. If nt, again, don't despair. You're on a program that is going to take 365 days. Having one candy bar is no reason to give up your resolution...or to wait until February before you start up your resolution again.
And in any event, there's no reason to give up chocolate completely. Even when you are in your "losing weight" phas as opposed to your "maintenace phase" there's always room for a bit of chocolate.
If you started trying to lose weight on Jan 1, remember that it's not time to step on your scale yet. You wont' have lost any weight at all, for all that you've been exercising and moderating your food intake. That's because your body is still in the process of getting to a caloric imbalance, so that you can start safely losing 2 pounds a week (maximum.)
Also, just in case you dont know, remember that you weigh more at night than you do in the morning. So, when you do start weighing yourself (and really, I don't think you should. Just try on your slightly too tight jeans once a week to measure your progress) only do it once, in the morning. Because of the food you eat, and more telling, the amount of liquid you consume, you could weight a couple more pounds at night than you do in the daytime. But come the morning and time to urinate, and you will "lose" those pounds right there.
Weight Training Monday
It's Monday, so time for weight training.
Dummbell curls
Leg curls
Straight arm raises (lifting your arms horizontally from your sides, strengthens the shoulders)
Leg extensions
French curls (for triceps)
Situps
Were you going to exercise every single day? And have you now missed a day? That's alright. There's no need to abandon a resolution because, in early days, you skipped a day.
Have you given up chocolate? Successfully? If so, more power to you. If nt, again, don't despair. You're on a program that is going to take 365 days. Having one candy bar is no reason to give up your resolution...or to wait until February before you start up your resolution again.
And in any event, there's no reason to give up chocolate completely. Even when you are in your "losing weight" phas as opposed to your "maintenace phase" there's always room for a bit of chocolate.
If you started trying to lose weight on Jan 1, remember that it's not time to step on your scale yet. You wont' have lost any weight at all, for all that you've been exercising and moderating your food intake. That's because your body is still in the process of getting to a caloric imbalance, so that you can start safely losing 2 pounds a week (maximum.)
Also, just in case you dont know, remember that you weigh more at night than you do in the morning. So, when you do start weighing yourself (and really, I don't think you should. Just try on your slightly too tight jeans once a week to measure your progress) only do it once, in the morning. Because of the food you eat, and more telling, the amount of liquid you consume, you could weight a couple more pounds at night than you do in the daytime. But come the morning and time to urinate, and you will "lose" those pounds right there.
Weight Training Monday
It's Monday, so time for weight training.
Dummbell curls
Leg curls
Straight arm raises (lifting your arms horizontally from your sides, strengthens the shoulders)
Leg extensions
French curls (for triceps)
Situps
Friday, January 7, 2011
How To Speed Up Your Metabolism...Safely
If you use Yahoo as your home page, or as your email provider, chances are that every day when you sign onto your computer, you'll see some kind of article bemoaning people who are overweight, or that is giving you tips to lose weight. Not a day passes, I don't think, when we the American public are informed that are bodies aren't perfect and we must not let that state continue.
Yes, that irks me, as that's part of the problem we in the US have today, this constant bombardment telling us that our bodies aren't perfect and that we must take all steps to make sure they are perfect.
Well, sorry for the mini-rant.
Occasionally Yahoo does come up with some good information that people who want to lose weight can use, and I'll share it here. [Except when their advice has obviously been bought and paid for, as I'll explain below.]
8 Tricks for Boosting Your Metabolism
Do Intervals
Mixing in fast-paced intervals raises your metabolic rate higher than doing a steady cardio workout, and will continue to do so up to an hour after you’re done, says Kristin McGee, a trainer and Pilates instructor whose client list includes Tina Fey and Bethenny Frankel. An Australian study also found that women who did intervals while they were biking lost three times as much fat as those who worked out at a steady pace. If you’re a walker, simply walk at your normal pace for 1 to 2 minutes, then speed-walk for 30 to 60 seconds. Repeat the sequence 10 to 15 times.
Opt for Caffeine
It’s time to hit Starbucks. A study published in the journal Physiology & Behavior shows that coffee drinkers have a 16 percent higher metabolic rate than those who abstain or drink decaf joe, because caffeine increases your heart rate and stimulates your central nervous system. Spread out the cups over your entire day to keep your metabolism running at a boosted rate—just be sure to have your last cup by early afternoon so you can hit the pillow with no problems later on.
CAN YOU TELL ME THIS PIECE OF ADVICE WASN'T BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY STARBUCKS. NO - YOU DO NOT WANT TO DRINK CAFFEINE, AND GET THE JITTERS, ETC. THIS IS A LOUSY PIECE OF ADVICE!
Add Some Ice
Though the increase is modest, there is some evidence that drinking cold water can cause a slight surge in metabolic rate. Since your body maintains a core temperature around 98.6°F, cold water will be brought to that temperature after being consumed and calories are burned during the warming process. Discovery Health deduced that you can burn up to 70 extra calories a day if you follow the common rule of drinking eight 8-ounce glasses of cold water per day. Need another reason to up your water intake? Researchers at the University of Utah found that participants who drank half of the recommended amount of water per day (four 8-ounce glasses), not only showed signs of dehydration, they also experienced a 2% decrease in calories burned per day.
Eat a Big Breakfast
It’s time to nix the oatmeal with skim milk. Instead, start your day with a fatty breakfast, including eggs and even a piece of bacon, suggests Molly Bray, PhD, lead author of a recent study showing that a fat-filled morning meal will jumpstart your metabolism for the day faster than a lowfat, low-calorie breakfast. Another study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology found that people who eat 22 to 55 percent of their total calories at breakfast gain 1.7 pounds over four years. That’s not bad considering those who eat 0 to 11 percent of their calories in the morning gain nearly 3 pounds.
Drink Green TeaNot only does green tea contain enough antioxidants to keep colds and the flu at bay, but it also does wonders for your metabolism, according to a study published in the journal Phytomedicine. Researchers found that people who drank the equivalent of three to five cups daily for three months shaved 5 percent off their body weight. Green tea contains ECGC, a plant compound that stimulates your metabolism, says Rania Batayneh, MPH, a nutritionist in private practice in San Francisco and Portland, Oregon, and founder of Essential Nutrition consulting.
WHAT THEY DON'T SAY IS IF PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS STUDY EXERCISED AS WELL. THEY PROBABLY DID. SO IT'S NOT JUST DRINKING GREEN TEA BUT OTHERWISE SITTING AROUND DOING NOTHING THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO LOSE WEIGHT
Don't Skimp on Dairy
Calcium-rich foods and drinks, including milk, yogurt and cheese, increase the rate at which fat turns into waste, says a study by researchers at the University of Copenhagen published in the The Journal of Nutrition. It doesn’t matter what form of dairy product you’re consuming as long as the serving size is adequate [I EXCISE A STUPID PIECE OF ADVICE HERE] either a full glass of 2% milk or 6 ounces of yogurt is perfect. Also, the study noted that you have to actually ingest the calcium in its natural form; supplements don’t work due to differences in the chemical makeup.
Build More Muscle
Gaining lean muscle mass boosts your metabolism and makes losing weight much easier, McGee says. If you add just 5 pounds of muscle to your body, you’ll burn up to 150 more calories per day without even working out those muscles. And, you can burn an average of 600 calories per hour during your cardio workout thanks to that extra muscle mass. “Muscle burns more calories than fat does, even at rest, so any strength-training activities to build lean muscle are excellent,” McGee says. The key is to challenge all your muscles and do a full-body strength-training workout, hitting your core, arms, legs, back and chest.
Pick Up Heavier Weights
By using heavy weights at a very slow rate—twice as slow as would feel natural—you break down your muscles (you’ll know the weights are heavy enough and the workout slow enough if you start to shake after just a few lifts or squats). Researchers at Wayne State University found that when your body repairs those overworked muscles, it causes your metabolism to increase for up to three days after the workout.
Yes, that irks me, as that's part of the problem we in the US have today, this constant bombardment telling us that our bodies aren't perfect and that we must take all steps to make sure they are perfect.
Well, sorry for the mini-rant.
Occasionally Yahoo does come up with some good information that people who want to lose weight can use, and I'll share it here. [Except when their advice has obviously been bought and paid for, as I'll explain below.]
8 Tricks for Boosting Your Metabolism
Do Intervals
Mixing in fast-paced intervals raises your metabolic rate higher than doing a steady cardio workout, and will continue to do so up to an hour after you’re done, says Kristin McGee, a trainer and Pilates instructor whose client list includes Tina Fey and Bethenny Frankel. An Australian study also found that women who did intervals while they were biking lost three times as much fat as those who worked out at a steady pace. If you’re a walker, simply walk at your normal pace for 1 to 2 minutes, then speed-walk for 30 to 60 seconds. Repeat the sequence 10 to 15 times.
Opt for Caffeine
It’s time to hit Starbucks. A study published in the journal Physiology & Behavior shows that coffee drinkers have a 16 percent higher metabolic rate than those who abstain or drink decaf joe, because caffeine increases your heart rate and stimulates your central nervous system. Spread out the cups over your entire day to keep your metabolism running at a boosted rate—just be sure to have your last cup by early afternoon so you can hit the pillow with no problems later on.
CAN YOU TELL ME THIS PIECE OF ADVICE WASN'T BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY STARBUCKS. NO - YOU DO NOT WANT TO DRINK CAFFEINE, AND GET THE JITTERS, ETC. THIS IS A LOUSY PIECE OF ADVICE!
Add Some Ice
Though the increase is modest, there is some evidence that drinking cold water can cause a slight surge in metabolic rate. Since your body maintains a core temperature around 98.6°F, cold water will be brought to that temperature after being consumed and calories are burned during the warming process. Discovery Health deduced that you can burn up to 70 extra calories a day if you follow the common rule of drinking eight 8-ounce glasses of cold water per day. Need another reason to up your water intake? Researchers at the University of Utah found that participants who drank half of the recommended amount of water per day (four 8-ounce glasses), not only showed signs of dehydration, they also experienced a 2% decrease in calories burned per day.
Eat a Big Breakfast
It’s time to nix the oatmeal with skim milk. Instead, start your day with a fatty breakfast, including eggs and even a piece of bacon, suggests Molly Bray, PhD, lead author of a recent study showing that a fat-filled morning meal will jumpstart your metabolism for the day faster than a lowfat, low-calorie breakfast. Another study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology found that people who eat 22 to 55 percent of their total calories at breakfast gain 1.7 pounds over four years. That’s not bad considering those who eat 0 to 11 percent of their calories in the morning gain nearly 3 pounds.
Drink Green TeaNot only does green tea contain enough antioxidants to keep colds and the flu at bay, but it also does wonders for your metabolism, according to a study published in the journal Phytomedicine. Researchers found that people who drank the equivalent of three to five cups daily for three months shaved 5 percent off their body weight. Green tea contains ECGC, a plant compound that stimulates your metabolism, says Rania Batayneh, MPH, a nutritionist in private practice in San Francisco and Portland, Oregon, and founder of Essential Nutrition consulting.
WHAT THEY DON'T SAY IS IF PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS STUDY EXERCISED AS WELL. THEY PROBABLY DID. SO IT'S NOT JUST DRINKING GREEN TEA BUT OTHERWISE SITTING AROUND DOING NOTHING THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO LOSE WEIGHT
Don't Skimp on Dairy
Calcium-rich foods and drinks, including milk, yogurt and cheese, increase the rate at which fat turns into waste, says a study by researchers at the University of Copenhagen published in the The Journal of Nutrition. It doesn’t matter what form of dairy product you’re consuming as long as the serving size is adequate [I EXCISE A STUPID PIECE OF ADVICE HERE] either a full glass of 2% milk or 6 ounces of yogurt is perfect. Also, the study noted that you have to actually ingest the calcium in its natural form; supplements don’t work due to differences in the chemical makeup.
Build More Muscle
Gaining lean muscle mass boosts your metabolism and makes losing weight much easier, McGee says. If you add just 5 pounds of muscle to your body, you’ll burn up to 150 more calories per day without even working out those muscles. And, you can burn an average of 600 calories per hour during your cardio workout thanks to that extra muscle mass. “Muscle burns more calories than fat does, even at rest, so any strength-training activities to build lean muscle are excellent,” McGee says. The key is to challenge all your muscles and do a full-body strength-training workout, hitting your core, arms, legs, back and chest.
Pick Up Heavier Weights
By using heavy weights at a very slow rate—twice as slow as would feel natural—you break down your muscles (you’ll know the weights are heavy enough and the workout slow enough if you start to shake after just a few lifts or squats). Researchers at Wayne State University found that when your body repairs those overworked muscles, it causes your metabolism to increase for up to three days after the workout.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Wednesday is Weight Training day
When you're just starting out on your weight training regime, there's no need to over due it. There's an old cliche, "No pain, no gain" - that's for weight lifters who are trying to bulk up muscle. You will not get bulky muscles unless you specifically try to do so unless you take supplements designed to promote extreme muscle growth.
But just performing "normal" weight lifting activities is going to incrase your muscle strength, give you a nice curvy bicep instead of a pencil thin one, and help prevent "widow's weeds" aka that flab under the arms most prominent in older women.
The exercises (alternate an arm exercise with a leg exercise, to give the muscles a change to rest between sets):
Dumbbell curls - strengthens your biceps
Leg extensions - strengthens the top of your thigh muscles
Dumbbel french curls - strengthens your triceps (the muscles under your arm). A French curl is when you hold the dumbbell palm out, instead of palm in
Leg curls - strengthens the bottom of your thigh muscles, and calves
Shoulder shrugs - strengthens your shoulders
Abdominal leg pulls - strengthens your stomach muscles
If you don't have a weight bench with a leg attachment, you can do the leg exercises on the floor, but you'll need ten pound legs weights that you can strap around your ankles. For leg curls, just lay face down on the floor and curl your legs up to your buttocks and back.
For leg extensions, sit on a chair high enough off the floor so your feet won't be brushing the ground, and simply raise your legs to a horizontal position, then back to the ground. Leg extensions are typically harder to do than leg curls, as the tops of your thighs aren't quite as strong. Try to do 10 repetitions to start with.
for abdominal leg pulls, don't wear leg weights. Just sit with your butt on the edge of the chair, hold on to the sides to ensure you don't fall off! and draw both your knees simultaneously up to your chin, then back straight out in space, over the chair. (If you don't have good balance, don't try this. Do situps instead).
But just performing "normal" weight lifting activities is going to incrase your muscle strength, give you a nice curvy bicep instead of a pencil thin one, and help prevent "widow's weeds" aka that flab under the arms most prominent in older women.
The exercises (alternate an arm exercise with a leg exercise, to give the muscles a change to rest between sets):
Dumbbell curls - strengthens your biceps
Leg extensions - strengthens the top of your thigh muscles
Dumbbel french curls - strengthens your triceps (the muscles under your arm). A French curl is when you hold the dumbbell palm out, instead of palm in
Leg curls - strengthens the bottom of your thigh muscles, and calves
Shoulder shrugs - strengthens your shoulders
Abdominal leg pulls - strengthens your stomach muscles
If you don't have a weight bench with a leg attachment, you can do the leg exercises on the floor, but you'll need ten pound legs weights that you can strap around your ankles. For leg curls, just lay face down on the floor and curl your legs up to your buttocks and back.
For leg extensions, sit on a chair high enough off the floor so your feet won't be brushing the ground, and simply raise your legs to a horizontal position, then back to the ground. Leg extensions are typically harder to do than leg curls, as the tops of your thighs aren't quite as strong. Try to do 10 repetitions to start with.
for abdominal leg pulls, don't wear leg weights. Just sit with your butt on the edge of the chair, hold on to the sides to ensure you don't fall off! and draw both your knees simultaneously up to your chin, then back straight out in space, over the chair. (If you don't have good balance, don't try this. Do situps instead).
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Do You Need a Support Group?
If you're trying to lose weight, and you're married with a kid or kids, it can be twice as difficult to lose weight. There's so much food available. Of curse there should be only healthy food available... candy bars are okay but your kid doesn't get any benefit out of "fruit rollups" or fruit juices for kids like Hawaiian Punch that are 90% sugar. If you don't want your children drinking pop, start them on real fruit juices, 100% orange juice or grape juice, with no added sugar.
(I say that candy bars or cookies are okay because you - and the kids - aren't being fooled into consuming you think is healthy - fruit - when actually there's only 10% fruit juice and the rest is sugar.
But what about at work? Do you have a colleague who keeps a bowl of candy on her desk for everyone? Don't ask her to remove it so you won't be tempted! That's the first exercise for your willpower muscle. Help yourself to one piece of candy a day, no more. (And don't forget to replenish his/her candy jar once a month or so to show appreciation). Chocolate and candy are not evil! Everything in moderation.
Depending on how overweight you are, cerain people might make cruel remarks. Human nature differs here. Some people decide there and then to lose weight so they wonn't be insulted anymore, others determine to gain more weight to show these creeps that they won't be bullied.
Of course, that's cutting the nose off to spite the face. Yes, you don't want people to think that it was their bullying that caused you to decide to lose weight, on the other hand you must lose weight to reach a healthy level. Answer is simple - you lose the weight because what they say doesn't matter, only your own health matters.
On the other hand, don't suffer in silence - especially if its family members who are making these jokes. Tell them immediately that what they say is hurtful and is not helping you, and if they can't say something positive to be quiet!
(I say that candy bars or cookies are okay because you - and the kids - aren't being fooled into consuming you think is healthy - fruit - when actually there's only 10% fruit juice and the rest is sugar.
But what about at work? Do you have a colleague who keeps a bowl of candy on her desk for everyone? Don't ask her to remove it so you won't be tempted! That's the first exercise for your willpower muscle. Help yourself to one piece of candy a day, no more. (And don't forget to replenish his/her candy jar once a month or so to show appreciation). Chocolate and candy are not evil! Everything in moderation.
Depending on how overweight you are, cerain people might make cruel remarks. Human nature differs here. Some people decide there and then to lose weight so they wonn't be insulted anymore, others determine to gain more weight to show these creeps that they won't be bullied.
Of course, that's cutting the nose off to spite the face. Yes, you don't want people to think that it was their bullying that caused you to decide to lose weight, on the other hand you must lose weight to reach a healthy level. Answer is simple - you lose the weight because what they say doesn't matter, only your own health matters.
On the other hand, don't suffer in silence - especially if its family members who are making these jokes. Tell them immediately that what they say is hurtful and is not helping you, and if they can't say something positive to be quiet!
Monday, January 3, 2011
Monday: Weight Training Day
You're back at work - if you haven't been before now! The holidays are over and now you have to deal with the aftermath - getting back to a regular 9 to 5 routine, and embarking on the process of transitioning to a healthier life style.
Part of your routine must be weight training - 3 ties a week. I do Monday, Wednesday and Friday, but you can choose any 3 days you like. As a beginner, you can't weight train every day - you'll wear yourself out. So you give yourself a day off between workout days to let your muscles recover.
Having said that, weight training is also something you're not going to go full-bore on to begin with. Go to your local sports store or Walmart, and check out their hand held weights. You don't want to purchase a weight machine - like a Bowflex - just yet. As a beginner it's best to start with free weights - dumbbells of various weights, a weight bench with leg attachment so you can do leg curls and leg extensions, or if you can't afford a weight bench yet - and you only need one with a barbell and a 50 pound set of weights - purchase leg weights from the store, and do your leg curls on the floor and your leg extensions from a chair.
The legs are typically a lot stronger than the arms, particularly in a woman, and it's essential that you do arm exercises of all kinds, such as shoulder shrugs, bicep curls and straight arm raises. By using light weights and doing many repetitions, you'll be working on toning your muscles, and ensure that the flab underneath the arms that affects so many older women won't affect you!
Part of your routine must be weight training - 3 ties a week. I do Monday, Wednesday and Friday, but you can choose any 3 days you like. As a beginner, you can't weight train every day - you'll wear yourself out. So you give yourself a day off between workout days to let your muscles recover.
Having said that, weight training is also something you're not going to go full-bore on to begin with. Go to your local sports store or Walmart, and check out their hand held weights. You don't want to purchase a weight machine - like a Bowflex - just yet. As a beginner it's best to start with free weights - dumbbells of various weights, a weight bench with leg attachment so you can do leg curls and leg extensions, or if you can't afford a weight bench yet - and you only need one with a barbell and a 50 pound set of weights - purchase leg weights from the store, and do your leg curls on the floor and your leg extensions from a chair.
The legs are typically a lot stronger than the arms, particularly in a woman, and it's essential that you do arm exercises of all kinds, such as shoulder shrugs, bicep curls and straight arm raises. By using light weights and doing many repetitions, you'll be working on toning your muscles, and ensure that the flab underneath the arms that affects so many older women won't affect you!
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Time to get serious
It's time to start our year-long journey toward acheiving a healthy weight (and a healthy weight is anything up to being 5 to 10 pounds over the weight the government tells you is your optimum weight!) and more importantly, maintaining it.
It starts today.
You are now working on a process toward changing your lifestyle to a more healthy one. And I repeat - do not cut out all chocolates, all sweets, etc. If you deprive yourself of stuff you love, you'll fail.
Not that there is any failure with my program, because it'a a year long process of exercise - exercising your will-power muscle as well as exercising your body, learning from any setback and applying that knowledge as you progress.
What to do today?
Continue to write in your journal after each meal. Did you eat a donut for breakfast and ten minutes later have a headache? Did you have a lot of energy after a particular meal? If so of what food did that meal consist? Were you feeling sluggish after a meal? If so, what did that meal consist of?
Your weight training program is Monday, Wednesday and Friday, so no need to start on that today. If you live in a sunshiney area,,go for a bikee ride. If you're one of those inundated by snow, try to go for a walk or go skiing.
Step on the scale and record your weight - then don't look at the scale again for 2 weeks. It will take you at least 2 weeks before you start losing weight - because you have to set up a caloric imbalance in your body, and your body has to recognize what you're trying to do. (Yes, I'm anthropomorphising a bit.) Also, since you're going to be lifting weights - light weights, if you're a beginner at it - you could even gain a pound or two in the initial two weeks, because muscle weighs more than fat. But you want muscle. Your body is a temple and muscles are what shape the walls. You don't want a temple that sags in and will blow over at the first sign of a strong wind.
If you eat a lot, you are going to cut down your meals by a fifth. One heaping spoonful of everything rather than two or three.
Also, try to get into the habit of drinking a glass of water about half an hour before each meal...you'll find that it does help to keep you feeling full. If there's a lot of food left over, no problem. Don't throw it away, put it in the fridge, properly marked, and have it for lunch or dinner in the days ahead. (If you've never eaten left-overs before, you may well find that food actually tastes better on the second day. If properly reheated, anyway!)
Above all, remember that this is the first day of the rest of your life. And that life is for enjoying.
It starts today.
You are now working on a process toward changing your lifestyle to a more healthy one. And I repeat - do not cut out all chocolates, all sweets, etc. If you deprive yourself of stuff you love, you'll fail.
Not that there is any failure with my program, because it'a a year long process of exercise - exercising your will-power muscle as well as exercising your body, learning from any setback and applying that knowledge as you progress.
What to do today?
Continue to write in your journal after each meal. Did you eat a donut for breakfast and ten minutes later have a headache? Did you have a lot of energy after a particular meal? If so of what food did that meal consist? Were you feeling sluggish after a meal? If so, what did that meal consist of?
Your weight training program is Monday, Wednesday and Friday, so no need to start on that today. If you live in a sunshiney area,,go for a bikee ride. If you're one of those inundated by snow, try to go for a walk or go skiing.
Step on the scale and record your weight - then don't look at the scale again for 2 weeks. It will take you at least 2 weeks before you start losing weight - because you have to set up a caloric imbalance in your body, and your body has to recognize what you're trying to do. (Yes, I'm anthropomorphising a bit.) Also, since you're going to be lifting weights - light weights, if you're a beginner at it - you could even gain a pound or two in the initial two weeks, because muscle weighs more than fat. But you want muscle. Your body is a temple and muscles are what shape the walls. You don't want a temple that sags in and will blow over at the first sign of a strong wind.
If you eat a lot, you are going to cut down your meals by a fifth. One heaping spoonful of everything rather than two or three.
Also, try to get into the habit of drinking a glass of water about half an hour before each meal...you'll find that it does help to keep you feeling full. If there's a lot of food left over, no problem. Don't throw it away, put it in the fridge, properly marked, and have it for lunch or dinner in the days ahead. (If you've never eaten left-overs before, you may well find that food actually tastes better on the second day. If properly reheated, anyway!)
Above all, remember that this is the first day of the rest of your life. And that life is for enjoying.
The Ridiculousness...and Evil..Continues
Just a couple of days ago I shared an article about parents who were so scared their babies were fat that they'd put them on diets at the age of 3 or 4 months and were starving them to death. This was a bad thing.
Now we've got this article, from Yahoo News, which states that 1 in 3 of all babies are obese.
Bullshit, if you will excuse the language.
The article uses data collected in 2001, and it covers only 2 age groups. 9 month olds and 2 year olds. Okay, how about another study at 5 or even 10, to see how many of these hideously overweight 2 year olds turned into obese 5 year olds, and then went on to being obese 10 year olds?
In addition, it's not until one of the very last paragraphs in the article, after every parent has been guilted into looking at their pudgy baby and thinking, "Oh my god, no food for you today, little one," when there's a sentence that states, "Hispanic kids, and kids of lower socioeconomic status, are the ones who most tend to be obese."
So what's with this 1 of 3 number then? Of the 8,000 babies surveyed, exactly how many were Hispanic? How many were of "low" socioeconomic status? And why does this article still go ahead and treat all babies with the broad brush. Just how many middle class white, Asian and black kids were obese? Out of how many surveyed?
It's impossible to be obese at 2 years old, unless you've got a mom who really shoves the food down your throat (and yes, you see the occasional kid like that on the front cover of the National Enquirer). But the vast percentage of kids are not obese at 2, at least not as any reasonable person calculates obesity, and to plant this in the minds of young parents - just more social engineering, more propaganda to get people obsessed with weight and fear even being a measly 5 pounds overweight.
What about the 8,000 kids who participated in this study? The researchers never saw them! The parents answered questionaires! Even at that age kids have the same 3 frames that grownups have, small, mediium and large. Was any adjustment made for that?
What do I mean by "social engineering"? Well, here's another sentence from that bottom paragraph:
However, the results could help target health education and other interventions [that's be social engineering, sending kids away to fat camps] to the populations that need them, he said. The study found that Hispanic babies were at the highest risk of becoming overweight or obese. Babies in families of low socioeconomic status were also more likely to be heavy. [Okay, Caucasian and Asian families, you've just been told that the 1 in 3 number doesn't apply to you. The numbers are skewed towards Hispanics, and those of lower socioeconomic status. So don't you go putting your child on a diet, because chances are you don't need to!]
Here's the complete article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20101231/sc_livescience/athirdof9montholdsalreadyobeseoroverweight
The path toward obesity starts at a young age - even before babies transition to a solid diet, according to a new study.
Almost one-third of 9-month-olds are obese or overweight, as are 34 percent of 2-year-olds, according to the research, which looked at a nationally representative sample of children born in 2001. The study is one of the first to measure weight in the same group of very young children over time, said lead researcher Brian Moss, a sociologist at Wayne State University in Detroit. The results showed that starting out heavy puts kids on a trajectory to stay that way.
"If you were overweight at nine months old, it really kind of sets the stage for you to remain overweight at two years," Moss told LiveScience.
Tracking obesity
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), childhood obesity has tripled over the last three decades. In 2008, 19.6 percent of kids between the ages of 6 and 11 were obese.
But less is known about obesity rates in very young children. In fact, researchers hesitate to label children that young as "obese." Recent studies have raised the alarm about particularly large babies, however. One 2009 paper published in the journal Pediatrics found that babies who gain weight rapidly in the first six months of life are at increased risk of being obese by age 3. Another study, published in April 2010 in the Journal of Pediatrics, found that heavy 6-month-olds are more likely to be obese as 2-year-olds.
What can be done?
"Studies have shown that exclusive breastfeeding - breastfeeding alone, not breastfeeding combined with bottle-feeding -prevents obesity," said Dr. David McCormick, senior author of that study at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. "Getting enough fiber - eating apples instead of drinking apple juice, for example - also helps keep babies on track to a healthy weight. By contrast, improper early introduction of cereal by adding it to an infant's bottle promotes obesity."
Overweight infants
Moss and his co-author, William Yeaton of the University of Michigan, used data from a survey called the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort, which contains data on 8,900 babies at nine months and 7,500 of those same babies at 2 years. (Some families moved out of the country or didn't respond to the second round of surveys.) The researchers classified the babies' weights based on CDC growth charts, which compare a baby's growth to a standardized growth curve. Kids in the 95th percentile of weight were categorized as "obese," while kids in the 85th to 95th percentile were counted as "at-risk," similar to the adult category of "overweight," Moss said.
Even in the first year of life, many babies fall into these two categories, Moss and his colleagues report in the January/February issue of the American Journal of Health Promotion. In the 9-month age group, 15.2 percent of babies were at-risk and 16.7 percent were obese. Among 2-year-olds, just under 14 percent were at-risk and almost 21 percent were obese.
"So you're seeing, combined, more kids being at-risk and obese [in the 2-year-old age group]," Moss said. "Of that combined total, more kids are obese than at-risk at two years."
The find hints at an unfortunate pattern: Kids who start out heavier end up heavier. Of kids who were normal weight at 9 months old, 75 percent were still normal weight at 2 years. But kids who were at-risk at nine months had only a 50 percent chance of being normal weight at age 2. More than 28 percent of at-risk kids ended up obese by their second birthday.
Now we've got this article, from Yahoo News, which states that 1 in 3 of all babies are obese.
Bullshit, if you will excuse the language.
The article uses data collected in 2001, and it covers only 2 age groups. 9 month olds and 2 year olds. Okay, how about another study at 5 or even 10, to see how many of these hideously overweight 2 year olds turned into obese 5 year olds, and then went on to being obese 10 year olds?
In addition, it's not until one of the very last paragraphs in the article, after every parent has been guilted into looking at their pudgy baby and thinking, "Oh my god, no food for you today, little one," when there's a sentence that states, "Hispanic kids, and kids of lower socioeconomic status, are the ones who most tend to be obese."
So what's with this 1 of 3 number then? Of the 8,000 babies surveyed, exactly how many were Hispanic? How many were of "low" socioeconomic status? And why does this article still go ahead and treat all babies with the broad brush. Just how many middle class white, Asian and black kids were obese? Out of how many surveyed?
It's impossible to be obese at 2 years old, unless you've got a mom who really shoves the food down your throat (and yes, you see the occasional kid like that on the front cover of the National Enquirer). But the vast percentage of kids are not obese at 2, at least not as any reasonable person calculates obesity, and to plant this in the minds of young parents - just more social engineering, more propaganda to get people obsessed with weight and fear even being a measly 5 pounds overweight.
What about the 8,000 kids who participated in this study? The researchers never saw them! The parents answered questionaires! Even at that age kids have the same 3 frames that grownups have, small, mediium and large. Was any adjustment made for that?
What do I mean by "social engineering"? Well, here's another sentence from that bottom paragraph:
However, the results could help target health education and other interventions [that's be social engineering, sending kids away to fat camps] to the populations that need them, he said. The study found that Hispanic babies were at the highest risk of becoming overweight or obese. Babies in families of low socioeconomic status were also more likely to be heavy. [Okay, Caucasian and Asian families, you've just been told that the 1 in 3 number doesn't apply to you. The numbers are skewed towards Hispanics, and those of lower socioeconomic status. So don't you go putting your child on a diet, because chances are you don't need to!]
Here's the complete article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20101231/sc_livescience/athirdof9montholdsalreadyobeseoroverweight
The path toward obesity starts at a young age - even before babies transition to a solid diet, according to a new study.
Almost one-third of 9-month-olds are obese or overweight, as are 34 percent of 2-year-olds, according to the research, which looked at a nationally representative sample of children born in 2001. The study is one of the first to measure weight in the same group of very young children over time, said lead researcher Brian Moss, a sociologist at Wayne State University in Detroit. The results showed that starting out heavy puts kids on a trajectory to stay that way.
"If you were overweight at nine months old, it really kind of sets the stage for you to remain overweight at two years," Moss told LiveScience.
Tracking obesity
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), childhood obesity has tripled over the last three decades. In 2008, 19.6 percent of kids between the ages of 6 and 11 were obese.
But less is known about obesity rates in very young children. In fact, researchers hesitate to label children that young as "obese." Recent studies have raised the alarm about particularly large babies, however. One 2009 paper published in the journal Pediatrics found that babies who gain weight rapidly in the first six months of life are at increased risk of being obese by age 3. Another study, published in April 2010 in the Journal of Pediatrics, found that heavy 6-month-olds are more likely to be obese as 2-year-olds.
What can be done?
"Studies have shown that exclusive breastfeeding - breastfeeding alone, not breastfeeding combined with bottle-feeding -prevents obesity," said Dr. David McCormick, senior author of that study at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. "Getting enough fiber - eating apples instead of drinking apple juice, for example - also helps keep babies on track to a healthy weight. By contrast, improper early introduction of cereal by adding it to an infant's bottle promotes obesity."
Overweight infants
Moss and his co-author, William Yeaton of the University of Michigan, used data from a survey called the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort, which contains data on 8,900 babies at nine months and 7,500 of those same babies at 2 years. (Some families moved out of the country or didn't respond to the second round of surveys.) The researchers classified the babies' weights based on CDC growth charts, which compare a baby's growth to a standardized growth curve. Kids in the 95th percentile of weight were categorized as "obese," while kids in the 85th to 95th percentile were counted as "at-risk," similar to the adult category of "overweight," Moss said.
Even in the first year of life, many babies fall into these two categories, Moss and his colleagues report in the January/February issue of the American Journal of Health Promotion. In the 9-month age group, 15.2 percent of babies were at-risk and 16.7 percent were obese. Among 2-year-olds, just under 14 percent were at-risk and almost 21 percent were obese.
"So you're seeing, combined, more kids being at-risk and obese [in the 2-year-old age group]," Moss said. "Of that combined total, more kids are obese than at-risk at two years."
The find hints at an unfortunate pattern: Kids who start out heavier end up heavier. Of kids who were normal weight at 9 months old, 75 percent were still normal weight at 2 years. But kids who were at-risk at nine months had only a 50 percent chance of being normal weight at age 2. More than 28 percent of at-risk kids ended up obese by their second birthday.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Fill-ett or Fil-ay?
I don't normally watch the Cooking Channel - I'm a meat and potatoes girl, I am - but I was channel surfing after watching UConn get defeated by the Oklahoma Sooners (football) and came across Two Fat Ladies. I'd heard of this show - two fat ladies who drive around England in a motorcycle, and cook food.
I'm an Anglophile. When I was young and, more importantly, when my sister lived over there, I went over once a year to take in some plays and drive around the country looking at castles.
And they're fun, although the commercials every five minutes get extremely annoying.
I can't quite place their accents - they say ays instead of ohs (I'm gay-ing to put this sauce on this fish) and so on, a favorite actor of mine, Dinsdale Landen, had the same accent...
But it's interesting, when you listen to British actors pronounce French words, they always pronounce them with a French accent, i.e., properly. But both these ladies pronounce filet - as in beef filet - as fil-ett. Too funny. [And who knew the Brits pronounced oregano, or-a-gah-no, instead of or-egg-uh-no?]
Now I wouldn't eat anything these women cook, not because I don't think they cook well, but because I hate fish, and most vegetables and fruits, and all the other things they cook are way too fancy for me, but it's fun to watch them, and to hear their interplay.
And of course, they're fat. Not extremely obese, but about 100 pounds overweight. Which means they can still move and get about fine.
And the joy of this show is that they are not concerned about calories at all. Or cholesterol. They don't even mention them. It's up to their viewers to cook the food, and portion it out amongst their table companions, and maybe save some for the next day so they don't get a whacking great influx of calories all in one night.
To tell the truth, I doubt if this show is ever shown in England anymore. Just as the English "nanny state" has gone in and digitally removed cigarettes from old movies, so they probably don't want to have these two women, comfortable with their weight, acting as a bad influence on Englanders today who simply must, must, not be overweight!
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that being 100 pounds overweight is healthy for you - I am saying it should be a person's business how much they weigh, and they shouldn't be verbally abused by others because of it. On the other hand, it's ridiculous for an extremely overweight person (i.e., someone 50 or more pounds over weight) to sue a doctor who tells her she is fat and must lose weight, because he "hurt her feelings" (this actually happened). It's a doctor's responsibility - not a layperson's - to give people medical advice, and of course having weight in proportion to your height is simply healthy. Being too thin is worse than being too fat. But being more than 50 pounds overweight cause you so many problems - all that weight to carry on your feet - that it is simply more healthy - especially as you get into your 60s and 70s, to not have to carry that extra weight around.
Okay, so not all guys get a free pass...
Val Kilmer was in the news yesterday, as he's had a tax lien put on his house. The comments section below the article has lots of unkind remarks...most of them laughing at the tax woes of someone who should be rich enough not to have any tax woes, but others regarding the fact that he's about 100 to 150 pounds overweight.
And walking around shirtless, besides.
Interestingly, I checked on the IMDB and he's busy making movies over the last year (being overweight certainly hasn't hindred his career - I daresay he'd even been the leadig man in some of these movies and had a beautiful, slender woman on his arm in each of them...)
Whereas if an actress of similar stature, and age (the 50s) puts on a hundred pounds, she'll probably never work in Hollywood again. And if she was particularly known for her beauty...
Yahoo Has Been Reading This Blog!
or at any rate great minds think alike.
It's Jan 1, and here's what Yahoo news has to say about New Years Resolutions. I share the ones that sound similar to the advice I've been giving you also. (Of course, advice is easy to give, I'm also going to help you follow that advice!)
10 Resolutions You Should Never Make
2. Fit Into Your High School Jeans
Resolving to be healthy is one thing, but setting hard and fast weight loss goals makes them more difficult to achieve. It’s more reasonable to commit to a workout routine, not a number on a scale or some denim that hasn’t been in style for years.
7. Cut Out Sugars and Starches – Completely
Restricting your diet drastically is difficult, if not impossible for an extended period of time. Instead, give yourself small constraints, only eat homemade baked goods, or cut portions in half and you will start to see changes.
The article is written by Marie Claire, and of course it is directed solely at women. Here are some other no-gos that I thought were interesting and a little sad.
1. Get Married by the End of the Year
Marriage is a huge goal, especially if you’re still single, making the odds of failing painfully high. Instead, whether you’re in a relationship or not, focus on what you like about your current situation — you’ve got enough pressure in your life.
[Do some women actually make such a resolution? To get married in a year? How sad, as it implies they're willing to take anyone with enough money, whether or not they're really in love.]
8. Win Back Your Ex
Sure, it’s a fantasy we’ve all had, but an ex is an ex for a reason. Spend the time and energy you would dedicate to getting his attention to looking for new prospects – or better yet, spend it on yourself.
[Another sad one. No wonder guys have got big egos.... once you've been "dumped" - stay dumped. There are plenty of more fish in the sea, and plenty of these will be the right guy for you. Have a little pride!]
10. Try to Change Him
If he’s unwilling to make adjustments for you in his life, you cannot change him. Repeat, if a guy doesn’t want to change, he won’t. Either accept him as is, or walk away.
[And too many women accept him as he is, instead of walking away...]
Okay, sorry to be preachy on Jan 1, but I do find these things so sad and unnecessary - and all brought on by the never-ending media bombardment indoctrinating women into the belief that they have to look like skeletons to be happy, have to have a boyfriend to be happy, have to have a baby to be happy, ya da ya da ya da.
But it's the new year. A time for rebirth. Let's all go onward and upward, ladies.
It's Jan 1, and here's what Yahoo news has to say about New Years Resolutions. I share the ones that sound similar to the advice I've been giving you also. (Of course, advice is easy to give, I'm also going to help you follow that advice!)
10 Resolutions You Should Never Make
2. Fit Into Your High School Jeans
Resolving to be healthy is one thing, but setting hard and fast weight loss goals makes them more difficult to achieve. It’s more reasonable to commit to a workout routine, not a number on a scale or some denim that hasn’t been in style for years.
7. Cut Out Sugars and Starches – Completely
Restricting your diet drastically is difficult, if not impossible for an extended period of time. Instead, give yourself small constraints, only eat homemade baked goods, or cut portions in half and you will start to see changes.
The article is written by Marie Claire, and of course it is directed solely at women. Here are some other no-gos that I thought were interesting and a little sad.
1. Get Married by the End of the Year
Marriage is a huge goal, especially if you’re still single, making the odds of failing painfully high. Instead, whether you’re in a relationship or not, focus on what you like about your current situation — you’ve got enough pressure in your life.
[Do some women actually make such a resolution? To get married in a year? How sad, as it implies they're willing to take anyone with enough money, whether or not they're really in love.]
8. Win Back Your Ex
Sure, it’s a fantasy we’ve all had, but an ex is an ex for a reason. Spend the time and energy you would dedicate to getting his attention to looking for new prospects – or better yet, spend it on yourself.
[Another sad one. No wonder guys have got big egos.... once you've been "dumped" - stay dumped. There are plenty of more fish in the sea, and plenty of these will be the right guy for you. Have a little pride!]
10. Try to Change Him
If he’s unwilling to make adjustments for you in his life, you cannot change him. Repeat, if a guy doesn’t want to change, he won’t. Either accept him as is, or walk away.
[And too many women accept him as he is, instead of walking away...]
Okay, sorry to be preachy on Jan 1, but I do find these things so sad and unnecessary - and all brought on by the never-ending media bombardment indoctrinating women into the belief that they have to look like skeletons to be happy, have to have a boyfriend to be happy, have to have a baby to be happy, ya da ya da ya da.
But it's the new year. A time for rebirth. Let's all go onward and upward, ladies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
