Pages

How to reach and maintain your ideal weight, using common sense.
This blog is for healthy individuals who are mobile.



Monday, August 29, 2011

Kids' Weight Loss Book Creates Furor


One thing I do in almost every blog post is to emphasize how important it is to understand that you want to maintain a healthy weight not for appearance's sake, but because it's just more healthy to do so.

I try very hard to not encourage people to get obsessed about their weight - an obsession which is more prevalent in women than in men and leads to anorexia, bulimia, etc. etc.

And so prone are women to this obsession that I was extremely upset to see the First Lady's program on childhood obesity, which to me - and others - seemed to just get girls started on their life of weight obsession at way too early an age. (Every watch any cartooms aimed at kids these days? They all get in a couple of prosletyizations for staying active and not over-eating - the subliminal message? For God's sake don't be fat or no one, but in particular boys, will like you!

Now we get this piece of crap.

What's the problem that *I* see with the book? Well, it's title, Maggie Goes on a Diet. Why not reshape that - Maggie Becomes a Soccer Star. Make the goal not about losing weight, but about being a great soccer player.

The cover? Fat girl wearing bulky clothing looks in a mirror at a skinny girl. She's holding a strapless, lowcut dress. Implication? Once you're skinny, you can wear a strapless dress to show off your breasts (if any) and be attractive to boys.

Any kid's book should not focus on weight loss, but on achieving something, with the weight loss just an ancillary item. To do it any other way is truly irresponsible.

The author of the article below says the book is hardly likely to influence girls to lose weight or go on a diet. (Why is it being published, then? What other than that can be its purpose, when it's very title screams it out?) And it may well be that no fat girl will read it. But how many cruel girls will buy that book out of their pocket money, and put it on the desk of some fat girl whom they delight in tormenting?

From Discovery News: Kids' Weight Loss Book Creates Furor
n upcoming children's book with the seemingly noninflammatory title "Maggie Goes on a Diet" is causing a firestorm of protest.

According to the book's description on Amazon.com, "This inspiring story is about a 14-year-old who goes on a diet and is transformed from being overweight and insecure to a normal sized teen who becomes the school soccer star. Through time, exercise and hard work, Maggie becomes more and more confident and develops a positive self-image."

You'd think that with one-third of American kids overweight or obese, and children experiencing unprecedented weight-related health problems including diabetes, a book about a girl losing weight and gaining self-esteem would be welcomed. Guess again.

Critics and reviewers are blasting the book, which has not been released and which almost no one (including myself or the experts quoted here) have fully read. It's being called horrible, irresponsible, and dangerous.

Joanne Ikeda, a Nutritionist Emeritus in the Department of Nutritional Sciences at the University of California at Berkeley, criticized the book on "Good Morning America" on several levels. "Overweight children should not lose weight," Ikeda told Discovery News. "Instead, they should grow into their weight. Putting a child on a calorie restricted diet can stunt growth and one takes the risk of ending up with a short, fatter child!"

Different Definitions of Dieting
Part of the reason that the book is causing such a stir is that there is a lot of confusion about what the word "diet" means. Many people assume the word means a calorie-restrictive, semi-starvation regimen. For some, putting a teenage girl -- even an overweight one -- on a diet is tantamount to child abuse, if not an invitation to an eating disorder.

Yet that's not how doctors and nutritionists use the word diet, as in the time-tested advice that "the best way to lose weight is through diet and exercise." The primary definition of "diet," according to the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, is "food and drink regularly provided or consumed; the kind and amount of food prescribed for a person for a specific reason." That is the main definition; it's not starvation, it's actively choosing healthier foods and portions over unhealthier ones -- usually for weight loss.

To be fair, Ikeda had not seen the book, and it's not clear that what Maggie eats in the book constitutes the calorie-restrictive diet she described.

Maggie lost weight, according to ABC News reporter Andrea Canning (who did read the book), "by eating healthier foods like oatmeal, fruits, and exercising more." Maggie doesn't go on a carrot-a-day starvation diet but instead an apparently healthy, sensible one that includes making healthier choices. The goal of weight loss is not to be thin, but to be healthy.

Sending the Wrong Message?

Sexologist and relationship expert Logan Levkoff expressed different concerns about the book in the same "Good Morning America" piece: "There's no question that books like this that teach our kids to focus on what's outside... And to suggest to them that popularity comes with being thin, this is the wrong message to send to our kids."

This is a tricky situation, because whether we as parents and educators like it or not, the "wrong message" is the truth.

Research on fat bias is very clear: thinness is widely associated with attractiveness and popularity. Decades of studies show that people who are thinner are judged overall more intelligent, more likeable, more attractive, more capable, and more honest than overweight or obese people.

The fact that such bias exists may be unfair, but pretending that it's not real (or not a part of the discrimination experienced by overweight people) doesn't fool kids, and doesn't make the problem go away.

Ikeda suggested to Discovery News that "the kids who tease Maggie in the book [should be] called before the school principal along with their parents [and] assigned to write an essay on how kids come in all sizes and shapes, and deserve respect no matter what size and shape they happen to be."

Levkoff echoes this concern, and surely both are correct that the root of the teasing problem lies not with Maggie (or her weight) but instead with the bullies.

But that's really a separate issue; the premise of Kramer's book is a girl losing weight and feeling better about herself, not exploring issues of anti-fat bias and bullying. Maggie wants to lose weight for herself, not to look perfect, nor like a Barbie or a supermodel. She's an overweight teenager who wants to lose weight to be healthier, to feel better about herself, and play soccer.

How Strong Are Media Influences?

"Maggie Goes on a Diet" is, of course, only one of many pop culture items that parents and some experts claim (or fear) will lead to a rise in anorexia or other eating disorders.

Everything from Barbie dolls to TV shows to teen magazines and fashion advertising have been blamed over the years. Even the film "Black Swan" was attacked by critics who were concerned that it would lead to a surge in eating disorders among female audiences.

All this concern is likely a tempest in a teapot. Maggie is, after all, merely an orange-haired character in a 44-page rhyming kids book that won't be published for months. She's not likely to become an influential figure in anyone's life, nor a positive or negative role model. Parents, peers, and teachers exert far greater influence on a child's health and lifestyle than a kid's book.

[I would say that it's all on the peers. Girls especially tease other girls unmercifully. But girls can overeat to gain weight so they won't be getting the unwanted attention of boys, or they can overeat because they're so unhappy at being verbally abused by their peers every day, or they can become anorexic to keep skinny so that people will like them, which is what many anorexic girls believe. blog ed.]

The concern over the book's potential influence also ignores that fact that kids in the book's recommended age range, 4 to 8 years old, don't create their own lifestyles -- they don't choose, buy, or prepare their own food, or set their own schedules or activities. It doesn't matter if a character in their favorite book eats broccoli instead of hamburgers, or spends two hours exercising instead of watching TV.

Their lives and diets are controlled by responsible adults, who will hopefully make decisions based upon medical advice and common sense instead of a kids book.

Sunday, August 28, 2011

OT - disaster preparedness

First, I must apologize for my sporadic posting of late. The news about Pat Summitt has hit me kind of hard - not only because I always admired Pat Sumitt but because it is scary. "They" always say that if you keep your mind active - do crossword puzzles, play scrabble, etc. - there'll be less chance of getting Alzheimers in old age.

That of course is utter bushwa. A mystery writer named Charlotte Macleod - obviously extremely intelligent - got Alzheimer's. Terry Pratchett - a genius - has early onset Alheimers. (Or dementia, whatever.) And now Pat Summitt. Very intelligent people, minds like quicksilver, and they got it.

So brain activity doesn't matter, except that the tragedy is increased ten-thousand-fold when you see a genius gradually losing their memory, their ability to do the most basic things including feeding themselves or going to the bathroom on their own... Alzheimers and dementia are awful diseases and I urge everyone, if you do not already have charities that you support, or if you have more discretionary money than you know what to do with - contribute to Alzheimer's research. The life you save could be your own.

Anyway, here's my thoughts on another kind of disaster preparedness, after Hurricane Irene has been downgraded to a tropical storm. People should be breathing sighs of relief, not getting snarky on the folks that tried to ensure their safety.

A lot of experts (and no, I'm not going to qualify that by saying "experts" as if I think they don't deserve the title) thought that Hurricane Irene was going to be a lot worse than it was, and lots of folks were ordered to evacuate their homes, neighborhoods, etc.

Turns out that for the most part it wasn't necessary. Lots of property damage, but nothing on the scale of what they'd anticipated.

So are these experts to be faulted because "mother nature" weakened the storm?

No.

Everytime a hurricane comes through anywhere, there is a potential for serious damage. People need to have practice in evacuating - they need to have a plan and they need to have experience in carrying it out. Otherwise, when it's the real thing, it'll be an utter disaster, like Hurricane Katrina.

The problem with most people is that they don't believe in the "Cry Wolf" story. After one "unneccesary" evacuation, the next time government officials tell them to evacuate, they'll decide that it's just another false alarm and they won't move. And then the real thing hits, and you've got unnecessary death and suffering until the government comes in to rescue them.

Now, I'm not saying that everyone who refuses to evacuate does so because they're stupid. The problem is looters. All the law abiding folk do as they're told and head to safety, meanwhile a few thieves stroll in and help themselves to everyone's possessions.

There are few things worse than returning to your home to find that unknown people have made off with everything you own, and that you'll never be able to get it back.

Moral of the story - prepare yourself, and your business, for any disaster.

Know what kind of disasters can occur in your part of the world, of course. If you're in a dry state like Colorado or Wyoming, you probably don't have to worry about flooding. But there's always fire. Or just plain old robbery.

Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.

Have a water and fire proof safe for your important papers - and have copies of those important papers in a completely separate location. Always have your computers backed up - and offsite is best, as if a fire rolls through your home and your computer is burned to a crisp, and so is the backup hard drive that was attached to it, you're SOL.

Carbonite is an offsite backup service that backs up everything automatically, and costs very little. Even if its your *third* backup, it's so cheap that there's no reason not to have it.

Have an inventory - and keep it current - of everything you own.

Make a note of everything you'd want to save should there be a fire or other reason for evacuating quickly, always bearing in mind that the most important things you have to save our family.

Thursday, August 25, 2011

No need to choose between career and motherhood...

Of course one statistic this article doesn't mention - are the 88% who are mothers divorced, single parent, or still married to father of her kids?

Most of Forbes' most powerful women are moms
(CBS News) Forbes is out with its annual ranking of the World's 100 Most Powerful Women.

Topping the latest list is German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton moves into the No. 2 spot, followed by Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff at No. 3.

Women on the list come from politics, business, media, entertainment and non-profit groups.

Their power derives from money and might, but also social media, reach and influence.

They control $30 trillion collectively. They're 54 years old, on average. Twenty-nine are CEOs. Eight are heads of state. Seventy-four are list returnees. And 22 are single.

Among many noteworthy moves on the list: First lady Michelle Obama fell from No. 1 to No. 8, and Oprah Winfrey from No. 3 to No. 14.

Moira Forbes, president and publisher of ForbesWoman, discussed the list on "The Early Show" Thursday.

One number that stands out: Eight-eight percent of the women are mothers.

"It's a percentage that surprised even us," Forbes says. "Power women today are not necessarily choosing career or family. They are doing both.

"On average they have two kids. They have all taken unconventional paths as mothers."

Other Lists
World's Billionaires
Forbes 400 Richest Americans
World's Most Powerful People
World's Leading Public Companies
Celebrity 100
2010 World's Most Powerful Women
The number is their age:

1 Angela Merkel
Chancellor 57 Germany Politics

2 Hillary Clinton
Secretary of State 63 United States Politics

3 Dilma Rousseff
President 63 Brazil Politics

4 Indra Nooyi
Chief Executive, PepsiCo 55 United States Business

5 Sheryl Sandberg
COO, Facebook 41 United States Business

6 Melinda Gates
Cofounder, Cochair, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 47 United States Non-Profit

7 Sonia Gandhi
President, Indian National Congress Party 64 India Politics

8 Michelle Obama
First Lady 47 United States Politics

9 Christine Lagarde
Managing Director, International Monetary Fund 55 France Non-Profit

10 Irene Rosenfeld
CEO, Kraft Foods

11 Lady Gaga
Entertainer 25 United States Celebrity/Lifestyle

12 Jill Abramson
Executive Editor, NY Times 57 United States Media

13 Kathleen Sebelius
Secretary of Health and Human Services 63 United States Politics

14 Oprah Winfrey
Media Personality 57 United States Media

15 Janet Napolitano
Secretary of Homeland Security 53 United States Politics

16 Susan Wojcicki
SVP, Advertising, Google 43 United States Business

17 Cristina Fernandez
President 58 Argentina Politics

18 Beyoncé Knowles
Entertainer, Designer 29 United States Celebrity/Lifestyle

19 Georgina Rinehart
Mining Tycoon 57 Australia Billionaire

20 Cher Wang
Cofounder, Chair, HTC; VIA Technologies 52 Taiwan Business

21 Margaret Hamburg
Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration 56 United States Politics

22 Michele Bachmann
Presidential Candidate 55 United States Politics

23 Julia Gillard
Prime Minister 49 Australia Politics

24 Mary Schapiro
Chair, Securities and Exchange Commission 56 United States Politics

25 Anne Sweeney
Co-Chair of Disney Media Networks; President, Disney-ABC Television Group 53 United States Business

26 Aung San Suu Kyi
General Secretary, National League For Democracy 66 Myanmar Politics

27 Ursula Burns
CEO, Xerox 52 United States Business

28 Amy Pascal
Co-Chair, Sony Pictures 53 United States Business

29 Angelina Jolie
Actress, Humanitarian 36 United States Celebrity/Lifestyle

30 Josette Sheeran
Executive Director, UN World Food Programme 57 United States Non-Profit

The other 70 can be found here:
http://www.forbes.com/wealth/power-women#p_3_s_arank

Why Keep A Journal or Diary?

I urge all of my weight loss clients to start keeping a journal from the day they come to see me. But a journal is worth much more than a weight loss tool.

Here's an article from Right Mind Logic. (rightmindlogic.com) [This is a commercial website that sells a program called iwrite.4.life. If interested, check it out. Truth to tell, even though I write everything else on the computer, my journal is always hand written. But, your mileage may vary.)

Basically, there are two advantages of keeping a professional journal:

The process of writing something down forces you to think it through until you understand it.
Storing pieces of knowledge or experience saves you from reinventing the wheel.

Journal writing is an investment
The basic concept of journal writing is simple. You write down any information now that may be useful or relevant in the future.

Think of it as an investment. A few moments now might save you hours in the future. This applies to all kinds of journal writing, private or professional. The "usefulness" of a private journal may simply be the ability to indulge in fond memories. However, in this article I'll focus on a certain aspect of professional journal writing: Don't reinvent the wheel!

Don't reinvent the wheel
While there are many more reasons why professionals keep journals (e.g., to prove what has been agreed upon) I believe the "don't reinvent the wheel" aspect to be one of the most important ones. As a modern professional, you are constantly solving problems. Some are small; some are bigger. Some are challenging to solve, as they require you to mobilize all your creative potential; some are boring but the solution is no less important.

The truth is that we would all like to deal with just the creative and enjoyable stuff, but too much of our time is taken up by the repetitive procedures we can't ignore. That's the area that needs to be fixed in writing: Solved once and for all! So next time you'll just look it up and do it. The best candidates for this "programming yourself" (because what you write up is nothing but a program to solve a known problem) are those tasks that are mildly difficult and occur intermittently. Inevitably, the exact moment you forget how to do it will be just before the problem creeps up again!

But again, these are only potential benefits and they will not come to you automatically. Writing a journal is an investment of your time. Unless you find that you get more out of it than you put into it you will quickly stop doing it. But like with most investments it is not always easy to know if you should get out of it or if you should be doing it differently. That's why you should follow some rules...

Five simple rules of journal writing
Rule number one
You have to stay with it for a while before you make a decision whether to continue. An empty journal has no value. Depending on how much you write, you should give yourself at least several weeks before you can expect to be able to see the benefits.

Rule number two
Make it easy for yourself to enter text. Maybe the most neglected issue in this context is that you have to learn how to type using ten fingers. This is actually a minor investment that will pay off big. It will not take you longer than two weeks to get used to it. The nice thing is that you'll get enough exercise while you write your journal. Only learn the basics and keep writing! There is no excuse at all for not learning how to do this.

Rule number three
Start writing now and get organized while you write. Keep iwrite.4.life™ open and take some notes whenever you come across an activity that gives you the feeling that you will be doing this again in the future and may have difficulties remembering the exact steps. A good idea would be to collect this kind of notes in a How To... Topic. Here are some categories that have proven useful again and again:

How To...
Favorite Mistakes (How Not To...)
Goals
Achieved
To Do
Done
Ideas
And talking about getting organized, you want to check out Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity by David Allen. Really.

Rule number four
Review what you wrote on a regular basis. Take a little time at the end of the day to go over your daily notes. Do you still understand what you wrote? If you wrote down a procedure or a How To... Topic, follow the steps mentally to make sure everything is correct and complete.

Rule number five
Invest some time in learning or improving the fundamental skills that all professionals need. Keep yourself up to date about topics like self-management, goal-oriented planning, project management, (technical) writing, and others. These are all basic tools of the trade for any professional - no matter what the specific profession. For starters, you may want to have a look at How to Write, Speak, & Think More Effectively by Rudolf Flesch.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Guys Can Get Anorexia Too



(This "skinnier" photo doesn't show how gaunt he is now.)

I'm thinking specifically of Sean Murray of NCIS. "Gaunt" is the word for Sean Murray these days. According to his tweets (see below) he's lost 25 pounds. He sure seems to have lost more than that to me.

From an NCIS blog:
Updated: Sean Murray addressed the weight loss from his Twitter account (Gotta love the Twitter!), he said he lost 25 pounds via abstaining from alcohol, most sugar and eating organic food. OMG! No alcohol!? I’m doomed. He went on to address that if you look closely, you can watch his weight loss, via one pound at a time over the course of season 7 of NCIS.

Wow, it’s working. Almost too well. He seems pretty gaunt, that’s for sure and it really seems like it’s beyond a normal diet plan. I have to wonder if he went vegetarian too. That could account for the change we’re noticing more than anything else. To turn vegetarian, you have to be pretty careful to maintain protein intake and other details. That’s if he did.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Pat Summitt Diagnosed With Early Onset Dementia

This is OT, in the sense that it has nothing to do with weight loss, but I'm so devastated by this news that I just have to vent.

Pat Summitt was born in 1952. That meansshe's only 59. 59! And she just announced today that she'd been diagnosed with Early Onset Dementia (aka Alzheimers.)

Of all the diseases that there are, this has got to be one of the worst.

The absolute worst, of course, would be to have a functioning mind inside a body that can't move - that would be pure hell.

But Alzheimers is close. And Early Onset Alzheimers - Summitt could live another 40 years easily...40 years of not knowing her name, not remembering how to get dressed or go to the bathroom...

And she knows its coming...

God this is so awful.

Moral of the story - Don't obsess on how much you bloody weigh! - enjoy your life. Do good things with your life. Because you never know when it could be all over.

Sunday, August 21, 2011

Habits are hard to break

After ten years with the same email password, I changed it a week ago.

Now, every time I go to sign up to my email, I always type in the wrong email. Sometimes I do it 3 or 4 times before I remember that I changed it.

I suppose its 65% muscle memory and 35% memory memory.

Now, breaking a habit that involvese food can take much longer than a week. That's because there are additional factors - such as hunger pains, or at least, "remembered" hunger pains to deal with.

As I've posted before, when I was young, I drank a lot of Pepsi. I had a fast metabolism - I biked a lot during the summer months so I never gained weight then, and any weight I gained over the winter, I would lose very quickly once spring came around and I could go out biking agian.

Then I hit 40, my metabolism changed, and even with me biking the same amount (I have an odometer on my bike and like to keep track of time and distance), the weight wasn't coming off.

I used to drink 6 pepsis a day, I've cut it down to 2. That's a lot of calories!

How did I do it?

Well, it was all about breaking the habit. It used to be that whenever I'd return from a bike ride (I was, and am, a freelance writer who works from home, so I could go out for a bike ride, or a walk, whenever I wanted) I would have a Pepsi. Indeed, it got to be a habit - anytime I got up from my desk, I'd return to it with a nice ice cold Pepsi.

And I had to break that habit.

And I did it slowly. First substituting a glass of water for one of the 6 pepsis, then after a week or so, for 2, and so on.

I had to fight against hte feelnig that it wasn't fair... for 40 years I'd been able to drink Pepsi with impunity - a drink I loved (for I'm not a coffee drinker - and now because of damn biology I had to give it up.

I was not happy.

but it had to be done.

So now, I drink two pepsis a day. One when I get up in the morning, the other at noon.

And that's it.

And my weight remains steady, at exactly the weight I like.