Hey all,
Summer is coming to a close, and I don't like it. Summer is my favorite season, but fall isn't bad either. The real problem that I have with the end of summer is that I usually become less active and less motivated. It becomes harder to exercise, write, and just be productive. One good thing is that I finally have a job interview. The job is research related, but it's only part time which kind of sucks. However, at this point, it's better than nothing. It's kind of sad because, in the past, the end of the summer signaled the start of a new school year. It was a time where I'd see my friends and get back into the swing of things. This year is different because I graduated last fall, and I'm not starting graduate school. We'll see how I carry it.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Clearly, I don't look like an exerciser
Hey all,
I've run into a dilemma over the past couple of months. I have no desire to perform cardiovascular exercise. I lift some weights and working at my dad's sawmill is low level exercise, but I can't seem to do enough cardio. Occasionally, I play some basketball (which I'm not very good at) or go for a short walk, but I have to start covering three miles a day. Everyday! No exceptions! The only plausible way I can ensure success in this endeavor is to exercise in the morning which will be difficult. Or, I can do it immediately after I watch Jeopardy. But, it really comes down to motivation.
As I think about it, I don't know what's stopping me from losing weight. A lot of my confidence or lack there of is due to my body, but I can't seem to do anything about it. However, I also know that I'm not trying very hard. It's time for a change. It's time for me to lose some damn weight before it kills me. My blood pressure is high, and my blood sugar is probably above normal. I just don't get what it's going to take for this change to occur. There has to be an answer.
I've run into a dilemma over the past couple of months. I have no desire to perform cardiovascular exercise. I lift some weights and working at my dad's sawmill is low level exercise, but I can't seem to do enough cardio. Occasionally, I play some basketball (which I'm not very good at) or go for a short walk, but I have to start covering three miles a day. Everyday! No exceptions! The only plausible way I can ensure success in this endeavor is to exercise in the morning which will be difficult. Or, I can do it immediately after I watch Jeopardy. But, it really comes down to motivation.
As I think about it, I don't know what's stopping me from losing weight. A lot of my confidence or lack there of is due to my body, but I can't seem to do anything about it. However, I also know that I'm not trying very hard. It's time for a change. It's time for me to lose some damn weight before it kills me. My blood pressure is high, and my blood sugar is probably above normal. I just don't get what it's going to take for this change to occur. There has to be an answer.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
UFO experiece
Hey all,
A few weeks ago, I was at a bar in Minneapolis. The bar happened to be on the rooftop, and there was a storm outside. At a random glance, I looked into the sky and saw four orbs of light. At first, I thought it was ball lightning, but I haven't heard of any cases where there are four balls outside of the clouds. At first, the orbs traveled in a straight line, then three disappeared behind a skyscraper, but the fourth traveled in a different direction and disappeared into the clouds. It was an unusual experience. For anyone who may suggest it, I was not drunk. This isn't my first experience with a UFO.
My first experience was in high school. It was late at night and I saw a large light floating in the sky. A beam seemed to be emanating to the Earth, and it stayed in this position for about 15 minutes, but I never saw it leave. This incident was late at night, and I was very tired. This could a case of mistaken identity.
The second experience was during deer hunting weekend. I was laying down in the back seat when I looked into the sky and saw two large orbs of light disappear into the clouds. Again, this may have been mistaken identity or some sort of dream, but this most recent was spotted by others. I just wanted to discuss my experiences for anyone who would listen.
A few weeks ago, I was at a bar in Minneapolis. The bar happened to be on the rooftop, and there was a storm outside. At a random glance, I looked into the sky and saw four orbs of light. At first, I thought it was ball lightning, but I haven't heard of any cases where there are four balls outside of the clouds. At first, the orbs traveled in a straight line, then three disappeared behind a skyscraper, but the fourth traveled in a different direction and disappeared into the clouds. It was an unusual experience. For anyone who may suggest it, I was not drunk. This isn't my first experience with a UFO.
My first experience was in high school. It was late at night and I saw a large light floating in the sky. A beam seemed to be emanating to the Earth, and it stayed in this position for about 15 minutes, but I never saw it leave. This incident was late at night, and I was very tired. This could a case of mistaken identity.
The second experience was during deer hunting weekend. I was laying down in the back seat when I looked into the sky and saw two large orbs of light disappear into the clouds. Again, this may have been mistaken identity or some sort of dream, but this most recent was spotted by others. I just wanted to discuss my experiences for anyone who would listen.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Inglourious Basterds
Hey all,
The new film from Quentin Tarantino is out after 8 year of work. I saw it today, but I have to admit that I was disappointed. With a running time of over 2 1/2 hours, the film felt long. The opening scene really drags and is loaded with dialogue. It's supposed to be dramatic and increasingly suspenseful, but I felt that it failed in this regard. These moments occur a few times throughout the movie, but they tend to be anti-climatic and wasted screen time. Honestly, I expected a fast paced action movie which I knew would be gory and violent, but the action was usually abbreviated which left me unfulfilled. And, for anyone who thinks that I just don't like Tarantino, I love Pulp Fiction and like Reservoir Dogs and, while the dialogue in those movies seems interesting and witty, it feels wasted and drawn out in this movie. I had incredibly high hopes for Inglourious Basterds, but it didn't live up to its expectations for me. On imbd.com, it's rated at 8.6, so I may have not watched it in the right mood. For any one who wants a synopsis, I'll discuss the beginning of the movie.
It starts in France with a character who is hiding Jews and gives them up (this must have taken at least 10 minutes if not 20) which introduces you to two of the central characters. Then, you meet the Basterds. They are a Jewish American force lead by a part-Native American lieutenant played by Brad Pitt. He's excellent in this role just like most of his movies. Honestly, he is probably the only face you'll recognize in the movie unless you know who Eli Roth, Sam Levine, or B. J. Novak are. The Basterds only have one mission, and that's to kill Nazis. Lieutenant Aldo (Pitt) also wants his men to scalp their enemies, and they oblige their leader. At this point, a short back story is provided for a couple of the Basterds. As the story advances, a German war hero takes a liking to a young woman who is a Jew that escaped execution at the beginning of the movie. This German has a movie about himself that he wishes to show in her cinema, and she eventually comes around to the proposition simply because she has no choice. This premier is such an opportunity for propaganda that many of the High Officers will be at the showing, and a plot begins. I won't tell you anymore. It's entertaining but not great. 6/10
The new film from Quentin Tarantino is out after 8 year of work. I saw it today, but I have to admit that I was disappointed. With a running time of over 2 1/2 hours, the film felt long. The opening scene really drags and is loaded with dialogue. It's supposed to be dramatic and increasingly suspenseful, but I felt that it failed in this regard. These moments occur a few times throughout the movie, but they tend to be anti-climatic and wasted screen time. Honestly, I expected a fast paced action movie which I knew would be gory and violent, but the action was usually abbreviated which left me unfulfilled. And, for anyone who thinks that I just don't like Tarantino, I love Pulp Fiction and like Reservoir Dogs and, while the dialogue in those movies seems interesting and witty, it feels wasted and drawn out in this movie. I had incredibly high hopes for Inglourious Basterds, but it didn't live up to its expectations for me. On imbd.com, it's rated at 8.6, so I may have not watched it in the right mood. For any one who wants a synopsis, I'll discuss the beginning of the movie.
It starts in France with a character who is hiding Jews and gives them up (this must have taken at least 10 minutes if not 20) which introduces you to two of the central characters. Then, you meet the Basterds. They are a Jewish American force lead by a part-Native American lieutenant played by Brad Pitt. He's excellent in this role just like most of his movies. Honestly, he is probably the only face you'll recognize in the movie unless you know who Eli Roth, Sam Levine, or B. J. Novak are. The Basterds only have one mission, and that's to kill Nazis. Lieutenant Aldo (Pitt) also wants his men to scalp their enemies, and they oblige their leader. At this point, a short back story is provided for a couple of the Basterds. As the story advances, a German war hero takes a liking to a young woman who is a Jew that escaped execution at the beginning of the movie. This German has a movie about himself that he wishes to show in her cinema, and she eventually comes around to the proposition simply because she has no choice. This premier is such an opportunity for propaganda that many of the High Officers will be at the showing, and a plot begins. I won't tell you anymore. It's entertaining but not great. 6/10
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Eugenics, good or bad?
Hey all,
This is a topic that has been an interest of mine for about a year or so. For anyone who doesn't know, eugenics is a genetic based breeding approach which intends to improve society (it was the initial goal at least). However, after being associated with the Nazis and Adolf Hitler, it has since lost steam. It was also the basis for the movie Gattaca where people born outside of eugenics were forced to perform menial jobs, but one of these normal born men makes into the space program. Clearly, these examples are not the best uses of eugenics. Yet, in the future, there may be sufficient technology to repair our illnesses and overcome the weaknesses of genes.
As you may have guessed, I don't think that eugenics is a bad idea on a selective level. I think that if the technology exists, it should be available to everyone regardless of race, class, or any other separating feature. To some degree, it wrecks the surprise if you pick everything about your child, but it may eliminate poor eyesight, obesity, and many forms of disease which I don't think is a bad thing. Eugenics should not be a standard, but it's not evil and may be used to improve human beings one day. Think about it, and let me know what you think.
This is a topic that has been an interest of mine for about a year or so. For anyone who doesn't know, eugenics is a genetic based breeding approach which intends to improve society (it was the initial goal at least). However, after being associated with the Nazis and Adolf Hitler, it has since lost steam. It was also the basis for the movie Gattaca where people born outside of eugenics were forced to perform menial jobs, but one of these normal born men makes into the space program. Clearly, these examples are not the best uses of eugenics. Yet, in the future, there may be sufficient technology to repair our illnesses and overcome the weaknesses of genes.
As you may have guessed, I don't think that eugenics is a bad idea on a selective level. I think that if the technology exists, it should be available to everyone regardless of race, class, or any other separating feature. To some degree, it wrecks the surprise if you pick everything about your child, but it may eliminate poor eyesight, obesity, and many forms of disease which I don't think is a bad thing. Eugenics should not be a standard, but it's not evil and may be used to improve human beings one day. Think about it, and let me know what you think.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Change...expanded
Hey all,
I should probably expand on what I wrote yesterday. I honestly doubt that anyone reads this, but what the hey. Yesterday, I outlined how I was a hypocrite and, in my opinion, an utter failure. In retrospect, I was probably a bit hard on myself. However, I was not wrong in the areas where I was lacking: Health, environment, and the underprivileged. To reiterate, I am currently a member of the underprivileged, so that one will be a difficult problem to fix. Yet, I can outline a plan for the other two. There is also a problem with this, and it's called planning fallacy. Everyone thinks that they are going to accomplish more than they do. Taking that into consideration, here are my plans.
The environment is an easy short term solution. I will look at products to see if they are recyclable, and, if they are, I will recycle them. In my area, no one has to recycle, so it is imperative that I help. This seems minor, but I have to start somewhere.
Health is simple as well. I need to reduce my consumption of food. I've began to eat more vegetables, but I fear that it's not enough. I have to eat less junk food which begins with pop. Also, I should set a weight loss goal of one pound per week which is only about a 500 calorie reduction in food intake for a day. Small steps are better than no steps. Here it goes.
I should probably expand on what I wrote yesterday. I honestly doubt that anyone reads this, but what the hey. Yesterday, I outlined how I was a hypocrite and, in my opinion, an utter failure. In retrospect, I was probably a bit hard on myself. However, I was not wrong in the areas where I was lacking: Health, environment, and the underprivileged. To reiterate, I am currently a member of the underprivileged, so that one will be a difficult problem to fix. Yet, I can outline a plan for the other two. There is also a problem with this, and it's called planning fallacy. Everyone thinks that they are going to accomplish more than they do. Taking that into consideration, here are my plans.
The environment is an easy short term solution. I will look at products to see if they are recyclable, and, if they are, I will recycle them. In my area, no one has to recycle, so it is imperative that I help. This seems minor, but I have to start somewhere.
Health is simple as well. I need to reduce my consumption of food. I've began to eat more vegetables, but I fear that it's not enough. I have to eat less junk food which begins with pop. Also, I should set a weight loss goal of one pound per week which is only about a 500 calorie reduction in food intake for a day. Small steps are better than no steps. Here it goes.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Change
Hey all,
I'm kind of in a gloomy mood tonight because I am a hypocrite. I am a hypocrite like so many other people. I want to improve the world and help to foster change, but I can't even change myself. I haven't lost any weight, and I haven't done anything with meaning in my life. I supposedly care about all these issues and really I've done nothing to support them. The environment is important to me, but I continue to buy non-biodegradable products, drive everywhere, and support companies that don't give a crap about the environment. Helping those who are less fortunate than me is also important, but I have no money. However, I could give rides or volunteer at a soup kitchen, but I don't. Health is another important area for me that, in reality, trumps all the rest, but I'm still fat. I eat loads of food that is unhealthy and slowly shortening my life.
So, the question is simple. How do I stop being a hypocrite? Is it even possible? Because I want to be optimistic, I will leave this alone for now and discuss it in my next post.
I'm kind of in a gloomy mood tonight because I am a hypocrite. I am a hypocrite like so many other people. I want to improve the world and help to foster change, but I can't even change myself. I haven't lost any weight, and I haven't done anything with meaning in my life. I supposedly care about all these issues and really I've done nothing to support them. The environment is important to me, but I continue to buy non-biodegradable products, drive everywhere, and support companies that don't give a crap about the environment. Helping those who are less fortunate than me is also important, but I have no money. However, I could give rides or volunteer at a soup kitchen, but I don't. Health is another important area for me that, in reality, trumps all the rest, but I'm still fat. I eat loads of food that is unhealthy and slowly shortening my life.
So, the question is simple. How do I stop being a hypocrite? Is it even possible? Because I want to be optimistic, I will leave this alone for now and discuss it in my next post.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Negatives
Hey all,
I was reading an article in Men's Health that had an interesting tip. It recommended doing a negative weight work out because it supposedly increases your metabolism for 72 hours. Honestly, it seems too good to be true, and it didn't answer why regular weight lifting doesn't do this. Still, Men's Health is usually pretty accurate with fitness information. So, if you're wondering how to do a negative or what it is, I'll explain it in the next paragraph.
Doing a negative is pretty easy. It's the opposite motion of a normal lift. Usually with a lift like benching, the common practice is to use a weight over your one rep max. This, of course, means that you will need a spotter. However, there's no reason why this can't be applied to lifts normally done with dumb bells or kettle bells. I've only began to do this, and I have yet to see much change. If you want to try it, I would recommend taking it slow if you've never done these before.
If strength gain is the primary objective, you be able to do no more than six reps to achieve the maximum effect. Also, if you're plateaued with your current work out, this can be an excellent workout to break the cycle.. Have fun and good luck.
I was reading an article in Men's Health that had an interesting tip. It recommended doing a negative weight work out because it supposedly increases your metabolism for 72 hours. Honestly, it seems too good to be true, and it didn't answer why regular weight lifting doesn't do this. Still, Men's Health is usually pretty accurate with fitness information. So, if you're wondering how to do a negative or what it is, I'll explain it in the next paragraph.
Doing a negative is pretty easy. It's the opposite motion of a normal lift. Usually with a lift like benching, the common practice is to use a weight over your one rep max. This, of course, means that you will need a spotter. However, there's no reason why this can't be applied to lifts normally done with dumb bells or kettle bells. I've only began to do this, and I have yet to see much change. If you want to try it, I would recommend taking it slow if you've never done these before.
If strength gain is the primary objective, you be able to do no more than six reps to achieve the maximum effect. Also, if you're plateaued with your current work out, this can be an excellent workout to break the cycle.. Have fun and good luck.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Kettlebells
Hey all,
Kettlebells are actually a Soviet invention created to train soldiers quickly during World War II (or so I've been told), but they are also a great workout. Using only one or two, you can do an entire body workout with them. Finding a weightliting program for kettlebells is fairly easy. There are many websites that outline workout plans, and you can find them by googling kettlebells. Still, the best part of kettlebells is that you have a two in one weight workout that includes cardiovascular and weight training which also results in quick muscle creation (or toning) while burning a lot of fat; however, this effect may wear off eventually after habituation.
There are some recommendations for anyone who wishes to try this workout. For men, I would recommend either a 35 or 53 pound kettlebell. For women, I would recommend probably a 20 or 25 pounds kettlebell (lighter if needed). As a caveat, I also recommend that you use a light weight immediately to keep from injuring yourself, and websites contain video and instructions for the lifts which you probably want to watch closely. If you are still unsure, I would ask a personal trainer for help or someone who appears to be experienced with them. However, they are an excellent work out and a nice change of pace. Have fun with them. I know I do.
Kettlebells are actually a Soviet invention created to train soldiers quickly during World War II (or so I've been told), but they are also a great workout. Using only one or two, you can do an entire body workout with them. Finding a weightliting program for kettlebells is fairly easy. There are many websites that outline workout plans, and you can find them by googling kettlebells. Still, the best part of kettlebells is that you have a two in one weight workout that includes cardiovascular and weight training which also results in quick muscle creation (or toning) while burning a lot of fat; however, this effect may wear off eventually after habituation.
There are some recommendations for anyone who wishes to try this workout. For men, I would recommend either a 35 or 53 pound kettlebell. For women, I would recommend probably a 20 or 25 pounds kettlebell (lighter if needed). As a caveat, I also recommend that you use a light weight immediately to keep from injuring yourself, and websites contain video and instructions for the lifts which you probably want to watch closely. If you are still unsure, I would ask a personal trainer for help or someone who appears to be experienced with them. However, they are an excellent work out and a nice change of pace. Have fun with them. I know I do.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
There are a lot of secrets in District 9
Hey all,
District 9 just came out yesterday, and I went to see it last night. I thoroughly enjoyed it. For those who don't know, the story revolves around a group of aliens who have been on Earth for over 25 years, but they live in slum conditions. There's a group that oversees these slums and is beginning an evacuation to a "better" location. This group is known as MNU or Multi-National United, and the man who is responsible for operating this move is named Wikus Van De Merwe.
At the beginning of this movie, he is less than compassionate toward the aliens who are derogatorily called prawns. The group enters the slums where the aliens are notified of their eviction, but they don't take it well. Whenever an alien acts out againt an MNU agent, the being is immediately shot and killed. At this point, the story switches to two aliens who looking for a specific fluid. They find it and head back to their home where they use a chemistry set to alter the fluid into something else. This fluid is then added to a cylinder which is of the utmost importance. However, MNU agents knock on the door to notify the residents of their eviction. They quickly hide the cylinder, but MNU searches the house and discovers it. Wikus finds it and, after playing with it for a second, is sprayed with some fluid. It's at this point where the story really takes off, and I won't spoil it for you. It's a fun wild ride, but it also is making a point about something. I'm really impressed with a film that makes a point while being well written and action packed. I can't recommend this film enough.
District 9 just came out yesterday, and I went to see it last night. I thoroughly enjoyed it. For those who don't know, the story revolves around a group of aliens who have been on Earth for over 25 years, but they live in slum conditions. There's a group that oversees these slums and is beginning an evacuation to a "better" location. This group is known as MNU or Multi-National United, and the man who is responsible for operating this move is named Wikus Van De Merwe.
At the beginning of this movie, he is less than compassionate toward the aliens who are derogatorily called prawns. The group enters the slums where the aliens are notified of their eviction, but they don't take it well. Whenever an alien acts out againt an MNU agent, the being is immediately shot and killed. At this point, the story switches to two aliens who looking for a specific fluid. They find it and head back to their home where they use a chemistry set to alter the fluid into something else. This fluid is then added to a cylinder which is of the utmost importance. However, MNU agents knock on the door to notify the residents of their eviction. They quickly hide the cylinder, but MNU searches the house and discovers it. Wikus finds it and, after playing with it for a second, is sprayed with some fluid. It's at this point where the story really takes off, and I won't spoil it for you. It's a fun wild ride, but it also is making a point about something. I'm really impressed with a film that makes a point while being well written and action packed. I can't recommend this film enough.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Insurance companies....friend or foe
Hey all,
While few people have actually discussed the role of insurance companies in these town hall meetings, I have a difficult time believing that they are playing no role in these proceedings.
People show up in throngs to rant and rave about healthcare reform. However, instead of engaging in an open discussion, they yell and disrupt the discussion. I can understand that people don't wish to pay for healthcare reform, but I don't understand the logic of this behavior. It seems so counter productive which is probably the purpose. Likewise, I don't think people would act this way unless they informed or even paid to do so.
The fact of the matter is that another insurance company (our government) would bring down the price of insurance for everyone. Those who are insured are already paying for the uninsured who have to be treated in the case of an emergency. This runs at about 75 billion dollars per year, and hospitals absorb this cost increasing the price of other care. However, another aspect that isn't mentioned is the cost of chronic care that is also included in this. People who have long stays in the hospital are only covered for a period of time. After this period is over, the hospital again absorbs this cost while maintaining care for this patient. These costs can be
While few people have actually discussed the role of insurance companies in these town hall meetings, I have a difficult time believing that they are playing no role in these proceedings.
People show up in throngs to rant and rave about healthcare reform. However, instead of engaging in an open discussion, they yell and disrupt the discussion. I can understand that people don't wish to pay for healthcare reform, but I don't understand the logic of this behavior. It seems so counter productive which is probably the purpose. Likewise, I don't think people would act this way unless they informed or even paid to do so.
The fact of the matter is that another insurance company (our government) would bring down the price of insurance for everyone. Those who are insured are already paying for the uninsured who have to be treated in the case of an emergency. This runs at about 75 billion dollars per year, and hospitals absorb this cost increasing the price of other care. However, another aspect that isn't mentioned is the cost of chronic care that is also included in this. People who have long stays in the hospital are only covered for a period of time. After this period is over, the hospital again absorbs this cost while maintaining care for this patient. These costs can be
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Scary
Hey all,
I had a slightly troubling experience today. I was getting some gas, and, when I went in to pay for it, I heard some lady mention that someone should take a shot at President Obama after saying that he was going to take away guns or ammo (it wasn't clearly stated). Now, I'm kicking myself for not saying something to women who was with her children. What's more disturbing is that this woman said this at all in public. It bothers me, but it also bewilders me. What do people hate so much about President Obama? Is it simply because he's black? Does it have to do with the fact that this country is changing? Honestly, I didn't want George W. Bush as president, but I didn't want someone to kill him. It just seems so irrational, and I hope that this feeling is not a common one.
However, people do seem to think that liberals are going to take away guns from people, but what predecent is there for this line of thought? Guns will never be fully removed from the hands of United States citizens. Personally, I enjoy hunting and shooting. It's enjoyable in my opinion. In the same light, why is it such a big deal to place some restrictions on who can buy guns? Having stringent standards should help to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and those who may harm others someday. The amount of gun deaths in this country every year including homicide and suicide is staggering, and I think we can still do something about this while maintaining the abilility to own and operate firearms. These are my thoughts for now. I may discuss this in a later post.
I had a slightly troubling experience today. I was getting some gas, and, when I went in to pay for it, I heard some lady mention that someone should take a shot at President Obama after saying that he was going to take away guns or ammo (it wasn't clearly stated). Now, I'm kicking myself for not saying something to women who was with her children. What's more disturbing is that this woman said this at all in public. It bothers me, but it also bewilders me. What do people hate so much about President Obama? Is it simply because he's black? Does it have to do with the fact that this country is changing? Honestly, I didn't want George W. Bush as president, but I didn't want someone to kill him. It just seems so irrational, and I hope that this feeling is not a common one.
However, people do seem to think that liberals are going to take away guns from people, but what predecent is there for this line of thought? Guns will never be fully removed from the hands of United States citizens. Personally, I enjoy hunting and shooting. It's enjoyable in my opinion. In the same light, why is it such a big deal to place some restrictions on who can buy guns? Having stringent standards should help to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and those who may harm others someday. The amount of gun deaths in this country every year including homicide and suicide is staggering, and I think we can still do something about this while maintaining the abilility to own and operate firearms. These are my thoughts for now. I may discuss this in a later post.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
3 cans a day
Hey all,
As I stated in a previous post, I consume an insane amount of pop (soda) everyday. It's a serious problem that is beginning to take a serious toll on my body. My plan is simple. I will wean off of pop slowly. By using a step-wise process, I will hopefully be able to reduce my consumption until I do not drink it at all. The first step is an easy which will cut my consumption in half. I will drink 3 cans of pop a day. This includes everything from eating out to eating with regular meals or just random pop drinking. So, I also love this Mongolian grill in Fargo (yes, the one mentioned in the movie) where I usually drink pop. If I still want to drink pop there, I can't drink any pop earlier in the day. I'll keep you posted on how this works, and I'll lay out the other plans for weight loss I plan on employing.
As I stated in a previous post, I consume an insane amount of pop (soda) everyday. It's a serious problem that is beginning to take a serious toll on my body. My plan is simple. I will wean off of pop slowly. By using a step-wise process, I will hopefully be able to reduce my consumption until I do not drink it at all. The first step is an easy which will cut my consumption in half. I will drink 3 cans of pop a day. This includes everything from eating out to eating with regular meals or just random pop drinking. So, I also love this Mongolian grill in Fargo (yes, the one mentioned in the movie) where I usually drink pop. If I still want to drink pop there, I can't drink any pop earlier in the day. I'll keep you posted on how this works, and I'll lay out the other plans for weight loss I plan on employing.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Watchmen
Hey all,
Many consider this to be the greatest graphic novel of all time. I don't know if I would call it the greatest ever, but it is very high on my list. The movie did not quite live up to its expectations. I've read it 8 times because it's complex and fun. I'll recap it quickly for anyone who's wondering what it's about.
The story revolves around a group of heroes who have been outlawed. The setting is 1985, and the world is on the brink of nuclear annihilation. Some of the heroes remain in hiding. One has continued to work as a vigilante, and the others work for the government. The heroes are largely like batman with no superhuman abilities. However, one does have superpowers, and he is also the only deterrent to nuclear war.
The trouble begins when a hero is murdered. This hero is the Comedian, and he has been working for the government. Another hero named Rorschach investigates and begins to suspect a plot to kill heroes. After contacting possible targets, another is exiled. The plot gains support, and the world may be at stake if the culprit isn't discovered soon enough. Back stories follow which provide plenty of character development. This is one graphic novel that does not disappoint, and I don't wish to spoil anything. Read it!
Many consider this to be the greatest graphic novel of all time. I don't know if I would call it the greatest ever, but it is very high on my list. The movie did not quite live up to its expectations. I've read it 8 times because it's complex and fun. I'll recap it quickly for anyone who's wondering what it's about.
The story revolves around a group of heroes who have been outlawed. The setting is 1985, and the world is on the brink of nuclear annihilation. Some of the heroes remain in hiding. One has continued to work as a vigilante, and the others work for the government. The heroes are largely like batman with no superhuman abilities. However, one does have superpowers, and he is also the only deterrent to nuclear war.
The trouble begins when a hero is murdered. This hero is the Comedian, and he has been working for the government. Another hero named Rorschach investigates and begins to suspect a plot to kill heroes. After contacting possible targets, another is exiled. The plot gains support, and the world may be at stake if the culprit isn't discovered soon enough. Back stories follow which provide plenty of character development. This is one graphic novel that does not disappoint, and I don't wish to spoil anything. Read it!
Sunday, August 9, 2009
I make a mistake. It's freedieting.com
Hey all,
I'm sorry. The correct site is freedieting.com. The other site is a diet site, but it's a lot of lose weight quick schemes that don't work. To lose one pound of fat, 3500 more calories have to be burned than consumed. To lose 25 pounds in a month, you would have to burn 87,500 calories more than you consume. That's just under 3000 calories burned a day. You could not eat and exercise heavily, and you may not burn off that many calories a day. Unless you are consuming 5000 calories or so, this isn't realistic, and it definitely isn't healthy.
I'm sorry. The correct site is freedieting.com. The other site is a diet site, but it's a lot of lose weight quick schemes that don't work. To lose one pound of fat, 3500 more calories have to be burned than consumed. To lose 25 pounds in a month, you would have to burn 87,500 calories more than you consume. That's just under 3000 calories burned a day. You could not eat and exercise heavily, and you may not burn off that many calories a day. Unless you are consuming 5000 calories or so, this isn't realistic, and it definitely isn't healthy.
freediet.com
hey all,
I just wanted to plug this site quick. I'm not receiving any compensation for this, but I was supremely impressed with this website. It provides a lot of accurate information about weight loss and encourages fat loss. They not only want people to change their diet, but also exercise habits that include cardiovascular activity and weight lifting. With that being said, I would like to discuss the importance of these three activities and how they relate to weight.
Diet is obviously important to weight loss, and people tend to approach this the wrong way. We need food to survive and our bodies are meant to survive as long as possible, yet people so often starve themselves in an effort to lose weight. Eventually, metabolisms crash and the weight loss stops. Oddly enough, eating all three meals and snacking may be the best way to do this. The proportions become smaller.
Cardiovascular exercise is an excellent way to maintain or improve health, and it burns a good chunk of calories. However, without a diet change, this can easily be compensated for by just eating more food. The combination of these is the best option. Also, exercise increases metabolism for a short time, but there's a problem using only these two approaches. Muscle loss will occur with fat loss. This is easy to be fixed.
Lifting weights is the way to stop muscle loss. It has numerous other benefits as well. It's increases bone strength and metabolism for an entire day. Now, I'm sure many people don't want to gain muscle weight, but there is an easy solution to this. By doing 15 repetitions per set, you will only tone muscle and not gain it. This is final piece to weight loss puzzle that is so often ignored. By combining these three approaches to weight loss, success is much more likely.
I just wanted to plug this site quick. I'm not receiving any compensation for this, but I was supremely impressed with this website. It provides a lot of accurate information about weight loss and encourages fat loss. They not only want people to change their diet, but also exercise habits that include cardiovascular activity and weight lifting. With that being said, I would like to discuss the importance of these three activities and how they relate to weight.
Diet is obviously important to weight loss, and people tend to approach this the wrong way. We need food to survive and our bodies are meant to survive as long as possible, yet people so often starve themselves in an effort to lose weight. Eventually, metabolisms crash and the weight loss stops. Oddly enough, eating all three meals and snacking may be the best way to do this. The proportions become smaller.
Cardiovascular exercise is an excellent way to maintain or improve health, and it burns a good chunk of calories. However, without a diet change, this can easily be compensated for by just eating more food. The combination of these is the best option. Also, exercise increases metabolism for a short time, but there's a problem using only these two approaches. Muscle loss will occur with fat loss. This is easy to be fixed.
Lifting weights is the way to stop muscle loss. It has numerous other benefits as well. It's increases bone strength and metabolism for an entire day. Now, I'm sure many people don't want to gain muscle weight, but there is an easy solution to this. By doing 15 repetitions per set, you will only tone muscle and not gain it. This is final piece to weight loss puzzle that is so often ignored. By combining these three approaches to weight loss, success is much more likely.
Friday, August 7, 2009
G. I. Joe
Hey all,
I just saw this movie, but I have to tell you that I wasn't a fan of it as a kid. I was just a little too young to really enjoy it, but my brothers loved the show and the movie. I also enjoyed this flick. It was campy, fun, and filled with action. The characters are developed well enough for a novice like me to identify and follow. But, seriously, the action was crazy, fun, and present throughout. As expected, the acting is less than oscar worthy, but, if anyone expects that level of acting, they will be disappointed. Finally, it was funny. And, I think, it was going for all of this. It's meant to be a little cheesy and somewhat laughable. Just in case people are wondering about the plot, I'll provide a little synopsis.
The story begins with the introduction of some new weaponry. A convoy is supposed to carry it to a safe destination, at which point, you meet Duke and Ripcord. The convoy is attacked by an unknown force (Cobra), and you meet the Baroness for first time. Just when things seem grim, the G. I. Joes show up with Scarlett, Heavy Duty, and Snake Eyes who save the day. The story is off as Duke and Ripcord join the G. I. Joes. To tell you more begins to ruin the fun, so I'm going to let you find out for yourself. You may be surprised just how enjoyable it is.
I just saw this movie, but I have to tell you that I wasn't a fan of it as a kid. I was just a little too young to really enjoy it, but my brothers loved the show and the movie. I also enjoyed this flick. It was campy, fun, and filled with action. The characters are developed well enough for a novice like me to identify and follow. But, seriously, the action was crazy, fun, and present throughout. As expected, the acting is less than oscar worthy, but, if anyone expects that level of acting, they will be disappointed. Finally, it was funny. And, I think, it was going for all of this. It's meant to be a little cheesy and somewhat laughable. Just in case people are wondering about the plot, I'll provide a little synopsis.
The story begins with the introduction of some new weaponry. A convoy is supposed to carry it to a safe destination, at which point, you meet Duke and Ripcord. The convoy is attacked by an unknown force (Cobra), and you meet the Baroness for first time. Just when things seem grim, the G. I. Joes show up with Scarlett, Heavy Duty, and Snake Eyes who save the day. The story is off as Duke and Ripcord join the G. I. Joes. To tell you more begins to ruin the fun, so I'm going to let you find out for yourself. You may be surprised just how enjoyable it is.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
BMI.....ridiculous
Hey all,
So, I wanted to discuss the BMI some more. This scale was created between 1830 and 1850 by Adolphe Quetelet. Yet, since that time, I know of no study that has either tried to verify or correct this data. While I am not a full blown expert, I do read weigh loss articles where this statistic is used regularly. It does harken back to the idea that this scale is soley based on weight and doesn't bear in mind body fat. I think that body fat percentages (which are not perfect either) would be a better indicator of overall health of an individual and our nation en masse. Moreover, I don't believe the BMI to be a tough fix.
Next, it would not be difficult to adjust the BMI to increase its accuracy. The research design is simple. You take people's height and weight, but you also measure their body fat percentage using the water based method of discovering body fat (it's the most accurate). After a sample of 10,000 or so, you should have an accurate comparison. After adding or substracting a small number from the weight or height, there would be a better picture of this nation's health.
Finally, I think the reason that this hasn't been done has to be addressed. Scientists receive large grants of $500,000 to fix this "problem". If weight loss is their livelihood, there may be no incentive to actually discover a long term weight loss program. Also, the research in this area is scarily consistent. After six months of weight loss programs, participants have lost 8% of their body weight. However, the program ends, and they are just followed by the study. At which point, they slowly gain the weight back. These studies need to last for a longer period of time (some do) and see if the programs actually work over the long term. Still, the first question needs to be asked, is the weight problem as serious as we've been told? Until the BMI is replaced with something better or is corrected, we'll never know.
So, I wanted to discuss the BMI some more. This scale was created between 1830 and 1850 by Adolphe Quetelet. Yet, since that time, I know of no study that has either tried to verify or correct this data. While I am not a full blown expert, I do read weigh loss articles where this statistic is used regularly. It does harken back to the idea that this scale is soley based on weight and doesn't bear in mind body fat. I think that body fat percentages (which are not perfect either) would be a better indicator of overall health of an individual and our nation en masse. Moreover, I don't believe the BMI to be a tough fix.
Next, it would not be difficult to adjust the BMI to increase its accuracy. The research design is simple. You take people's height and weight, but you also measure their body fat percentage using the water based method of discovering body fat (it's the most accurate). After a sample of 10,000 or so, you should have an accurate comparison. After adding or substracting a small number from the weight or height, there would be a better picture of this nation's health.
Finally, I think the reason that this hasn't been done has to be addressed. Scientists receive large grants of $500,000 to fix this "problem". If weight loss is their livelihood, there may be no incentive to actually discover a long term weight loss program. Also, the research in this area is scarily consistent. After six months of weight loss programs, participants have lost 8% of their body weight. However, the program ends, and they are just followed by the study. At which point, they slowly gain the weight back. These studies need to last for a longer period of time (some do) and see if the programs actually work over the long term. Still, the first question needs to be asked, is the weight problem as serious as we've been told? Until the BMI is replaced with something better or is corrected, we'll never know.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Being fat and the BMI
Hey all,
You know that statistic that says people in this country are largely overweight and obese? Well, if you don't, experts say that 2/3 of this nation is overweight and half of those are obese. These numbers are based solely on information obtained with the BMI or Body Mass Index. It's a simple calculation: Body weight in kilograms divided by height squared (in meters). For example, I weigh 330 pounds divided by 2.2 which is 150 kg. My height is 6 feet or 72 inches times 0.0254 which equals 1.83 meters. That squared is 3.445. So, 150 divided by 3.445 equals 43.54. According to their standard, I am morbidly obese, and this may be correct. However, I could lose 110 pounds, and I would be just under obese (BMI =29).
Now, there is no question that we consuming more food today than we ever have before. However, we also consuming more meat than ever before. Also, our food contains many additives that may affect our weight which just makes us larger. Another increasingly popular trend is weight lifting. It's attractive for men to be muscular, and, likewise, there is a level of fitness that women aspire towards which might pack on some muscular weight. It's an easy measure, but it is flawed. I will continue to talk about this issue in my next post. Stay tuned.
You know that statistic that says people in this country are largely overweight and obese? Well, if you don't, experts say that 2/3 of this nation is overweight and half of those are obese. These numbers are based solely on information obtained with the BMI or Body Mass Index. It's a simple calculation: Body weight in kilograms divided by height squared (in meters). For example, I weigh 330 pounds divided by 2.2 which is 150 kg. My height is 6 feet or 72 inches times 0.0254 which equals 1.83 meters. That squared is 3.445. So, 150 divided by 3.445 equals 43.54. According to their standard, I am morbidly obese, and this may be correct. However, I could lose 110 pounds, and I would be just under obese (BMI =29).
Now, there is no question that we consuming more food today than we ever have before. However, we also consuming more meat than ever before. Also, our food contains many additives that may affect our weight which just makes us larger. Another increasingly popular trend is weight lifting. It's attractive for men to be muscular, and, likewise, there is a level of fitness that women aspire towards which might pack on some muscular weight. It's an easy measure, but it is flawed. I will continue to talk about this issue in my next post. Stay tuned.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Healthy Habits
Hey all,
I need to get back into some healthy habits. First off, I need to eat a more balanced nutritional diet. I've come up with a plan for this, but that's easier said than done. First off, I should consume a large breakfast where I consume some milk, whole wheat toast, another protein, and probably some fruit. I should also include some fruits and vegetables as snacks throughout the day. For lunch, I should have a protein with a fruit and a veggie. Supper would also be very similar to lunch except smaller. That's a first basic step that isn't so basic.
Next, I need to exercise more. This was an area where I excelled for a while, but it has become difficult after moving back to my parent's house (I'm looking for a job). I think the key to success here is to vary my workouts. I usually would just go for a run, but this is hard especially later in the day. I have a basketball and golf clubs which I could probably put to good use. Hopefully, I can get back on track. Any tips?
I need to get back into some healthy habits. First off, I need to eat a more balanced nutritional diet. I've come up with a plan for this, but that's easier said than done. First off, I should consume a large breakfast where I consume some milk, whole wheat toast, another protein, and probably some fruit. I should also include some fruits and vegetables as snacks throughout the day. For lunch, I should have a protein with a fruit and a veggie. Supper would also be very similar to lunch except smaller. That's a first basic step that isn't so basic.
Next, I need to exercise more. This was an area where I excelled for a while, but it has become difficult after moving back to my parent's house (I'm looking for a job). I think the key to success here is to vary my workouts. I usually would just go for a run, but this is hard especially later in the day. I have a basketball and golf clubs which I could probably put to good use. Hopefully, I can get back on track. Any tips?
Monday, August 3, 2009
Pop
Hey all,
I have a serious problem. I know that pop (soda) is terribly unhealthy with its high calories and low nutritional values. It also has carbonic acid which isn't good for teeth and carbonated water which affects bone density negatively. For some reason, I have not been able to quit the stuff. I know that I can or at least should be able to, but this hasn't happened yet. I thought that blogging about this issue would provide strength and a new resolve for me. My consumption wouldn't be so bad if it were only one or even two cans a day, but I drink probably an average of six cans a day. It shows too. I now weigh 330 pounds, and it's time for a change. I want this monkey off my back and, hopefully, I took the first step towards that goal today. Toss some helpful advice my way if you feel like it.
On a related note, my parents are both diabetic, and this seems to be the path in which I'm heading as well. It's a serious problem for this country as well as me, and I know that this chronic disease will greatly shorten my life. So, maybe, just maybe, I need to take this adage to heart: "If you think you can or you can't, you're right." It's time for me to believe in myself.
I have a serious problem. I know that pop (soda) is terribly unhealthy with its high calories and low nutritional values. It also has carbonic acid which isn't good for teeth and carbonated water which affects bone density negatively. For some reason, I have not been able to quit the stuff. I know that I can or at least should be able to, but this hasn't happened yet. I thought that blogging about this issue would provide strength and a new resolve for me. My consumption wouldn't be so bad if it were only one or even two cans a day, but I drink probably an average of six cans a day. It shows too. I now weigh 330 pounds, and it's time for a change. I want this monkey off my back and, hopefully, I took the first step towards that goal today. Toss some helpful advice my way if you feel like it.
On a related note, my parents are both diabetic, and this seems to be the path in which I'm heading as well. It's a serious problem for this country as well as me, and I know that this chronic disease will greatly shorten my life. So, maybe, just maybe, I need to take this adage to heart: "If you think you can or you can't, you're right." It's time for me to believe in myself.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Fundamentalism....fun for everyone
Hey all,
Fundamentalism is not something that I consider to be a good thing. It tends to lead to absolutes and group think. It's great that people have such zeal for their beliefs, but this energy could be put to better use. Imagine if the energy used to attack beliefs were put to helping people. That would bring about an amazing change. I bring this up because I read some quotes from Christians on wikipedia. Now, I will admit that I did not fact check this information, and the quotes are so extreme that I originally considered them to be hyperbole. However, I no longer believe this to be the case. The thing that really surprises me is the anti-science, anti-atheism, anti-homosexuality, and anti-liberal nature of these comments.
In the view of a scientist, liberal, and self-acclaimed logical thinker, these comments are, at once, hilarious and scary. A sample argument is: "If we came from monkeys, then why aren't we born monkeys (apes)" as an attack against evolution, but they include many others. Attacks against gravity, a spherical Earth, and a heliocentric solar system (geocentric is the only way apparently) are there. Atheists are considered to be less than human, somehow, in these discussions. Liberal public schools (didn't realize they were so highly polarized toward liberalism) are also a topic of discussion, and, of course, homosexuality. Part of me wonders where they receive this information, but it's also sad in a way. These "Christians" who openly pass judgment on others are alienating people and slowly reducing the religion to fundamentalist zealots. I would encourage other ways, but I don't think they'd listen. Anyone agree or disagree?
P.S. I know some Christians (they are not the majority) who are excellent representatives of the religion and are, in my opinion, Christ-like.
Fundamentalism is not something that I consider to be a good thing. It tends to lead to absolutes and group think. It's great that people have such zeal for their beliefs, but this energy could be put to better use. Imagine if the energy used to attack beliefs were put to helping people. That would bring about an amazing change. I bring this up because I read some quotes from Christians on wikipedia. Now, I will admit that I did not fact check this information, and the quotes are so extreme that I originally considered them to be hyperbole. However, I no longer believe this to be the case. The thing that really surprises me is the anti-science, anti-atheism, anti-homosexuality, and anti-liberal nature of these comments.
In the view of a scientist, liberal, and self-acclaimed logical thinker, these comments are, at once, hilarious and scary. A sample argument is: "If we came from monkeys, then why aren't we born monkeys (apes)" as an attack against evolution, but they include many others. Attacks against gravity, a spherical Earth, and a heliocentric solar system (geocentric is the only way apparently) are there. Atheists are considered to be less than human, somehow, in these discussions. Liberal public schools (didn't realize they were so highly polarized toward liberalism) are also a topic of discussion, and, of course, homosexuality. Part of me wonders where they receive this information, but it's also sad in a way. These "Christians" who openly pass judgment on others are alienating people and slowly reducing the religion to fundamentalist zealots. I would encourage other ways, but I don't think they'd listen. Anyone agree or disagree?
P.S. I know some Christians (they are not the majority) who are excellent representatives of the religion and are, in my opinion, Christ-like.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Bible quotes
Hey all,
I don't want to bash Christianity or the bible, but there are times when Christians make it difficult. If people used the teachings of Christ as a guideline for the treatment of humanity, this world would be a pretty damn good place. However, people get bogged down in the perfection of the bible and the apparent conservatism of Jesus.
First off, the bible is not perfect. It was constructed in its current form at the Council of Nicea. The Da Vinci Code discusses this, but the meeting itself was more about the divinity of Jesus. It was decided that more God-like and less human. Other scripture was left out that did not match this standard, but few know anything about this meeting. This occurred around 400 A.D., but the bible has been translated many times, and the translations are probably not perfect ones. Finally, until the days of Guttenberg, the bible was copied by hand. This alone should be a clue that it could have been changed with relative ease. I know there are a lot of people who would disagree with me, but the teachings of Jesus can not be ignored.
Jesus was not a conservative. He never outright discussed homosexuality or abortion (although people have tried to say that he did). However, he did discuss wealth, taxes, and offenses (maybe war). Jesus told followers that it'd be easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to go to heaven (Matthew 19:24). Jesus to give Caesar what is Caesar's, and to give God what is God's (Matthew 22:21) which I take, in one regard, as pay your taxes. When an evil one strikes you, turn and offer up the other cheek as well (Matthew 5:39). This seems like a clear statement of non-violence. There are many teachings like this, and I don't understand how people can construe them so differently.
I don't want to bash Christianity or the bible, but there are times when Christians make it difficult. If people used the teachings of Christ as a guideline for the treatment of humanity, this world would be a pretty damn good place. However, people get bogged down in the perfection of the bible and the apparent conservatism of Jesus.
First off, the bible is not perfect. It was constructed in its current form at the Council of Nicea. The Da Vinci Code discusses this, but the meeting itself was more about the divinity of Jesus. It was decided that more God-like and less human. Other scripture was left out that did not match this standard, but few know anything about this meeting. This occurred around 400 A.D., but the bible has been translated many times, and the translations are probably not perfect ones. Finally, until the days of Guttenberg, the bible was copied by hand. This alone should be a clue that it could have been changed with relative ease. I know there are a lot of people who would disagree with me, but the teachings of Jesus can not be ignored.
Jesus was not a conservative. He never outright discussed homosexuality or abortion (although people have tried to say that he did). However, he did discuss wealth, taxes, and offenses (maybe war). Jesus told followers that it'd be easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to go to heaven (Matthew 19:24). Jesus to give Caesar what is Caesar's, and to give God what is God's (Matthew 22:21) which I take, in one regard, as pay your taxes. When an evil one strikes you, turn and offer up the other cheek as well (Matthew 5:39). This seems like a clear statement of non-violence. There are many teachings like this, and I don't understand how people can construe them so differently.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)