Okay, my cousin's husband just called me to task on my last blog post about Supersize Me and Fat Head.
He's calling me out, rightly so, for saying that vegans are a bunch of militant hippies with no upper body strength. To prove his point, he mentioned that his wife, my cousin, the Amazon workout freak, is a vegan.
Honestly, I didn't know this. Erin, his wife, is one of the two fittest people I know. The other being my buddy Patrick. Both of them are crossfitters. Both of them are in incredible shape. Both of them take their fitness to include not just workouts, but diets as well.
Now, my point in the previous post wasn't really to bag on vegans. It was to bag on Supersize Me and I used vegans to illustrate two basic points.
First, that sometimes people have an agenda regarding food. With vegans, that agenda is pretty obvious. It's partly nutritional, but it's also political. This could be said about a lot of groups in the food debate, including the guys who make the nutritional pyramid. Honestly, the controversy about the new food pyramid was probably akin to what I'd expect about a debate on whether it's prudent for 15 year olds to be sexually active. I still can't believe the controversy that thing stirred up.
Second, that veganism, or any diet, has advantages and disadvantages. I believe the advantages of being a vegan outweigh the disadvantages, but there are disadvantages. I think that generally speaking, it is not the optimal diet for a person trying to add strength.
Doesn't mean you can't add strength. It means it's harder and more problematic than it would be on other diets.
Most of the vegans I know are admirably slender. Frankly, they're some of the most physically attractive people I know of, generally speaking.
So, if looking good and feeling good are your goal, veganism is probably a great choice. You should be aware of the potential vitamin deficiencies that could result. You should do something to make sure you're getting sufficient iron, but as a lifestyle choice, this one isn't bad, and is better than most.
The bottom line is, there are dangers with a vegan diet. If you account for them, you're going to be fine. Is it a perfect diet? No. Is it a good diet? Yeah, I'd say on balance, it can be.
You'll notice a lot of shading, here. I've acknowledged a lot of benefits of veganism. So, why not endorse it wholeheartedly?
Because I believe you can achieve all those benefits with a non-vegan diet as well. In fact, I think if you add some lean animal meats to a vegan diet, you'd have a great diet. Trouble is, you can't add lean animal meats to a vegan diet.
This is where I want to illustrate a principle. I was watching a TV show the other day where a woman testified that she did 45 minutes of Windsor pilates every day for a month and came out with a physique that resembled something halfway between a runway model and a playboy centerfold.
I didn't doubt it for a moment. I wasn't the least bit skeptical. Why? Because 45 minutes a day of any workout routine is going to get you into enviable physical condition. We aren't in bad health because we're doing the wrong exercises. We're in bad health because we're doing NO exercises.
If you did P90X every day? You'd be in great shape. If you lift weights for 45 minutes a day? You'd be in great shape. If you went to the crossfit gym every day? You'd be in great shape. If you ran for 45 minutes a day? You'd be in great shape. If you did your rowing machine for 45 minutes a day? You'd be in great shape.
In fact, if you went to your backyard, got down on all fours and crawled around like a dog for 45 minutes a day, you'd be in great shape.
See the pattern here? It almost doesn't matter (within reason) what activity you chose. If you do it regularly, for long enough and with some intensity, you'll not just be in good shape, but you'll be in great shape.
Same thing with diets, but with some very serious caveats, which I'll add at the end.
What vegans are eating is important. You want to make sure it's a balanced diet. However, what's probably more important is what they're NOT eating. They're not eating ice cream every night. They're not eating a giant plate of nachos drenched in cheese. They're not eating a bag of fries as a mid-afternoon snack. They're not eating a snickers bar to sustain them until lunch.
All sorts of diets can work, if you approach them with a high degree of self-discipline. One of the best diets I ever did was one where I ate chicken breast or lean beef, rice, vegetables, etc. The diet was highly planned out, nutritionally complete and allowed me to lose weight and feel great.
More importantly, what was NOT on the diet were the things I mentioned above. I wasn't eating candy. I wasn't eating ice cream. I wasn't snacking on fatty foods, etc.
A well-planned, disciplined diet works. Within limits, it doesn't matter which one you chose.
So, that's why I say a vegan diet is good, but that I tend to shade away from it. I think it could be better. Now, in practice, probably 90% of the country would benefit from going vegan because 90% of the country is giving no thought, whatsoever, to what they're eating.
So, this may be a case of not allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good. If you're eating vegan and it works for you, I take my hat off to you.
We could debate 'til the sun goes down about whether adding some lean meat to your diet would be beneficial. I will not be able to sway a single vegan on the planet.
Ultimately, the diet that works is the diet you can stick to and incorporate into your day-to-day life. Period. If that's a vegan diet, then get down with your bad self.
Personally, what I'm settling in on is a "lower" (though not "low") carb, balanced diet.
It works for me, it might not work for you. We should all eat what we think is right, and frankly, if you're thinking about what you're eating and eating in an even remotely disciplined manner, you're way ahead of most folks.
Now, for the caveats: you can eat a diet that's nutritionally incomplete. That's just common sense. So, you should be aware of this fact and avoid doing that. However, you can achieve good results with diets that I think are genuinely bad for you, like Atkins. What will always work best in the long run is a nutritionally complete diet, and Atkins isn't.
You can lose a lot of weight eating just cottage cheese and peaches. There are actually dietary clinics where this is the menu. Does it let you lose weight? Yes, at astounding rates. Is it a good idea? No, I really don't think it is.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Friday, March 11, 2011
Supersize Jimmy
Just saw a great documentary, "Fat Head", where the guy goes on a fast-food-only diet for 30 days. He actually manages to lose a lot of weight (12 pounds). This documentary is a direct jab at "Supersize Me" where a guy goes on a McDonald's diet for 30 days and gains a ton of weight. Well... 25 pounds to be precise.
In both documentaries, they go to doctors before and afterwards and the doctors verify that weight wasn't just gained or lost, but that basic measures of health corresponded.
I have always had trouble with Supersize Me, and not just for the guy's child-molester fu manchu mustache.
The first problem I had with it was that he drank gigantic full-sugar (or corn syrup) sodas. In fact, I sorta wonder if towards the end, he was starting to panic when his weight-gain plateaued and his numbers started to improve. Because, it appears that he wanted a milkshake with pretty much every meal in week 3 and beyond. Can't say for sure: he doesn't provide the public with his food diary. Set aside the idea of drinking 3 servings of ice cream with every meal, and let's talk about sugary soda.
McDonald's didn't invent soda with sugar in it. In fact, you can buy soda with sugar in it nearly anywhere. McDonald's wasn't even the first place where you could buy a big one. Those of us who are a little older can remember when the 32 ounce big gulp from 7-11 was the cultural sign for sugared beverage excess. Today, 32 ounces is considered a pretty pedestrian size. The big drinks I get at McDonalds are usually in excess of 40 ounces.
So, I don't think you can lay the calories from the sodas at McDonald's door. Roughly speaking, a can of sugary soda is about 200 calories. A big McDonald's drink is equivalent to 3 or 4 of them. So, if you got a big drink, 3 times a day, you could literally be drinking about 2,000 calories in beverages, alone. Not only is this common sense, but one of his technical experts in the movie flat-out tells him to stop drinking his calories and, at the very least, drink water or some other non-caloric beverage to add some sanity to his diet.
2,000 calories, times 30 days is 60,000 calories. If the math is right (and in this case, the 3,500 calories = 1 pound isn't that good as far as explaining weight loss or gain, but I'll go into that in a minute), then his beverages, alone, should have accounted for almost 20 pounds of weight gain.
During the documentary, he gained 25 pounds. Again, the math is wonky on this, and I'll go into that in a bit, but basically, the bulk of his weight gain might have been avoided if he did everything the same, but ordered diet coke instead of coke.
The second problem I have with Supersize Me is that the guy is just a giant P***Y. I ate pretty much that exact diet. Not for a month, but probably for something like 11 years. Seriously. From about 1987, when I got out of the Army, until about 1998 when I started training for my first marathon.
I wasn't the picture of health. I'll admit that. I gained weight. I'll admit that. I probably weighed about 190-ish when I got out of the Army. I ballooned up to about 225 at one point. So, literally, over the course of 11 years, I gained somewhere on order of 30 to 35 pounds. That's 3 pounds per year.
During the first 3 years of that period, I also consumed at least a six pack a day of full-sugar soda, too. I switched to diet because I noticed some weight gain.
Also note that we're talking about the period of time where I went from being 21 years old to being 32 years old. It's not that unusual to gain weight during this time.
I'm not saying that my weight gain was due to just getting older. I mean, what, maybe 5 pounds or so would be a natural and healthy weight gain during that period.
I gained weight because my diet wasn't very good and my physical activity was ridiculously little.
Which brings me to problem #3 with Supersize Me: he basically stopped getting physical activity. In fact, he limited the amount he walked every day to less than he usually walked.
So, okay, he's blaming McDonald's for the fact that he gained 25 pounds. However, he drank sugary soda (which wasn't invented by McDonald's and is served or sold in pretty much any place that serves or sells food). He ate McDonald's, three meals a day, every day. He limited his physical movement.
Essentially, he deliberately ate the most ridiculous diet he could conceive. In the end, he gained 25 pounds, which, he attributes to McDonald's.
The first warning bell that went off for me while watching this thing was that his girlfriend was a vegan chef. In a way, he seemed to fit the profile of somebody who ate low calorie, low fat food. He was very thin. He did have high blood pressure, but frankly, those types of things are so frequently genetic and not related to anything behavioral that I can't really draw a conclusion there.
However, he does a fitness assessment at the start of the movie, and I couldn't help but notice that he appeared to do only about 35 push-ups. Pushups have been an area of expertise for me ever since I got off the bus at Fort Dix for basic training. For a dude, 35 push-ups is what would be considered "not many". In fact, 35 push-ups, for a man, is what would be considered, "very weak and not in very good shape". It would be indicative of a person who has a serious deficiency of upper body strength.
Which, in a way, affirms a little bit about what I suspect vegans end up becoming: very thin people who aren't very strong. Fine, they look good, and this guy's physique was something to be commended. Being strong isn't that important in society, but I'm just mentioning this to illustrate that diets have consequences. Good diets have good consequences. Bad diets have bad ones. However, even good diets, like a vegan diet (which I will admit, has more good going for it than bad), may have some negative consequences if you pursue it mindlessly.
He does say in the movie that he eats meat and has no intention of becoming a vegan. However, living with a vegan chef probably influenced his diet a lot. I know that if I lived with a vegan chef, I'd be eating a lot of vegan.
The thing I notice when the movie starts is that this guy is impressively thin. With his lack of strength, I do tend to wonder if he was maybe a tad underweight. (Don't get me started on BMI. That's such a total joke that anybody who believes it probably couldn't pass the requisite science to get a bachelor's degree in biology.)
If so, then eating a high-fat diet, especially abruptly, would probably be a huge shock to his system. In the end of the movie, he even notes that during the last week of his insane "diet", his blood-analysis numbers actually improve. He probably settled into something approximating a reasonable weight for himself and his body was no longer in shock. It looks like he actually lost weight during the last week.
So, if you eat McDonald's, yes, you're going to get fat. However, if you eat vegan, it's possible that any reasonably fit 12 year old will whip your ass in a fistfight because you can barely do 35 push-ups. When I was in the Army, that was not enough to let you graduate basic training. I believe that today, that's not enough to let you START basic training. This guy is literally weaker than essentially every male in the Army.
The fact that this guy's girlfriend was a vegan chef tells me that there may be the slight possibility that this guy had an agenda going into this thing. I don't know how many vegans you've met, but despite the patchouli and incense hippie nature of the vegan vibe, some of them can be militant "meat is murder" type people sometimes. They can be zealots and like many zealots, they don't care a lot about the means they use to advance their cause, so long as it advances their cause.
Now, he's not a vegan, but at one point in the movie, he talks to her and they mention how they hate the system that produces food the way it does or somesuch. This is obviously a topic of conversation in their household and something they both believe in. (The details aren't that obvious in the movie, but it is clear tht they both have a problem with the food industry. I'm not talking about McDonald's when I say "the food industry". I mean, the industry that produces food that's not vegan.)
So, bottom line, I don't like the guy. I think he had an agenda and that agenda wasn't to try and find the truth, whatever the truth may be. I think his conclusion is BS. I want to find a reasonably fit 12 year old to whip his ass.
To me, the biggest problem I have with his conclusion is that nobody forces anybody to eat at McDonald's. This is a point he acknowledges, but then he immediately says that McDonalds should stop selling super sized cokes and fries.
What? Whose business is that? I really like being able to buy a bucket of diet coke for $1. If McDonald's wants to sell it to me, what right does he or anybody else have to demand that they don't?
Yes, I really do wish that healthy food choices were as convenient as a McDonald's drive thru. I really, really do.
I just don't see how that's McDonald's problem.
One of my favorite dishes to get at take-out is Thai Pad Chicken noodles. If I want them, I go to a place that sells them. I don't berate McDonald's for not selling them. If you go to McDonald's, you know what they sell. To me, being mad that McDonald's doesn't sell healthy food is like being mad that the Chevy dealer won't sell you a Honda or Lexus.
To their credit, McDonalds sell salads and apple fries and all sorts of stuff that truly is better for you. Guess what. I don't buy that stuff. Neither does almost anybody else. McDonald's has to keep that stuff on the menu because some activist is going to make a big stink because they don't offer healthy choices, otherwise.
Perhaps the best quote I ever heard regarding cheeseburgers came from a dietician who said, "There is nothing wrong with eating a cheeseburger. I just ate one. The thing is, you can't eat it every day. However, if you want to have one, and you have it once a week or once every two weeks, there is no harm from it at all."
People are people. We overindulge. We eat stuff that's bad for us. Nobody is shutting down Godiva Chocolates. They sell food that's horrible for you, and I sincerely doubt you could live on that for 30 days or 11 years, or really any amount of time.
So, enough about Supersize Me. There are fans of the documentary, and I'm not one of them. The guy seems like the worst kind of activist who has decided that he knows the best way to live, and he wants to prevent anybody else from living any other way.
In fact, a note that I find particularly hilarious is that they say, basically, that McDonald's is evil for putting playgrounds in their restaurants. One of the people interviewed says that in some neighborhoods, there are no other playgrounds. Okay, let's accept that premise for a minute: that the only place you can find a playground in some parts of the country is at McDonald's.
In Fat Head, they point out that if nobody else is providing a playground for children, and McDonalds does, how does that make McDonald's bad? They're the only entity providing a place for kids to play and that makes them bad? I don't get that line of logic at all.
So, on to Fat Head.
The counter-argument is coming from a guy who made "Fat Head". I love this documentary. Not just because the guy is infinitely more entertaining, infinitely less pompous and generally does a better job of presenting factual information. I love it because he points out some problems with the way we try to lose weight.
This is the part where I admit that I struggle with my weight. I don't think anybody who sees me would call me obese, but I clearly weigh more than I should and more than I want to.
One thing I've always thought was a total crock was the calories in - calories out = weight gain or loss.
It doesn't work that way. (If it did, then Supersize Me guy would have gained probably more like 50 or 60 pounds). In fact, at the end of the movie, his weight basically plateaus at a tad over 200 pounds. This is despite eating about 5,000 calories a day. If calories were all that mattered, he should have gained over 10 pounds a week, every week, like he did in his first week.
Now this is controversial. You have guys who swear up and down that this is true and it works this way every time and you can't ignore math.
Personally, I think this theory, at best, illustrates a general principle, but doesn't do it with any precision, at all, and frequently doesn't explain what happens in the real world.
According to this theory, a calorie of fat, carbohydrate, or protien is treated exactly the same by your body. That's simply not true and anybody who asserts this doesn't have the slightest clue as to what they're talking about.
I figure this is probably one of those things like when they tell an alcoholic that alcoholism is a disease. It's not. Or, if it is, it's the only disease that's instantly cured by making better decisions. It's just that sometimes you can get a good result by shading the truth a little bit.
On the calories in - calories out side, yeah, it's better than nothing. If you believe this, it's possible that it could help you make lifestyle changes that do, indeed, cause you to lose weight.
However, I've used it to try and lose weight and I never lose as much weight as the formula says I should. I also notice that when I go off the wagon and eat whatever I want, I also don't gain as much weight as the formula says I should.
The documentary says that perhaps fat isn't the problem in diets. Instead, that it's carbohydrates.
To prove it, the guy eats at McDonald's, but avoids french fries. He also gets diet soda, or iced tea, or lite lemonade, and avoids the sugary beverages. He also doesn't eat 6 McDoubles at a sitting. He eats, say, one Big Mac, and that's it. (Note, he isn't going carb-free. He isn't throwing away the bun from his hamburger. He's just reducing the amount of total carbs he eats.)
Yeah, the diet has a little more to it than that, but not much. That's about 90% of the diet.
When I thought about it, I've heard people say that fat is good and that fat is bad. I've heard people say that meat is good and that meat is bad. I've heard people say vegetable oil is good and vegetable oil is bad.
There's a lot of controversy in dietary circles.
However, I honestly don't ever remember anybody who said that french fries are anything other than little dietary death sticks.
So, if nothing else, the movie has gotten me to basically give up french fries for life. I think this is going to be one of those quantum changes like giving up sugary soda. There is so little consensus among dietary "experts" that when you find one thing that 100% of them agree on, you might want to consider embracing it.
In any event, this "eat the burger, not the fries" theory is actually borne out by an example from Supersize Me of a guy who eats 2 or 3 Big Macs a day, but has perfectly healthy weight (he's actually on the thin side) and great cholesterol. Seriously, Supersize Me gives you an exact case study in a guy who is eating this diet and it is working.
Now, the rest of the deitary advice in the documentary is controversial to say the least. However, I am wondering if perhaps I do need to incorporate more animal fats into a healthy diet.
He is working on some theories that are tangent to a lot of diets, the most notable and recent being paleo diets. Basically, that we weren't meant to consume all these carbs. That we were not meant to consume ANY vegetable oils or corn syrup. Finally, that our diet was meant to include meat. Yes, we did murder the meat to get it. Usually this involved running after it, but that's getting into exercise, which is a different subject, altogether.
I also notice that (insert ominious government conspiracy theory music, here), our current obesity epidemic coincides with the timing of when everybody switched from cane sugar to high fructose corn syrup. Corn is heavily subsidized by the government, making it one of the cheapest foods in the country. That means that when you drink a sugary soda, it's not generally sweetened by sugar, it's sweetened by corn syrup. All these corn oils and stuff we cook with? Probably has more to do with cheapness than goodness.
Now, we've basically been sold on the idea that corn stuff is better than other stuff, but now that I think about it, the logic appears to be: corn is better than fatty beef. Thus, corn oil is better than beef tallow.
The more I think about it, the more I see that although this may be true, it also may not be. We've simply been given no evidence at all. Well... a little evidence, and frankly, corn products are turning up on the losing side more and more as the evidence comes in.
How does this all relate to me? My dieting tends to be one of two varieties. Option one: eat anything, any time, gain weight. Option two: eat low-fat, calorie controlled, to lose the weight I gained with option one.
I'm actually going to try incorporating some more fat into option two. That's actually a bit of a new twist and one of the things I've never tried before.
I'm also going to try focusing a little on eating fewer carbs. I'm not going to eliminate them or go all Atkins or anything, though.
I figure that I can eat the equivalent of two slices of bread or a serving of rice, 3 meals a day, and still come in around 100 grams of carbs.
As a final note: I should point out that I'm not advocating that anybody take up an all fast food diet, like I did for 11 years. It wasn't good for me. My health clearly didn't benefit from it. I may have done lasting damage to my body. It probably hastened the arrival of my first heart attack. (Which has not happened, yet... knock on wood.)
I'm just saying that it wasn't as damaging as Supersize Me suggests. I didn't gain 25 pounds a month. In fact, that's probably in the ballpark of what the fast-food diet caused me to gain over the course of a decade, with the rest of the weight gain more than attributable to getting older and not exercising.
Now, you'll notice that I'm a little defensive about McDonald's here, and I'm going to give you a reason why. When I got my first real job, I made less than $30,000 a year to start. I made enough to pay rent, make my car payment, and meet my basic living needs and that was about it. I tried to save maybe $50 a month, but usually a blown tire or some other calamity reduced my savings to zero on a pretty regular basis.
I wasn't poor. I know what poverty looks like, and during a few months in my life, I got way too close to it for comfort. However, I was struggling.
At that time, my meals consisted of a very, very large amount of the following:
1. A chinese restaurant on the way home from work would sell me a pint of rice and a pint of sweet and sour soup for $2. (Granted, this isn't fast-food per se, but it's exceedingly high in fat and carbs, making it pretty close to the nutritional value of fast-food.)
2. McDonald's, at that time, had a combo called the "All American Hamburger Meal." It was almost never on the menu. You had to know it existed and ask for it. You got a medium soft drink, small fries and a hamburger. It cost $2 as well.
At the time, I was going to night school (a very, very demanding, research-oriented school) and was pursuing a certification. So, saying I should have gone to farmer's markets and bought fresh produce and cooked it myself was just out of the question.
At the time, I remember watching a TV documentary on people in prisons and they mentioned that they got 8 hours of recreational activity a week. I thought, "I don't get 8 recreational hours a week and I haven't done anything wrong."
So, I was broke and I had no time. McDonald's food wasn't good for me. I know that. I wasn't delusional. But it was cheap and fast and kept me alive at a time when I had darned few other options.
It kept me going until a point in my life where I had the money to buy better food. To me, it was never a destination, but a way to get to a destination.
So, for somebody to say that McDonalds is evil, or they shouldn't be allowed to sell X, Y or Z, or that people who shop there are stupid, just rings of unnecessary paternalism to me.
If I want a big mac value meal, I should be able to buy one. If they want to supersize it, then I should be able to buy it if I want to. Period.
If I'm broke and the only option is to either get fat or to go hungry, guess what? I'd rather get fat.
I'm just not a big fan of beating up on a business that sells a product that's perfectly legal, perfectly safe (if used reasonably) and that, at one point in my life, really helped me get through. Yes, McDonald's food is dangerous, even deadly, if eaten improperly.
However, what's "improper"? Both of these movies showed an example of guys who ate at McDonald's every day and were the picture of perfect health. Fat Head even provides some scientific rationale to back it up.
I'm for people having all the information they need so they can make the best choices for them. Then, I'm for government and activists and busybodies of all kinds to just butt out.
In both documentaries, they go to doctors before and afterwards and the doctors verify that weight wasn't just gained or lost, but that basic measures of health corresponded.
I have always had trouble with Supersize Me, and not just for the guy's child-molester fu manchu mustache.
The first problem I had with it was that he drank gigantic full-sugar (or corn syrup) sodas. In fact, I sorta wonder if towards the end, he was starting to panic when his weight-gain plateaued and his numbers started to improve. Because, it appears that he wanted a milkshake with pretty much every meal in week 3 and beyond. Can't say for sure: he doesn't provide the public with his food diary. Set aside the idea of drinking 3 servings of ice cream with every meal, and let's talk about sugary soda.
McDonald's didn't invent soda with sugar in it. In fact, you can buy soda with sugar in it nearly anywhere. McDonald's wasn't even the first place where you could buy a big one. Those of us who are a little older can remember when the 32 ounce big gulp from 7-11 was the cultural sign for sugared beverage excess. Today, 32 ounces is considered a pretty pedestrian size. The big drinks I get at McDonalds are usually in excess of 40 ounces.
So, I don't think you can lay the calories from the sodas at McDonald's door. Roughly speaking, a can of sugary soda is about 200 calories. A big McDonald's drink is equivalent to 3 or 4 of them. So, if you got a big drink, 3 times a day, you could literally be drinking about 2,000 calories in beverages, alone. Not only is this common sense, but one of his technical experts in the movie flat-out tells him to stop drinking his calories and, at the very least, drink water or some other non-caloric beverage to add some sanity to his diet.
2,000 calories, times 30 days is 60,000 calories. If the math is right (and in this case, the 3,500 calories = 1 pound isn't that good as far as explaining weight loss or gain, but I'll go into that in a minute), then his beverages, alone, should have accounted for almost 20 pounds of weight gain.
During the documentary, he gained 25 pounds. Again, the math is wonky on this, and I'll go into that in a bit, but basically, the bulk of his weight gain might have been avoided if he did everything the same, but ordered diet coke instead of coke.
The second problem I have with Supersize Me is that the guy is just a giant P***Y. I ate pretty much that exact diet. Not for a month, but probably for something like 11 years. Seriously. From about 1987, when I got out of the Army, until about 1998 when I started training for my first marathon.
I wasn't the picture of health. I'll admit that. I gained weight. I'll admit that. I probably weighed about 190-ish when I got out of the Army. I ballooned up to about 225 at one point. So, literally, over the course of 11 years, I gained somewhere on order of 30 to 35 pounds. That's 3 pounds per year.
During the first 3 years of that period, I also consumed at least a six pack a day of full-sugar soda, too. I switched to diet because I noticed some weight gain.
Also note that we're talking about the period of time where I went from being 21 years old to being 32 years old. It's not that unusual to gain weight during this time.
I'm not saying that my weight gain was due to just getting older. I mean, what, maybe 5 pounds or so would be a natural and healthy weight gain during that period.
I gained weight because my diet wasn't very good and my physical activity was ridiculously little.
Which brings me to problem #3 with Supersize Me: he basically stopped getting physical activity. In fact, he limited the amount he walked every day to less than he usually walked.
So, okay, he's blaming McDonald's for the fact that he gained 25 pounds. However, he drank sugary soda (which wasn't invented by McDonald's and is served or sold in pretty much any place that serves or sells food). He ate McDonald's, three meals a day, every day. He limited his physical movement.
Essentially, he deliberately ate the most ridiculous diet he could conceive. In the end, he gained 25 pounds, which, he attributes to McDonald's.
The first warning bell that went off for me while watching this thing was that his girlfriend was a vegan chef. In a way, he seemed to fit the profile of somebody who ate low calorie, low fat food. He was very thin. He did have high blood pressure, but frankly, those types of things are so frequently genetic and not related to anything behavioral that I can't really draw a conclusion there.
However, he does a fitness assessment at the start of the movie, and I couldn't help but notice that he appeared to do only about 35 push-ups. Pushups have been an area of expertise for me ever since I got off the bus at Fort Dix for basic training. For a dude, 35 push-ups is what would be considered "not many". In fact, 35 push-ups, for a man, is what would be considered, "very weak and not in very good shape". It would be indicative of a person who has a serious deficiency of upper body strength.
Which, in a way, affirms a little bit about what I suspect vegans end up becoming: very thin people who aren't very strong. Fine, they look good, and this guy's physique was something to be commended. Being strong isn't that important in society, but I'm just mentioning this to illustrate that diets have consequences. Good diets have good consequences. Bad diets have bad ones. However, even good diets, like a vegan diet (which I will admit, has more good going for it than bad), may have some negative consequences if you pursue it mindlessly.
He does say in the movie that he eats meat and has no intention of becoming a vegan. However, living with a vegan chef probably influenced his diet a lot. I know that if I lived with a vegan chef, I'd be eating a lot of vegan.
The thing I notice when the movie starts is that this guy is impressively thin. With his lack of strength, I do tend to wonder if he was maybe a tad underweight. (Don't get me started on BMI. That's such a total joke that anybody who believes it probably couldn't pass the requisite science to get a bachelor's degree in biology.)
If so, then eating a high-fat diet, especially abruptly, would probably be a huge shock to his system. In the end of the movie, he even notes that during the last week of his insane "diet", his blood-analysis numbers actually improve. He probably settled into something approximating a reasonable weight for himself and his body was no longer in shock. It looks like he actually lost weight during the last week.
So, if you eat McDonald's, yes, you're going to get fat. However, if you eat vegan, it's possible that any reasonably fit 12 year old will whip your ass in a fistfight because you can barely do 35 push-ups. When I was in the Army, that was not enough to let you graduate basic training. I believe that today, that's not enough to let you START basic training. This guy is literally weaker than essentially every male in the Army.
The fact that this guy's girlfriend was a vegan chef tells me that there may be the slight possibility that this guy had an agenda going into this thing. I don't know how many vegans you've met, but despite the patchouli and incense hippie nature of the vegan vibe, some of them can be militant "meat is murder" type people sometimes. They can be zealots and like many zealots, they don't care a lot about the means they use to advance their cause, so long as it advances their cause.
Now, he's not a vegan, but at one point in the movie, he talks to her and they mention how they hate the system that produces food the way it does or somesuch. This is obviously a topic of conversation in their household and something they both believe in. (The details aren't that obvious in the movie, but it is clear tht they both have a problem with the food industry. I'm not talking about McDonald's when I say "the food industry". I mean, the industry that produces food that's not vegan.)
So, bottom line, I don't like the guy. I think he had an agenda and that agenda wasn't to try and find the truth, whatever the truth may be. I think his conclusion is BS. I want to find a reasonably fit 12 year old to whip his ass.
To me, the biggest problem I have with his conclusion is that nobody forces anybody to eat at McDonald's. This is a point he acknowledges, but then he immediately says that McDonalds should stop selling super sized cokes and fries.
What? Whose business is that? I really like being able to buy a bucket of diet coke for $1. If McDonald's wants to sell it to me, what right does he or anybody else have to demand that they don't?
Yes, I really do wish that healthy food choices were as convenient as a McDonald's drive thru. I really, really do.
I just don't see how that's McDonald's problem.
One of my favorite dishes to get at take-out is Thai Pad Chicken noodles. If I want them, I go to a place that sells them. I don't berate McDonald's for not selling them. If you go to McDonald's, you know what they sell. To me, being mad that McDonald's doesn't sell healthy food is like being mad that the Chevy dealer won't sell you a Honda or Lexus.
To their credit, McDonalds sell salads and apple fries and all sorts of stuff that truly is better for you. Guess what. I don't buy that stuff. Neither does almost anybody else. McDonald's has to keep that stuff on the menu because some activist is going to make a big stink because they don't offer healthy choices, otherwise.
Perhaps the best quote I ever heard regarding cheeseburgers came from a dietician who said, "There is nothing wrong with eating a cheeseburger. I just ate one. The thing is, you can't eat it every day. However, if you want to have one, and you have it once a week or once every two weeks, there is no harm from it at all."
People are people. We overindulge. We eat stuff that's bad for us. Nobody is shutting down Godiva Chocolates. They sell food that's horrible for you, and I sincerely doubt you could live on that for 30 days or 11 years, or really any amount of time.
So, enough about Supersize Me. There are fans of the documentary, and I'm not one of them. The guy seems like the worst kind of activist who has decided that he knows the best way to live, and he wants to prevent anybody else from living any other way.
In fact, a note that I find particularly hilarious is that they say, basically, that McDonald's is evil for putting playgrounds in their restaurants. One of the people interviewed says that in some neighborhoods, there are no other playgrounds. Okay, let's accept that premise for a minute: that the only place you can find a playground in some parts of the country is at McDonald's.
In Fat Head, they point out that if nobody else is providing a playground for children, and McDonalds does, how does that make McDonald's bad? They're the only entity providing a place for kids to play and that makes them bad? I don't get that line of logic at all.
So, on to Fat Head.
The counter-argument is coming from a guy who made "Fat Head". I love this documentary. Not just because the guy is infinitely more entertaining, infinitely less pompous and generally does a better job of presenting factual information. I love it because he points out some problems with the way we try to lose weight.
This is the part where I admit that I struggle with my weight. I don't think anybody who sees me would call me obese, but I clearly weigh more than I should and more than I want to.
One thing I've always thought was a total crock was the calories in - calories out = weight gain or loss.
It doesn't work that way. (If it did, then Supersize Me guy would have gained probably more like 50 or 60 pounds). In fact, at the end of the movie, his weight basically plateaus at a tad over 200 pounds. This is despite eating about 5,000 calories a day. If calories were all that mattered, he should have gained over 10 pounds a week, every week, like he did in his first week.
Now this is controversial. You have guys who swear up and down that this is true and it works this way every time and you can't ignore math.
Personally, I think this theory, at best, illustrates a general principle, but doesn't do it with any precision, at all, and frequently doesn't explain what happens in the real world.
According to this theory, a calorie of fat, carbohydrate, or protien is treated exactly the same by your body. That's simply not true and anybody who asserts this doesn't have the slightest clue as to what they're talking about.
I figure this is probably one of those things like when they tell an alcoholic that alcoholism is a disease. It's not. Or, if it is, it's the only disease that's instantly cured by making better decisions. It's just that sometimes you can get a good result by shading the truth a little bit.
On the calories in - calories out side, yeah, it's better than nothing. If you believe this, it's possible that it could help you make lifestyle changes that do, indeed, cause you to lose weight.
However, I've used it to try and lose weight and I never lose as much weight as the formula says I should. I also notice that when I go off the wagon and eat whatever I want, I also don't gain as much weight as the formula says I should.
The documentary says that perhaps fat isn't the problem in diets. Instead, that it's carbohydrates.
To prove it, the guy eats at McDonald's, but avoids french fries. He also gets diet soda, or iced tea, or lite lemonade, and avoids the sugary beverages. He also doesn't eat 6 McDoubles at a sitting. He eats, say, one Big Mac, and that's it. (Note, he isn't going carb-free. He isn't throwing away the bun from his hamburger. He's just reducing the amount of total carbs he eats.)
Yeah, the diet has a little more to it than that, but not much. That's about 90% of the diet.
When I thought about it, I've heard people say that fat is good and that fat is bad. I've heard people say that meat is good and that meat is bad. I've heard people say vegetable oil is good and vegetable oil is bad.
There's a lot of controversy in dietary circles.
However, I honestly don't ever remember anybody who said that french fries are anything other than little dietary death sticks.
So, if nothing else, the movie has gotten me to basically give up french fries for life. I think this is going to be one of those quantum changes like giving up sugary soda. There is so little consensus among dietary "experts" that when you find one thing that 100% of them agree on, you might want to consider embracing it.
In any event, this "eat the burger, not the fries" theory is actually borne out by an example from Supersize Me of a guy who eats 2 or 3 Big Macs a day, but has perfectly healthy weight (he's actually on the thin side) and great cholesterol. Seriously, Supersize Me gives you an exact case study in a guy who is eating this diet and it is working.
Now, the rest of the deitary advice in the documentary is controversial to say the least. However, I am wondering if perhaps I do need to incorporate more animal fats into a healthy diet.
He is working on some theories that are tangent to a lot of diets, the most notable and recent being paleo diets. Basically, that we weren't meant to consume all these carbs. That we were not meant to consume ANY vegetable oils or corn syrup. Finally, that our diet was meant to include meat. Yes, we did murder the meat to get it. Usually this involved running after it, but that's getting into exercise, which is a different subject, altogether.
I also notice that (insert ominious government conspiracy theory music, here), our current obesity epidemic coincides with the timing of when everybody switched from cane sugar to high fructose corn syrup. Corn is heavily subsidized by the government, making it one of the cheapest foods in the country. That means that when you drink a sugary soda, it's not generally sweetened by sugar, it's sweetened by corn syrup. All these corn oils and stuff we cook with? Probably has more to do with cheapness than goodness.
Now, we've basically been sold on the idea that corn stuff is better than other stuff, but now that I think about it, the logic appears to be: corn is better than fatty beef. Thus, corn oil is better than beef tallow.
The more I think about it, the more I see that although this may be true, it also may not be. We've simply been given no evidence at all. Well... a little evidence, and frankly, corn products are turning up on the losing side more and more as the evidence comes in.
How does this all relate to me? My dieting tends to be one of two varieties. Option one: eat anything, any time, gain weight. Option two: eat low-fat, calorie controlled, to lose the weight I gained with option one.
I'm actually going to try incorporating some more fat into option two. That's actually a bit of a new twist and one of the things I've never tried before.
I'm also going to try focusing a little on eating fewer carbs. I'm not going to eliminate them or go all Atkins or anything, though.
I figure that I can eat the equivalent of two slices of bread or a serving of rice, 3 meals a day, and still come in around 100 grams of carbs.
As a final note: I should point out that I'm not advocating that anybody take up an all fast food diet, like I did for 11 years. It wasn't good for me. My health clearly didn't benefit from it. I may have done lasting damage to my body. It probably hastened the arrival of my first heart attack. (Which has not happened, yet... knock on wood.)
I'm just saying that it wasn't as damaging as Supersize Me suggests. I didn't gain 25 pounds a month. In fact, that's probably in the ballpark of what the fast-food diet caused me to gain over the course of a decade, with the rest of the weight gain more than attributable to getting older and not exercising.
Now, you'll notice that I'm a little defensive about McDonald's here, and I'm going to give you a reason why. When I got my first real job, I made less than $30,000 a year to start. I made enough to pay rent, make my car payment, and meet my basic living needs and that was about it. I tried to save maybe $50 a month, but usually a blown tire or some other calamity reduced my savings to zero on a pretty regular basis.
I wasn't poor. I know what poverty looks like, and during a few months in my life, I got way too close to it for comfort. However, I was struggling.
At that time, my meals consisted of a very, very large amount of the following:
1. A chinese restaurant on the way home from work would sell me a pint of rice and a pint of sweet and sour soup for $2. (Granted, this isn't fast-food per se, but it's exceedingly high in fat and carbs, making it pretty close to the nutritional value of fast-food.)
2. McDonald's, at that time, had a combo called the "All American Hamburger Meal." It was almost never on the menu. You had to know it existed and ask for it. You got a medium soft drink, small fries and a hamburger. It cost $2 as well.
At the time, I was going to night school (a very, very demanding, research-oriented school) and was pursuing a certification. So, saying I should have gone to farmer's markets and bought fresh produce and cooked it myself was just out of the question.
At the time, I remember watching a TV documentary on people in prisons and they mentioned that they got 8 hours of recreational activity a week. I thought, "I don't get 8 recreational hours a week and I haven't done anything wrong."
So, I was broke and I had no time. McDonald's food wasn't good for me. I know that. I wasn't delusional. But it was cheap and fast and kept me alive at a time when I had darned few other options.
It kept me going until a point in my life where I had the money to buy better food. To me, it was never a destination, but a way to get to a destination.
So, for somebody to say that McDonalds is evil, or they shouldn't be allowed to sell X, Y or Z, or that people who shop there are stupid, just rings of unnecessary paternalism to me.
If I want a big mac value meal, I should be able to buy one. If they want to supersize it, then I should be able to buy it if I want to. Period.
If I'm broke and the only option is to either get fat or to go hungry, guess what? I'd rather get fat.
I'm just not a big fan of beating up on a business that sells a product that's perfectly legal, perfectly safe (if used reasonably) and that, at one point in my life, really helped me get through. Yes, McDonald's food is dangerous, even deadly, if eaten improperly.
However, what's "improper"? Both of these movies showed an example of guys who ate at McDonald's every day and were the picture of perfect health. Fat Head even provides some scientific rationale to back it up.
I'm for people having all the information they need so they can make the best choices for them. Then, I'm for government and activists and busybodies of all kinds to just butt out.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Depression, victory and defeat...
Yesterday I was as depressed as I can ever remember being. Strange since I got a notice that I'd just been accepted to the law school I applied to. Trouble is, there's been a lot of other stuff in my life that just sorta sucks.
I finally got caught up on bookkeeping for the biz. We did have a great month last month, but not so great this month. Things have really slowed down. This business has really taken a toll on me lately. As awesome as it was in 2007-2009, it's that bad, now. I am doing the best I can, but I sometimes wonder if this thing is going down. We just need more weather, especially rain.
My grandfather just died. He was my stepmother's Dad. Great guy. Flew bombers in WWII. Was always very kind to me. I wasn't a blood relative, but starting in the 2nd grade, they used to pay my airfare to come out and visit them about every other year through High School.
Some of my fondest memories of childhood are from visiting them. My grandmother on that side passed away a little while ago, too.
It wasn't unexpected in his case. He was in the final stages of alzheimer's disease. Not that you ever wish death on anybody, but honestly, I wouldn't want to keep living like that. Death isn't a good thing, but once quality if life is gone, sometimes it's not the worst thing.
I also had a scare recently. My grandmother had a heart issue. She's okay, now, but that was a big shock as well.
I think just under the weight of everything, I started to get a little mopey. I also noticed that I have been eating a very low fat diet the past few days. Just saw a documentary where they linked low-fat diets to depression. So, today, I made sure to get some fat.
All in all, a lot going on. I've got Navy coming up in April. I only need to go once more this fiscal year after that. However, I have to pay my own airfare down to Texas and rent a car. (Long story. Basically, I pay my own travel in order to drill with the unit I want to drill with.)
I'm about as broke now as I can ever remember being as an adult. So, between flying out for my grandpa's memorial service and flying down to Texas, it's going to be a hit. I honestly can't remember the last time I had to sweat so hard over such small amounts of money.
Sometimes, it just sucks to be me. I'll survive, but things really blow right now. I am hoping we get a ton of money in and things look up, soon.
I finally got caught up on bookkeeping for the biz. We did have a great month last month, but not so great this month. Things have really slowed down. This business has really taken a toll on me lately. As awesome as it was in 2007-2009, it's that bad, now. I am doing the best I can, but I sometimes wonder if this thing is going down. We just need more weather, especially rain.
My grandfather just died. He was my stepmother's Dad. Great guy. Flew bombers in WWII. Was always very kind to me. I wasn't a blood relative, but starting in the 2nd grade, they used to pay my airfare to come out and visit them about every other year through High School.
Some of my fondest memories of childhood are from visiting them. My grandmother on that side passed away a little while ago, too.
It wasn't unexpected in his case. He was in the final stages of alzheimer's disease. Not that you ever wish death on anybody, but honestly, I wouldn't want to keep living like that. Death isn't a good thing, but once quality if life is gone, sometimes it's not the worst thing.
I also had a scare recently. My grandmother had a heart issue. She's okay, now, but that was a big shock as well.
I think just under the weight of everything, I started to get a little mopey. I also noticed that I have been eating a very low fat diet the past few days. Just saw a documentary where they linked low-fat diets to depression. So, today, I made sure to get some fat.
All in all, a lot going on. I've got Navy coming up in April. I only need to go once more this fiscal year after that. However, I have to pay my own airfare down to Texas and rent a car. (Long story. Basically, I pay my own travel in order to drill with the unit I want to drill with.)
I'm about as broke now as I can ever remember being as an adult. So, between flying out for my grandpa's memorial service and flying down to Texas, it's going to be a hit. I honestly can't remember the last time I had to sweat so hard over such small amounts of money.
Sometimes, it just sucks to be me. I'll survive, but things really blow right now. I am hoping we get a ton of money in and things look up, soon.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
A Dream Come True
Just want to put a shout out to my boy. I was pretty old for a first-time parent. Logan was born when I was 36. Seems like just yesterday. I waited a long time for him and when he came into my life, I could not have been happier.
Every day really has been a joy since he came around. Every phase he ever went through was full of wonder. I just can't imagine my life without him in it.
Every now and then, I'll hear of, or see a frazzled parent who is just sick of their kid (or kids.) I'm not talking about behavioral problem kids or kids with disabilities. I'm just talking about flat-out normal kids. I remember reading an article where a mother was hacked off with her two daughters and as they were walking down the street, the mother was a few steps behind them and flipped them off.
That wasn't the shocking part. The shocking part to me was how many other mothers were supportive and understanding of the action!
I just don't get it. Maybe Dads have it easier. I don't know. Kids don't wreak the havoc on our bodies that they do on their mothers. When Logan needed round the clock feeding as an infant, it was his mother who bore the brunt.
However, I changed at least as many poopy diapers. I got up in the middle of the night with him when he had ear aches. Back in the days when he didn't sleep through the night (due to sleep apnea caused by enlarged adenoids and tonsils, which have since been removed), he did a number on my sleep, too.
Which is to say, I feel like I pitched in equally or moreso on everything other than nursing. I've been tired with him, frustrated and had to handle him when he's been throwing a little tantrum.
Overall, though, those times were very few.
Part of it is that he's not a teen, yet. Maybe he'll get rebellious, then. Who knows.
He's a very well-behaved kid. Doesn't give anybody a hard time. He's sensitive, considerate and polite. In that and so many other ways, it's as though I dreamed him up.
Sometimes I wonder whether the parents who seem to resent their kids so much have kids who are hard to handle specifically because the parents view the kids as some sort of inconvenience in their lives.
Personally, my son is basically the reason for my life. Everything I did prior to this was to prepare me to be a father. I have one shot at this and it doesn't last that long. My time with him is already basically halfway over.
His mother and I are not together anymore. This is my weekend without him. On the one hand, it's nice because I can run errands and catch up on everything that I feel guilty doing when he's here. On the other hand, there's an emptiness in my life when he's gone.
There are so many more lessons he needs to learn. He's already coming to understand that some people are just plain mean. Two girls at school have been known to say cruel things to classmates. Logan also has a team-mate on one of his sports teams who is sarcastic and puts other players down.
As much as possible, I wish I could keep him in a controlled world for as long as possible. However, he has to learn to function in the world as it is, not as I wish it was.
I truly believe that someday, I'll look back on my life, and my only regrets will be in the ways I came up short for the people I loved. The money? The career? That's all such small potatoes. When I'm gone, my only connection to immortality will be my son.
So, yeah, my boy is and always has been a dream come true for me. Probably always will be. No matter how hard I try to resist it, time is moving relentlessly and only in one direction. I'm looking forward to the next 9 years. Once they're gone, I probably won't know what to do with myself.
I guess I could always throw myself wholeheartedly into whatever career I'm doing at the time. Probably not a bad idea because I'll have, at most, maybe another 15 working years, and that'll be it.
Once my son leaves the house, though, I will still have a relationship, but I won't get to see him nearly as much as I wish. We won't be as big a part of each other's lives as I'd want.
Which makes it all the more important to make the most of these days, now. I waited a long time for them. When they're gone, they won't come back again.
Every day really has been a joy since he came around. Every phase he ever went through was full of wonder. I just can't imagine my life without him in it.
Every now and then, I'll hear of, or see a frazzled parent who is just sick of their kid (or kids.) I'm not talking about behavioral problem kids or kids with disabilities. I'm just talking about flat-out normal kids. I remember reading an article where a mother was hacked off with her two daughters and as they were walking down the street, the mother was a few steps behind them and flipped them off.
That wasn't the shocking part. The shocking part to me was how many other mothers were supportive and understanding of the action!
I just don't get it. Maybe Dads have it easier. I don't know. Kids don't wreak the havoc on our bodies that they do on their mothers. When Logan needed round the clock feeding as an infant, it was his mother who bore the brunt.
However, I changed at least as many poopy diapers. I got up in the middle of the night with him when he had ear aches. Back in the days when he didn't sleep through the night (due to sleep apnea caused by enlarged adenoids and tonsils, which have since been removed), he did a number on my sleep, too.
Which is to say, I feel like I pitched in equally or moreso on everything other than nursing. I've been tired with him, frustrated and had to handle him when he's been throwing a little tantrum.
Overall, though, those times were very few.
Part of it is that he's not a teen, yet. Maybe he'll get rebellious, then. Who knows.
He's a very well-behaved kid. Doesn't give anybody a hard time. He's sensitive, considerate and polite. In that and so many other ways, it's as though I dreamed him up.
Sometimes I wonder whether the parents who seem to resent their kids so much have kids who are hard to handle specifically because the parents view the kids as some sort of inconvenience in their lives.
Personally, my son is basically the reason for my life. Everything I did prior to this was to prepare me to be a father. I have one shot at this and it doesn't last that long. My time with him is already basically halfway over.
His mother and I are not together anymore. This is my weekend without him. On the one hand, it's nice because I can run errands and catch up on everything that I feel guilty doing when he's here. On the other hand, there's an emptiness in my life when he's gone.
There are so many more lessons he needs to learn. He's already coming to understand that some people are just plain mean. Two girls at school have been known to say cruel things to classmates. Logan also has a team-mate on one of his sports teams who is sarcastic and puts other players down.
As much as possible, I wish I could keep him in a controlled world for as long as possible. However, he has to learn to function in the world as it is, not as I wish it was.
I truly believe that someday, I'll look back on my life, and my only regrets will be in the ways I came up short for the people I loved. The money? The career? That's all such small potatoes. When I'm gone, my only connection to immortality will be my son.
So, yeah, my boy is and always has been a dream come true for me. Probably always will be. No matter how hard I try to resist it, time is moving relentlessly and only in one direction. I'm looking forward to the next 9 years. Once they're gone, I probably won't know what to do with myself.
I guess I could always throw myself wholeheartedly into whatever career I'm doing at the time. Probably not a bad idea because I'll have, at most, maybe another 15 working years, and that'll be it.
Once my son leaves the house, though, I will still have a relationship, but I won't get to see him nearly as much as I wish. We won't be as big a part of each other's lives as I'd want.
Which makes it all the more important to make the most of these days, now. I waited a long time for them. When they're gone, they won't come back again.
The One Sports Parent Piece of Advice I Will Give This Year
We've seen this type of column written before. Usually, it's an article about how you should be supportive and respectful and teach your kids to be that way. I won't rehash that ground. It's been well-done in the past and I doubt I could add more to it.
However, there's another piece of advice I'd like to give to people with kids in sports.
My son is getting ready to start another year of travel baseball. Really, his "year" never really ends. The season ends in mid-July. He gets maybe a month break, then tryouts for the next year's team. This is a highly selective and competitive program and he needs to make the team every year.
During this "time off" he has private coaching that he goes through to try and stay sharp for the tryouts. Mid October, Fall workouts end and he gets a break until January. During that time, he's also playing football and basketball.
The kid doesn't get a break, but he loves sports. If I made him stay home, he'd hate it.
This has given me a lot of experience as a sports Dad, and there are some things I learned that are worth reiterating.
Note: I'm going to use the masculine in referring to kids, but this applies to female athletes as well.
So, here it is: let the coaches coach. Keep your mouth shut. This is very, very hard. You see your kid playing, he's doing something wrong, and you want to set him on the right path. You are very, very well intentioned on this.
However, you need to resist the urge. Other than cheering for your kid, you need to keep your mouth shut. Why? Because your kid already has a coach. Depending on the team, he may have two or three or four. He's trying to listen to them and focus on the game.
If you've ever tried to do something with 3 or 4 people standing over your shoulder, you are only starting to get the picture.
Now, try doing something with 3 or 4 people not only standing over you, evaluating your every action, but yelling at you, all at once.
Starting to get a clearer picture here?
Now, throw in one more person, who is the uber-person authority figure in your universe, whose voice pierces through all that other noise, who is also yelling at you. While you're trying to focus on what the coach, and maybe the assistant coach are yelling, and while you're trying to pay attention to a game where not only are there a lot of skills involved, with a potential for injury, plus a whole bunch of kids on the other side of the ball trying to make you fail.
The very fact that your kid has to try and keep his ears tuned to see if you're trying to get his attention means he's got that much less focus on the task at hand.
This is not to say that there is never a time for you to speak up. I'll just say that before you do, think twice, then think a third time, then a fourth. The times when you should say something, but don't, will be outnumbered about 50 to 1 with the times when you should have kept your mouth shut but didn't. If you never say anything, you will come out ahead on this, I assure you.
I am no angel on this, trust me. Now, I have vowed to only open my mouth when my son is clearly just drifting off daydreaming, and then, only to say, "Hey, heads up out there!" I also vow not to say this very often... once a day, max, is my goal.
If your kid is playing travel sports, and you didn't play professionally or in college, chances are the coaches on the team know more about the game than you do. Let them coach. You actually make the coaches' job more difficult when you're trying to coach your kid at gametime. Especially if you weren't actively involved in helping at every practice, you just don't know what's been going on, what the coach has been working on, what instruction he's been giving your kid, etc
So, for most travel teams, you will tend to do far more harm than good by trying to coach your kid at gametime.
What about rec league sports? Yeah, sometimes the coaches aren't very good. I actually coached a kids' 3 and 4 year old soccer team. My qualifications were that I had never coached a sport and have never played soccer. When the minimum wage kid running the program at the YMCA/JCC walked up and asked, "Hey, would you mind helping a little bit with the coaching?" I said "no problem" not realizing that I was volunteering for the head coaching job.
Even so, rec league is supposed to be "recreation". Let the coaches coach. Let the kids play. This is supposed to be "play" and recreation is supposed to be fun. Don't take things too seriously. As hard as it is for a hand-selected kid on a travel team to have 3 people yelling at him, it's even harder for a younger kid who might not be playing at a very high level.
This should go without saying, but people don't like having their shortcomings harped on in public. The more you yell at your kid about all the things they're doing wrong, the less they're going to enjoy the game.
Now, we know that sometimes you have to correct your kid. That's part of being a parent. I've heard a rule of thumb that I try to adhere to: for every negative thing you say to a person, you need to have a relationship such that you're saying 5 positive things to them. Same goes for sports. Make sure that there are lots of positive comments and attaboys when they're doing things right. It'll keep the negative comments in perspective.
Please take this one to heart, for your sanity and the mental health of your child: don't try to coach them at gametime. The time to coach them, if you're so inclined and knowledgeable enough, is when you're home, away from the team, getting some quality one on one time with them.
Gametime? They're in front of their friends and a whole lot of strangers. It's easy to inadvertently embarass them.
Spend the time during non-game days if you're determined to coach your child. You'll both be better off for it.
However, there's another piece of advice I'd like to give to people with kids in sports.
My son is getting ready to start another year of travel baseball. Really, his "year" never really ends. The season ends in mid-July. He gets maybe a month break, then tryouts for the next year's team. This is a highly selective and competitive program and he needs to make the team every year.
During this "time off" he has private coaching that he goes through to try and stay sharp for the tryouts. Mid October, Fall workouts end and he gets a break until January. During that time, he's also playing football and basketball.
The kid doesn't get a break, but he loves sports. If I made him stay home, he'd hate it.
This has given me a lot of experience as a sports Dad, and there are some things I learned that are worth reiterating.
Note: I'm going to use the masculine in referring to kids, but this applies to female athletes as well.
So, here it is: let the coaches coach. Keep your mouth shut. This is very, very hard. You see your kid playing, he's doing something wrong, and you want to set him on the right path. You are very, very well intentioned on this.
However, you need to resist the urge. Other than cheering for your kid, you need to keep your mouth shut. Why? Because your kid already has a coach. Depending on the team, he may have two or three or four. He's trying to listen to them and focus on the game.
If you've ever tried to do something with 3 or 4 people standing over your shoulder, you are only starting to get the picture.
Now, try doing something with 3 or 4 people not only standing over you, evaluating your every action, but yelling at you, all at once.
Starting to get a clearer picture here?
Now, throw in one more person, who is the uber-person authority figure in your universe, whose voice pierces through all that other noise, who is also yelling at you. While you're trying to focus on what the coach, and maybe the assistant coach are yelling, and while you're trying to pay attention to a game where not only are there a lot of skills involved, with a potential for injury, plus a whole bunch of kids on the other side of the ball trying to make you fail.
The very fact that your kid has to try and keep his ears tuned to see if you're trying to get his attention means he's got that much less focus on the task at hand.
This is not to say that there is never a time for you to speak up. I'll just say that before you do, think twice, then think a third time, then a fourth. The times when you should say something, but don't, will be outnumbered about 50 to 1 with the times when you should have kept your mouth shut but didn't. If you never say anything, you will come out ahead on this, I assure you.
I am no angel on this, trust me. Now, I have vowed to only open my mouth when my son is clearly just drifting off daydreaming, and then, only to say, "Hey, heads up out there!" I also vow not to say this very often... once a day, max, is my goal.
If your kid is playing travel sports, and you didn't play professionally or in college, chances are the coaches on the team know more about the game than you do. Let them coach. You actually make the coaches' job more difficult when you're trying to coach your kid at gametime. Especially if you weren't actively involved in helping at every practice, you just don't know what's been going on, what the coach has been working on, what instruction he's been giving your kid, etc
So, for most travel teams, you will tend to do far more harm than good by trying to coach your kid at gametime.
What about rec league sports? Yeah, sometimes the coaches aren't very good. I actually coached a kids' 3 and 4 year old soccer team. My qualifications were that I had never coached a sport and have never played soccer. When the minimum wage kid running the program at the YMCA/JCC walked up and asked, "Hey, would you mind helping a little bit with the coaching?" I said "no problem" not realizing that I was volunteering for the head coaching job.
Even so, rec league is supposed to be "recreation". Let the coaches coach. Let the kids play. This is supposed to be "play" and recreation is supposed to be fun. Don't take things too seriously. As hard as it is for a hand-selected kid on a travel team to have 3 people yelling at him, it's even harder for a younger kid who might not be playing at a very high level.
This should go without saying, but people don't like having their shortcomings harped on in public. The more you yell at your kid about all the things they're doing wrong, the less they're going to enjoy the game.
Now, we know that sometimes you have to correct your kid. That's part of being a parent. I've heard a rule of thumb that I try to adhere to: for every negative thing you say to a person, you need to have a relationship such that you're saying 5 positive things to them. Same goes for sports. Make sure that there are lots of positive comments and attaboys when they're doing things right. It'll keep the negative comments in perspective.
Please take this one to heart, for your sanity and the mental health of your child: don't try to coach them at gametime. The time to coach them, if you're so inclined and knowledgeable enough, is when you're home, away from the team, getting some quality one on one time with them.
Gametime? They're in front of their friends and a whole lot of strangers. It's easy to inadvertently embarass them.
Spend the time during non-game days if you're determined to coach your child. You'll both be better off for it.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Adventures in Ice Storms and No Electricity
I feel like I'm only just now settling back into a normal routine after the ice storms that hit us Sunday night / Monday morning.
It took down some power lines and I was without power for days.
I went to help the neighbor start her generator and she had her generator wired up so that it was powering circuits in the house.
I, on the other hand, was just using my generator to run some small space heaters. I also had to run them in low power mode. Turns out, they only kept the house at about 45 degrees. Good enough to keep the pipes from freezing, though.
On Monday, I did some reading up on what was required to use the generator to run circuits in your house, but Lowe's was sold out. I figured I wasn't going to be able to do anything until the next day, and the electric company was saying they were going to have power restored on Tuesday evening.
On Tuesday, they updated their estimate to say that most houses would be restored by Wednesday evening. So, I ran out, bought the transfer switch that would let me hook into a handful of circuits on my main circuit board.
My main concern was my furnace. It was taking every bit of electricity the generator could muster to run those 4 small space heaters because electric heating elements take a LOT of juice.
I got everything hooked up and after some minor troubleshooting, got the furnace running. Unfortunately, the previous owners of my home didn't label any of the circuits. So, by trial and error I found some of the more important ones like the refrigerator and the bedroom where I'm sleeping.
About 3 hours after I finished all that, the power company had the power restored. I'm all set for next time something like this happens, though.
I also fried my generator. It's toast. Lucky for me, my brother was selling a generator and I bought it.
It's amazing how a disruption like that just sort of throws your whole life out of whack. The warehouse (where I have my business) was out of power, too. So, we did a little bit of business, but the work in the office got backed up a bit.
Now, things are back to normal. I can go back to eating right and exercising. Glad that's over. I still need to go to the hardware store and fix a thing or two on the generator and install all the wiring a little more permanently than it is, right now. After that, I'll be ready for the next outage.
It took down some power lines and I was without power for days.
I went to help the neighbor start her generator and she had her generator wired up so that it was powering circuits in the house.
I, on the other hand, was just using my generator to run some small space heaters. I also had to run them in low power mode. Turns out, they only kept the house at about 45 degrees. Good enough to keep the pipes from freezing, though.
On Monday, I did some reading up on what was required to use the generator to run circuits in your house, but Lowe's was sold out. I figured I wasn't going to be able to do anything until the next day, and the electric company was saying they were going to have power restored on Tuesday evening.
On Tuesday, they updated their estimate to say that most houses would be restored by Wednesday evening. So, I ran out, bought the transfer switch that would let me hook into a handful of circuits on my main circuit board.
My main concern was my furnace. It was taking every bit of electricity the generator could muster to run those 4 small space heaters because electric heating elements take a LOT of juice.
I got everything hooked up and after some minor troubleshooting, got the furnace running. Unfortunately, the previous owners of my home didn't label any of the circuits. So, by trial and error I found some of the more important ones like the refrigerator and the bedroom where I'm sleeping.
About 3 hours after I finished all that, the power company had the power restored. I'm all set for next time something like this happens, though.
I also fried my generator. It's toast. Lucky for me, my brother was selling a generator and I bought it.
It's amazing how a disruption like that just sort of throws your whole life out of whack. The warehouse (where I have my business) was out of power, too. So, we did a little bit of business, but the work in the office got backed up a bit.
Now, things are back to normal. I can go back to eating right and exercising. Glad that's over. I still need to go to the hardware store and fix a thing or two on the generator and install all the wiring a little more permanently than it is, right now. After that, I'll be ready for the next outage.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Fitness Tips from a Not-Very Fit Individual
Not sure why I'm inspired to write this. Probably because I got my treadmill room set up. It's still a bit of a mess, but it's convenient and it's working for me. If I have easy access to a treadmill, I find it pretty easy to go and do a workout if I can avoid boredom. In this case, I've done all I can to avoid the boredom. I have stereo speakers for my iPod, a nice TV and a blu-ray player with netflix.
Now, yeah, I'm not a fitness authority. I have spent more of my life out of shape than in-shape. It seems like I'm constantly "getting into shape". So, if I have any expertise, it's probably just because of the sheer number of times I've brought my fitness level up from zero.
So, here are some tips I have. Take or leave them as you will.
1. Don't be discouraged that you can't do "enough". This is probably my biggest single piece of advice and the thing I struggle with most. I remember when I was young, they recommended 20 minutes of cardiovascular exercise, 3 times a week. Now, I think it's something like 35 minutes, 4 times a week.
If you can't do 35 minutes, 4 times a week, my advice to you is to just ignore that guidance, entirely. 20 minutes, 3 times a week is infinitely better for you than the alternative. In the USA, the alternative is usually sitting on the couch eating girl scout cookies. 20 minutes every now and then is so superior to not exercising that a meaningful comparison can't really be made. It is infinitely better to do something instead of nothing. Period.
If you can't manage 20, then manage 10. Even doing 5 minutes now and then will beat total inactivity. Don't ever get into the mind-set of, "If I can't do X, then I may as well not do anything at all." Doing nothing at all is the worst possible thing for you to do. Do something, anything. Take the steps instead of the elevator. Wrestle with your kids. Chase them around the front yard. It all adds up and it all has beneficial effects.
So, don't let yourself get discouraged. A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. You never know where that step will take you.
2. Find the things that work for you, personally. Me? I like having a treadmill in the house. I like to run right at suppertime, right before I eat. Something about that particular exercise does it for me. It doesn't do it for everyone. An exercise that's convenient and pleasant for you to do is superior to one that you consider a hassle.
I know that home exercise equipment gets a bad rap, but frankly, I own a lot of it, and over the years, I've gone through phases where I've worn out each and every one. (Okay, the concept 2 rower hasn't gotten as much use as I'd like, but that one is relatively new.)
Folks will tell you that an elliptical isn't a workout, or that treadmill is inferior to elliptical, or that rowers are the best of the bunch, whatever. They'll say that walking is a waste of time. They'll say that weight-lifting won't cause you to lose weight. They'll say that it's hard to hit your target heart-rate while cycling or rollerblading.
Are those things true? Well... yeah, they're all true to a degree, which is what makes those statements so insidious. All those things will discourage you and talk you out of doing beneficial activities. Ignore them. If you like to lift weights, lift weights. If you like to walk, walk. It's your life, and it's your thing. If you're doing anything at all, you're far better off than most people.
If it works for you, it works for you. All you need is an elevated heart rate while doing something you don't mind doing. So, find what you like and just do it.
3. If you want to lose weight, you're probably going to have to diet. There was one period of my life where I was able to eat anything I wanted and still couldn't get myself above "skin and bone" level. However, my daily workout routine would be something like a 7 mile run, 25 mile bike and 3,000 meter swim workout. That's all in one day, and that was considered an easy day. Hard days had stuff like 20 mile runs, 2 mile swims and 100 mile bike rides in them.
Other than that, I have literally gained weight while in peak mileage training for a marathon. That's how much of a factor diet is in this equation.
So, why exercise? Hey, we're a vain nation and we all want to look better, right? Trust me on this, you can still be on the heavy side, but much healthier. Also, weight isn't the sole measure. A lot of the time, the scale isn't showing much of a difference, but your body is re-shaped and more fit and toned. However, the benefits to your heart health are well worth it, even if your weight loss is negligible.
Once your heart stops working, it's "game over". There's no reset button on this one. So, even if you don't lose weight, the exercise is worth it.
4. There are a lot of things you can do to "diet" that don't involve much sacrifice. How much genuine satisfaction did that Big Mac value meal give you? Seriously. Half the time I eat one, it's poorly prepared, the fries aren't good and the bun is stale. (Unfortunately, the other half of the time, I experience a near-ecstasy, but we'll set that aside for the moment.)
Even the fast food places have healthier alternatives. Me? I will still eat burgers and fries and now and then, I'll go totally off the deep end once in a while. However, I probably get as much satisfaction from a kids meal as I do from a big mac value meal. It's still not good for me. We're talking 500 calories and 200 of them from fat. But compared to the 1,000 calories from a medium big mac value meal (and sorry... I don't usually get the medium), it's a huge improvement.
Yes, you can totally overhaul your diet. You can go on a rice and chicken breast diet (which I do, frequently), but the best diet is one you can sustain. Getting a diet coke instead of a regular coke is HUGE in terms of calories consumed. Drinking Powerade Zero instead of Gatorade with sugar is huge. Getting a McDonald's hamburger instead of a big mac is huge.
To me, these are choices that are easy to make because they don't involve much sacrifice.
It may surprise folks to know what the actual calories are of some of their food choices. The series of "eat this, not that" books is a good thing, in my opinion. The books are exactly what the title suggests. They give guidance like, a Whopper with cheese is 760 calories. A big mac is 540. If you have to chose between the two, go for the Big Mac.
In the example above, that's about 30% fewer calories for what most people would consider a comparable experience.
Trust me on this: if we all consumed 30% fewer calories, we'd all lose weight.
5. If at all possible don't do this alone. Find a workout partner. Walk with a friend. Run with a club. In the age of the internet, if you can't do any of the above, post your workouts on Facebook. Your friends will be encouraging and supportive and it'll give you a chance to brag a little about what you're doing. All this provides encouragement to not give up.
6. The hardest part of any workout? Putting your shoes on. Seriously. The workout is almost never that bad once you get going into it. However, getting ready to do it? Eeeek. I think that's why running in my home is so much easier for me than running outside. If I run in my home, I put on shorts, shoes, and start running.
If I run outside, I probably want a shirt (and certainly any unfortunate spectators want me in a shirt). I want to know when was the last time I drank, and if I drank, how much, because I don't want to be 2 miles out and have to pee, etc.
Look for workouts that involve a minimum of hassle. If you have to change clothes, arrange a sitter, drive someplace, be somewhere at a certain time, every one of those things is a chance for you to say "screw it" and decide to do something else. (See previous comment on girl scout cookies and the couch.)
Get dressed and then let things take their course, but get dressed. Once you get that far, you may find that the rest isn't as bad as you thought.
Anyway, that's all I have for today. Waiting for my son to come over. I should probably throw on some shorts and hit the treadmill for a couple of miles while I'm waiting.
Now, yeah, I'm not a fitness authority. I have spent more of my life out of shape than in-shape. It seems like I'm constantly "getting into shape". So, if I have any expertise, it's probably just because of the sheer number of times I've brought my fitness level up from zero.
So, here are some tips I have. Take or leave them as you will.
1. Don't be discouraged that you can't do "enough". This is probably my biggest single piece of advice and the thing I struggle with most. I remember when I was young, they recommended 20 minutes of cardiovascular exercise, 3 times a week. Now, I think it's something like 35 minutes, 4 times a week.
If you can't do 35 minutes, 4 times a week, my advice to you is to just ignore that guidance, entirely. 20 minutes, 3 times a week is infinitely better for you than the alternative. In the USA, the alternative is usually sitting on the couch eating girl scout cookies. 20 minutes every now and then is so superior to not exercising that a meaningful comparison can't really be made. It is infinitely better to do something instead of nothing. Period.
If you can't manage 20, then manage 10. Even doing 5 minutes now and then will beat total inactivity. Don't ever get into the mind-set of, "If I can't do X, then I may as well not do anything at all." Doing nothing at all is the worst possible thing for you to do. Do something, anything. Take the steps instead of the elevator. Wrestle with your kids. Chase them around the front yard. It all adds up and it all has beneficial effects.
So, don't let yourself get discouraged. A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. You never know where that step will take you.
2. Find the things that work for you, personally. Me? I like having a treadmill in the house. I like to run right at suppertime, right before I eat. Something about that particular exercise does it for me. It doesn't do it for everyone. An exercise that's convenient and pleasant for you to do is superior to one that you consider a hassle.
I know that home exercise equipment gets a bad rap, but frankly, I own a lot of it, and over the years, I've gone through phases where I've worn out each and every one. (Okay, the concept 2 rower hasn't gotten as much use as I'd like, but that one is relatively new.)
Folks will tell you that an elliptical isn't a workout, or that treadmill is inferior to elliptical, or that rowers are the best of the bunch, whatever. They'll say that walking is a waste of time. They'll say that weight-lifting won't cause you to lose weight. They'll say that it's hard to hit your target heart-rate while cycling or rollerblading.
Are those things true? Well... yeah, they're all true to a degree, which is what makes those statements so insidious. All those things will discourage you and talk you out of doing beneficial activities. Ignore them. If you like to lift weights, lift weights. If you like to walk, walk. It's your life, and it's your thing. If you're doing anything at all, you're far better off than most people.
If it works for you, it works for you. All you need is an elevated heart rate while doing something you don't mind doing. So, find what you like and just do it.
3. If you want to lose weight, you're probably going to have to diet. There was one period of my life where I was able to eat anything I wanted and still couldn't get myself above "skin and bone" level. However, my daily workout routine would be something like a 7 mile run, 25 mile bike and 3,000 meter swim workout. That's all in one day, and that was considered an easy day. Hard days had stuff like 20 mile runs, 2 mile swims and 100 mile bike rides in them.
Other than that, I have literally gained weight while in peak mileage training for a marathon. That's how much of a factor diet is in this equation.
So, why exercise? Hey, we're a vain nation and we all want to look better, right? Trust me on this, you can still be on the heavy side, but much healthier. Also, weight isn't the sole measure. A lot of the time, the scale isn't showing much of a difference, but your body is re-shaped and more fit and toned. However, the benefits to your heart health are well worth it, even if your weight loss is negligible.
Once your heart stops working, it's "game over". There's no reset button on this one. So, even if you don't lose weight, the exercise is worth it.
4. There are a lot of things you can do to "diet" that don't involve much sacrifice. How much genuine satisfaction did that Big Mac value meal give you? Seriously. Half the time I eat one, it's poorly prepared, the fries aren't good and the bun is stale. (Unfortunately, the other half of the time, I experience a near-ecstasy, but we'll set that aside for the moment.)
Even the fast food places have healthier alternatives. Me? I will still eat burgers and fries and now and then, I'll go totally off the deep end once in a while. However, I probably get as much satisfaction from a kids meal as I do from a big mac value meal. It's still not good for me. We're talking 500 calories and 200 of them from fat. But compared to the 1,000 calories from a medium big mac value meal (and sorry... I don't usually get the medium), it's a huge improvement.
Yes, you can totally overhaul your diet. You can go on a rice and chicken breast diet (which I do, frequently), but the best diet is one you can sustain. Getting a diet coke instead of a regular coke is HUGE in terms of calories consumed. Drinking Powerade Zero instead of Gatorade with sugar is huge. Getting a McDonald's hamburger instead of a big mac is huge.
To me, these are choices that are easy to make because they don't involve much sacrifice.
It may surprise folks to know what the actual calories are of some of their food choices. The series of "eat this, not that" books is a good thing, in my opinion. The books are exactly what the title suggests. They give guidance like, a Whopper with cheese is 760 calories. A big mac is 540. If you have to chose between the two, go for the Big Mac.
In the example above, that's about 30% fewer calories for what most people would consider a comparable experience.
Trust me on this: if we all consumed 30% fewer calories, we'd all lose weight.
5. If at all possible don't do this alone. Find a workout partner. Walk with a friend. Run with a club. In the age of the internet, if you can't do any of the above, post your workouts on Facebook. Your friends will be encouraging and supportive and it'll give you a chance to brag a little about what you're doing. All this provides encouragement to not give up.
6. The hardest part of any workout? Putting your shoes on. Seriously. The workout is almost never that bad once you get going into it. However, getting ready to do it? Eeeek. I think that's why running in my home is so much easier for me than running outside. If I run in my home, I put on shorts, shoes, and start running.
If I run outside, I probably want a shirt (and certainly any unfortunate spectators want me in a shirt). I want to know when was the last time I drank, and if I drank, how much, because I don't want to be 2 miles out and have to pee, etc.
Look for workouts that involve a minimum of hassle. If you have to change clothes, arrange a sitter, drive someplace, be somewhere at a certain time, every one of those things is a chance for you to say "screw it" and decide to do something else. (See previous comment on girl scout cookies and the couch.)
Get dressed and then let things take their course, but get dressed. Once you get that far, you may find that the rest isn't as bad as you thought.
Anyway, that's all I have for today. Waiting for my son to come over. I should probably throw on some shorts and hit the treadmill for a couple of miles while I'm waiting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)