New Years Resolutions

OK so I still have 2 days left...but I'm writing out my 2012 goals and thought it a good time to review where I got in 2011.

Admittedly, I'm taking a pass on some from last year because my decision to go to grad school drastically changed where my time and energy went to.  And grad school had been a vague goal I've had for a long time, so I think I'll just count that as an "extra".  Still...I actually got 6 out of 10 this year

I decided this year I'm going to write these out differently though.  Rather than set 10 knowing I probably will get 5, I think I'm going to set 2-3 goals that are more of the "stretch" kind, and then the rest, however many that is, either ongoing goals or more todo/bucket list things.

This year - I want to get an "A" on my final Capstone project for grad school, and start (continue? from 7th grade) piano lessons.  I still have some logistics to figure out on the second one, I think I need a teacher that is more geared toward adults, which might be tricky.  Todos?  Look into solar panels - we've been wanting to look at that for awhile.  Refinish that little table that sits downstairs that I've meant to do for 14 years (and even got halfway done once).  And get to visit some more people this year - after school is done in August probably.

Happy New Year...in two days!

Homer's Odyssey

I got Gwen Cooper's recent book "Homer's Odyssey" for Christmas from my mom, and finished it this morning.  I was in tears at Chapter 23 - what a fantastic (true) story!  I'd recommend it to anyone who is a pet owner/cat lover.

Gwen's blog is here:

http://gwencooper.com/wordpress/

Little Tom

I can't help but share these...Thanks to the Camp Companion FB page for sharing this one. 

http://animalcaresociety.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/little-tom/

BTW, if you're on Facebook and you're an animal person, you should subscribe to Camp Companion's FB page - I am continually amazed by how many animals that group takes care of and adopts with such little resources (but lots of volunteer energy!)

Smart Phone Addiction?

Thanks to friend Bill for this one:


http://www.cioinsight.com/c/a/IT-Management/Smartphone-Addiction-Nine-Telltale-Signs-660974/?kc=EWWHNEMNL11282011STR2

If I have to be completely honest (and I adjust "watching my kid's soccer game" to "watching a sporting event") I would have to own up to 5 out of 10.  Smart phones are great pieces of technology but like anything, they can get overused :(

Happy Halloween!

We just finished handing out all our candy, 7:26pm, 350 pieces (we gave some kids two of the smaller pieces).  Last year it was closer to 8...quite a few, and still a lot walking by.

And, I am proud to say that I didn't eat a single piece.  One of the advantages of having so many kids so quickly :)  I DID enjoy a nice big piece of maple bacon wedding cake this weekend at the wedding we were at (all the food was fantastic actually).  The cake was as good as it sounds!

It Gets Better Project - Republicans

I've been following the "It Gets Better" project since it started over a year ago by Dan Savage and others.  There are thousands (maybe millions) of It Gets Better videos that have been made by gay people, advocates, companies, and I'm glad to say even many professional sports teams now have added videos.  The Advocate published an article yesterday with a link to an It Gets Better video made by all of the senators and representatives from New Jersey - ALL of them, including the 3 Republicans.  I commend them for putting aside political differences and addressing need for change with the problems of kids getting bullied and feeling the need to commit suicide.

• Advocate article
• Youtube video

Dear Me...

One of my dear friends recently posted a blog entry about an article about celebrities writing letters to their younger selves - cleverly titled Dear Me.  Our diversity groups at work have had similar exercises, the results of which people within the group have shared.

I've done this exercise in my head many times.  Maybe I have watched and read too much sci-fi and have "seen" the bad things that can happen because of messing with the timeline, but I always end up on the skeptical side of making changes.  ("Back to the Future" is probably the most widely known example.  If you're more geeky, Star Trek: The Next Generation had an episode called "Parallels" which discussed alternate realities.  Star Trek: Voyager had several episodes dealing with time travel and the "temporal prime directive" and how bad things can get when you mess with time).

In any case, it's always been very hard for me to come up with things I would actually tell my younger self, for fear that I would actually make things turn out worse somehow.  Maybe that is a testament to how well I think my life has turned out (?), maybe I haven't made too many major mistakes (?).  I always come up with about 2 or 3 very specific things I'd probably like to undo (I won't share these :)  But I also think I might encourage my younger self to not be so afraid to do things - almost every regret I come up with is usually something I DIDN'T do.

My friend and I also agreed that maybe the point of the exercise is to make sure you learn from your mistakes (since you can't actually go tell your younger self stuff).

vs.

WARNING: rant ahead.

I have a set of geek podcasts I listen to, one of them being NPR's "Science Friday". They're pretty hit and miss, some are fluff and some are really interesting, depends on the speaker usually.

Anyway, the one I listened to yesterday was about "denialism" of science in our society. Basically, the group of science-oriented people who think that people who ignore science because of some other belief (religion, morality, or just plain ignorance) are stupid and wrong. Just like people who perceive science conflicting with their religious or moral beliefs are stupid and wrong.

Now...I'm not defending a "side" here, and in fact I am really tired of the fact that we have "sides" in the first place. In this particular case, the issue is always portrayed as "science vs. religion" or "science vs. morality", as if they are really two comparable things.

Science, to my understanding, and based on definitions I've found, is basically the process of understanding and explaining how things work. How things "are". Conclusions, theories, postulates, etc. in science can be proven or dis-proven, and to me, a good scientist is always in pursuit of the truth, meaning their goal should be to better understand how the world around them works, functions, etc.

Faith, religion, morality, etc. are essentially a set of beliefs a person has about what's right and wrong, or how the world should be, or in an abstract sense, the "why" behind how the world is.

Scientific understandings can certainly be APPLIED - as a factor in creating and inventing new things, making things work better, and making decisions as a society or government on the laws and policies we make.

Beliefs can also be APPLIED in a similar manner - many of society's laws and rules have a moral as well as practical basis (we all agree that people shouldn't kill other people, that we shouldn't steal from each other, etc.)

The problem is when these two things are equated. It is all too easy to look through history and see where a particular religion or belief system "took offense" to a scientific explanation of how something in the world works. When scientists in the middle ages learned that the sun and planets didn't revolve around the earth, they were made to be religious heretics because that threatened a belief that the earth and its people were somehow "divine".

Did the fact that we now understood something that we didn't understand before actually change the scientific reality of anything? No. Did that have to mean that the people's belief that the earth and its people were special or "divine" really have to change? No - in fact it seems like it should never really be a big stretch for someone who believes in a higher power to believe that maybe the higher power knows more than they do (duh).

Likewise, we see scientists who have turned their science into their belief system - that every scientific conclusion should dictate the way we live, and that if we don't "believe" in this science and do as it "instructs" we are wrong. (NOTE I'm not talking about a person choosing to believe there is no higher power or choosing not to have a belief system, which is an individual choice). The examples that came up in this podcast were genetically modified food, and abortion. This guy's argument was that because no one has gotten "significantly ill" because of genetically modified food (a subjective phrase, not a scientific one), that we should all just be ok with it. And that on abortion, if science were to prove that an unborn fetus less than 3 months old couldn't actually feel the abortion procedure being done, that everyone against abortion should rethink their views and be ok with that and that we're stupid and ignorant if we're not. In effect, creating (ironically) a belief system out of science.

The particular abortion discussion that was going on was between this speaker and a caller who was fairly obviously against abortion - but in this case I felt like she was at least making the distinction between science and her beliefs - basically saying that one of the reasons she BELIEVES abortion is wrong is because of scientific evidence that a fetus can feel what's going on.

I guess the frustration I have really is that everything in our society seems to be geared toward A vs. B, yes or no, up-or-down votes, one-word answers, polarization, where in reality issues are complicated and most people are somewhere in the middle. Politicians are the worst on this, and the media feeds into it as well.

"Either you're pro-life or you're pro-choice."
"For genetically modified food or against it."
"For or against gay marriage."
"Democrat or Republican."
"Creation or Evolution."
and my personal favorite "If you're not a Republican then you must be against God."

That's just a short list. If I look those over, I know that on most of them I have more than one opinion and have a whole range of feelings on them, and some can't even be directly compared.  The creation vs. evolution example is along the same lines as the earlier mention of "heretics" that thought everything revolved around the earth. Just because we now understand something more about the world (that evolution has gone on and is still going on today), does that preclude the existence of God or a higher power? Of course not - in fact I'd say that a higher power designing a planet would probably want to have designed in the capability of things to evolve and adapt if they wanted it to survive a long time. It isn't a big stretch to think the writers of the bible wrote things in terms they understood AT THE TIME - that doesn't make them wrong, it just means we know more about how our world works now than they did then.

Presbyterian Church, Madison, Wisconsin

Thanks to my faraway (in Iowa) friend Susan for sharing this one:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20111016/OPINION01/310160020/1036/Guest-columnist-long-journey-changed-heart

I grew up in a Presbyterian church so this means a little bit more to me.  Blessings to Scott Anderson as he re-embarks on his journey as a pastor.

Yes to animal shelter adoption, no to animal breeders

I recently saw this posted on the Camp Companion Facebook page, and it broke my heart.  I encourage everyone to read it, I'll warn you if you have pets of your own you will be in tears (but you should still read it and pass it on).

http://themagnificentsoil.tumblr.com/post/10716076247/a-letter-from-a-shelter-manager-anonymous-in

I realize there are "human" problems like poverty and hunger that we need to deal with and I'm not trying to inflate animal issues.  But the problem with the uncontrolled population is one that can be solved.  I certainly hope that employees at animal pounds treat the animals there with as much dignity and respect as possible - there is no reason to abuse animals, even if they are going to be put to sleep.  However, animal pound employees are not the problem - they do not have the resources to deal with an overpopulation problem that is caused by people buying animals from breeders and then surrendering or abandoning them because "they're too much work" or "they didn't expect this or that".

There is NO need for pet breeders - we have plenty of available pets in this world just waiting for good homes.  Even if you want a purebred, an estimated 30% of animals in shelters and rescues are purebreds.  And pets need to be spayed and neutered!!!  There is no good excuse for not doing this - for people that can't afford to have this done privately at their vet, there are public and private programs all over the place to help with this and many will even do it for free.

The animals that are euthanized at shelters for no good reason don't get a choice.  We, as a society, need to step up and solve this very solvable problem that WE have created.

This one deserves a repost...

Thanks to friend Shelley for sharing this one - I, too, grew up with Mr. Rodgers Neighborhood and believe if we could all be more like Fred Rodgers, this world would be a wonderful place to be.

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2011/09/each-of-you-is-special-just-because.html

It's just "Don't Ask" now...

Yesterday (9/20) morning at 12:01am, the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy that formalized the ban on gay and lesbian persons in the military officially ended.  The policy was created in 1993 by then President Clinton as a compromise between the change he wanted to make (to fully allow gays and lesbians to serve openly) and the policy that congress would actually pass and that the miliary at the time would actually accept.  Most people forget that, despite DADT not being what anyone wanted at the time, it WAS better than what the military's policy was before (before that, they could ask, pursue, dig into your personal life, etc. - after DADT, they couldn't).  Still, 13,000+ qualified men and women have been discharged from the military in 18 years under DADT, simply for being themselves.

Of course it's only been a day, but the general feeling is that this really isn't going to change very much.  Sure, there will be a spike of gays and lesbians currently serving to come out over the next few days (this article was a good example, and another talked about two soldiers just got married since they live in a state that allows it) but, just as in most workplaces, people go to work and do their job, and, for the most part, leave their personal life at home.

I had a long chat with a friend of mine who has served in the military about this a few years ago.  He thought it would be very disruptive and he would have been uncomfortable serving with a gay soldier.  I asked him if he was uncomfortable serving with female members of the military and he said no.  I then asked if the military has a code of conduct that everyone is required to follow.  He said yes (I already knew that, but I was pointing it out).  I said that if ALL soldiers, gay, straight, or otherwise, are required to follow this code of conduct or lose their job, then what difference does it make if they're gay?  I think he thought about that one for awhile.  We never had another chat about it, so I don't know.

I don't think this is some huge step forward in rights like many people are making it out to be.  The vast majority of the military are in their teens and 20s, and that generation of people is already past this issue and doesn't care anyway.  Most people growing up now know and have gay and lesbian friends in high school and college.  It's still good to know that these qualified men and women will no longer be losing their jobs for no good reason.

Unrelated, I also have to throw in this article I read this morning:  http://news.yahoo.com/alexander-gop-leaders-thanks-no-thanks-223425967.html. 

It talks about a Tennessee republican senator who has decided he doesn't want to be forced to vote party lines on everything anymore, but rather actually make a conscious decision about each piece of legislation he is voting on.  This article shouldn't even be news, EVERY one of our elected leaders should base their decisions on their constituents, the available facts, and their conscience, but in our current system that is NOT the case.  So kudos to Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, I hope you get re-elected next fall.

The ABCs of me

My good friend Shelley in her baking blog did a re-post of this "ABCs of me" which is getting passed along from blog to blog.  I generally don't "forward" stuff, but this isn't quite the same as forwarding email, and there's no penalty of death or years of bad luck if you don't continue it on.  But if you do have a blog, it's kind of a fun thing to post.

A – Age.  I’m 37

B – Bed Size.  King

C – Chore I dislike.  Cleaning the bathroom.  I can never seem to get the nooks and crannies, and I've never been good with cleaning chemicals.  Vaccum, dust, sweep, fold clothes, love it!  (maybe I don't like the "wet" cleaning chores?)

D – Dogs.  I love animals and someday we'll have a dog.  But I'd have to say I'm really a cat person at heart when it comes down to it.

E – Essential start to my day.  A good breakfast, coffee, and I do a lot better when I get that half hour of "quiet time" in the morning - I relish it.

F – Favorite Colors.  Earth tones.

G – Gold or silver?  Gold (do I really have a strong preference?  no)

H – Height.  I’m 5’10.5"

I – Instruments I play(ed).  I took piano lessons for a number of years when I was younger.  I have played saxophone since the 6th grade (26 years now!).  Same with handbells.  I attempted trumpet lessons two years ago and failed miserably, but it was fun.  I

J – Job title.  Advisory Software Engineer

K – Kids.  Three wonderful little kittehs.

L – Live.  Rochester MN, for 14 years.

M - Money tip I like best.  I like the one Shelley posted (spend less than you make) but I might take that a step further and say "be happy with what you have".  Sometimes we forget to do that.

N – Never plan to…  Control everything :)

O – Overnight hospital stays.  Tonsils out when I was 7.  The sinus surgery I had at age 15 was almost going to turn into an overnight but made it out before the day was over :)

P - Pet Peeves.  People who think they need to fill up all quiet spaces with talking, or feel the need to chime in on absolutely every topic being discussed.  Intolerance of other people's beliefs and cultures, period.  People who claim to be Christians but demonstrate hatred and fear by their actions.

Q - Quote from a movie.  The entire end speech that Michael Douglas makes in "The American President".  My friend Tony and I had that all memorized at one point.  "My Name is Andrew Sheppard and I AM the president."

R – Righty or lefty?  Righty, but I still suspect I might bat left handed - or maybe I just suck at softball :)

S - Siblings.  I have a younger sister 3 years younger, and a younger half-brother who is 25 years younger.

T - Time I wake up.  I only wish I could sleep past 7...usually it's 6 or sometimes even earlier.

U – Underwear.  Boxer briefs.

V - Vegetables I don’t like.  Cauliflower.  Plain celery.  There are probably others.

W – What makes me run late.  Usually just stupidity - I don't tend to be late much though.

X – X-rays I’ve had.  Besides the regular dental checkups, broken arm in 3rd grade, broken finger in college, and broken wrist last year.

Y – Yummy food I make.  The family recipe, handed down from my grandma, for chocolate chip cookies.  Everyone loves these.  I don't say that lightly - really, everyone does.

Z – Zoo animals I like.  Elephants.

Kitteh

Today marks 3 years with Madame Sparkles and Mr. Fluffy Face.  I'm including the most recent picture of each - Madame in her very common stately pose, and Fluffy Face in one of his new favorite hiding spots, the top shelf of our bedroom closet.

Better Choices

I just entered week 27 of my food "lifestyle change" (I have been reminded that "diet" is just "die" with a "t" and what I'm doing isn't hard and is a permanent commitment).  I'm down 33 lbs and have 10 to go for my initial goal.

I didn't lose any weight over the past two weeks.  And I didn't gain any either.  And this is a good thing.  Here's why - both last weekend and the weekend before I was out of town, somewhat on vacation, and away from my "safety" zone of good eating.  Now I've explained that part of making a permanent change like this is realizing that in times like vacations, you do need to enjoy yourself and not miss out on certain things just to stay on some strict eating schedule.  However, part of that is also learning how to make "better" choices even when you're out of your regular schedule, and realize that you may even put on a pound or two during those times, but then get back to normal, and that's ok.  That is a situation I need to be able to handle and repeat for the rest of my life.

Did I do ok over those weekends?  Yeah.  Most of the meals had fruit and vegetables and proteins, and I was able to choose those over carbs.  I "pre-approved" the night I knew we were going out to the pizza restaurant, as that is what we were doing, it was a new and unique place, and I knew I would enjoy it.  And I did.  And the past weekend, when we were at the sports bar watching the Nebraska game, most of the food was bar food and the choices were somewhat limited (I still did as good as I could, broccoli-cheese soup and chicken fingers vs. french fries and nachos).

Could I have done better?  Yeah.  At the lake, we had two big boxes of homemade chocolate chip cookies, one box that they made and one that I made.  When we got to the lake after the 6 hour drive, I wanted a cookie.  Fine, one cookie after a long drive on a vacation is fine.  Within 2 hours I'd had 10.  Not fine.  And over the weekend, I probably had 10 more.  Not fine.  I can do better than that.  20 cookies in a weekend is like my old days.  And, to quote a famous Jedi Master, "that leads to the dark side".

So...the process continues.  But I feel pretty good about 2 weekends in a row where I was able to maintain my current weight, and then jump right back into the "normalcy" of my good eating decisions.

In the Zone

It's a beautiful summer day in Minnesota, I hope everyone here had the chance to just sit outside and get a little bit of sun (and yes, we all freak out too much about sunburns and skin cancer - getting 15 minutes of good solid sunlight without sunscreen is still good for us - Vitamin D - as well as just puts us in a better mood!)

Sports athletes talk about being "in the zone" when they're on a hitting streak, shooting streak, etc. - some even describe feeling like everything seems like everything around them is in slower motion and they are at full speed. I don't know if I would exactly describe all of that for me, but I'm heading into my last week of my first of 4 semesters of graduate school (yes, I'll be 1/4 done on Thursday!), am handling the constant busy-ness at work, and am continuing to lose weight, and mostly just feel great. Yeah, sometimes I feel tired, but usually it's a good kind of tired :)

I was chatting with my manager this morning and told him how good I felt lately and how much I was getting done despite all the things going on, and he said he once heard the quite "If you want something done, give it to a busy person". Why is this so true? I know in college I performed a lot better with the 18-credit semesters than with the 12-credit ones. The summer job I had in Omaha, I got WAY more work done in our busy times than in our non-busy times. And in earlier years in Rochester, I was involved in a LOT of activities (probably more than I should have been) and yet I maintained a much more regular exercise and workout routine than I did the last couple of years, even though I was much busier.

So...I guess maybe my very good friend from college hit it on the money with the phrase he always used: "I'll sleep when I'm dead". Words to live by :)

192

Happy Mid-August to everyone! For those of us in Minnesota, I hope you are all enjoying the nicer summer weather we've had this week.

Today is the end of week 22 of my Atkins diet, and I weighted in at 192 this morning, which is a total lost of 31 lbs. The past month was not a huge amount of "loss" because of a 5-day vacation in Maine (and who isn't going to eat great food on vacation, not to mention great seafood in Maine!) but even with that trip, it's still going pretty well (over 1 lb/week average). Yesterday was particularly fun because we went and did some clothes shopping, and I bought 3 new pairs of skinnier jeans (not to be confused with "skinny fit" jeans as my build is not designed to wear those no matter how much weight I lose!). Just to give you some perspective, last winter (before I started this) I finally had to break down and buy two pairs of jeans and a pair of black pants in bigger sizes because I couldn't fit into the clothes I had anymore. The jeans I bought yesterday are 4 sizes smaller than those, and still actually had some breathing room. I'm going to give my larger-sized clothes to charity this week so that I don't have anything to fall back on (not that I have any intention or thought that I'm ever going to slip to that level again). My goal is still 180 by the end of the year - even if I go at the 1 lb/week pace, that is still easily doable (and if I don't quite make it, no big deal, I WILL make it by next year!).

I'm also entering my final two weeks of summer semester for grad school - it's hard to believe that I'm already done with 2 1/2 months of this 14-month program, it's going fast! I get a WHOLE WEEK off between summer and fall, at which point both Erin and I will be in classes, so you may not see us much in the fall (hopefully we'll get a few breaks!) My fall semester looks to be pretty full, as I'll not only be taking the 8 credits of the program classes, but a 3-credit elective. Eleven credits plus work, plus activities...well it's going to be full. But I'm looking forward to it.

Back to studying...

Retired

...or at least repurposed at some point. Yes, after nearly 10 years of faithful service, my little blue Linksys WRT54G has been unplugged and replaced by the router I purchased today. The Linksys was not failing or working incorrectly - actually it's probably been the most consistent piece of computer equipment I've ever owned. But it was finally starting to show it's age - no wireless N, no guest network, no gigabit, no IPv6, and I think now that I'm pushing more bandwidth through it, it wasn't always keeping up. I'm going to bring it to mom's house and plug it in there, and it will probably run another 10 years.

Any piece of technology that lasts 10 years (and is still useful) is pretty good...Linksys WRT54G, I salute you!

One Hit Wonders

A fun little recap of "one-hit wonders" over the past 25 years (groups that had one hugely popular song and then nothing else):

http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/74387/chart-watch-extra-one-hit-wonders

I LOVE one-hit wonders, in fact I have an entire playlist on my iPod made up of just that. I don't like them BECAUSE they're one-hit wonders, I think I like them because they're unique and often don't fit into a typical category or sound. The same is true of groups that occasionally do a song that is totally out-of-character for the group. The biggest example that comes to mind is "Friday I'm In Love" by The Cure - I don't generally like music by The Cure, but I liked that song. And I generally don't like stuff by "Cake" either, but they did a whole album ("Comfort Eagle") that was completely different than the rest of their stuff, and I loved it.

There was even a (fictional) movie made about one-hit wonders, called "That Thing You Do", one of my all-time favorite movies, about a fictional 60s band called, appropriately, "The Wonders" and their quick rise to and fall from stardom. Fantastic movie and I love the song too.

So, one-hit wonders...we salute you!

Prime

Yes, today is my birthday, and in mathematical terms I'm "in my prime" because my age is now a prime number :) I won't tell you which one, but if you know the general range of my age, you can probably guess.

A shout out to my friend Amber, who was born on the exact same day and year as me, in the same state, and born 3 minutes after me - we didn't know each other until a few years ago, and have been birthday buddies ever since.

One of the perks of birthdays for me is that by registering my email address with the 3 main coffee shops I go to (Caribou, Starbucks, and Dunn Brothers), I get a free drink on my birthday. Which means I have to have 3 coffee drinks on my birthday. But you can never have too much coffee right? So I started the morning with a Caribou White Chocolate Mocha...79g of carbs...I haven't had 79g of carbs IN A DAY since I started the Atkins diet 22 weeks ago (btw, I've lost 28 lbs now!) My body may go into sugar shock...I don't plan to get 3 mochas, I'll use the other drinks for something less sugary.

I am fortunate my birthday landed on a Wednesday this year because this week I have class Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday, Rochester PrideFest (IBM table) Saturday, not to mention work and homework. And given that we're leaving next Thursday evening for Maine for 5 days, I have two papers for school to have done before I leave, plus a project on Tuesday. So...I'm going to enjoy today! Early dinner with my cousins, later dinner with my friends.

OK, the sugar is setting in....too jittery to keep typing... :)

Electronic Rights

An interesting article about a trial going on where the prosecution is arguing that the defendant is required to decrypt their hard drive:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20078312-281/doj-we-can-force-you-to-decrypt-that-laptop/

This is another case of laws not keeping up with technology - a problem that's going to get more and more prevalent as time goes on. I personally think that encryption is out there, it's going to be everywhere, and the government trying to stop it, have backdoors, or force a defendant to have to decrypt something isn't really going to work.

Good thought for the day

Thanks to my most previous mortgage consultant, Dan Bieber, for this one (and btw, if you are ever looking for a mortgage person when buying or re-financing, I'd highly recommend Dan Bieber, he was fantastic to work with!)

"If you have a tendency to brag, just remember it's not the whistle that pulls the train." - O.F. Nichols

Dallas!

Oh boy...I hate to admit that I'm WAY more excited about this than I should be....

http://news.yahoo.com/era-dallas-headed-tnt-next-summer-184534705.html

I grew up watching Dallas with my parents and grandparents, I remember people having "Who Shot J.R." parties during that season. I watched them again when TNN re-ran them in 1997, and more recently on TNT somewhere around 2007. At some point I want to get the DVDs when they get dirt cheap.

Why do I like this show? Much of the later seasons aren't even that good - after "the dream season" it went downhill quickly, and the last season shouldn't have even happened. But it still has this quirky 80s appeal...and it's about as opposite of reality TV as you can get, so maybe that's another reason I like it. Or maybe I secretly want to be a Texas oil baron (yeah right!)

Anyway...I don't have satellite or cable anymore, but I'm guessing I will be able to stream it from somewhere this fall.

Happy 4th - freedoms that we fight for

I wish everyone a safe and blessed 4th of July today as our country turns 235 years old. I have many wonderful family memories of past July 4th days as I know many people do. (For those of you not in Minnesota, I hope you have as nice a weather weekend as we have had here, today looks to be absolutely beautiful!)

I saw this article among CNN's headlines yesterday, about a soldier, Andrew Wilfahrt from Minnesota who served and tragically died in Afghanistan. He was very intelligent and highly respected and liked by his superiors and peers. He was also gay, and is believed to be the first gay soldier to die in combat after the lift of the DADT military ban by congress.

Just this summer, the Minnesota legislature voted to place an amendment on the 2012 ballot to bar same-sex marriage in Minnesota (and a reminder that there is already a Minnesota law that bans same-sex marriage on the books). People like Corporal Wilfahrt, gay Americans who are serving (and dying) to protect our country's freedoms are not allowed to return home and have the freedom to marry the person they love. They are barred from the very freedoms they are dying to protect. I hope people consider this next November when they're casting their ballots and voting on this amendment.

Compromise and Rational Evaluation

I'm not posting this because the author agrees with my own views on the topic, but because of his rational analytical approach to how he reached (and changed and evolved!) his views on same-sex marriage:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/06/27/frum.gay.marriage/index.html

I really wish that our politics didn't have to be this "all-or-nothing", "black-or-white" thing - when you actually ask people more in-depth what their opinions are on this or many other topics, the answers are a lot more complex and across-the-board. But those kinds of things don't fit into 30-second sound bytes, political speeches, news headlines, or 2-minute news segments. And they don't force people to polarize, which seems to be the objective of most politicians (on both sides of the aisle!)

TV no more?

An interesting article from friend Bill, talking about something I've been saying for awhile now:

http://broadcastengineering.com/news/most-tv-content-moving-web-within-two-years/index.html

The article says that the major TV networks and players will be distributing 75% of their content via the internet within 2 years. That is a bit faster than I have been predicting - I'm not sure everyone has the bandwidth capacity yet for that - but I would guess within 5 years we'll be there for sure. Every device that comes out now is network-capable, and most have applications built-in to play Netflix, Hulu, or just general web browsers where you can play anything.

The big takeaway from this article is the idea that we need to stop thinking about TV shows as TV shows, movies as movies, etc. and realize that in the future they are all in the category of "video content" and the internet is content-type-agnostic. This also solves SO many technology problems of the past, where we all had to have very specific hardware for TV broadcast formats, cable formats, satellite boxes, etc. and upgrading to a newer technology took years because it meant everyone had to get new hardware. Now that this is all software (mostly) in these devices that are basically all just computers on one scale or another, rolling out something like a new HD standard or a new company like Netflix or a new network providing content will be much more open and easy.

We've been "off the TV grid" (meaning only getting over-the-air and internet-delivered content) for over a year now and we're loving it - and saving about $90/month in the process.

199 - Diet Conclusions

(and, no I'm not "DONE" yet, "DONE" meaning I've reached my goal weight of 180 - but as an update, I just finished week 14, and I weighed in at 199 this morning - down 24 lbs)

I was going to do this post a few weeks ago, but I decided that I wanted to wait until I actually had more weeks and data to draw conclusions on. I will start again with the disclaimer that these are my own conclusions based on my own experiences, reading, and research. I am not a doctor or a medical professional and would advise anyone to talk with a doctor before making any changes concerning their diet or health.

I will also ask that you not confuse my passion for this topic with the idea that I am on some sort of crusade for or against, well, anything. I think the only crusade I'm on is against ignorance, and for people to know that THEY are ultimately in charge of their health. When it comes to weight, diet, exercise, etc., don't accept that there is no solution out there for you - everyone is different and there is no one right answer.

The mistakes I've made with diets in the past

• The foremost mistake I've made in my first two weight-loss attempts was not having a long-term/lifetime plan and goals. The losing weight goals are fairly easy. But I need to have a plan in my head for what to do if I gain 5 or 10 lbs somewhere down the road - how to steer myself back on course without letting myself get 45 lbs overweight again. If you think of it as a permanent change or lifestyle change, it has to include a long-term plan.
• If I am to do another marathon someday, I also must have a plan for my "in-training" eating and then a plan for getting back to my "not-in-training" eating when I'm finished. (Will I ever do another marathon? Maybe...it's really not an ideal way to stay in shape, I'd say it's more an "accomplishment" and not strategy for weight loss or healthy living)
• During my 2004 Atkins, which was at the height of the low-carb hype/craze, there were a ton of low-carb "replacement" types of products - shakes, ice cream (boy do I miss Kemps Caramel Cow Tracks low-carb!), things made out of protein flour, etc. - the goal of these products, besides making money, was to try to replace the high-carb versions so you didn't feel so "deprived". I bought a lot of them, and they certainly worked. However, I don't think it really helped me break the mental addiction I have to those "comfort" carb foods. This time around, the hype is all gone and there aren't all those products, and I'm focusing on eating good, quality, real, whole foods and not trying to replace the carb stuff.

The myths about low-carb diets

• MYTH: Dr. Charles Atkins died of his own diet. REALITY: Dr. Atkins died of complications from a head injury he suffered falling off of a ladder.
• MYTH: Low-carb diets are hard on your kidneys. REALITY: High-protein diets have the POSSIBILITY of being hard on your kidneys. Low-carb diets like Atkins replace most of the carb calories with fiber and fat. A general guideline I've read in exercise and weight training books is that a person consume a minimum of 1g of protein per 3 lbs of body weight. If you're somewhere around that, it is unlikely that you will have kidney issues (of course, always check with your doctor!!!)
  
• MYTH: Low-carb diets raise your cholesterol and triglycerides because you consume more cholesterol and fat. REALITY: Besides the articles I've linked below, numbers generally speak for themselves. You should absolutely be checking these numbers at your regular physical examination with your doctor.
  
• MYTH: Low-carb diets work because you actually consume less calories. REALITY: Well, actually, in some instances people might eat less calories. I personally don't know if I do or not because I do not count calories. But the questions that should be asked are "why do you eat less calories?" and "does it really matter?" If you can lose weight, don't get hungry, aren't depriving or starving your body, and can eat more food any time if you really need to, the number of calories you're actually consuming seems kind of irrelevant. (also see my own conclusions on the self-limiting nature of proteins and fats).
  

Why a low-carb diet works for me

I really do believe that I have a carbohydrate addiction that is some combination of physical and mental. For me, eating something sweet or highly starchy produces a reaction in my body similar to the reaction that people with other addictions (drug, alcohol, gambling, etc.). I only know a limited amount of science on the topic, but I understand that it has to do with dopamine levels among other things.

As is the case with many physical addictions, the only way to stop them is to stop doing whatever the addiction is. Now, if you have a food addiction, obviously you can't just stop eating food. I think many people (including me) incorrectly assume that they have a food addiction though, when what they really have is that addict/dopamine reaction to sugar and high-glycemic carbs. After a few weeks of cutting that stuff out, my physical cravings were gone and have not returned.

This time around, I've tried to be particularly aware of the mental process that goes on when it comes to my food choices. A good example is the coffee shop, where I love my mochas and lattes. Now, I love me my coffee, and I get my big mug full every morning and enjoy it all morning at work or at home. But frequently in the afternoons, or when I'm away from home, I get the urge to go get a mocha or a latte. Sure, they taste good, but why, really, do I want them vs. having a decaf cup of coffee, which is probably just as satisfying to my love of coffee? What I've found is that, in my head, I tend to view these kinds of treats as both "celebrations" for when I'm in a good mood, and "pick-me-ups" for when I'm in a bad mood (and sometimes just plain time-filler for when I'm bored!). Occasionally that is probably a good thing. Every day, sometimes multiple times a day? That is a dependence. I have similar feelings at home about chips or crackers or other snacks - when I start to question WHY I actually want something, I've had similar insights.

My own "big picture" conclusions

Human beings that lived "pre-agriculture" were hunters and gatherers. Their diets were primarily seeds, nuts, berries, fruits, and animals they hunted for food. Agriculture - the ability to grow things like wheat in mass quantities, has really only been around "en masse" for a few hundred years, which is a tiny fraction of human history. So, regardless of your beliefs on the origin of human beings, it would stand to reason that the human body was designed and/or evolved to operate on that pre-agriculture/hunters-and-gatherers type of diet.

In the earlier part of last century through the 50s, it is estimated that 5% of the population was obese. There was no non-organic food, no bleached flour, very little pre-packaged and processed food, no high fructose corn syrup, and sugar was not added to everything. People of our grandparents generation ate real, whole food - eggs, real butter (or lard!), whole milk, fruits, vegetables, and meat. Carbohydrates back then consisted of fruits, nuts, seeds, and whole-grains. As we got into the 70s, 80s, and 90s, more and more processed, pre-packaged carbohydrates became available, many touted as "low-fat" as the push toward low-fat diets continued. And yet, obesity numbers have steadily increased over that period - depending on which sets of numbers you look at, 35-60% of people are now considered overweight or obese (it's certainly larger than 5%!)

Again, I would always encourage anyone to do their own research, and certainly find something that works for you and do it. And of course consult with your doctor, but also remember that YOU are ultimately in charge of your own health, and that there is no "one-size-fits-all" doctor or solution for everyone - if it were actually that easy we wouldn't have problems!

Minnesota

I've been following the news and Facebook posts concerning the Minnesota Legislature's current attempt to put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage onto the 2012 general election ballot. Thirty-one states have had similar state amendments put on their ballots over the last 15 years, and 31 states have approved them (one state rejected the first attempt and passed it the second time). Most political analysis tends to show that, in large part, conservative politicians tend to want so-called "wedge" issues like this on a ballot because it gets conservative voters to show up on election day, and likely vote for conservative politicians.

My response so far has been to write letters to my state senator and state representative, both Republicans (District #29, Dave Senjem and Duane Quam). Senator Senjem has already voted for this in the senate, and the house has not yet voted. I expressed my disappointment to Senator Senjem, and to both I asked them how they would feel if the right to marry their wife and have the legal protections that their wife and children have was put onto a ballot for voters to decide on. I also pointed out that over the next year and a half, I, like many other people in my situation, will be spending our time, energy, and probably money campaigning to defeat this amendment, instead of spending our time, energy, and money on our families, and doing things that actually make a difference (for me, that is the volunteering I do at church and the animal shelter, and the community bands I play in, not to mention the time I will be spending on my master's degree).

The response I am expecting from my elected officials (if I get any at all) is that they're not voting for a marriage ban, they're voting to give Minnesotans the right to vote and make the decision themselves. Which is a complete political cop-out. If that is really how they believe things should be (that we should all vote on everything ourselves), then we do we have elected officials? It is also important to point out that 301 out of the last 304 proposed constitutional amendments were NOT passed on to voters. So the VAST majority of the time, the legislature does NOT believe that people should have the right to vote on an issue themselves.

The constitution should be HARD to change or amend. Our US constitution only has 26 amendments in almost 250 years. Some states, like Iowa, require that the legislature pass a proposed amendment in two consecutive sessions (i.e. 2 years apart) before it goes to the ballot. Other states have similar rigorous procedures like requiring 2/3 majorities. The US constitution requires that, after it gets through the senate and house, that 3/4 of all of the states ratify an amendment in a general election. 3/4!!! All to make sure that amendments are taken seriously. Minnesota? Legislative majority, and popular vote majority in one election. Governor has no power to do anything. Minnesota Supreme Court can't overturn an amendment. Where are the checks and balances here?

Friend Shelley shared a good blog post with me from Nick Coleman on the topic. A recent poll hows that over half of Minnesotans don't support amending the constitution for this issue. But history also shows that even when poll numbers show that something isn't going to happen in an election, sometimes it still does (Proposition 8 in California in 2008). So, despite the best efforts of me and a lot of other people over the next year and a half, it's very possible that this amendment will pass, and that my right to marry the person I love will be taken away in Minnesota forever (forever = it would take another amendment to nullify this one, which would probably mean years more of time, energy, money, campaigning, etc.).

Oh, and in case you didn't know, there is already a law on the books in Minnesota prohibiting same-sex marriage. Yes, that law could be overturned by a court or repealed by a legislature. But that has not happened, and so even if this amendment fails, I still don't have the right to marry the person I love.

For the first time since I've lived in Minnesota (and just so you know, I've lived in Minnesota the majority of my life, from age 1 to 8, and from age 22 to 36, a total of 21 out of 36 years), I am really considering whether I will be living here for the rest of my life.

Willpower

My good friend Shelley writes a world-renowned blog on Debt Reduction. One of her most recent articles talks about the temptation/struggle of excess spending when you actually have more money to spend (vs. saving and wiser, more planned uses of money). This got me thinking about how we all have temptations we have to deal with, and the willpower we use to deal with them.

I have gone 7 straight weeks on the Atkins diet now, and have not cheated or slipped once (yes, not even once, not even a little bit!) That's been the case on every diet I've ever seriously committed to, marathon training I've done, weight lifting programs I've been on, etc. People look at that and tell me that I must have extraordinary "willpower". It's fun to get a compliment like that, but I'll admit that in this case what they're calling "willpower" is really rooted in what I would describe as an "obsessive" personality (to a degree anyway). Once I decided to start doing this diet, there are clear rules to follow and I have no trouble following them and almost nothing can make me deviate from clear rules (that I've decided to follow). This phase of the diet is very simple and safe for me - follow the rules and you will lose weight. There are no decisions to make, no optional paths to follow. Two good recent examples - Thursday Erin baked a whole bunch of cookies for work, and many were still out (and they smelled SO good!). I was home alone, no one would know. Did I flinch? No, not really. Almost no force on earth would have made me eat one of those cookies, because the rules were in place in my head, and I was following them. Last night after handbell practice, one of my dear friends brought in some leftover wedding cake from her daughter's wedding, which I attended earlier this year. I had had a piece of this cake at the wedding reception, and it was some of the best cake I'd ever had. Did I flinch? No. The only potential hard thing I might have had to deal with was offending someone by not taking a piece of cake, and having to explain why. But pretty much nothing would have made me want to eat a piece of that cake.

What's going to be the hard part? The reason why I end up in these situations needing to be on diets in the first place? That will come when I've lost all the weight I want to lose. "Eating in the Real World" is what Atkins calls it, and the South Beach book has a similar section. For some people this is much easier than the diet itself - "moderation" is what it's called. Enjoy that occasional cookie or piece of wedding cake, and do a good job the rest of the time. My personality doesn't seem to work that way though. I don't know how to enjoy an occasional treat without the "rules" in my head having to be altered. I don't know how to skip a day of marathon training (I did miss days but they were always for planned reasons). For me the easy part is now. The hard part is yet to come.

15

Life has sort of interrupted my blogging as of late, but a few updates...

On Easter Sunday, we managed to plant almost all of our garden (the nicest day in the last two weeks weather-wise). We took a more minimalist approach this year and didn't do seedlings and just planted the seeds, we'll see how it turns out. Erin is still looking at getting grape vines strung up too.

Very excited about our forthcoming retaining walls, which may not happen now until early June because the weather isn't cooperating, but it's going to be great when they're done. Very ready to get out there and plant trees and rose bushes!

Got to see my two nieces this weekend, and niece #3 who is forthcoming in July :) Not the greatest weather weekend but we did see the movie "Rio" which was just plain fun as far as movies go.

And last but not least...after 7 weeks of faithfully following my low-carb diet, I am down 15 lbs this morning, feel great, and am not having any problems sticking to it. If the weather would ever cooperate, I might even get outside more :)

Camp Companion

I just have to give a general shout out to the wonderful group of people that is Camp Companion of Rochester - I don't know that I've EVER witnessed such an active group of people in any organization anywhere. I love to go to their Facebook page and just see all the animals being rescued, treated, adopted, so many all the time! We adopted our 3 cats from them and they are just wonderful to work with. And all of this is done via foster homes - quite an undertaking and quite amazing.

https://www.facebook.com/campcompanion

100 Miles!

A little lighter of a post, and a shout out of my friend Wayne, who attempted his first 100-mile run. And is a great storyteller :) I owe the birth of my entire running career to Wayne, before I met him I never thought I'd run 10 miles in my lifetime, and by the next summer after we met he had me running his 10 and 20 mile training runs with him, just for fun.

Now, I've done 3 marathons, which are 26.2 miles, and they took me between 4 1/2 to 5 hours to finish. And I was dead by the time I finished. Now, think about doing that do that 4 times in a row.

Or, to put it in a different perspective - how long does it take you to even DRIVE 100 miles?

Congrats Wayne, even though you ONLY got through 80 out of 100 :) (and he says he's going to do another one in a few months, wow!)

My History with Carbohydrates

I have come to learn that that I am a carbohydrate addict to some degree. I'm not really even sure if I know what that means, but over the course of my life, and especially in later years, there was something more to wanting something sugary or starchy than just being hungry. Whether it be a slight alteration of my route somewhere so I could stop and get an afternoon mocha, or an attempt to cure a low energy or down part of the day...it was definitely pre-meditated.

In many cases when someone has an addiction to something, they try to just quit doing it entirely - smoking, alcohol, gambling, or whatever it is that interferes with life. When it comes to food though, it isn't as simple - obviously we can't just stop eating food entirely. But, in 2004, at 215lbs, and after several friends of mine had been having success with the low-carb diets, and despite this being contrary to all "conventional diet wisdom", my curious side got the best of me and I started reading. There were two books out at the time getting the most traction - "Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution" and "The South Beach Diet". I read both of them. And even then I had lots of skepticism - how could all this stuff about low-fat, high-carb, calories in < calories out, the food pyramid, etc. possibly have been wrong all these years?

However, I was also had a great exercise routine going, including a lot of power weight training, and I knew that whatever I did had to be high enough in protein so that my muscles could recover from their workouts (I was already supplementing with protein shakes). So, on Saturday, January 10th, 2004, after the holiday eating had "cleared", I went to the grocery story and stocked up on all the food I would need (and also got rid of or gave away all my "carb" food).

I won't explain all the details of Atkins, but every low-carb diet has a similar set of phases - an "induction" phase with almost no carbs at all that resets your body so that you get off of the sugar spikes/lows you're used to with high-carb diets, an intermediate phase (or two) where you slowly add stuff back in, and a lifetime maintenance phase where you figure out how many carbs you can eat without losing weight, and presumably adjust it over the rest of your life.

The main difference though, between a low-carb diet and other more "conventional" diets, is that besides having to limit carbs (either by # of grams per day, or by the foods you are eating), you eat normally, and if you're hungry, you eat. For me, this was huge for two reasons - I knew I wouldn't be starving my body, my muscles, etc., and I also knew that I'd never get to that point in the day where I'd have eaten all my allotted "portions" (calories, servings, etc.) and couldn't eat anymore. If I really wanted to eat some more, I could - just not carbs.

Dr. Atkins does say that the first couple of days when you stop eating carbs altogether, your body will try to fight you. The first time I did this, it really took a whole week of feeling like I was in a fog, but I now realize that the main reason for that was probably the fact that I was also giving up caffeine completely at the same time - and before that I was a coffee + 5-6 can/day diet pop drinker. Besides that week though, every day after that I generally felt better, and had lost 10 lbs in two weeks (Dr. Atkins does mention that a few pounds of that are usually water weight). After two weeks I continued to phase 2, where you add back 5g of carbs every day for a week, then the next week you add back 5g more, etc. while monitoring your weight loss, until you're losing about 1 lb/week.

According to the log I kept, I went from 215 to 185 in about 4 months, and trickled down to 180 after that. By the summer, I was a healthy, in-shape 180 doing power weight training and cardio. I was never hungry, never tired (after week 1), and at my physical all my cholesterol, triglyceride, blood sugar, and blood pressure numbers were fantastic. I might have been in the best shape of my life. So you think, "wow, it worked", huh? Yes, it did. And that could have been the end of the story, had I stuck with the lifetime maintenance plan and just controlled my carb intake (and by controlled, we're talking 80-150g a day depending on physical activity, which is NOT that hard to accomplish).

But that's not the end of the story. And not because of Atkins or low-carb. I kept in great shape the rest of 2004 into 2005. And then...I started marathon training again. Anyone who is a runner knows that when you run 30-40 miles per week, you just can't gain weight, and for long runs you generally want some more "quick" energy, the kind that comes in carbs. Which is fine, because when you're running those kinds of miles, you burn it all off. But, as in 1999, once I started eating like a high-mile runner, I didn't have a plan to stop eating that way when I was done running. I actually did another marathon in 2006, so I kept on that high-energy-burning routine through June 2006, when I finished my 3rd marathon. I was still in fantastic shape - around 175 and could run 20+ miles at a time :) But, alas, when all that high-mile running stopped, the high-mile eating didn't.

(Do you see a pattern here?) It was summer, I was in great shape, I'd just run 2 marathons in two years, why should I give up eating all the ice cream, cookies, chips, crackers (pick your favorite carb) that I want? I will get back to the "good" eating "pretty soon".

"Pretty soon" turned out finally be nearly 5 years later, in March 2011. At 223 lbs, the most I've ever weighed in my entire life, I'd gained 43 lbs, stopped exercising, and, for 2 straight years at my annual physical my cholesterol, triglyceride, and blood pressure numbers have gotten progressively worse. Somewhere in those 4 years I tried an "all organic foods" diet, which might have helped me eat better quality food, but didn't help me lose any weight. I also half-heartedly tried to start the South Beach Diet, but, at least for me, it was not structured enough for me to not stray on (I think some people find that a lot easier).

So, March 14th, 2011, I started Atkins again, this time with some experience and hopefully a little smarter. There's also been a lot of new studies and science in 7 years, which was great and helpful to read. Yesterday I finished week 4 and am down 13 lbs to 210. My long-term target is 180 again, but I now see this as a lifetime thing, so if it takes a year to get there I'm ok with that. I've also started back into some regular exercise - I ran a mile last Thursday, a far cry from the 26.2 I had been running, but I suppose you have to start somewhere :)

One more post (I know I said 3, but hey it's my blog and I want to write some conclusions), which will include some of the more useful and interesting links I've found pertaining to studies on carbohydrates, cholesterol, and saturated fat.

My History with Diets

I never tried any official "diet" or organized plan of any sort until I started working full-time in 1997 after I graduated from college. I went through various phases of trying to eat less or exercise more, or drink diet pop, etc. etc. but none of these really had any plan or goal, and of course I never really stuck to them. Besides the junior year of college when I somehow dipped down to 185, I had hovered around 200 most of my post-7th grade life (to 215 in May of 1997).

Two things changed when I started working and living on my own - I had a LOT more free time all of a sudden (all I had to do was work, which was WAY less than all the stuff I had going on at school) and I had total control of what I was eating now - I bought my own groceries, made my own meals, and ate out when I wanted to.

So in the fall of 1997, after I got settled into my job, I found a diet book I had gotten awhile back called "The Clinic 30 Program". This diet was based on the "conventional" diet thinking we've all had pounded into our heads since elementary school health class - low-fat, high-carb, high-protein, eat less calories (the food pyramid we all remember!). All "modern" medical science at that time was in agreement (or so I thought anyway) about that, so I figured it must be right! This particular program was set up so that you could have a specific number of servings of each of the food groups - 4 bread/cereal, 7 meat/protein, 2 vegetable, 2 dairy, 3 fruit, and 1 fat. A "serving" is about what you'd expect - a slice of bread, an ounce of meat, a piece of fruit, a vegetable, an 8 oz glass of milk, and fat was like a pat of butter. So this was an extremely low-fat diet. Basically, if you eat all your servings every day, that's about 1300-1400 calories a day.

I actually have all of the paper charts I used to keep track of what I ate every day, and my progress. I started at 210 lbs on 9/22/1997. I followed the program (there were 3 phases) seriously for over a year, and then off-and-on for another year and a half after that (when I started marathon training in 1999 I stopped - remember that point for later :)

I got down to 170 on 6/29/1998 (actually got down to 167 two days later, but that was because of the stomach flu, so it doesn't really count). I also completely trashed my body and lost almost all of my muscle mass. For the first several weeks of the diet I felt like I was starving all the time (and now I know that I was starving my body!) The diet did not emphasize making healthier food choices, only counting calories and servings, and I still wasn't in the habit of eating vegetables and fruit, so most of my days I really only ate my bread/cereal, meat, and fat servings (I did eat more fruit as I went on because I was so hungry). I was probably fortunate that by the time I got to my "goal" weight I had started running, and also joined the Rochester Athletic Club and had started lifting weights regularly, because it sort of forced me to eat more and kept my muscle from completely disappearing. Looking back, I think that the abuse and stress I was putting on my body with that diet caused me to get sick a lot more - I had a lot of stomach flus and other "tummy" issues.

I ran a lot in 1998 and did a full marathon in 1999. You don't gain weight doing marathon training, no matter what you eat :) After I was done with the marathon in Oct 1999 though, I stopped doing all the running I was doing, but I kept eating like I was doing all that running. So, by March 2000, I was back to 200 again.

Between 2000 and 2003, because of the amount of physical activity I was doing, I stayed between 190 and 200. But I slowly crept up to 215 again by the beginning of 2004, and I decided I needed to figure out something better...

Next post...why I now understand and believe that carbohydrates hold the key to our weight (and maybe a lot of our health)

My History with Food and Weight

(I am going to do this in 3 related posts so that they're not so long - and if you you just want to get to the main topic, skip to the 3rd one, although this stuff may make you appreciate it more)

Over the past ~ 4 years, I have once again let myself slowly slip into some bad habits when it comes to eating and exercise. While this isn't a yo-yo cycle for me, I can now see some trends that I've decided I need to break, hopefully once and for all.

I'll make a standard disclaimer before I start - I am not a doctor or a medical professional, and some of the information about diets and medically-related topics are based on my own reading, research, and experiences of what works for me. Everyone should consult a doctor before making any life-changing decisions related to their health. That being said...don't forget that YOU are ultimately responsible for your health. Doctors, as good as they are, can only make their best judgments on the information they know about you, and the information they know themselves, and even the best doctor on Earth still can't know everything about everything. I would encourage people to remember that it's ok to get a second opinion and that there is often more than one way to solve a medical or health problem.

So, I have issues with food. I have had them since I was very young, before I can even remember (according to my parents, somewhere around age 2 1/2). I was EXTREMELY picky as a child - I don't think I threw tantrums about much of anything, except probably food. You say, "yeah I was picky too, we all grow out of it". Well, to put it in perspective - most of my younger life, there were about 4 or 5 things I would eat (other than things like dessert which pretty much anyone eats, although I was even picky about that). I lived on peanut butter and crackers, fried chicken, bacon, toast, cereal, milk, Wild Berry Hi-C, and fruit rollups. I did not eat pizza until I was about 15, and then it was ONLY cheese pizza from Pizza Hut. As I got into high school, I figured out french fries were ok, as well as plain chicken sandwiches. I didn't eat any fruits or vegetables to speak of, unless you count corn-on-the-cob, during the one month in the summer when it was in season. Not until college did I even start edging my way out of my eating shell (a little).

I don't know exactly when I slipped into the "overweight" category as a kid, but I have one "reference point" I usually go with. In 7th grade in PE class, we did a unit on wrestling, and were divided up into weight classes. I was at 200 lbs by then - easily the biggest in my 7th grade class (to be fair, I was also the tallest at that point because I grew sooner than just about everyone). I hovered around 200 through most of high school, which at 5'10" (even with a large frame) is probably still too much.

In college, I actually got to some period during my junior year where I dropped down to about 185 - I wasn't really specifically trying to lose weight, but a combination of having a walking campus, taking a weight lifting class (that really de-mystified weight training which I've continued to do through most years after that) and maybe a lot of studying and stress, I just dropped some pounds. During my IBM co-op, I also worked out a lot because I had a lot of free time. Sadly, my senior year I think I over-endulged a bit on pretty much everything, and graduated college in 1997 at an out-of-shape 215, my all-time max weight then.

Next post...my attempts at diets, cardio, marathons, weight training, and how they worked.

Mario Fun

A cool "first-person" view of SMB

Spay, neuter, adopt

Probably preaching to the choir knowing who reads my blog, but this is a good one to pass on. Thank someone who volunteers at an animal shelter. Volunteer yourself.

Fun "Trick Quarterbacking" video

And all from the 3rd string QB of the UConn Huskies...

Cool stuff where I work

http://www.startribune.com/business/115533889.html?elr=KArksUUUycaEacyU

Super Bowl

I didn't have a chance to watch the Super Bowl this year as I was driving home during that time, but I did listen to it a bit, and read about it this morning. While I have kind of stopped caring about the NFL (I am much more interested in college football these days) I thought this thing about Aaron Rodgers (the game MVP QB of the Packers) was cool:

http://espn.go.com/blog/rick-reilly-go-fish/post/_/id/826/aaron-rodgers-unforgettable-forgiveness

I've read and seen enough about him to know that this is generally how he is. I wish all players could have this kind of class and team attitude. I'd certainly enjoy watching the NFL a lot more if they did.

Flashback fun

Thanks to friend Ryan for this one....

http://www.behance.net/Gallery/ALT1977-WE-ARE-NOT-TIME-TRAVELERS/545221

Many sci-fi shows deal with the topic of using time travel for financial gain. Fun to think about anyway...

When the star leaves...

I posted this on Facebook too...it is rumored that Steve Carell is leaving "The Office" but that they are going to continue the show without him. Which started me thinking about shows over the years that lost their main character or star and tried to continue...here are the ones that come to mind (and some posted by other people to my Facebook post on the same topic):

• "Sliders" - after 2 1/2 seasons, "The Professor" John Rhys-Davies left and the writers all got replaced. That was bad enough, but after Season 4 "Quinn" Jerry O'Connell left too, and the show just got ridiculous.
• "The Dukes of Hazzard" - the season where "Bo and Luke" were replaced with similar-looking but much worse cousins "Vance and Coy". The producers thought the car and Daisy were what everyone watched the show for, and didn't want to bow in to the bigger contract demands of the Bo and Luke actors. They were wrong...and the show never really recovered.
• "Valerie" - a show named for Valerie Harper. After several seasons, she left, and in the show they killed her off and replaced her with the aunt played by Sandy Duncan. This actually wasn't the worst replacement ever, and Jason Bateman expanded his role and became the star I think. Still wasn't nearly as good as the beginning.
• "X-Files" trying to replace Mulder and Scully. Couldn't be done.
• "Saved By The Bell" trying to go with similar-but-worse (if that is possible) next generation actors. And then attempting to revive the original actors by doing "The College Years". And yet people continued to watch...
• "That 70s Show" without "Eric" Topher Grace. I think everyone thought there was enough other talent to keep going, and really the other actors were all very funny and good, but for some reason, the Eric character kind of held it all together. Never recovered.

Post some more of your favorites!

Fun catalog flashbacks

Thanks to friend Matt for sharing this fun flashback to 70s catalog models

http://www.visualnews.com/2010/10/16/who-shot-the-couch-vintage-bad-fashions/

Cholesterol

Thanks to friend Dan for the link to this one:

http://naturalcommunitiesmag.com/2010/06/28/cholesterol-friend-or-foe-2/

I've read an increasing number of articles saying that we've over-evilized eggs and that they actually provide a healthy amount of LDL/HDL cholesterol. I've also read articles that talk about how we aren't measuring the right thing when we test cholesterol levels (that we should be doing the test to see if our artieries are clogged instead) but it never really expained why. This article explains a lot more about that, and how our body uses cholesterol.

I am getting increasingly skeptical of drugs like cholesterol medication, given that they all have these horrible side effects on our liver. This further makes me wonder if all these drugs we take end up having more side effects and cause us to have more problems (which might make us take more drugs, etc. etc.)

Why "Christians" continue to get a bad name

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/01/19/Ala_Gov_Not_Christian_Not_Your_Brother/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AdvocatecomDailyNews+%28Advocate.com+Daily+News%29

The problems with separation of church and state aside (everyone has the right to their own personal opinions), this, to me, is the problem with how Christianity is viewed in our society. Most of you who know me know that I am a Christian, and I have a hard time understanding how someone who makes remarks like the Alabama governor is making could possibly be reading the same bible that I am reading. The "Golden Rule" in the Christian bible contains two parts - 1) You shall love the lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind, and 2) YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.

Now, to me the first part is a personal relationship between a person and God. But the second part seems pretty clear - there are no exceptions on who is "your neighbor". That means everyone. Period. And it only takes a little bit of reading about the life of Jesus, for which "Christ"ianity is based on, to see that Jesus didn't hate people, exclude people, etc. Certainly, people have different opinions, different beliefs, different faiths, different religions, etc. The rule does not say "You shall agree with your neighbor as yourself". But someone who claims to be a Christian and yet isn't living part 2 of the "Golden Rule" and is ignoring the countless examples of it in the life of Jesus, to me, is a hypocrite. Period.

My Blackberry is broken

Hilarious - thanks to friend Bill for sharing