Thursday, July 13, 2006

Gerolsteiner Caught With Team Discovery's Dope


I think this was the afternoon headline in L'Equipe.

If it wasn't, it must have been something like that. I mean, granted, I was one of first people on the "Hincapie is not going to win the Tour" bandwagon but, still, the Disco boys rode better times when they were on front the entire race working for the Texan. Bizarre.

Leipheimer has been left for dead and making odd sounding excuses along the way. All of a sudden, he's attacking everyone in sight and three Gerolsteiner's are beating the best Discos.

Other than that, not much enexpected happened. Landis looks the strongest but, as a follower in the mountains with bigger hills to come, it's doubtful he'll be able to put things away before the time trial. A big climbing day by any number of of guys could still turn the race on its head.

Expect every Frenchman in the race to attack tomorrow.

Congrats to Landis, Menchov and especially for Dressel for choosing to defy the odds and defend the yellow. He put up a spirited fight and almost made it and, I'm sure, I'm not the only one who wished he had. Landis didn't want the jersey just yet and I think they'll be happy to let breaks go up the road tomorrow.

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Explaining the Tour


Today's the first big day in the mountains. However, with the finish over 40k from the top of the last climb, not too many hands will be revealed. It's a day where you can't win the tour, but you can lose it. There are a couple of guys off the front that are going to take the yellow jersey, which doesn't much matter to the real contenders. That usually sounds strange to the people I talk to, so today I'll break down the race and how it works.

GC - is the race for the general classification based on overall time. This is what Armstrong won, the yellow jersey, and is the main prize. A GC rider is protected by his team during the race and should only need to shine at two points when he can no longer be protected: in the high mountains and on individual time trials.

Points - is the green jersey, the sprinters prize. This goes to the most consistant rider, place wise, as opposed to time. Because most of the stages are flat-ish, the people who can sprint out of a group win this prize. Teams matter during this prize, a lot, as a strong leadout from your team can greatly aid a sprinter. Since the sprinters generally can't climb, you'll see them gather together to try and support each other over the mountains (called the autobus, or just bus) where they need to survive to the finish in under the time cut. This isn't always easy. The green jersey wearer often fails to get over the mountains in time to finish the race.

Mountains - is the polka dot jersey for the best climber. It's usually not for the best climber in the race, but the most aggressive climber. The very best climbers are usually in a tactical match for the GC, so any climber who either doesn't fancy their GC chance or plain can't time trial, will try and win this. To win the mountain jersey you have to be aggressive and ride away from the field early on long mountain stages to get all of the points on the early climbs. Each rated climb has a point value which increases as you go deeper into the race. In order to win this jersey, you need to gain most of the points on the early climbs, meaning the wearer of the spotted jersey has to spend many kilometers alone in front of the race, expending massive amounts of energy, and then hold on and stay in time contention the rest of the race. ouch.

Young rider - the white jersey is for the best placed young rider on GC. Most teams have a dedicated GC leader and don't really work for this prize. Therefore, there's rarely too much drama surrounding this but it's always an indication of who to watch out for in the future. Often times this winner comes from the lesser squads as the power teams have all of their riders committed to working for their leader.

So, today, all of the GC contenders are happy to sit and watch each other and let a breakaway go up the road. This calculated gamble has often led to surprises in the race. In 1990, Claudio Ciappucci and a small group gained 10 minutes and wasn't caught until the second to last day of the race. In '04, Thomas Voekeler did the same thing and held the jersey for nearly half of the race. This is what's playing out today. A two-man break is gaining nearly 1o minutes. Cryil Dressel is going to win the moutains and the yellow jersey but Juan Migel Mercado is more dangerous as a GC threat. Tomorrow, Dressel will probably attack again an try to get more mountain points but Mercado, a good stage racer, could sit with the leaders and try to gain the yellow. He may be able to get it and hold it for a while.

As the GC riders go, T-Mobile with a reduced squad, probably doesn't want the jersey because working for it is hard work on the team. So what we saw was posturing. Tomorrow, there will be no hiding so today all the riders are trying to look cool and gain some type of psychological advantage going into the first monsterous mountain stage. If you were watching, notice Landis riding with his jersey zipped all the way up while his teammates--and most of the field--were fully un-zipped and gasping. This is posturing. "You think this is hard? I'm barely breathing," kind of stuff.

When I said you can't win but can lose, I think Levi has lost it. He hasn't said what, but something is wrong. If you lose the leaders over today's climb, your GC chances are over. Same with Iban Mayo and yesterday's leader, Gonchar (btw, his name is G, not H as is being reported by most people because "they made a mistake on my passport").

Another interesting note, Eric Zabel made it to the front group. He's trying to win his seventh green jersey but, at 36, no longer has the legs to win the big sprints. But crafty riding can gain points where most sprinters dare not go. He and Daniel Bennati made the front group and got a few points. If they can continue this they could sneak up on the leaders. Chances are, this won't be enough to win the competition unless McEwen and Boonen don't get over the mountains but that's happened before. And it's always interesting to watch big sprinters try and hang with the waif-like climbers in the moutains.

So today we didn't learn much but the race got more interesting. Tomorrow, we'll know who's got a chance to win. To me, the best looking three are Landis, Kloden, Evans. All the Discovery four look decent too, so look for them to attack, along with Giberto Simoni, for sure. Now I'd better get on my bike.

Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Flomax


Well, damn, I had a great post on the World Cup written here but then my internet connection began to go on the fritz and I lost it. Hopefully, that inspiration will come back to me but now I'm just irritated so, today (from my local coffee house), I'll post on the most irritating aspect of the Tour de France.

But first, my challenge. My grade on the first rest day is a C-. It's been good as an overall life commitment but my "training" has often consisted of bike commuting between various bars and restaurants for the World Cup matches. But, given the cup has finished, as well as all of my social commitments (like a mad 30-hour Video Shop renunion in Vegas), I reckon it'll get better. And, despite all the reverie, my fitness level went up, not down, over the course of the World Cup; something I'll guess is a rare event world-wide. Maybe only me, Ronaldo, Luis Figo, and Zidane.

New Tour prediction: slot Kloden into top 10, or top 5, or top 1....

So, for sure, the worst (of many many many) commercials during the Tour is the Flomax ad. You've heard me rant on this subject before; drugs that advertise side effects far worse than the problem they're claiming they "may" be able to help with. In this case, it's "frequent trips to the restroom(sic)" or some such nonesense. I mean, sure, that could be a problem. It could even be quite irritating. However, I'd far prefer it to the list of side effects promised, one being frequent fainting. The funny thing is that the ad shows guys fishing, golfing, handling heavy machinery and being generally active which, seems to me, is the exact kind of place you wouldn't want to be fainting. But, hell, what do I know? Perhaps a quick nod off in the middle of fighting a marlin is preferable to needing to take a whizz.

Saturday, July 08, 2006

"Surprising Day at the Tour"


Not exactly. But to listen to the OLN commentary or read any American news source it seems like it was a shocking day, and mainly because George Hincapie didn't win. But, really, was there anything in his past other than his relationship with a certain Texan that showed his might? Um, no.

One shocking thing was the poor performance of Levi Leipheimer. I don't think anyone expected this and, in fact, I don't think he's ever ridden anything close the this bad a time trial. After two top 10 Tour finished and in a year he's supposed to be peaking, it seems to point to something being quite wrong. We'll see in the days ahead.

Another is the crash of Bobby Julich, who now holds the unprecidented distinction of crashing out of the Tour twice as a team leader (if de facto this time), in time trials, something normally thought of as safe. The only explaination that I can find for this is that perhaps thinking he'd be there to support Basso in the mountains, he didn't recon the time trial courses because he didn't think he'd be allowed to ride hard, and was therefore unaware hidden curb that seemed to cause his accident. But, man, even with the crash, it was still pretty much bad luck to be forced out of the race.

Other than that, today was filled with proven time trialists having good performances. The "completely unexpected" winner, Sergie Gonchar, wouldn't have been so unexpected had he not come to the race to ride for Jan Ullrich (who must be beside himself seeing how his team performed today on a course that perfectly suits his talents). After all, he's won a stack of time trials over the years and held the lead in the Giro de Italia. Rogers, Lang, Landis, etc, etc. were all expected to do well here.

Landis was the big winner for the day, moving into the clear race favorite. Kloden proved to be fit as well and is now, "suddenly", a contender. Other proven guys had solid rides, mainly GC threats Evans, Menchov, Sastre. Some of the best climbers, like Rujano, Mayo, and Simoni lost a ton of time which will, undoutable, lead to many attacks, fireworks, and a fun time in the mountains. Who of the favorites will be able to follow?

As for Discovery, they now have a clear leader, 2-time Giro winner Paulo Salvodelli, and a great team to support him. But what does this do to the American coverage? The way OLN's been reporting, it's not far fetched to think they might just throw in the towel and get back to bass tournaments and shooting things. How can we sell a race to the American public without a a movie star mug with a podium girl wife? Landis is more like that kind of working-class hero the French would rally behind. We certainly can't broadcast something like that!

Allez, Floyd!

Thursday, July 06, 2006

Doping

I'll post my own thoughts on this at some point but this is very interetsting and explains, rather well, some of the misconceptions with doping.

I do ask you, if these riders are the only ones doping than wouldn't they have had some quantifiable shift in performance that could easily be graphed? Doping, by definition, is performance enhancing (makes you go faster). Yet, there is no evidence of this sort. This either means that no one dopes, which seems unlikely in the face of these allegations, or that everyone does. There is truly no other explaination when you look at the numbers. The problem, perhaps, is that what is actually doping is misunderstood.

Reported on cyclingnews.com

Fuentes: "Tour at that speed impossible without doping"
In an extensive interview broadcast by Spanish radio Cadena Ser, gynaecologist and doping expert Eufemiano Fuentes has talked about his behind-the-scenes activities in the sport. First of all, he insisted on his belief that he was not a criminal and only attended to his medical duty of preserving the athlete's health.

"I'm don't feel like a criminal; I haven't killed anyone and I haven't destroyed anyone's health," he said. "I'm a health professional; my priority is to cure my patients because I think that the sport at high level is not healthy. I'm accused of crime against public health, but they should sanction those who play at being doctors." So instead of boosting the rider's performances, Fuentes considered that he only "supplemented and adjusted" those bodily functions of the riders which showed a deficit.

"[Cyclists] are very special sportsmen because they reduce their heart rate by half when resting," he continued. "Their hearts are big, and when they stop cycling their hearts reduce their size to normal within six months, which results in what we call 'sudden death'."

Fuentes, who added that his treatments also concerned other sports than cycling (football, tennis, athletics), said that it was possible to ride the Tour de France without "medical" help, but not at that speed. "You just can't ride four of these mountain stages successively at that speed, it's very harmful," he said, adding that in his opinion it was more dangerous for a cyclist to start the Tour de France with a hematocrit level of 31 percent, than one of 51 percent - even though this meant that the rider would be excluded from competition.

The Madrid-based doctor named two cyclists, Alberto Contador and Vicente Ballester, but only to say that he did not know them and that he did not know why their names were on the list established by the Spanish criminal investigators. He also said that there were riders still participating in the Tour de France that he had treated and that he "had enough of the hypocrisy. The Tour direction sent home riders that I never treated, and there are now clients of mine in the peloton. I'm furious. People were named that I don't even know but other names were concealed."

Moreover, he stated that the bags of blood that were found were destined "for use in the next ten years", and that the quantities of EPO seized "for a family member who might need it." he also added that he had been threatened not to reveal any persons involved with him. Fuentes felt "lynched by the media" and "killed professionally".

This second story concerns Lance Armstrong's former personal coach:

Leipheimer in Ferrari hotel
German press agency dpa has reported that Gerolsteiner team manager Hans-Michael Holczer had confirmed information according to which his Tour de France leader, American Levi Leipheimer, had possible contacts with controversial preparatore Michele Ferrari. At the start of stage five in Beauvais, Holczer admitted that Leipheimer had stayed in the same hotel during a training camp on Spanish island Tenerife last year. "But he assured me once again that he isn't working with the Italian," said Holczer.

Landis


Since I'm writing this at the rather crazy hour of 5am, it seemed like a good subject would be the craziest rider in the peloton, Floyd Landis. I think going from a normal amount of exercise to heaps of exercise is wreaking havoc with my sleep. The last couple of nights I've woken up early, even though I'm quite tired. It's either that or the World Cup reverie in combination with the exercise. Still, I'm already over two hours behind my Tour challengers; nothing a couple of long days in the mountains can't fix.

I bring this up because as I'm laying in bed I'm wondering what Floyd might do, which is probably just get up and start training. With the top riders riders from last year's Tour all out due to retirement (Armstrong) or doping (Ullrich, Basso, Mancebo), or lack of a team due to doping (Vinokorov) along with the pre-race favorite (Valverde, crash), American Floyd Landis is now the odds on favorite to win the race. After years of calculated and professional behavior from the Texan, this may be just the shot in the arm (pun intended) that the sport needs. Landis couldn't be more different than Armstrong.

Raised in a Mennonite community he wasn't even allowed to wear shorts when he first began to race his bike. His parents, horrified at the thought of someone trying to race bikes for a living, gave him so many chores that he wouldn't be able to ride during the day. So he trained at night, every night, even during the Pennsylvania winter. He'd read that Tour riders training 100 miles a day, so that's what he did. He'd train during the snowy winters with plastic bags over his shoes wearing layers of sweat pants on a lousy bike until he left home at 17 and promptly became a professional mountain biker.

Thrust into the limelight, Landis has nothing to do with Armstrong's entourage or the Discovery team's clinical political correctness. He makes his winter home the Riverside country suburb of Murrieta, a place not exactly associated with the rich and famous. During the season, he lives in a dingy $700 a month apt. He's brash and says whatever's on his mind.

When Armstrong's association with Dr. Michele Ferrari came up in the book, Lance Armstrong's War, most of the Armstrong circle gave measured responses about the association, pointing to Chris Carmichael, OLN golden boy touted as the man behind Armstrong by the US press as an important component's. Ferrari, unquestionably one of sports most brilliant minds, was not the type of character American's wanted their hero associated with because he was open and critical about the UCI's doping policy and, essentially, pro dope, calling EPO under supervision "safer than orange juice." Landis, however, laughed outright when asked who Armstrong's real trainer was. "You've met both of them," he said to the author Daniel Coyne. "Who would you listen to?" a reference obviously pointing to Ferrari.

He's also tough as nails, once refusing to go to the hospital with a broken hip until it was apparent it would never heal on its own. Then, after having a bunch of bolts placed in his hip to hold it together, he was on his trainer the next week, and starting the Tour de France not long after.

One of my favorite Landisisms was his response to the cliche of giving 110%.

"Well, why not 112 percent?" Landis inquires, eyes widening with burning incredulity. "Why not 500 percent or 1,300 percent or 38 billion percent? I mean, if he can crank it up beyond 100 percent, why not? What's stopping him, exactly?"

Or on overtraining:

There's only one rule: The guy who trains the hardest, the most, wins. Period. Because you won't die. Even though you feel like you'll die, you don't actually die. Like when you're training, you can always do one more. Always. As tired as you might think you are, you can always, always do one more."

So there's no such thing as overtraining?

"If you overtrained, it means that you didn't train hard enough to handle that level of training," Landis says, his fingertip rapping the table for emphasis. "So you weren't overtrained; you were actually undertrained to begin with. So there's the rule again: The guy who trains the hardest, the most, wins."

And ther's plenty more where that came from. Check out this article, for starters. Go Floyd!

Oh, and btw, congratulations to France and Italy for reaching the World Cup finals.

Bravo!

Tuesday, July 04, 2006

One Game Changes Everything




My challenge is a rather large undertaking and today it was exacerbated by more than the Tour. Add celebrations for the 4th and the World Cup semi-finals and you've got a difficult scenario for fitness. Thankfully, I live in a huge city as my commute to the various activities I was to participate in got me a few hours on the bike. I'm a bit in the red on my challenge, meaning I owe about an hour and a half. I'm tellin' ya, this will be a lot easier when the World Cup ends.

At the Tour today there was justice. Mattias Kessler, who deserved to win yesterday, found the strength to attack the peloton once again and this time stayed away. His victory will hopefully take a touch of the sting out of Germany's woes over their valient loss to Italy. The Italians were superior in a brilliant match, one for the ages. Anyone who thinks "soccer is boring" needs to find a reply of today's overtime. Sitting next to a German fan down at my local, he could only shake his head at the winning goal. "That was absolutely beautiful," was all he said.

It may not feel like it here in the USA, but you should believe those slogans that state "one game changes everything."

Viva Italia!
Hoppe Germany!
Happy Birthday, America!

Monday, July 03, 2006

The Longest Day


Hmmm, I think this little training program I've concocted might be kind of hard. 5-plus hours in the saddle today for the boys, meaning that if I ride for 3 hours, which is reasonable, I need to do 2 hours of additional exercise. I think my social life's about to disappear for the month of July. Oh, well, it'll be fun and, by the end, I should be pretty fit. I'll perform a fit test later today and see how much I improve over the next three weeks.

The last two days (and the couple prior) have all been 2-3 hours on the mtn bike. Yesterday, I was definitely feeling tired and I'm thinking "this is day 2!" Maybe I'll recover today... ha!

On the tour: some fun strategy has been played out over the last couple of days. It was nice to see Big George (Hincapie) use a cheeky move yesterday to gain the yellow. Thor got it back today with some more straight forward sprinting. The race for the green jersey looks a lot more wide open than I had thought. Boonen was unbeatable during the early season but he's definitely beatable now. He went 1-1 with two straight up sprints with Husvold today before being nowhere in the finale. McEwen is on form, for sure, but it's always interesting to see whether or not he can get over the mountains. If the bigs guns falter, crafty riders who can climb, Eric Zabel and Stuart O'Grady are still in the mix and may have something to say about it yet.

You can tell absolutely nothing about the yellow jersey race at this point but it's always fun to look anyway. Landis has had two glitches already. He missed the start of the prolong and lost a hand full of seconds. Today he was in a minor crash. Evans has stayed near the front and out of trouble. Kloden (notice not in my top 10 because I didn't want to gamble on his unknown form) is right in the mix. If he's at his level of two years ago he might be the favorite. You can't tell anything about Valverde right now. He's so fast he could probably win a stage like todays if he was in the mood, so maybe he's just riding smart. His only real unknown is long time trialing, so we'll know where he stands after stage nine. If he's among the leaders, look out.

Tomorrow's stage is pretty bumpy. It would suit a breakaway, which I'm sure will be attempted. But the sprinter's teams are very strong so, I imagine, Husvold will try and hang onto yellow so look for another select sprint finish.

Sunday, July 02, 2006

Tour Preview


The Tour hasn't even started and we've already had the craziest day in sports this year, and maybe the biggest day in the history of cycling because 58 major players, as well as the top two Tour contenders, have been implicated in a doping scandal and kicked out of the race. I'll discuss this more over the coming weeks but, for now, let's sort out what to think about who's left in the race.

The course:

Each year, the Tour takes a different course around France, usually including a few days in another country. This year's Tour uses an old school profile that features more time trialing, less climbing, and no team time trial. If Armstrong were still in the race, this would suit him against Ivan Basso but not against Jan Ullrich. The lack of a team time trial lessens the advantage of the power teams: Discovery and CSC, meaning a guys like Alejandro Valverde or Iban Mayo don't start the race already having given up a couple of minutes.

This year, the long time trials had made Jan Ullirch a favortie over a pure climber like Basso. I still would have picked Basso based on how he destroyed everyone in the Giro d'Italia. Now they're both gone, along with Francisco Manecebo and a very unlucky Alexander Vinokerov, who was not in a doping scandal but lost his entire team and, hence, cannot participate himself. With last year's top 5 riders not competing, it means the race is completey wide open. There isn't even a minor favortite, much less a clear favorite. Here are the players:

Alejandro Valverde (Spain, Caisse d'Epargne) - This wonderkid is one of the best one-day racers in the world and hasn't even began to flirt with his potential. Vegas has him the odds-on favorite but he's never won a grand tour nor has he finished the Tour de France. He can sprint and climb, a rare combination, but the oddsmakers are setting him up almost purely on potential.

Levi Leipheimer (USA, Gerolsteiner) - The highest finisher from last year left in the race, Leipheimer is a solid rider supported by an excellent team who just won the Dauphane Libre. His form is there but the buzz is that he doesn't quite have the talent or team to stand on the top of the podium. Could be true but there is little doubt he'll be in the mix and has a great chance to move on to the podium.

Floyd Landis (USA, Phonak) - Armstrong's former teammate has already won three stage races this year. With heaps of talent, a great team, and plenty of brashness to handle the pressure, many are touting him as Armstrong's heir apparant.

Cadel Evans (Aussi, Davitamon-Lotto) - A strong finish last year and a solid build up this spring, this former mountain biker (like Landis) can climb and time trial equally well and seems well suited to this year's course. His team, however, might have trouble if forced to control the race.

Paulo Salvodell, George Hincapie, Jose Azevedo, Yaroslav Popovych - Discovery doesn't have Lance but they've got a lot of cards to play. Big George showed he can win in the moutains last year but can he climb in a leader's position? Savoldelli is realistically their best shot, having won the Giro twice. Azevedo and Popovych both have finished high in major tours. It should be interesting and fun to watch them play all these cards.

Wild Cards - The are many many peope that could shake up this race. Denis Mechov finished second in the Vuelta de Espana last year and seems to be improving. Both Damiano Cunego and Giberto Simoni have won the Giro. They seem to lack enough time trialing ability to win here but could make thing very intersting in the mountains. Ditto for Michael Rasmussen, who will probably go for another spotted jersey (the best climber). Iban Mayo hasn't been heard from in two years but a recent win shows he might be on form, something to consider since he's one of the few people who dropped Armstrong in the mountains.

T-Mobile and CSC - With the loss of their leaders, it's hard to imane these powerhouse teams going quietly. T-Mobile has world time trial champion Mick Rogers and Tour podium finisher Andreas Kloden to pick up the slack. If Kloden, who's lacked form the last couple of years, is strong, he should be a favorite.

CSC will look to American Dave Zabriske to grab the yellow during the first time trial. History seems to show he'll lose it in the mountains but if anyone's strong enough to hold the jersey, it's CSC. Bobby Julich may be too old but the race profile suits him. Frank Schleck could also be ready for a breakthrough year as well and Carlos Sastre has proven tough in stage races. Like Discovery, they have a lot of cards to play. Look for some creative strategy from them once the race hits the mountains.

Green Jersey (sprinter) - This is Tom Boonen's to lose but look for Thor Husvold, Robbie McEwen, Eric Zabel and Stuart O'Grady to try and knock the world champion out.

Polka Dot Jersey (mountain) - Depending on who tries for this it could be fantastic. Certainly Rasmussen will try again but if Gibo or Cunego don't fancy their chances for the overall, this could be epic.

Prediction.

Anything can happen, but I've got to choose someone, so:

1. Landis
2. Valverde
3. Salvodelli
4. Leipheimer
5. Evans
6. Sastre
7. Rogers
8. Menchov
9. Hincapie
10. Cunego

Le Tour, Dope, and a New Training Program











My new training program began yesterday. While it's not very scientific it will be hard, fun, and lead to something when it's over. I'll explain the "rules" over the coming days. For now, all I know is that it will mirror the Tour de France, which may lead to some discussion about doping in sports, something this is almost entirely misunderstood by the general public.

In my chat last week, one of our members was complaining about lack of motivation. I mentioned that with the Tour beginning this week, it was the perfect time to begin a training program. This race is a great vicarious training partner because, no matter how much you may be suffering or sacrificing, you can be sure there are others out there suffering and sacrificing more.

I've done a Tour training program once before. Back in '98 i mirrored the race. Because I hadn't done much bike riding and was completely off the couch, I road each day of the race but began riding only 10% of the racer's distance, which increased over time until I was riding 100% of their distance over teh final few days.

This year it's going to be tougher. Because I'm training for a few different sports, I won't just be on my bike. But I will train, and train a lot. Here are the rules.

1. Train as many hours per day as the riders race.
2. Bike each day the riders ride.
3. Blog each day.

So I'll be back, everday for the next 21 days. Along with my training program, you'll also get my views on this year's race, the doping scandal, and why American's are so ambivilant towards the World Cup.

Monday, June 12, 2006

17 beers a day for better health?


Once again, Yahoo has served up a misleading headline that drives home the point that you need to read articles and not just browse headlines. Furthermore, you then need to analyze the information and decide what it means. In this case, at least, not much analysis is needed.

"Beer ingredient may fight prostate cancer " reads the headline.

The article, in fact, tells a far different story, mainly that you probably need to drink about 17 beers a day for this to be true. Can 17 beers a day be healthy? C'mon! Without even discussing its alcohol content, we're talkin' about 3,000 calories consisting of alcohol and carbs--not exactly the Zone. With a diet like this you'll die long before prostate cancer has any sort of chance to affect your healthy at all.

What this article is actually telling us is that not all of beer's ingredients are bad for us but, in order to have a balanced diet, we need to eat other foods as well. Hardly a sexy headline but, unfortunately, that's the way it is.

Thursday, June 01, 2006

What if I don't want to get bulky?


Women often fear getting 'bulky' by lifting weights. My standard
answer is that gaining bulk is very difficult and in a program
where you're doing 10 - 25 reps it's nearly impossible. I received
the below email from my boss who got it from one of our clients.
According to this guy, Dave, I've been toning down my responses.
You know, I think Dave is onto something.

Carl, I saw this on one of the bodybuilding boards I peruse,
this in response to a girl who feared she would "bulk up" if she lifted
weights....I can sooooo see this going through the mind of Stever Edwards..lol

FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME, YOU CANNOT GET TOO BIG
FROM LIFTING WEIGHTS! A NON-DRUG-USING MALE
TRAINEE WOULD HAPPILY CRAWL ON HIS LIPS THROUGH
A FIELD OF LEECHES TO ADD FIFTEEN CRUMMY LITTLE
POUNDS OF MUSCLE A YEAR! DO YOU THINK THAT YOU
ARE SOMEHOW SO SPECIAL THAT YOU WILL DEFY THE
LAWS OF PHYSIOLOGY AND SUDDENLY BECOME HUGE
ONE DAY? WAKE UP AND SMELL THE GODDAMNED
TESTOSTERONE, HONEY

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Getting Slow

This morning I'm sore, tired, and starting to 'get slow'. Getting slow is a term a friend and I used to use to denote the early stage of a training process when your body is in breakdown, particularly your fast-twitch fibers, and you are litterally slower than you were before. It's hard to get out of bed, hard to walk around, and even harder to do anything quickly.

I often get mail from people complaining about their exercise program making them hungry, weak, tired, or leading to unwanted weight gain in the early stages. They are upset because the program promised to do just the opposite. But that's how exercise works. Your body breaks down in order to re-build. It's a process, part of which is a negative effect that leads to a positive. So before you get fast, you get slow. Before you get strong, you get weak. And so on.

So I've been very busy this year. Exercising, but with no plans or focus--just trying not to atrophy. This week I, completely serendipitously, rode my bike hard the last three days. Last night I woke up a bunch during the night and this morning I'm sore, and slow. I'm about to go back on the road. It's a working trip but my bikes are coming, so I'll try and stay on it and work through this point. Because it gets better, and rather quickly too. But if you don't stay with a program you could wind up in a perpetual state of breakdown, never realizing any more. This is why exercise programs are called 'programs;' you've got to see them to their end if you want to find out what they will do for you.

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Lactic acid as a fuel source?

Some interesting research out of Berkeley:

Lactic acid as fuel?

From what I can tell, so far, this doesn't change much in the world of training too much. You still need to train in the aerobic realm to enable oxygen transport and in the glycolytic pathways for anaerobic endurance, which will come down to your Kreb's Cycle efficiency. It's just that now, perhaps, we've got different terminology for what is actually happening in the body. But perhaps this understanding will somehow revolutionize training once it's fully understood. Anyway, it's always great when new research--especially stuff that breaks the mold of what we 'know'--comes out.

What could be more fascinating? Truly. Don't you just love science?

Monday, May 01, 2006

Crazy Advertising

This morning, my friend Isabelle sent me that latest on Xenical being approved for over the counter. Check this out:

GlaxoSmithKline has received conditional approval from the FDA to sell the weight-loss drug Xenical over-the-counter. It would be sold under the brand name Alli.

The pill blocks fat from being absorbed by the body. If it wins final approval, it will be the only FDA-approved weight-loss drug available without a prescription.

Sounds all well and good, huh? But wait, there's more!

However, the drug can cause excess gas and oily discharge, and can lead to hepatitis, gallstones and kidney stones. Recent studies have also linked the drug to precancerous colon lesions and a heightened risk of breast cancer, prompting consumer groups such as Public Citizen to petition the FDA to reject GlaxoSmithKline's request for over-the-counter sales and pull Xenical from the U.S. market.

How does something like this even get on to the legalization radar of the FDA? These guys must have some seriously talented lobbyists, is all that comes to mind.

So now you have a choice. Eat better, exercise, lose weight and feel better, or take a pill, lose weight, and get sick and go to the hospital. Who would take this stuff?

I guess a lot of people.

I'm confused, almost daily, by all of the drug company ads for stuff that's supposed to fix and ailment (many brought on by unhealthy living habits) that end with a long running list of possible side effects. And these aren't along the lines of "may cause drowsiness" but often put you at risk for something far more dangerous than what you are suffering from in the first place. I mean, sheesh, looking pudgy at the beach may be bad for my self image but it sure beats a case of hepatitis, which people die from every year.

Are we ever going to wake up?

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

The Worst Food on the Planet

Nutrition 911, Part VI: The Worst Food on the Planet
By Steve Edwards

Welcome to Part VI of our oh-so-basic nutrition class designed to give
you an overview of basic nutrition and make healthy eating much
simpler. In Part I, we addressed the terms organic, grass-fed,
free-range, and farm-raised. Part II analyzed the ever-popular
"fat-free" and trendy "low-carb" slogans. In Part III, we took the CliffsNotes approach to reading food labels. Part IV tackled
dessert.

Last time (Part V), we discussed what you should eat. This time, let's
talk about what you shouldn't eat. Actually, I mean drink; leading to
our first lesson of the day. Calories are calories, whether you eat them
or drink them. And just what are the worst calories you can consume?
The answer is soda pop. Forget about brands; whether it's Coke, Barq's Root Beer, or Dr. Pepper, it's all junk. The taste might make you happy,
but from a nutritional point of view, soda's only place in the world is
to make people fat, sick, and unhappy.

Alarming statistics

In America, we drink a lot of cola (or "un-cola"). A lot. On average we
each drank 52.4 gallons in 2005, and this figure includes infants,
healthy folks, prisoners, etc., meaning that the average soda drinker actually gulps (their word) more than this. Carbonated soft drinks
are the biggest single caloric source in the American diet. Teenagers,
in particular, are hooked on the stuff and get an average of 13 percent
of their daily calories from "pop." If this doesn't scare you, it should.
In terms of sheer amount, these statistics could be alarming if it were
any one food. A proper diet should have some balance and diversity.
And soda pop is the antithesis of "any food." It's bad food.

"Empty calories"

We use the term "empty calories" for foods, like soda, that have no
place in a nutritious diet. I feel this term is misleading. The calories
in soda are far from empty. Most of them come from sugar. In the USA,
it's nearly always high-fructose corn syrup, the cheapest, most
processed sugar on the market. Other ingredients include caffeine,
various phosphates and acids, and artificial colorings. We'll get to
their effects on the human body in a minute, but first, let's stick to
the simple stuff. The average teenager consumes between 10 and 15 teaspoons per day of refined sugar via soda—about their daily
requirement, according to government standards, for all foods.
This means, that for the average teenager, their soda consumption
virtually eliminates their chances of eating a balanced diet. There's nothing empty about that.

Weird science

The soda companies are a marketing juggernaut. They spend roughly
$700 million a year on media advertising alone. Not to mention
hundreds of millions more sponsoring events, athletes, musicians,
and such. This volume of cash makes it difficult for consumers to
avoid them, by design. To avoid the temptation to drink Coke, you've
got to be highly principled or living in the middle of the jungle. And
even then, well, I once happened upon a soda vending machine
halfway up Mount Yarigatake in the Japanese Alps and a friend
traveling in Guatemala found Coke in a rural area that didn't have
running water. Let's just say, they're going to continue to make it
easy for you to find the stuff.

This type of marketing machine won't go away quietly. With the
stats above, you could certainly put two and two together and link
soda companies to the childhood (and adult) obesity epidemic that is arguably the world's most serious health crisis. Yet, while researching
this article I came across a widely published "study" stating that "soft drink consumption has no effect on childhood obesity." Suspicious
from the get-go (the word "no" being a huge red flag), it didn't take me
long to find this statement: "The research paper was supported by an unrestricted gift from the American Beverage Association." Bingo. Remember those Phillip Morris tobacco "studies" that promised a
long and healthy life from chain smoking?

What makes it so bad?

Besides the simple caloric trade-off, sodas are formulated to give you
a rush. The sugar is mixed with phosphates designed to speed it into
your system. It's so good, in fact, that many cyclists prefer Coca-Cola
to specific sports food when they need a sugar rush near the end of
races. And, while a sugar rush is a good thing when you're trying to
exceed your anaerobic threshold and are out of blood glycogen (never mind, if you don't know what this is), it's a bad thing whenever you're
not, which is even a competitive cyclist's state of being 99 percent of
the time.

Beyond the simple sugar rush, these acids and phosphates alter your
body's pH levels and inhibit absorption of other nutrients. Then there
are the effects of certain artificial coloring agents. For example,
yellow #5, commonly used in soft drinks, has been linked to
attention deficit disorder, hives, asthma, and other allergic reactions
in some children.

Then there is the nutrient trade-off to consider. A person who drinks
a Big Gulp per day must go to great lengths to maintain a balanced
diet. Otherwise they will almost certainly be deficient in numerous vitamins, minerals, dietary fiber, and essential fatty or amino
acids—none of which are found in soda. For this reason, soda is
often linked to type 2 diabetes, osteoporosis, dental erosion, and a
higher risk of kidney stones and heart disease. And that's just a start. There's plenty of less scientific data linking soda to
poor scholastic habits.

Diet sodas and juicesIn an attempt to become thought of as healthier,
soda companies have diversified into non-carbonated beverages and
diet sodas. While these are an improvement in some ways, they are
hardly a solution to the problem.

First off, most juices and other caloric non-soda alternatives are
mainly just sugar and water without the carbonation. A quick label comparison between a commercial orange juice and a Mountain Dew would show a similar "bottom line" with regards to calories and sugar.
The only improvement would be the lack of the non-caloric offenders.

But that's no small matter, as the true effects of these ingredients
have not been thoroughly studied. Despite their no-calorie status,
diet sodas have been linked to assorted illnesses. There is no good
science on this yet but my own anecdotal evidence is, so far, 100% accurate. I've yet to have a client not lose weight by kicking diet soda. Granted, all of my clients drank an excessive amount, but regardless,
there is little doubt that the pH balance of diet sodas hinders the
body's ability to absorb nutrients. One client, a female athlete, lost
15 pounds by making no other dietary change but eliminating diet
soda. Fifteen pounds and zero calories—more weird science. The
bottom line to all this is that, for best results, your body would be
happier if you cut most of the calories out of your liquids and cut
out soft drinks—caloric or not—altogether.

How can you help?

In my world, soft drinks would come with the same type of regulatory language as cigarettes and booze, at least. Actually, in my world we'd
all be educated and wouldn't require this language at all, but that's
politics 911, not nutrition 911. Anyway, here are five ways you can help educate the public about the dangers of soda, according to the Center
for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Contact your local
government officials and/or the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) and suggest that:

National and local governments should require chain restaurants to declare the calorie content of soft drinks and all other items on
menus and menu boards.

The FDA should require labels on non-diet soft drinks to state that frequent consumption of those drinks promotes obesity, diabetes,
tooth decay, osteoporosis, and other health problems.

Local, state, and federal governments should provide water fountains
in schools, government buildings, parks, and other public spaces.

School systems and other organizations catering to children should
stop selling soft drinks (as well as candy and other junk foods) in hallways, shops, and cafeterias.

State and local governments should consider levying small taxes
on soft drinks, with the revenues earmarked for promoting health
and fitness. A national 2-cent tax on a can of soda pop would raise
$3 billion annually.

The Worst Food on the Planet, The Response

I wrote an article about soda, which is certainly the worst thing you can consume as a regular part of your diet. In my mailbag, I got a lot of great responses so I'm going to add all of it here. In fact, I'll add both the article and the responses, should anyone stumble on this blog who didn't find my through my work. Enjoy.

First, the response:

Worst Food on the Planet

Thanks for the huge response this week. This mailbag’s going to be a little long, since I want to share a lot of your letters.

Thanks for the info. on soda. But, I have a question. Other than water, what DO we drink besides water? We only buy 100% juice for our son and that is not available from a vending machine. And heaven forbid he should drink water! Bad food and drinks are everywhere! It's not safe to leave your home without taking food and drinks along with you!Wow! It is tough to even drive down the road without the kids saying they're hungry because of all of the fast food chains we pass along the way! Even though we don't allow him to have soda, it's nearly impossible to avoid "convenience." I'm enraged that they give "toys" with their food. That is the main reason our son claims he's hungry. When we pull up to the drive thru, and I tell him he can get food, no toy, he is no longer hungry! It's tough to raise healthy children with all of the marketing going on. Thanks!Bridget GraverWindsor, NY

There were many of these questions. The bottom line is that calories in drinks should be restricted as much as possible. You are always diluting the whole food and missing out on fiber and such. So you should learn to drink plain water and use caloric drinks as supplements and desserts. Even sodas—if consumed in moderation, like one a day—aren’t too bad. The probably is that we tend to drink them all day long. Washing down a meal with a couple hundred calories of sugar just cannot have a positive effect on your health.
A great alternative is to flavor your water with a small amount of juice. At first, it'll seem like watered down juice, but once you get used to it you will taste the juice in a more subtle manner that actually does a better job of quenching your thirst. Once you get used to this, 100% juices or soft drinks will taste too syrupy.
Also got a lot of letters on other drinks, including beer. One beer is probably a touch better for you than one soda but the rule remains. Drink a lot of beer in a day and your diet will suffer. It’s still calories, most of 'em 'empty'. That’s why they call it a 'beer belly'.
Coffee and tea have no calories, unless you add stuff to them (which is usually high in calories). So mochas n' stuff (and southern sweet tea, thanks Ralene) are filled with sugar and/or fat, but black coffee or straight tea aren't bad unless you're sensitive to caffeine. Caffeine can actually aid in weight loss, but tends to have other effects that can hurt you, especially if it affects your ability to sleep, which is very important.

Ok Steve, I learned long ago the vices of soft drinks. However I am very confused on what besides water to drink.You see I am a single dad to a 13 year old girl. She is a good athlete in volleyball and track. I do a beachbody workout of some type 3-5 days a week .Our refrigerator never has any soft drinks unless brought over by friends or faimily. In the box we keep grape, orange, apple juice, low fat milk, power aid and beer. She drinks juice or milk for breakfast and I drink grape juice(everyday). When I workout(early mornings) I sometimes drink a protein shake afterwards but always plenty water. Lunch is usually poweraid for her and water for me. Dinner is usually poweraid (or apple juice) for her and sometimes a beer for me.Late night 2-4 times a week we have ice cream or cookies and milk. When she visits her Mom(2 nights a week) I have 1-3 beers . Besides this I do drink a lot of water but she drinks only a little water. So my question is do I pitch the juice? Is it ok to drink a lot of poweraid or gatoraid? What else can we drink?
Randy


I got a lot of email about kids. Since she is athletic she definitely has more leeway on what she should drink. But juices and stuff should be limited, as should milk the older you get. The big baddie in this mix is Gator-Power aid. These sports drinks are designed for sports and should never be consumed with meals or while you're sitting around unless it’s so hot you’re sweating like crazy. During and immediately after sports they are fine. At other times, they're just as bad as soda.
On juice, fresh-squeezed juice with pulp—hence fiber—is much better. Juice from concentrate is just sugar. No matter what you drink, learn to read labels http://www.beachbody.com/jump.jsp?itemID=437&itemType=NEWSLETTER_ISSUES.

Hi, Steve, I hope this email finds you in great health and spirits. After a life-long addiction to soda, I am pleased to report that I have resisted the sweet stuff for nearly a year now and have lost over 15lbs as a sole result of this resistance. A gradual trade-off for products like Vitamin Water, various green/white tea drinks and flavored seltzers certainly eased my transition back into drinking primarily water. Quick question though, how do drinks such as: Fresca or Crystal Light and even naturally flavored carbonated water such as orange seltzer compare in calories, etc.? Basically, I'm curious if nutrisweet or citric acid flavored carbonated beverages are also unhealthy )(specifically those that do NOT contain corn syrup and other unnatural additives/preservatives)? Thank you, in advance, for your time and effort; they are greatly appreciated. Best,Christian

It's probably not the best but there certainly isn’t definitive research on this subject and, hey, it’s better than drinking soda all day long. I would continue to strive for making your diet as natural as possible but I doubt you're doing yourself a ton of harm using these as treats. Just don't make them staples.

I really enjoyed reading the newsletter and my ears particularly perked up when I read about diet soda actually preventing weight loss. I know you’ve partially addressed your observations that it caused this in a number of your clients. I had never been aware of this. I know it’s not the greatest thing in the world for you, but I had no idea that it could hinder weight loss. And so, my question is this – WHY? Or I guess a better question would be HOW? How is it possible that something that has zero calories in it can prevent weight loss? Please note, I’m not arguing with you, but for someone who is absolutely addicted to diet soda – actually only Diet Coke sweetened with Splenda – I would find it much easier to kick the habit if I knew the reason behind it.Would reducing the number of cans of soda help this or must it be eliminated completely? Is this true of all carbonated beverages or just sodas? Thank you,H.S.

I mentioned how in the article. There is more to food than calories. Different substances affect the way your body absorbs nutrients. Sodas use a blend of various chemicals that change your body’s natural pH balance—all man-made foods do, which is why your diet should be made up with as much whole foods as possible. Small amounts of diet sodas most likely won’t do much, but a steady diet is bad news. I’m going to let a few emails answer the rest of your question.

i had all but completely eliminated all diet soft drinks from my life a few months ago. turns out, the aspartame, not the caffeine, was the contributing factor to the worsening of a cardiac arrythmia problem i have. now that i have read this nugget of information, if i need a little caffeine blast once in a while, i'll have some plain iced tea (or just go stick my head in the freezer, it works pretty well). i have not lost weight from my efforts, though i have just been diagnosed with a hypothyroid disorder. i am sure keeping those chemicals out of my body has improved my well-being regardless, and i know i feel much better-- no mood swings, no irritability, anxiety, depressive episodes, etc.. i had no idea this stuff was linked to ADD, but i do know i have had much better focus and concentration. this stuff may be worse for you than alcohol in moderation.
-khamanda


Whoa! Get this: When we lived in Texas I hadn't seen my next door neighbor for a few months...saw him out side one day and he had become this tall slim person when before Pillsbury Doughboy.

"What happened??" I asked.
"Lost 80 lbs when I stopped drinking DIET soda!"
What did he drink instead? "Mostly water".
" No-o-o-o-oo! Water? Well, whaddya know!"
Sincerely!
Laurie Hatch

I enjoyed the article on sodas a great deal. So much so that I forwarded it to my mother because i have two younger brothers who drink at least one soda each day.
I actualy gave up soda all together about eight months ago. I had been drinking only diet caffiene free for a long time but one day I just decided that it was pointless to continue to drink them. I lost about5 or 10 pounds in that first month, which seemed odd at first because it wasn;t like I was consuming any less calories. But I have also felt healthier and been sick less since i cut the sodas out of my diet. Now I choose water over every other beverage option and am not even tempted to take a sip of soda.
Hopefully others can give up this horrible substance because there is no upside to consuming it.
THANKS,brandon


I completely agree with this whole article and the suggestions at the end. Even diet soda will increase chances of tooth decay. Because of the acid. I am a Dental Hygienist and tell my patients this all the time. I really really agree with school taking out the soda machines. And there is NO GOOD reason for the schools to sell junk food to kids. And I wish I knew how to help stop the schools from selling the JUNK. Kathy


What research do you base your article on? Micheal Bowers


I used a lot of sources, the main study being the one the showed soda as the number one caloric source in America. However, let's just assume there was no research.

Whether it's number one or number ten, there is little doubt that a high percentage of calories in the American diet come from soda. We don’t need a study to tell us this. Let's just run some numbers based on very basic nutritional knowledge using the information on the side of a can of soda.
It's almost all sugar, along with various chemicals designed for rapid absorption. We don’t need science to tell us we get a rush from drinking soda. You just need to drink one. Basic nutrition shows us that we should not have too much simple sugar in our diet. If you drink soda all day long, there is no way your diet can possibly be balanced. No study is needed to show this either.

We also know that our diets should consist of protein, fat, carbs and that we need nutrients, such as vitamins. Again, just looking at the side of a can of soda will confirm that it lacks almost any nutrients but simple sugar and mysterious chemicals.

Therefore, before we even resort to studies to confirm that the chemicals are bad and hurt our diet in other ways, the simple facts still show that soda should not be a major component in your diet.

Hey Steve,
I recently read a book by a Dr. Batmanghelidj called Your Body's Many Cries for Water. In the book he promotes water as a cure for many things and chronic dehydration as the cause of many diseases. The more "subversive" part of his theory is that he also believes that good salt should be taken along with the water at the ratio of .25 tsp salt for every quart of water. I'm wondering if you have read this book and what your thoughts on it are. I've been a runner in Florida (so I sweat lots) and water drinker for many years and often found myself craving salt (in the form of potato chips). And I've wondered how the salt would be replenished and balanced when I sweat so much out and drink so much water. I'm a pretty good eater too; I stay away from processed foods, etc. He's got a website at
http://www.watercure.com/.

I think the book I had was an older version and I believe he says a few things that are not quite correct such as urination being a means for the body to rid itself of excess hydrogen. I thought it was nitrogen. And like many promoters of alternative ideas he spends a large amount of time defending himself. But from what I remember of biochemistry I believe most of what he says is accurate and on an instinctive level it seems that what he's saying makes sense. I'd like to know what your thoughts on this use of salt are.
thanks!
power 90 2 weeks in believer
B Beckford


This is a different subject but electrolyte balance (salts) is important. Salt seems to be misunderstood. Most people get way too much of it because our non-natural foods are loaded with it. However, if you have to little salt you can—and will—die. Salt used to be the most prized substance on earth. It’s necessary for life.

If you eat very clean and don’t add salt to your foods, you should. However, if you eat in restaurants or out of cans, you probably get more than you need.

Your body probably needs about 500mg of salt a day to do nothing but sit around. However, working out of working outside on a very hot day can easily deplete a 1,000mg an hour. Therefore, your salt consumption should vary along with your activity level and amount that you sweat (because you lose salt). My salt consumption varies from almost nothing some days to many thousands of mg’s when I’m doing an endurance event.

wow, the soda article was great and i try to think how its still possible to reach parents who will believe this and will practice it...how upset i get when i see a 1 or 2yr old drinking soda from a can or macdonald cup...its the parents i want to slap.... my children who are 28/26 now...i had asked the elementary private school (20yrs ago)to please stop selling junk and soda at the school, their response was but we make 60,000 a yr extra money....

if your child has no control of buying this stuff its not our fault....but the major problem of this is...everyone at least 85% need to do something and i'm afraid only 20% will take the time to do what they should and stand up to this but no one wants to take that 10minutes to see what they can do....i work at walmart...i'm proud to work there but something that i think walmart needs to do is not open those macdonalds in their stores anymore....but can a healthy food place afford the high rent there? i don't think so...only macdonalds can afford it, and every other customer i see has a bag of macdonalds when they pass me.....thats my two cents worth....thanks for listening......

glady mills

There are so many of these I’m just going to let ‘em roll for a while. Great stuff, everyone. Thanks for sharing!
Kudo's to that article on soft drinks. They make this stuff so available at school, then tell us our kids are ADD, all the while, making money on them. No telling the damage I did to my body when I was a teenager using diet soda to control my eating...not necessarily my weight! Luckily, I had a revelation, and gave it up rather easily years ago. Consequently, while I was raising my 4 children, I never bought the stuff. It was always available elsewhere, they "learned to drink it", and we did go through the periods when they complained that I never bought them soda when I went to the store (like all their other friends' homes....), but I rarely see these same 4 teenagers drinking sodas today! We do drink iced tea and coffee, but moderately, and we go through a 5 gallon bottle of pure clean fresh water every day or so around our house, much of it in that pure state. The last time I drank a diet dr. pepper (3 months ago), I had such severe physical reactions, I thought I was going to have to run by the ER on my way home. That convinced me forever!
Marcia

YES ... I absolutely agree with the article on every point.
I grew up in a house pop in the refridgerator 24/7 ... it was used as a "reward" for good behavior, or as a dinner drink, on weekends for a "party drink", and any other real or imagined "occcasion".
I finally rebelled against the stuff in my early '30's and began drinking water 90% of the time. I stopped drinking coffee after too many dental cleanings and stomachaches from all the acid.
Today, at 59 years old, I am healthier, still go to the gym 3 days per week, and have done 50 mile + bicycle rides. Water is my drink of choice and always will be. Any kind of pop is bad stuff for the body. I think it should be taxed like liquor or cigarettes. RonVancouver WA
Loved your article on how bad soda is. I stopped drinking soda about 13 years ago because I was getting kidney stones. I don't miss it at all. If I have a sip of someone's soda for a taste, it is so sweet to me. I don't enjoy it at all, I'd rather have water.
Fran Figurelli

Thanks for the news on soda. I have been waiting for someone to come out with this info for parents and children alike on this particular subject. Many people have no idea about the dangers it can cause including aspartame poisoning. All should be made aware of what these things do to our body and mind and this is a good start. Being informed is the only way to make a difference.
Sincerely , Julie Fowler - Beach Body member



Having moved here just over a year ago from England, I am amazed at how much sugar and salt seems to be in ordinary foods. I am having a hard time finding bread that doesn't taste sweet and everything has high-fructose corn syrup listed on the label, even if it's not supposed to be sweet. I bought fresh chicken breast the other day and it tasted salty and I commented to my husband that it seems as if people can't taste food any more unless it's flavor is enhanced.

Having read the ACAHS article, I can agree with everything. I worked at a school in England and the children (aged 4-7) could bring in a snack for recess, but were only allowed to bring in fresh fruit or vegetables. Their attention after recess was improved because of the slow release energy in the snack. A young child that moved from the USA turned up with a blueberry muffin. On being told that she was only allowed to bring in a fruit or vegetable snack, her mother replied that blueberries were fruit! At lunch time, only water was offered to drink and the children that brought in lunch from home were not allowed to bring in any carbonated beverages. School meals were also on the healthy side with lunchtime supervisors who encouraged the children to eat some of everything so that they were getting a balanced meal. Even with my own children, I have had trouble convincing them that Sunny-D is not the same as orange juice. "But it's full of vitamins, Mum" they would say, "it says so on the commercial". I simply refused to buy the stuff and when we were in the supermarket showed them all the additives and sugars listed on the label. Then I showed them the label on fresh orange juice. Now they are convinced.
I have always managed to steer them away from McDonalds too (except for the odd birthday party) and they now call it McTrash. I am glad that I managed to change their way of thinking before we moved to the USA, because it is so much harder to find healthy, unadulterated food here than it is in the UK. I will persevere though, because they are both much better behaved when they eat REAL food.

Thanks for the articles, I'll keep reading
Regards
Clair Bourne

What a great article. While you're singing to the choir with me-- I've been a label reader and organic food eater for decades-- but you state everything really well in this article. I'm forwarding it to friends. Thanks for having the guts to slam the soda companies-- something they well deserve!!

Barbie Beckfordnew member 1.5 weeks into power 90.
Thank you so much for publishing the article on the dangers of soda. You made some excellent points. One thing I might add is that doctors should start warning patients (especially pediatricians) about the dangers of soda, just as they warn patients about the dangers of smoking.If the public can begin to become aware of the dangers of trans fat, perhaps there's hope in this area, too.
Kim Parham
I thoroughly enjoyed Steve's article on regular and diet softdrinks. I couldn't agree more on them being the worst food/drink on the planet!! They are the possible link to so many health problems today and a warning label should be placed on every container.This article needs to go to every home in America. Thanks for your input and awareness. I plan to share this article with friends who need it most.
Sincerely,Pam Maurer , Montgomery, Alabama

Thanks for this great article. Is it possible to add a link to our senators & congressmen? There should be some kind of website to this effect somewhere that might even add a form letter or email that we can send. That way your editorial not only has info, it has effect.

Please feel free to pass this on. Here are a couple of links. Make yourself heard.
Contact Congress
Amen...
Madonnatantric

Coffee

As a coffee acheiver, I love to point to stuff like this.

I've got something else to blog about today; I'm just sayin'...

I'm finishing my coffee.

Enjoying... my... coffee.

Friday, April 21, 2006

Who Can You Trust?

I recently received an email from someone defending soda companies, using the line, "I trust companies like Pepsi and Coca-cola...". I'm not sure where this trust comes from but it brings to light that it's difficult to know what information you should trust these days.

Concerning this, there was a recent article about a class action suit against some soft drink manufacturers over benzine in their soft drinks:

This battle stinks to high heaven, on both sides of the account. Certainly, the legal side of it seems to be one of those suits out there chasing the most money using fairly shoddy research. But they are the 'good guys'.

The soft drink companies are defending themselves using language like, "Benzene is ubiquitous to the environment. It's in the air. It's in dozens of foods, including bananas, meat and eggs," when, in fact, benzene forms naturally in forest fires, gasoline and cigarette smoke, among other things, and it's widely used industrially to make plastics, rubber, detergents, drugs and pesticides--a pretty healthy sounding line-up to me. Gee, where can I get some?

My point here is that, at some point, we need to become more educated because we can only really trust ourselves and our own feelings and instincts. The marketplace has made companies so beholden to shareholders and their beloved 'bottom line' that it's very hard to blindly trust anyone who is trying to make a profit. As I've shown earlier, money can fund mock science and poor research. Our only recourse is to become better educated and, fer chrissakes, use some common sense. Nickle and diming in a lawsuit over benzene in soft drinks shouldn't even be an issue. If we were educated, we wouldn't be consuming stuff that "forms naturally in forest fires, gasoline and cigarette smoke, among other things, and it's widely used industrially to make plastics, rubber, detergents, drugs and pesticides" in the first place.

Saturday, April 08, 2006

Dream State

Dream State

I just got up. Still groggy, but I wanted to get this down. I dreamt about watching a movie last night—the entire movie. A full hour and a half feature film that doesn’t exist. When I first woke up my first thought was “This isn’t real. I’ve been dreaming. Damn!” because I knew I’d forget and it was a very affecting film.

It was about a mom and her two daughters and a relationship they have with a girl, who was the main character—yep, a total chick flick. I can’t remember much of it, only the final scene, the sound track, which as far as I know isn’t real music (if I were a musician I’d write it down, because it’s good), a few scenes that are fading as I write, and some very vivid, beautiful, and haunting shots of Toronto. This is strange, since I’ve not been to Toronto. And the only reason I know it was Toronto, and that I was watching a film as opposed to in the film, is that I read a review while watching it because I was surprised I hadn’t heard of it, being a film-0-phile and all, and one of the reviews had said, “Toronto has never looked so beautiful.”

This is pretty strange. I’ve never dreamt an entire film before. I do, however, have a vivid dream world. I dream in film scenes. I’m usually in the film but see the world as camera shots. I have a couple of different dream worlds, where places exist, relationships happen, people try and shoot me, new climbing areas are found, developed, re-visited, etc, etc. It’s very vivid. But, as far as I can recall, I’ve never watched a movie—certainly not an entire movie—in a dream.

The nature of the film is also odd. Not that it’s a chick flick; I watch plenty of those. It was an art house chick flick. Think Allison Anders, not Penny Marshall. Kind of a Blue Car meets Gas, Food, Lodging meets The Five Senses (the only Toronto movie I could think of). But I also watch plenty of “guy” films. And last night, prior to bed, I was watching Deadwood, which is about as un-chick flick as it gets.

So do I have a point? I guess it’s the way training affects ones dream state. Lately, my dreams have become extremely vivid and I’ve been exercising less and less. Last night, they were too vivid, I think. Dreaming that I’m in a movie is one thing, but watching a movie. Hmmm. I’m saying this is a signal to begin to get more serious about my training.

I had a pretty big year last year. During the winter, I trained hard for climbing and was in my best climbing shape in probably a decade. But only for a short time before I got hurt. Then I trained a lot on the bike, had a lot of epic days, and attempted something that hadn’t been done before, where I also got hurt. Then I went off to Australia and started climbing again, since my knee was out of commission. Over did it and hurt my shoulder, which I exacerbated over the next few months until finally I was forced to just shut everything down and take a big break. So, for the last couple of months, I’ve focused on work and life and have done less exercise than at any point since, probably 1999. Mainly just rehab and easy cardio.

Over the last month, my dream world has really picked up, getting more and more vivid. Something this made me think of was that it had, to a degree, disappeared. And since I was probably bordering on overtraining much of last year, I think I can now utilize my dream state to gauge my training. If it shuts down, I’m probably doing too much and should begin a recovery phase until it returns. But when I start watching entire movies in my dream, the recovery phase is over, and it’s time to pick up the intensity again. I think I’ll go get on my bike.

PS – For the record, I’m aware I didn’t address, at all, the nature of the film. I’m going to have to think about that one. In the final scene, them mom, who’d tried to kill herself, wakes up. The three girls are in a hospital room with her. There’s no dialog but you can tell by her actions that whatever caused her to try and take her life was a mistake, and she’s grateful to have a second chance. The music starts (the song that doesn’t exist except in my head at this moment). FADE OUT.

ROLL CREDITS (yes, there were credits. Unfortunately, I don’t remember any of the names.)