CommunityBrowse groupsBlogEtiquetteInvite Your friendsSuccess Stories



Most people who know me understand that I love debate on controversial subjects. In this thread, I'm going to bring up topics or make statements that I think would stir up some debate. Too me, debate is a very positive thing. While hearing things we don't agree with probably will not change our thoughts instantly, it will give us something to think about that can affect our beliefs in the future.

When reading what I write, please remember that the only thing I have complete confidence in is my ability to be wrong. So don't be shy about voiceing your opinion, but don't be offended if you get rebuttal.

And remember, I've been known to take a side I don't necessarily agree with for the pure joy of fostering further debate.

Wed. Jan 29, 7:21am

Add comment  
Werewolf diet

Are you kidding me? Losing wt based on lunar cycles? Will we never stop searching for magic bullets? This is shear craziness.

From an article I read:
"Unlike the Paleo diet, which encourages you to eat like a cave man, the so-called Werewolf Diet doesn’t actually involve having the bloodlust of werewolves. But it is based on the cycles of the moon, and it’s the latest eating craze among some celebrities.

The idea is that the moon influences the water in our bodies in the same way that it impacts the tides of the ocean. According to the website Moon Connection, humans are made up of a lot of water (which is true), and when the moon is full or at a new phase, there’s a gravitational pull that can last for 24 hours and affect how much water weight you can gain or lose (questionable). Dieters can follow two plans, the basic moon diet plan and the extended version. The basic version is a 24-hour day of fasting in which you only drink water and juice during the full moon or new moon. That supposedly cleanses your body of toxins, and the website says you can lose up to six pounds of water weight that day (highly unlikely).
Read more: Werewolf diet: promising the moon |"

My belief: Eliminating crap is the only proven method of losing wt. Exercise will help after that. It's not rocket science.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014, 7:26 AM

Add comment
Sorry to disappoint you, but I have to agree with you. This is one of the most ridiculous things I've heard. I thought it was a joke when I read the title.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014, 2:47 PM

Add comment
what howling at the moon.. shredding off my clothes wont make me skinnier.. im so disappointed lol- oh it suppose to be the phases of the moon that will make me lose weight.. and here i was thinking it was what i put in my body and how i moved my body.. silly me.. magic bullets are for guns not for health and wellness.
just my opinion .. i could be wrong, but the 207 pounds i have released says i may be doing something right..

really people own your choices stop looking for a magic bullet,, be you own magic bullet.. put in the what it takes to reach your goals


Wednesday, January 29, 2014, 3:19 PM

Add comment
MYTH: Calories consumed - calories burnt = wt loss/gain

OK, the Werewolf diet was too easy, but it was just something I saw today on the news and found entertaining. Here's a better one.

The theory that you will lose wt if the amount of calories burnt is more than the amount consumed (per day) is a myth.
My reasoning::
1. If you currently eat 1300 cals/day of healthy foods, then change to 1200 cals/day of snickers bars, and keep the exact same lifestyle and exercise routines, you will gain wt despite the fact that you reduced your cals. I've never tested that but I believe it to be true.
2. People who exercise should gain muscle from the exercise. Muscle burns more than fat. Therefore, there metabolisms should increase as they lose wt if they are exercising while they lose. Since their metabolisms are improving, therefore their calorie expenditure throughout the day is increasing (due to increased muscle), once they have reduced calories to the point where they start losing, they should never stop losing. They would never hit a plateau because their muscle mass is increasing which steadily improves their metabolism.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014, 9:38 PM

Add comment
I don't even get this thread.

Thursday, January 30, 2014, 9:47 AM

Add comment
Its just something I started to get people to think. I post a question or comment that is either controversial or just something new I saw. People can comment differing opinons or just ignore it.

Thursday, January 30, 2014, 10:08 AM

Add comment

I've noticed a big change in PE since I was a kid (I'm 54 now), especially girls PE. Now even in my time, PE for girls was different than for boys. Girls had archery and badminton. Boys mostly played games where they threw balls at each other. Many PE teachers today think the class needs to be much more than getting a good 45min of exercise. It must be a full mind/body/spirit experience (seems more true for my daughters teachers than my sons). But even in my sons PE class, there is less emphasis on just getting in 45min of enjoyable exercise and more emphasis on structured things.

I'm not sure I agree with this. Here are some examples:
1. During 1 school yr, my daughters PE teacher felt it was important to learn the rules of every sport that they spent about 3wks each on. During tennis, they had to learn all the terminology and rules, and had home work and tests. Same with bowling, volley ball, and others.
2. Many teachers require a lot of running and the kids have to wear heart rate monitors and stay above percentiles. They are graded on that.
3. They had archery, which I don't even think of as a physical sport. One does not develop significant muscle or raise the HR doing archery.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned. But I know my daughter hated the year she had testing and was scored on how competitive she was in the sports. To me, the purpose of grade school and high school PE is:
a) Burn off some energy so they can concentrate on academic classes and not be aggressive during the rest of the day.
b) Burn some calories and get some general fitness
c) Just have fun so they develop a love of being active. I think I had a total of 1 test my entire 4yrs of high school PE. I learned the basics of volley ball, football, baseball, etc, but wasn't graded on all the terminology. We just exercised hard and looked forward to it. Today, I'm very active in my sports (wall climbing and ww kayaking and exercising). PE in HS wasn't regimented, we just gave it hell and were tired when we were done.

I wonder if todays regimented classes really instill a love of exercise. I occasionally play tennis. I barely know the rules, but I just like to get out and try it. I don't know all the basketball rules, but I occasionally like to shoot some hoops. Point is, I don't have to know all the rules just to have some fun with it.

My take:
HS PE should be more about just getting the kids to be active (PE is about the only exercise the majority seem to get these days) and letting them have some fun and burn off energy. If they find a sport they like, they will learn the rules on their own.

Whats your thought?

Thursday, January 30, 2014, 9:47 PM

Add comment
So what am I commenting about here?

Friday, January 31, 2014, 2:08 PM

Add comment
It's. finding a sport you like and can have fun with can make it not boring. My children's p e classes are really great. They mix it up every day and they always say its their favorite subject.

Friday, January 31, 2014, 5:58 PM

Add comment
I think you WILL lose weight eating crap if you consistently eat less crap than you need. There is much more to be gained by eating healthful food, but if someone ONLY ate 1200 calories and they routinely burned a lot more than that over time - they WILL lose weight. More likely people who eat crappola rebound and over eat b/c they're hungry. 1200 in candy bars and crap is not a lot of food. People are not just eating 1200 in empty calories and calling it a day.

And people don't just gain muscle from the average work out. I base this on - the level of effort I see at the gym, input from people who work with athletes and talk about what it takes to truly build muscle, and personal experience (only did cardio in my 20's and didn't have ANY muscle!).

I believe the sentiment that bodies do not plateau - people and their consistency and their diligence plateau. They think they're exercising enough, but they're not as they start to exercise a little less, a little less vigorously, with less variety. They think they're watching what they eat, but they start to routinely justify why they can have just a little of this and a little of that - no longer exercising and eating how they were to lose weight. Then they claim the weigh gain is muscle or their bodies have plateaued.

I also don't believe that something is true for every single human being. I believe that these things are true for most people, but I'm sure there are exceptions out there - just not the vast majority who think so!

january 30 - I believe adults are ruining about everything out there related to kids, sports/activity, and fun!

Sunday, February 02, 2014, 2:31 PM

Add comment
I'm just going to vent about cell phones tonight. Tonight some moron sat on a machine at the gym I wanted to use and texted. I went about my other exercises, did 3 sets of curls, and 2 ab exercises and he was still texting. Finally I just went over a with a look of "your an idiot", I asked if I could slip in a set. He got up knowing what I was thinking. Leave the d@m cell phones in your locker or just don't respond if its not an emergency. Same goes for going to movies. I put mine on vibrate if I absolutely must stay in touch for an emergency. Why do so many people think they have to be in touch every minute of the day and lose all sense of courtesy?

Wednesday, February 05, 2014, 9:58 PM

Add comment
I like this thread!


Friday, February 21, 2014, 8:46 AM

Add comment
Me too. No one gets how rude it is to check their cell all the time.

Friday, February 21, 2014, 9:48 AM

Add comment

I was having a discussion about politics (my favorite topic to debate) w/ a friend at work today. I always love to discuss topics w/ those who have opposing views, as my friend does. It wasn't much of a debate since we both agreed that we see nothing on the horizon to get excited about for 2016. Things we agreed on:
1. How can Congress not vote to get rid of the penny? It cost more to make than its worth. An overwhelming majority don't want it. But Congress cant come to a decision on something as simple as that.
2. Why do we still have 6 day a week mail? I get maybe 10 useful pieces of mail a week and none of them are so urgent I could not wait an extra day on (and I don't even pay bills online).

I'd wager that a vote by the public would get >90% in favor of cutting to 5 day mail and getting rid of the penny. Yet Congress can't even do that.

Sorry, I had to vent about something. Its day 2 w/o nicotene. Man, I hate being a junky. Its strange to think I can poison myself w/ nicotene (and all the other drugs that come with it) legally.

Thursday, March 06, 2014, 8:33 PM

Add comment
Hooray on two days off cigs!!!!! and yes congress is often totally lame - don't know how they keep their jobs

Friday, March 07, 2014, 5:40 PM

Add comment
Late weighing in on the PE question:

We couldn't go outside a lot of the year for PE (weather) so we learned dancing! Contra-dancing, square dancing, a little swing... K-12 PE classes have sure come in handy later in life! I definitely am not against kids actually learning something in PE.

Who knows, your kid who didn't like learning the rules of tennis in middle school might find herself suddenly thrown into a conversation about Wimbledon with the cutest guy in her college class (It happened to me!) and be very glad of the knowledge.

Saturday, March 08, 2014, 5:30 PM

Add comment
still off the cigs?? You can do it!

Monday, March 10, 2014, 1:56 PM

Add comment
PP. Yep.

Monday, March 10, 2014, 9:39 PM

Add comment
Hooray .............hoofrickinray.......four days off cigs and counting........hooray for peelout!!!!!!!!!

Tuesday, March 11, 2014, 2:48 PM

Add comment
Absolutely awesome - peel... you can do it!

Thursday, March 13, 2014, 1:50 PM

Add comment
Annoyances of the day

So I read an article today about 2 girls 18 and 15 who were arrested for making an autistic boy perform sex acts (some w/ animals), kicking him in the groin, and making him walk on thin ice till he fell in the water. This was over several periods. How freaking depraved can the world get? And where were the parents (of both)?

I also read of how the Senate is investigating the CIA and claims the CIA is spying on the Senate computers over waterboarding that occurred 5 yrs ago and the CIA is claiming the Senate stole classified material from the CIA. I'm not going to debate whether waterboarding is right or not nor am I particularly interested in who is stealing/spying from whom. What kills me is that an investigation in waterboarding is taking 5yrs. Really? 5yrs? How slow can these people possibly move? I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but some times I still am. I mean, this is a country where Michelle Bachmann was a contender for president (you won't hurt my feelings if you have a rebuttal on that cause arguing over who is the best politician anymore is like arguing over which is the best turd in a giant cesspool). Theres only 1 politician I really like. I would have voted for him for president if it wasn't for his nutcase partner. I won't say who that was, cause its whole other story.

Thursday, March 13, 2014, 10:00 PM

Add comment
About scales, wt gain, and muscle

My thoughts on scales and the notion that you can't trust them cause an increase in wt could be muscle growth. When I'm trying to lose, I weigh daily. I want daily feedback, but I realize there is going to be noise in the data. The scale is just a tool, no different that calipers or tape measure.

I disagree w/ the notion that muscle growth is going to be a significant factor in wt gain for the average person of a period of less than several months. Muscle growth is dependent on several factors:
1. Genetics
2. Sex (that's male or female). Don't mean to be unPC, but men develop muscle faster and in greater quantity than women (in general).
3. Type of w/o. Muscle growth occurs when you try to push the muscle past its limit. Lifting tears the muscle down, and the body responds by trying to make it stronger. If you aren't doing a w/o geared toward growth, you will not gain a lot of muscle size. Continually increasing reps of any exercise is great for burning calories, building strength, and increasing cardio. However, it does little for muscle growth. You will gain strength, and you will shed fat that covers the muscle, but you will not get significant growth.
4. How you feed the muscle.
5. Age (as you age, it gets more difficult to gain muscle)

Don't confuse feeling firmer, or having your muscle show more with growth. Removing the fat covering the muscle will make the muscle look bigger, and feel firmer, but that's only cause its been covered up.

An increase in strength also does not necessarily mean an increase in muscle size. Increases in percieved strength come from 3 things:
1. The body naturally tries to do things using the least effort. You become more efficient at doing something as you practice it. The body finds the best speed to perform the exercise, the best body position, etc.
2. The body starts using more of the muscle fibers. A muscle is not a single entity. It is comprised of fibers. The more fibers the body can get to "fire up", the more it can lift. As you lift wts, the body starts using more fibers of the muscles. That is an increase in strength, not muscle size.
3. The last reason, and the hardest to get, is because of actual muscle growth. A gain of 1lb of real muscle a month is a very significant feet for most people (I'm excluding young, genetically predispositioned, males, who pump iron). For the average person trying to gain muscle, 1lb/month is a lot.

So if you want to stop using scales and use tape measures, fine. Tapes are tools too, just much less convenient, very dependent on how tight you pull them and exactly how you hold your body, and the pace of the changes you will measure won't allow you to see if you are headed in the right direction for a much longer period than a scale will.

In short, if you are gaining wt, you are probably not gaining muscle size. You are either gaining fat or gaining water. That's why you have to think in terms of trend lines, and not daily fluctuations.

As always, I love rebuttal and am very confident in my ability to be wrong.

Friday, March 14, 2014, 11:42 PM

Add comment
Scales, wt gain, and muscle growth

My thoughts on scales and the notion that you can't trust them cause an increase in wt could be muscle growth. When I'm trying to lose, I weigh daily. I want daily feedback, but I realize there is going to be noise in the data. The scale is just a tool, no different that calipers or tape measure.

I disagree w/ the notion that muscle growth is going to be a significant factor in wt gain for the average person of a period of less than several months. Muscle growth is dependent on several factors:
1. Genetics
2. Sex (that's male or female). Don't mean to be unPC, but men develop muscle faster and in greater quantity than women (in general).
3. Type of w/o. Muscle growth occurs when you try to push the muscle past its limit. Lifting tears the muscle down, and the body responds by trying to make it stronger. If you aren't doing a w/o geared toward growth, you will not gain a lot of muscle size. Continually increasing reps of any exercise is great for burning calories, building strength, and increasing cardio. However, it does little for muscle growth. You will gain strength, and you will shed fat that covers the muscle, but you will not get significant growth.
4. How you feed the muscle.
5. Age (as you age, it gets more difficult to gain muscle)

Don't confuse feeling firmer, or having your muscle show more with growth. Removing the fat covering the muscle will make the muscle look bigger, and feel firmer, but that's only cause its been covered up.

An increase in strength also does not necessarily mean an increase in muscle size. Increases in percieved strength come from 3 things:
1. The body naturally tries to do things using the least effort. You become more efficient at doing something as you practice it. The body finds the best speed to perform the exercise, the best body position, etc.
2. The body starts using more of the muscle fibers. A muscle is not a single entity. It is comprised of fibers. The more fibers the body can get to "fire up", the more it can lift. As you lift wts, the body starts using more fibers of the muscles. That is an increase in strength, not muscle size.
3. The last reason, and the hardest to get, is because of actual muscle growth. A gain of 1lb of real muscle a month is a very significant feet for most people (I'm excluding young, genetically predispositioned, males, who pump iron). For the average person trying to gain muscle, 1lb/month is a lot.

So if you want to stop using scales and use tape measures, fine. Tapes are tools too, just much less convenient, very dependent on how tight you pull them and exactly how you hold your body, and the pace of the changes you will measure won't allow you to see if you are headed in the right direction for a much longer period than a scale will.

In short, if you are gaining wt, you are probably not gaining muscle size. You are either gaining fat or gaining water. That's why you have to think in terms of trend lines, and not daily fluctuations.

As always, I love rebuttal and am very confident in my ability to be wrong.

Friday, March 14, 2014, 11:43 PM

Add comment
More on the topic in the previous post.

This is a followup to my previous post.


•Average Natural MAN: between 0.25 and 0.5 pounds of muscle per week (or about 1-2 pounds of muscle gained per month).
•Average Natural WOMAN: between 0.12 – 0.25 pounds of muscle per week (or about 0.5-1 pound of muscle gained per month).

Of course you can get a wide range of answers on the web. Go to a bodybuilding site that sells supplements and it will say a large number. But that's just so that when you don't gain that much, you will buy some supplements.

Point is, the scale is a very useful tool for understanding if you are losing or gaining wt. It will not tell you if the wt is from water, fat, or muscle. Your eyes will tell you if you need to lose fat. If the eyes say you need to lose fat, then the scale is a very good indicator of fat gain/loss as long as you look at a trend line. Water will fluctuate only so much. If you look at at your wt trend over a one month period and your wt went up, it is most likely due to either fat or water gain, not muscle gain (especially if you are in several of the following categories: a woman, any sex not genetically predispositioned toward muscle growth, 35+ yrs old, not performing a w/o specifically geared toward muscle growth, not feeding the muscle sufficient protein).

What is a w/o that builds muscle? A muscle growth w/o is one where you keep trying to lift heavier amounts. For example, a typical chest muscle growth w/o will include something like this:
Set 1 - 10 reps of a moderate (40% of your 1 rep max) wt as a warmup.
Set 2- 8 reps using about 60% of your 1 rep max.
Set 3 - The max wt you can lift 5-7 times. You keep going until you absolutely can not do another rep, but use a wt that gets you into the 5-7 rep range.
There are lots of variation on this, but its a basic guide. Even if you follow a routine like this, you aren't guaranteed muscle growth. The other factors above can still inhibit muscle growth (remember, growth and strength are not the same thing).

A w/o where you do lots of reps on a single set will not promote growth. A w/o where you do 3 sets of 10 reps with the same wt will not promote growth either. These routines will burn fat, increase cardio, firm the muscle, can slow the loss of muscle that occurs as we age, and have general fitness benefits. Its great for many reasons, but muscle growth is not one of them.

Just my amateur opinion.

Saturday, March 15, 2014, 5:01 PM

Add comment
Another followup:
Here are a couple more reasons I think only a specific type w/o will cause muscle growth for most people except those who have several of the high growth factors mentioned above.

Look at long distance runners. Even though they run for years, the ones I've seen do not have large muscles. There legs have a great deal of definition, but never due I see large thigh muscles. And they work their legs a lot!. If all it took to get growth was working the muscle, long distance runners should all have bodybuilder thighs. Now contrast that with someone who does squats and other leg exercises using wt and focuses on continually trying to increase the wt. They develop size, but sometimes never the definition a runner gets.

Also look at the women who teach classes in my gym (some teach at least 7 classes a week). Some have been there for 5+ years. If all it takes is lots of working the muscle to gain a lb a month, these girls should have gained 60lbs of muscle. But they aren't that muscular. They are strong, well defined, and have a great deal of cardio ability. Now contrast that to some of the girls who lift wts seriously, 1 of which competes in bodybuilding competitions. We have about 4 who you can see are pushing to increase wt. Their bodies show signs of muscular growth. They also tend to have some of the other factors I mentioned above.

But just because general exercise that is not focused on achieving muscular growth doesn't cause growth (at least in my opinion) or because a person does not have enough of the factors to really get some growth, it doesn't mean there aren't reasons to exercise. I am 54 and not genetically inclined to develop muscular size. So why do I even bother?
Increase in strength
Increase in energy
Increase in flexibility
Increase in cardio
Increase in resistance to disease
Reduced fat

There are plenty of reasons to do any exercise program. But one must be realistic when it comes to muscular growth. A lb a month of muscular growth is a very high target.

And remember, I love other opinions. Its how we learn.

Saturday, March 15, 2014, 11:05 PM

Add comment
Peel out what is your height and weight and fitness level

Sunday, March 16, 2014, 11:05 AM

Add comment
5'10, currently 175lb, ideal would be 163, age 54, genetically inclined not to develop large muscles (thinner bone structure).
Fitness level is hard to define but I'll try:
I don't have any major health issues other than thyroid which a simple pill daily keeps totally in control of with no symptoms.
I have occasional issues with joint pain in my shoulders, but it decreases when I keep active at the gym.
I'm able to participate in white water kayaking, down hill skiing, and indoor wall climbing on a regular basis.
I'm an adrenaline junk.
Ex light smoker (12 days and counting)
I guess I would rank my self in the 70th-80th fitness percentile for people aged 54.

Sunday, March 16, 2014, 2:59 PM

Add comment
All: Don't think that just cause I write an opinion, that I think anyone else should agree with it. I wirte things in hope that people will give me rebuttals. I used to believe 2 things that I've changed my mind on based on rebuttals:
1. You can lose wt primarily through exercise. I now believe that diet is >80% of the battle, and exercise <20%. In fact, I believe most people can lose wt throught diet alone, but can't lose wt through exercise alone. However, I feel exercise is what makes you feel better.
2. Calories in - calories out decides wt loss. I now believe its the type of calories you consume is more important than the number of calories you consume.

I changed my mind on these based on rebuttals. But I requires solid reasoning to change my mind. Do what works for you, but be open minded to changing your philisophy based on reasoning.

Monday, March 17, 2014, 8:28 AM

Add comment
Hi Peelout, this is Jackie and someone mentioned your thread in one of my groups. Calories in - calories out does not decide weight loss. This isn't meant to spark a debate. That statement has been proven to be wrong. 100 calories of swiss chard are a completely different nutritional profile than 100 calorie snack pack and nutrients are a key component to weight loss.

Monday, March 17, 2014, 1:03 PM

Add comment
Thanks Jackie. If calories in - calories out being less that 0 meant automatic wt loss, then a person who was maintaining there wt at 1400 calories could lose wt by eaating all candyas long as they reduced there calories (say eating six 200 calorie candy bars = 1200cals). I just can't believe you would lose wt eating 1200 cals of almost all sugar). Thats why I switched to the theory that it is the type of calories you eat that causes wt loss. Of course, people do lose wt by reducing calories, but its because they reduce the "crap" foods which are generally high in calories.

Monday, March 17, 2014, 8:04 PM

Add comment
Getting away from fitness and back to my favorite subject, politics:

Donald trump has made it official. He will not be running for govenor of NY. However, he has decided to do something bigger (although he did not say what). At least he is consistent. This is about the 6th election cycle where he has made it official that he will not be running for anything after spending 6 months insinuating that he might. Now all the Republican Presidential Candidates can start lining up to kiss his ring like they did in the last presidential election. The women have 2 people tied for goofiest polititian. For the men, I'd say Trump leads the pack, although I'm not sure you can call yourself a politician if all you ever do is announce you aren't running for something.

In case you are wondering, I have officially decided that I am not running for president in 2016. Although I may quit the job I was hired to do and go do lucrative book and speaking deals where all I do is complain and give folksy quips to people on the fringe. But thats another story.

Tuesday, March 18, 2014, 8:51 PM

Add comment
But you stated - it's simple, calories in - calories out determines weight loss. Did I miss the part where you mentioned the type of calories matter?

Wednesday, March 19, 2014, 10:18 AM

Add comment
I think there is some confusion in what I wrote.

Here is what I think you (and Jackie) are referring to:
"Calories in - calories out decides wt loss. I now believe its the type of calories you consume is more important than the number of calories you consume."

When I started with PT, I believed that Calories in - Calories out = wt loss/gain. If you burned more calories than you consumed, you would lose wt. I then said "I now believe...". Based on discussions with team members, debate, and reading some of the links people sent me, I changed my mind on this about a year ago and no longer believe it. I now believe the theory that high starch or high sugar calories cause an insulin spike in blood sugar. The body responds by storing the starch or sugar calorie as fat to lower the blood sugar level (the process is kind of interesting and you can find it by googling "a calorie is not a calorie". This is the basic premise of the ATKINS diet. I'm not a supporter of the ATKINS diet though because it eliminates nearly all carbs. Based on the theory I believe, high fiber carbs are slow acting and do not cause blood sugar spikes. You can eat tons of vegys and hi fiber fruits. Just stay away from crap (potatos, chips, donuts, candy, soda, etc).

I must not have been very clear several posts up cause it seems to have caused confusion. Sorry about that.

Incidently, notice I always say theory and not fact or proven. For any fitenss/diet fact thats been proven, I can come up with the opposite fact thats also been proven. Thats why I always say theory. Its the theory I believe based on my limited reasoning skills relative to the supporting evidence that I find logical.

Wednesday, March 19, 2014, 11:29 AM

Add comment
12lbs in 3wks?

I happened to notice the advertisement for the cheat system on here today. Seen it a million times, but the statement "Lose 12lbs in 3wks" struck me. Now I've read the cheat system, and like many systems, it will work cause it eliminates crap. Let me repeat that, I believe its a good system. However, the claim about 12lbs in 3wks seems a little over the top. I'm not saying it has never happened, but I would say its what the analytical call an "outlier". In the 2yrs I've been on here, I've yet to see anyone lose 12lbs in 3wks. The often touted 2lb's per week goal is something very few achieve especially with any consistency. 12lbs in 3wks is 4lbs per week. That is gi-normous. I have seen people on Biggest Loser show lose much more in a week, but you have to factor in the % of wt loss for them since they often way 300+lbs, the fact that they get to eat, sleep, and breath at a ranch designed for wt loss, they have expert trainers daily, they have motivation from team members constantly, and they are isolated from outside stresses and their jobs.

Now I realize that to sell something these days, your product has to stand out. And saying lose 2lbs/wk just isn't flashy compared to some of the claims out there (A new you in only 5min a day). But really, can anyone tell me how many times they have heard a member say they lost 12lb's in 3wks? The person has to have done it in the last 2yrs. I'm not interested in anything before that.

And in case anyone missed it above, I am stating that I think the Cheat System is a good system and that it will work. I'm just skeptical of the 4lb per week part.

Thursday, March 20, 2014, 8:52 PM

Add comment
Peel out, we wouldn't have put it there if people hadn't actually done it. Is it typical, no. If you're 130, you will not get to 118 in 3 weeks. But if you have a lot to lose? You sure can.

It's interesting that you're taking that assumption instead of just asking the question, especially since you've actually been a member of PEERtrainer as long as you have. Members barely post their successes here for whatever reason. But we have members. Meghan S. did. She won't post her before and after pictures but she did.

Hope you read the 400 page book so you can see how it works! Jackie

Monday, March 24, 2014, 11:04 AM

Add comment
One other thing peelout - we wrote the book because people wanted an actual plan. The cheat system diet, in it's current form available on PEERtrainer is a simple list without explanation about fitness, psychology, why we structured it and there are no 3 week plans. We explain it pretty in depth, but if you're looking for current members, they didn't do our actual plan. All of our success stories (Which there are tons and tons of them) followed a variation of the cheat system on its own. We are lucky to have the best partners to combine with the PEERtrainer weight loss lab. I'm not sure if you know that we've had 60,000,000 unique visitors over the last 9 years use PEERtrainer for something or other, whether it's looking up calories or using a log or reading our articles. I've personally read the emails and the issues withc actually following thorugh. No diet works unless you'll actually do it. Being obsessed with the question - what will people actually do - vs. our info is best - is what has made the Cheat System Diet so popular and actually welcomed. Everyone has learned from each other here and we married that to the science. It's been a very cool process. Jackie

Monday, March 24, 2014, 11:19 AM

Add comment
Thanks Jackie. I always appreciate feedback. Thats how we learn.

By the way, my comments on this thread are meant to be provocative. Asking a plain vanilla question like "Has anyone lost 4lbs on the cheat system?" would probably not get a very strong response (like yours). Asking a question that challenges someone elses view point gets a much stronger response that challenges the view point I issued. I despise plain vanilla.

Monday, March 24, 2014, 11:43 AM

Add comment
You've started one of the most interesting threads as of late! As soon as I heard about it in a group, I had to come visit. -- Jackie

Monday, March 24, 2014, 12:04 PM

Add comment
As long as everyone (me included) is open to their ability to be wrong, debate is extremely fun and educational.

Monday, March 24, 2014, 2:20 PM

Add comment
3 ways we defeat ourselves

I liked this. TCB posted it on PNP and I'm copying it here.

There are 3 things we tell ourselves that defeat us. 1 is rationalizing- things like its a birthday or holiday or lluncheon or other things we say are ok to pig out when we could find a reason every day if we let that get out of hand. 2- unrealistic expectations or goals like I will lose 20lbs and go to the gym every day in 2 weeks. when we fail, we give up. 3- all or nothing thinking- if we arent perfect we just say oh well might as well eat since I screwed up. Every moment is a new start.

Tuesday, March 25, 2014, 1:12 PM

Add comment
Thanks for reposting the above - I love that.

Friday, March 28, 2014, 2:09 PM

Add comment
Hey Mr. Peel- still off cigs??!!!

Friday, March 28, 2014, 2:10 PM

Add comment

Still getting urges. Once the mind been given a chemical dependency, it never forgets it. The desire will always be there. You can only control it and program the mind so that the urges become weaker and less frequent.

Chemical dependency is a very interesting topic. I've read several autobiographies about alcoholics. Read up on alcoholism and you will understand why I don't believe overeating is an addiction. There are criteria for something to be labeled an addiction, and I don't believe overeating qualifies as an addiction. Its debatable, but it comes down to degree. I mean, we use the term "addicted" for everything these days. An addiction is when something is in total control of your life. For a smoker or alcoholic, you are thinking and planning your day around your drug of choice. If a 3hr meeting is planned, the smokers mind will instantly calculate the timing of the cigs prior to the meeting, the length of any breaks in the meeting, and the likelihood of leaving the meeting early. A smokers entire waking time revolves around getting the fix. An overeater on the other hand will have periods of wanting, such as at bed time. A smoker will go outside in the winter and stand in the rain with the flu just to get a fix. An overeater may occassionally travel for a treat, but not to the same extent. So I would argue that to say overeating is an addiction is to say that everything that we want is an addiction.
I know popcorn w/ butter and a large soda at the movies is not good for me. I always have it though. So I must be addicted.
When I've been working out regularly, if I skip a workout, I feel down. I must be addicted to w/o's.
So is everything that is bad for me but I do anyway an addiction? If you disagree with me and believe overeating is an addiction, then give me your definition of addiction and why you believe overeating is an addiction.

And please don't tell me "numerous studies and the vast majority of scientists" line. I can show multiple times where studies at the time showed something and was then discovered not to be correct years later. Tell me your reasoning as to why you believe it.

As always, I am the first to admit my ability to be wrong so you will never hurt my feelings by stating you think I am wrong.

Friday, March 28, 2014, 3:20 PM

Add comment
I pretty much agree with you. I guess the alcoholic"gene" is debatable...I don't think you are "destined" by what your parents did/do. I do see your point about smokers vs. over eaters, however, some over eaters will actually go into their trash for food. Congrats on not smoking -I've lost a couple friends to lung cancer. You are re-training your brain to not be dependent and it will get easier over time. Interesting thread - sounds like you'd make a good politician.

Friday, March 28, 2014, 4:32 PM

Add comment
Thanks but I'd make a lousy politician. I'm honest.

Which brings up an interesting topic. Name a politician you believe has/had high moral integrity. By more integrity, I mean he was honest, faithful to his wife, was not involved in any "ethics lapses" (politico speak for crimes), and just basically the kind of nice guy you would want your daughter to marry. Just shift the tense of the sex if your choice is a woman. And by moral, I don't mean they have to have conservative views.

There are only 2 I can think of: Jimmy Carter and John McCann. Lots of people didn't like Carter as president but I've never heard anyone say he wasn't a morally upstanding person. I mean, who could have made lots of money after being president, but he spends his time building houses for the poor. You won't find many politicians who do something like that.

I don't know much about John McCann but he doesn't vote the party line. He votes the way he sees it. Any politician who believes his own party is right 100% of the time is not being honest w/ himself. McCann votes the way he believe is right. As far as I know, he's been a good husband. I like that. I have no patience for bad husbands. I won't have anything to do w/ them.

So anyone got any thoughts?

Saturday, March 29, 2014, 11:47 AM

Add comment
The undisputed dumbest web site ever.

I don't normally post links, but while researching smoking (I'm closing in on 1 month of freedom from nicotene), I came across the following site:
Check out the site. If you don't believe its the absolute stupidist site ever, let me know what you think is worse.

Heres the mission statement copied from the site:

To educate and provide practical information on the pleasures of smoking.
Provide an online community for those who love to smoke.
Thwart the anti-pleasure establishment by showing that people really do enjoy smoking.

Here are some of the featured articles:
Smoking F.A.Q.
How to Start Smoking
Tips: How to get the most out of smoking.

I've seen some far left and far right political sites that come close, but this one takes the prize.

Monday, March 31, 2014, 8:11 PM

Add comment
McCain is a good man but he lost his way a bit during the campaign - howabout his running mate? Carter is using his influence to help people now. As far as that website- holy sh@@- that's like teenagers encouraging people to kill themselves- wtf???

Tuesday, April 01, 2014, 2:53 PM

Add comment
Hey, I'm with you all the way on what you said about McCain, losing his way, and his running mate. You are dead on there. Its unfortunate that good man and good politician don't go together.

Tuesday, April 01, 2014, 5:25 PM

Add comment
Is Peertrainer vulnerable to heartbleed

I'm not too computer savvy. Has PT looked into heartbleed and do I need to change my password if PT is vulvnearable?

Tuesday, April 15, 2014, 12:35 PM

Add comment
Hey Peel- still not smoking? still weight lifting? you must look like a total stud muffin.

Monday, April 28, 2014, 2:01 PM

Add comment
Not smoking. Still working out but down to 4/wk. Not looking very studly though. I've been off my CR's and wt is up to 175. 163 is my ideal.

Thursday, May 01, 2014, 10:43 AM

Add comment
1) give yourself break - quitting smoking is huge 2) get back to your CR's!

Thursday, May 01, 2014, 3:28 PM

Add comment
ok peel quitting smoking is huge, but i know you can stick to your crs. i went away and gained 4 pounds so today is a new month.. im back so lets smash this month!!!!


Thursday, May 01, 2014, 3:54 PM

Add comment
Here is why I automatically question what "studies" say.

I recently read an article about a study on whether involved parenting improves a students achievements in school. Some things run so contrary to logic that they fall into the bucket called "if it doesn't make sense, it probably isn't.

Here is the start of the article and what I hope is the link to it:
Most people, asked whether parental involvement benefits children academically, would say, “of course it does.” But evidence from our research suggests otherwise. In fact, most forms of parental involvement, like observing a child’s class, contacting a school about a child’s behavior, helping to decide a child’s high school courses, or helping a child with homework, do not improve student achievement. In some cases, they actually hinder it.

Read the article yourself and let me know your thoughts. As for me, I raised 2 kids who have had a combined total of 2 B's in their life (16 and 18 now). The rest were A's. My expectations were known and simple: I expect straight A's unless I have seen them doing homework nightly, requesting addition help from their teachers if they are having a hard time in a subject, and come to me for additional help with homework if they are having difficulty. If I have seen that, then a grade lower than an A is fine (and that has been communicated to them). My son is one of those lucky ones for whom everything comes easy. My daughter was more typical and had to work extremely hard. But she got the A's (except for the 2 B's) and I was always involved. I see lots of examples of me out there, but I also see lots of examples of fairly uninvolved parents. And the data I see reflects my beliefs.

I consider this "research" to be absurd and is typical of what our society is becoming. Crap like the following exerpt from the end of the article shows a lowering of standards:
"Conventional wisdom holds that since there is no harm in having an involved parent, why shouldn’t we suggest as many ways as possible for parents to participate in school? This conventional wisdom is flawed. Schools should move away from giving the blanket message to parents that they need to be more involved and begin to focus instead on helping parents find specific, creative ways to communicate the value of schooling, tailored to a child’s age. Future research should investigate how parental involvement can be made more effective, but until then, parents who have been less involved or who feel uncertain about how they should be involved should not be stigmatized.

What should parents do? They should set the stage and then leave it."

As always, I could be wrong. However, I will put up the grades of 100 students with parents like me against the grades of 100 students with parents living by the final conclusion of the article above anytime.

Wednesday, May 07, 2014, 9:46 PM

Add comment

I totally agree with you on all points. Being a HS nurse I spend more time at my job fielding issues related to students (more often than not, girls) trying to get out of PE class. I find that PE is geared towards the student that is already active and into sports in general. I see our students required to run the mile 4 times/year and must do it in a specified time limit regardless of physical fitness or medical limitations. There is never a build up to this activity to help those who may not already be in shape and there is never a slower time accepted for those who have medical limits, such as asthma. I would like to see PE classes that allow for body image issues to be addressed. There is always the heavy set student that can't keep up or does not feel comfortable in a swim suit. What about yoga, zumba, or other fun types of PE classes? Not everyone is competitive but everyone needs to be encouraged to move regularly and find exercises that appeal to them so they will then be encouraged to make them a life style change.

Thursday, May 08, 2014, 8:44 AM

Add comment

Thanks for the feedback. When I was in school (I was a boy), I was short and very skinny. Gym at my school (at least for boys) just revolved around being active. We pretty much played games that involved lots of movement (football, dodgeball, wrestling, basketball, etc). Never did we get tested on knowing the dimensions of the field, all the rules, etc. PE was something we looked forward to because it was just plain fun and we burned lots of energy (most often got a good sweat in). It was the most activity of each day since I wasn't into sports. Contrast that today w/ my daughters PE. During tennis, she had to come home and look up info for a test. She had to know dimensions, rules, and vocabulary. She hated that. She just wanted to go hit balls. This happened on all the sports in PE. My belief is just let them go out and have some fun. If they then like the sport, they will learn the other stuff on their own or join an extracurricular activity. We complain that kids don't get enough exercise in school. Well then just make it fun and hyper-active.

I especially hate the part of gym now where they have to job around a track w/ a HR monitor and stay above a calculated min HR rate. My son was in CC and thought it was boring and too easy. Other students just plain hated it. How exciting is jogging around a track for an hour. Does it instill a love for being active? Sure they learned about the science of keeping the HR up. But most studies I've read lately say intermix brief intense exercise w/ lower intensity exercise. Make the HR go up and down, not stay at some minimum. Plus, overweight kids couldn't keep up anyway. They hated running (as I still do) and it did nothing to instill a love for exercise.

Thursday, May 08, 2014, 8:23 PM

Add comment
Are people addicted to certain foods?

I often hear people say: "I'm addicted to _______". I've never believed food is an addiction for 99.9% of people. Any debate on this first requires a definition. My definition is that an addiction is something you consistently want throughout the day. You think about it constantly, planning when you will get your next "fix". By this definition, smoking, alcoholism, gambling, all fit. Now let's take a food I've hear several people say they are "addicted" to - ice cream. Now I often want and have a bowl of ice cream at night. Does that mean I'm addicted to it? No! Whether I have it or not, I don't think about it the next morning. Never enters my mind.

Now some people will point out that certain foods (fatty, sweet, etc) cause the pleasure center of the mind to release endorphins. I've read this as well and find it quite believable. However, lots of things do that. I love kayaking. I'm quite sure that my mind is releasing endorphins when I'm doing it. However, when my trip is over, I'm not craving kayaking the next morning. I want to do it again in the future, the sooner the better, but it does not possess me. I also love ribs. The thought and act of eating at Famous Daves gives me great pleasure. I'm sure while eating more ribs than my stomach actually wants, my endorphins are going crazy. But that hardly fits the definition of an addiction.

Just because something stimulates your pleasure center and gets your endorphins pumping does not make it an addiction. Perhaps its a matter of degree of addiction, but comparing a desire to eat a certain food to addictions like smoking, alcohol, gambling, street drugs, prescribed drugs, etc seems like quite a stretch to me. Scientists are always trying to find a reason to explain things that discount self control. That's how we come up with crap like "affluenza" (not guilty because your rich parents did not set limits for you".

When I eat crap (and I eat plenty), I believe its because I make a personal choice. Yes, it will make me feel temporarily good to eat the crap, but I'm not addicted to the crap. Yes, I tend to eat more crap when I'm down and I know my brain is wanting to bring me up by releasing endorphins, but I can say no. I just make a choice not to.

I do believe that there are a small percentage of people with what I would call "eating disorders". These people will literally eat them selves to death. However, for the most part, eating crap is a personal choice. We all make bad choices in life, but lets get real and not call them addictions. They are bad choices.

As always, I am the first to admit that I am human and possess the capability to often be wrong. So don't be shy about voicing a different opinion. I love debate.

Tuesday, May 13, 2014, 10:13 PM

Add comment
Follow up comment regarding addictions to certain foods

Oh yes, if you disagree, please state your definition of what "addiction" means. Often, people debating do not have the same definition. In fact, its often easier to debate a topic than to define the topic.

Hope to hear from you.

Tuesday, May 13, 2014, 10:16 PM

Add comment
If there weren't something to food addiction then the food companies probably wouldn't have bothered with getting their hands on the brain research that the tobacco companies used to sell more product. Perhaps people having a difficult time controlling themselves around certain foods is because they've been designed to have that exact effect! Notice not many people complain they sat down with a bag of carrots and plowed through the whole bad yet again!

Thursday, May 15, 2014, 9:27 AM

Add comment
Excellent point. I love rebuttal. And I do believe food companies study and make changes to increase our desire for something. However, to me its a matter of degree. I crave ice cream only at night. Never in the morning. When I crave a food product through out the day like a smoker craves a cigarette (I'm an ex-smoker) or an alcoholic craves a drink, then I will believe its an addiction. But when I crave it only once a day and sometimes not at all, I don't think it qualifies as an addiction. But thats just my definition. It's like defining who is an American Indian (or any other race). If you have 1% Cherokee in you, does that make you an Indian? If not, then at what point? It's all in how you define it. For me, food cravings are like being 1% Indian where as an alcoholic would be 100% Indian.

I love debate. Question everything, especially "studies".

Thursday, May 15, 2014, 9:47 AM

Add comment
Perhaps think of food addiction as less an addiction to ONE food like your ice cream, but to all the things they ADD to most processed food to make you crave it more and more. So it's not a singular addiction to A food, but an overall addiction to the sugar, fat, salt and other additives that are added to processed food!

Thursday, May 15, 2014, 11:54 AM

Add comment
Lovin the feedback.

Here's another reason I don't think food qualifies as an addiction. I would bet that most of the people who believe they are addicted to crap food could give it up if some millionaire offered them $1,000,000 to do so for 1 year. To me, food is a craving, not an addiction. Again, its a matter of degree. Most alcoholics could not do that just for money.

Another reason I don't believe its an addiction is that I refuse to tell myself that. I strongly believe that we can program our minds. If we consciously tell ourselves we are addicted to crap food, then our subconscious will accept that we are addicted. Its like when all runners and scientists agreed that the human body would never be able to run a mile in less than 4min. But once someone broke the 4min mile, suddenly several others broke it. Did multiple runners suddenly change genetically or physically? No. The saw it could be done and there subconscious no longer held them back.

Thursday, May 15, 2014, 9:28 PM

Add comment
People give up different addictions all the time. Just because they can give it up doesn't mean it's not addictive. Being addicted doest mean you are incapable of exercising self control to overcome it - they are not mutually exclusive states.

No to mention that people aren't all wired exactly the same. Just because it doesn't apply to you doesn't mean it isn't so.

Sunday, May 18, 2014, 10:52 AM

Add comment
Great feedback and well taken.

I guess it still comes back to "degree of desire" for me. I have a hard time comparing addictions like smoking, alcohol, or drugs like (cocaine, meth, heroine) to that of a food addiction. My definition of chemical addiction would also include a physical withdrawl symptom (in addition to a mental symptom) . Quitting heavy caffeine use will cause headaches, this is easily verified, lethargy, etc as the body suddenly does not get caffeine. I've never seen a physical withdrawl symptom from quitting food types. I may still crave it, but I don't define it as an addiction. By the ASAP definition, anything that a person has trouble consistently quitting is an addiction.

If addiction is defined as anything that the body continuously craves, then food types could fit the definition for some people. I just feel addiction is an overused term, similar to ADD. I believe ADD is real, but too many people think they have just because they have a hard time focusing on one thing at a time. I think 99% of people probably have a hard time focusing on only 1 thing, but not everyone who says they have ADD actually has ADD. I think Dr's over diagnose it. People come to the Dr expecting him/her to define a reason for why they feel a certain way, so the Dr gives the closes diagnosis he can. My mind jumps all over the place at work and I have a hard time giving focus to one thing due to emails, people walking around me, overheard conversations, etc. But its just something I need to work on, not ADD. On the other hand, I've seen people who I would guess really have ADD. Just not as many who think they do.

As usual, the debate comes down to the definition of addiction. My definition restricts addiction to extreme addictions such as alcohol, tobacco, illegal drugs, etc. I prefer to use the term cravings for more minor things.

Then again, I pretty sure I was not created perfect so I'm prone to error.

Sunday, May 18, 2014, 11:46 AM

Add comment
Following my comment above, I googled "is addiction overused"? Here is an article from Psychology Today:

"The Overuse and Misuse of the Word "Addiction"
The term is so overused that the meaning has been sucked out of it.
Published on February 16, 2011 by Stanton E. Samenow, Ph.D. in Inside the Criminal Mind

"Addiction" has been utilized to explain many phenomena. In fact, the term is so overused that the meaning has been sucked out of it. Anything that anyone likes too much he is in danger to developing an "addiction." There is the "chocoholic" or person who is addicted to chocolate. There is the 'jogaholic" or individual who is addicted to jogging. The "bibliomaniac" is addicted to reading. A person who pursues sex unrelentingly is a "sexaholic." There is a book on "approval addiction," a reference to people who will do anything to gain the approval to others. In the Fall 2006 issue of a University of Michigan publication, an article appears that is titled "Caffeine Confessions." The writer asks, "Is there an addiction problem on campus?" And there is, according to professionals, addiction to gambling, pornography, and video games. The list is endless.

There is the implication that a person who suffers from addiction is in the grips of a force over which he or she is powerless. Many specialists in addiction maintain that the first step in "recovery" is to acknowledge such powerlessness. A synonym for "powerless" is "helpless." Of course, if a person is helpless, then he can do nothing about the particular problem he faces.

I suggest that we be more sparing in applying the word "addiction". There is a physiological dependence that some people develop as they continue to use certain substances. They experience what is termed a "tolerance effect" -- i.e., they seek more of the substance to get the same charge, voltage, or excitement that they derived by using less of it previously.

Is the "addict" as helpless as the media, some professionals, and addicts themselves profess? There are people who "kick the habit" on their own even to what have been termed "hard drugs" such as heroin and cocaine. If the supply runs low, if obtaining the substance is too risky, if use of the substance interferes with something they want badly enough, they cease their use - i.e., go "cold turkey." By sheer force of will, they abstain. An article in the "Harvard Mental Health Letter" published more than a decade ago (December, 1999) noted that most people who become "addicted" to cocaine "succeed in breaking the habit." The article notes that experts no longer even agree about the addictive nature of crack cocaine.

"Addiction" is far more psychological than it is physiological in most cases. A man who had not used a mind-altering substance during two years of incarceration resumed cocaine use after 18 months of abstinence while living in the community. He commented that he returned to the drug because, "I like it too much." It was not simply the drug he "craved" but, rather, it was the people, the places, the risks, the "thrill of the deal" all of which preceded even putting the drug into his body. Then there was the effect of the drug itself. When he asked me as his counselor, "What do you have that compares with cocaine?" he was inquiring whether what society calls a responsible life could compare with the high voltage excitement of the world of cocaine use. He found that going to work, pinching pennies, paying bills, and living within the restraints of responsible living did not compare with cocaine and all that it involves. He made a series of choices to return to his "addiction" that was not just to a substance but to an entire way of life."

(Remember, I always say I'm prone to error. My comments are thoughts and opinions. It doesn't necessarily make them right.)

Sunday, May 18, 2014, 11:56 AM

Add comment
i think addiction is used when people want to have something and dont want to be responsible for the choice of how much they have.. i myself this past week realized i was eating way too much pb.. maybe it was the sugar in the processed jars, but i was eating by the spoonfulls i had went through a med size jar in less than a week and a half..

i know pb in measured amounts is fine, but overdoing it is not good for releasing weight..soooooo i said it was too addictive..

well the truth is i wanted the pb, so i made the choice to look at it as i had no control over it that it was controlling me.. the truth is i can control it. i am not addicted. it is not a addictive substance.. i was just making a choice to eat as much as i like.

so i did a experiment to prove i could control pb..i decided to only have it three days a week.. so three days went by im like ok.. ill have my first day.. i only have 4 days left i can have pb three of those.. but i thought ok i have went three days,, i wonder if i can do 4.. so i did 4.. than im like ok 4 days wonder if i can do 5.. so i did this up until today is 9 days without pb..

so its not a addiction,, its not addictive,.. its my choice.. now i have proven i choose what i eat it doesn't control me.. pb can be eaten in moderation. if i can go without it for 9 days.. than i have full control of my choice when i eat it.

so yes i think addiction is sometimes used as a excuse to eat the way we want instead of putting limits on to what we should be eating.


Sunday, May 18, 2014, 12:23 PM

Add comment
Did you hear they took a poll of the seven dwarfs? Six out of seven dwarfs said they were not Happy. TeeHee.

Thanks for the feedback lynn.

That which the mind can conceive and believe, it can achieve.
If we tell ourselves something, the subconscious will work to create it, whether its positive or negative.

Sunday, May 18, 2014, 8:49 PM

Add comment
Purchse from a store if you use their expertise

I hope no one goes to a store, takes up the time of the person selling the product (possibly working on commission) and then purchases the product on the web. I'm sure everyone here thinks there time at work is of some value, and would be ticked if someone wasted their time and energy. If you want to buy on the web, great, I have no problem with that. Just blindly order the product and take what you get. But a store built on service, like a bike or running shoe store, some electronics stores, etc price the value of their expertise into the price of the product. If you use their expertise, purchace the product from the store. Otherwise, you are basically helping to put someone out of a job. I bet you would not like that. I also advocate requiring sites to charge taxes on their sales. Brick and mortar stores help pay for fire and police protection, roads, schools, etc. Some people say that internet sales shouldn't have to pay for these things because they don't use those services. Unless the products are helicoptered to your property, they probably use roads to get delivered. And the reason the product that doesn't get ripped off when left on your porch by UPS (in most neighborhoods) is because of the fear of getting arrested. So taxes should be required to be paid by internet dealers the same as brick and morter stores.

Monday, May 19, 2014, 12:37 PM

Add comment
Lose wt without leaving your couch

I guess I was wrong about losing wt sitting on the couch (an analogy I frequently use regarding dusting the couch w/ your azz). Evidently, Americans are so lazy that multiple people have written articles about working out on the couch cause we're too lazy to get off of it. (I googled lose weight on the couch)
Here is a link to one of the articles.
Really? Working out on the couch? Give me a break.

By the way, before I finished this comment, I went back and googled about losing wt on the toilet. Unfortunately, nobody has come up with an exercise program to use while releving ourselves. Give it time. I'm sure it will happen.

Monday, May 19, 2014, 2:32 PM

Add comment

I am a recovered addict. I was addicted to alcohol, pot and meth and cigarettes. I believe that that people that succumb to these named addictions are also more likely to have an "addictive" personality. While this may all seem mental, in fact, it is not.

SO - with that said.. my definition of addiction is that of which ANY NUMBER OF THINGS (including fats and SUGAR - which the standard american diet people don't REALIZE their bodies crave) are some substance that your body thinks they need to continue to survive. Like the smokes I used to want to hurt people over if I didn't have any... or the "next" high that I needed to keep going on pot. When pot wasn't enough, I turned to meth.

Regarding alcohol - this was my worse. I used to drink anytime any day for any reason. Sometimes every day. Not much different than smoking cigarettes (which was the hardest substance for me to quit out of ALL of them)

I believe people can be addicted to even a greater number of things outside of those which alter the chemical balance of the body; including sex and porn, shopping and serial killers. Alot of addictions are mental and in some of those instances, the individual has a psychological problem that causes them to crave some sort of deviant behavior.

Wednesday, May 28, 2014, 10:04 AM

Add comment
I appreciate the addiction comment. Always glad to have more perspectives. Weird how some people can just try different drugs, use them recreationally, and never get addicted. For others, it only takes a few trials and they get hooked. Unlike cocaine, pot, and some other drugs, cigarettes tend to hook everyone who smokes them for more than a short period. And yet they are legal. I would love to see the tax on them quadruple. It may hurt those who are already addicted, but at $20/pack, I bet the number of people starting would plummet.

Wednesday, May 28, 2014, 8:53 PM

Add comment
A.D.D vs lazy

OK, before I start, let me go on record as saying emphatically that "YES, I DO BELIEVE ADD IS REAL AND SOME PEOPLE HAVE ADD"! I wrote that in all caps because I don't want any ambiguity on my belief.

Now, most people who read what I write or talk to me in person also know that I am a huge believer in personal responsibility. I believe that people are responsible for a greater percent of their own actions or inactions than society wants to accept. We used to have a word in society called "lazy". This word was directed towards people who never worked, or didn't pick up their yards, or a host of other things that the general population did do. I used to live in a part of a major city that was going downhill quickly and believed that a very large percentage of the people were lazy. I mean, if you are unemployed but can afford cigarettes or cable TV, you can afford to mow your yard. I've also worked with people who I considered lazy. You know, minimum effort required just to keep the job. Today in society, I don't hear the word lazy much. We don't want to hurt feelings and we want to come up with a medical term that explains everything.

Now I'm a social liberal, moderate conservative. I believe in social programs and support them to an extent. So I ask this in all earnestness. How does one define the difference between lazy and ADD. If I work with someone I consider lazy, how can I tell if the person is really lazy or just has ADD? And maybe I just don't have a clue as to what ADD entails, although I think it means the inability to focus on a single task. On the other hand, how do you define who is lazy vs ADD. To me, if you don't mow your yard for a month but you have time to watch TV 3hrs a day, I'm thinking your lazy unless there is someother extenuating circumstance (like a single parent who works to support multiple kids and then has to care for the kids alone).

Again, I'm very earnest in my wanting to understand the difference. If you are about to chastise me for even asking, please reread the first sentence. I'm hoping for some real life experience, not statistics by "experts".

Thursday, May 29, 2014, 6:52 PM

Add comment
Oh great, dock head is back. Anyone want to get scammed? It that's your thrill, go se the spell caster doofus. I'm guessing the writer is some Nigerian nut case judging by the poor English (Hope I didn't offend any Nigerians that have real jobs). Or maybe the azz really had a "weeding" ceremony.

PT, please remove the jerk posting the spell caster crap.

Sunday, June 01, 2014, 10:29 PM

Add comment
Food For Thought…per se, re: Addiction

Why food can be just as addicting as drugs…it's designed to affect the brain the same way drugs do and I'm guessing not many would have trouble labeling someone who can't resist the cravings of drugs as a drug addict. Not everyone who drinks becomes an alcoholic. Not everyone who eats ice cream snarfs down a gallon in one sitting.


Wednesday, June 04, 2014, 12:22 PM

Add comment
Wow, food as an addiction is my hottest topic. Appreciate all the feedback as I have been give a lot of info to consider. The beauty of debate is in considering new ideas. Those with an open mind will consider other lines of thinking. Perhaps there are some addictive qualities. But I still think its an overused phrase.

I prefer to program my mind by not calling it an addiction. That may or may not be true, but I'm a pretty strong believer that what we tell ourselves consciously affects our subconscience. If I tell myself I'm addicted, it gives my subconscience one more reason to give in. If I tell myself something is a choice, I give myself the power to more easily change the behavior.

Wednesday, June 04, 2014, 12:40 PM

Add comment
Food Addiction (sugar)

For me, one bite of ice cream leads to another. One piece of birthday cake sets me up to be craving sweets the rest of the day. I say to myself, I have to treat this as if it were an addiction, and just avoid sweets all together. I just can't be a "social eater" when it comes to sugar. I have to totally avoid it, or else I just set myself up for endless craving (which is torture). The reason I have to avoid it is I have Type 2 diabetes, so I have a strong incentive to improve my health.
Obviously we need food to survive, so we can't treat all food as addictive. But anything that makes you feel really good (like ice cream) can become an addiction.

Thursday, June 05, 2014, 12:33 AM

Add comment
More on a calorie is not a calorie

Here is an exerpt from an article. The two world-renowned obesity experts say that effective weight loss should be more about what you eat. That is because different food interacts differently with your body.

A real diet should not focus solely on how much fat or how many calories are in that food, the experts say. For instance, nuts are good for you despite their high calorie and fat content. But an ice cream sandwich is not. It may be low in calories, but it also has a significant number of refined carbohydrates, which will cause your insulin level to spike.

Because of the way insulin impacts you at your cellular level, fat cells will absorb the calories. But there aren’t enough nutrients in that ice cream sandwich to give your body the energy it needs, so your body craves more food, thinking it is still hungry.

Friday, June 06, 2014, 7:13 AM

Add comment
Best Motivational Book Ever

Hands down, the best motivational book ever written (I'm excluding whatever your choice of religious book is) is:
Think and grow rich, by Napoleon Hill.
It's written regarding making money, but the principles are applicable to any goal or desire. The book was written over half a century ago and it stills sells in almost every book store.

Friday, June 06, 2014, 9:48 PM

Add comment
I'm all over the place here, but since it's not a paper I'll skip the editing and let my haphazard rebuttal stand:

It sounds like you've melded two issues: personal choice/responsibility and addiction. Addiction is simply the physiological response/result of that substance whether it's a drug, alcohol or sugar and chemicals in food. Addiction is what makes not giving in to those cravings so dang hard. (And, again, not everyone is affected the same way by things.)

Choice and being addicted are separate issues. You can choose to not feed a food addiction, but it doesn't change the fact that your body and brain could be addicted to those foods. Being addicted to something doesn't change the fact that it is ultimately an individual's choice and responsibility to stop a behavior.

An alcoholic or drug addict ultimately has to make that choice, too, but it doesn't take away from the fact that their bodies ARE addicted to that substance. They crave it and until they decide to give it up - the feed it. There is a reason people have a hard time just saying 'no' to the craving of food - because those foods were engineered to have that effect. They're not just weak minded, weak willed people who are making excuses. Taking control of one's health and choices IS a decision, though.

I doubt you will find anyone who can't stop themselves from eating kale and carrots and swiss chard or unprocessed oatmeal, etc. It's super easy to eat reasonable amounts of those foods. These foods weren't designed to create reactions in the brain like other processed foods. And people may not realize they are truly addicted to the all the crap they put into processed foods - they just know that despite every best intention, they keep going back to the foods that make them feel good…in that moment. And when they stop eating that stuff regularly - they feel like crap!

Go onto any message board for any PT cleanse they've been doing the last few years and you will see a whole lotta bitching about how awful and hard the first few days are. We're not just grumpy cuz we can't eat our chips - we truly feel like hell until all that crap gets out of our system.

Choice and addiction - two separate issues.

Monday, June 09, 2014, 2:39 PM

Add comment
Thank you. Excellent input. I like the distinction between addiction and choice. So another definition of addiction might be something that makes you feel like crap when it is taken away for a period of time. I could agree with that. I am still going to look at the crap I crave as choices however. For me, mindset is everything and I will look at every bad habit I have as a bad choice I freely make, even if it makes me feel like crap to quit it. However, those things that make me feel like crap could be defined as addictions. I just choose to dwell only on the choice aspect and not the addiction aspect.

Thats the great thing about debate. As long as one is open minded, learning can occur.

Monday, June 09, 2014, 3:13 PM

Add comment
Wedding waste.

I went to a wedding over the weekend. My wife is good friends w/ the brides mom. The event cost at least $20,000. 450 people invited, catering alone cost about $8000, the hall $4000, plus DJ, fancy decorations, etc. I know the parents footing the bill thought it was silly. They offered to give them the money and let them have a much less expensive wedding and use the money for a down payment on a house. But the bride would have none of that. Had to have the fairy tale wedding.

Just my opinion, but that's part of the problem w/ society. I was raised to always live below my means and save for a rainy day. I have little sympathy for people who never save when times are good and then cry a river when they lose a job and suddenly can't afford their house cause the live paycheck to paycheck so they can afford a fancy house, new cars, etc. Every time the cable company raises rates, people get all ballistic. I can't help but giggle since I've never had cable. Same with smart phones and new cars. I have nothing against people having one, but guess what, they are not a necessity. Same w/ high speed internet. I had dial up for years until it became necessary for my kids education to have something faster. And then I got a slow form of broadband.

I have sympathy for those who struggle cause they work a lot but only get paid enough to get by. I don't have sympathy for people who can't forgo luxuries so they can save a little and then expect me to use my tax money to bail them out when times get bad.

OK, I'm done venting.

Monday, June 16, 2014, 8:29 PM

Add comment
Why do teams die out?

I find the dynamics of the different teams to be very interesting and often wonder why some die out and others grow.

I used to enjoy Marathon Mamas and Maniacs, even though I hate running and have no desire to start. It's always interesting to see different perspectives on exercise. The teams focus was on running/jogging/walking, but very little on diet. Unfortunately, it seems to have died out for the most part.

Biggest Losers was another team I liked. When I joined PT, it was very active. It leaned more towards the socializing side, with people discussing a lot of issues in their personal lives. There wasn't much commenting on what exercising people were doing, but there was discussion of eating. Unfortunately, the team dwindled down over time.

Progress Not Perfection had about 5 members when I joined. Now its grown quite a bit. It has a lot of focus on both exercise and eating, but not as much on peoples personal issues.

The Cheat System Diet 21 Day Challenge seems to be picking up pace right now. The commenting is pretty much strictly about the CS diet (hence the team name), but almost no commenting about exercise. I'm hoping it grows as I like the Cheat System concept.

There are a few other teams with a few comments/week.

Anyone have any thoughts on what brings a team up or down? I've noticed that once the the number of comments drops below what I call a "critical mass", the team generally starts to die out. When I joined PNP, Liz, Suz, and a couple others were doing a lot of commenting daily. I think people responded to that and began to join in. I think for a team to survive, it needs at least a few core members who comment quite a bit. Other people see that and want to be a part of it, so they join in. The confusing part is why a team dies out. Biggest loser had a lot of comment interaction when I started with PT. Now its lucky to get 1 every couple days, and was pretty much getting that way even before VitD unfortunately left. It would be interesting to understand how Biggest Loser could dwindle in interaction after being such a busy team in the past.

I'm just curious. Any thoughts?

Thursday, June 26, 2014, 9:56 PM

Add comment

Saturday, June 28, 2014, 12:14 AM

Add comment
I've been on some of those teams you mentioned and, at times, life just keeps me away from the computer!

Saturday, June 28, 2014, 3:12 PM

Add comment
I've been kept away too so I know what you mean. I wonder if part of the problem where teams die off is when being too busy just happens to coincide with several of main commenters and then people see no action and so they don't comment either. Sort of a bad alignment of the stars.

Saturday, June 28, 2014, 5:27 PM

Add comment
The GOP fights are starting. Yippee

I love election time. It can be so entertaining to watch the in-fighting as the candidates vie for the primaries. Looks like Rick Perry and Rand Paul have lobbed the first grenades. Perry is accusing Paul of being an isolationist and Paul suggests Perry should worry about the border. Paul also took a crack at Perry's new glasses.

I guess I should be depressed about that since I would like to vote Republican for Pres this time. Only for the reason that I tend to switch back and forth. Both parties suck, I just don't want to see either party run the white house for too long. But it is entertaining how nasty they get towards each other. Soon enough they GOP candidates will be making the obligatory march to kiss Donald Trumps ring. So the party that stands against gay marriage bows down to Trumps version of marriage fidelity??????????

Don't worry, I'm not a strong Democrat either. I don't want all my money given away. But the GOP just makes it so easy when they cast stones about other peoples values.

Monday, July 14, 2014, 8:38 PM

Add comment
solusi pengobatan herbal

saya juga berjualan obat herbal. berikut beberapa website yang aku bidik. Obat Alami Amandel Yang Ampuh Tanpa Operasi
Obat Tradisional Infeksi Saluran Kemih Yang Aman
Obat Tradisional Sakit Pinggang Yang Ampuh
Kalung Kesehatan Terbaik
Obat Tradisional Sakit Pinggang Yang Ampuh
Obat Herbal Untuk Anemia Aplastik
Obat Tradisional Untuk Ambeien Yang Ampuh
Obat Sakit Pinggang Yang Ampuh
Obat Tradisional Asma Yang Paling Ampuh
Obat Herbal Wasir Yang Ampuh
Kalung Kesehatan Terbaik Bion
Obat Alami Untuk Anemia Aplastik
Obat Tradisional Untuk Anemia Hemolitik
Obat Herbal Anemia Hemolitik Alami
Obat Herbal Untuk Maag Kronis
Jual Casing Iphone Waterproof
Jual Tongsis Harga Murah
Jual Holder Hp untuk di motor
Jual Case Iphone Anti Air
Jual Case Iphone Waterproof
There is also a waterproof iPhone case can be seen in Jual casing iphone anti air


Thursday, September 04, 2014, 2:46 AM

Add comment
I just read every single comment here. Peel, you are very interesting! I don't agree about your issue with spending money on a wedding but I agree with a lot of your comments!

Tuesday, October 14, 2014, 4:49 PM

Add comment
peel is amazing.. im grateful to call him my friend. hes like a big bro.

if you want more interaction hes on progress not perfection 2014.. hes on a work hiatus but thats where you can find him.


Tuesday, October 14, 2014, 7:13 PM

Add comment
Trump announces when he will announce he is not running

It's that time of year again. Donald Trump has once again announced when he will announce if he is running for office. He stated about a wk ago that he will announce next year if he is running.

My prediction: He will yet again announce that he is not running. (I must have a crystal ball cause I'm right every year.) The man is a bad joke and yet all the GOP contenders will announce they have met w/ him when they start running. I think they actually bow down and kiss his ring.

Monday, October 27, 2014, 7:26 AM

Add comment
What candidate will I vote for?

I will vote for a candidate that comes out and states the following is his/her platform:
1. Abolish the penny. I won't even bend over to pick one up off the street. It costs way more than a penny to even make a penny.
2. Cut mail delivery to 5 days/wk but only through attrition. That way, nobody loses their job, but I will soon get junk mail only 5 days/wk.
3. Add a constitutional amendment getting rid of time changes. I hate the fact that it gets dark an hour earlier in the winter simply due to a time changes. Several states don't even abide by the time change.
4. Get rid of the mortgage deduction for 2nd homes and boats. It's a tax write off for the rich. I've got nothing against the rich, but I don't feel my taxes should subsidize vacation homes and/or yachts.

Thats all it would take for me and they would get me vote. Four simple changes that over 90% of the public would support yet politicians won't do. Any other suggestions?

Monday, October 27, 2014, 7:36 AM

Add comment
I agree and I disagree with the above post. For me it would be: No Daylight Savings Time! I hate it that it gets light an hour after I'm at work in the winter!

Where one stands on this question of course depends on which side of your time zone you live on -- I live on the West side. Tthe folks on the East side probably all love DST.

Thursday, October 30, 2014, 6:09 AM

Add comment
**Fall. From my POV, this is about to correct itself.

Thursday, October 30, 2014, 6:10 AM

Add comment
School PE

Just read most of these interesting. I remember grammar school (I am soon 60). Had a blast playing teatherball, dodgeball and recess in general. But hated having to complete the presidential fitness tests. I just wasn't that physically fit I guess. It was embarrassing though to do it in front of everyone when you weren't good. I loved sports though. In junior high and high school we were very physical: tennis, basketball, track, field hockey, swimming. We were also tested on the rules of each sport. I hated that part but I think it is good to know how to properly play the sport to compete. I also think that recess and p.e. Are important for the kids to get the "ants in their pants" and stress out so they can concentrate better when they go back to class. I remember my gym teachers were stern and all business but I learned and got great aerobic workouts. Roblollymom

Friday, November 07, 2014, 3:50 PM

Add comment
Obamas daughters, THC, and Jeb

Read 2 articles that got my mustard up recently.

1st, how about the Republican PR person who attacked Obamas daughters. The kids were at a turkey pardoning ceremony and looked bored. I would have been bored watching such a silly event on TV, let alone being there. They were probably the only ones in the room whose faces showed what they were honestly feeling. She also said they were dressed like they wanted to sit at the bar (or something like that). Really? From the picture I saw, they were modestly dressed, wearing sweaters, and 10 times more modestly dressed than I see some girls dressed on the rare occasion I go to church. Attacking the presidents kids is off limits regardless of who is in the white house. I'm glad she resigned (obviously must have been "asked" to).

The other was an article (I clicked on a link and it took me to some article) about Ferguson. Now reporters today unfortunately all put bias in to their reports, regardless of whether they are liberal or conservative. This one was talking about M Brown and how their source said his THC (pot for the few who would not know that) level was so high it could have caused hallucinations. I'm not going to get into the debate on which side of the issue I believe. My problem is with the reporters statement. I was young and wild once and no amount of pot causes hallucinations without additives like PCP. Reporters often make ridiculous statements and then site anonomous sources. So do our politicians but I have higher expectations for reporters than politicians (I have higher expectations for my toilet than politicians).

On the plus side, Jeb Bush said he might run. I generally lean liberal, and I have no real love for seeing a 3rd Bush in office, but out of the field of Republicans, Jeb would be one of my top 2 choices. He doesn't seem totally wacky. Although neither did McCain till he picked Palin nor Romney till he got to the primary.

Tuesday, December 02, 2014, 8:00 PM

Add comment
Peelout. Did you mean you lean democrat/progressive? On a straight-line political spectrum Liberal is one step left of democrat, Socialism is the third step left ...The right is: Republican/moderate, then conservative, then fascism which is third step to right/extreme right.... right? Maybe tea party is the new name for "ultra conservative?" and fits between conservative and fascism.

By the way, I tried the werewolf diet. They're not bad with ketchup.

Thursday, December 04, 2014, 8:20 PM

Add comment
I like the breaddown on the definitions. I guess in general terms, I lean left. On social issues (abortion, pot, gay marriage), I'm to the left. On financial issues, I'm to the right (cut benefits (both for the rich and the poor), stop subsidizing sports, giving money to corporations to entice them to move to my state, etc). I had a freind who recently said I was really a libertarian. Unfortunately, there are many different shades of libertarian too so thats even a hard party to define.

Heres some of the things I believe, not that anyone gives a shoot:
Gay marriage does not affect me or anyone else. Let them have every benefit I have.
Abortion- I support the ability of a raped/incest person to have an abortion. And since I'm willing to say its OK in these cases, I would be a hypocrite to say its not OK in other cases. So I support the right to have it in all cases (although there needs to be a limit on when). However, I also see other peoples opinions on this.
Pot - Its not going away. Its no worse than beer (did both alot when younger, stopped both around the age of 26). Legalize and tax the heck out of it.
Programs for the poor - I support programs like job training, college loans (not grants), etc. I do not believe state aid should be a career though. I don't think I've ever seen a time when I could not find a job at McD's.
State labor programs - I think everyone should have to work, even if its picking up trash. I think to get a gov't check, a person should have to show up and do public work if they can't find private sector work. They use to have things like this a long time ago.
Gov't subsidies - Cut them. Eliminate home mortgage deductions. Why should I get to deduct my interest because I own a home. That means I'm subsidized by people who choose to rent. Tax all income equally. That means if I make money from stock I own, its taxed at the same rate as the person who sweats their azz off to earn it. Right now, I'm taxed less for investment income than for my work income. Thats not fair to those that don't have enough to invest. There are many, many tax strategies that the wealthier have that the poor do not. I'm not rich, but I have enough that I use some of these strategies. I don't feel bad using what the law allows, I just want the law changed. I would also cut a lot of things for the poor (free cell phones for example). I had freinds I partied with when I was younger who were more than able to get a job. They were just too lazy, plus they got a check each month from the govt just because they existed.

I also believe strongly in personal responsibility. Don't walk like trash, dress like trash, and talk like trash, and then blame others for your problems. Don't blame the system if you have multiple kids from multiple daddies. Don't think your a man unless you are there for your kids. Oh yeah, I also think castration is a reasonable punishment for rape.

And lastly, don't cheat on your wife and then then run for office and tell me how gay marriage ruins the sanctity of marriage (slam to Newt Gingrich and many others in the Republican party).

Well, I have to get off my soap box now. But thats where I stand.

As always, I fully respect all other views. The only thing I am 100% confident in is my ability to be wrong.

Friday, December 05, 2014, 7:45 AM

Add comment
Why should I get to deduct my interest because I own a home. That means I'm subsidized by people who choose to rent."

Hmm? I've never heard anyone complaining about this before. It's supposed to be a perk for being responsible and paying (hopefully extra) towards owing a home.

I'm still not clear how you are "subsidized by people who pay rent". What? Please explain further. I'm not upset! Just curious.

Saturday, December 06, 2014, 4:21 PM

Add comment
oops! I meant owning a home not owing it: although the latter seems more true!

And now I have a question for you.. Why do people who eat meat and hunt act afraid of vegetarians: "WHOT! YUS A VEGETARIAN?? YIKES!"

After all , they hunt & eat meat. If ever there was a situation where a group had to turn to cannibalism, the vegs are going first. And has they are "grass fed" they would be a low fat meal.. So whats up with the fear?

Saturday, December 06, 2014, 4:26 PM

Add comment
Thanks for commenting.

Heres how renters subsidize home owners. The govt needs to take in a certain amount of money. If I as a home owner get to write off my mortgage interest, that money has to be made up somewhere. A renter does not get to write off any mortgage interest. They will pay more in taxes than an equivalent person who owns a home and gets to reduce their taxes by writing the interest off (all other things being the same). Any tax not paid by one person has to be made up somewhere. Its not the govt's job to "reward" people for being responsible. Owning a home is a choice. Increased wealth through home ownership is its own reward. Some people say that if we don't have the mortgage deduction, they couldn't own as expensive a home. Too bad. If a renter could write off part of their rent, they could rent a more expensive place, but they don't get to.

Another thing about mortgage interest deduction. The rich can write off interest on a vacation home and even a yacht. Are we trying to encourage yacht ownership? I'm for reducing subsidies to all, both rich and poor.

I could back the republicans regarding cutting back on some of the free benefits to the poor, but the repubs never mention the welfare the rich get as well. And trust me, there are many.

As for the vegetarian question, I cant answer for others, only me. I'm not sure what you meant by "afraid of vegetarians". I eat a lot of meat, but I've never been afraid of a vegetarian. Perhaps you meant amazed or surprised. I could care less what anyone else puts in their body. It doesn't affect me. I am always amazed when someone tells me they are vegetarian though, but only cause its so contrary to the way I'm wired. I love meat. But I know vegy's are healthy so I do my best to eat as many as I can. Its kind of like running. I hate running. I try to do some form of cardio in my exercise cause I know its good for me, but I don't enjoy it. So when someone tells me they ran a half marathon, I'm amazed and as lots of questions about the how and why. But only cause I'm curious.

Sunday, December 07, 2014, 3:43 PM

Add comment
Whew. I read through this whole thing. Are you a health coach? Are you fit? I only take advice from people who look good and fit.

Sunday, December 07, 2014, 4:51 PM

Add comment
No, I am not a health coach. This thread isn't even meant to be about advice. It's just a place I made to list randon thoughts I have and get other peoples feedback (and sometimes just vent). Theres no such thing as a wrong opinion here. I say what I think and invite others to respond. Theres never any offence taken by me regarding other peoples opinions, and I hope the same go's for others responding to what I write. The only thing we can all be 100% confident in is our ability to be wrong.

As for am I fit, that depends on a persons definition. Heres my stats:
Male, 5'10", 163-173lbs, genetically dispositioned to be on the the thin side with smaller muscle structure, overall health is adequate to participate in physically demanding activities such as white water kayaking, indooor and rock wall climbing, hiking, and skiing, incredibly good looking (OK, that may be an incredible exaggeration, no major health issues.. So I guess I'm reasonably fit. As for taking advice from people, if anyone here was an "expert", they probably wouldn't be on this site as they would already be where they wanted to be physically. We are here because we don't have all the answers. So don't "take" advice from people, just give consideration to what they say and decide if you should/want to apply it your needs.

Sunday, December 07, 2014, 5:47 PM

Add comment
Forgot to add that I'm 54.

Sunday, December 07, 2014, 6:21 PM

Add comment
Peel - loving all your political stances :) The wife cheating/sanctity of marriage thing made me laugh.

Have you ever read or listened to Freakanomics? Seems right up your alley.

I've known a few fit people who look good who have the most horrendous life styles/diets!


Sunday, December 07, 2014, 8:57 PM

Add comment
Ok. Here is one: How do I tell my friend she is fat? The answer is siimple - I don't cause she already knows. But wow. She was gorgeous 18 years ago when we first met... She got married a year and a half ago and gained about 65 pounds. Maybe 80.

This is an ex model. She probably killed her metabolism if that's possible. Her husband is still trim... So it's not a "together" thing or his bad habits.

Her dress yesterday was a nightmare.

Monday, December 08, 2014, 11:57 AM

Add comment
What in the heck is your point? 1st, its none of your business to tell someone they are "fat". And your comment about the dress? What did that have to do with anything. Your comments made so little sense that I think you are just trolling.

I take no offense to others views, but you are not stating any view. Just bad mouthing someone that hasn't done anything that affects you. Go away.

Monday, December 08, 2014, 12:29 PM

Add comment
I think it's natural to wonder "What happened to so-and-so?" if a person goes through any sudden physical change. Illness and injury are reasonable concerns to have about a friend.

"How do I tell my friend she is fat," however, is the kind of question we expect from someone who is 13. And apparently this poster is over 18.... What is up with that?

In related news, never think you can tell by looking whether the spouse/partner is part of the problem. Bicycle racers are thin as heck, and all they eat is sugar. Having one of those around the house was no party! There were packages of pop tarts stashed in every closet, it was like there was going to be a World pop tart shortage or something.

Monday, December 08, 2014, 12:54 PM

Add comment
It may not be the spouse that's the problem, per se, just the result of taking on new habits in the first few years of marriage. I remember plating my dinner to match that of my husbands early on. Since I'm not 6 feet tall, male and 170 pounds, that habit did me no favors!

World wide Pop Tart shortage...that made me laugh.

Monday, December 08, 2014, 1:00 PM

Add comment
Yep. I stated that question like i was 13 because it's socially awful to think or ask such a question: Why did you get so fat so fast? And judging by your dress, you're in denial at the extremity of it.

It's worrisome. If she didn't get out of bed for days and days straight, should I stay silent?? If she started drinking herself to death, do I giggle at her drunkenness at parties? NO.

And as a friend, it IS my business, nay, duty, to be supportive. But how do I be supportive on such an explosive issue? Judging from Peel's tantrum-comment, (to go away) it's impossible.

She is NOT fat and happy. Don't pretend.

Monday, December 08, 2014, 2:34 PM

Add comment
You didn't ask how you should approach someone about a health/mental issue such as not being able to get out of bed for days, eating disorder, depression, etc. You only commented on her outer appearance. As for your saying I should not pretend she is fat and happy, you did not say if she was happy or not. There are overweight people who are just as happy as thin people. If you had asked how you could be supportive when a person is showing signs of depression, etc, you would have gotten support. You asked how you could tell her she has gone from being gorgeious to being fat. Every comment you made in your original post was about outer appearance.

But if you just mis-wrote your question and are sincere, then be proud of your question and sign off with your user name. Maybe I am wrong and misinterpeted your question. By signing off with your username, it will be easy to judge if your are sincere by all your other posts on this website.

Then again I could be completely wrong.

Tuesday, December 09, 2014, 7:09 AM

Add comment
Heres an idea I start thinking about a few months ago based on an article I had. I know a teen who has about 3 pot possessions on his record. Regardless of what you think about pot (I'm for legalization and heavy taxation), these 3 charges have the potential to ruin his life. Now lets take it a step further. Consider shop lifting, petty theft, and many other non-violent crimes. These crimes definitely deserve punishment, but is a single count of these worth destroying a career over? Most businesses will turn you away for any felony conviction and even petty offences. Now I'm not exactly for being soft on crime. But if we want people to lead a straight life and be productive, should we shackle them to never being able to get a decent job because of a single crime. I would propose that a non-violent crime get wiped off your public record after about 4 years. It would remain on a private gov't record forever (so judges can see if you are repeating crimes and therefore deserve harsher sentences), but private individuals and businesses would not see it. I know a person who sold and used pot when younger, tried to scam an insurance company with a false report, and did several other non-violent petty crimes (I know, insurance scamming and selling pot are not petty but the other things he did were). This person paid his way through college, became and engineer, and is the type person everyone would love to have as a neighbor. If not for luck of never getting caught, this person would never be able to have become the success he is.

So what do you think about a "4 year fall off" program where non-violent offences fall off your public record after 4 years of having no other convictions (starting after any jail sentence).

Tuesday, December 09, 2014, 5:42 PM

Add comment
I've been wondering a bit aimlessly the last month, giving a lot of thought to why I stopped on my "new small change every 2 weeks" program that was working so well for about 2 months. I really believe that program is the best I've deviced for creating change in my life, but something was missing. I made changes, but the changes were not translated into habits. So I've been reasearching quite a bit on habit formation and what it takes to create a habit. I'll be talking quite a bit about it in a thread called habit formation in the community tab on the team Progress Not Perfection site if anyone wants to discuss. For defitions sake, a habit is any routine followed consistently, good or bad.

Friday, December 12, 2014, 8:05 AM

Add comment
At lunch today, I was talking to 2 Cat employees who were from China. By talking to them, I realized that one thing that all people have in common across the world is that they all have very low opinions of their politicians (to put it mildly). That gives all of us common ground and binds all the people of the world together in our disgust of our politicians. We need to build on that and together celebrate the one thing we all have in common. So this holiday season, take the time to send a few of your favorite politicians a card thanking them for being so crappy and helping to unite the people of this planet in the one thing we can all agree on.

Wednesday, December 17, 2014, 6:50 AM

Add comment
Prediction on Donald Trump

I must be psychic. I've been saying all along that Donald Trump will yet again announce that he might run for president in 2016. And today, my prediction came true. Donald has announced he might run for president. Yes, the man who has announced he might run for either mayor of NY or president umpteen times and then announced he will not be running the same umpteen times is at it again. The man who is so concerned about our national debt (as am I) feels the nation needs him. Perhaps he can eliminate the debt the same way he did with his businesses and declare bankruptcy for America (4 times he has done this). Yes, this man knows how to get rid of debt.

He could also help pass antigay marriage laws because gay marriage hurts the sanctity of marriage. Trump certainly knows a bit about the sanctity of marriage, just ask Ivana, his first wife (I believe of 3 now). In my opinion, he ranks right up there with Newt Gingrich and Mark Sanford. Now there is a trio that understands marriage sanctity.

My next predictions (as always)_
1. Next year, Donald Trump will announce he is not running for president.
2. All the Republicans candidates will make the journey to say they have spoken to trump, then bow down and kiss his ring.
3. I will not get my wish that Jeb Bush is the Republican candidate because even if he does make a serious run, he will get shot down in the primaries for being too liberal for a Republican (as much as I disliked Bush 2, I like the fact that Jeb is sort of a moderate Republican which is something I could vote for).
4. Ted Cruz will continue to embarrass himself.
5. The tea party will continue to back the most absurd people (Ex: Bridge to nowhere supporter then deny it Sarah Palin, Body has a way of shutting down pregnancies in the case of legitimate rape Todd Akin, and every other word out of her mouth including her latest "We should bomb Iran now" Michelle Bachmann)

If you don't like my thoughts, feel free to counter with your thoughts. I could never get offended in a debate over who is the best turd in the giant cess pool of politicians. I come from Illinois, where 4 of our last 7 governors are or have been in prison (At least its been a bipartisan effort to go to prison, both Repubs and Dem's).


Wednesday, December 17, 2014, 10:45 PM

Add comment
Merry Christmas All

Tuesday, December 23, 2014, 12:57 PM

Add comment
Speaking of cell phones this site is horrible to use on one. I could give you guys a
quote on making it responsive.

Saturday, December 27, 2014, 5:04 PM

Add comment
Ok this should have been a comment under a thread about cell phones...way back up the page.

Saturday, December 27, 2014, 5:07 PM

Add comment

I just read a link posted on another thread about "woo" which I investigated and found interesting. One of the subjects on the link was "Breatharianism". I think this surpassed the "Wolfman" diet in shear stupidity:

Breatharianism is the old/new age idea that one can live without food and drink, and subsist only off of "pranic light." According to practitioners, pranic light is accurate, channelled information from a huge invisible spaceship hovering over North America.

I guarantee you will lose wt on this diet, unless you add in the wt of the coffin you will soon need.

I'm not sure if the stupidity of Breatharianism is surpassed by the hilarity, or if the hilarity is surpassed by the stupidity.

(For some reason, Michelle Bachmann popped into my mind as I was typing the last statement. But that's another story.)

As always, I admit my ability to be wrong on any subject so feel free to contradict me. I never take offense to an opinion.


Tuesday, December 30, 2014, 10:47 AM

Add comment
Who is responsible for children failing in schools?

I read an article today which had a statement that always irks me. It basically spoke of how schools are failing children. This is a pet peeve of mine. For me, it comes back to the 80/20 rule which can be applied to so many things. For childrens education, it is this:
"The school is responsible for 20% of how well your children learn, the parent is responsible for 80%". (my personal belief)
My kids went to a school district that generally scores high on all the normal stats regarding "school performance". My personal belief is that we simply have a community where there are a lot of involved parents. During my kids schooling (1 is now a freshman in college, 1 is a junior in HS), I saw teachers who ranged from "need to be fired" to "excellent". During their schooling, they got a combined total of 2 B's and the rest were all A's. When I went to school, I got everything from A's to C's, yet when I went to college, I graduated Summa Cum Laude. I had the ability to get A's in HS, but my target was simply to average a high B. The difference? My level of involvement in my kids education vs my parents. I know I had what it takes to get mostly A's in HS. Yet it was not a priority from my parents to achieve academically. In my house, my kids knew my expectations. I simply expected straight A's. Now I did explain to them that I would accept a lower grade, but only if I saw them putting in the time on homework, coming to me with problems, and going to the teachers for extra help. If they did all that and still could not get an A, then fine. I

I see to many people blaming all kinds of problems on schools such as poor graduation rates, graduating w/o being able to read, etc. I lean towards the liberal side socially, but most of the blame needs to be assigned to poor parenting. I read an article recently by a teacher at a poor performing school who was distraught by how few parents show up for open houses. How does a parent expect to instill the value of education if they don't show their kids how much they value education by getting off there lazy azz and going to "meet the teacher night". How many of these parents utilize the web to monitor their kids grades? In my district, grades are posted on the web. Yet even in my district, I hear from parents who are "surprised" when they find out their kids got an F in a class. Really? That parent has no right to be surprised when they could have monitored every grades the entire semester. These were the same parents I never saw at meet the teacher nights. They complained that "their kids just refused to do homework or lied to them about getting it done". Really? Couldn't they get off there azz and check the homework? Failure to do homework was not an option in my house. I didn't have to discipline either. Some things were just known not to be options.

I'm not saying there aren't reasons for poor parenting in poor school districts like having parents who didn't graduate, gangs, parents on drugs, parents having kids too early, etc. But even though I'm fairly liberal, I'm not going to be politically correct and try to put the blame on the schools. Excuse me, but on AVERAGE (there are always exceptions), most of the blame for children failing in school (notice I said failing, I didn't say they had to get all A's) is due to poor parenting (and once again, I did not say your children had to get straight A's). Are there poor schools? Yes. But I almost never hear a parent, newspaper, magazine, community activist, or politician say "Most of the blame for so many kids failing in school is due to a lack of involvement on the part of many parents". They always say it's the "failing school". I'm tired of hearing that.

As always, I always welcome opposing views due to my ability to be wrong. Last I checked, God made me human.

Saturday, January 03, 2015, 11:50 PM

Add comment
I agree with you. That said, my sister is moving when her kid is going to be enrolled in school, so that her child can attend a school that doesn't have one of the lowest ratings in the nation (Norfolk, VA). I expect that my sister will be very involved, as her kid, 4, is already into books and computers. But, the school is not just rated poorly academically; it has been investigated for sexual bullying and other abhorrent things that are turned a blind eye to... things that do not set up a good learning environment because no one is being held accountable. What can you do except find a different school. I'm sure you can blame the parents for allowing their kids to exhibit such bad behavior, but they can't be there to watch everything and at some point the administration should step in.

Monday, January 05, 2015, 4:25 PM

Add comment
Your sister is exactly the kind of parent who is in involved and will make sure her children succeed to their full potential. I agree there are crappy schools. I moved out of Peoria (300,000 pop) because I did not want my kids to go to school there. Too many crappy parents not supervising there kids. Can't speak for Norfolk, VA. I do know its painfully hard to for admins and teachers to do much of anything w/ even violent kids. Parents want to sue, race can play a factor inviting organizations to scream and holler, ACLU wants to get involved, etc. My wife is cashier at a pretty good grade school in a pretty middle class town w/ an excellent school system. But even in this town, an "aid" has to ride the buses to control children and then its next to impossible to get a kid kicked off the bus. Sorry to sound old school, but getting my azz spanked from a principle was a definite possibility when I was little. We were brought up knowing that striking a teacher or even mouthing off was just not done. Teachers and admins can't discipline anymore. Too many parents out their who never get involved in their kids education but would definitely get involved as soon as Tommy gets spanked.

Man, I can't stand Rush Limburger but I would love to have his job. Imagine getting paid just for voicing your opinion. I will have to be satisfied w this little thread and forgoe any pay.

By the way, I absolutely love open, friendly debate w/ opposing view points. I never take offense at another opinion. So if anyone ever has one, please post it. I even have friends who support the Tea Party and you can guess what I think of the Tea Party.


Monday, January 05, 2015, 6:31 PM

Add comment
Sanctity of marriage? Give me a definition.

Hey, its been a while. This thought came to me the other day when my wife was saying she saw Jeff Goldblum on TV w/ his pregnant and what appeared to be 20yr old wife. Now, I personally am pro-freedom of marriage (PC speak for I support it), but I have no animosity towards anyone who has a different opinion.

But when I hear congressmen talking about how they are opposed to it because the Bible teaches it, or because that's the way its always been, or because it violates the sanctity of marriage, I have to ask myself:

If 2 gays can not be married because it violates some sanctity, then should:
1. a 20yr old girl be able to legally marry a 50yr old guy (or 80yr as has happened)? I mean, marrying someone your grandfathers age violates my sense of marriage sanctity.
2. a man be able to cheat, remarry, then cheat again, and remarry again? To me, cheating on your spouse violates some sanctity. Lets make it illegal to get married if you've cheated on your wife (of course you can still run for president).

Before people throw around the sanctity of marriage statement for why gays can't marry, they better be ready to make a few other things illegal as well.

As always, I'm never offended by other opinions.

Sunday, January 25, 2015, 8:23 PM

Add comment

Hi Peelout,
I saw your poast asking abt acupuncture and pain. Yes, I have been going to acupuncture or many years and I feel it has helped me immensely. Like any type of tx/service . . . you have to find a practitioner that is reputable and you find success with. Just like w/ OT and PT there are good and great tx go to a great one.

Monday, January 26, 2015, 12:05 AM

Add comment

Hi Peelout,
Question: Why do you think the makers of Peertrainer have not up graded their website?

Monday, January 26, 2015, 12:08 AM

Add comment
reply to random (PP)

random, I don't know much (anything) about websites or their design, but I'm guessing its not easy to make changes to a site. If you notice, there are probably only about 25 different people commenting on any day. Facebook and sites like that have caused internet sites like this to lose most of their customers. I'm guessing (no proof) this site gets opened about 100 times/day (including members and people just surfing). The site makes money based on the amount of advertising (and sales of products). That income is probably based on how much traffic a site gets. Since the site does not get a lot of traffic (and therefore income), it is probably not financially worth the time/cost to make upgrades to improve the cost (have to pay for someone who can do web design). Unfortunately, that leads to a downward spiral. Think of a store that is having fewer and fewer customers. At some point, the owner stops making needed upgrades to the store to save money. Trouble is, then even the loyal customers stop coming. Thats my hunch anyway.

Monday, January 26, 2015, 7:03 AM

Add comment
nice post

you style for this post is good, thanks for sharing wth us SBOBET


Monday, January 26, 2015, 1:58 PM

Add comment
What will I have to show for this year? Part 1

In the past, I focused on making SMART goals, such as reaching a desired wt. Each time I would do this, I would declare "this was the time". Will power would keep me working to reach my goal, and for a few weeks I would eat well and exercise and would lose wt. Sometimes I would get close to my goal, then I would hit that wall all of us understand. The will power and motivation disappeared. It might be due to work, sometimes stress, or sometimes just lack of continued interest. This cycle would unfold several times a year. At the end of the year (been on PT about 3 or 4 years I think), I would be right where I was at the start of the year.

Around mid Dec of 2014 I listened to an audiotape by Charles Duhigg called "The Power of Habit". Since then, I've changed my entire approach to getting healthy. I still have goals, but I no longer daily focus on "the goal". Since reading Duhiggs book, I've been focusing only on creating habits in my life that lead me towards the goal. I've started 3 of these this year and can tell you its made a huge improvement in my life in only the 1st month. I've created 3 new habits that have become as automated as brushing my teeth. Habits are not goals. They are routines you create using the same cue/routine/reward loop used in advertising.

I'm not going to go into how to create a habit here. I've discussed that in detail in my log and the habit formation thread I created on the community tab of Progress Not Perfection 2015. I am going to recommend you try it. Lack of knowledge is not the reason any of us have issues w/ are health. We all know "what" we need to do. The issue has always been in doing it. Doing it is obviously hard. We tend to stop/start/stop over and over again. Duhiggs approach is different. You create small habits that over time will make a big difference. These habits then tend to cascade into other areas of your life.

Lets use exercise as an example. We all know its good for us, but how many of us can honestly say we exercised consistently more than half of last year (or even a few months for many)? Now ask yourself how many times you didn't brush your teeth last year? What if exercise was as automatic as brushing your teeth? Duhiggs book teaches how to make that happen. I made exercising 3 times per week my second habit. I only started with the intention of doing it 3 times/wk but it quickly became a 7 day a week habit. So far this month, I've done some form of exercise 26 out of 26 days. I've never done that before in my life and certainly w/ so little effort. Not all days are intense and not all are at the gym. I have 3 intense days at the gym, 2-3 stretching days, and 1-2 days were I engage in one of my sports. But everyday I have done a planned physical activity over and above my normal activities.

Continued on next thread

Tuesday, January 27, 2015, 7:44 AM

Add comment
What will I have to show for this year? Part 2

This is a continuation of the previous thread.

Now right about now, I would be thinking the same thing you might be thinking. Yeah, yeah, interesting stuff, but its only been one month. New ideas come and go. And your right. I figure it will take me about 6months to prove to myself that this has "lastability" for me. All I'm suggesting is you try it. Think of 1 habit you would like to have created last Jan that if you had done it for one year, you would be happy you did. If you had exercised daily for a year and it was automated, would that make you happy? What if you actually drank that water daily that you've wanted to do for so long? My suggestion is to pick one small change you would like to make for starters. There habits that add something and habits that subtract something. I recommend your first be a habit that adds something new (1 bottle water a day, daily exercise, salad, etc). Taking something aways is entirely doable, but a little more difficult. You want some easy wins for your first couple habits. Eliminating sugar, alcohol, snacking, etc are not easy wins (but are still much easier using Duhiggs process). Use the steps Duhigg teaches (summarized in the habit formation thread on PNP2015. Then focus only on that until you are comfortable it is a habit. It takes 21 days to create a habit is a fallacy (google it). The time to create a habit is dependent on the person, the size of change,and the persons environment. Only you can determine when something is a habit.

The best things about creating habits is that they tend to cascade into other areas of you life. Other changes occur that were not part of the original quest. For instance, I can pretty much guarantee that if you start exercising daily as a habit, some of your eating habits will change for the better. This cascading effect has happened on each of the 3 habits I have created so far this year (no, I did not start them all this at the same time, that is a no-no).

So what is the point of this long winded and not so elequent comment?
If after years of trying to reach your "goal", consider using a strategy to create habits that cause lasting change. Start small and easy, get some quick wins and build confidence. Don't set a goal and then expect your habits to change using will power. Create habits that allow the goal to happen.

Just my thoughts

Tuesday, January 27, 2015, 8:11 AM

Add comment
Snow in the NE

I knew the NE was getting a lot of snow, but it did not hit me how much until tonight when I heard on the news that some places got 6' in 3wks. That blows my mind. Not sure I've ever heard of anything like that before. Probably has, I just don't remember it. I imagine a lot of people are having to shovel their roofs off. Where do you people even shovel the snow to?

Thursday, February 12, 2015, 8:40 PM

Add comment

"habits are first cobwebs than cables"

Tuesday, February 17, 2015, 11:27 PM

Add comment
Thanks ocean. I really like that. Even though I've been exercising everyday since Jan 1, I know my habit is still in the infancy stage. As time goes on, I want it to change from a cobweb to a cable.

Wednesday, February 18, 2015, 7:11 AM

Add comment
Great article

Thank you for sharing a great article,very informative
gili boat prices

Thursday, February 19, 2015, 8:14 PM

Add comment
Its getting serious

I read in the paper today that Trump says he is more serious than ever about running for president. Which since he's announced he might run for something about a dozen times now means he's about as serious as Saturday Night Live. Or maybe as serious as Newt is about marital fidelity.

In other news, yet another Illinois politician busted. Congressman Aaron Schock resigned amidst multiple inquires into his spending. He allegedly reported 170000 miles for mileage reinbursements on a vehicle he just sold w/ 80000 miles, got a loan of $600000 on a $300000 property, used tax payer money for non-government related spending including a concert, and some other things. I'm actually quite saddened. Although I did not agree w/ much of what he did in office, I actually thought he was a very hard working person, seemed pretty honest, and thought he was in office because he had convictions (not mine, but he had them). He might get some new convictions.

Following Schocks resignation, our previous governor Blagodovich, (actually2 governors ago) asked if he could sell Schocks congressional seat (Blago is in jail for trying to sell Obamas previous seat). Illinois politics may be corrupt, but at least its consistent.

Thursday, March 19, 2015, 8:55 PM

Add comment
Democrats best hope to win the white house

Ted Cruz announced he is running for president. 5min later, the Democratic party contributed to his campaign. Oh please let the Republicans pick someone I can vote for. I keep voting Democrat only because the Republicans insist on catering to the Tea Party.

As always, I love rebuttals. All we are debating is who is the best turn in a giant cess pool.

Monday, March 23, 2015, 8:25 PM

Add comment

Related Content:

How To Lose Weight- The Basics
Weight Watchers Points System
The Fat Smash Diet
The Eat To Live Diet
The Beck Diet Solution
How To Get The Motivation To Lose Weight


How To Be Successful Using PEERtrainer

How To Burn Fat
Online Weight Loss Support- How It Works
Does Green Tea Help You Lose Weight?
Tips On Using PEERtrainer
Visit The PEERtrainer Community
Diet and Fitness Resources


Weight Watchers Meetings
Learning To Inspire Others: You Already Are
Writing Down Your Daily Workouts
Spending Money On A Personal Trainer?
How I Became A Marathon Runner


Preventive Health

How To Prevent Injuries During Your Workout
Flu Season: Should You Take The Flu Shot?
Are You Really Ready To Start PEERtrainer?
Super Foods That Can Boost Your Energy
Reversing Disease Through Nutrition

New Diet and Fitness Articles:

Weight Watchers Points Plus
How To Adjust Your Body To Exercise
New: Weight Watchers Momentum Program
New: PEERtrainer Blog Archive
Review Of The New Weight Watchers Momentum Program

Weight Loss Motivation by Joshua Wayne:

Why Simple Goal Setting Is Not Enough
How To Delay Short Term Gratification
How To Stay Motivated
How To Exercise With A Busy Schedule

Real World Nutrition and Fitness Questions

Can Weight Lifting Help You Lose Weight?
Are Protein Drinks Safe?
Nutrition As Medicine?

Everyday Weight Loss Tips

How To Eat Healthy At A Party
How To Eat Out And Still Lose Weight
The Three Bite Rule
Tips On How To Stop A Binge