 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / October 2006Meaningful Cubicle Exercises
Alright I really need to butch up. I'm defintely slipping, and I think I need to go back to my calorie counting, even if a larger porportion of that is guesstimate. Do you think pushups and situps could usefully be incorporated to a workday, like 3 or 4 breaks of 10 pushups and 20-30 situps each? It still doesn't answer the question of aerobic activity, but still. Kirk, 227, 2-m'f'in-14, 180  SignatureQUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal "The real problem with having mind-controlled zombies as my servants is that it's tough to get up a really sincere-sounding round of cheers when I've come up with a plan I think is worth cheering." --Maximus, X-Factor > Alright I really need to butch up. I'm defintely slipping, and I think I > need to go back to my calorie counting, even if a larger porportion of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Kirk, 227, 2-m'f'in-14, 180 Like any other WOE change it's basically a change you're making for the rest of your life. If you don't intend to do "3 or 4 breaks of 10 pushups and 20-30 situps each" for the rest of your life, it's no different than temporary fixes like diet pills or fad diets. It'll work while you're doing it, but reverse as soon as you quit. SignatureCheese http://cheesensweets.com/contacts/cheese.php > Like any other WOE change it's basically a change you're making for the > rest of your life. If you don't intend to do "3 or 4 breaks of 10 > pushups and 20-30 situps each" for the rest of your life, it's no > different than temporary fixes like diet pills or fad diets. It'll work > while you're doing it, but reverse as soon as you quit. I understand that completely. My hope, faint as it may be, that there might be some property of "smoke break worksouts" that would prove more durable and permanent than the "20 minute daily" routines I've looked to apply before, and haven't stuck with. I mean, during the workday I'm already in need of small quick breaks anyway, right? Half the time when I go for a poor-decision snacky, it's an angst-reduction technique, my brain needs a chance to step back and ponder before I dive back into the coding. If I could pull a bait-and-switch, get the distance I need via someting with a small exercise benefit rather than a nutritional detriment, and do that all the time and for the rest of my working career, it would put me ahead of the game. SignatureQUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal A program should follow the 'Law of Least Astonishment'. What is this law? It is simply that the program should always respond to the user in the way that astonishes him least. --Tao of Programming, > > Like any other WOE change it's basically a change you're making for the > > rest of your life. If you don't intend to do "3 or 4 breaks of 10 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > durable and permanent than the "20 minute daily" routines I've looked to > apply before, and haven't stuck with. Hi Kirk, I think this might be a good ADDITION to your regular workout routine, but not a good replacement. It sounds like you are trying to duck a committment to exercise. > I mean, during the workday I'm already in need of small quick breaks > anyway, right? Half the time when I go for a poor-decision snacky, it's an [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > a nutritional detriment, and do that all the time and for the rest of my > working career, it would put me ahead of the game. Yes, it is a good alternative. Exercise is good. Just don't count on odd scraps of time in the office to accomplish a lot. While on the subject,. today I needed to get a paper file from one side of the building to the other. What an opportunity to go for a run! Fortunately there was no one in the way of the 285 pound freight train that came storming through the halls. I was winded and happy! Next time I should wear sneakers instead of wing-tips. :-( Neil 385/285/220 >While on the subject,. today I needed to get a paper file from one side >of the building to the other. What an opportunity to go for a run! >Fortunately there was no one in the way of the 285 pound freight train >that came storming through the halls. I was winded and happy! Next time >I should wear sneakers instead of wing-tips. :-( I used to run through the building sometimes when I worked on weekends. I think I'd have felt a bit self-conscious doing it when other people were around, though. (My building had a 200-yard long straight hallway in the finished cellar, and it was popular with exercise walkers when weather was bad outside. I used to do that sometimes in the past -- never tried running it, though -- generally there would have been walkers in the way. The building also had a gym but I didn't belong to it, as I preferred my more full-featured gym.) Chris 262/130s/130s started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004 > >While on the subject,. today I needed to get a paper file from one side > >of the building to the other. What an opportunity to go for a run! [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > weekends. I think I'd have felt a bit self-conscious doing it when > other people were around, though. I was 385 pounds. Running in the office looks sane next to that. :-) Neil 385/285/220 > Alright I really need to butch up. I'm defintely slipping, and I think I > need to go back to my calorie counting, even if a larger porportion of > that is guesstimate. Guessing doesn't work. Count them correctly or don't bother. > > Alright I really need to butch up. I'm defintely slipping, and I think I > > need to go back to my calorie counting, even if a larger porportion of > > that is guesstimate. > Guessing doesn't work. Count them correctly or don't bother. Reasonable estimates do, sweetie. And are certainly better than "not bothering". Being off by, say, +/- 200 calories a day is fine, especially if its the process and accountability that comes from recording gets someone to have 1000 calories less a day. Same old queen, same old mediocre advice. SignatureQUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal You Shall Not Subject Your God To Market Forces! --Book of Om, Chap. IV v.6b ("Small Gods",Terry Pratchett) > > > Alright I really need to butch up. I'm defintely slipping, and I think I > > > need to go back to my calorie counting, even if a larger porportion of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Reasonable estimates do, sweetie. Kirk, "guesstimate" and "reasonable estimate" are not one and the same. It's not fair to change your meanings midstream. And are certainly better than "not > bothering". Being off by, say, +/- 200 calories a day is fine, especially > if its the process and accountability that comes from recording gets > someone to have 1000 calories less a day. > > Same old queen, same old mediocre advice. I thought her advice was fine. Any serious calorie counting is "reasonable estimate" simply because food isn't like a car part on an assembly line. One apple is slightly larger than another, one cut of meat has slightly more fat, etc. However, a "guesstimate" strikes me as pulling a calorie total out of the air. Neil 385/285/220 > > > > Alright I really need to butch up. I'm defintely slipping, and I think I > > > > need to go back to my calorie counting, even if a larger porportion of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > > Reasonable estimates do, sweetie. > Kirk, "guesstimate" and "reasonable estimate" are not one and the same. > It's not fair to change your meanings midstream. With all due respect, I believe "guesstimate" and "reasonable estimate" to be roughly synonymous. In my profession of software engineering, at least, you have "WAG" (wild a.s guess), "guess", and "guesstimate", in decreasing order of uncertainty. (Unfortunately, the schedules seem to be more likely built against the WAG side of things.) > I thought her advice was fine. Any serious calorie counting is > "reasonable estimate" simply because food isn't like a car part on an > assembly line. One apple is slightly larger than another, one cut of > meat has slightly more fat, etc. However, a "guesstimate" strikes me as > pulling a calorie total out of the air. You estimate the portion size, the general kind of ingredients, come up with a number, than multiply by 1.5. Plus, you try to keep your daily targts lower WELL lower than the "break even" point for the day, calorie wise, to compensate for any excessive optimism. SignatureQUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal BAR JOKE #11 A man walks into a bar. He has a few drinks and chats with the bartender. Later that night, he goes home and reflects on the poor decisons he's made in life. > > > > > Alright I really need to butch up. I'm defintely slipping, and I think I > > > > > need to go back to my calorie counting, even if a larger porportion of [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > With all due respect, I believe "guesstimate" and "reasonable estimate" to > be roughly synonymous. Why respect me? No one else does. :-) I thought this little 'discussion' between you and Queen came down to a matter of word-meaning. I'll let Her Majesty debate meanings with you, if she feels so inclined. I am done. In my profession of software engineering, at least, > you have "WAG" (wild a.s guess), "guess", and "guesstimate", in decreasing > order of uncertainty. (Unfortunately, the schedules seem to be more likely [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > targts lower WELL lower than the "break even" point for the day, calorie > wise, to compensate for any excessive optimism. OK. I would advise that the final pounds are more difficult to get off than the first ones, so perhaps more precise calorie counting is in order here. Compare it to sculpture; first you hack off large chunks of the stone, and then you work on detail. Good to see you are posting again, Kirk. Good progress! Now finish it off! Neil 385/285/220 > I thought this little 'discussion' between you and Queen came down to a > matter of word-meaning. I'll let Her Majesty debate meanings with you, > if she feels so inclined. I am done. Well, you were right to call me out at possibly changing definition midargument, but that really wasn't my intention. > OK. I would advise that the final pounds are more difficult to get off > than the first ones, so perhaps more precise calorie counting is in > order here. Compare it to sculpture; first you hack off large chunks of > the stone, and then you work on detail. That's fair enough. For the most part, it's the social setting issues that provide the biggest calorie counting challenges... I think having a host understand that I'm taking a smaller portion is fine, but saying that I'll only eat what has been carefully measured on a per ingredient basis seems to be pushing it. Kirk, 227,212,180 SignatureQUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal So, if happiness isn't being rich, then it's probably not being middle class, which means you're just as likely to find it at rock bottom, which doesn't require all the effort, and hell, I'm already there. --"Staggering Heights" kisrael@sunfire12.eecs.tufts.edu wrote: > That's fair enough. For the most part, it's the social setting > issues that provide the biggest calorie counting challenges... I think > having a host understand that I'm taking a smaller portion is fine, but > saying that I'll only eat what has been carefully measured on a per > ingredient basis seems to be pushing it. In cases where I have to guess the caloric content I try to be very conservative. I may be logging twice as many calories as I'm actually consuming. I'd rather err on the side of too few calories. Also, I try to eat very slowly, so as to avoid the "Oh! You must've been starving. Here, have some more." SignaturePhil M. > kisrael@sunfire12.eecs.tufts.edu wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > eat very slowly, so as to avoid the "Oh! You must've been starving. Here, > have some more." Yes, but you're wise and cautious and have been doing this for a while. Most people, especially people who do not have extensive experience in carefully counting calories (woo, double alliteration!), do not err on the side of caution. They tend to grossly underestimate the number of calories in most things. "Guesstimating" is a bad idea for beginners. > > kisrael@sunfire12.eecs.tufts.edu wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > "Guesstimating" is a bad idea for beginners. Agreed. > > I thought this little 'discussion' between you and Queen came down to a > > matter of word-meaning. I'll let Her Majesty debate meanings with you, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > saying that I'll only eat what has been carefully measured on a per > ingredient basis seems to be pushing it. No one is asking you to make the host break down the contents of the food.But there are ways you can cut down on the calories you are taking in. For instance, if they are serving chicken, remove the skin. Ask that they don't serve you gravy. Etc.... > Kirk, 227,212,180 Keep up the good work! Neil 385/285/220 > No one is asking you to make the host break down the contents of the > food.But there are ways you can cut down on the calories you are taking > in. For instance, if they are serving chicken, remove the skin. Ask > that they don't serve you gravy. Etc.... Right. In the case of the stew, it was the portion I could request to be smaller, which I did. While obviously that helps with the larger goal of eating less, it doesn't help with the smaller goal of accurate calorie counting. > > Kirk, 227,212,180 > Keep up the good work! Thanks, Kirk 227,211,180 SignatureQUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal "It's the cracked ones who let all the light into the world." --writer from my Tufts writing class > > No one is asking you to make the host break down the contents of the > > food.But there are ways you can cut down on the calories you are taking [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > While obviously that helps with the larger goal of eating less, it doesn't > help with the smaller goal of accurate calorie counting. I hope you will forgive me for a chess comparison. When I was a scholastic tournament director, I was often asked "What happens when I am keeping my scoresheet and I forget a move or mess up?" My answer to the kids is the same as my answer to you: "Start keeping score again on your next move." Skip the stew and move on. Now, if you wind up skipping moves, err, food items constantly, then there's a problem. > > > Kirk, 227,212,180 > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > "It's the cracked ones who let all the light into the world." > --writer from my Tufts writing class Can't agree with the quotation, Kirk. Many people who let "light" into the world are perfectly ordinary. Shakespeare, for instance, had so boring a life that cranks feel the need to invent alternate authors of the canon. Neil 385/285/220 > > QUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal > > "It's the cracked ones who let all the light into the world." > > --writer from my Tufts writing class > Can't agree with the quotation, Kirk. Many people who let "light" into > the world are perfectly ordinary. Shakespeare, for instance, had so > boring a life that cranks feel the need to invent alternate authors of > the canon. I agree, I like the quote more for its sound than its sense. I did a high school paper on the authorship of Shakespeare... wrote it in the form of a dialog. Managed to get a high-A on it in both history and english even though it was laregely cribbed from a set of Atlantic articles... not my proudest academic moment, in retrospect. SignatureQUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal "Stupid people see beauty only in beautiful things." --Oliviero Toscani quoting Dadaist Saying > With all due respect, I believe "guesstimate" and "reasonable estimate" to > be roughly synonymous. In my profession of software engineering, at least, > you have "WAG" (wild a.s guess), "guess", and "guesstimate", in decreasing > order of uncertainty. (Unfortunately, the schedules seem to be more likely > built against the WAG side of things.) So that's like frob, twiddle and tweak for control dials, right? ;^) > > > Alright I really need to butch up. I'm defintely slipping, and I think I > > > need to go back to my calorie counting, even if a larger porportion of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > if its the process and accountability that comes from recording gets > someone to have 1000 calories less a day. You've already proven that you don't know what a reasonable estimate is. It didn't work the first time, and it's going to continue not to work. > Same old queen, same old mediocre advice. I'm not the one gaining weight because I can't follow a simple plan. > You've already proven that you don't know what a reasonable estimate is. > It didn't work the first time, and it's going to continue not to work. Actually, you're wrong. the first phase of my plan petered out when I *stopped* guesstimating calories, *because of "your" kind of thinking* in the matter: I'm on the road on a business trip, don't have access to easily "nutrition info" for the food I have available, calorie count or composition, so I let it go, and didn't resume even when I was back in my regular daily circumstances. The act of calorie counting, getting "exact" counts when avaiable, making estimates when not, with a lower than neccesary target to account for some of the wiggleroom, is, by itself, a technique that I personally, and I think others, find useful element in fufilling that first rule of dieting "eat less". Saying get out your god damn micrometer or "don't bother" is an idiotic form of black and white thinking. Kirk 227/212/180 SignatureQUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal BAR JOKE #11 A man walks into a bar. He has a few drinks and chats with the bartender. Later that night, he goes home and reflects on the poor decisons he's made in life. >> You've already proven that you don't know what a reasonable estimate is. >> It didn't work the first time, and it's going to continue not to work. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the food I have available, calorie count or composition, so I let it go, > and didn't resume even when I was back in my regular daily circumstances. You can download the USDA nutrient data base http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=8964/ and burn it on to a CD or put it on a memory stick. I assume that you'd either have a laptop with you or some kind of computer access in your work on the business trip. Not as easy access as you'd have at home but better than nothing. The standalone version of fitday also has a pretty extensive food database. It's $20.00, though. I run mine off a memory stick which I carry around with me. Tonia > Guessing doesn't work. Count them correctly or don't bother. a) that doesn't make sense b) insofar as I can assume I know what you mean, IMNSHO you're wrong, and c) that's not a very nice thing to say . . . . . . so I'm assuming this is something personal, an assumption that appears to borne out by the rest of this thread so far, so I'm simply voicing my annoyance and moving on. If guess-timating calories didn't "work," nobody would ever lose weight by counting calories consumed, and/or calories burned, and/or food portions. In fact, lots of people lose weight by guess-timating calories. ep > If guess-timating calories didn't "work," nobody would ever lose weight by > counting calories consumed, and/or calories burned, and/or food portions. > In fact, lots of people lose weight by guess-timating calories. You can't "guess" until you already have a solid grasp of what it entails. Kirk does not. > > If guess-timating calories didn't "work," nobody would ever lose weight by > > counting calories consumed, and/or calories burned, and/or food portions. > > In fact, lots of people lose weight by guess-timating calories. > You can't "guess" until you already have a solid grasp of what it > entails. Kirk does not. Based on the way I lost weight *when I was sticking to my calorie counting routine*, guesstimates and all, you're still wrong. SignatureQUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal "It's the cracked ones who let all the light into the world." --writer from my Tufts writing class > > Guessing doesn't work. Count them correctly or don't bother. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > ep Hi Edna, Queen and Kirk have a history of such 'discussions.' I think Queen is right in this instance. I spent years "guesstimating" my calories. FFIDs do it all the time. That way they can tell themselves they are 'eating light' while packing it in. I still remember when the light dawned for me. On the 8th of January, 2006, I sat down and added up my calories for the day. I was horrified to discover that my 'light' eating was over 3000 calories! I ceased to be a FFID from that moment. Neil 385/285/220 > > Guessing doesn't work. Count them correctly or don't bother. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > ep Hi Edna, Queen and Kirk have a history of such 'discussions.' I think Queen is right in this instance. I spent years "guesstimating" my calories. FFIDs do it all the time. That way they can tell themselves they are 'eating light' while packing it in. I still remember when the light dawned for me. On the 8th of January, 2006, I sat down and added up my calories for the day. I was horrified to discover that my 'light' eating was over 3000 calories! I ceased to be a FFID from that moment. Neil 385/285/220 >> Guessing doesn't work. Count them correctly or don't bother. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > ep I think there's a posting history there that you aren't aware of.. in and of itself, there's a reason for what she says.. She's rude.. as always.. but she does have a point. Will~ Do you have access to a shower at work? I wouldn't want to work with someone who's been doing push up and sit ups all day without shower.. Will~ > Alright I really need to butch up. I'm defintely slipping, and I think I > need to go back to my calorie counting, even if a larger porportion of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Kirk, 227, 2-m'f'in-14, 180 > Do you think pushups and situps could usefully be incorporated to a > workday, like 3 or 4 breaks of 10 pushups and 20-30 situps each? It still > doesn't answer the question of aerobic activity, but still. Useful for what? It's not likely to hurt anything; go for it. > Do you think pushups and situps could usefully be incorporated to a > workday, like 3 or 4 breaks of 10 pushups and 20-30 situps each? It still > doesn't answer the question of aerobic activity, but still. Maybe you need to get one of those exercise bike desks for your cubicle? http://www.slimgeek.com/ >> Do you think pushups and situps could usefully be incorporated to a >> workday, like 3 or 4 breaks of 10 pushups and 20-30 situps each? It still >> doesn't answer the question of aerobic activity, but still. > > Maybe you need to get one of those exercise bike desks for your > cubicle? http://www.slimgeek.com/ I suggested that the college I work for get those for all us office workers. The other office workers thought it was a neat idea. The administration didn't. It's easier to hire a replacement when we get too sick to work and let the state pay the disability costs than take proactive steps to keep us healthy! >> Maybe you need to get one of those exercise bike desks for your >> cubicle? http://www.slimgeek.com/ > > I suggested that the college I work for get those for all us office workers. > The other office workers thought it was a neat idea. The administration > didn't. I think it might be neat as well but, well, my cubicle is in a large wing with maybe about 60 or 70 peoplei in the same area. What if they were all pedaling and sweating? I think the air conditioning would need some upgrading :) > It's easier to hire a replacement when we get too sick to work and > let the state pay the disability costs than take proactive steps to keep us > healthy! That's for sure, always. Or actually in my country, there are at least some small efforts by employers to support exercising. For example, in my company they finally started with what are known as "exercise bills" which can be used to purchase gym memberships and such, in places who have chosen to accept those bills. We emplyees have to pay 25% of the nomination only. There's a limit of how much of these bills can be had per year however, so I can get maybe half a years' gym membership for 25%, but have to pay full price for the other half. In my previous job, I could get 50% of my money back against pretty much any exercise activity, as long as I had a receipt. At most 32 euros per month, though. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.