DAILY DOSE of WELLNESS:Health, Diet, Fitness, Longevity, Mind, Beauty

Any tips, articles, questions or answers, related topics you want to share/discuss?
Send it over.


**********************



If you're so committed to losing weight that you refuse to eat a baked potato for fear of eating empty carbs, you might be missing out on important nutrients and backing your diet into a corner. Open your mind to the truth behind these diet and weight myths and learn how to enjoy some of your favorite foods again.

Myth 1: Potatoes and bread are fattening.
Actually: It's just the opposite. Starchy vegetables and bread (whole-grain bread, that is) are quality carbs needed to fuel every part of you, from your brain to your muscles. What gets you into trouble is how you eat them: Smear butter on a slice of whole-wheat bread or deep-fry potatoes and you can double, triple, or quadruple the calories.

Myth 2: Drinking a glass of water before a meal curbs appetite.
Actually: Yes and no. Water tames appetite if it's incorporated into food, such as soup, or a thick drink, like V8 100% Vegetable Juice. Apparently, when water is bound to food, digestion is slower, explains Elizabeth Somer, RD, author of 10 Habits That Mess Up a Woman's Diet.

That's why women in one study found chicken-rice soup more satisfying than chicken-rice casserole and a glass of water -- even though the soup had 27% fewer calories! One exception to this rule: It's easy to confuse hunger and thirst, so if you find yourself craving something -- but what? -- drink a big glass of water and wait a few minutes. You may find that's what your body really wanted.

Myth 3: Shellfish is high in cholesterol.
Actually: On the one hand, it's true: Just 3 ounces of shrimp delivers more than a third of your daily cholesterol. But there's a surprising flip side to this story: Shrimp is low in saturated fat -- the kind that becomes artery-clogging bad cholesterol -- and has a smidgen of heart-healthy omega-3s. In fact, University of Southern California researchers discovered that eating shellfish, such as shrimp, every week reduced heart attack risk by 59 percent!

Myth 4: The occasional burger and fries won't kill you.
Actually: It depends on your definition of "occasional." If occasional means every Friday night and then some, well, you may be pushing it. But if it means every few months, and you're fit, and you've got good numbers (i.e., weight, waist size, cholesterol, blood pressure), AND you're chowing down on vegetables, whole grains, nuts, and other nutritious fare most other days, hey, you'll live. But few of us are that perfect. If you do occasionally indulge, offset the effects of a fat fiesta with a brisk 90-minute walk afterward.

Myth 5: Women naturally gain weight after menopause.
Actually: While you can blame a lot of things on hormones (everything from acne to PMS), in this case, slowing down physically is far more likely the cause. Study after study has found that older women who exercise regularly and vigorously can maintain their figures.

Myth 6: Diet soda is worse than the real thing.
Actually: We all would be better off switching to water, diluted fruit juice, and green tea rather than drinking soda -- diet or regular. Both types increase kidney and heart disease risk, plus they contain acids that erode tooth enamel, inviting cavities.

Final Fact (this one's no myth): Maintaining your weight, waist, and body mass index at a desirable level can make your RealAge as much as 6 years younger.
http://health.yahoo.com/featured/29/top-diet-myths-exposed/print/

This is interesting. I thought of OT when I came across it.


Not enough shut-eye may raise diabetes risk
Reuters
By Megan Rauscher - Wed Aug 12, 7:28 AM PDT

"Our findings suggest that combining the unhealthy aspects of the Westernized lifestyle with insufficient sleep may add to the risk of overweight and sedentary individuals to develop diabetes," Dr. Plamen Penev, of the University of Chicago, Illinois, and a senior author of the study, told Reuters Health.

Penev and colleagues subjected 11 healthy but sedentary middle-aged men and women to two 14-day periods of sedentary living with free access to food and either 5.5 hours or 8.5 hours of sleep each night.

As nightly sleep times changed from 8.5 to 5.5 hours, the participants went to bed later and got out of bed earlier and, as a result, average sleep duration was reduced by about two hours a day.

When the adults had their bedtimes decreased from a healthy 8.5 hours to 5.5 hours they showed changes in their response to two common sugar tests, which were similar to those seen in people with an increased risk of developing diabetes.

"If confirmed by future larger studies," Penev told Reuters Health, "these results would indicate that a healthy lifestyle should include not only healthy eating habits and adequate amounts of physical activity, but also obtaining a sufficient amount of sleep."

SOURCE: Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, September 2009.

http://health.yahoo.com/news/reuters/us_diabetes_risk-print.html

HotParadox wrote:This is interesting. I thought of OT when I came across it.


Not enough shut-eye may raise diabetes risk
Reuters
By Megan Rauscher - Wed Aug 12, 7:28 AM PDT

"Our findings suggest that combining the unhealthy aspects of the Westernized lifestyle with insufficient sleep may add to the risk of overweight and sedentary individuals to develop diabetes," Dr. Plamen Penev, of the University of Chicago, Illinois, and a senior author of the study, told Reuters Health.

Penev and colleagues subjected 11 healthy but sedentary middle-aged men and women to two 14-day periods of sedentary living with free access to food and either 5.5 hours or 8.5 hours of sleep each night.

As nightly sleep times changed from 8.5 to 5.5 hours, the participants went to bed later and got out of bed earlier and, as a result, average sleep duration was reduced by about two hours a day.

When the adults had their bedtimes decreased from a healthy 8.5 hours to 5.5 hours they showed changes in their response to two common sugar tests, which were similar to those seen in people with an increased risk of developing diabetes.

"If confirmed by future larger studies," Penev told Reuters Health, "these results would indicate that a healthy lifestyle should include not only healthy eating habits and adequate amounts of physical activity, but also obtaining a sufficient amount of sleep."

SOURCE: Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, September 2009.

http://health.yahoo.com/news/reuters/us_diabetes_risk-print.html

Oh Lord I'm gonna die!

The sleep is a problem for me, I can rarely sleep 8 hours at one time. Generaly I sleep for 3 to 4 hours then I'm wide awake. If I try to stay there and get back to sleep I find myself just getting bored, aggravated and I actually get what I call bed fatigue because I get sore from laying there.

Actually I believe what is healthy for you is very dependant on each individual. What's right for one person would be way too much for another. It all depends on your mass, chemical make up, and metabolisim (sp?), along with how active you are. I also think the size of portions at each meal plays a big roll. I'm a firm believer that several small meals throughout the day if far more healthy than the same amount of food shoved into 3 meals. The only true way to lose wieght is exercise along with diet. You can not lose and maintain a weight without excercise, diet alone will only lead to heartbreak and heart attacks.

Personally I think trying to live longer by counting calorie, cholesterol, and fat content of everything causes more harm through stress than it does good. If you were meant to live to be 100, you'll live to be 100. If you were meant to die at 35, you're going to die at 35.

Keep in mind this post is just the opinion of a overweight redneck who has yet to practice what he just preached.

WOW!!!! i'm very impressed, doggieboy. to me, you make a lot of sense. i buy it. Sometimes, i think the results of these studies come out the way the researchers want them to. by that i mean, who really knows what controls they use in the labs and if and how they slant things. I mean, think about it, peanut butter is great for you with one study and causes cancer with the next. What's up w/that?

Exactly. How the study comes out is completely dependant on what variables are present. That's why I pay no attention to polls and most stats unless you poll every one in the area that is concerend. National election and popularity polls are crap unless you poll at least 90% of the entire population. Otherwise you're not getting all the information. And anybody who post the results can put any number they want in the results anyway. jmo

And what olks should always take into consideration is that what will work for one person will not always work for the next person. And sometimes it could have a bad effect. It is usually best to talk to your care giver about things like that.

Here's an interesting one. I like to provide a link with my stuff, but I don't have one. Sorry. NEways, here it is:

Bananas

Containing three natural sugars - sucrose, fructose and glucose combined with fiber, a banana gives an instant, sustained and substantial boost of energy. Research has proven that just two bananas provide enough energy for a strenuous 90-minute workout. No wonder the banana is the number one fruit with the world's leading athletes. But energy isn't the only way a banana can help us keep fit. It can also help overcome or prevent a substantial number of illnesses and conditions, making it a must to add to our daily diet.

Depression:
According to a recent survey undertaken by MIND amongst people suffering from depression, many felt much better after eating a banana. This is because bananas contain Tryptophan, a type of protein that the body converts into serotonin, known to make you relax, improve your mood and generally make you feel happier.

PMS:
Forget the pills --- eat a banana. The vitamin B6 it contains regulates blood glucose levels, which can affect your mood.

Anemia:
High in iron, bananas can stimulate the production of hemoglobin in the blood and so helps in cases of anemia.

Blood Pressure:
This unique tropical fruit is extremely high in potassium yet low in salt, making it the perfect way to beat blood pressure. So much so, the US Food and Drug Administration has just allowed the banana industry to make official claims for the fruit's ability to reduce the risk of blood pressure and stroke.

Brain Power:
200 students at a Twickenham (Middlesex) school were helped through their exams this year by eating bananas at breakfast, break and lunch in a bid to boost their brain power. Research has shown that the potassium-packed fruit can assist learning by making pupils more alert.

Constipation:
High in fiber, including bananas in the diet can help restore normal bowel action, helping to overcome the problem without resorting to laxatives.

Hangovers:
One of the quickest ways of curing a hangover is to make a banana milkshake, sweetened with honey. The banana calms the stomach and, with the help of the honey, builds up depleted blood sugar levels, while the milk soothes and re-hydrates your system.

Heartburn:
Bananas have a natural antacid effect in the body, so if you suffer from heartburn, try eating a banana for soothing relief.

Morning Sickness:
Snacking on bananas between meals helps to keep blood sugar levels up and avoid morning sickness.

Mosquito bites:
Before reaching for the insect bite cream, try rubbing the affected area with the inside of a banana skin. Many people find it amazingly successful at reducing swelling and irritation.

Nerves:
Bananas are high in B vitamins that help calm the nervous system.

Overweight and at work?
Studies at the Institute of Psychology in Austria found pressure at work leads to gorging on comfort food like chocolate and chips. Looking at 5,000 hospital patients, researchers found the most obese were more likely to be in high-pressure jobs. The report concluded that, to avoid panic-induced food cravings, we need to control our blood sugar levels by snacking on high carbohydrate foods every two hours to keep levels steady.

Ulcers:
The banana is used as the dietary food against intestinal disorders because of its soft texture and smoothness. It is the only raw fruit that can be eaten without distress in over-chronicler cases. It also neutralizes over-acidity and reduces irritation by coating the lining of the stomach.

Temperature control:
Many other cultures see bananas as a "cooling" fruit that can lower both the physical and emotional temperature of expectant mothers. In Thailand, for example, pregnant women eat bananas to ensure their baby is born with a cool temperature.

Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD):
Bananas can help SAD sufferers because they contain the natural mood enhancer Tryptophan.

Smoking:
Bananas can also help people trying to give up smoking. The B6 & B12 they contain, as well as the potassium and magnesium found in them, help the body recover from the effects of nicotine withdrawal.

Stress:
Potassium is a vital mineral, which helps normalize the heartbeat, sends oxygen to the brain and regulates your body's water balance. When we are stressed, our metabolic rate rises, thereby reducing our potassium levels. These can be rebalanced with the help of a high-potassium banana snack.

Strokes:
According to research in "The New England Journal of Medicine," eating bananas as part of a regular diet can cut the risk of death by strokes by as much as 40%!

So, a banana really is a natural remedy for many ills. When you compare it to an apple, it has four times the protein, twice the carbohydrates, three times the phosphorus, five times the vitamin A and iron, and twice the other vitamins and minerals. It is also rich in potassium and is one of the best value foods around.. So maybe its time to change that well-known phrase so that we say, "A banana a day keeps the doctor away!"

But no nanners on the fishing boat, it's bad luck.

really? how come?

Don't really know myself, I just know some guys get real testy about bannanas on their boat.

well, don't bring 'em on board. you wouldn't want to rock the boat.

Me rock the boay? Never.

CarolinaHound wrote:Me rock the boay? Never.

rock it, never---capsize it, probably.

CarolinaHound wrote:

HotParadox wrote:This is interesting. I thought of OT when I came across it.


Not enough shut-eye may raise diabetes risk
Reuters
By Megan Rauscher - Wed Aug 12, 7:28 AM PDT

"Our findings suggest that combining the unhealthy aspects of the Westernized lifestyle with insufficient sleep may add to the risk of overweight and sedentary individuals to develop diabetes," Dr. Plamen Penev, of the University of Chicago, Illinois, and a senior author of the study, told Reuters Health.

Penev and colleagues subjected 11 healthy but sedentary middle-aged men and women to two 14-day periods of sedentary living with free access to food and either 5.5 hours or 8.5 hours of sleep each night.

As nightly sleep times changed from 8.5 to 5.5 hours, the participants went to bed later and got out of bed earlier and, as a result, average sleep duration was reduced by about two hours a day.

When the adults had their bedtimes decreased from a healthy 8.5 hours to 5.5 hours they showed changes in their response to two common sugar tests, which were similar to those seen in people with an increased risk of developing diabetes.

"If confirmed by future larger studies," Penev told Reuters Health, "these results would indicate that a healthy lifestyle should include not only healthy eating habits and adequate amounts of physical activity, but also obtaining a sufficient amount of sleep."

SOURCE: Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, September 2009.

http://health.yahoo.com/news/reuters/us_diabetes_risk-print.html

Oh Lord I'm gonna die!

The sleep is a problem for me, I can rarely sleep 8 hours at one time. Generaly I sleep for 3 to 4 hours then I'm wide awake. If I try to stay there and get back to sleep I find myself just getting bored, aggravated and I actually get what I call bed fatigue because I get sore from laying there.

Actually I believe what is healthy for you is very dependant on each individual. What's right for one person would be way too much for another. It all depends on your mass, chemical make up, and metabolisim (sp?), along with how active you are. I also think the size of portions at each meal plays a big roll. I'm a firm believer that several small meals throughout the day if far more healthy than the same amount of food shoved into 3 meals. The only true way to lose wieght is exercise along with diet. You can not lose and maintain a weight without excercise, diet alone will only lead to heartbreak and heart attacks.

Personally I think trying to live longer by counting calorie, cholesterol, and fat content of everything causes more harm through stress than it does good. If you were meant to live to be 100, you'll live to be 100. If you were meant to die at 35, you're going to die at 35.

Keep in mind this post is just the opinion of a overweight redneck who has yet to practice what he just preached.

There is nothing wrong with getting 3 to 4 hours sleep here, and another 3 to 4 hours sleep later. Actually there has been studies done on this. I don't know where I saw the studies on this. I do however remember the studies showed that people who did this were quite productive and happy.

As long as you get around 8 hours sleep in a 24 hour period, it seems that this is healthy. If you were to only get 3 to 4 hours of sleep a day, that would lead to trouble for sure.

One study I saw was about some people who went far into the woods. They had no TV or electricity no cell phones, nothing like that.

They stayed out there for a few months.

The results were that they found as they tuned in with nature. That they would sleep for 3 to 4 hours then wake up, do chores fish and other things. Than get another 3 to 4 hours sleep.

So perhaps this study shows you are in tune with nature.

This also may explain why so many have insomnia.

Everyone is expected to get up at the same time, work the same amount of hours each day and go to bed and get 7 to 8 hours sleep.

Sure we as humans are adaptable. Some people are very good at this.
From what I have seen, getting your 8 hours sleep at two different times in the day seems to be the natural way of doing things.

So don't worry about only getting 3 to 4 hours at a time, it is quite natural.

So once you wake up, after 3 to 4 hours sleep. Don't try to stay in bed trying to get more sleep. Know that later in the day you will get your other 3 to 4 hours sleep.

Theophilus wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:

HotParadox wrote:This is interesting. I thought of OT when I came across it.


Not enough shut-eye may raise diabetes risk
Reuters
By Megan Rauscher - Wed Aug 12, 7:28 AM PDT

"Our findings suggest that combining the unhealthy aspects of the Westernized lifestyle with insufficient sleep may add to the risk of overweight and sedentary individuals to develop diabetes," Dr. Plamen Penev, of the University of Chicago, Illinois, and a senior author of the study, told Reuters Health.

Penev and colleagues subjected 11 healthy but sedentary middle-aged men and women to two 14-day periods of sedentary living with free access to food and either 5.5 hours or 8.5 hours of sleep each night.

As nightly sleep times changed from 8.5 to 5.5 hours, the participants went to bed later and got out of bed earlier and, as a result, average sleep duration was reduced by about two hours a day.

When the adults had their bedtimes decreased from a healthy 8.5 hours to 5.5 hours they showed changes in their response to two common sugar tests, which were similar to those seen in people with an increased risk of developing diabetes.

"If confirmed by future larger studies," Penev told Reuters Health, "these results would indicate that a healthy lifestyle should include not only healthy eating habits and adequate amounts of physical activity, but also obtaining a sufficient amount of sleep."

SOURCE: Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, September 2009.

http://health.yahoo.com/news/reuters/us_diabetes_risk-print.html

Oh Lord I'm gonna die!

The sleep is a problem for me, I can rarely sleep 8 hours at one time. Generaly I sleep for 3 to 4 hours then I'm wide awake. If I try to stay there and get back to sleep I find myself just getting bored, aggravated and I actually get what I call bed fatigue because I get sore from laying there.

Actually I believe what is healthy for you is very dependant on each individual. What's right for one person would be way too much for another. It all depends on your mass, chemical make up, and metabolisim (sp?), along with how active you are. I also think the size of portions at each meal plays a big roll. I'm a firm believer that several small meals throughout the day if far more healthy than the same amount of food shoved into 3 meals. The only true way to lose wieght is exercise along with diet. You can not lose and maintain a weight without excercise, diet alone will only lead to heartbreak and heart attacks.

Personally I think trying to live longer by counting calorie, cholesterol, and fat content of everything causes more harm through stress than it does good. If you were meant to live to be 100, you'll live to be 100. If you were meant to die at 35, you're going to die at 35.

Keep in mind this post is just the opinion of a overweight redneck who has yet to practice what he just preached.

There is nothing wrong with getting 3 to 4 hours sleep here, and another 3 to 4 hours sleep later. Actually there has been studies done on this. I don't know where I saw the studies on this. I do however remember the studies showed that people who did this were quite productive and happy.

As long as you get around 8 hours sleep in a 24 hour period, it seems that this is healthy. If you were to only get 3 to 4 hours of sleep a day, that would lead to trouble for sure.

One study I saw was about some people who went far into the woods. They had no TV or electricity no cell phones, nothing like that.

They stayed out there for a few months.

The results were that they found as they tuned in with nature. That they would sleep for 3 to 4 hours then wake up, do chores fish and other things. Than get another 3 to 4 hours sleep.

So perhaps this study shows you are in tune with nature.

This also may explain why so many have insomnia.

Everyone is expected to get up at the same time, work the same amount of hours each day and go to bed and get 7 to 8 hours sleep.

Sure we as humans are adaptable. Some people are very good at this.
From what I have seen, getting your 8 hours sleep at two different times in the day seems to be the natural way of doing things.

So don't worry about only getting 3 to 4 hours at a time, it is quite natural.

So once you wake up, after 3 to 4 hours sleep. Don't try to stay in bed trying to get more sleep. Know that later in the day you will get your other 3 to 4 hours sleep.

You know that could be very true. When I get up early and go fishing in the morning, I'll come home around 1 and usually sleep for a couple hours during the hot part of the day, then get up and do work outside or go fishing again. I actually feel better when I do that instead of trying to hump it all day.
Yea, I like that. I'm in tune with nature, in tune with the critters....

They Snooze Less, But They Don't Lose
Genetic mutation could explain why some of us function fine on six hours a night.

THURSDAY, Aug. 13 (HealthDay News) -- A lucky few can get by just fine on six hours of sleep, and a new study suggests a genetic mutation might help explain why.

The finding doesn't appear likely to help people with insomnia. Still, it "opens a door" to greater understanding of why people sleep as long as they do, said study co-author Ying-Hui Fu, a professor of neurology at the University of California at San Francisco.

Armed with this research, scientists may be able to eventually develop safe ways to tinker with people's bodies so that they can sleep less, she said. "At the same time, we'll feel fine."

According to Fu, about 5 percent of people get by on six hours or less of sleep a night without any ill effects. "They're perfectly fine, and they don't have a problem," she said. "For them, six hours is like eight hours for me."

For most people, however, eight or 8.5 hours of sleep are best, she said.

"We spend one-third of our life in a state of sleep, and we know that sleep is required. If you deprive any mortal organism of sleep, it will die," Fu said. "But we don't know what is regulating how much we need. That's the bottom line about why this study is exciting."

Fu and her colleagues examined the DNA of a mother and daughter who each get by on about six hours of sleep and compared it to that of other family members. They report their findings in the Aug. 13 online issue of Science.

The researchers found that the women shared a genetic mutation but other members of their family did not. Further research found that mice with the mutation slept less and recovered more quickly after being deprived of sleep.

It's not clear, however, how the mutation actually affects sleep patterns.

Future research could provide more insight into how the mutation works, and Fu said her dream is to find a way to create a drug that would allow people to sleep less.

This could have benefits beyond more wakefulness. Studies have shown that people who sleep an average amount of 30 to 60 minutes below average live the longest, said Dr. Daniel F. Kripke, emeritus professor of psychiatry at the University of California at San Diego.

But genetics are only part of the picture, he said.

"Sleep amounts seem to be determined as much as 50 percent by genetics, and the rest by habits, social and work situations, recreation -- exercise, the Internet and late-night TV -- and environmental factors such as noise and light," he said.

As for the new study, Kripke cautioned that even if the genetic mutation does affect sleep, it's not clear if that helps people who have it. "We do not know if the amount that the people with the variation are sleeping is good or bad for them," he said. "We do not know if the gene effect should be called 'sleep deprivation' or 'enhanced energy.'"

http://health.msn.com/health-topics/articlepage.aspx?cp-documentid=100243381&GT1=31036

HAHA! There HP, take that! Not sure how I feel about being called a mutant though.

lol you can join the X-Men

Yea, Insomnio.

CarolinaHound wrote:They Snooze Less, But They Don't Lose
Genetic mutation could explain why some of us function fine on six hours a night.

THURSDAY, Aug. 13 (HealthDay News) -- A lucky few can get by just fine on six hours of sleep, and a new study suggests a genetic mutation might help explain why.

The finding doesn't appear likely to help people with insomnia. Still, it "opens a door" to greater understanding of why people sleep as long as they do, said study co-author Ying-Hui Fu, a professor of neurology at the University of California at San Francisco.

Armed with this research, scientists may be able to eventually develop safe ways to tinker with people's bodies so that they can sleep less, she said. "At the same time, we'll feel fine."

According to Fu, about 5 percent of people get by on six hours or less of sleep a night without any ill effects. "They're perfectly fine, and they don't have a problem," she said. "For them, six hours is like eight hours for me."

For most people, however, eight or 8.5 hours of sleep are best, she said.

"We spend one-third of our life in a state of sleep, and we know that sleep is required. If you deprive any mortal organism of sleep, it will die," Fu said. "But we don't know what is regulating how much we need. That's the bottom line about why this study is exciting."

Fu and her colleagues examined the DNA of a mother and daughter who each get by on about six hours of sleep and compared it to that of other family members. They report their findings in the Aug. 13 online issue of Science.

The researchers found that the women shared a genetic mutation but other members of their family did not. Further research found that mice with the mutation slept less and recovered more quickly after being deprived of sleep.

It's not clear, however, how the mutation actually affects sleep patterns.

Future research could provide more insight into how the mutation works, and Fu said her dream is to find a way to create a drug that would allow people to sleep less.

This could have benefits beyond more wakefulness. Studies have shown that people who sleep an average amount of 30 to 60 minutes below average live the longest, said Dr. Daniel F. Kripke, emeritus professor of psychiatry at the University of California at San Diego.

But genetics are only part of the picture, he said.

"Sleep amounts seem to be determined as much as 50 percent by genetics, and the rest by habits, social and work situations, recreation -- exercise, the Internet and late-night TV -- and environmental factors such as noise and light," he said.

As for the new study, Kripke cautioned that even if the genetic mutation does affect sleep, it's not clear if that helps people who have it. "We do not know if the amount that the people with the variation are sleeping is good or bad for them," he said. "We do not know if the gene effect should be called 'sleep deprivation' or 'enhanced energy.'"

http://health.msn.com/health-topics/articlepage.aspx?cp-documentid=100243381&GT1=31036

HAHA! There HP, take that! Not sure how I feel about being called a mutant though.

I saw that article yesterday and meant to post it. Pretty interesting.

I honestly do not remember the last time I had a solid nights sleep. I can only sleep for a couple of hours and then I will wake up. Only on rare occasions will I even stay in bed for 6 hours. I will occasionally take an hours nap during the day but not often.

Imagine if you had that problem and were not retired OT. You and I, for the most part, if we feel like taking a nap in the day there's usually no reason we can't. But somebody that's working a steady job has a ruff time of it. And in some that lack of sleep adds up and eventually affects them by heart conditions and other diseases. They fall in the trap of drinking coffee and popping caffine pills or energy drinks to meet production at work and try to meet the obligations they have to their children and spouses.

Our society has gotten to the point where the need to have "more" is causing us to kill ourselves slowly. Sadly even if you decide you have enough, it's all a couple can do anymore to maintain what they have. And it's even worse for the number of single parents who are trying their best to give their kids the things they never had. It's all they can do to support not having much of anything. It's almost as if we, the human species, has created our own twilight zone senerio of slow torture, with no way out.


(side note, the kids are the ones that get pushed to the side when there is a lack of time, which is what I believe the major cause of alot of those kids troubles.)

Ok, I'm done preaching now.

And what a fine job of preaching you have done my fine feathered friend. What you are saying is entirely true in my honest opinion. I do remember in my younger years I used to work hard and loved it. I also could fall asleep on a moments notice and sleep like a rock for 8 to 9 hours with no problem. Today I take nothing to help me sleep. I get a really bad headache if I do. And yep I can take a nap and not have to worry about it. Maybe we should go to the kind of scenerio like they had in the movie Logan's Run. It was an effective way to control the population even if it ws a bit harsh.

I just think we need to get over the need to have $500,000 homes and $50,000 cars. And realize that not buying our kids the latest video game system, or fashion they see all the other kids having is not child abuse.

CarolinaHound wrote:I just think we need to get over the need to have $500,000 homes and $50,000 cars. And realize that not buying our kids the latest video game system, or fashion they see all the other kids having is not child abuse.

bingo, baby.

Of course, check w/your doctor....


http://health.yahoo.com/experts/weightloss/2181/are-eggs-healthy-for-weight-loss/print/

Are Eggs Healthy for Weight Loss?
Johns Hopkins University
By Margaret Furtado, M.S., R.D. - Posted on Fri, Jul 17, 2009, 2:26 pm PDT

A new study in the online journal entitled Risk Analysis reports that eating one egg a day accounts for less than 1 percent of the risk of heart disease, the leading killer of American men and women. This, in my opinion, helps deflate the myth that all eggs are always bad for you and can never be included in a heart-healthy meal plan.

The researchers cited lifestyle factors, such as a poor diet, smoking, obesity, and a sedentary lifestyle as chief contributors (30 to 40 percent) of someone's heart disease risk, with men having higher risks than women. Risk factors that could be potentially treated, such as high blood pressure and diabetes, accounted for a whopping 60 to 70 percent of the risk. In this light, a single egg doesn't seem so big a threat.

Eggs have gotten a lot of bad press of late. There seems to be a constant drumbeat, perhaps in the media, about eggs being off-limits if you want to keep your heart healthy. (Just today, I was seeing a patient of mine with young children and, coincidentally, one of his daughters asked me, "Are eggs bad for you?")

Instead of worrying about an egg a day, I think we should turn our attention to the potential risks of stress (especially chronic stress), physical inactivity, and poor overall diet choices (like diets high in junk foods and low in fruits and vegetables).

This research, which was (full disclosure) funded by the Egg Nutrition Center, serves to further substantiate the premise that healthy adults really can eat (whole) eggs without upping their heart disease risk significantly. And what's more, the authors noted that their analysis did not adjust for all the health-promoting benefits of eggs, which might decrease some heart disease risk.

What is it about eggs that could actually help your heart?

* Eggs are high in choline, an organic, water-soluble nutrient that's usually grouped in with the B vitamins. They are also high in betaine, a nutrient related to choline. Together these 2 are associated with lower levels of homocysteine (an amino acid that studies has shown to be related to a higher risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, and peripheral vascular disease). It's good to keep homocysteine levels under control because high homocysteine levels usually suggest chronic inflammation, a process that has been linked with heart disease, as well as to Alzheimer's disease and dementia. Treatment of a high homocysteine level usually involves supplementation of the B vitamin folic acid—but don't take more than 1,000 micrograms—1 gram—a day, or it can mask a vitamin B12 deficiency.
* Eggs are a great source of high-quality (or high biological value, HBV) protein; in fact, they are considered to be the best overall source of protein.
* Eggs provide 13 essential vitamins/minerals, including riboflavin, an important B vitamin needed to help your body get energy from food. Eggs also contain vitamin D, a fat-soluble vitamin lacking in the diet of many Americans. People who are overweight and/or have diabetes are at a higher risk for vitamin D deficiency.
* Eggs also help you feel full, since your body produces a hormone called PYY when you eat high-protein foods. PYY tells your brain you're no longer hungry, so if you're trying to lose some pounds, opting for a high-protein snack like a boiled egg can really help you feel full (and it's only 75 calories). I personally like the organic eggs high in omega 3 fatty acids (the healthy fats), from chickens raised without hormones or chemicals. These eggs are higher in omega 3s because of the healthier feed given to the chickens. The high-omega-3 eggs add another possible benefit to a balanced diet.

However, if, for whatever reason, you want to keep the fat and cholesterol content in your diet low, eat the egg whites and skip the yolk, since all the protein (and virtually none of the fat) is in the whites. There are even cartons of pure egg whites in the grocery store that make it easy. Or you could separate the eggs at home by discarding the yolks, or at least a few of them. This study, however, seems to be suggesting that even the egg yolk isn't anywhere near the health risk people have perceived it to be for all these years. They're also a very affordable source of protein, a big plus in today's economy!

Bottom line: If you really like whole eggs, and your doctor or dietitian thinks they're fine for you, then go ahead and enjoy them, yolks and all!

Yep the yolks on them. Make mine bacon and two eggs over easy with hash browns.

I eat a few raw egg whites several times a week for recovery after the gym. I reckon they're the quickest, easiest source of protein short of buying those ridiculously expensive energy drinks, and with no yolks there's no cholesterol.

I'll take mine fried with a runny yolk. Makes good toast and biscut soppin!

CarolinaHound wrote:INSOMNIO!!

Insomnio, Immortalus and Paradox Lady

That's the way I have 'em as well when I'm eating them for breakfast I cook them in loads of butter as well.


A healthy alternative to regular scrambled eggs is to use only 1 egg yolk for 6 egg whites. It tastes exactly the same but has 1/6th the fat and cholesterol. I don't particularly like scrambled eggs though, so I tend not to do this anymore.

Aint it enough that I throw away the shell?? Actually I put the shells in the compost for my garden, never waste nothin.

CarolinaHound wrote:Aint it enough that I throw away the shell?? Actually I put the shells in the compost for my garden, never waste nothin.

Lol. I was eating them almost every day until the cold weather stopped me running in the mornings. I'm sure eating them whole every now and then is ok, but not every day. I certainly eat the whole thing when I'm cooking a proper breakky with bacon, tomato etc.

Kazza wrote:

CarolinaHound wrote:Aint it enough that I throw away the shell?? Actually I put the shells in the compost for my garden, never waste nothin.

Lol. I was eating them almost every day until the cold weather stopped me running in the mornings. I'm sure eating them whole every now and then is ok, but not every day. I certainly eat the whole thing when I'm cooking a proper breakky with bacon, tomato etc.

I watched Rocky when I was 16 and got it in my head I was going to be a boxer. I'd been working out with weights for a bit and was firming up pretty good anyway. Wasn't doing the running though untill I watched that movie. Decided I'd better start running, note I'd already been smoking for three years. Got off work one morning came home got in my sweats and opened the fridge and cracked an egg into a glass. Figured the best thing to do was to throw my head back and choke it down in one gulp. Won't too crazy about the raw egg idea anyway, but Rocky did it, had to be the way to go about things. So I put the glass to my mouth, back went the head, down went the egg, and right back up came the egg. After I finally stopped gaging, I lit a smoke and never did start running.

Lol. I combine them with a spoon of milo and some water, and then mix it up real good. If you do that then you can't taste the egg at all, but if there's still some unmixed egg in there then the feeling of that sliding down my throat is enough to make me gag.

I think I'll just go with the ole Protien and energy shake from GNC or something. Nice malt chocolate falvor. lol

Those are good. I was using those for a while, but it got too expensive for me. Another alternative is skim milk powder. You can buy it from the supermarket for 1/4 the cost of those protein shakes, and it has practically the same amount of protein in it. Just add some chocolate flavouring.

Kazza wrote:Those are good. I was using those for a while, but it got too expensive for me. Another alternative is skim milk powder. You can buy it from the supermarket for 1/4 the cost of those protein shakes, and it has practically the same amount of protein in it. Just add some chocolate flavouring.

That's the best idea I've heard yet re:protein shakes. Thanks, K.

HotParadox wrote:

Kazza wrote:Those are good. I was using those for a while, but it got too expensive for me. Another alternative is skim milk powder. You can buy it from the supermarket for 1/4 the cost of those protein shakes, and it has practically the same amount of protein in it. Just add some chocolate flavouring.

That's the best idea I've heard yet re:protein shakes. Thanks, K.

Hi ya HP!