Archive

Monthly Archives: June 2012

On a recent trip to my partner’s parent’s home we drove along a quiet highway in south east Wisconsin. Evening time, sun setting, rolling hills. And hot, hot, hot. As we came over a hill we saw a woman walking. In her workout gear she was obviously walking for exercise. Good to see.

This woman was overweight, she looked warm and she looked tired. Yet she was doing it. She was walking. She was exercising. My guess is that this was the last thing she wanted to be doing at that moment, slogging up a hill in the heat in the rolling hills of Wisconsin. Or maybe it’s where she truly wanted to be. Maybe a place she needed to be. For her. Maybe she came to a place in her mind that begged her to go for a walk. To get healthier. Maybe she found that place deep inside her that said, “Go for a walk, I know it’s late, but do it. One step at a time.”

The more I think about it that woman probably did want to be there. Good for you, Ms. Lady Walking up the Wisconsin Hills. I’ll,never know your name but I’m incredibly proud of you.

And that leads to today’s food rule, borrowing from Nike:

Just do it. Go for a walk, eat a carrot, call a friend. Do something for your health. Today. If only for today. Start.

Happy Friday.

Much has been of the recent study demonstrating that a low glycemic diet is good for energy expenditure during the maintenance phase of a weight loss program and all things blood (triglycerides, cholesterol, etc).  The study was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, an incredibly prestigious journal thus giving it a aura of credibility that publishing in “Weight Loss for Big People” get you.  People paid attention.  The New York Times wrote it up as did the Wall Street Journal.  Talk about bipartisan.

Researchers in Boston took people who had lost 10-15% of their bodyweight and randomly assigned them to different diets.  The first, the traditional low fat diet, followed by the low carb diet (think Atkins), and the a low glycemic diet (40% carbs, 40% fat, and 20% protein).  The low glycemic diet also reflects the focus of “minimally processed grains, fruit, vegetables and legumes,” where as the low fat diet relied on more traditional, highly processed carbohydrates (think starchy vegetables and other sources of sugar).  When on the low carb or low glycemic diet subjects burned significantly more calories at rest than when on the low fat diet.

Thought #1:  Low fat diets are wrongheaded and we have been on this path for years.

In reality the low fat diet saw the most dramatic decrease in resting expenditure.  Those on the low carb diet burned 350 more calories at rest than did the low fat group.  350 calories.  At rest.  Whoa.  The low glycemic group burned 150 calories more at rest than did the low fat group.  Let’s go low carb!  Not so fast.  The low carb group saw increased stress hormones and inflammatory markers.  That equals bad.

Thought #2:  Don’t go low carb, it causes bad things to happen.

Guess where that leaves us?  Moderation.  That’s right, a little bit of everything is just fine.  Does it surprise anyone that a diet focussed in on ”minimally processed grains, fruit, vegetables and legumes” combines the best of both worlds?  How many of you even know what a legume is?  I have to look them up every time I read the word.  No dramatic decrease in resting energy expenditure and no off the chart changes in your blood work?  You don’t say, moderation eh?

Low glycemic is science code for healthy eating.  It’s not rocket science and it has been around for a long time.  Should it surprise anyone of us that 100 calories from Coca Cola is actually different than 100 calories from broccoli?  Inherently we know this to be true but for too long we have been hit with the mantra that a calorie is a calorie is a calorie.  The science is a changin’ my friend.  I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there are good calories and there are bad calories.  (Go see Gary Taubes’ book if you don’t believe me.  It’s aptly titled.)

And take a look at this graphic from NPR.  Look where most of the Coca Cola is consumed:

403 8oz servings of Coke per year per person in the United States.  12 servings in India.  Guess where Coke is starting to spend it’s money?

I am going to go out on a limb and say that the calories in Coke are refreshing when it’s 95 degrees outside yet they might not be the best for you, your waistline, or your blood.

Last night I finished reading “Charlotte’s Web” with our 4 year old.  There were times over the past few weeks that I wondered if she was hearing any of the story as she played with the wall, laid her head on my chest, and otherwise entertained herself while we lay in her bed.  Yesterday afternoon my partner asked what Wilbur was up to.  Our daughter knew exactly what was going on in the story.  Kids pick up everything, even when we don’t think they are.  Not much is better than reading to your child in the evening.  Pure joy.

We could all learn a bit from Wilbur.  He’s a wise pig.  Read this exchange:

“I’m glad I’m a sedentary spider,” (said Charlotte).

“What does sedentary mean?” asked Wilbur.  

“Means I sit still a good part of the time and don’t go wandering all over creation.  I know a good thing when I see it, and my web is a good thing. I stay put and wait for what comes.  Gives me a chance to think.”

“Well, I’m sort of sedentary myself, I guess,” said the pig.  ”I have to hang around here whether I want to or not.  you know where I’d really like to be this evening?

“Where?”

“In a forest looking for beechnuts and truffles and delectable roots, pushing leaves aside with my wonderful strong nose, searching and sniffing along the ground, smelling, smelling, smelling…”

If only we all wanted to be where Wilbur wanted to be.  Running around a forest searching for delectable roots. Smart pig.  Being active, real food eating.  One can make a solid argument for the genius of Charlotte, but Wilbur is right there.

And not only Wilbur, the farm was full of wise animals.  The sheep was another bright bulb, read as he gives Templeton the rat some unsolicited advice:

The old sheep spoke to him (Templeton) about his size one day.  ”You would live longer,” said the old sheep, “if you ate less.”

“Who wants to live forever?” sneered the rat. “I am a naturally heavy eater and I get untold satisfaction from the pleasures of the feast.” He patted his stomach, grinned at the sheep, and crept upstairs to lie down.

Accurate observations by both the sheep and Templeton.  The more we eat the heavier we become as your weight is a function of consumption.  The heavier you are, the more health related issues you deal with.  I too get “untold satisfaction from the pleasures of the feast.” These days that’s my problem, the feast is everywhere.  Can you think of one place in modern society where it unacceptable to eat?  I’d be hard pressed to.  Wise animals lived on Zuckerman’s farm.

Over the last couple of weeks our daughter asked a few times if Wilbur becomes bacon in the end.  We were relieved that he did not, and although Charlotte’s passing brought the question, “Is she dead, daddy?” no tears were shed.  I thought of Wilbur and his wiseness this morning as I read a new research report that demonstrates if we eat pork protein for breakfast we reduce our feelings of hunger prior to lunch and the more pork protein we eat, the less hungry we get.  The reduced feelings of hunger had no impact on how much was consumed at lunch, however.

I’ll stick with reading Wilbur’s tao and not eating him.

That’s what Mike Posner tells me.  Not sure who Mike Posner is but his song is a hit.  This is also what my body is telling me, “Baby, please don’t go,” and by go I mean go out, leave home, bye bye.  Why?  A recent article confirms what many of us who struggle with weight already knew: that when we leave the confines of our homes we struggle even more with eating.

Overweight and Obese Humans overeat away from home, by de Castro and his colleagues is an interesting view into the world of eating out.  And not just at a restaurant, but anywhere that is not your home.  I love the fact that the title states “humans,” as if dogs regularly leave home to eat out.  On second thought, maybe they do.  I know a dog who once left home alot.  Not sure if it was for food or the St. Bernard that live a few blocks away.

In the present study over 1,000 people were followed for seven days and overweight and obese individuals ate larger meals than their normal weight counterparts when away from their normal confines. Surprisingly, normal weight individuals actually ate a bit less when going out (600 calories out vs. 630 calories at home).  Conversely, overweight and obese individuals consumed about 550 calories at home and nearly 700 while out.  Quite a difference.  Another added twist, overweight individuals didn’t consume much alcohol at home while normal weight individuals imbibed a bit, however, when out, normal weight individuals didn’t alter their alcohol intake dramatically while the overweight grouped consumed significantly more.  Now would be a good time to ask, “Why?”

By way of explanation, let me share a few highlights of the article.  Love these lines:

“The built environment has been implicated in the development of the epidemic of obesity.”

Yes!

“The General Model of Intake Regulation (de Castro & Plunkett, 2002) suggests that as long as the environment and physiology are stable, body weight will be maintained at a stable settling point. A new stable body weight will only be attained if a long-term change in either the environment or the physiology occurs.”

Double yes!!

“Overweight/obese individuals appear to be more responsive to environmental cues for eating away from home.”

Triple yes!!!

Put these in context of the article.  The built environment impacts how much we eat and it impacts those with weight struggles more.  Chicken or the egg?  Look again at the general model of intake regulation mentioned: as long as the environment and physiology are stable, so is weight.  I would argue that our physiology has remained relatively stable over the past 30 years and that a huge factor in the obesity epidemic is the environment, both built and otherwise.  This speaks to how powerful an influence our environment is.  We take in cues all the time whether we are aware of them or not, and as de Castro points out above, overweight and obese individuals are more responsive to these cues.  Don’t go out!  Stay at home forever!

In practical application in our household here is how it goes:

Me: Let’s go out to dinner. (Inner monologue: “Yes, appetizers, big portions, love it!)

Partner: Ok (Inner monologue: “Sounds good, I can enjoy a nice, normal meal without having to cook.”)

And therein lies the difference, I struggle with weight and my partner more easily maintains hers.  I am a victim of my environment, she does not seem to be.  She listens to her body, I listen to what’s going on around me.

In light of not being able to avoid leaving our home at some point, and trust me, I eat well at home, I need to think of strategies to eat less and be much less responsive to my environment when I go out.  Awareness is the first step to success. I am aware, brutally aware, of how much the built environment reels me in.  Next time I go out I will repeat a mantra that I previously wrote about in relation to a friend’s running:

                Quiet mind…
                Quiet step…
                Quiet breath…
                Quiet met.
Will it allow me to bring my inner monologue in line with what I need to do?  We shall see.

At some point in each of our parenting lives we have imagined space shuttles out of carrots, cajoled fruit into being an airplane, and otherwise gotten sneaky in order to feed our children.  Parenting is not easy.  Parenting at the dinner table can be even less so.  I have no answers in this area.  I can spew thoughts on parental style, permissive, authoritarian, authoritative, your’e already sleeping.  We have to do what works for our children not what works for someone else’s kids.  Easier said than done when the disapproving glances and awkward silences abound during playdates.  Sure there is research that demonstrates association and outcomes with certain styles, but the more I read the more I become sure of one fact: one size does not fit all.

On Friday I mentioned Plum Organics as they had been highlighted in the New York Times for their food pouches.  Convenient, ready on the go, and as I mentioned, kids love to suck.  These can be a great way to get our kids some nutrition rather than another yogurt pop or bowl of ice cream.  Here is where I am in conflict with myself:  I like dinner time.  I like sitting down with my family even if for only a few moments.  Our oldest daughter is getting to the age where we can ask questions regarding her day and occasionally she will answer.  I feel there is value to this.  Research tends to back up the value of mealtime, however, there are some rumblings that it may not be as powerful an influence as we thought.  Is anything, really? Yet I value those moments.  I can remember them from my childhood, “What was good about today?” my mother would ask each night.  I don’t remember my responses but I remember that she asked.

I don’t question families that don’t sit down to eat.  What works for us may not work for others.  As kids grow up sports come into play, music lessons, life.  All that can interrupt dinner.  I hope that we don’t substitute dinners for food pouches.  Use them wisely, just don’t use them all the time.

Just my thoughts on a beautiful Monday morning.

Or at least they sincerely enjoy their vegetables pureed and served with a straw.  Gotcha with the title, eh?  Yesterday I mentioned I like squeezing more than sucking when it comes to my water bottle during workouts.  Seems as if children enjoy sucking too.  Makes sense, they come out of the womb knowing how to do it.

Now that I think about it, I find it hard to believe that it took someone so long to market this.  Parents have been blending food for eons in order to get their kids to eat.  All they needed to do was through it in a Zip-Loc bag, plug a straw in, and bam, you have a $53 million company.  Plum Organics is leading the charge in food pouches and whether you agree or disagree, they are hot.

In the article published yesterday in the New York Times, Matt Richtel talks about the immense (and growing) popularity of these food pouches.  Kids love them, parents love them when the time is right.  Give kids control, let them eat when they are hungry, and free range parenting are terms thrown around in the article.  There are many ways to go on this topic and Mr. Richtel points out a big issue: less mealtimes as a family.  That would be an extreme.  We’ve bought the applesauce version from Trader Joe’s and our daughter loves them.  Read the article, I’ll comment next week.

And when someone says it best, there is no need to say it again.  Two more articles in today’s Times that I couldn’t hope to summarize as they both say what needs to be said:

How can a big gulp look so small?

Dirtying up our diets.

And today is Friday,  so food rule time, here we go:

Suck every once in awhile.  I mean it.  Truly let yourself suck.  If you want to drink more water, suck.  Find a squeezeable clear bottle and have at it.  You’ve had the skill your entire life, heck, your an expert. A professional!  Take that skill and run with it.  Just don’t fill your squeeze bottle up with beer.  At least not before noon. On a Saturday.

Happy Friday.

Speaking of portion sizes….last night our daughter switched it up on me.  ”The fullest, daddy,” she said as my partner scooped the frozen yogurt out of the container.  Again she wanted the bowl with the most.  What have I created?  A desert monster!  Yesterday I spoke of how parents serve their kids too much food, and as we ate our frozen yogurt I also thought how having kids creates opportunities for parents to eat more.  Our little one is providing me a rationale to eat more.  No fault of her own, I am just using her.  I really need to get off the frozen yogurt binge I am on, the scale is not being nice to me these days.

Thinking of portion sizes while at the fitness center this morning I drifted off in thoughts of water bottles.  Sounds fun, eh?  Here’s why:  a few weeks back I attended a conference in California.  One of the sponsors (PowerBar) was handing out plastic water bottles.  BPA free mind you.  Roughly 24 ounces,  yellowish tint, yet I can see the contents.  ”PowerBar” splashed down one side.  I picked one up through it in my bag and off I went.

For the past year or so I have been using a Kleen Kanteen during my workouts.  Steel.  It took some getting used to, having to suck not squeeze the water out, but I have come to enjoy it.  No one likes to suck, right?  Out came the PowerBar bottle for a bit, thought I’d try it and not let it go to waster.  Can you guess what happened?  Yup, I found myself drinking more water during my workouts.  Quite a bit more.  The question is why?

Last year my team and I presented research deonstrating that athletes engaged in team sports drink more water during practices when they use clear water bottles with their names written on them as opposed to opaque water bottles, water bottles without their names, or water from a communal jug that they had to pour themselves.  Why?  Past research tells us that three things may have happened:  1)  They develop a bond with their bottle, as if to say, “That bottle has my name on it,  I drink from it.” 2) They could see how much they had consumed, thus they had a cue to drink more, and 3)  The bottle was filled for them, reducing the effort they had to put in to get the water.  Relationship building, salience, and laziness.  Three things that drive us to consumption.

Back to the present question of my PowerBar bottle.  I realize that I like to squeeze my water more than suck my water.  I’m working hard enough during my exercise, you expect me to expend the energy to suck water out of a bottle?  Being that I like the squeeze and it’s relatively easier (my perception), I do more of it.  I really enjoy a good squeeze.  Combine those factors and I consume more water during my workout.

An example of a container, how I feel about it, and it’s design impacting how much I consume.  Want to drink more water today, whether exercising or otherwise?  Try not to suck so much.

 

“Which one has the most?” my daughter inquired last night as I scooped frozen yogurt into bowls.  ”This one,” I responded as I pointed to the green bowl with one scoop in it.  ”Ok,” she said and took her most bowl to the table.  I quickly added another scoop to the blue bowl (mine) and nonchalantly sat down hoping her own focus on the most bowl would help her overlook mine.  ”Maybe your next blog should be about portion sizes,” my partner chided me with a smile.  I came up with some silly response and she just rolled her eyes.

Portion size it is.  How many of you know what appropriate portion sizes for the foods you serve?  Not many of us do.  Sure, we may know that 2-3 oz is a serving of meat but what does that mean?  Don’t tell me it’s the size of a deck of cards, that’s simply not enough.  And there is the crux of portion sizes, feeling victimized if someone actually restricted you such small quantities.  Had I told my daughter last night that my bowl had the most frozen yogurt she would have felt shortchanged and that would’ve have impacted not only her behavior but her eating behavior.  Maybe a bit of pouting would have taken place.  Followed by another scoop of frozen yogurt to ease the pain.  One scoop of frozen yogurt can’t be nearly enough.  Can it?

Over the years portion sizes have increased. We all know this.  Portions served at restaurants, even portions outlined in cookbooks.  Up, up, and up.  Try as we might it is hard to fight off the feelings of neglect, starvation, and disapproval when served appropriate portions.  ”Are you kidding me?  That is one serving of peanut butter?  That will cover exactly one quarter of one piece of toast.  Argh, I hate food,” or something along those lines.

How can we possibly fight off feelings of wanting, needing more, victimization, and guilt in the face of small portions?  That is a challenging question and gets at the heart of so much in relation to food.  Feelings towards it and our relationship with it.

A quick research note:  I came across two articles this morning in my search that are worth mentioning.  Both speak to our ability to estimate how much we are eating and portion control.   In the first, “Accuracy of Estimation of Large Food Portions” by Harnack, et. al. (Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 2004) researchers demonstrated that adults chronically underestimate how much they are eating.  That is to say adults don’t know much about portion size.  The typical estimate of calories consumed was more than 50% less than actual consumption.  Oops.

The second study truly fascinated me.  ”Children’s bite size and intake of an entree are greater with large portions than with age appropriate or self selected portions.” I love study titles that tell you everything.  No need to read further, the title says it all.  Thanks, Fisher, et. al. (American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2003).  The results may seem self evident in that a child will take larger bites and consume more when large portions are served.  Read the last four words of the title again:  ”or self selected portions.”  That’s right, kids will eat less when they serve themselves.  In this study they consumed 25% less calories of the entree when the adults left them alone.  We adults are always screwing up our kids.

Even more telling, when the children were given large portions, “These increases were seen even though observational data indicated that the children were largely unaware of changes in portion size.”    The children didn’t notice, and more importantly didn’t seem to care, about how much was on their plate.  They just ate.  With more food, bigger bites.  With bigger bites, more consumption.  You know how this story ends.

Portion control is tough.  Adults don’t understand it.  I am acutely aware of what the research, the guidelines, and my waist tell me, yet I still want to fill up my bowl with frozen yogurt.  One scoop is just too lonely.  And if I am in charge of my daughter’s consumption, watch out.

What can be done about this?  What can I do so as not to hurt my own feelings, so as not to feel a sense of loss and nostalgic regret when I only get one scoop of frozen yogurt?  Smaller bowls would be a first step.  That one scoop won’t seem so lonely.

Now I am off to get my 31 oz trenta coffee at Starbucks.  Come on, a tall?  That’s not nearly enough.

Our daughter has discovered the delights of one certain water fountain at Macalester College.  We head over to their swimming pool each afternoon for lessons water bottle in tow.  This water fountain is one of those that you set your water bottle at the back and it is filled from a dispenser at the top.  No messing around with getting your water bottle at the right angle to fill it.  Our daughter likes it simply because she feels cool filling her water bottle at a fountain.  Unbeknownst to her there is a little counter at the top of the fountain that tells us how many plastic water bottles she has saved by filling her Kleen Kanteen.

These water fountains are a plenty these days and I admit to feeling a sense of momentary pride when I fill up my water bottle.  ”That’s right, I’m saving the planet.  What are you doing?”  Yesterday I thought about that little counter and wondered if it was motivating.  Does the fact that you get an environmental pat on the back every time you fill your water bottle make you more likely to do it again?  Does it make you more likely to make similar decisions throughout your day?  Or is it simply a fleeting feeling?  Rather than calorie counts or fat grams on food I wonder what a pat on the back would do for our food choices.  Not the “Less Sugar” or “Heart Healthy” claims we see, but rather something more visceral.  I have no idea of what this would be yet, just wondering.  Because when it comes down to it we make choices based on feelings.

Following this line of thinking I happened across a piece in yesterday’s New York Times by Gina Kolata.  Serendipitous timing.  Ms. Kolata asks the question “What makes someone a committed exerciser? And how motivating are the much vaunted improvements to health?”  That is to say what makes a person keep exercising?  Is it a little plastic bottle counter in their head that motivates them?  Or rather, as Ms. Kolata discusses in light of a recent study that states 10% of people may have an “adverse” response to exercise, is it a “feeling.”  A feeling of energy, of pride, of ego, that may keep people committed to exercise?  Here is an interesting clip from her article:

‘“When a physician tells a patient, ‘You need to make a change for your health,’ that can be motivating, especially if the person has a health problem,” said Rodney Dishman, director of the exercise psychology laboratory at the University of Georgia. “But it usually wanes over time. People don’t feel their bones getting stronger, they don’t feel lipids changing, they don’t feel their blood pressure changing.”

Most who start exercising say the goal is to lose weight or improve their health. But those who begin on the promise of imperceptible health effects often stop, Dr. Dishman said, saying they do not have time, or are too tired after work, or they just lost interest.’

“…but those who begin on the promise of imperceptible health effects often stop,” so true and so scary.  Have you seen a marketing campaign or fitness center advertisement lately that doesn’t include some mention of health gains?  Yet if these don’t motivate people maybe the approach is wrong.  Try convincing today’s college students they should exercise in order to keep their lipids and blood pressure in check.  You can imagine the looks.  Imperceptible.

So if it’s not promises of health that motivate people to exercise what is it?  ”Biological traits, Dr. Dishman says, “seem to play a bigger role in both the choice to be active and the outcomes of being active than folks — namely public health advocates— have been willing to admit.”  Darn it, and I have the sitting gene.  If left to my own devices I tend to want to sit and read.  (However, at work I stand all day,  standing desk, the whole bit.  Talk about environmental influences, geez).

Health promises don’t sustain exercise.  Too imperceptible.  Biological traits may help us (if we the active gene) or hinder us (if we have the sitting gene).  Why do some people keep on exercising?  How are they able to do that?  What a gift!

We are back to that “feeling,” says Ms. Kolata.  That feeling of pride, of ego, of an energy and mood boost.  To be able to tell everyone at work “Yeah, I worked out this morning,” to be defined as a jock, a runner, or simply active.  Maybe that is what drives us.  What drives me?  The fear of gaining weight.

Talk about perceptible.

Now, off to get that plastic bottle counter implanted in my head.

Wasn’t that a great show?  Oh, Winnie.  Last week I mentioned a few myths that were out there about exercise.  Myths that get legs of their own and get perpetuated over and over.  (Is that redundant?).  I wonder why it is that we hold onto these myths.  Do they make us comfortable?  Is it a habit?

This morning at the fitness center I was on a treadmill with those darned moving stairs machines in front of me.  I am fascinated by the people that use these day after day as they are rather difficult machines to conquer when used properly.  That’s the thing, almost no one does.  Another myth perpetuated:  the faster you go the more calories you burn.  That would be true if you weren’t holding on for dear life.  Whether it be the moving stairs (official name is the Stepmill) or the treadmill as soon as you hold on you decrease the amount of work you do.  I see so many people draped over the top of the Stepmill or hanging onto the treadmill for dear life.  Maybe it’s all the calories they see being burned or the ability to run more miles than they thought they could or made it’s ego.  I have no idea.

Here’s the deal:  the Stepmill and treadmill don’t know you are laying your hands on it.  The machine thinks you are simply that fast and strong and calculates caloric expenditure thusly.  So even though the machine says you just burned 750,00 calories in one hour, it’s a bit off.  Much better to slow down and exercise well.  That’s the ego part.  Slow down.  You will do so much more for yourself if you exercise without holding on.

There is one person at the fitness center I frequent who uses the Stepmill well.  I am duly impressed.  He goes at a decent clip, one foot over the other with perfect posture, as if someone had a string in his head and was holding him up.  For an hour he goes.  While reading the newspaper he holds up in front of him.  Now that’s talent.  He steps once per week.  On the other days he does yoga, pilates, runs, strength trains.  A model for all of us:  balance.

Here’s another myth that I need to do some homework on.  Back to our Stepmills.  This morning a woman was walking on the thing sideways.  I often see this as I am sure you have too.  I wonder “why?” My guess is that this woman believes she is doing something special for her inner and outer thighs.  Is she?  I’d have to guess no and a quick literature search seems to support my thoughts.  Again, walking up a Stepmill is difficult enough, let alone sideways.  What’s the compensation?  Hold on.  So now you are holding on while contorted and walking sideways.  Maybe we should call that functional training, seems to me that’s the position I assume when carrying a 4 year old and groceries up our back steps.

Somewhere along the line this sideways woman saw someone else doing it and possibly asked the person why.  The person may have responded “it works my inner and outer thighs,” and off the person went with a new convert.  The fact that we see one person trying something in the fitness center carries alot of weight with us (no pun intended).  ”If they are doing that, then so should I” goes the thinking.  We never stop and ask ourselves, or better yet ask a professional, “does that work?”  We simply do it, incorporate into our workouts, let it become a habit, and then ask, “Why aren’t my thighs looking better?”

Could be all the yogurt and ice cream I ate over the weekend.  Straight to the thighs they say.  One could wonder why we went to two frozen yogurt shops and had ice cream on a third occasion in the last three days.  It’s a good thing to wonder about.  Someone told me calories don’t count on Father’s Day Weekend.  I chose to believe them.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 133 other followers

%d bloggers like this: