|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#661
|
|||
|
|||
Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 17:10:46 -0600, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/6/2014 4:23 PM, Phil W Lee wrote: Frank Krygowski considered Tue, 04 Nov 2014 18:23:30 -0500 the perfect time to write: On 11/4/2014 12:11 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 7:36:30 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote: Can you remember people pushing un-powered lawn mowers? Clipping hedges with big manual clippers? Walking to the store to buy some groceries? Lifting garage doors by using their muscles? Raking leaves using an actual rake? Shoveling snow using an actual shovel? Washing dishes by hand. I don't think there has been a tremendous drop in physical activity over the past few decades -- not if you look at how urban adults actually lived in the '50s and '60s. Most adults smoked like chimneys and drank like fish. Scotch and water were drunk in equal proportions around many homes. Fathers were handy, but the yard work was done by the kids. That's what kids were for. People drove big, heavy cars and didn't walk or ride bikes. We Californians did not shovel snow. Ward Clever sat around in a Cardigan and smoked a pipe, and he worked at a desk all week. Ward was trim -- and good looking! By my memories, there was a lot more physical work back then. In the '50s, we lived on a small city lot; about 1960 we moved to a much larger suburban lot. My dad pushed a reel-type mower on the small lot. On the new lot, he (and we kids) put the entire lawn in by hand, shoveling dirt, sifting out stones, seeding and weeding. It was a couple years before he caved in and bought his first powered rotary mower. Dad was also an avid gardener, but never owned a roto-tiller; he spaded and forked his large gardens, and yes, we helped. We also helped care for and harvest and preserve apples from six overgrown trees. Dad never had a snow blower until he was in his '60s. He and we shoveled snow by hand. We also went around the neighborhood offering to shovel drives for a couple bucks. Screwdrivers and saws were entirely manual, and nails were driven by a hammer, not a nail gun. That included when we built our garage. Beyond all that work, it seems to me that recreation was more active. Touch football (in the street, telephone pole to telephone pole) was an almost daily activity for the neighborhood teens, and Dad sometimes played "steady quarterback." Family gatherings involved softball or wiffle ball, badminton and volleyball and sometimes swimming. Adults made sure that kids of all ages were somehow included. Indoors in the winter, we played table tennis several times a week for years and years, at an activity level that left me and everyone else dripping. And my brothers and I had the second largest paper route for the metro area newspaper. Delivered by bike, of course, unless the snow was too deep and we had to walk. It's possible that we were unusually active - above average, so to speak. But the family next door to us now has two teenage boys. Nice, kids, but they are nowhere near as active as we were. And you can tell that by looking at them. Kidding aside, the obesity issue is complicated, particularly with kids. My personal belief is that in adults, it is a function of diet, stress and to a lesser extent exercise. I do suspect that diet is a bigger influence. Exercise of almost any type just doesn't consume that many calories, and food can pump calories back in very easily. From http://www.bicycling.com/training-nu...mighty-calorie : "Cyclists notoriously overestimate how many calories they're burning," says Leslie Bonci, MPH, RD, director of sports nutrition at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. "If you eat an energy bar and drink a sports drink on a moderate ride, you've effectively cancelled out any calorie burn." IIRC, there's evidence that regular exercise boosts your basal metabolic rate, at least partly because muscle burns more energy than fat; so there may be benefits to exercise beyond the simplest calorie counts. But I think that if a person wants to lose weight, eating less (i.e. portion control) is the place to start. I wonder how much difference central heating has made? When I was young, heating was something that you worked to provide. Therefore you didn't waste heat by heating a house more than was necessary, and burned quite a few calories just keeping warm. Now, with central heating being commonplace, people keep their homes warmer, and that discourages exercise, instead of encouraging it, as a cooler home did. Indeed. One mid-January week in northern Wisconsin in a cabin with a fireplace cured me of any romance in wood heat. At around 0F, it's four solid hours of cutting/splitting/hauling wood. Every day. That was 35 years ago and I am not ready for a redux. The great benefit of heating with wood is that it warms you twice. Once when you cut it and once when you burn it. -- Cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#662
|
|||
|
|||
Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light
On 11/6/2014 5:23 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:
I wonder how much difference central heating has made? When I was young, heating was something that you worked to provide. Therefore you didn't waste heat by heating a house more than was necessary, and burned quite a few calories just keeping warm. Now, with central heating being commonplace, people keep their homes warmer, and that discourages exercise, instead of encouraging it, as a cooler home did. Coincidentally, we're just into heating season here. And as has often been the case, if we're just sitting around early in the heating season, setting the thermostat to 70 Fahrenheit sometimes leaves us feeling chilly, even though 70 should be fine. I felt that way the other day. So I got up and did some pushups. That heated me right up, and I felt nicely warm the rest of the evening. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#663
|
|||
|
|||
Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light
On Sat, 08 Nov 2014 00:13:43 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote: Frank Krygowski considered Thu, 06 Nov 2014 23:03:03 -0500 the perfect time to write: On 11/6/2014 5:23 PM, Phil W Lee wrote: I wonder how much difference central heating has made? When I was young, heating was something that you worked to provide. Therefore you didn't waste heat by heating a house more than was necessary, and burned quite a few calories just keeping warm. Now, with central heating being commonplace, people keep their homes warmer, and that discourages exercise, instead of encouraging it, as a cooler home did. Coincidentally, we're just into heating season here. And as has often been the case, if we're just sitting around early in the heating season, setting the thermostat to 70 Fahrenheit sometimes leaves us feeling chilly, even though 70 should be fine. I felt that way the other day. So I got up and did some pushups. That heated me right up, and I felt nicely warm the rest of the evening. Sorta underlines my point. Of course, not that long ago, more effort was required for normal household chores, and that kept people warmer, as well as burning calories. I strongly suspect that part of becoming used to colder temperatures is the body adjusting the base metabolic rate to burn more energy just to keep itself warm, even without the deliberate effort. See http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...bodcon.html#c1 for a partial answer. I have also read that shivering is a body function that uses energy. https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...5102015AAh6oxq estimates that one can burn ~400 calories/hour shivering and breathing cold air. On the other hand in an environment of 81 degrees F burned an additional 239 calories a day more than when kept at 71.6 degrees. It also appears that fat people can withstand colder temperatures than skinny people. But apparently the secret is to turn down the thermostat and not add clothing. If the house is cold enough that you are shivering then you are burning more calories. -- Cheers, John B. |
#664
|
|||
|
|||
Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 23:54:44 +0000, Clive George wrote:
On 06/11/2014 23:10, AMuzi wrote: Indeed. One mid-January week in northern Wisconsin in a cabin with a fireplace cured me of any romance in wood heat. At around 0F, it's four solid hours of cutting/splitting/hauling wood. Every day. Crappy insulation? The cabin I've stayed in for skiing holidays in in Norway gets ridiculously hot off not much wood at all. Just logs with wool between them and windows with an interior and exterior pane. I spent a month in Sweden many moons ago. That was hot as hell too. You could watch birds freeze out of the sky whilst sweating. -- davethedave |
#665
|
|||
|
|||
Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light
If it weren't for America, this troll would be cleaning Nazi toilets...
-- Andre Jute fiultra1 yahoo.com wrote in news:2d730ada-2342-4b77-8c6c-3d2b2711e4d4 googlegroups.com: X-Received: by 10.43.139.73 with SMTP id iv9mr5220971icc.19.1415212936174; Wed, 05 Nov 2014 10:42:16 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.41.147 with SMTP id z19mr988066qgz.1.1415212936037; Wed, 05 Nov 2014 10:42:16 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!h15no6321942igd.0!new s-out.google.com!u5ni24qab.1!nntp.google.com!u7no265 3101qaz.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.go oglegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 10:42:15 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: hb-dnVlJQKABpsfJnZ2dnUVZ7q6dnZ2d brightview.co.uk Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.44.94.100; posting-account=CHUGDgoAAACzKMcl6j-ZuzitmltC8m79 NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.44.94.100 References: baad3c90-ca77-452b-95b2-85af973c725f googlegroups.com m372r7$jt0$1 dont-email.me iipe5apubvh0vgtco3fopa5omrlfr1uai3 4ax.com 51217142436712722.612667spoo-flarn.com news.eternal-september.org m38bff$2rq$1 dont-email.me 7e26a931-4fe2-4052-b6d5-e948b473d74d googlegroups.com m39k5n$gnk$1 dont-email.me rfeh5a56iggcdfrqoj1dnj2g7sidsagh0o 4ax.com m3ampe$q6$1 dont-email.me 198c02d0-45fc-46d1-ad8c-ae58c4a1b550 googlegroups.com m3arpj$l0o$1 dont-email.me k2ij5ap713ri9b1uc0t6nsvdv78vmim6b4 4ax.com hb-dnVlJQKABpsfJnZ2dnUVZ7q6dnZ2d brightview.co.uk User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: 2d730ada-2342-4b77-8c6c-3d2b2711e4d4 googlegroups.com Subject: Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light From: Andre Jute fiultra1 yahoo.com Injection-Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 18:42:16 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Xref: mx02.eternal-september.org rec.bicycles.tech:167522 On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 3:00:48 PM UTC, Clive George wrote: On 05/11/2014 06:50, John B. Slocomb wrote: The major problem with any form of exercise as a weight control program is that you have to work so hard and so long to lose one Big Mac and if you have the large fries it gets even worse. Are the USians in this group aware of the portion sizes in restaurants/diners over there compared to here? They're enormous. Nothing new in that. During WW2 American soldiers in Britain were rationed *down* to more than double the calories permitted to the host nation. Andre Jute |
#666
|
|||
|
|||
Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light
You cannot delete duplicate posts on UseNet, idiot...
-- Andre Jute fiultra1 yahoo.com wrote in news:2cf4e94e-a06e-49d7-bdbc-758fb0d160ea googlegroups.com: X-Received: by 10.236.63.199 with SMTP id a47mr2674416yhd.6.1415264549833; Thu, 06 Nov 2014 01:02:29 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.41.147 with SMTP id z19mr49989qgz.1.1415264549774; Thu, 06 Nov 2014 01:02:29 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!n ewspeer1.nac.net!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nn tp.giganews.com!i13no1628349qae.0!news-out.google.com!u5ni26qab.1!nntp.google.com!u7no279 1219qaz.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.go oglegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 01:02:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: e7e8e04c-3cb5-4a24-8f2b-68c76af39e9c googlegroups.com Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.44.94.100; posting-account=CHUGDgoAAACzKMcl6j-ZuzitmltC8m79 NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.44.94.100 References: 51217142436712722.612667spoo-flarn.com news.eternal-september.org m38bff$2rq$1 dont-email.me 7e26a931-4fe2-4052-b6d5-e948b473d74d googlegroups.com m39k5n$gnk$1 dont-email.me rfeh5a56iggcdfrqoj1dnj2g7sidsagh0o 4ax.com m3ampe$q6$1 dont-email.me 198c02d0-45fc-46d1-ad8c-ae58c4a1b550 googlegroups.com m3arpj$l0o$1 dont-email.me k2ij5ap713ri9b1uc0t6nsvdv78vmim6b4 4ax.com hb-dnVlJQKABpsfJnZ2dnUVZ7q6dnZ2d brightview.co.uk smhl5ap8modugu3j044b37hovko78gfkq4 4ax.com m3ejkv$atl$1 dont-email.me e7e8e04c-3cb5-4a24-8f2b-68c76af39e9c googlegroups.com User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: 2cf4e94e-a06e-49d7-bdbc-758fb0d160ea googlegroups.com Subject: Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light From: Andre Jute fiultra1 yahoo.com Injection-Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2014 09:02:29 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Lines: 0 Xref: mx02.eternal-september.org rec.bicycles.tech:167562 Duplicate post. Deleted. |
#667
|
|||
|
|||
Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light
On Thursday, October 23, 2014 at 10:40:59 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
big snip Why is it unsafe to take the lane on the West Coast? I'm on the West Coast, and I take the lane every day (at least in some places). I think what you mean to say is that there is no need to take the lane (regardless of region) where there is adequate room for cars to pass safely while riding as far right as practicable. It may also be unsafe to take the lane even when allowed under the law (prevent unsafe passing, preparing for a turn, road hazard, etc.) depending on conditions. You, Frank and the rest of the world will debate when it is really "too" unsafe to lawfully take the lane. Rather than calling someone a gutter bunny, I prefer to see what the conditions are like. OTOH, there are gutter bunnies in the world . . . -- Jay Beattie. |
#668
|
|||
|
|||
Not much needed in a "Be Seen" light
On 1/21/2015 9:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, October 23, 2014 at 10:40:59 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: big snip Why is it unsafe to take the lane on the West Coast? I'm on the West Coast, and I take the lane every day (at least in some places). I think what you mean to say is that there is no need to take the lane (regardless of region) where there is adequate room for cars to pass safely while riding as far right as practicable. It may also be unsafe to take the lane even when allowed under the law (prevent unsafe passing, preparing for a turn, road hazard, etc.) depending on conditions. You, Frank and the rest of the world will debate when it is really "too" unsafe to lawfully take the lane. Rather than calling someone a gutter bunny, I prefer to see what the conditions are like. OTOH, there are gutter bunnies in the world . . . There certainly are. Many bicyclists - perhaps most - believe they have no right to use any pavement more than three feet from the right edge of the road, at least when any motor vehicle is within 100 yards behind them. I've seen many cyclists risk their life to honor that imaginary rule. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Busch & Mueller "Big Bang"---the ultimate bike light? | Gooserider | General | 23 | February 9th 07 04:04 PM |
24hr rider needed for "Sleepless in the Saddle" (12/13th August, Catton Hall, UK) | steve.colligan | Unicycling | 3 | July 3rd 06 10:32 PM |
Cable Disc brakes - rear one keeps "fading". Advice needed. | al Mossah | UK | 1 | June 30th 06 10:12 AM |
High-end Single Speed Mt. Bike - Ventana "El Toro" - Super Light! | ClimbTheMtns | Marketplace | 0 | April 30th 06 05:02 PM |