Quote for The Day

The Dalai Lama, when asked what surprised him most about humanity, answered:

"Man. Because he sacrifices his health in order to make money. Then he sacrifices money to recuperate his health. And then he is so anxious about the future that he does not enjoy the present; the result being that he does not live in the the present or the future; he lives as if he is never going to die, and then dies having never really lived."

Sometimes you just can't add to the wisdom of the Dalai Lama. 

Getting Back into the Groovy 70's, Calorie Wise

Why have obesity rates risen so dramatically?  Because the number of calories we eat has gone up.   You have to check out the chart I've pasted above at the link--it's interactive and as you slide from left to right, it shows how calories we ingest have increased from the 1970 and what kind of calories we're consuming.

The bottom line is that, on average people now consume 23.3% more calories in a day then they did in 1970.    That is a huge increase in calories.   What's more, the biggest jump in calories consumed occurred between 1990 and 2008.  

And, it's not just the amount of calories we consume, but how we consume them.    Most of the additional calories we now consume are added fat and sugar (although we seem to be eating a hell of a lot more of everything).

I know that when I started to try to lose weight, the hardest thing was readjusting my portion sizes.   We've gotten so used to super-sized portions, that when we're confronted with right-sized portions, it looks inadequate.   The portions also initially seemed to leave me hungry.  We're so used to overfilling our bellies, that when you get a correct sized portion, we don't feel "full."

Rather than going "cold turkey" I reduced my portions gradually.  As I got used to less food, the smaller portions became more satisfying and more "filling." 

I also overhauled where I got my calories from.   By focusing on eating a mostly raw/vegan diet, I was able to eat more and feel satisfied while reducing my overall caloric intake substantially.   Again, I did this gradually, over time, so as to not "shock" my system.  Now, I'm used to eating this way, and, when I do have a "heavy" meal, I actually feel kind of hung over and sluggish the next day.

I still eat meat, dairy, fish, eggs and desserts, I just focus on eating "mostly" raw/vegan.  That means that instead of a processed snack when I need a mid-morning pick-up, I eat an orange or some grapes.  I eat lots of salads, and try to have a salad every night with dinner.  

And, when I do eat meat, I eat less of it and more veggies.  In fact, veggies and fruit, raw and cooked, make up the bulk of what I eat these days.  

Our Big Pig Problem

Scientific American has a fantastic article on our reliance on feeding antibiotics to our food animals, and the Dane's experience in stopping the practice. 

The Danes, who are the world's largest exporter of pork, managed to eliminate antibiotics from their farm animals with no ill effects to the industry. 

So why can't we?

Losing Weight Starts in the Kitchen

I saw this over at HuffPo and had to post it here.  The author, has come to the same conclusion I have--you can never be thin or healthy if you let the food industry prepare your food for you. 

He makes a lot of good comments including this:

What didn't make sense to me was her willingness to blame the food industry and restaurants for limiting her healthy food options, yet she was unwilling to take her health into her own hands. The fact is, our quick and easy, rapid-pace lifestyle has gotten us to where we are in the first place, and it is really going to take some effort on our parts to tip the scales in the other direction.

And this:

I often hear my clients complain that they need a fast solution. They say they need to eat on the go, that they don't have time to think about eating, and that they can't even begin to think about making healthy food choices, let alone learn how to cook! We have made eating a chore, kicked it to the lowest priority on the list, and even treat it as though it were a hassle. With so many fast and cheap alternatives, why bother putting much thought into meal planning?

It's so easy to blame the food industry for our current obesity epidemic, but in reality, we must all take responsibility for our own actions. We've forgotten that we are the ones who asked the industry for quicker and faster meals over the years. We sure did get what we wanted, but at what cost?

And this:

So where do we begin? Well, stop demanding quick, easy, and processed foods and start cooking wholesome meals made from real foods. This will increase the demand for nutritious foods, putting pressure on the manufacturers to increase supply and forcing them to boost their selection of real foods because now this is what their customers are asking for.

You don't have to be Julia Childs everyday! Just pack your lunch, bring food to work, snack sensibly, and stop depending on the food industry and restaurants to fuel your life. You don't have to cut eating out completely, and believe me, I really enjoy a great meal out on the town, but I see it as a special occasion, not an everyday event.

Losing Weight starts in the kitchen. Pure and simple. If you take control of your food, you take control of your weight and your health. If you cede control of your food to the food industry you cede control over your own weight and health. You'll never be thin nor healthy if you insist that you can not prepare your own food. Also, the time argument is just pure BS. If you have time to run to a take out joint, you have time to make your own food.

Preparing your own food can be as simple as peeling and eating a banana for breakfast instead of pouring it out of a box or heading out to McDonald's for an Egg McMuffin.   Throwing some lettuce in a container and adding some chopped cucumbers, onions, etc for lunch takes hardly any effort and probably takes less time to heading to Au Bon Pain to pick up a sandwich to bring back to the office. 

Addictions

A new study shows how food is just as addicting as drugs.

I fully believe this.   I know from my own experience that I just can't have certain foods around me because if I see them, I eat them.  

First Hike of the Year

Yesterday the weather managed to not be frigid, there was some sun, and we hadn't had a really heavy rain all week.   Since the likelihood of getting mired knee-deep in mud was slim, I decided to take my 16 year old son, who is on the autistic spectrum, for our first hike of the new year.

We happen to be fortunate to live literally around the corner from a 1,700 acre nature preserve called Devil's Den.  Devil's Den spans several towns here in Connecticut and there are hiking trails throughout the preserve.    I've been taking advantage of a fortunate proximity to hike with both my family and friends ever since I've lived in Weston.

With all the snow this Winter, I did manage to get into the Den a few times to snow shoe.   But with all the snow and rain, and the tendency of Devil's Den to get really muddy, I've been avoiding going in for the last 6 weeks.  

But yesterday seemed to be a good day to finally head back in, so I got my hiking boots on and told my son he was coming with me for a short hike (you have to delineate these things for him, we have some set hikes he knows by heart which takes the anxiety out of the equation for him). 

I wasn't the only person who thought that way.   When I got to the Den entrance, the parking lot was completely filled and cars were parked all the way down the road leading to the entrance.   But that's a good thing--more hiking.

My son and I climbed out of the car, covered ourselves in repellent in case the Lyme ticks were out (it was probably too cold, but after having Lyme 3 times I don't take risks), and off we headed into the woods.

I was chilly when we first started, but after 15 minutes of hiking up hill, I warmed up, and by the time we ended our hike 45 minutes later, I had a good sweat worked up.

And, according to my calorie estimator, I burned 263 calories.

Now that the weather is finally warming up (we hope but its been a wild and crazy year), I'll be doing a lot more hiking again.
 

Fasting to Get Closer to God

I've covered modern attitudes about fasting before, but after I saw this article in the New York Times regarding fasting and religion, thought it was time to bring it up again.

You can tell the extent of the food industry's brainwashing of the American public by the appalled reactions you get when you bring up fasting.

Tell someone that you're going to fast for a day or two, and you're viewed as crazy, out of the ordinary, and jeopardizing your health.   People shake their heads and will actually ask you why you would even do such a thing as go 1 day without eating.  

But, when you look back on history, fasting was part of the regular cycle of human existence, and often tied to religious observance.   Fasting during  Lent, Ramadan or Yom Kipper were part of the natural cycle of the religious year and preparing yourself to be closer to God.

If you go back even further, fasting was often just a part of human existence.   Our ancient ancestors fasted because, sadly, they often didn't have access to food.  

So, although the modern food industry has convinced us that we need to be constantly stuffing our pie-holes day in and day out, in actuality our bodies are designed to go days without food from time to time.

In our modern world, food is so readily available, that the problem is that we spend billions trying to negate the effects of eating that bounty, i.e, lose the fat.

The reality is that fasting for one day a month, is probably healthier then sticking to the 3 meals a day, every day, dogma that we've espoused.  But we are now so surrounded by food and food advertising that consciencely not eating is unthinkable.

Now, of course, there is a difference between healthy fasting, and eating disorders.  Short term fasting for health or religious reasons is, well, healthy.   Short or long term fasting for no other reason then to try to loose weight is unhealthy. 

If You Can't Beat them, just Market the product Differently

I was over at Marion Nestle's great blog on food politics, and found this discussion of a new full-page Coca-Cola ad fascinating. 

I'm guessing that the message about drinking high-sugar beverages must be seeking into the general populace because Coke is now essentially telling people that it's OK to drink a nutritionally devoid, sugar laden, chemical-filled beverage so long as you do it in moderation, and, oh yeah, exercise. 

I tried to find the actual full-page Coke ad somewhere on line and couldn't but, according to Nestle, this is what it says:

Our nation is facing an obesity problem and we plan on being part of the solution. By promoting balanced diets and active lifestyles, we can make a positive difference.

For some people, a 12-fl.-oz. beverage may be too much. Everyone’s needs are different. So we’ve created a variety of package sizes….

While keeping track of calories is important, so is burning them off. In our partnership with the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, we’ve helped more than one million kids learn the importance of physical activity and proper nutrition….

Hm-m-m-m. Methinks the corporation protests too much.   I love that they are using marketing to reposition themselves as being--well--not as crappy as they really are, and, by the way, you could just exercise to work off those extra nutritionally-useless calories you just consumed.

OK, there are 155 calories in a can of Coke classic. That means that if you are a 135 pound, 5'5", 50 year old woman you would have to either walk for more than an hour, jog for approximately 1/2 an hour, or work out at the gym for about 45 minutes.


I don't know what your day is like, but for me, trying to find an the extra exercise time to work off that Coke just isn't there.


As a former diet soda addict (clean over 20 years now), I can attest that there is absolutely no reason to drink any kind of soda at any time.   I not only don't ever drink soda ever, I never have it in my house anymore, even for guests, and have never provided soda to my children.   Both my son and daughter have tried soda (offered to them by others when I wasn't around), and both will now turn it down when offered to them.

Getting off of soda helped get rid of a lot of the "bloat" (water retention) that I used to have, and I found I wasn't as fatigued as before.  Furthermore, I stopped being plagued by constant head-aches. 

By not serving (or offering) my children soda, they actually PREFER drinking water.   I kid you not.  Offer my kids a soda, and they'll ask for a bottle of water.   Both also love real fruit juices (100% juice or nothing).  

I wish my parents had been as strict with me.  

Is Exercising in our Genes?

Turns out there may be a genetic reason why some of us love to exercise while others loathe it. 

I'm in the love it catagory.  I always loved a good strenous work-out-whether it was skiing, hiking, running--you name it.  That's why I love Ashtanga yoga.  I've taken plenty of friends with me to an Ashtanga class and their reaction was "too hard, I never want to do this again."

Nutritional Propaganda--Eating Breakfast

I've always been leery of "nutritional propaganda."  You know, campaigns trying to convince you that you should be eating (or not eating) this or that.  

One bit of traditional advice that I've always held suspect was the idea that too lose weight, you had to eat a humongous breakfast.  

Now, I'm one of those people who has to eat breakfast.  Don't ask me why, but I can't get through my morning without having something, even if it's a little fruit to get me going. 

But, if I've had a lot to eat the day before, I always thought it insane that you're supposed to then eat some huge breakfast the next day.  Let's face it, if I went out for a special meal with my husband the night before, I'm just not all that hungry.

It always seemed strange to me that we were somehow biologically programmed to eat breakfast every morning when our ancient ancestors basically ate when they got food, and that often meant days with no food much less three distinct meals.

And, if you're the type that just isn't all that hungry in the morning, then why should you stuff your face when you're not in the mood?

So, I've always held the "eat breakfast" and "breakfast is the most important meal of the day" mantras with some speculation, generally attributing them to propaganda promulgated by all those food manufacturers selling breakfast cereal. 

It just didn't make sense.  If you eat when you're not hungry, how on earth does that induce you to eat less throughout the day?

Well, as it turns out, my skepticism was justified.  New research shows that eating breakfast does not lead to a cut in the overall intake of daily calories.  The study showed that people ate the same at lunch and dinner irregardless of what they ate for breakfast.   If someone ate 400 calories for breakfast, then they generally ate 400 calories more then the person who didn't eat breakfast.

I think that to control weight, it's more important to listen to your body then watch the clock.  If you're hungry, eat, if not, don't even if the clock says its time for breakfast, lunch or dinner.



Cleansing Is Hell-But worth it.

Last week, I posted that I was starting a spring cleanse using the Nature's Secret product The Ultimate Cleanse. It's a product I've used before with some success. Yesterday, however, one of my commentators wrote to me:

I got the Detox package you posted a few days ago, and since Tuesday night I have been taking it. After I got the package I started reading the Amazon review and was not very comfortable to take it, but since I had opened the package I did. On Amazon some people had posted about side effects, but I have to say, I am not experiencing any side bad effects. I am experiencing side effects as explained there, but nothing uncomfortable.

My curiosity was peeked, so I went to Amazon to read the reviews. I have to admit that some of them were pretty negative, but since I've cleansed before, not unexpected. Most of the "bad" side effects they detailed, were pretty typical of what happens during a cleanse.

The problem, I guess, was that people bought into the idea of "cleansing" without fully understanding what it means to cleanse. I started using the Ultimate Cleanse on the advice of my knowledgeable, local health food store dude. You know the type, an older, former hippy-type, with long, flowing gray hair.

The first time that I did the Ultimate Cleanse cleanse, I had already done several hard-core cleanses, including a couple of juice fasts and a raw food vegan fast. So, I was already pretty "clean," and didn't really have any extreme reactions.

I'm going to be honest here--cleansing when you start doing it can be pretty uncomfortable. It's no walk in the park. It's not uncommon to feel like absolute shit the first couple of times you cleanse during the actual cleansing period. Afterwards you feel great, but the first few times I did cleanses, I had serious head-aches, ran fevers and my skin broke out--all pretty typical experiences.

You feel awful, because as you "cleanse" toxins stored in your fat are re-released into your system. The cleanse helps you to rid your body of these toxins, but before they clear out you full just awful. We all react to cleanses in our own ways. My sister when she cleanses has to set days aside to do nothing but sleep.

I'm at a point now that when I cleanse, most of the worst stuff is behind me. I feel a little sluggish, get a couple of minor break-outs, and maybe want to take a nap now and again, but it's basically all stuff I can deal with.

I know many plenty who are willing to "suffer to be beautiful." As someone who's gone through her own share of bikini waxes, I can attest to suffering for beauty myself. So, it always mystifies me why these same people find it intolerable to do a little "suffering" to be clean of toxins? In the end, it makes you beautiful as well.

We've Got More Junk in Our Collective Trunk

According to the Federal Transportation Administration we need bigger seats on buses because we've got too much junk in our trunks. We've gotten so much fatter that the FTA is recommending that seats be designed to accommodate an average passenger weight 175 pounds versus the previous 150 pounds. I guess the good news is that bigger seats on buses will mean fewer seats on buses, forcing more people to stand (and thus burn more calories). God knows we can use it.

All Natural? Really?

You know that the words "all Natural" on a package has reached a new low of meaningless when Frito-lay starts putting them on a package of Barbeque-flavored potato chips. I thought that this WSJ piece on how Frito-Lay and Kraft are reformulating their junk food to make them less junky and slap the label "all Natural" on them was quite illuminating. But while removing some of the junkier ingredients in junk food is, of course, a positive step, in the end you have to remember that these "all Natural" products are just a better class of crap. The article writer seems have agreed with me:

Making snacks with natural ingredients doesn't necessarily make them healthy, nutritionists and industry critics caution, even if they are potentially less bad. That includes potato chips, which contain a lot of fat and salt. The revamped Frito-Lay's chips' fat and sugar content hasn't changed much.

"Foods that are less loaded with sugar, fat and salt, that's what's important. Everything else is marketing," says David Kessler a former Food and Drug Administration commissioner and snack-industry critic.

I think Marion Nestle said it well here:

But isn’t a “healthy” processed snack food an oxymoron? They can tweak and tweak the contents, but these products will still be heavily processed. Too much evidence now concludes that marketing a product as “healthy” or “natural” makes people think it has no calories. And as I keep saying, just because a processed food is a little bit less bad than it used to be, doesn’t necessarily make it a good choice.

Stay Away from those Non-Stick Pans

I've written before about the dangers of those chemical laden "miracle" non-stick pans, but now there's even more evidence that Teflon plans should be avoided.

Turns out that the main ingredient used in these pans, PFC's, can bring on early menopause.

But then, if a pan has to come with a warning not to have a bird in the room when you heat it up, shouldn't that tell you something?

Me, I'll continue to stick with my seasoned cast iron pans.

Response to a Reader

I had a response to this post that I thought I should respond to. The commenter wrote:

At the risk of drawing a lot of ire - why does it need to be the government that does something? We don't need government control in every aspect of our lives - and once we invite it in, it's too hard to get rid of if it doesn't work. Parents need to take back control of teaching their children how to make good choices - and they need to band together on a local level to have their schools remove or limit the soda machines, etc. Start forcing the local school boards to take action by being a vocal parent.

This isn't an unusual response. I've gotten this "the government shouldn't get involved" mantra before. What I found curious about it was that while the commentator first says "government stay out, let parents be in charge," she then ADVOCATES GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT in the form of removing soda machines, etc. from schools.

It always mystifies me when people are completely unaware of what government involvement means. I'm always baffled by the people who scream whenever there's a pot-hole in the road, but then go to rallies saying they've against taxes.

EARTH TO PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES IF YOU WANT SMOOTH ROADS, BRIDGES THAT DON'T FALL DOWN, SCHOOLS THAT CAN EDUCATE KIDS TO COMPETE WITH OTHER COUNTRIES, PUBLIC BEACHES AND PARKS, ETC. THEN YOU HAVE TO PAY TAXES.

This is reality, our current rates of low taxation are COMPLETELY UNSUSTAINABLE. There is absolutely NO WAY to continue them without dramatic cuts to just about every single public service we hold dear.

The point of yesterday's post advocating that Congress do something about child-hood obesity, was that the majority of people now want government action. Government would not be "controlling" our lives, but controlling the manufacturers making profits off of making our kids fat. And, that's the rub, by "controlling" these manufacturers, it's likely that they'll make less money.

That did not use to be a problem when it came to our government protecting us. Now it is. Now, when corporations stand to make less profits, we the public lose.

But still, I get this "we don't want the government controlling us" argument.
Ok, here's reality--Government taking intervention has saved countless lives in this country.

Do you think the government shouldn't have gotten involved after the Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire? Wasn't government intervention there, in the form of work-place safety regulations better? Or do you really believe that government shouldn't have stepped in and regulated manufacturers and let people continue to die?

I mean, if you read about Triangle you hear echos of today. Here's what one writer had to say about it:

Aided by Frances Perkins, a young social worker who was in Washington Square looking on in horror as the seamstresses jumped to their deaths, Smith and Wagner visited hundreds of factories and sweatshops. Over time, they authored and enacted legislation that required certain workplaces to have sprinklers, open doors, fireproof stairwells and functioning fire escapes; limited women’s workweeks to 54 hours and banned children under 18 from certain hazardous jobs. (Years later, Wagner, by then a U.S. senator, authored — with help from Perkins, who had become labor secretary — the legislation establishing Social Security; he also wrote the bill legalizing collective bargaining.)

Businesses reacted as if the revolution had arrived. The changes to the fire code, said a spokesman for the Associated Industries of New York, would lead to “the wiping out of industry in this state.” The regulations, wrote George Olvany, special counsel to the Real Estate Board of New York City, would force expenditures on precautions that were “absolutely needless and useless.”

“The best government is the least possible government,” said Laurence McGuire, president of the Real Estate Board. “To my mind, this [the post-Triangle regulations] is all wrong.”

Such complaints, of course, are with us still. We hear them from mine operators after fatal explosions, from bankers after they’ve crashed the economy, from energy moguls after their rig explodes or their plant starts leaking radiation. We hear them from politicians who take their money. We hear them from Republican members of Congress and from some Democrats, too. A century after Triangle, greed encased in libertarianism remains a fixture of — and danger to — American life.

How about food safety rules? Do you have any idea how many Americans died from unsanitary food prior to those rules being put in place?

Huge corporations and billionaires have spent billions of dollars to convince the public that any kind government regulation of business is "bad." If government was really so "bad" then, why would these people have to spend so much to buy our thoughts and politicians? Wouldn't we just all gravitate to that view?

The truth is, that governments have always existed for one reason--to protect their citizens. If the king didn't effectively do it he eventually got thrown out, and as events in the Middle East show, even violent dictators have to eventually pay the price for not safeguarding their citizenship.

Right now our government isn't doing a very good job of protecting us because the people its supposed to have protected us against, bought it and managed to buy enough of the media to convince the very people who are getting screwed by the lack of government control, that lack of government control is what they want.

OK Congress--Do Something

According to a recent poll, the majority of Americans think that the government should do something about child-hood obesity.

Of course, although significant majorities see the need for government intervention, and the number will likely rise, the likelihood of the government actually doing something is slim.

That's because food manufacturers have big bucks to put in politicians pockets, and food manufacturers want to keep kids fat and obese because that's how they make money.

If the government was going to do something, it would be measures, like taxing soda, that reduce consumption. That would hurt profits.

So, while I take heart that the "we have the right to eat desert" message of the Palin faction of this country is pretty much only resonating with a small group of ignorant idiots, the reality is nothing will change.

Rather sad.

Diet Vieux, Nouveau Nom

There's a new fad diet on the horizon, and this one is connected to royalty. The Dukan diet has been popular in Europe for a while now, but its promoters are now bringing it to the US.

The Dukan diet sounds a lot like Atkins and South Beach, in that it involves eating copious amounts of protein but very little carbs. Just the name is new.

Something tells me in the next few months I'll be having to arrange my lunch dates with girlfriends around their "Dukaning." In other words, they'll be no sharing of Paella because someone can't eat the rice.

I've been through this before, I had countless friends on both Atkins and South Beach.

And, you know what? Those friends all regained whatever weight they lost while on those diets.

So here we go again.

Losing Weight Starts in the Kitchen

I was happy to see this little piece on Jezebel. I'm always thrilled to hear or read about someone taking the time and the initiative to learn to cook.

What disturbed me, however, is that quite a few of the comments to this story were from people declaring that they didn't know how to cook and never wanted to learn.

I was particularly shocked by the number of people writing that they purposedly refuse to learn to cook, because if they do, people will expect them too.

I want my family to expect me to cook for them, and eventually I want them to cook for themselves.

The only way to control what goes into your body and the bodies of your family is to prepare your own food.

Whether you get processed convenience foods, take-out, or go to restaurants, you are ceding a measure of control over your own body to someone else, and that is never a good thing.

Of course I cook for my children. Do you have any idea what goes into kid's convenience foods? Read the label, and you'll be scrambling up eggs for the kids regularly as well.

Six Rules for Weight Loss

1. Losing Weight for good is a life commitment, not a temporary change. To put it plainly, you got fat because of your current eating habits, so if you go back to them, you'll get fat again. The only way to take weight off and keep it off is to make permanent changes to your diet.

2. Losing Weight starts in the kitchen. Take control of your food and you take control of your weight. Take-out food, restaurant food and convenience foods will make you fat. That is a fact. Portions are too large, and the food contains too much fat, sodium and calories. If you want to lose weight for good, you have to learn your way around a kitchen, and you have to learn to prepare food for yourself.

3. Don't believe advertisements or health or weight control claims on packaging. The goal of advertisements and claims on product packaging is to sell stuff, not make you healthier or thinner. Chances are that if the box says it will help you get thinner, it's more likely that the product will actually make you fatter.

4. Eat better eat less. Eat higher quality foods, such as organic, and eat less of it. Scale down your portion sizes and focus on higher quality foods made from fresh fruits and vegetables. If you eat meat, fish and dairy, go organic. Yes you'll pay more, but you should be eating less anyway. If you go to a restaurant, your goal should not be to get the most food for your money, but the best food for your money.

5. You can't do it alone. If you have a family, you have to bring the whole family along to better eating. You can't sit at the dinner table for the rest of your life eating a salad while the rest of your family gorges on cheeseburgers. The whole family needs to be cutting back on junk foods, meat, dairy and overly processed foods. It's not easy, but if you take it slow and introduce healthy foods slowly while at the same time eliminating unhealthy food, it can be done. Better yet, don't introduce unhealthy foods to begin with, and make things like soda a special treat.

6. You have to move more. Getting to the gym is great, but you have to learn how to incorporate more movement into your daily life. When we were an agricultural society, it wasn't unusual for people to burn through 7,000 calories a day--so they could eat all the bacon and dairy they could get our hands on (which was still less then what we eat today). In today's world, many of us only burn through 2,000 or fewer calories a day. Learning to incorporate more movement into our everyday lives is probably one of the best things you can do for weight control. For example, take the stairs instead of the escalator or elevator, take the extra trip up the stairs instead of letting things pile up on the bottom for one big trip up, walk to your mailbox instead of waiting to drive by it, learn to walk around and pace while you're on the phone instead of sitting.

Spring Cleaning

I don't know what it is about Spring, but I always find myself wanting to clean house. I start opening up drawers, cabinets and closets and find myself disgusted with the mess and clutter.

I swear if I had the time, I'd spend an entire week doing nothing but just cleaning out the house and hauling stuff over to Good Will.

In recent years, the beginning of Spring also has me wanting to start a good cleanse. After the holidays, the cold weather, and all the heavier food, I just want to clean myself out and lighten up as well.

A few weeks ago when my husband was out of town, I did a rather intense three day cleanse. I drank a special brewed tea twice a day, and only ate fruits and vegetables. I felt great afterwards, but was real happy to eat a nice piece of whole grain bread and have a little fish.

For the last three years I've started Spring by going on a light month-long cleanse. Nothing is really banished from my diet, instead I go easier on eating any red meat and dairy (and try to avoid it as much as possible), reduce alcohol and caffeine consumption (again trying to avoid it if possible), and upping my consumption of raw fruits and vegetables.

I also use a great product to support my month-long cleanse. The Ultimate Cleanse by Nature's Secret is a herbal blend which helps to detox the system. You can read more about this product here.

By using this product, I can cleanse easily without any major disruptions in my lifestyle. As a working Mom, this is, of course, a major advantage. Sure, I'd love to get away to some exotic spa to do a full scale cleanse for two weeks, but I don't have the time, babysitting (or money), for that. Just doing any kind of intense cleanse at home is tough when you have a husband and kids. It's kind of hard sticking to a juice fast for a week, when you're grilling up grilled cheese sandwiches for the kids.

Now, cleansing isn't really about losing weight. It's about getting healthy. But the reality is, healthy translates into getting to one's optimal weight and keeping it there.