It isn't easy. It's hard: too hard for most people.
Metabolism varies depending on what you do, and what you eat. It can vary as much as 700 calories for people with similar body composition. That is, I may look exactly the same as you, and exercise the same amount, but I can eat 700 calories more than you each day without gaining weight.
Thus you are burning more calories than I am: enough more to equal or exceed your consumption.
These are problems that can be overcome, of course, but claiming it is a simple inequality is ignoring a number of complications, tautological, and not particularly helpful.
Attempting to deny the existence of that simple inequality avoids the hard truth: you must take in fewer calories than you burn in order to lose weight. Yes, of course the burn rate varies over time and from one individual to another. That's why "x calories per day" diets are crap. There are only two ways to get rid of fat: cut it out or get your body to burn it for energy. The only way to do the latter is to reduce your calorie intake to below your needs (you try to increase your needs, of course, but that is the same thing),
There's a lot more to it than just aerobic fitness, though. You also need to maintain strength, range of motion, and flexibility (especially as you get older). Otherwise you'll end up with lower back pain that keeps you from taking those walks, a knee injury from stepping off a curb wrong, pulled muscles from trying to reach the top shelf...
There is as much emphasis on exercise as there is on weight. Fat and/or flabby people know what they "ought" to do. They choose to do otherwise. That's their right (which is not to say that it is wrong to continue warning them).
Well, 90% of one's max HR is simply that; to a certain point, it'll be higher the more fit you are.
No it won't. In fact, as you get fit your max HR may decrease. However, you will be able sustain it much longer. Your heart will become stronger, will move more blood per stroke, and your circulatory resistance will decrease. Your resting HR (and your blood pressure) will drop substantially so that your ratio of max HR to resting HR will increase even if your max HR decreases.
Not unless you have a serious heart condition. It is impossible for a healthy person (no matter how unfit) to injure his heart by working it hard.
Interval training is excellent. I do roughly what the article describes every other day (on the other days I just run two miles). This keeps my blood pressure below 120 and my resting heart rate in the low fifties.
IIRC urandom reseeds itself whenever there is entropy available but free runs when entropy runs out instead of blocking as random does. Thus until the entropy pool runs dry the two are the same.
That was "planned obsiolescence"[1]. It was evil. This is "biodegradeability". It is "Green". You are supposed to want your things to rot and fall apart. Creates jobs, you see. Buying stuff that is durable and using it until it wears out is what old people do. After all, you have to throw your 'pod away and buy the new model ever six months anyway, right?
[1] Not really, but that's what the popular press redfined it as.
It probably isn't. If it is, have the lawyer write up a set of modifications that would make the policy acceptable to you. Present it to your employer and if he won't agree to it, quit.
He was arrested by the Maylasian police. Interpol just forwarded the request from Saudi Arabia. That's what they do. Don't impute more power to them than they already have. They'll have arrest powers soon enough and will start hauling people off to the ICC for "hate crimes" and "crimes against humanity". You'll all applaud. At first.
Thereby giving them another club to threaten the media with and further entrenching the establised organizations. No. Publish all the communications after the fact or keep them completely secret (the juicy stuff will leak, of course).
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't easy. It's hard: too hard for most people.
Thus you are burning more calories than I am: enough more to equal or exceed your consumption.
Attempting to deny the existence of that simple inequality avoids the hard truth: you must take in fewer calories than you burn in order to lose weight. Yes, of course the burn rate varies over time and from one individual to another. That's why "x calories per day" diets are crap. There are only two ways to get rid of fat: cut it out or get your body to burn it for energy. The only way to do the latter is to reduce your calorie intake to below your needs (you try to increase your needs, of course, but that is the same thing),
> Maybe you're young and/or lucky enough that you don't need exercise.
There is no such person. You may find your flabbiness tolerable now but it will come back to haunt you in a few decades.
> ...eaten by a civet...
An organic civet.
> What is your purpose?
Increased length and quality of life.
There's a lot more to it than just aerobic fitness, though. You also need to maintain strength, range of motion, and flexibility (especially as you get older). Otherwise you'll end up with lower back pain that keeps you from taking those walks, a knee injury from stepping off a curb wrong, pulled muscles from trying to reach the top shelf...
The key problem is will power. I guess we need a pill for that.
There is as much emphasis on exercise as there is on weight. Fat and/or flabby people know what they "ought" to do. They choose to do otherwise. That's their right (which is not to say that it is wrong to continue warning them).
If you consume fewer calories than you burn you will lose weight. No amount of adapting can get around that.
Someone with very high prices. (Or you could do without...)
Abdominal obesity leads to diabetes even for the fit fat.
Please provide a link. I can't find that on their site. Google finds the phrase on americanrunning.org but it is not credited to the AHA.
No it won't. In fact, as you get fit your max HR may decrease. However, you will be able sustain it much longer. Your heart will become stronger, will move more blood per stroke, and your circulatory resistance will decrease. Your resting HR (and your blood pressure) will drop substantially so that your ratio of max HR to resting HR will increase even if your max HR decreases.
You don't need any gadgets: just a stretch of road and a supply of self-discipline.
> Because I think it's boring.
You'll find diabetes and heart disease boring as well. But don't worry: Alzheimer's will help you forget the boredom.
Not unless you have a serious heart condition. It is impossible for a healthy person (no matter how unfit) to injure his heart by working it hard.
Interval training is excellent. I do roughly what the article describes every other day (on the other days I just run two miles). This keeps my blood pressure below 120 and my resting heart rate in the low fifties.
> That is interesting, how often is "frequently"?
IIRC urandom reseeds itself whenever there is entropy available but free runs when entropy runs out instead of blocking as random does. Thus until the entropy pool runs dry the two are the same.
> ...designed to fail?
That was "planned obsiolescence"[1]. It was evil. This is "biodegradeability". It is "Green". You are supposed to want your things to rot and fall apart. Creates jobs, you see. Buying stuff that is durable and using it until it wears out is what old people do. After all, you have to throw your 'pod away and buy the new model ever six months anyway, right?
[1] Not really, but that's what the popular press redfined it as.
Made from 100% post-consumer waste, of course.
> Do you really want one without Ethernet?
I do.
It probably isn't. If it is, have the lawyer write up a set of modifications that would make the policy acceptable to you. Present it to your employer and if he won't agree to it, quit.
There is an exemption for Free Software. I agree that the controls are asinine, though.
He was arrested by the Maylasian police. Interpol just forwarded the request from Saudi Arabia. That's what they do. Don't impute more power to them than they already have. They'll have arrest powers soon enough and will start hauling people off to the ICC for "hate crimes" and "crimes against humanity". You'll all applaud. At first.
Install a bidet.
Google shares. Microsoft would get hammered in such a war.
Thereby giving them another club to threaten the media with and further entrenching the establised organizations. No. Publish all the communications after the fact or keep them completely secret (the juicy stuff will leak, of course).