Anytime you outlaw possession of something then your goal is just to put as many people in prison as possible. This does nothing to prevent children from being abused and it's more to give law enforcement the authority and excuse to snoop on peoples computers.
I think we should go after real pedophiles, which would be the people who created the child pornography. If the police want to talk to people who downloaded the images that would be more helpful than putting them in prison. Maybe these people can help the police track own where it came from.
Lets accept that politicians are bribed robots programmed by moneyed masters.
The reason the RIAA/MPAA copyright cartel is making the rules in this instance is because they won over the moneyed masters who control the politicians. If you support limited copyright rather than unlimited then you are in the minority of the moneyed masters because in most cases unlimited copyright just like some of the scams on wallstreet is free money. The owner of the copyright doesn't have to work for it.
I'm not against copyright but I'm against using copyright infringement as a political weapon.
But you need more than new politicians. You need "your" politicians. You need more influence, and it will only change when people who profit from peer to peer are financing campaigns and getting people elected. It will only change when the political atmosphere changes. The old timer curmudgeons rule the political arena and until you put new minds not just new faces into these positions it will not change. Keep in mind that bribery/quid pro quo is how things get done and corruption is how things work.
This is the same sort of moves that were made during prohibitions and during the war on drugs. They do not care about the consequences to the economy or about the UK citizen. He only cares about the people he really works for and thats the copyright cartel. This Mandelson works for the RIAA/MPAA. He is their man, not yours. If you want this to change then your man will have to be in that position.
Those hormones get released when you do any weight lifting at all. Those hormones get released if you eat the right foods or get enough sleep. From a body building perspective, if you have naturally big body parts you should strive for balance and for building muscles which wont build on their own.
If you will genetically grow big legs just by eating more theres really no need to waste effort training them, especially if you are interested in having a balanced bodybuilder physique. Yes it might be slightly healthier to train them but only in the short term, in the long term it doesn't make a difference.
"Not. Not in reality (I haven't seen any third world starving person looking "fat") nor within context (people with a high percentage of fat on his diet may look fatty; but if they don't eat fat but say, mainly vegetables, white fish, a bit of carbohydrates -pasta and rice, and a bit of red meat, they won't look fatty no matter what)."
Thats a result of quality of calories, not amount. If you don't get enough vitamins and minerals then you'll look and be sickly. If you get enough vitamins and minerals your weight will become stable at the normal levels. Plenty of Americans consume very low calorie diets and because they take vitamins and get proper nutrition they don't look like they went through a famine.
In 2006 I was 156lbs, my lowest weight. I reached this weight by accident trying a vegetarian diet. This weight was too low because I felt weak all the time. I started bulking up my consuming more calories. I consumed meat again but I focused on a high intake of omega 3 fat and fish oil along with calories. Fish oil allows you to bulk up muscle without putting on any fat, as long as you consume a low glycemic diet with the fish oil.
I do not eat much junk food or dairy, and I would not have gained any fat at all if I didn't drink the occasional bottle of wine or drink the occasional beer.
Bulking is fairly easy when you are in your 20s because testosterone levels are naturally high. Fish oil and higher calorie and protein intake raises testosterone levels even more, and if you lift weights it keeps testosterone levels high also. Right now I'm in a cutting phase this month, I actually bulked up too much and while I don't look bad, I'm about 20lbs above my ideal weight so it's time to cut down. At a rate of 10lbs a month by December I'll be at my ideal weight if I stick to it.
Clean bulking is just a matter of eating right. If you don't eat junk food and you have good genes you'll be able to bulk almost all muscle if you are young. Low glycemic index, high calorie and high in omega 3 fats is how you clean bulk. When you consume enough omega 3s the body actually burns more fat and builds more muscle because DHA increases testosterone levels somehow.
Diet, resistance training, and minimal aerobics. In fact you could lose weight without doing any aerobics at all, it's just when you get below 15% body fat percentage then you have to push yourself with aerobics or cardio.
Also you are consuming over 1000 calories which is definitely the slow way. If you lose 3lbs a week then its probably all fat. If you lose more than that then you are losing muscle. Usually you have muscle to spare if you bulked up, but the point is to have the lowest body fat percentage.
However the amount of muscle you lose is determined by the rate of weight loss. If you cut calories a lot, like under 1000 calories a day, then you don't want to exercise too much. You do that type of diet when you wont be exercising at all but sitting on your ass all day and still want to lose weight. If you are exercising then you need at least 1000 calories a day typically but the deciding factor as to whether you burn muscle is how much protein you consume and how much water you drink. Body builders expect to lose muscle before a competition, so they cut for 3 months typically after bulking to as much muscle as their genes and body will let them carry they starve themselves down.
30lbs in 3 months sounds exactly like what you are supposed to lose in a cutting cycle so you appear to know what you are talking about. As far as 5lbs of it being muscle, 5lbs of muscle doesn't take everyone 6 months to gain. I can gain 5lbs of muscle every month with minimal exercise. I admit I'm not 40 so thats probably why, but even at 40, if you eat right and you train right you can get 1lb of muscle per week with little to no fat gain at all. In fact when I bulk I do it in such a way that I gain nearly pure muscle, I bulk hardcore for 2 or 3 weeks out of the month then I cut back for the final week of the month. The fat comes off easier and easier as you gain more muscle, and if you dont cut for longer than a week, you'll gain all your muscle back naturally but the fat will remain gone.
I alway assume it's 50/50 but the truth is it depends on what you eat. If you eat enough protein and fat while on a low calorie diet and you exercise you wont burn much muscle. Also it depends on the rate of speed you cut the pounds. If you drop 5lbs a week or more then you will be losing half your weight in muscle. If its 2lbs a week its probably all fat.
There is a reason why body builders lift weights. They lift weights so that when they go into the cutting phase and burn muscle they'll still have some muscles to show off after dropping 20 or 30lbs. The body burns muscle and fat together, so its going to burn some muscle with the fat, but if you have plenty of muscle to spare along with the fat to spare, you'll be just fine. Most people can go to the gym and bulk up their muscles all year and then diet like crazy for 3 months.
You don't lose muscle when you run, bike, and or lift weights along with cutting calories because exercise is what keeps your resting metabolism up. It's really very simple, a few hours a week of exercise will guarantee that your resting metabolism stays high.
And you will metabolize muscle either way so its best to build as much muscle as you can BEFORE you drop the calories. You can then expect to lose 20% of muscle.
In order to lose weight for cutting purposes you only have to do enough to keep your metabolism from slowing down when you enter starvation mode. If you just burn 100 calories 3 times a week that alone would be enough to keep your body burning fat all week. It's not important that you burn a lot of calories, its just to keep your body burning itself.
You are correct on paper but not in practice. If a person never exercises at all their metabolism will slow to a crawl and they'll stop losing weight after they reach a certain weight. Usually that certain weight is either slightly overweight, or within the healthy range. The problem with this is they'll look like a smaller fat person rather than a fit person.
Weight loss is not as important as fat loss. It's better to be ripped and obese, than to be small and chubby. The only way to lose fat is to combine weight lifting and exercise with a low calorie diet.
You don't want to build muscles which are naturally big according to your genetics. If you have naturally big legs genetically, you wont need to train them. When you eat more calories they'll grow big again. You should train and bulk in the areas where your physique is weakest, thats usually peoples abs, back, chest or arms, but its according to genetics. If you have poor genes for the lower body then train the lower body.
The point of lifting weights is to trigger muscle growth in areas which don't build muscle from just walking.
There is only one way to lose fat, and thats a healthy low calorie diet combined with exercise. I'm poor so losing weight is actually cheaper and easier than gaining it. When in a cutting cycle I save money on food because I consume less. To lose 3lbs a week requires no exercise at all. To lose 5+lbs a week requires aerobic exercise 30 mins 3 times a week to keep the metabolism from slowing.
So to lower your body fat percentage you bulk, cut, bulk, cut, bulk, cut, bulk, cut, for the rest of your life. Eventually after a few years of bulking and cutting cycles your body fat percentage will approach the single digits. Bodybuilders who aren't on drugs get that ripped look by doing this. And once you get that ripped look and lower body fat percentage down to the single digits its near impossible to get fat because your muscle to fat ratio is so off balance that even if you pack on weight, you still will look ripped. I know because I packed on 30lbs, but because I bulked cleanly and slowly at a pace of 5lbs a month, and because I had a very low body fat percentage when I started, my body fat percentage is still low and I just weight 30lbs more. This is how athletes bulk up, as oppose to drinking a lot of beer and eatting junk food and bulking up so fat that you gain mostly fat. Whenever you gain weight you will gain muscle and fat if you do it slowly and you lift weights, and the next time you cut down, you'll lose weight but you'll keep a lot of the muscle you gained.
You will lose weight when you switch diet at first because you are cutting the carbs and sugar but once your body adapts to that you'll gain your weight back. The trick to keeping your body fat percentage at the lowest possible level is to go through a cutting cycle once a year. This is where you train for approximately 3 months bootcamp style. You skip breakfast in the morning or skin dinner at night, and you run in place of that meal. The combination of skipping meals and running causes weight loss. If running is not your thing (I don't run), then play basketball or ride a bike. Anything which keeps your body moving for an hour is good enough. You don't even have to do it every day, but just a few times a week and its done to keep the metabolism from slowing down when you go into starvation mode.
That is the trick. You bulk, then you cut, then you bulk and then you cut until your body fat percentage goes down into the single digits. I judge my progress based around how much fat I have and how much muscle I'm gaining. Based on how fast I run or for how long. Weight is never accurate enough to determine progress unless you are 50 years old and cannot judge progress in other ways.
Slashdot Mirror
Anytime you outlaw possession of something then your goal is just to put as many people in prison as possible. This does nothing to prevent children from being abused and it's more to give law enforcement the authority and excuse to snoop on peoples computers.
I think we should go after real pedophiles, which would be the people who created the child pornography. If the police want to talk to people who downloaded the images that would be more helpful than putting them in prison. Maybe these people can help the police track own where it came from.
It's better to go to prison for not decrypting your key than to go to prison for being a convicted sex offender.
If you want freedom of speech on the internet, encrypt your entire harddrive. Don't ever go online with an unencrypted drive.
Doesn't the UK have a house of Lords? Wasn't the house of Lords unelected officials?
Fill m in on UK politics if I'm wrong but this seems to be how they always operate.
Lets accept that politicians are bribed robots programmed by moneyed masters.
The reason the RIAA/MPAA copyright cartel is making the rules in this instance is because they won over the moneyed masters who control the politicians. If you support limited copyright rather than unlimited then you are in the minority of the moneyed masters because in most cases unlimited copyright just like some of the scams on wallstreet is free money. The owner of the copyright doesn't have to work for it.
I'm not against copyright but I'm against using copyright infringement as a political weapon.
But you need more than new politicians. You need "your" politicians. You need more influence, and it will only change when people who profit from peer to peer are financing campaigns and getting people elected. It will only change when the political atmosphere changes. The old timer curmudgeons rule the political arena and until you put new minds not just new faces into these positions it will not change. Keep in mind that bribery/quid pro quo is how things get done and corruption is how things work.
This is the same sort of moves that were made during prohibitions and during the war on drugs. They do not care about the consequences to the economy or about the UK citizen. He only cares about the people he really works for and thats the copyright cartel. This Mandelson works for the RIAA/MPAA. He is their man, not yours. If you want this to change then your man will have to be in that position.
Those hormones get released when you do any weight lifting at all. Those hormones get released if you eat the right foods or get enough sleep. From a body building perspective, if you have naturally big body parts you should strive for balance and for building muscles which wont build on their own.
If you will genetically grow big legs just by eating more theres really no need to waste effort training them, especially if you are interested in having a balanced bodybuilder physique. Yes it might be slightly healthier to train them but only in the short term, in the long term it doesn't make a difference.
"Not. Not in reality (I haven't seen any third world starving person looking "fat") nor within context (people with a high percentage of fat on his diet may look fatty; but if they don't eat fat but say, mainly vegetables, white fish, a bit of carbohydrates -pasta and rice, and a bit of red meat, they won't look fatty no matter what)."
Thats a result of quality of calories, not amount. If you don't get enough vitamins and minerals then you'll look and be sickly. If you get enough vitamins and minerals your weight will become stable at the normal levels. Plenty of Americans consume very low calorie diets and because they take vitamins and get proper nutrition they don't look like they went through a famine.
In 2006 I was 156lbs, my lowest weight. I reached this weight by accident trying a vegetarian diet. This weight was too low because I felt weak all the time. I started bulking up my consuming more calories. I consumed meat again but I focused on a high intake of omega 3 fat and fish oil along with calories. Fish oil allows you to bulk up muscle without putting on any fat, as long as you consume a low glycemic diet with the fish oil.
I do not eat much junk food or dairy, and I would not have gained any fat at all if I didn't drink the occasional bottle of wine or drink the occasional beer.
Bulking is fairly easy when you are in your 20s because testosterone levels are naturally high. Fish oil and higher calorie and protein intake raises testosterone levels even more, and if you lift weights it keeps testosterone levels high also. Right now I'm in a cutting phase this month, I actually bulked up too much and while I don't look bad, I'm about 20lbs above my ideal weight so it's time to cut down. At a rate of 10lbs a month by December I'll be at my ideal weight if I stick to it.
Clean bulking is just a matter of eating right. If you don't eat junk food and you have good genes you'll be able to bulk almost all muscle if you are young. Low glycemic index, high calorie and high in omega 3 fats is how you clean bulk. When you consume enough omega 3s the body actually burns more fat and builds more muscle because DHA increases testosterone levels somehow.
Actually it does work.
You gain or lose weight based on how many calories consumed. A low gi diet means you'll gain mostly muscle but I've bulked and cut on this diet.
Cardio is used to keep the metabolism fast and keep your body from slowing down in starvation mode.
If you eat a couple avocados a day, and maybe an orange, along with some protein you'll be fine.
Diet, resistance training, and minimal aerobics. In fact you could lose weight without doing any aerobics at all, it's just when you get below 15% body fat percentage then you have to push yourself with aerobics or cardio.
Also you are consuming over 1000 calories which is definitely the slow way. If you lose 3lbs a week then its probably all fat. If you lose more than that then you are losing muscle. Usually you have muscle to spare if you bulked up, but the point is to have the lowest body fat percentage.
However the amount of muscle you lose is determined by the rate of weight loss. If you cut calories a lot, like under 1000 calories a day, then you don't want to exercise too much. You do that type of diet when you wont be exercising at all but sitting on your ass all day and still want to lose weight. If you are exercising then you need at least 1000 calories a day typically but the deciding factor as to whether you burn muscle is how much protein you consume and how much water you drink. Body builders expect to lose muscle before a competition, so they cut for 3 months typically after bulking to as much muscle as their genes and body will let them carry they starve themselves down.
30lbs in 3 months sounds exactly like what you are supposed to lose in a cutting cycle so you appear to know what you are talking about. As far as 5lbs of it being muscle, 5lbs of muscle doesn't take everyone 6 months to gain. I can gain 5lbs of muscle every month with minimal exercise. I admit I'm not 40 so thats probably why, but even at 40, if you eat right and you train right you can get 1lb of muscle per week with little to no fat gain at all. In fact when I bulk I do it in such a way that I gain nearly pure muscle, I bulk hardcore for 2 or 3 weeks out of the month then I cut back for the final week of the month. The fat comes off easier and easier as you gain more muscle, and if you dont cut for longer than a week, you'll gain all your muscle back naturally but the fat will remain gone.
I alway assume it's 50/50 but the truth is it depends on what you eat. If you eat enough protein and fat while on a low calorie diet and you exercise you wont burn much muscle. Also it depends on the rate of speed you cut the pounds. If you drop 5lbs a week or more then you will be losing half your weight in muscle. If its 2lbs a week its probably all fat.
There is a reason why body builders lift weights. They lift weights so that when they go into the cutting phase and burn muscle they'll still have some muscles to show off after dropping 20 or 30lbs. The body burns muscle and fat together, so its going to burn some muscle with the fat, but if you have plenty of muscle to spare along with the fat to spare, you'll be just fine. Most people can go to the gym and bulk up their muscles all year and then diet like crazy for 3 months.
You don't lose muscle when you run, bike, and or lift weights along with cutting calories because exercise is what keeps your resting metabolism up. It's really very simple, a few hours a week of exercise will guarantee that your resting metabolism stays high.
And you will metabolize muscle either way so its best to build as much muscle as you can BEFORE you drop the calories. You can then expect to lose 20% of muscle.
In order to lose weight for cutting purposes you only have to do enough to keep your metabolism from slowing down when you enter starvation mode. If you just burn 100 calories 3 times a week that alone would be enough to keep your body burning fat all week. It's not important that you burn a lot of calories, its just to keep your body burning itself.
If your body fat percentage is the same as it was before then you aren't more fit, you just weigh less.
You are correct on paper but not in practice. If a person never exercises at all their metabolism will slow to a crawl and they'll stop losing weight after they reach a certain weight. Usually that certain weight is either slightly overweight, or within the healthy range. The problem with this is they'll look like a smaller fat person rather than a fit person.
Weight loss is not as important as fat loss. It's better to be ripped and obese, than to be small and chubby. The only way to lose fat is to combine weight lifting and exercise with a low calorie diet.
You don't want to build muscles which are naturally big according to your genetics. If you have naturally big legs genetically, you wont need to train them. When you eat more calories they'll grow big again. You should train and bulk in the areas where your physique is weakest, thats usually peoples abs, back, chest or arms, but its according to genetics. If you have poor genes for the lower body then train the lower body.
The point of lifting weights is to trigger muscle growth in areas which don't build muscle from just walking.
There is only one way to lose fat, and thats a healthy low calorie diet combined with exercise. I'm poor so losing weight is actually cheaper and easier than gaining it. When in a cutting cycle I save money on food because I consume less. To lose 3lbs a week requires no exercise at all. To lose 5+lbs a week requires aerobic exercise 30 mins 3 times a week to keep the metabolism from slowing.
So to lower your body fat percentage you bulk, cut, bulk, cut, bulk, cut, bulk, cut, for the rest of your life. Eventually after a few years of bulking and cutting cycles your body fat percentage will approach the single digits. Bodybuilders who aren't on drugs get that ripped look by doing this. And once you get that ripped look and lower body fat percentage down to the single digits its near impossible to get fat because your muscle to fat ratio is so off balance that even if you pack on weight, you still will look ripped. I know because I packed on 30lbs, but because I bulked cleanly and slowly at a pace of 5lbs a month, and because I had a very low body fat percentage when I started, my body fat percentage is still low and I just weight 30lbs more. This is how athletes bulk up, as oppose to drinking a lot of beer and eatting junk food and bulking up so fat that you gain mostly fat. Whenever you gain weight you will gain muscle and fat if you do it slowly and you lift weights, and the next time you cut down, you'll lose weight but you'll keep a lot of the muscle you gained.
You will lose weight when you switch diet at first because you are cutting the carbs and sugar but once your body adapts to that you'll gain your weight back. The trick to keeping your body fat percentage at the lowest possible level is to go through a cutting cycle once a year. This is where you train for approximately 3 months bootcamp style. You skip breakfast in the morning or skin dinner at night, and you run in place of that meal. The combination of skipping meals and running causes weight loss. If running is not your thing (I don't run), then play basketball or ride a bike. Anything which keeps your body moving for an hour is good enough. You don't even have to do it every day, but just a few times a week and its done to keep the metabolism from slowing down when you go into starvation mode.
That is the trick. You bulk, then you cut, then you bulk and then you cut until your body fat percentage goes down into the single digits. I judge my progress based around how much fat I have and how much muscle I'm gaining. Based on how fast I run or for how long. Weight is never accurate enough to determine progress unless you are 50 years old and cannot judge progress in other ways.