April 18, 2019
February 27, 2015
Perspective
A funny conversation I had yesterday shed some perspective (as if I needed any) on the dynamics of my family and the way that God has blessed us the past few years.
I was having lunch with a good friend of mine, although when I say good friend I don't know what that really means because this was probably the first time we'd seen eachother in nearly 2 years. But anyway, we were having lunch and we were talking about kids.
Ina and I were already married when we attended his wedding. I remember having lunch with him when they were expecting their first child, it was around the same time that we had learned of our infertility.
Yet, yesterday sitting there discussing with my friend, I asked him how old is his eldest (daughter) was. She was 3 and a half. He asked me how old mine was. My son is turning 4 next month. We both grinned at each other as we were reminded of God's love.
Kind of funny how that worked out.
I was having lunch with a good friend of mine, although when I say good friend I don't know what that really means because this was probably the first time we'd seen eachother in nearly 2 years. But anyway, we were having lunch and we were talking about kids.
Ina and I were already married when we attended his wedding. I remember having lunch with him when they were expecting their first child, it was around the same time that we had learned of our infertility.
Yet, yesterday sitting there discussing with my friend, I asked him how old is his eldest (daughter) was. She was 3 and a half. He asked me how old mine was. My son is turning 4 next month. We both grinned at each other as we were reminded of God's love.
Kind of funny how that worked out.
September 27, 2013
2013 TV Post 1
Believe it or not, the wife and I still have time for television despite a 2 and a half year old occupying the majority of our time. The little guy is quite a handful but once he's down for the night we like to spend a relaxing evening watching television (and eating lots of junk food). I'll just go through some of the shows we've watched this week.
The Blacklist
The premise of this show is a most wanted criminal shows up at the FBI's front door and surrenders and wants to help. That's the gist of it. The underlying theme is similar to Silence of the Lambs except the maximum-security criminal is not a sicko. Like Hannibal Lector, this guy only wants to talk to one person who if I had to guess, is probably his long lost daughter that he abandoned at a very young age. Just a wild guess.
Bottom line: This show has potential. James Spader plays the criminal and it's the perfect role for Spader because he is great at roles where he gets to talk a lot while everyone listens, or playing an a-hole. Robert Downey Jr would also have done a good job here.
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Marvel hits the tube in this one where it follows a team of people that I assume will search for less-powerful heroes and try to get them on their side before criminal organizations get to them first to make them into bad guys. None of the real Avengers will show up because it probably costs too much to get them a guest appearance, but the show is very much in that Avengers' Universe and those superheroes are referenced often.
Bottom line: It's Joss Whedon and it's ABC. If it were FOX, the network that cancels all my favorite shows I'd probably not bother watching but ABC is relatively safe. They're also a network that does not have a lot of highly rated shows unless you count Dancing With Stars as a show. They have a bunch of long-running series and are known for that (LOST, Grey's Anatomy) and they tend to stick with shows a little longer than some of the more trigger happy networks (damn you FOX).
Modern Family
Modern Family is starting to get old for me. I loved the concept of how they interviewed the members of the family separately and the humor, but that fresh style has become old. I'm finding more and more that I can sit through an entire episode and laugh only once or twice compared to laughing the entire time and chuckling to myself hours later.
I think that MF is slowly falling into the trap that many other sitcoms fall into, which is where the characters slowly unravel because the writers get too focused on one aspect of the character. It's like they become stereotypes of themselves, if that makes any sense.
Bottom line: It's a super popular show and will continue to be that because there's really not much else on.
Bones
I grew tired of this show because the cases aren't interesting enough at once Booth and Brennan got together it essentially killed the drama for the non-case side of the spectrum of this show.
Bottom line: This show needs to end. Even my wife is kind of hoping this show ends soon, and she's been a loyal follower since the beginning.
Revolution
Last year they ended it off with a bang. The power came back on for a few minutes, someone launched a bunch of nukes and we were told that the President was still alive and was going to make his way back. This season we found out that the nukes did detonate, taking out half the USA. But the old crew survived and now were in another town dealing with some ruffians.
Bottom line: I don't think this show will last beyond this current season. I've said this before -- this show is Walking Dead without the zombies. It's a Western that is masquerading as a science fiction and their cover has been blown.
The Blacklist
The premise of this show is a most wanted criminal shows up at the FBI's front door and surrenders and wants to help. That's the gist of it. The underlying theme is similar to Silence of the Lambs except the maximum-security criminal is not a sicko. Like Hannibal Lector, this guy only wants to talk to one person who if I had to guess, is probably his long lost daughter that he abandoned at a very young age. Just a wild guess.
Bottom line: This show has potential. James Spader plays the criminal and it's the perfect role for Spader because he is great at roles where he gets to talk a lot while everyone listens, or playing an a-hole. Robert Downey Jr would also have done a good job here.
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Marvel hits the tube in this one where it follows a team of people that I assume will search for less-powerful heroes and try to get them on their side before criminal organizations get to them first to make them into bad guys. None of the real Avengers will show up because it probably costs too much to get them a guest appearance, but the show is very much in that Avengers' Universe and those superheroes are referenced often.
Bottom line: It's Joss Whedon and it's ABC. If it were FOX, the network that cancels all my favorite shows I'd probably not bother watching but ABC is relatively safe. They're also a network that does not have a lot of highly rated shows unless you count Dancing With Stars as a show. They have a bunch of long-running series and are known for that (LOST, Grey's Anatomy) and they tend to stick with shows a little longer than some of the more trigger happy networks (damn you FOX).
Modern Family
Modern Family is starting to get old for me. I loved the concept of how they interviewed the members of the family separately and the humor, but that fresh style has become old. I'm finding more and more that I can sit through an entire episode and laugh only once or twice compared to laughing the entire time and chuckling to myself hours later.
I think that MF is slowly falling into the trap that many other sitcoms fall into, which is where the characters slowly unravel because the writers get too focused on one aspect of the character. It's like they become stereotypes of themselves, if that makes any sense.
Bottom line: It's a super popular show and will continue to be that because there's really not much else on.
Bones
I grew tired of this show because the cases aren't interesting enough at once Booth and Brennan got together it essentially killed the drama for the non-case side of the spectrum of this show.
Bottom line: This show needs to end. Even my wife is kind of hoping this show ends soon, and she's been a loyal follower since the beginning.
Revolution
Last year they ended it off with a bang. The power came back on for a few minutes, someone launched a bunch of nukes and we were told that the President was still alive and was going to make his way back. This season we found out that the nukes did detonate, taking out half the USA. But the old crew survived and now were in another town dealing with some ruffians.
Bottom line: I don't think this show will last beyond this current season. I've said this before -- this show is Walking Dead without the zombies. It's a Western that is masquerading as a science fiction and their cover has been blown.
May 02, 2013
To tip or not to tip
Today we had a team lunch at Gabby's, the one at 309 King Street West.
We ordered at 12:20pm, and at 12:56, I saw our waitress with her back facing us, wiping tears from her eyes as an older woman rubbed her back. I could only assume (given the way she took our orders) that she was relatively new at her job and had screwed up the orders and was now sorry for her mistake. The older lady calmed her down and then came over to our table to explain (lie) about why are food hadn't arrived yet.
She told us it was because there a huge influx of people who had arrived at once and so the kitchen was backed up. This of course was a blatant lie because we'd seen other people arrive 20 minutes after we ordered, who were already eating and getting ready to pay their bills. But I mean, what else are you going to say.. you're not going to throw your employee under the bus. I think that kind of lie is acceptable -- assuming that you're going to make up for the mistake. Free appetizers or coupons usually work when 11 people are sitting around for 45 minutes waiting for their food. But we got nothing. The food came 2 minutes after the manager walked away.
So I guess here's the debate:
When you get bad service, do you tip anyway or do you not tip?
Tip no matter what
Some people tip no matter what, they believe there is a minimum tip they should give regardless of service, and if the service was really good, then you give them a little extra.
Tip is a reward
Others believe the tip is the reward. A waiter's job description is to take your order, enter it into the computer or give the order to the kitchen, and then when the time comes bring the food back out and serve it to you. Later on, you might bring out the bills and take payments. That's the job. Failing to do this means you failed to do your job. Successfully completing these tasks means you get paid, and anything above and beyond that job description earns potential rewards (ie: tips). Therefore, only tip when such rewards are deserved.
==
Personally I fall in the former category where I feel the need to tip no matter what. If I had really bad service I give them 10-15% (depending on the establishment), and bring that up to 15-20% if deserved. The only places I've given lower than 10% is buffet's (where I did half of their job for them) or restaurants that I frequent often and some days I give more and other days I give less. The amount often depends on how much I have in my pocket, and whether or not I need to keep some reserve for future purchase (bubble tea after lunch anyone?)
But I do think that tipping as a reward does make quite a bit of sense. Tipping someone who has provided half-assed service only enables poor performance on the job. What's their incentive to go above and beyond if they're going to get paid either way?
We ordered at 12:20pm, and at 12:56, I saw our waitress with her back facing us, wiping tears from her eyes as an older woman rubbed her back. I could only assume (given the way she took our orders) that she was relatively new at her job and had screwed up the orders and was now sorry for her mistake. The older lady calmed her down and then came over to our table to explain (lie) about why are food hadn't arrived yet.
She told us it was because there a huge influx of people who had arrived at once and so the kitchen was backed up. This of course was a blatant lie because we'd seen other people arrive 20 minutes after we ordered, who were already eating and getting ready to pay their bills. But I mean, what else are you going to say.. you're not going to throw your employee under the bus. I think that kind of lie is acceptable -- assuming that you're going to make up for the mistake. Free appetizers or coupons usually work when 11 people are sitting around for 45 minutes waiting for their food. But we got nothing. The food came 2 minutes after the manager walked away.
So I guess here's the debate:
When you get bad service, do you tip anyway or do you not tip?
Tip no matter what
Some people tip no matter what, they believe there is a minimum tip they should give regardless of service, and if the service was really good, then you give them a little extra.
Tip is a reward
Others believe the tip is the reward. A waiter's job description is to take your order, enter it into the computer or give the order to the kitchen, and then when the time comes bring the food back out and serve it to you. Later on, you might bring out the bills and take payments. That's the job. Failing to do this means you failed to do your job. Successfully completing these tasks means you get paid, and anything above and beyond that job description earns potential rewards (ie: tips). Therefore, only tip when such rewards are deserved.
==
Personally I fall in the former category where I feel the need to tip no matter what. If I had really bad service I give them 10-15% (depending on the establishment), and bring that up to 15-20% if deserved. The only places I've given lower than 10% is buffet's (where I did half of their job for them) or restaurants that I frequent often and some days I give more and other days I give less. The amount often depends on how much I have in my pocket, and whether or not I need to keep some reserve for future purchase (bubble tea after lunch anyone?)
But I do think that tipping as a reward does make quite a bit of sense. Tipping someone who has provided half-assed service only enables poor performance on the job. What's their incentive to go above and beyond if they're going to get paid either way?
May 01, 2013
BBQ Duck
I need a new place to get BBQ duck. After literally years of searching for the best BBQ duck in Toronto, I found it in Markham. Specifically a place called Van's BBQ inside the food court at First Markham Place.
I went there steadily for 3 years and got to know the owner (or I assume he's the owner). Never got his name (Van?) but we spoke regularly whenever I was there and he talked often about going to other places who offered BBQ duck to compare his product with others. Having done the same, I would agree wholeheartedly that he had the best BBQ duck with a 100 kilometer radius.
Alas, about 2 months ago I went as usual to find that it had been locked up. The metal door and been closed. At first I assumed he'd gone on vacation but after repeat visits week after week, to my chagrin, it never reopened. Two weeks ago, it had the conclusive For Lease sign in front of it. The horror.
There's another place 2 spots over that just plain sucks. For some reason they always had a long lineup throughout the years, but their duck is just terrible. It's basically plain duck with some kind of sauce they've poured over it to simulate the proper taste of BBQ duck. So disappointing. Perhaps they have better product of other BBQ items which might explain the lineup.
Sad times indeed.
On the plus side, Van going out of business probably decreased my chances of a heart attack by about 20%..
I went there steadily for 3 years and got to know the owner (or I assume he's the owner). Never got his name (Van?) but we spoke regularly whenever I was there and he talked often about going to other places who offered BBQ duck to compare his product with others. Having done the same, I would agree wholeheartedly that he had the best BBQ duck with a 100 kilometer radius.
Alas, about 2 months ago I went as usual to find that it had been locked up. The metal door and been closed. At first I assumed he'd gone on vacation but after repeat visits week after week, to my chagrin, it never reopened. Two weeks ago, it had the conclusive For Lease sign in front of it. The horror.
There's another place 2 spots over that just plain sucks. For some reason they always had a long lineup throughout the years, but their duck is just terrible. It's basically plain duck with some kind of sauce they've poured over it to simulate the proper taste of BBQ duck. So disappointing. Perhaps they have better product of other BBQ items which might explain the lineup.
Sad times indeed.
On the plus side, Van going out of business probably decreased my chances of a heart attack by about 20%..
April 22, 2013
#firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo
#firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo #firecolangelo #firebc #firebryancolangelo
April 02, 2013
December 17, 2012
Social experiment
Debates about violent video games and right to carry arms will rage on forever and nothing may ever get done other than a lot of quibbling. The bottom line is, are you willing to give those things up, lets say for 5 years, on the chance that this sort of thing will stop happening? I am.
Ban all violent video games. Remove the right to carry a gun, or even own a gun. Wait 5 years. Count the number of mass murdering that goes on. Then, go back if it didn't work. If it did, we all win.
Ban all violent video games. Remove the right to carry a gun, or even own a gun. Wait 5 years. Count the number of mass murdering that goes on. Then, go back if it didn't work. If it did, we all win.
December 11, 2012
Repetitive strain injury
I twisted my neck earlier last week and as a result of overcompensating for that injury, I've started to notice some other issues with my muscles and joints. As for the neck injury, it's the 3rd time in my life that I've had this and perhaps something I need to be concerned about down the line. But.. this post is more about the muscles and joints.
As a gamer-turned-parent, (who still enjoys regular gaming in non-work/parenting hours). not to mention a person who sits in front of a computer for all hours of his working day, I've begun to invest a bit more time researching ways to prevent repetitive strain injury.
You can read all about RSI on Wikipedia, or proper ergonomics and posture.. but what I've found so far on the internet are ways to slow down RSI rather than ways to strengthen yourself so that it won't happen. The latter being more important to me because I have no choice but to sit in front of a computer and keyboard and mouse 8-9 hours per day.
You can find any number of different exercise to prevent your muscles from cramping up or bunching together during a prolonged period of hunching over your computer desk, and those are all very helpful. But sitting in front of the computer for 10-12 hours out of 24 per day and doing stretches and exercises is no different from eating junk food and trying to exercise it off. Sooner or later it's all going to catch up to you.
I'm not going to lie -- I'm not exactly the person you go to when asking about exercise because I barely do any myself. And furthermore, due to medical reasons I have very little chance of building up any kind of muscle mass. This I can get into some other time. So really what it comes down to, right now, is how I can build some muscles up in my body so that I can sit for (accumulated) long hours in front of a computer/screen.
This is my new quest.
As a gamer-turned-parent, (who still enjoys regular gaming in non-work/parenting hours). not to mention a person who sits in front of a computer for all hours of his working day, I've begun to invest a bit more time researching ways to prevent repetitive strain injury.
You can read all about RSI on Wikipedia, or proper ergonomics and posture.. but what I've found so far on the internet are ways to slow down RSI rather than ways to strengthen yourself so that it won't happen. The latter being more important to me because I have no choice but to sit in front of a computer and keyboard and mouse 8-9 hours per day.
You can find any number of different exercise to prevent your muscles from cramping up or bunching together during a prolonged period of hunching over your computer desk, and those are all very helpful. But sitting in front of the computer for 10-12 hours out of 24 per day and doing stretches and exercises is no different from eating junk food and trying to exercise it off. Sooner or later it's all going to catch up to you.
I'm not going to lie -- I'm not exactly the person you go to when asking about exercise because I barely do any myself. And furthermore, due to medical reasons I have very little chance of building up any kind of muscle mass. This I can get into some other time. So really what it comes down to, right now, is how I can build some muscles up in my body so that I can sit for (accumulated) long hours in front of a computer/screen.
This is my new quest.
July 26, 2012
July 23, 2012
Update
From past Thursday, here are my meals:
Thursday lunch: standard drumstick lunch
Thursday dinner: Pho
Friday lunch: standard drumstick lunch
Friday dinner: BBQ (95% meat)
Saturday lunch: All You Can Eat Sushi
Saturday dinner: one drumstick, and some Kraft Dinner
Sunday lunch: Pho
Sunday dinner: Ramen
All in all, a whole lot of carbs. I didn't weigh myself on Wednesday but I had been hovering around 152. This morning I was 157. So 5 pounds gained on the weekend from two pho's, a lot of sushi rice and ramen.
My understanding is that in 2-3 days I'll be back to 152. We'll see.
Thursday lunch: standard drumstick lunch
Thursday dinner: Pho
Friday lunch: standard drumstick lunch
Friday dinner: BBQ (95% meat)
Saturday lunch: All You Can Eat Sushi
Saturday dinner: one drumstick, and some Kraft Dinner
Sunday lunch: Pho
Sunday dinner: Ramen
All in all, a whole lot of carbs. I didn't weigh myself on Wednesday but I had been hovering around 152. This morning I was 157. So 5 pounds gained on the weekend from two pho's, a lot of sushi rice and ramen.
My understanding is that in 2-3 days I'll be back to 152. We'll see.
June 26, 2012
Other people are doing it too
They call it the Slow-Carb diet:
http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2012/06/24/how-to-lose-100-pounds/
Here's their rules, pretty much the same as what I did. I wish I had before and after pictures.
Rule #1: Avoid “white” starchy carbohydrates (or those that can be white). This means all bread, pasta, rice, potatoes, and grains. If you have to ask, don’t eat it.
Rule #2: Eat the same few meals over and over again, especially for breakfast and lunch. You already do this; you’re just picking new default meals.
Rule #3: Don’t drink calories. Exception: 1-2 glasses of dry red wine per night is allowed.
Rule #4: Don’t eat fruit. (Fructose –> glycerol phosphate –> more bodyfat, more or less.) Avocado and tomatoes are excepted.
Rule #5: Take one day off per week and go nuts. I choose and recommend Saturday.
I didn't do Rule #5.
http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2012/06/24/how-to-lose-100-pounds/
Here's their rules, pretty much the same as what I did. I wish I had before and after pictures.
Rule #1: Avoid “white” starchy carbohydrates (or those that can be white). This means all bread, pasta, rice, potatoes, and grains. If you have to ask, don’t eat it.
Rule #2: Eat the same few meals over and over again, especially for breakfast and lunch. You already do this; you’re just picking new default meals.
Rule #3: Don’t drink calories. Exception: 1-2 glasses of dry red wine per night is allowed.
Rule #4: Don’t eat fruit. (Fructose –> glycerol phosphate –> more bodyfat, more or less.) Avocado and tomatoes are excepted.
Rule #5: Take one day off per week and go nuts. I choose and recommend Saturday.
I didn't do Rule #5.
June 20, 2012
151
I don't really understand the science behind it anymore, but I'm still losing weight. I've gone back to eating pretty much everything I ate before except for rice. Burgers (with buns), hot dogs, chips, candy, even soft drinks and beer -- pretty much the same I ate before the diet. The only major change is we pack our own lunch now so I'm only eating out for lunch once or twice per week.
I've also been exercising perhaps a tiny bit more than before, but only as product of having to clean the house and getting everything ready as we increase our family size. I'm wearing clothes that had been tucked far back in the closet and a lot of my shorts don't work anymore without a belt. I've lost at least 1 inch on my waist, closer to 2.
Lunch we bring is no longer just the two drumsticks but a whole bunch of other stuff -- pork chops, steaks, etc. I'm still eating vitamins every day and at least 1 apple, and about 1L of water also per day.
I've also been exercising perhaps a tiny bit more than before, but only as product of having to clean the house and getting everything ready as we increase our family size. I'm wearing clothes that had been tucked far back in the closet and a lot of my shorts don't work anymore without a belt. I've lost at least 1 inch on my waist, closer to 2.
Lunch we bring is no longer just the two drumsticks but a whole bunch of other stuff -- pork chops, steaks, etc. I'm still eating vitamins every day and at least 1 apple, and about 1L of water also per day.
June 07, 2012
152
Just to update, I got to around 152 lbs a few weeks ago, and I've been in maintenance mode ever since. I've had to purchase new belts and several new pairs of pants while also being re-introduced to some old pairs that I nearly threw out.
What maintaining entails is basically that you eat enough carbs that you don't lose weight, while still managing your intake so that you don't end up gaining weight. This means around between 100-150g of carbs, which is pretty easy to do.
What maintaining entails is basically that you eat enough carbs that you don't lose weight, while still managing your intake so that you don't end up gaining weight. This means around between 100-150g of carbs, which is pretty easy to do.
April 27, 2012
What I've been eating
It seems to take me a lot of effort to remember to write posts.
Anyway, as promised before, here is what I've been eating for the past month or so.
Breakfast/Snack: One apple (21g of carbs)
I don't always eat one, it depends on how hungry I'm feeling at the time. I've read a bit about intermittent fasting and starving yourself between dinner and lunch is actually just fine. I drink a ton of water each day, at least 1.5 to 2 liters worth and a lot of that is to suppress hunger. I find I usually eat the apple on a Monday or Tuesday because on weekends I'm usually a lot looser with the diet and end up spoiling myself, which then leads to earlier hunger on M/T, whereas by W/T/F I'm back to normal again.
Lunch (16g of carbs):
2 Chicken Drumsticks (0g of carbs)
1 cucumber (4g) occasionally
3-4 cauliflower florets (3g) occasionally
5-6 broccoli florets (4g)
1/2 red bell pepper (5g)
The red bell pepper is the golden boy of this lunch. The reds are the most nutritious in terms of all the little goodies they contain. Red peppers have about 8 times as much nutrition as the green ones, and maybe 2-3 times as much as the orange and yellow ones.
Dinner (11g)
2 Chicken Drumsticks (0g of carbs)
Mushrooms (1g)
Onions (6g)
Broccoli (4g)
For the most part my protein has been dark chicken meat. Remember, I'm not looking to boost my protein levels so I can maximize my exercising because I'm not exercising at all. I'm not looking to avoid eating fat either (as there's no linkage between gaining weight and eating fat). This is strictly a no-carb diet so I don't have to eat chicken breasts or tuna, etc.
I've had a few steaks, pork chops or lamb chops on occasion to replace of chicken if we ran out.
The vegetables are usually cooked in this case, as opposed to raw like for my lunches. It's nice to eat a nice warm meal at night and that's really the only reason I've been doing that instead of eating it raw at lunch time. I'm pretty firm about not cooking peppers because those things (especially the red ones) are so chock full of nutrients that it would be a travesty to cook it all away. But mushrooms and onions have a lot less and taste so good sauteed that I can't resist and I don't mind losing the bit of nutrition that they have.
Dessert (on occasion):
Frozen Yogurt (30g)
Supplements:
Vitamin C
Multivitamin
Some levels of hunger can also be suppressed by eating multivitamins and in all honesty, you should be eating these if you're on any kind of diet. You can eat a multivitamin and least you know that even if you feel hungry, you're not damaging yourself in any way. I eat a Vitamin C every day purely out of habit because of not wanting to catch an illness on public transportation.
Putting it all together, you're thinking OMG he's eating so little. Truth is I'm stuffed by the time I've finished my dinner most of the time, which means my stomach has likely shrunk a bit over this past month. I'm eating on average 53g of carbs per day; studies have shown that you lose weight when you eat less than 100g of carbs per day, so I'm in a pretty sweet spot right now.
As of this morning I'm 153.8 pounds, so I've lost a total of 12 pounds in 5 weeks.
Anyway, as promised before, here is what I've been eating for the past month or so.
Breakfast/Snack: One apple (21g of carbs)
I don't always eat one, it depends on how hungry I'm feeling at the time. I've read a bit about intermittent fasting and starving yourself between dinner and lunch is actually just fine. I drink a ton of water each day, at least 1.5 to 2 liters worth and a lot of that is to suppress hunger. I find I usually eat the apple on a Monday or Tuesday because on weekends I'm usually a lot looser with the diet and end up spoiling myself, which then leads to earlier hunger on M/T, whereas by W/T/F I'm back to normal again.
Lunch (16g of carbs):
2 Chicken Drumsticks (0g of carbs)
1 cucumber (4g) occasionally
3-4 cauliflower florets (3g) occasionally
5-6 broccoli florets (4g)
1/2 red bell pepper (5g)
The red bell pepper is the golden boy of this lunch. The reds are the most nutritious in terms of all the little goodies they contain. Red peppers have about 8 times as much nutrition as the green ones, and maybe 2-3 times as much as the orange and yellow ones.
Dinner (11g)
2 Chicken Drumsticks (0g of carbs)
Mushrooms (1g)
Onions (6g)
Broccoli (4g)
For the most part my protein has been dark chicken meat. Remember, I'm not looking to boost my protein levels so I can maximize my exercising because I'm not exercising at all. I'm not looking to avoid eating fat either (as there's no linkage between gaining weight and eating fat). This is strictly a no-carb diet so I don't have to eat chicken breasts or tuna, etc.
I've had a few steaks, pork chops or lamb chops on occasion to replace of chicken if we ran out.
The vegetables are usually cooked in this case, as opposed to raw like for my lunches. It's nice to eat a nice warm meal at night and that's really the only reason I've been doing that instead of eating it raw at lunch time. I'm pretty firm about not cooking peppers because those things (especially the red ones) are so chock full of nutrients that it would be a travesty to cook it all away. But mushrooms and onions have a lot less and taste so good sauteed that I can't resist and I don't mind losing the bit of nutrition that they have.
Dessert (on occasion):
Frozen Yogurt (30g)
Supplements:
Vitamin C
Multivitamin
Some levels of hunger can also be suppressed by eating multivitamins and in all honesty, you should be eating these if you're on any kind of diet. You can eat a multivitamin and least you know that even if you feel hungry, you're not damaging yourself in any way. I eat a Vitamin C every day purely out of habit because of not wanting to catch an illness on public transportation.
Putting it all together, you're thinking OMG he's eating so little. Truth is I'm stuffed by the time I've finished my dinner most of the time, which means my stomach has likely shrunk a bit over this past month. I'm eating on average 53g of carbs per day; studies have shown that you lose weight when you eat less than 100g of carbs per day, so I'm in a pretty sweet spot right now.
As of this morning I'm 153.8 pounds, so I've lost a total of 12 pounds in 5 weeks.
April 17, 2012
Diet update
Here's what I've learned over the past few days about my diet, or rather, how insulin works.
This is going to be severely dumbed down and simplified, so if you have a good understanding of insulin, don't read this. Here's my quick understanding of it and how it relates to dieting. Insulin is a hormone, which regulates carbs and fat breakdown in the body. It helps your body either store the sugars and carbs as fat, or gets it to turn it into energy which is then used up. Basically what you want to do is eat just enough sugar (carbs) so that your body is turning it into energy and not storing it up as fat.
Hence the low or no-carb diet where if you intake little carbs, it'll all turn to energy and you will lose weight because your body will start looking for other fat to turn into energy because you're not eating enough of it, and so you'll lose weight.
The way to do this is to make sure your body doesn't build up its insulin resistance because if it does, it'll just ignore what it's supposed to do and just start storing up more fat. You don't want that.
A perfect example is this past weekend where I engorged in really bad food. Saturday morning I was 154 pounds, but by the end of the weekend as in Sunday night, I was 160. Pastries, beer, battered wings, cookies, pop. Everything that I didn't touch for the past 4 weeks. Ina and I attended a course over the weekend and they had free food and who was I to reject free food, right? That and we didn't have time to cook so we had to eat out.
So during the weekend I put on a fair bit of weight because of the sudden influx of sugars and carbs. But then as of this morning I was nearly back to normal. This shows how the insulin kicked back into gear and with no resistance, was able to convert any excess carbs back into energy. The example of insulin resistance is how my wife also gained as much weight as I did, but that weight didn't go back down as easily as mine did. That's because she's been drinking pop and snacking throughout my diet (she's taken part in it when it's been convenient for her but hasn't gone out of her way to avoid carbs). So her resistance is higher (this is also because of a health issue she has, btw) and therefore her weight hasn't gone back down the way mine has.
I'm currently at 156.5 lbs.
I'll get into my daily intake and meals with my next update.
This is going to be severely dumbed down and simplified, so if you have a good understanding of insulin, don't read this. Here's my quick understanding of it and how it relates to dieting. Insulin is a hormone, which regulates carbs and fat breakdown in the body. It helps your body either store the sugars and carbs as fat, or gets it to turn it into energy which is then used up. Basically what you want to do is eat just enough sugar (carbs) so that your body is turning it into energy and not storing it up as fat.
Hence the low or no-carb diet where if you intake little carbs, it'll all turn to energy and you will lose weight because your body will start looking for other fat to turn into energy because you're not eating enough of it, and so you'll lose weight.
The way to do this is to make sure your body doesn't build up its insulin resistance because if it does, it'll just ignore what it's supposed to do and just start storing up more fat. You don't want that.
A perfect example is this past weekend where I engorged in really bad food. Saturday morning I was 154 pounds, but by the end of the weekend as in Sunday night, I was 160. Pastries, beer, battered wings, cookies, pop. Everything that I didn't touch for the past 4 weeks. Ina and I attended a course over the weekend and they had free food and who was I to reject free food, right? That and we didn't have time to cook so we had to eat out.
So during the weekend I put on a fair bit of weight because of the sudden influx of sugars and carbs. But then as of this morning I was nearly back to normal. This shows how the insulin kicked back into gear and with no resistance, was able to convert any excess carbs back into energy. The example of insulin resistance is how my wife also gained as much weight as I did, but that weight didn't go back down as easily as mine did. That's because she's been drinking pop and snacking throughout my diet (she's taken part in it when it's been convenient for her but hasn't gone out of her way to avoid carbs). So her resistance is higher (this is also because of a health issue she has, btw) and therefore her weight hasn't gone back down the way mine has.
I'm currently at 156.5 lbs.
I'll get into my daily intake and meals with my next update.
April 16, 2012
the problem with St. Louis Wings
Here's the problem with St. Louis Wings --
Person A: says "I feel like having wings tonight."
Person B says: "How about St. Louis Wings?"
Person A: "St. Louis Wings sucks and they're overpriced."
Person B: "That's true."
Person A: "But man I really want wings. Tonight."
Person B: "Where should we go?"
Person A: "I have no idea.."
Person B: "Err.. how about St. Louis Wings?"
Person A: "Fine."
What St. Louis Wings has going for them is that when people think of having wings, they think of them. And they can't think of anywhere else. The problem is that they suck. They really do. The sauce is always way too thick that you can't even taste the chicken, they have a limited selection of flavors, and everything in the restaurant is overpriced.
Ina and I used to go to Puck N Wings but the one near us closed down. We went to All Star Wings on Saturday. Very good. New go-to place for wings and beer.
Person A: says "I feel like having wings tonight."
Person B says: "How about St. Louis Wings?"
Person A: "St. Louis Wings sucks and they're overpriced."
Person B: "That's true."
Person A: "But man I really want wings. Tonight."
Person B: "Where should we go?"
Person A: "I have no idea.."
Person B: "Err.. how about St. Louis Wings?"
Person A: "Fine."
What St. Louis Wings has going for them is that when people think of having wings, they think of them. And they can't think of anywhere else. The problem is that they suck. They really do. The sauce is always way too thick that you can't even taste the chicken, they have a limited selection of flavors, and everything in the restaurant is overpriced.
Ina and I used to go to Puck N Wings but the one near us closed down. We went to All Star Wings on Saturday. Very good. New go-to place for wings and beer.
April 11, 2012
The Diet
I started a diet about 3 and a half weeks ago. Actually it's probably exactly 3 weeks ago.
I've cut out all white carbs (please excuse me if my definitions don't make any sense). Basically what that means for me is that I've stopped eating rice entirely, and no more bread. I've also stopped drinking pop and beer. Actually pop and beer was what I had given up for Lent but ended up extending that as part of my diet.
The results have been great. I haven't exercised a single day yet, which means it's been the diet alone that have showed results. I started the diet at 166 pounds and as of last Friday I was 156 pounds. My goal throughout this time has been to reach 150 or less. That will probably require some exercise on my part.
As I mentioned as of last Friday. The reason is that Saturday I went to a wedding banquet and ate more than my fair share, and then Sunday my in-laws took us out to a seafood restaurant (where I couldn't eat most of the food now that I'm allergic to shellfish), but they ordered a couple of dishes just for me and I ate it all, quite happily. I still managed to stay away from the white carbs but the portions were massive.
As of now, I'm 158 pounds.
What I've been eating is mostly vegetables high in fiber but loaded with good stuff. Red bell peppers has been my main 'snack', just several slices of them per day, usually about half a bell pepper per day. Costco sells 6 of them for $7 which includes 2 yellow, 2 orange and 2 red. Which is a shame because the red ones are actually the best from a nutritional standpoint. They're also the best tasting ones. For protein we've been buying, in bulk, chicken drumsticks. We marinate for a day and then we bake them. I tried to do chicken breast for some time but considering how little fat I'm eating these days I figured it's safe to eat drumsticks.
I'm also eating a lot of broccoli, cooked and uncooked and occasionally I'm also have cauliflower raw and cooked. I started eating a mini-cucumber each day in the beginning but stopped when I realized there wasn't that much nutrition in there and I'd rather fill my stomach with only good stuff. Occasionally we treat ourselves to some pork chops or beef/lamb, but for the most part we're eating chicken.
I also sautee some onions and mushrooms from time to time to eat with either broccoli or cauliflower.
That's about all I've eaten over the past 3-4 weeks.
I've cut out all white carbs (please excuse me if my definitions don't make any sense). Basically what that means for me is that I've stopped eating rice entirely, and no more bread. I've also stopped drinking pop and beer. Actually pop and beer was what I had given up for Lent but ended up extending that as part of my diet.
The results have been great. I haven't exercised a single day yet, which means it's been the diet alone that have showed results. I started the diet at 166 pounds and as of last Friday I was 156 pounds. My goal throughout this time has been to reach 150 or less. That will probably require some exercise on my part.
As I mentioned as of last Friday. The reason is that Saturday I went to a wedding banquet and ate more than my fair share, and then Sunday my in-laws took us out to a seafood restaurant (where I couldn't eat most of the food now that I'm allergic to shellfish), but they ordered a couple of dishes just for me and I ate it all, quite happily. I still managed to stay away from the white carbs but the portions were massive.
As of now, I'm 158 pounds.
What I've been eating is mostly vegetables high in fiber but loaded with good stuff. Red bell peppers has been my main 'snack', just several slices of them per day, usually about half a bell pepper per day. Costco sells 6 of them for $7 which includes 2 yellow, 2 orange and 2 red. Which is a shame because the red ones are actually the best from a nutritional standpoint. They're also the best tasting ones. For protein we've been buying, in bulk, chicken drumsticks. We marinate for a day and then we bake them. I tried to do chicken breast for some time but considering how little fat I'm eating these days I figured it's safe to eat drumsticks.
I'm also eating a lot of broccoli, cooked and uncooked and occasionally I'm also have cauliflower raw and cooked. I started eating a mini-cucumber each day in the beginning but stopped when I realized there wasn't that much nutrition in there and I'd rather fill my stomach with only good stuff. Occasionally we treat ourselves to some pork chops or beef/lamb, but for the most part we're eating chicken.
I also sautee some onions and mushrooms from time to time to eat with either broccoli or cauliflower.
That's about all I've eaten over the past 3-4 weeks.
February 03, 2012
Today's thoughts
Superbowl forty-six
I know I haven't really been commenting much on football ever since the wildcard round. I actually have a few posts drafted but by the time I remembered to publish it was already too late. Suffice to say I did not expect to see the Giants in the Superbowl, nor did I expect them to be facing the 49ers. Everything else has fallen into place as expected.
In this rematch of one of the most electrifying Superbowls I've ever seen, it's a less talented Pats team against a much more talented Giants team, and yet I can't help but think the Patriots will win this one. Throughout this years' playoffs I've taken note of the difference in coaching, and this is one where I think Pats have a significant advantage. Despite my continual mocking of his name and what he's done in the past, I have a lot of respect for Bill Belicheat. I think he's the best situational coach because of the preparation he puts his players through. He's certainly smarter and craftier than Tom Coughlin. So on the coaching side, it will come down to whether or not Belicheat can make use of his versatile players to outsmart the talented Giants.
Defense always wins championships, and on the outset it seems like the Giants should win because of this. The Pats defense was terrible during much of the regular season, but since about week 14 or 15, Belicheat has gotten his defense to play, I want to say -- better, or perhaps to their potential. They started out the year with a lot of young guys who have matured throughout the year and now understand the system. I think the Giants have a better defense overall, but I don't think the Pats are that far behind compared to what most people think. I think you give the same group of guys one more year and when you redo the odds in Vegas, the Pats will be favored by more than a touchdown.
Offensively, the Pats are just better, hands down.
For the Pats to win, all they need to do is protect Tom Brady, which they've usually been able to do for most of his career. Let's face it, giving an average quarterback 5-6 seconds of unhurried protection will allow you to execute your offense 65-75% of the time. Giving a laser-eye/laser-arm (Tom Brady) 5-6 seconds of that protection will allow him to execute almost all the time, especially when you factor in guys who always find ways to get open like Wes Welker, Julian Edelman, Aaron Hernandez. Then you factor in Rob Gronkowski who isn't always open but might as well be because he's taller and stronger than everyone else around him.
For the Giants to win, they need to get to Tom Brady. I keep reading about how tough Tom Brady is, but anyone watching games where teams get to Brady know that he's not tough on the field, at all. He's got a laser arm, and one of the best on-the-spot vision in football. He is able to look at 5-6 options downfield very quickly, a skill very few have the ability to do. However, when someone is bearing down on him, he's not able to scramble away and for the most part usually ends up on the ground without anyone even hitting him. He's not a tough guy. If the Giants can reduce that normal 5-6 second window to 1-2, and actually hit him a few times, Tom Brady goes from top QB in the league to an average guy who makes all kinds of mistakes and lies down or takes a knee when he sees someone about to deck him. He's no Eli Manning, in that regard.
Peyton Manning's next team
By no means am I insisting Peyton will end up on a new team, but if I managed the Colts, I'd let him go.
I love Peyton Manning, likely more that a heterosexual man should care to admit. I plan to name at least one of my kids after him. But for the Colts to have any kind of future, they need to allow Peyton Manning to become a free agent. The Colts, despite a pretty solid record over the past 8-10 years are a team that is bereft of talented positional players. Yes there's a few standouts like Reggie Wayne, and we had Marshall Faulk for awhile, but everyone else is just average. The Colts have benefited from having the best quarterback, quite possibly in the history of the sport, and have pretended for a near decade to be a great team.
Bill Polian has squandered pick after pick on draft busts, that the average fan don't notice because you see Peyton turning these below average guys into superstars. On the defensive end, not being on the field for long helps. We all saw what happened to them this year when the Colts' time-of-possession was worst in the league.
The Colts, if possible should try to re-sign Peyton Manning to a more management contract, and then trade him away and acquire as many quality prospects and draft picks as they can possibly get. Here is a list of teams that will be looking to acquire him either as a free agent or via trade: Washington Redskins (no thanks), New York Jets (pass!), Miami Dolphins (okay), Tennessee Titans (yes please), Arizona Cardinal (umm..).
Houston Texans are not a possibility, but I'd love to see Manning playing in the same division as the Colts with a far superior team. Strong defense, great offensive line, several key talented positions.
I know I haven't really been commenting much on football ever since the wildcard round. I actually have a few posts drafted but by the time I remembered to publish it was already too late. Suffice to say I did not expect to see the Giants in the Superbowl, nor did I expect them to be facing the 49ers. Everything else has fallen into place as expected.
In this rematch of one of the most electrifying Superbowls I've ever seen, it's a less talented Pats team against a much more talented Giants team, and yet I can't help but think the Patriots will win this one. Throughout this years' playoffs I've taken note of the difference in coaching, and this is one where I think Pats have a significant advantage. Despite my continual mocking of his name and what he's done in the past, I have a lot of respect for Bill Belicheat. I think he's the best situational coach because of the preparation he puts his players through. He's certainly smarter and craftier than Tom Coughlin. So on the coaching side, it will come down to whether or not Belicheat can make use of his versatile players to outsmart the talented Giants.
Defense always wins championships, and on the outset it seems like the Giants should win because of this. The Pats defense was terrible during much of the regular season, but since about week 14 or 15, Belicheat has gotten his defense to play, I want to say -- better, or perhaps to their potential. They started out the year with a lot of young guys who have matured throughout the year and now understand the system. I think the Giants have a better defense overall, but I don't think the Pats are that far behind compared to what most people think. I think you give the same group of guys one more year and when you redo the odds in Vegas, the Pats will be favored by more than a touchdown.
Offensively, the Pats are just better, hands down.
For the Pats to win, all they need to do is protect Tom Brady, which they've usually been able to do for most of his career. Let's face it, giving an average quarterback 5-6 seconds of unhurried protection will allow you to execute your offense 65-75% of the time. Giving a laser-eye/laser-arm (Tom Brady) 5-6 seconds of that protection will allow him to execute almost all the time, especially when you factor in guys who always find ways to get open like Wes Welker, Julian Edelman, Aaron Hernandez. Then you factor in Rob Gronkowski who isn't always open but might as well be because he's taller and stronger than everyone else around him.
For the Giants to win, they need to get to Tom Brady. I keep reading about how tough Tom Brady is, but anyone watching games where teams get to Brady know that he's not tough on the field, at all. He's got a laser arm, and one of the best on-the-spot vision in football. He is able to look at 5-6 options downfield very quickly, a skill very few have the ability to do. However, when someone is bearing down on him, he's not able to scramble away and for the most part usually ends up on the ground without anyone even hitting him. He's not a tough guy. If the Giants can reduce that normal 5-6 second window to 1-2, and actually hit him a few times, Tom Brady goes from top QB in the league to an average guy who makes all kinds of mistakes and lies down or takes a knee when he sees someone about to deck him. He's no Eli Manning, in that regard.
Peyton Manning's next team
By no means am I insisting Peyton will end up on a new team, but if I managed the Colts, I'd let him go.
I love Peyton Manning, likely more that a heterosexual man should care to admit. I plan to name at least one of my kids after him. But for the Colts to have any kind of future, they need to allow Peyton Manning to become a free agent. The Colts, despite a pretty solid record over the past 8-10 years are a team that is bereft of talented positional players. Yes there's a few standouts like Reggie Wayne, and we had Marshall Faulk for awhile, but everyone else is just average. The Colts have benefited from having the best quarterback, quite possibly in the history of the sport, and have pretended for a near decade to be a great team.
Bill Polian has squandered pick after pick on draft busts, that the average fan don't notice because you see Peyton turning these below average guys into superstars. On the defensive end, not being on the field for long helps. We all saw what happened to them this year when the Colts' time-of-possession was worst in the league.
The Colts, if possible should try to re-sign Peyton Manning to a more management contract, and then trade him away and acquire as many quality prospects and draft picks as they can possibly get. Here is a list of teams that will be looking to acquire him either as a free agent or via trade: Washington Redskins (no thanks), New York Jets (pass!), Miami Dolphins (okay), Tennessee Titans (yes please), Arizona Cardinal (umm..).
Houston Texans are not a possibility, but I'd love to see Manning playing in the same division as the Colts with a far superior team. Strong defense, great offensive line, several key talented positions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
