Friday, July 31, 2009
What's been happening?
The IM Canada prep has now been in full swing for a little over 2 weeks and I'm finally settling into a groove. There's a marked difference to how things are going this year as opposed to last. I won't dwell on the primary reason for too long but more than anything my self encompassing belief that this is what I do, this is what I will be doing for another decade, and this what I seek to pursue to absolute perfection has left me with a singular mindset... do whatever it takes to get better. To take inspiration from "Outliers"... I have the opportunities... I know what to do to take advantage of them. I simply must persevere and just.keep.doing.
An ongoing story.... my improved nutrition has GREATLY aided in my leaning out, losing some muscle and all the while having a great level of energy throughout the day. I don't even think about what my grocery bill is going to be. I simply go into the store knowing what foods I need to procure to fuel my sessions and go on my way. I will likely devote time to a more lengthy post on what I've learned over the past 6 months and how I've implemented it sometime in September once the craziness has passed. What could possibly be more crazy then training for an IM? ;-) For one, I've pulled out of Calgary 70.3 due to a combination of the following...
My brother is getting married in two weeks and I'll have 90+ family and friend members in town with events that I'll be needing to attend to.
The lease on my current abode is up on 8/31... I, and two friends, had agreed on a nice place up on the NE side of town only to be eeked out for the lease. They were left with 4 days to move so scrambled for a 2BD. So now I'm seeking out my own place... I'm far from panicking over it and subtly perusing craigslist but this is something that I would really like to put behind me and be done with. The taking of time to meet and check out places takes away from the, oh so very important, recovery that I've been doing an exceptional job of. (grammarians... I'm sorry ;-)
Every time I find a "great deal" on a place... something glaring about it raises its head upon further inspection. Latest incarnation of this... nice place, good location, amble space, ok view... 100 feet from RxR tracks. 150 feet from RxR crossing (read: whistle and horn blowing in the night). Yeah... that ain't gonna work. Got 4-5 visits lined up for next week at some promising places with ideal move in dates and I'm hopeful something will work out.
I've recently switched to a Mac Book Pro. It's my first foray into the Mac world and thus far i like it. I'd gotten a little bit fed up with the unreliability of my PC and the shaky hardware/software platform I was dealing with.
I'm still finding ways to hurt myself...this time off the bike though. The other day I sliced off the end of my thumb... considering my insurance sucks I've dealt with this on my own. :) It'll make a good story when I'm old... and can afford real health insurance. Dear Washington DC... please get your ass in gear. ;-)
So a lot of life stuff... what about that training... oh yeah... getting back to that. Despite some rough patches in the first couple weeks I'm getting excited about my run, feeling that the cycling is on a good timeline and that I will come into form nicely for the race and that my swim... well... hopefully i can give it a boost in the last couple weeks prior to the gun. It's a nice recovery device right now (Saturday being the only good effort day).
One last note... I've still yet to line up accommodations for Ironman Canada and my long list of got-to folks have come back with nothing. Should anyone out there have a lead on something it would be greatly greatly appreciated.
Thanks!!!!
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Pearl Pass and Castle Creek
Monday, July 20, 2009
Bend Pics
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Boulder Peak
Eventually fixed it.
| Reactions: |
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Eat Food, Not too much, Mostly Plants
Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.
That, more or less, is the short answer to the supposedly incredibly complicated and confusing question of what we humans should eat in order to be maximally healthy. I hate to give away the game right here at the beginning of a long essay, and I confess that I’m tempted to complicate matters in the interest of keeping things going for a few thousand more words. I’ll try to resist but will go ahead and add a couple more details to flesh out the advice. Like: A little meat won’t kill you, though it’s better approached as a side dish than as a main. And you’re much better off eating whole fresh foods than processed food products. That’s what I mean by the recommendation to eat “food.” Once, food was all you could eat, but today there are lots of other edible foodlike substances in the supermarket. These novel products of food science often come in packages festooned with health claims, which brings me to a related rule of thumb: if you’re concerned about your health, you should probably avoid food products that make health claims. Why? Because a health claim on a food product is a good indication that it’s not really food, and food is what you want to eat.
Uh-oh. Things are suddenly sounding a little more complicated, aren’t they? Sorry. But that’s how it goes as soon as you try to get to the bottom of the whole vexing question of food and health. Before long, a dense cloud bank of confusion moves in. Sooner or later, everything solid you thought you knew about the links between diet and health gets blown away in the gust of the latest study.
Last winter came the news that a low-fat diet, long believed to protect against breast cancer, may do no such thing — this from the monumental, federally financed Women’s Health Initiative, which has also found no link between a low-fat diet and rates ofcoronary disease. The year before we learned that dietary fiber might not, as we had been confidently told, help prevent colon cancer. Just last fall two prestigious studies on omega-3 fats published at the same time presented us with strikingly different conclusions. While the Institute of Medicine stated that “it is uncertain how much these omega-3s contribute to improving health” (and they might do the opposite if you get them from mercury-contaminated fish), a Harvard study declared that simply by eating a couple of servings of fish each week (or by downing enough fish oil), you could cut your risk of dying from a heart attack by more than a third — a stunningly hopeful piece of news. It’s no wonder that omega-3 fatty acids are poised to become the oat bran of 2007, as food scientists micro-encapsulate fish oil and algae oil and blast them into such formerly all-terrestrial foods as bread and tortillas, milk and yogurt and cheese, all of which will soon, you can be sure, sprout fishy new health claims. (Remember the rule?)
By now you’re probably registering the cognitive dissonance of the supermarket shopper or science-section reader, as well as some nostalgia for the simplicity and solidity of the first few sentences of this essay. Which I’m still prepared to defend against the shifting winds of nutritional science and food-industry marketing. But before I do that, it might be useful to figure out how we arrived at our present state of nutritional confusion and anxiety.
The story of how the most basic questions about what to eat ever got so complicated reveals a great deal about the institutional imperatives of the food industry, nutritional science and — ahem — journalism, three parties that stand to gain much from widespread confusion surrounding what is, after all, the most elemental question an omnivore confronts. Humans deciding what to eat without expert help — something they have been doing with notable success since coming down out of the trees — is seriously unprofitable if you’re a food company, distinctly risky if you’re a nutritionist and just plain boring if you’re a newspaper editor or journalist. (Or, for that matter, an eater. Who wants to hear, yet again, “Eat more fruits and vegetables”?) And so, like a large gray fog, a great Conspiracy of Confusion has gathered around the simplest questions of nutrition — much to the advantage of everybody involved. Except perhaps the ostensible beneficiary of all this nutritional expertise and advice: us, and our health and happiness as eaters.
FROM FOODS TO NUTRIENTS
It was in the 1980s that food began disappearing from the American supermarket, gradually to be replaced by “nutrients,” which are not the same thing. Where once the familiar names of recognizable comestibles — things like eggs or breakfast cereal or cookies — claimed pride of place on the brightly colored packages crowding the aisles, now new terms like “fiber” and “cholesterol” and “saturated fat” rose to large-type prominence. More important than mere foods, the presence or absence of these invisible substances was now generally believed to confer health benefits on their eaters. Foods by comparison were coarse, old-fashioned and decidedly unscientific things — who could say what was in them, really? But nutrients — those chemical compounds and minerals in foods that nutritionists have deemed important to health — gleamed with the promise of scientific certainty; eat more of the right ones, fewer of the wrong, and you would live longer and avoid chronic diseases.
Read the rest... http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/magazine/28nutritionism.t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2
Monday, July 06, 2009
Triathlon in Sports Illustrated
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Thursday, July 02, 2009
A lot of racing: thoughts on 6 races in 5 weeks
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Pacific Crest Half Iron and Summary of 6 races in 5 weeks
| Reactions: |