Health Centres / Gyms

[joiner_sim]

Hmmmmmm...... Okay thread gone off a little, but thanks for the advice on the first page.

The main reason behind me looking at joining an expensive fitness centre is that I want to be able to go swimming whenever I want. Currently the nearest swimming pool to me has been shut for a year now, due to open in july, but then I still stuck with same problem I'm getting now. The nearby pools to me are used by alot of swimming groups and so I cannot get to go very often at all.

The centre I'm looking at joining has a swimming pool, so this is a big factor for me as I used to go twice a week when I lived in Birmingham (so I don't think Ill have much to worry about not going). I've never used a proper gym before so this will be an added perk.

The price we've been told to expect over the phone ranges from £45-£53, hopefully there will be room to haggle and get a discounted price. -This being that I do actually like the place and its atmosphere. Me and my missus will be joining together if it is good for us, we go for a taster on Sunday.....

 

[Jacob]

Hi, Folks

One of the best things to remember is.

The plural of anecdote isn't fact.

Pete

We have anecdotes and we have our own theories. What is the problem with that, or this thread for that matter?

 

[StevieB]

....... - you will not convince me its due to wheat, but thats not because I have a closed mind, its because I have seen the evidence (and even generated some of it) and made my own mind up on that basis.

Steve

So are you saying that my weight loss had no connection with a no wheat diet?
The evidence was pretty clear for me - and the rationale is fairly obvious. In my opinion wheat is a major factor in western obesity - just think big mac. Partly the starch itself but also wheat products as vehicle etc.
This may well be unknown to medical science - I had two years of general illness and anxiety (cancer? ulcers? etc) and was scanned and tested in various ways, had two years on PPI pills before I twigged that simple cause was wheat. Not "allergy" just a more vague "intolerance". The doctors didn't know anything.
When I decided to try it the symptoms disappeared in a day and the excess weight followed more slowly.

No - I am saying your weight loss was due to a reduction in calorific intake. Whether you achieve this through cutting out wheat, or cutting out something else or even cutting down a bit of everything is irrelevant - its the reduction in calorific content that is important.

Steve

 

[TrimTheKing]

Seems that Trim believes fat hardens the arteries, when it does nothing of the sort. Arteries get blocked by the body's attempts to repair thinning artery walls with plaque, not cholesterol. Sometimes a little lump of plaque breaks off takes a short journey, and then and wham! Infarction!

John

I am being careful to not be antagonistic (Christ knows why, I couldn't give a Shyte whether you like me or not, that's not my aim) but I have no reason to wind you up either, whereas you apparently do...

Can I ask you to go back and quote exactly where I wrote, or even suggested that hardening of arteries is because of fat.

When you can do that then I will stand corrected. Otherwise, I can expect a retraction of you libellous accusation, no?

Okay, a little overreaction maybe, but still, don't put words or your own meaning into my posts, rather take the time to read the words.

You are saying the body doesn't need exercise, I think there is plenty of proof out there the contrary. Maybe you can lie a good life without, but I bet your body would be healthier with.

One last point, you mention being a big lad. Well I am 6'3" and 13.5st and eat like a horse, always have. Now I eat lots of carbs, bread, pasta etc well pretty much all foods (except cucumber, that is evil!) but I also do a lot of exercise, be that football or cycling, as well as running around after two kids.

I know for a fact that if I have 2 weeks off exercise then I can start to put weight on immediately. I appreciate that I am still eating the calories that I would normally burn off with exercise but still, doesn't that prove that more food and less exercise and you get (body)fat?

Thanks
Mark

 

[StevieB]

Steve.


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-Cholester ... 626&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-We-Get-Fat- ... pd_sim_b_3


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Trick-Treat-Hea ... 728&sr=1-3


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Life-Without-Br ... 728&sr=1-6

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-Cholester ... pd_sim_b_7


With the exception of the last book, I have read all of the above. The last one pretty much reiterated what most of the others said, so I skimmed it. So, there is part of the research on which I base my opinions. The rest I have gleaned from the net from people like Dr. Al. Sears. (Who unfortunately recommends foods I can’t afford or even obtain; grass fed beef and other cattle, wild Alaskan salmon and so on.) Far better for us than fat making bread that’s for sure!

Sorry John, those books are the authors opinion, not peer reviewed scientific studies. As such they cannot be considered as evidence to my mind. As you say, lets agree to disagree on this one. The bottom line from my perspective is still that calorie reduction, rather than wheat specifically, is the mechanism by which all weight loss is achieved. Whichever is correct - and we can both believe whatever we like - you are managing to lose weight and that can only be good.

Steve

 

[Jacob]

....... - you will not convince me its due to wheat, but thats not because I have a closed mind, its because I have seen the evidence (and even generated some of it) and made my own mind up on that basis.

Steve

So are you saying that my weight loss had no connection with a no wheat diet?
The evidence was pretty clear for me - and the rationale is fairly obvious. In my opinion wheat is a major factor in western obesity - just think big mac. Partly the starch itself but also wheat products as vehicle etc.
This may well be unknown to medical science - I had two years of general illness and anxiety (cancer? ulcers? etc) and was scanned and tested in various ways, had two years on PPI pills before I twigged that simple cause was wheat. Not "allergy" just a more vague "intolerance". The doctors didn't know anything.
When I decided to try it the symptoms disappeared in a day and the excess weight followed more slowly.

No - I am saying your weight loss was due to a reduction in calorific intake.

Agree, obviously

Whether you achieve this through cutting out wheat, or cutting out something else or even cutting down a bit of everything is irrelevant - its the reduction in calorific content that is important.

Steve

If the wheat component of my diet carries a lot of the calories, then the wheat is relevant. You are just splitting hairs. Wheat is "fattening" - for me and probably for many other people.
If I was drinking too much gin and had to cut down you might as well argue that reducing my gin intake was irrelevant, it was the reduction in alcohol intake which counted. True, but stupid, unless you could show me how to carry on drinking gin and reduce my alcohol consumption at the same time.

 

[Benchwayze]

Steve.


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-Cholester ... 626&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-We-Get-Fat- ... pd_sim_b_3


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Trick-Treat-Hea ... 728&sr=1-3


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Life-Without-Br ... 728&sr=1-6

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-Cholester ... pd_sim_b_7


With the exception of the last book, I have read all of the above. The last one pretty much reiterated what most of the others said, so I skimmed it. So, there is part of the research on which I base my opinions. The rest I have gleaned from the net from people like Dr. Al. Sears. (Who unfortunately recommends foods I can’t afford or even obtain; grass fed beef and other cattle, wild Alaskan salmon and so on.) Far better for us than fat making bread that’s for sure!

Sorry John, those books are the authors opinion, not peer reviewed scientific studies. As such they cannot be considered as evidence to my mind. As you say, lets agree to disagree on this one. The bottom line from my perspective is still that calorie reduction, rather than wheat specifically, is the mechanism by which all weight loss is achieved. Whichever is correct - and we can both believe whatever we like - you are managing to lose weight and that can only be good.

Steve

Steve PM sent.

 

[Benchwayze]

Steve.


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-Cholester ... 626&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-We-Get-Fat- ... pd_sim_b_3


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Trick-Treat-Hea ... 728&sr=1-3


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Life-Without-Br ... 728&sr=1-6

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-Cholester ... pd_sim_b_7


With the exception of the last book, I have read all of the above. The last one pretty much reiterated what most of the others said, so I skimmed it. So, there is part of the research on which I base my opinions. The rest I have gleaned from the net from people like Dr. Al. Sears. (Who unfortunately recommends foods I can’t afford or even obtain; grass fed beef and other cattle, wild Alaskan salmon and so on.) Far better for us than fat making bread that’s for sure!

Sorry John, those books are the authors opinion, not peer reviewed scientific studies. As such they cannot be considered as evidence to my mind. As you say, lets agree to disagree on this one. The bottom line from my perspective is still that calorie reduction, rather than wheat specifically, is the mechanism by which all weight loss is achieved. Whichever is correct - and we can both believe whatever we like - you are managing to lose weight and that can only be good.

Steve

Steve PM sent.

Fair enough Steve....
In Forum:

I have no wish to fall out over this, but have you read these books before? Or are you merely dismissing them because the titles tell you they wouldn’t sit with your own beliefs? That’s akin to saying one religion is merely opinion, but yours is fact.

As to peer reviewed studies and research, suppose you conducted a five year study on cholesterol, using all the usual safeguards of placebos, and blind studies etc. To your surprise your results suggested that some of the accepted thinking was wrong. Would you then offer a paper for your peers to review? I don’t believe you would. Simply because you would be well aware that your results might fly in the face of what your peers think.

Wasn’t this precisely why it took so long for the Medical Profession to accept that the mere act of washing hands could reduce the risk of infection during surgery? So much for peer reviewed studies. As long as you agree with your eminent peers you are okay. When you disagree, you have to run for cover! At the very least you might run the risk of looking 'silly'.

It is starch (Mainly bread, pastries, potatoes and pastas,) and sugars that made me obese. Since I gave up these ‘delights’, I have lost about two stones. My blood sugar levels are normal. My cholesterol is around 5.5 which it was when I was half my present 72 years. But based on what I have read cholesterol protects me as I get older, so a higher level doesn’t worry me. My glucose tolerance is improved, my blood pressure is lowered. Not quite normal yet, but I have been able to reduce my medication. I feel better in myself; I have to buy new, smaller clothes, and my light-headed spells have vanished. I am also sleeping better. I don’t need a Doctor to tell me that is due to my change in diet. If it isn’t though, and is a mere coincidence, then I must be one lucky man to have so many pleasant side-effects of ditching the ‘stodge’. What I am eating is high calorie food. Eggs and Meat every day. Beef, Pork, Lamb, plenty of Fish, Chicken, Cheese, and Double cream. I also take heaps of fresh green vegetables and a limited amount of fruit. The only roots I eat are carrots, because I do like them. Now if all that saturated fat that isn't a greater calorific intake, than when I was eating 'healthily' I will be very surprised. I have tried low fat, soup diets, weight-watchers online and a host of other fads. They never worked, and all the time I felt hungry.

So, I ignored current medical advice on ‘Healthy-eating’ and I have become lighter and healthier. What more proof could I want? Doesn’t that even dent your conviction about the 'calories in = calories out' theory?

I accept that on my own I don’t prove or disprove anything, but that doesn’t really bother me.
I am happy to be feeling better.

Regards and have a Good 2012.

TAIHTS.

John

 

[RogerS]

This a good book, as well. Tells it how it really is :wink:

That David Icke talks a lot of sense [/irony]

 

[Benchwayze]

By which you mean?
(Irony, sarcasm or mickey taking Roger?) Choose your pleasure. :wink:

I don't think Icke is the Messiah, and I don't believe in a complete Global Conspiracy. But I do see that the drug companies have a vested interest in a 'sick' population, Or has that never occurred to you?

I know what works for me. If you think I am exaggerating then so be it.
If you have a weight problem, then try my way for a month. It shouldn't harm you, but it would probably surprise you.

If you don't have the problem then good luck to you.

Regards
John

 

[StevieB]

I can go through amazon and find books that state alien's exist, I can find books which state the world will in in 2012 due to Myan prophecy, I can find books that claim to prove god exists and books that state he doesn't. Writing a book doesn't make its content correct, evidence based or factual.

That’s akin to saying one religion is merely opinion, but yours is fact.

You misunderstand me. I am saying you should look at the evidence behind a statement and judge the statement on the basis of that evidence. I am not claiming my stamtents are true and yours are false becuase it's me saying them, I am saying the evidence behind my statements is large and that I cannot see the evidence behind yours.

As to peer reviewed studies and research, suppose you conducted a five year study on cholesterol, using all the usual safeguards of placebos, and blind studies etc. To your surprise your results suggested that some of the accepted thinking was wrong. Would you then offer a paper for your peers to review? I don’t believe you would. Simply because you would be well aware that your results might fly in the face of what your peers think.

You clearly believe what you wish, but please do not tell me what I would and wouldn't do in a scientific context. Apart from being personally insulting, you are presuming to judge my scientific integrity as well. As I said above and in my response to your PM, I really do think this discussion is going nowhere and would be best left to fade away.

Steve

 

[Jacob]

.... Apart from being personally insulting, you are presuming to judge my scientific integrity as well. As I said above and in my response to your PM, I really do think this discussion is going nowhere and would be best left to fade away.

Steve

I rather thought personal insults were your speciality, looking at your earlier comments! Scientific integrity? A bit weak on simple logic I thought.

 

[StevieB]

I know you are only trolling Jacob, but I have re-read the entire thread and cannot see a personal insult. The closest would be my statement that I find some of John's statements incorrect or silly. If anyone needs to resort to personal insults to win an argument then they have probably already lost, but I guess opinions will differ on what constitutes winning and losing and indeed on what a personal insult is.

I am quite happy to apologise if its felt I have resulted to personal insults in this, or indeed any other thread. That was not my intention.

Steve

 

[Benchwayze]

Steve,

If you feel insulted, then I apologise. It wasn't wasn't my intent to insult or to judge, so I suggest you read what I said once again.

Were I to imply that you don't know what you are talking about, that would be an insult and a judgement.

However I merely expressed what I thought you might do, in a given set of circumstances. How can that be insulting? It's merely conjecture on my part. As for bringing in Aliens (and David Icke has been mentioned somewhere too) That sounds like an attack on my integrity.


Now please leave it, or I might begin to doubt your integrity.

NMTBS

John

 

[RogerS]

Hmmmmmm...... Okay thread gone off a little, but thanks for the advice on the first page.

The main reason behind me looking at joining an expensive fitness centre is that I want to be able to go swimming whenever I want. Currently the nearest swimming pool to me has been shut for a year now, due to open in july, but then I still stuck with same problem I'm getting now. The nearby pools to me are used by alot of swimming groups and so I cannot get to go very often at all.

The centre I'm looking at joining has a swimming pool, so this is a big factor for me as I used to go twice a week when I lived in Birmingham (so I don't think Ill have much to worry about not going). I've never used a proper gym before so this will be an added perk.

The price we've been told to expect over the phone ranges from £45-£53, hopefully there will be room to haggle and get a discounted price. -This being that I do actually like the place and its atmosphere. Me and my missus will be joining together if it is good for us, we go for a taster on Sunday.....

Looks like your decision has been made for you ! Fully understand accessibility in pools with groups, mother and toddlers etc. I'm guessing you've thought about early mornings, evenings although appreciate those times dont always fit in with a busy household. Only thought would be to see if you could sign up just for six months so you can see in July how the land lies at your local pool when it re-opens. Re the gym..personally I'd like to see a decent range of free-weights rather than a lot of high-tech gizmo machines but you do need a good instructor to get the maximum benefit. Anyway, hope Sunday goes well.

 

[Jacob]

I know you are only trolling Jacob, but I have re-read the entire thread and cannot see a personal insult. The closest would be my statement that I find some of John's statements incorrect or silly. If anyone needs to resort to personal insults to win an argument then they have probably already lost, but I guess opinions will differ on what constitutes winning and losing and indeed on what a personal insult is.

I am quite happy to apologise if its felt I have resulted to personal insults in this, or indeed any other thread. That was not my intention.

Steve

You call Benchwayze silly, and accuse me of trolling.
"If anyone needs to resort to personal insults to win an argument then they have probably already lost"; yes I think you are struggling!
To be fair, I don't think you lost the argument - more that you did not properly engage with it. It's not enough to say "you are wrong because I know more about it than you"

Sorry for the interventions Joiner_sim I was merely chatting about weight loss and exercise, I thought!
Not into gyms myself but we spend a lot of time in the pool doing Kayak training, which is surprisingly physically demanding. And cycle a lot.