Posts by floggingsully

Original Post by nahlay:

I was looking for others who have already obtained the goal to help add new exercises to my workout. That was all. Not to have 100 people tell me how it's not obtainable. 

I have obtained this exact goal and therefor can help you.

Squats are the only exercise that can enhance the diamond thigh gap.  Running and cycling are detrimental to the diamond shaped thigh gap as they produce much more of an oval shaped gap.

By mixing back, front, overhead and goblet squats you can manipulate what cut of diamond you want, though I can't give specifics about what mix of the various squats will yield what cut because it varies depending on your shoe size and favorite backstreet boy.

Original Post by kelrantymus:

*snort* Yeah, ok. My guess is the athletes spending that much on shoes also have so much volume and training that the stress injuries are normal ones an real endurance athlete gets. If you run more, you are more likely to be hurt somehow no matter the shoes but athletes who do run more tend to spend more on their shoes so your correlation does not equal causation.

The study may have normalized for mileage, I don't remember.  When I read it my first thought was that runners who were less likely to get hurt wouldn't keep upgrading to more expensive shoes.

Original Post by kelrantymus:

You're not a runner. Why do you insist on debunking the experiences of runners, marathoners, ultra runners, triathletes and trail runners? You don't pick on the cyclists nearly as much even though we advise professional bike fittings, too, for proper cycling and to lessen injuries. Why not go pick on us in that regard, too?

You're right, I'm not a runner or a triathlete anymore.  I don't run on an empty stomach anymore or stop eating after 8pm anymore, not that any of that matters because science trumps anecdotes.  Sorry.

I have no idea if proper bike fittings reduce injury.  Nor can I remember any times when anyone on here claimed they did.

Original Post by kelrantymus:

What about all the people who recommend buying a book like Starting Strength or New Rules of Lifting? You don't debunk them. What about when a veteran runner like cpa says he doesn't think weight lifting is helpful to runners? Why not go pick on him?

What about people who recommend SS or NROL?  What's to debunk?  Has someone said that either program reduces injury rates? and compared to what?

I've brought up, on numerous, occasions the study which found that trained marathon runners increased their running efficiency by running less and lifting more.  It's one of my favorites.  If I missed someone claiming that running isn't helped by lifting, I'm sorry, please point in that direction so I can set em strait.

Original Post by kelrantymus:

Or is this because we're just dumb girls who like to shop? Is that it? Normally, you don't bother me, but this vendetta you have against runners, especially female runners, it seems, is really obnoxious.

I'm sorry that the suggestion that the snake oil you've been buying is actually snake oil upsets you.  I'm also sorry you've stooped to calling me sexist for pointing out that it's snake oil, I thought you were above that.

Original Post by lysistrata:
I wear the expensive shoes because they are really comfortable and I'd rather not take the risk

Did you know studies have shown that the more you spend on running shoes, the more likely you are to get hurt?

Original Post by bierorama:

Go to a running store and have them size your foot, watch you run and analyze your old shoes.

A 12 month study of nearly 1000 novice runners found that getting properly fitted shoes makes no difference in injury rates (source).

Original Post by jules817:

Original Post by floggingsully:

The IRS held the auction, does this mean all the money is going to be federal revenue?

apparently it is going to cover the back taxes owed by the person who originally owned the spots...

Whoever owned the spots owed over half a million in back taxes?  Either way, more money for the gov.

Original Post by chevy98:

Would it be benificial to take something like the fiber power that you add to water?

The chance of it helping are a lot higher than the chance of it hurting.

Original Post by Daisym1504:
I was actually losing weight before at a higher calorie-consumption and less exercise? 

Go back to doing what worked.

Original Post by lysistrata:

Besides what Kevin said about increased costs of debt service affecting us now, part of the problem is that the government borrowing and people not saving are not phenomena that just started yesterday.  They've been going on for decades. 

What Kevin said about debt services is a good argument for why people not saving is bad for the economy long term, but what we're talking about is the economy now.  If everyone all of a sudden started putting 20% in their 401K or putting 20% towards debt that the economy start growing faster now?

If Leamer said that the economy wasn't growing faster now because people weren't saving enough a decade ago it would make sense (though it would be harder to blame that on Obama), the idea that the economy isn't growing now because people aren't saving enough now is still silly.

Original Post by lysistrata:

Gonna leave that cute little baby out in the cold then?

Because, like you pointed out, people overspending and borrowing to obtain a higher standard of living now makes their ability to maintain that position into the future more precarious.  

I don't disagree with you that the government borrowing lots of money and people not saving are bad long term.  But the idea that these things are preventing growth now is ridiculous.

Original Post by lysistrata:

Original Post by floggingsully:

Original Post by lysistrata:

According to Leamer, the reason we have yet to see significant economic recovery is because of too much government spending fueled by borrowing, too little national savings to fund late in life medical needs, and too many workers lacking competitive skills in the job market. 

This is a joke right? the economy isn't growing because the government is spending money and people are spending instead of saving? that's complete BS.

No, it's not a joke.  The government doesn't spend your money nearly as efficiently as you do.

Now, the multiplier effect ... that's a joke.

But the government isn't spending my money with their spending fueled by borrowing, they're spending my kids money.

And I'd still like to hear an explanation of how people not saving is adversely affecting the economy today.