Obesity and Consumer Debt

Do we Live TOO Hand to Mouth?

Although I‘ve never seen any data concerning the relationship of obesity levels and the rate of consumer debt, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to put some of the pieces of the puzzle together.

In the year 2005, the rate of consumer debt was 950 billion dollars. By 2006 that number had risen to 1 trillion dollars. To put that into perspective, that is $3333.333 per person living in the United States.

The corollary to this is the rate of growth in obesity in the U.S. It is estimated that between 1976 to 1980 obesity levels averaged about 14.5 percent. Between 1988 to 1994, the level had grown to 23 percent. From 1999 to 2004 the estimated level of obesity had reached an average of 30.5 percent. Does this look like a direct reflection of the rate of consumer debt increases?

Here’s a neat little program that illustrates the level of growth over the years: http://health.msn.com/reports/obesity/

And this may only be the tip of the iceberg. Researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) analyzed data from health surveys, which are used to estimate obesity levels in states. Because people tend to provide incorrect information about their weight and height, especially in telephone surveys, the researchers concluded that estimates of obesity in individual states have been too low, by more than 50 percent. Their study, which corrects for misreporting in those surveys, appears in the May 2006 issue of the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

Based on this new understanding of the survey data, the authors found that, on average, women tend to underestimate their weight while men do not. When it comes to height, young and middle-aged men tend to overestimate their height more than women in the same age groups. In 2002, the corrected prevalence of obesity in the U.S. population was 28.7 percent for adult men and 34.5 percent for adult women, more than 50 percent higher than previously estimated.

The research, which presents the first-ever corrected estimates of obesity for individual states, found that Southern states have the highest levels of obesity in the country. Using the authors' corrected data for 2000, the highest obesity levels for men were found in Texas (31 percent) and Mississippi (30 percent). For women, Texas (37 percent), Louisiana (37 percent), Mississippi (37 percent), District of Columbia (37 percent), Alabama (37 percent), and South Carolina (36 percent) led the pack. States with the lowest prevalence of corrected obesity for men in 2000 were Colorado (18 percent), District of Columbia (21 percent), and Montana (21 percent); for women, Colorado (24 percent), Montana (25 percent), and Massachusetts (27 percent).

What are we really dealing with here? Is this a lack mentality, where we feel that because of any number of influences (Madison Avenue marketing methods, keeping up with the Jones’, etc) has us believing that we don’t have all that we should? Or is it simply a lack of discipline?

Whatever the reasons, the issue is growing…no pun intended. What, therefore, is the best way to combat it? Epictetus, the ancient wise-guy, said, “Contentment comes not so much from great wealth as from few wants.” The Bible puts it this way, “For He satisfies the longing soul, and fills the hungry soul with goodness.” (Psalm 107:9) and, “Better is little with the fear of the Lord, than great treasure with trouble.” (Proverbs 15:16)

So does that mean that we aren’t to strive to better ourselves and to seek provision? No. However, I think it means that if what you are seeking is some external “something” to fill the void in your life where you feel empty, whether it is food or some material object, then you will either go broke or explode.

Marketing experts have an understanding about your weaknesses and use it to their advantage each and every day. That weakness is this: Humans are predisposed to purchase (or eat) emotionally and justify it logically.

Please read that again.

Do you really NEED a Mercedes 250 SL, or do you want it? Do you really NEED a second or third home, or do you want it? Please understand, if you have been blessed to make enough to afford these types of things and they won’t place an emotional or financial burden upon you, go for it. On the other hand, if you’re deep in consumer debt, why dig any deeper?

The same applies to health. Do you really NEED second helpings or do you want it? Do you really NEED dessert after your meals, or do you want it? Occasionally is fine, but just because you were poor as a kid (or had older brothers who always got the most food, or …(fill in the blank) doesn’t mean you have to live that way now. You are in control of your life and health.

Remember this: You have the power to choose. However, once the decision is made you become a servant to that decision. Does that make sense?

Now, what decision will you make with respect to your level of health and fitness?

New classes for the Firestorm Fitness System Fat Burning Fit Camps have just started and a few spots are still available. Why not give yourself the gift of health and fitness?

God bless,
Steve

the chin-up master

This dude is amazing.
Steve

Why do I feel better after I have a good cry?

Answer:
Studies of hundreds of volunteers have found that 85% of women and 73% of men feel less sad and less angry after crying.

Women cry four times as often as men -- on average 5.3 times a month, while men cry only 1.4 times a month.

Crying episodes in most women involve tears running down their cheeks, but most male crying episodes only result in watery eyes.

Research shows that emotional tears are chemically different from other types of tears, such as those shed when cutting onions.

Emotional tears have a higher protein content.

Because emotional stress can increase the risk for stress-related disorders and can even contribute to constriction of the coronary arteries, crying is a healthful response to emotional stress.

Tomorrow (Friday May 25) my wife undergoes a uterine biopsy to determine why she is in pain and experiencing abdominal discomfort. My tears have accompanied her wait during the interim leading to this procedure.

Please pray for her.

God bless,
Steve

Please pass me some of the dimethylpolysiloxene and tertiary butylhydroquinone!

The following is an article I recently read in "Early to Rise", an on-line newsletter which I have read for years and highly recommend in your subscribing. Here's some info on the site:

This article appears courtesy of Early To Rise, the Internet’s most popular health, wealth, and success e-zine. For a complimentary subscription, visit http://www.earlytorise.com/.

Industrial Strength Food: Not for Human Consumption By Jon Herring

I often advise ETR readers to eat a diet of whole, organic, unprocessed foods. Not only are these foods healthier - without the added sugar, fats, and sodium prevalent in processed foods - but you also know exactly what you're getting. An apple is an apple. A steak is a steak.

Not so with processed foods. For example: Did you know that a McDonald's Chicken McNugget contains 38 ingredients? In fact, about 56 percent of a McNugget is derived from corn, not chicken. But that's not all. In his book The Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan points out that this "food" also contains several synthetic ingredients that come not from a plant or an animal but from a petroleum refinery or chemical plant.

Two of them - dimethylpolysiloxene and tertiary butylhydroquinone - are known to be harmful. According to the Handbook of Food Additives, the former is an established carcinogen. And more than a gram of the latter is known to cause "nausea, vomiting, ringing in the ears, delirium, a sense of suffocation, and collapse." More than five grams can be fatal.

Doesn't exactly sound like dinner, does it?

I'm not trying to pick on McDonald's. Just about any processed food is bound to have a label full of incomprehensible ingredients. In his book Twinkie, Deconstructed, Steve Ettlinger decodes the ingredients in those little snacks. He also asks the question: "If we can bake a cake at home with as few as five ingredients, why does a Twinkie require 39?"

The answer, of course, is that most of those ingredients contribute to a Twinkie's "shelf life." Do you really want to eat something that can stay "fresh" on a shelf for a decade? Certainly not. Stick to whole, unprocessed foods.

I couldn't have said it better myself.
God bless you,
Steve

The myth of "low-fat" foods

"The sad reality of America today is that we're digging our own graves with a fork and knife." Unknown

One of the issues that I have with "corporate America's" food production portion is the slick marketing and outright lies they preach as truth. Here's an example:

I have proof that people are overeating low-fat foods because they've been led to believe they’re healthier.

A group of researchers told some folks to watch TV. They gave them bags filled with granola as a snack. One bag was labeled, “Low-fat Rocky Mountain Granola.” The other bag was labeled, “Regular Rocky Mountain Granola.”

Guess what? The folks who opted for the low-fat granola ate 32% more than those who ate the regular granola.

32%!

But this isn't limited to granola. The researchers repeated this experiment with low fat and regular chocolate. Big surprise...the results were almost identical. I think it's because people believe low-fat foods are synonymous with "guilt-free", therefore they eat more.

Here's the main reason that I find this so alarming: Low-fat foods have proportionately more carbohydrate, typically in the form of refined sugar. It is carbs, not fat that are the most fattening foods per calorie. This is especially true of empty, refined carbs.

These unnatural "foods" are devoid of nutrients and signal to your body that you are either nutritionally deprived or starving. Now that's a brilliant marketing concept, eh? Malnourished with a full stomach!

The result? Your metabolism shifts into fat storage mode despite how many calories you consume of those low-fat foods. And the marketers and manufacturers are betting you will keep consuming.

Here is the bottom line: You don’t need low-fat foods. Dietary fat is not the problem. The body's metabolism is set by hormonal responses. What hormone has more control and regulation over fat than any other? Insulin.

Here's the lowdown: Your body reacts to carbohydrates by secreting insulin. It's a simple process - eat more carbohydrate and your body will secrete more insulin and build more fat – provided all other things are equal.

The good news is this - fat and protein are neutral. They don’t raise your blood sugar or trigger the release of insulin.

And are you really so naive to believe that corporations don't have a hand in government control? Consider this:

The biggest fax paux in nutrition history took place in the 1980s, when the NIH (think USRDA) announced that Americans needed to cut their fat intake. It was recommended that we instead replace fat with carbohydrates. Therefore, calories from fat decreased while calories from refined carbohydrates increased… a lot! And the obesity epidemic has grown steadily since. Jared and his Subway sandwiches are not the answer...

Want a surefire program for packing on the pounds? Overeat low-fat foods because you think you can afford the calories. As an added bonus you will exponentially increase your potential for chronic disease...like obesity, diabetes and so called "heart disease."

I know it’s ironic … but low-fat foods will make you fat and tired. And a fat tired individual is often to sluggish mentally to make better food choices. Marketers know it, and now so do you.

Please keep fat in your diet. Plan your meals around a prepared variety and well-rounded selection of red meats and fish. Keep a bag of nuts nearby when you feel the need to snack. Walnuts, almonds, Brazil nuts and cashews are all very sound choices. These are the real "guilt-free" snacks.

Eat as much as you want. Please. You will get satisfied and you won’t overeat.

And, you won’t get fat. I promise. Try it.

God bless you,
Steve

Several myths of fat loss

Myth Tips to Remember

Myth #1: "You can “sweat” fat off your body."

Fact: Lord, give me strength!

The truth of the matter is that losing fat is a multi-faceted process and sweating has nothing to do with it. Bodily fat must be released first hormonally through the bloodstream and THEN you have to burn it. (Hence the "Firestorm" in Firestorm Fitness) If sweating was a successful solution in helping folks effectively lose weight, the state of Texas would be the most highly populated state in the US with the leanest folks anywhere!

And this is a note to you bone-heads who wear those wraps that make you sweat or those plastic suits: STOP IT! They're a waste of time and you look ridiculous.

Myth #2: Lifting weights is not good to do if you want to lose weight, because it will make you "bulk up.”

Fact: Aggh! If I hear this one more time...

O.K., I admit it. This one personally drives me bonkers.

Here's the lowdown on this particular myth: FOOD BULKS YOU UP! NOT LIFTING WEIGHTS!

Lifting is merely the signal for the increased calories to go to work. If you're eating enough to stimulate muscle growth, then you will.

Lifting weights on a regular basis is the number one most effective manner to maintain or lose weight. Performing strength training exercises 2 to 4 days a week will not "bulk you up." Only very intense strength training, combined with a certain genetic background and LOADS of calories, can build “Arnold Schwarzisnamer" type muscles.

Myth #3: Skipping meals is a good way to lose weight.

Fact: WRONG!

Studies have demonstrated repeatedly that people who skip breakfast and eat fewer times during the day are much more likely to be heavier than people who eat a healthy breakfast and eat four to six meals per day.

Myth: Low-fat or nonfat means no calories.

Fact: Please, tell me you don't really believe this?

While it may be true that a low-fat or nonfat food is sometimes lower in overall calories than the same size portion of the full-fat product, most processed low-fat or nonfat foods have just as many calories as the full- fat version of the same food.

Quite often, they contain even more calories.

The reason: We humans like the taste of fat.

If you remove it, foods taste like cardboard. To make it more palatable manufacturers add SUGAR, flour, or starch thickeners to improve flavor and texture after the fat is removed. These ingredients add calories and are actually WORSE for you than the real version.

Myth: "I can lose weight while eating whatever I want."

Fact: Welcome to the world of master marketing.

A.K.A. the Atkins diet, South Beach Diet and now the Sonoma Diet. Through effective marketing and hype, marketers (not strength training pro's like yours truly) have "learnt" us that, in order to lose weight, all you needed to do was munch away on anything you pleased...as long as it wasn’t a carb.

Portion sizes or control? Proper meal timing? Quality food choices? What the heck does that have to do with effective weight management?

Everything.

Myth: Starches are fattening and should be limited when trying to lose weight.

Fact: O.K., this one IS mostly true, but here is the reality:

There are lots of foods that are high in starch; bread, rice, pasta, cereals, beans, fruits, and some vegetables, like potatoes and yams. These are generally fine provided you,
· keep it fibrous (unrefined or processed)
· eat them combined with other foods (i.e. protein)
· Don’t overdo it. (There's that portion control again)

Starchy foods cause weight gain when they are eaten in large portion sizes. But you already knew that because eating too much of ANYTHING will turn to fat. They are especially lethal when they're combined with high-fat toppings like butter, sour cream, or mayonnaise.

Eating a normal, portion relevant amount of carbs is the only way that you can effectively fuel your way through the quality workouts that you need to change your physique.

Don't be fooled by tricks and ploys, like the "carb- cycling" techniques that are purported to work to help release the last few pounds of body fat. For most folks they simply don't pan out over the long haul.

God bless,
Steve

Thin people may be fat on the inside

This story is from an Associated Press article:

By MARIA CHENG, AP Medical Writer Thu May 10, 7:28 PM ET

If it really is what's on the inside that counts, then a lot of thin people might be in trouble. Some doctors now think that the internal fat surrounding vital organs like the heart, liver or pancreas — invisible to the naked eye — could be as dangerous as the more obvious external fat that bulges underneath the skin.

"Being thin doesn't automatically mean you're not fat," said Dr. Jimmy Bell, a professor of molecular imaging at Imperial College, London. Since 1994, Bell and his team have scanned nearly 800 people with MRI machines to create "fat maps" showing where people store fat.

According to the data, people who maintain their weight through diet rather than exercise are likely to have major deposits of internal fat, even if they are otherwise slim. "The whole concept of being fat needs to be redefined," said Bell, whose research is funded by Britain's Medical Research Council.

Without a clear warning signal — like a rounder middle — doctors worry that thin people may be lulled into falsely assuming that because they're not overweight, they're healthy.

"Just because someone is lean doesn't make them immune to diabetes or other risk factors for heart disease," said Dr. Louis Teichholz, chief of cardiology at Hackensack Hospital in New Jersey, who was not involved in Bell's research.

Even people with normal Body Mass Index scores — a standard obesity measure that divides your weight by the square of your height — can have surprising levels of fat deposits inside.

Of the women scanned by Bell and his colleagues, as many as 45 percent of those with normal BMI scores (20 to 25) actually had excessive levels of internal fat. Among men, the percentage was nearly 60 percent.

Relating the news to what Bell calls "TOFIs" — people who are "thin outside, fat inside" — is rarely uneventful. "The thinner people are, the bigger the surprise," he said, adding the researchers even found TOFIs among people who are professional models.

According to Bell, people who are fat on the inside are essentially on the threshold of being obese. They eat too many fatty, sugary foods — and exercise too little to work it off — but they are not eating enough to actually be fat. Scientists believe we naturally accumulate fat around the belly first, but at some point, the body may start storing it elsewhere.

Still, most experts believe that being of normal weight is an indicator of good health, and that BMI is a reliable measurement.

"BMI won't give you the exact indication of where fat is, but it's a useful clinical tool," said Dr. Toni Steer, a nutritionist at Britain's Medical Research Council.

Doctors are unsure about the exact dangers of internal fat, but some suspect it contributes to the risk of heart disease and diabetes. They theorize that internal fat disrupts the body's communication systems. The fat enveloping internal organs might be sending the body mistaken chemical signals to store fat inside organs like the liver or pancreas. This could ultimately lead to insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, or heart disease.

Experts have long known that fat, active people can be healthier than their skinny, inactive counterparts. "Normal-weight persons who are sedentary and unfit are at much higher risk for mortality than obese persons who are active and fit," said Dr. Steven Blair, an obesity expert at the University of South Carolina.

For example, despite their ripples of fat, super-sized Sumo wrestlers probably have a better metabolic profile than some of their slim, sedentary spectators, Bell said. That's because the wrestlers' fat is primarily stored under the skin, not streaking throughout their vital organs and muscles.

The good news is that internal fat can be easily burned off through exercise or even by improving your diet. "Even if you don't see it on your bathroom scale, caloric restriction and physical exercise have an aggressive effect on visceral fat," said Dr. Bob Ross, an obesity expert at Queen's University in Canada.

Because many factors contribute to heart disease, Teichholz says it's difficult to determine the precise danger of internal fat — though it certainly doesn't help.

"Obesity is a risk factor, but it's lower down on the totem pole of risk factors," he said, explaining that whether or not people smoke, their family histories and blood pressure and cholesterol rates are more important determinants than both external and internal fat.When it comes to being fit, experts say there is no short-cut. "If you just want to look thin, then maybe dieting is enough," Bell said. "But if you want to actually be healthy, then exercise has to be an important component of your lifestyle."

Steve's Comments: I think the last line of this article pretty well sums it up..."if you want to actually be healthy, then exercise has to be an important component of your lifestyle."

God bless,
Steve

Obesity and Consumer Debt:Do we Live TOO Hand to Mouth?

Although I‘ve never seen any data showing a relationship to obesity levels and the rate of consumer debt, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to put some of the pieces of the puzzle together.

In the year 2005, the rate of consumer debt was 950 billion dollars. By 2006 that number had risen to 1 trillion dollars. To put that into perspective, that is $3333.333 per person living in the United States.

The corollary to this is the rate of growth in obesity in the U.S. It is estimated that between 1976 to 1980 obesity levels averaged about 14.5 percent. Between 1988 to 1994, the level had grown to 23 percent. From 1999 to 2004 the estimated level of obesity had reached an average of 30.5 percent. Does this look like a direct reflection of the rate of consumer debt increases?

Here’s a neat little program that illustrates the level of growth over the years: http://health.msn.com/reports/obesity/

And this may only be the tip of the iceberg.

Researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) analyzed data from health surveys, which are used to estimate obesity levels in states. Because people tend to provide incorrect information about their weight and height, especially in telephone surveys, the researchers concluded that estimates of obesity in individual states have been too low, by more than 50 percent. Their study, which corrects for misreporting in those surveys, appears in the May 2006 issue of the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

Based on this new understanding of the survey data, the authors found that, on average, women tend to underestimate their weight while men do not. When it comes to height, young and middle-aged men tend to overestimate their height more than women in the same age groups. In 2002, the corrected prevalence of obesity in the U.S. population was 28.7 percent for adult men and 34.5 percent for adult women, more than 50 percent higher than previously estimated.

The research, which presents the first-ever corrected estimates of obesity for individual states, found that Southern states have the highest levels of obesity in the country. Using the authors' corrected data for 2000, the highest obesity levels for men were found in Texas (31 percent) and Mississippi (30 percent). For women, Texas (37 percent), Louisiana (37 percent), Mississippi (37 percent), District of Columbia (37 percent), Alabama (37 percent), and South Carolina (36 percent) led the pack. States with the lowest prevalence of corrected obesity for men in 2000 were Colorado (18 percent), District of Columbia (21 percent), and Montana (21 percent); for women, Colorado (24 percent), Montana (25 percent), and Massachusetts (27 percent).

What are we really dealing with here?

Is this a lack mentality, where we feel that because of any number of influences (Madison Avenue marketing methods, keeping up with the Jones’, etc) has us believing that we don’t have all that we should? Or is it simply a lack of discipline?

Whatever the reasons, the issue is growing…no pun intended. What is the best way to combat it? Epictetus, the ancient wise-guy, said, “Contentment comes not so much from great wealth as from few wants.” The Bible puts it this way, “For He satisfies the longing soul, and fills the hungry soul with goodness.” (Psalm 107:9) and, “Better is little with the fear of the Lord, than great treasure with trouble.” (Proverbs 15:16)

So does that mean that we aren’t to strive to better ourselves and to seek provision? No. However, I think it means that if what you are seeking is some external “something” to fill the void in your life where you currently feel empty, then you will either go broke or explode.

Marketing experts have an understanding about your weaknesses and use it to their advantage each and every day. That weakness is this: Humans are predisposed to purchase (or eat) emotionally and justify it logically.

Please read that again.

Do you really NEED a Mercedes 250 SL, or do you want it? Do you really NEED a second or third home, or do you want it? Please understand, if you have been blessed to make enough to afford these types of things and they won’t place an emotional or financial burden upon you, go for it. On the other hand, if you’re deep in consumer debt, why dig any deeper?

The same applies to health. Do you really NEED second helpings or do you want it? Do you really NEED dessert after your meals, or do you want it? Occasionally is fine, but just because you were poor as a kid (or had older brothers who always got the most food, or …(fill in the blank) doesn’t mean you have to live that way now. You are in control of your life and health.

Remember this: You have the power to choose. However, once the decision is made you become a servant to that decision. Does that make sense?

Now, what decision will you make with respect to your level of health and fitness?

God bless you,
Steve

The Law of Sowing and Reaping

"Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever
a man sows, that he will also reap." Galatians 6:7 NKJV

When I was an eight-year-old kid, I used to wait after school at a day care center for my Mom to come and pick up my younger brother, sister and I. We romped on the playground, chased each other and generally did what every other kid used to do back then; we had fun outside.

On my ninth birthday, a kid dared me to jump from the monkey bars to an adjacent limb from an oak tree. Even at that tender age, I just knew that I was ten feet tall and bullet proof and that I could make it. NOT! A trip to the emergency room later confirmed that I had broken my Ulna and Radius just above the growth plate near my wrist. It was a hard way to learn a lesson, and I haven’t jumped from a set of monkey bars in over 35 years. Thank you very much!

I’m not real bright. And as far as I can recollect, I’ve never claimed to be. However, I do have one thing going for me which proves that I have at least two working brain cells to rub together: my wife, Kennon Marie. She is about as smart as they come, and the fact that she loves me as much as she does simply boggles my mind. Why? Because I know me all too well and what bounces around inside my noggin! How she tolerates me is beyond my comprehension, but I’m certainly grateful that she does.

There is one lesson that, regrettably, has taken me quite a while to learn. (Remember the “not too bright” thing? Forget the monkey bars, will you? Here’s a better example!) I have found that the better I treat my wife, the more affection I show her, the more kindness, love, respect and gratitude I shower upon her the more I get back in return. As one intelligent individual put it, “the more deposits I make into her emotional bank account, the more withdrawals in like manner I can take out.”

Right now, some of you are saying, “No kidding! You really are brain dead!” That’s alright, I’ve learned from my previous errors…for the most part. But what, if anything, does this have to do with health, fitness and fat loss? Plenty.

Stay tuned and I’ll tell you why.

Certain things that occur here in God’s creation for us are backed by principles that are immutable, undeniable and utterly absolute. One such “law” of God is that of sowing and reaping. It’s very basic and easy to understand, but many people try in vain to deny its existence.

Think of a habit in which you currently participate. It could be anything; watching a certain show on television, smoking, talking on your mobile phone while you drive or working out at 5:30 am each day. Whatever. The point is, for each and every habit in which you participate (sowing), you produce consequences (reaping). The results of these habits are consequences that are either beneficial to you in some way or not. They may have short term consequences, or long term consequences but they produce a definite result nonetheless.

The real question in all of this is: “What are you currently reaping from your sowing?”

Habits are a package deal: practice a habit, produce a result. There’s just no way around it. You can’t have one without the other. You can’t practice a negative habit and produce a positive result. Sorry! It’s immutable; remember?

The good news here is this: if you want to reap more positive results than your current sowing habits are producing, you have the free will to change your habits! That’s right, you have every opportunity to change the direction of your life RIGHT NOW if you so desire.

You can stop eating junk food and sugary, processed sweets and start eating fresh fruits and vegetables. You can stop drinking all of that nasty soda and start drinking clean, pure water. You can stop sitting on your backside and get up and get healthy, fit, lean and in shape! How? By sowing to better habits.

The first order of business is to come to the place of understanding just why it is you currently do what you do. Realize that on some level, whatever habits you have formed are, at this time, giving you some measure of enjoyment and/or pleasure. If they weren’t you wouldn’t be doing them. It’s OK; just own it so you can change it.

The next step is to make a decision to change. Nothing happens without decisions.

My 1968 Funk & Wagnall Dictionary defines a decision as: n. 1. The act of deciding (an issue, question, etc). 2. A conclusion or judgment reached by deciding. 3. The making up of one’s mind 4. Firmness in judgment, action, or character. 5. In boxing, a victory (great word, by the way) decided when there has not been a knockout.

Edwin Louis Cole, in his great book “Treasure” says it this way: “The level on which you live is under your power of choice. You have the freedom to choose, but once the choice is made (decision), you become the servant of that choice.”

Please read that again.

The next time you have the choice to eat something (sowing) that is beneficial to your goals and body or not (reaping), to which are you willing to become a servant? The next time you have an opportunity to exercise and train, or sit and watch T.V., to which choice will you be a servant?

You see, the corollary to this freedom of choice is this; decision translates into energy. Indecision saps energy. If you don’t like the life you’re currently living, change your choices. It’s that simple. Refusing to exercise your power and freedom to choose allows others to exercise it for you. Allowing others to make choices and decisions for you allows them to create your world, and others will ALWAYS make it too small.

In other words, making an empowering decision means that there is no turning back, no way out, no backtracking or sidestepping. It takes a certain degree of responsibility to make a decision, and a definite degree of character and responsibility to stick with one. Someone much wiser than I once said, “A man (or a woman) can be measured by the amount of responsibility he undertakes.” When you take a decisive stance on becoming healthier, then you have ended all uncertainty, all dispute, and you are conclusive with this resolve: "I will be victorious in this issue no matter what it takes or how long it takes me. From now on, The Buck Stops Here!"

Without making a decision to change habits for the better, you cannot take action. And action is where the real success of the story is fulfilled. No action (sowing), no results (reaping). Much action, much results. There’s that immutable thing again.

When a farmer wants to reap a crop of corn, he must sow his field with corn seeds. His actions in the sowing of the seed will, in due time, produce a field of corn. Likewise, when you sow to a new habit, you will, in due time, reap the benefits of your actions. Ponder this quote Rita Mae Brown: "A life of reaction is a life of slavery; intellectually and spiritually. One must fight for a life of action, not reaction." Smart lady.

The Bible states it this way, “Where no oxen are, the trough is clean; But much increase (productivity and change=reaping) comes by the strength (sowing and actions) of an ox.” (Proverbs 14:4) Your actions sown into a new habit will bring about and reap change for the better. Revel in it.

Like a farmer, the more new habits you sow into, the more new habit “crops” you reap. However, what if the farmer found out mid-way in the sowing process that corn wasn’t the “cash crop” he’d hoped it would be. Perhaps he has 200 acres of land on which to sow, and he’s planted 50 acres with corn. Since he wants a more profitable yield, he is now going to plant something more prosperous. Let’s say it’s wheat. He plants the remaining 150 acres with wheat. But what about the corn?

Let’s say that you have a habit of eating donuts every morning for breakfast. Those little white powdered beasts that look like tiny snow covered tires. Let’s also say that you’ve been doing it for five years now. This five year habit is like your 50 acres of corn. You decide to sow to a new habit, perhaps eating oatmeal and egg whites. You begin to sow to this new, more prosperous habit. Can you expect your previous crop (five years of donut eating) not to still yield some kind of harvest ever again. Probably not.

This is the area of concern for most people that is often never addressed properly. Anytime you sow to a new habit, you can expect the “old crop” to show up occasionally, waiting to be reaped. How do you deal with it? I refer back to Edwin Cole: “You have the freedom to choose, but once the choice is made you become the servant of that choice.”

You have two choices: harvest the crop or cut it down and let it die in the field to make room for the more prosperous crop.

When the old habit raises its head, will you always prevail? Probably not. But that’s OK. You are on the road to sowing a new habit. Focus on it and reap the rewards of it. Leave the old crop where you must, it isn’t serving you any further.

I hope you’ve gained a better understanding of the Law of Sowing and Reaping and can apply the lessons from it to the improvement and betterment your life. That way, you will have the satisfaction that what ever you sow, you will also reap.

God bless you,

Steve

Waa...waa...waa

I don't really know what to make of it.

Yesterday: I'm at the convenience store I always go to for my morning cup of Joe. A woman who works there is at the coffee counter arranging the cream, sugar, coffee stirring sticks and such. I would guess she is in her early sixties. In my usual jovial nature I asked, "How are you on this beautiful day?"

No reply.

She then looks at me and states, "It's not a good day. I have a lot of sh*t to do." She then proceeds to tell me how much work she has ahead of her and how she is the only one there who is going to be doing it. Blah,blah, de freakin' blah!

This strikes me odd for three reasons:

1) She really doesn't know me, and yet she feels perfectly comfortable in swearing like a sailor while she complains about her situation.

2) She has a job. Doesn't that entail certain aspects of "work" in order to receive monetary compensation for that work? Complaining ain't gonna make it go away.

3) This attitude is, my best guess, why she is working as a clerk in a convenience store at her age. I can't imagine that someone of her years retired from a teaching position and said, "You know, I ALWAYS wanted to work in a convenience store. Now that's living!"

As a side note, I looked straight into her eyes and said, "You know, the only thing we have control over in life is our attitude. Life is really 10% what happens to us and 90% how we react to it."

She grumbled something inappropriate to print and I paid for my coffee.

God bless,
Steve