When you live with someone (in this case, a child) it's often hard to notice them changing, because you see all the incremental changes. However, from time to time there will come a moment when you suddenly become aware of just how much they've changed. I had a moment like that last night with Nellie.
I was about to leave to go and give my lecture, but was trying to help G get Nellie in the bath and deal with Nathan. While I was sitting on the edge of the bath, pouring the water in, she came into the bathroom. No fussing. No crying. No screaming. No tantrums. She then proceeded to undress herself completely. She went to the loo. G then brought her some juice, so she decided I needed something to drink too, and poured me some water from the basin taps (a big deal, I can tell you!). Following this little feat, she hopped into the bath. All the while, we were having a conversation about Nathan.
This little encounter took my breath away and made me cry tears of joy. I had a moment of revelation, seeing my little girl all grown up: beautiful in body, but even more beautiful in spirit. It was all I could do to not grab her and eat her up. While I don't want her to grow up, because that means she will move away from me (both literally and figuratively), at the same time, I experienced such joy at seeing just how independent she's become.
Although she's still little, and a child, and definitely still has LOTS of moments, I'm beginning to see that the true nature she's developing is a beautiful one. Last week, while I was feeding Nathan, we had been eating something. She finished and asked what she should do with her plate. I asked her to put it on the sink. Then, without even being asked to, she noticed I had finished, so she picked up my plate too and carried BOTH to the sink. How thoughtful and sweet and kind is that?!
She is also increasingly loving towards, and concerned about, Nathan. Of late, she's been quite determined to ensure that someone takes care of him. If I'm not doing it, then she wants to know who will be - G, Priscilla, or the dogs? Of course, as with all siblings, there are times when she doesn't want to know him or be helpful in caring for him (like putting his dummy back in his mouth), but then I have to remind myself that that's normal behaviour for siblings.
Nellie & I are very similar in many ways. She is a very strong and determined child who likes to boss others around. Our similarity has the potential to cause tremendous fighting and stress when she becomes a teenager, and I've been quite concerned about this for some time now. I want to instill in her the values and character traits that will help us avoid real conflict in those years. These little glimpses I'm getting of who she's turning into fill me with such hope and joy that we are raising a beautiful little girl and that she's going to turn out more than fine in the end.
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
Monday, September 07, 2009
Why washing your hands may be bad for you
This is the text of the lecture I gave this evening to a group of our top academic kids at school as part of an extension programme we run for them.
Good evening. This evening we’re going to be talking about a rather unusual topic – something that is rather close to my heart. Actually, it’s rather close to YOUR heart, as well as mine. We’re going to be talking about parasites.
Good evening. This evening we’re going to be talking about a rather unusual topic – something that is rather close to my heart. Actually, it’s rather close to YOUR heart, as well as mine. We’re going to be talking about parasites.
Now why on earth would I choose a topic like this to discuss? When I was at university, I had three weeks of lectures on parasites and our lecturer started off by telling us how ubiquitous parasites are. It was a description he gave that initially captured my imagination, but as I studied these creatures I began to realise how incredible and amazing they are. If I had not opted to become a teacher, I think I might have become a parasitologist and spent my days marvelling at them.
The description my lecturer used was this: If all living tissue apart from parasites was instantly removed from the planet, you would still be able to see the outline and form of everything you see now – humans, animals and all plants. Think about that for a second. You would still see ‘people’ walking around, you would still see ‘trees’, ‘plants’, ‘dogs’, ‘cats’ and ‘butterflies’. If our success as a species is measured by our numbers, or our proliferation, then we don’t even rate on the scale, let alone come close to winning the prize. Rather, it’s the parasites that do. Humans have more DNA than most other species, we are much more technologically advanced and like to think that we have the greatest impact upon the earth. Yet, the humble parasites are more successful than we are in many respects.
Many people think that when discussing human parasites, we are discussing a Third World problem. This is not so. With the rise in international travel, increasing pollution and water contamination, increasing sexual promiscuity, and with many parasites becoming immune to the treatments we currently use (such as DDT to control parasite vectors), many people in the First World are infected and are not even aware of it. These parasites may enter their hosts’ bodies through any contaminated food or water they consume, by burrowing through their skin (either while swimming or while walking barefoot over contaminated soil), through the inhalation of contaminated dust, through sexual contact with an infected person, or through a vector like a house fly or mosquito.
Talk to any international traveller and they will probably be able to tell you a horror story of some sort. In Ecuador mosquitoes can deliver a Bot fly egg onto your skin, which will hatch and the larva will burrow into your body. In Malawi, swimming in the water will expose you to another microscopic burrowing parasite that will use any of your hair follicles as an entry point to your blood. In Nepal, drinking mountain water could result in a leech entering your nasal passages. Closer to home, in the Kruger Park, a mosquito bite could give you malaria.
Every human being has several parasites, they simply aren’t aware of it. Just in our guts, there are about 3200 different parasites we can have, from unicellular through to multi-cellular organisms. That number accounts for only about 30% of all human parasites, with the other 70% living in our other organs. Parasites really are ubiquitous, and as such, they deserve our special attention, and our grudging praise for the manner in which they manage to survive despite our best efforts to eliminate them. They are the ultimate Survivors!
For the benefit of the non-biologists present, let’s just spend a few moments reviewing some basic information about parasites.
Basic parasite info
Parasites exist on and in all living organisms, not just in animals or humans. In multi-cellular organisms they can be found externally – ectoparasite, internally in body spaces – extracellular parasite, or internally inside cells – intracellular parasites. In the life cycle, parasites have at least 3 different forms they adopt: eggs, larvae, adult; but many have several different larval stages. Often the larval and adult stages have different hosts and are unable to survive if they wind up inside the wrong host. If they do survive, then they are unable to reproduce. In other words, each parasite and each parasite stage is specially adapted to a specific host. This adaptation includes specialisation to:
- gain entrance to the host (or attach to the host in the case of an ectoparasite),
- bypass the host's defences or immune system, and
- avoid detection by the host that would lead to its destruction
This indicates that parasites have evolved alongside their hosts. It’s a pas de deux as first the host species evolves to try to protect itself and then the parasite evolves to bypass the host’s new adaptations, and then the host evolves again, etc. All of this begs the question though – what exactly is a parasite?
So what exactly is a parasite?
At school one learns that the definition of a parasite is any organism in relationship with another, in which the parasite benefits while the host is harmed. The parasitic relationship is more fully defined as a long-term one, one in which the parasite is highly specialised and adapted to suit their host, and one in which the parasite reproduces more quickly and frequently than the host. The parasite depends upon the host for protection, nutrients or some other life-supporting function and therefore the parasite does not usually kill the host, although it does reduce the host’s overall fitness. In truth, parasitism is much more complicated than that. In fact, it can be very difficult to prove or demonstrate what harm has been done to the host.
As a biology teacher who happens to be a Christian, I am often asked by my students why God created parasites. My students want to know what ecological role parasites play. Until recently, the only answer I could give was that they help to control population sizes by being the top predators or by being the keystone species (the species that has the greatest impact on the environment), or occasionally provide some small benefit. For example, as you sit here, you all have the parasite E.coli in your gut. Most strains of this parasite are fairly harmless, and in fact, most strains actually benefit their host by producing Vit K for you and by preventing other parasites or infections that could potentially kill you from being able to flourish.
However, the latest research has given me another, better answer. The latest research has shown that some parasites actually benefit their hosts in such a way that removing them would have a detrimental effect on their host’s survival. Specifically, it is now understood that many parasites help to prevent auto-immune diseases and allergies. Imagine that!
What is an auto-immune disease? This is any disease in which the body begins to attack itself, because it mistakes some organ or tissue as being foreign. Asthma and Multiple Sclerosis are both examples of auto-immune diseases.
The human parasite Schistosoma mansoni is a flat worm trematode, or fluke. It normally causes two different infections. In the larval stage it travels in the blood, feeding on your blood, and causing Bilharzia. In the adult worm stage it infests the intestines where it mates and lays eggs. These eggs can become trapped in the intestinal tissues instead of passing out of the host’s body. If this happens it causes an immune response that blocks the colon, leads to blood loss, increases blood pressure and causes swelling of the spleen and oesophagus which can tear and cause internal bleeding. All round, not a pleasant character to have living inside you.
Type 1 diabetes is caused when a person’s own immune system attacks the beta cells in the pancreas. These cells are responsible for producing insulin, which is essential for regulating blood sugar levels. Amazingly, research has shown that being infected with the Schistosoma eggs prevents the person from developing diabetes. This is because the parasite eggs release a soluble enzyme that stops the host’s immune system from producing the specific T Helper cells of the immune system that destroy the beta cells of the pancreas. So – having the parasite (which causes all those nasty side effects) can actually save the life of the host. Isn’t that a thought?!
Of course, this complicates matters when trying to define a parasite. If parasites actually benefit the host, can they still be called parasites? It would appear that for our immune systems to develop properly, they need to be exposed to these parasites so that they can learn to react against them, but also so that they are regulated by these parasites. Thus, for the moment, the answer is yes. Although parasites do bring benefits, those benefits are only fringe benefits. Their main effect on their host is still assumed to be a negative one. As our understanding and knowledge of parasites grows though, there may come a time when we change our definition, but that is the nature of science – constantly changing and adapting to accommodate new knowledge.
I am particularly fascinated by Schistosoma. The adults consist of a double layer of membranes. The outer one is continually shed and replaced as a protective mechanism against the host’s defences and digestive system. It’s only 1cm long, but the male has about 8 testicles. The Schistosoma is also one of the few parasitic worms that actually has a separate male and female worm.
Interestingly, if an infection only contains female worms, they don’t mature properly and remain unable to reproduce. However, if an infection contains only male worms, they still develop properly. In other words, the females need the males to develop, but the males don’t need the females.
When both males and females are present together though, they form mating pairs that last for life. This is because the females actually live inside the males. Well, sort of. Even though the worms are only 1cm long, the males are about 10x the width of the females. They develop a special groove on their side, and the much slimmer female crawls into it and spends the rest of her life there. She will lay about 300 eggs a day, which is basically the same as her own body weight. (Some parasites can lay 1 million eggs a day, so 300 per day is pretty insignificant.)
Another reason I’m fascinated by this particular parasite is that I was infected with it back in 2000, after going on holiday to Lake Malawi. It was only after my trip there that I discovered that the leading centre for the study of Schistosoma is found on Lake Malawi, not far from where we camped. It’s found there because the Lake has the highest incidence of the parasite in the world. There’s almost no way to avoid it if you swim in the lake. That’s because the parasite’s other host is a water snail. After it completes the part of its life cycle in the snail and leaves it, the parasite swims through the water, using its forked tail to propel it, until it finds a human. It attaches to your skin while it begins to search for a hair. As soon as it finds a hair, it then burrows through the hair follicle and into your bloodstream. Of course, it’s so tiny you won’t feel a thing, although you may develop a mild rash at the point of entry. You initially develop normal flu symptoms, but after those symptoms disappear you are left feeling extremely fatigued – a bit like Post Viral Fatigue Syndrome. That’s because the parasite is feeding on your blood, so you don’t have enough red blood cells to meet your own oxygen demands.
But let’s get back to the recent research on parasites.
The Hygiene Hypothesis
This new knowledge about parasites is part of what is becoming known as the “Hygiene Hypothesis”. This hypothesis has been in development since the late 1980s. The term was coined by the media following a short article entitled ‘Hayfever, hygiene and household size’ by David Strachan, in which he commented that:
Over the past century declining family size, improvements in household amenities, and higher standards of personal cleanliness have reduced the opportunity for cross infection in young families. This may have resulted in more widespread clinical expression of atopic disease, emerging earlier in wealthier people….
Atopic disease is an allergic hypersensitivity in parts of the body that are not in direct contact with the allergen. E.g. developing eczema on the elbows.
In the late 1990s, Dr. Erika Von Mutius compared the health of children in East and West Germany before the Wall came down. Her hypothesis was that the children from East Germany, living in much poorer and dirtier environments, would suffer more illnesses related to allergies and auto-immune diseases. When the Wall came down, she was able to really compare the two groups of children. To her surprise, the children from East Germany were far healthier than their counterparts from West Germany, despite having a more restricted diet and living in less healthy environments. This surprising result caused her to investigate further, whereupon she discovered that children in East Germany spent more time in crèches and nurseries where they were exposed to more germs. This piece of research leant further credibility to Strachan’s research.
In a nutshell, the current explanation of this hypothesis says that until sanitation became commonplace, exposure to germs and parasites was a regular threat that our immune systems faced. Our immune systems have two types of immune responses, caused by two different T Helper cells – TH1 and TH2. TH1 cells react to germs (viruses and bacteria), while TH2 cells react to allergens. Exposure to germs stimulates the TH1 cells, which in turn suppresses the TH2 cells. Thus, if we are not exposed to germs, the TH1 cells are not produced, so the TH2 cells overproduce, and we experience allergies.
This theory has been refined to include our reaction to parasites. In pre-sanitation times, if the immune system reacted to a parasitic infestation with a TH2 response strong enough to kill the parasites, the body’s own tissues would be seriously damaged in the process. Thus, our immune systems evolved to be able to tolerate parasites to some extent, by producing fewer TH2 cells, rather than kill them outright and damage our own bodies in the process. Since the body’s immune system has adapted to tolerate parasites, its responses to the mild allergens like pollen have also effectively been toned down, since these also require a TH2 response.
However, since the advent of sanitation, we are no longer routinely exposed to these parasites. The consequence of that is that our immune systems are no longer maturing in the way they should, and with fewer anti-inflammatory chemicals being produced, with the result that there has been a dramatic increase in the number of allergies and auto-immune diseases.
This research has been backed up by tests done comparing lab mice and rats to those found in the wild. The lab mice and rats were fed a healthy, nutritionally rich diet as well as being given various vaccines and kept in conditions similar to what people in the First World experience. Researchers then compared the production of antibodies called immunoglobins between the two groups of organisms. They found that those in the wild had significantly higher concentrations of the antibodies that prevented parasitic, bacterial and viral infections and also had significantly fewer allergies or auto-immune diseases.
If true, then this Hypothesis has potentially major implications for diseases like multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s, asthma, hayfever, some cancers, eczema, Parkinson’s, Irritable Bowel Syndrome and a host of other diseases. It might be possible, for example, to harvest the soluble enzyme produced by the Schistosoma eggs, or to synthesise it in a lab, to give to diabetics to stop the development or escalation of the diabetes.
In 2002 it was found that long term infections with tapeworms resulted in increased levels of anti-inflammatory chemicals called cytokines being produced. At the same time it was noted that high levels of these anti-inflammatory chemicals corresponded with fewer allergies and auto-immune diseases. Thus, the spin off from a parasitic infection is that these cytokines are produced. It might be possible to synthesise these chemicals in a lab to assist those who suffer from auto-immune diseases.
In the meantime, though, a branch of medical treatment is being trialled in which people are deliberately infected with parasitic worms, or helminths. The helminths obviously have to fulfil certain criteria, such as not being able to reproduce in humans, in order to protect the patient from potentially life-threatening side effects of a parasitic infection. Currently, there are only 3 species that meet all the criteria necessary: Hookworms, Pig Whipworm and Human Whipworm.
Crohn’s disease is one type of Inflammatory Bowel Disorder, or Irritable Bowel Syndrome. It is an auto-immune disease that is also thought to be inherited at some level. Treating patients who suffer with Crohn’s with Hookworms results in a 100% recovery rate. This kind of medical treatment falls under a new branch of medicine called Darwinian Medicine or Evolutionary Medicine.
Multiple Sclerosis is a brain disease in which the myelin sheath around nerves is slowly lost. As this layer is lost, the nerves cease functioning and progressive disability ensues. In 2007 Correale and Farez conducted a study with Multiple Sclerosis patients. 12 patients were already infected with intestinal parasites, so 12 uninfected patients at a similar stage in the disease were found. The 24 patients were then followed for 4.5 years, monitoring the development of the disease in each of them. It was found that the 12 who were infected with the intestinal parasites had fewer incidences of relapses and a greatly reduced disability accumulation. Being infected certainly did not cure the MS, but it did substantially reduce the impact of the disease.
Of course, nothing is ever quite that simple. Since the Hygiene Hypothesis was first proposed there have been several studies that seemed to contradict it. The incidence of asthma, for example, in poorer urban areas in the USA is increasing. This contradicts the Hygiene Hypothesis, which would expect that the poorer areas have a higher incidence of germs and worms, and thus that children should have fewer incidences of this auto-immune disease.
The problem arises because asthma can be caused by a variety of different things. It might be a reaction to cigarette smoke, vehicle emissions, an allergic reaction, obesity or an inherited condition, to list just a few. If the condition is inherited, then no amount of exposure to helminths during early childhood is going to help. If it is caused by obesity, and the subsequent inflammatory response of the lungs, the only a change in diet and loss of weight will help.
Thus, when considering the Hygiene Hypothesis, one must always bear in mind that chemicals, viruses and hygiene (i.e. exposure to helminths) impact upon the prevalence of a particular disease. When treating such a disease, or trying to prevent it, one must tackle the problem from several different directions at the same time.
One of the reasons that I quite like studying parasites is that they are so different to us. They usually consist of a just a digestive system and a reproduction system, with the more advanced ones possessing a few very basic senses. Yet, for all their relatively primitive development, they have such a massive impact on the world. From their impact on food production, to our health, they are responsible for so much of the suffering in the world. With advances in medical technology, we may yet be able to curb them, but I seriously doubt we will ever be able to eradicate them. If this recent research is to be believed though, then I’m not sure we would want to eradicate them.
So what does all this mean for us? Does it mean we should give up being vaccinated, or that we should stop cooking our food properly? Does it mean we should go around deliberately infecting ourselves with parasites? Quite simply, no. While exposure to germs and parasites is now accepted as having immunological benefits for humans, these things are still pathogens. They still cause tremendous disease and can threaten our very lives. However, there is a case to be made for not using antibacterial soaps, for allowing our young children to spend time with lots of other children so that they can be exposed to germs, and for letting our children play in the dirt. Maybe we should all relax and get a bit filthy, and maybe our grannies were right when they told us that what didn’t kill us would make us stronger! Maybe washing our hands all the time is actually not as good for us as we used to think.
Sunday, September 06, 2009
Effects of OBE
Back in May, we had the rector of UWC present a professional development session to the staff. During the session he commented on several discussions he'd been having with a variety of lecturers.
He had been asking them how they found the first cohort of OBE students (given that 2009 is the first year that kids who have been on the OBE system since they started school have entered tertiary institutions).
His summary of those discussions made the staff laugh: the kids have all the interpersonal skills we'd love - they can ask questions, they can relate to staff, they can debate - but they can't read or write or add.
His comment, while tragic, is true. At least, it's true in my experience.
On Friday, according to SABC News International, Dr Mamphela Ramphele, said basically the same thing in her address to principals at a conference in Polokwane when she was commenting on why transformation in the private sector is not taking place: "Excuse me, I will not appoint someone who cannot read; write and add. I don’t care how committed you are,” she said
The education department is adamant that OBE is here to stay. Personally, I have no problem with OBE. All good teachers teach in an OBE style: even under the Apartheid government that was true. What I have a problem with is the manner in which the curriculum has been changed and the manner in which OBE is being taught now. I don't mind if OBE stays. I mind if the current curriculum stays. There is no balance in the curriculum, and to my mind there has been no real referencing to the needs of tertiary institutions or the developmental stages of teenagers' brains, let alone any attempt to accept that one simply can no longer teach it all at school: there has simply been too much progress, research and development in every field to continue to teach all the history AND all the current developments at school level.
That debate aside though, there is an even bigger problem in education: a lack of teachers. If I was teaching classes of 20, instead of classes of 30, or if my colleagues at other schools did not have to teach classes of 40 or 50, then maybe, just maybe, the kids would have enough individual time with their teachers to get both the knowledge AND the skills.
He had been asking them how they found the first cohort of OBE students (given that 2009 is the first year that kids who have been on the OBE system since they started school have entered tertiary institutions).
His summary of those discussions made the staff laugh: the kids have all the interpersonal skills we'd love - they can ask questions, they can relate to staff, they can debate - but they can't read or write or add.
His comment, while tragic, is true. At least, it's true in my experience.
On Friday, according to SABC News International, Dr Mamphela Ramphele, said basically the same thing in her address to principals at a conference in Polokwane when she was commenting on why transformation in the private sector is not taking place: "Excuse me, I will not appoint someone who cannot read; write and add. I don’t care how committed you are,” she said
The education department is adamant that OBE is here to stay. Personally, I have no problem with OBE. All good teachers teach in an OBE style: even under the Apartheid government that was true. What I have a problem with is the manner in which the curriculum has been changed and the manner in which OBE is being taught now. I don't mind if OBE stays. I mind if the current curriculum stays. There is no balance in the curriculum, and to my mind there has been no real referencing to the needs of tertiary institutions or the developmental stages of teenagers' brains, let alone any attempt to accept that one simply can no longer teach it all at school: there has simply been too much progress, research and development in every field to continue to teach all the history AND all the current developments at school level.
That debate aside though, there is an even bigger problem in education: a lack of teachers. If I was teaching classes of 20, instead of classes of 30, or if my colleagues at other schools did not have to teach classes of 40 or 50, then maybe, just maybe, the kids would have enough individual time with their teachers to get both the knowledge AND the skills.
Beautiful hands
I just love this photo... Of course, it helps to have great subject material! I have to confess that I did tweak it slightly with Picasa, but only slightly. I wanted the effect of having it look like I'd taken it with an SLR, rather than with my phone. But irrespective, doesn't he just have the most gorgeous little hand?
Saturday, September 05, 2009
A cool place to stay...
The Grand Daddy Hotel, in Long Street, Cape Town, has a very unusual suite of rooms. Up on the roof are 7 caravans. Yup, caravans. They're the American Airstream trailers and they've been revamped and redesigned to the swanky style one would expect from a hotel.
At least, so I am led to believe. I, of course, do not have the money lying around to treat myself to this sort of luxury. And that despite the R600 I got today from my temporary side-line business of furniture sales.
Bridget McNulty (a diabetic whose travel blog I follow) recently reviewed them on 'Just the Planet'. If you're a Capetonian, or just someone interested in quirky places to stay, then her review is well worth the read.
At least, so I am led to believe. I, of course, do not have the money lying around to treat myself to this sort of luxury. And that despite the R600 I got today from my temporary side-line business of furniture sales.
Bridget McNulty (a diabetic whose travel blog I follow) recently reviewed them on 'Just the Planet'. If you're a Capetonian, or just someone interested in quirky places to stay, then her review is well worth the read.
The solution to the weight-loss problem?
When people see me now, they mostly comment on how thin I'm looking. While this is great, it's also awful. I seem to have lost most of my pregnancy weight from Nathan, but I've still got my pregnancy weight from Janel & Zoe to lose. I reckon there's a good 10-15kg there that could easily disappear without anyone noticing it. My ribcage has expanded outwards, along with every other part of my body*. All my clothes, apart from my preggie pants and pyjamas, still fail to fit me around the waist, hips, ribs, arms, thighs... oh sod it! I still feel horribly uncomfortable in most of my clothes. I still feel fat. (I don't care what you say - I may hide my rolls and flab well, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.)
One of my problems during pregnancy was that I simply couldn't exercise because my pelvic girdle (the bones that your hips are the edges of) was loose; so loose, in fact, that any movement of my legs was incredibly painful. I had to wear a special girdle thingy just so I could walk. Stairs were a no-go for me. Long distances (anything longer than from my classroom to the staffroom!) were a no-go. If I forgot that little rule and tried to go for a walk, I'd suffer for hours and possibly a few days afterwards. It all started at the beginning of the pregnancy, with the girdle thingy becoming a daily feature from the 3rd month. Just think - 5 months of no exercise at all, with a further 2 months of next to nothing at the beginning and another 2 months of next to nothing at the end while I was waiting for my pelvis to come together again. That's a HANG of a long time to go without exercise.
Since coming home from the hospital, I've been trying to get more exercise. However, it's very hard to break old habits - in this case, a 9 month-long habit. It's much easier just keeping the status quo of doing nothing, of being lazy.
I've been reading some of the latest research on weight loss which seems to indicate that exercise does NOT help you lose weight. It helps you get healthy, yes, but in non-weight related ways: it reduces blood pressure, increases lung capacity, increases flexibility and bone density, etc, etc. It does NOT help you lose weight. In fact, it's been shown that regular doses of moderate activity (note: not exercise) every day helps you lose as much weight as going to the gym 3-4 times a week. So there's no point (from a weight-loss perspective) in spending hours sweating it out at the gym.
If exercise doesn't help you lose weight, what does? Eating right. Plain and simple. Eating whole foods, eating unprocessed foods (i.e. cutting out sugar in all its forms), eating smaller portions, eating more vegetables and fruit, drinking more water and less caffeinated drinks.
Now, anyone who knows me will know that I am a chocoholic. No doubt about that. However, I am also a snack-aholic. Trying to restrict my portion sizes has, to date, only caused me to snack after the meal because I still feel hungry. I can wolf down a very decently-sized main meal, have two decent-sized helpings of pudding, and STILL have space for a snack. Not healthy when one's metabolism is no longer that of a rapidly growing pre-teen or teenager, but rather that of a rapidly-approaching middle aged potato that's been sitting on the couch for the last 9 months. I have tried, really I have, not to snack, but I wind up getting ratty and irritable within a very short space of time. My body craves the calories. Failure to get them = G and the kids have to put up with Ms Snap-your-head-off-if-you-so-much-as-look-at-me-wrong-and-even-if-you-don't-I'll-still-snap-it-off-because-I'm-hungry-and-need-to-eat-SOMETHING.
All of this left me feeling rather hopeless. If I don't have the willpower to get up from my desk chair and get the exercise I need, and if exercise doesn't help anyway, and if I don't have the willpower to moderate my food intake, I'm in serious trouble. I don't want to wind up like the people on 'The Biggest Loser', but I feel like I'm heading that way if something doesn't change, and soon.
This week has brought me a revelation though. We ran out of bandwidth last weekend. (That in itself was a revelation... wow - internet-lessness is... like... wow.) While waiting for the new month to begin, I decided to get started on the garden that DESPERATELY needs attention. Shortly after lunch on Monday I got stuck in. Apart from a few hours on Thursday and Friday morning, I was in the garden during daylight hours for the remainder of the week. I dug holes, laid gutters, weeded, planted plants, planted more grass runners than I care to think about, hauled 6 Vibrocrete wall slabs from the back of the property to the front (MAN! those things must weigh a ton each! I could only carry one at a time, and even then: only just!), hauled 6 concrete paving slabs from the back of the property to the front, hauled bricks around, and built brick borders for the beds.
It may not sound like much, but it was hard, physical labour that took me all week. (We now have a front garden, as opposed to a front building site.) Even now, there is still one small area that needs a gardening solution before I will be happy declaring that the front garden is fully completed. For now though, it's as done as it's going to get until I have more money to spend on plants. (And if I say so myself, it looks pretty damn good, even though the planting still has to mature and the grass has to grow.)
As I was reflecting on the effect of all this activity on my body, I realised that my food intake has changed this week. Firstly, I am not eating more. This surprises me because I've certainly been working like a dog. I would have thought that (as usually happens with exercise) the increased metabolism would cause me to increase my calorie intake. Not so. Secondly though, and probably even more important, my snacking habit has been greatly reduced. Again, I have been very surprised by this. I can't really explain it, except to think that my snacking is actually a comfort thing, rather than a need for extra calories, as I had always thought.
Maybe my snacking has more to do with my state of mind than my state of body. If this is true, then I think I've just found my personal key to losing weight. I haven't craved chocolate or biscuits or rusks or sweets in the same way. (Of course, I've still wanted them, but I've been satisfied by smaller quantities, and I've had days of no cravings at all.)
Most of my snacking is done after supper. Of course, since I've been asleep in bed by 9pm (or earlier) this week, it would have been rather hard to snack, even if I'd wanted to**. But here's the thing: when addicts talk about recovery, one of the things they mention is that in order to break a habit, you need to change your pattern of behaviour. If you normally have a bottle of wine when you get home from work, then don't come home directly after work. If you normally have your cocaine at the night club, stop going to the night club. In my case, that could read, if you normally snack after supper, go to bed as soon as you can after supper so you can't snack. (As a long term solution though, going to bed this early doesn't bring me much joy.... no more Desperate Housewives, no more movies, no more going to cell group, no more socialising, no more anything...)
Because I'm hyper-flexive (yup, my body is just one long catalogue of deformities, infirmities, and such like) I've always been nervous of sports that require my muscles to work hard to prevent injury. That rules out pretty much everything except horse riding (been there, done that, broke my spine doing it), cycling (been there, done that, not so effective with a broken spine), swimming (been there, done that, couldn't be arsed with the early morning training, the cold water, the foot cramps or green chlorine-induced hair colour) and yoga/ callinetics (been there, done that, too expensive to pay for classes). I've always known that it was hard work (my favourite work avoidance behaviour at school and university was weeding our lawns at home), but until this week, I never really rated gardening as a solution to my eating habits. Fancy that?!
So, surprise, surprise, it would seem that: garden more = eat less = lose weight. Plus it's fun. There are only two problems with this: one - it's a very solitary pursuit, which means that (certainly once I'm back at work) it will mean even less time with my family; and two - I have a small garden, which means that once the back breaking work is done over the next little while, there shouldn't been too much to do in the line of maintenance work (or is that just my fantasy?).
Still, I've got a month and a half left. Let's see how much of me is left when I go back to work before I make any final declarations though. Until then, here's hoping that all this work at least gives me the start of my summer tan.....
*I'm seriously thinking of investing in a few corsets to help my ribs return to their previous size. The only problem with that is that whatever fat is residing inside will be pushed outwards.... Maybe a nip and tuck with a boob job would sort it all out? Nah, I reckon a corset is the cheapest and least painful solution.
**Sex is also supposed to be a fun way to lose weight. I wouldn't know. Being asleep so early put rather a damper on finding out. Even if I'd wanted to (and I was too tired & too sore to want to, sorry), it's rather hard to be energetic about sex when you're fast asleep - and snoring, apparently. I wouldn't know about that either - I don't listen to myself when I sleep. Do you?
One of my problems during pregnancy was that I simply couldn't exercise because my pelvic girdle (the bones that your hips are the edges of) was loose; so loose, in fact, that any movement of my legs was incredibly painful. I had to wear a special girdle thingy just so I could walk. Stairs were a no-go for me. Long distances (anything longer than from my classroom to the staffroom!) were a no-go. If I forgot that little rule and tried to go for a walk, I'd suffer for hours and possibly a few days afterwards. It all started at the beginning of the pregnancy, with the girdle thingy becoming a daily feature from the 3rd month. Just think - 5 months of no exercise at all, with a further 2 months of next to nothing at the beginning and another 2 months of next to nothing at the end while I was waiting for my pelvis to come together again. That's a HANG of a long time to go without exercise.
Since coming home from the hospital, I've been trying to get more exercise. However, it's very hard to break old habits - in this case, a 9 month-long habit. It's much easier just keeping the status quo of doing nothing, of being lazy.
I've been reading some of the latest research on weight loss which seems to indicate that exercise does NOT help you lose weight. It helps you get healthy, yes, but in non-weight related ways: it reduces blood pressure, increases lung capacity, increases flexibility and bone density, etc, etc. It does NOT help you lose weight. In fact, it's been shown that regular doses of moderate activity (note: not exercise) every day helps you lose as much weight as going to the gym 3-4 times a week. So there's no point (from a weight-loss perspective) in spending hours sweating it out at the gym.
If exercise doesn't help you lose weight, what does? Eating right. Plain and simple. Eating whole foods, eating unprocessed foods (i.e. cutting out sugar in all its forms), eating smaller portions, eating more vegetables and fruit, drinking more water and less caffeinated drinks.
Now, anyone who knows me will know that I am a chocoholic. No doubt about that. However, I am also a snack-aholic. Trying to restrict my portion sizes has, to date, only caused me to snack after the meal because I still feel hungry. I can wolf down a very decently-sized main meal, have two decent-sized helpings of pudding, and STILL have space for a snack. Not healthy when one's metabolism is no longer that of a rapidly growing pre-teen or teenager, but rather that of a rapidly-approaching middle aged potato that's been sitting on the couch for the last 9 months. I have tried, really I have, not to snack, but I wind up getting ratty and irritable within a very short space of time. My body craves the calories. Failure to get them = G and the kids have to put up with Ms Snap-your-head-off-if-you-so-much-as-look-at-me-wrong-and-even-if-you-don't-I'll-still-snap-it-off-because-I'm-hungry-and-need-to-eat-SOMETHING.
All of this left me feeling rather hopeless. If I don't have the willpower to get up from my desk chair and get the exercise I need, and if exercise doesn't help anyway, and if I don't have the willpower to moderate my food intake, I'm in serious trouble. I don't want to wind up like the people on 'The Biggest Loser', but I feel like I'm heading that way if something doesn't change, and soon.
This week has brought me a revelation though. We ran out of bandwidth last weekend. (That in itself was a revelation... wow - internet-lessness is... like... wow.) While waiting for the new month to begin, I decided to get started on the garden that DESPERATELY needs attention. Shortly after lunch on Monday I got stuck in. Apart from a few hours on Thursday and Friday morning, I was in the garden during daylight hours for the remainder of the week. I dug holes, laid gutters, weeded, planted plants, planted more grass runners than I care to think about, hauled 6 Vibrocrete wall slabs from the back of the property to the front (MAN! those things must weigh a ton each! I could only carry one at a time, and even then: only just!), hauled 6 concrete paving slabs from the back of the property to the front, hauled bricks around, and built brick borders for the beds.
It may not sound like much, but it was hard, physical labour that took me all week. (We now have a front garden, as opposed to a front building site.) Even now, there is still one small area that needs a gardening solution before I will be happy declaring that the front garden is fully completed. For now though, it's as done as it's going to get until I have more money to spend on plants. (And if I say so myself, it looks pretty damn good, even though the planting still has to mature and the grass has to grow.)
As I was reflecting on the effect of all this activity on my body, I realised that my food intake has changed this week. Firstly, I am not eating more. This surprises me because I've certainly been working like a dog. I would have thought that (as usually happens with exercise) the increased metabolism would cause me to increase my calorie intake. Not so. Secondly though, and probably even more important, my snacking habit has been greatly reduced. Again, I have been very surprised by this. I can't really explain it, except to think that my snacking is actually a comfort thing, rather than a need for extra calories, as I had always thought.
Maybe my snacking has more to do with my state of mind than my state of body. If this is true, then I think I've just found my personal key to losing weight. I haven't craved chocolate or biscuits or rusks or sweets in the same way. (Of course, I've still wanted them, but I've been satisfied by smaller quantities, and I've had days of no cravings at all.)
Most of my snacking is done after supper. Of course, since I've been asleep in bed by 9pm (or earlier) this week, it would have been rather hard to snack, even if I'd wanted to**. But here's the thing: when addicts talk about recovery, one of the things they mention is that in order to break a habit, you need to change your pattern of behaviour. If you normally have a bottle of wine when you get home from work, then don't come home directly after work. If you normally have your cocaine at the night club, stop going to the night club. In my case, that could read, if you normally snack after supper, go to bed as soon as you can after supper so you can't snack. (As a long term solution though, going to bed this early doesn't bring me much joy.... no more Desperate Housewives, no more movies, no more going to cell group, no more socialising, no more anything...)
Because I'm hyper-flexive (yup, my body is just one long catalogue of deformities, infirmities, and such like) I've always been nervous of sports that require my muscles to work hard to prevent injury. That rules out pretty much everything except horse riding (been there, done that, broke my spine doing it), cycling (been there, done that, not so effective with a broken spine), swimming (been there, done that, couldn't be arsed with the early morning training, the cold water, the foot cramps or green chlorine-induced hair colour) and yoga/ callinetics (been there, done that, too expensive to pay for classes). I've always known that it was hard work (my favourite work avoidance behaviour at school and university was weeding our lawns at home), but until this week, I never really rated gardening as a solution to my eating habits. Fancy that?!
So, surprise, surprise, it would seem that: garden more = eat less = lose weight. Plus it's fun. There are only two problems with this: one - it's a very solitary pursuit, which means that (certainly once I'm back at work) it will mean even less time with my family; and two - I have a small garden, which means that once the back breaking work is done over the next little while, there shouldn't been too much to do in the line of maintenance work (or is that just my fantasy?).
Still, I've got a month and a half left. Let's see how much of me is left when I go back to work before I make any final declarations though. Until then, here's hoping that all this work at least gives me the start of my summer tan.....
*I'm seriously thinking of investing in a few corsets to help my ribs return to their previous size. The only problem with that is that whatever fat is residing inside will be pushed outwards.... Maybe a nip and tuck with a boob job would sort it all out? Nah, I reckon a corset is the cheapest and least painful solution.
**Sex is also supposed to be a fun way to lose weight. I wouldn't know. Being asleep so early put rather a damper on finding out. Even if I'd wanted to (and I was too tired & too sore to want to, sorry), it's rather hard to be energetic about sex when you're fast asleep - and snoring, apparently. I wouldn't know about that either - I don't listen to myself when I sleep. Do you?
Friday, September 04, 2009
Internet-lessness
This week I've been suffering from internet-lessness. According to Urban Dictionary, internet-lessness is the state of being without internet access. I prefer it's alternative definition: It is also "a rare disorder that usually only appears in parts of Africa, South America and Mexico. It is a rather contagious disease that originated in Zimbabwe where the virus was conceived. ALL contact with the host Mr Robert Mugabe most be avoided. God speed and God save us all." Of course, our case of internet-lessness was not caused by this esteemed gentleman, but due to our own greed in consuming that most precious of commodities in Africa - bandwidth.
According to the Nashua mobile website "Broadband has been scientifically proven to eradicate Internet-lessness. Side effects may include increased cleverness and coolness."
Ahh, that would explain it then. THAT'S why I have become increasingly stupid this week. It would also explain why my garden has evolved. (I will post a picture or two when it's all done... still some work to do on it next week.)
It has been surprisingly refreshing to have an enforced rest from my favourite activities. However, my conversational ability has become increasingly limited to the words: garden, digging, planting, tired, and sore muscles, while my body has been increasingly limited to the actions of sitting down and sleeping. Thus, it is with great joy that I have been cured of this insiduous affliction.
If something major has happened in your life since last week this time, and I haven't commented yet, you will need to inform me again. I am simply too unaccustomed to browsing back in the status updates to find your announcement.
According to the Nashua mobile website "Broadband has been scientifically proven to eradicate Internet-lessness. Side effects may include increased cleverness and coolness."
Ahh, that would explain it then. THAT'S why I have become increasingly stupid this week. It would also explain why my garden has evolved. (I will post a picture or two when it's all done... still some work to do on it next week.)
It has been surprisingly refreshing to have an enforced rest from my favourite activities. However, my conversational ability has become increasingly limited to the words: garden, digging, planting, tired, and sore muscles, while my body has been increasingly limited to the actions of sitting down and sleeping. Thus, it is with great joy that I have been cured of this insiduous affliction.
If something major has happened in your life since last week this time, and I haven't commented yet, you will need to inform me again. I am simply too unaccustomed to browsing back in the status updates to find your announcement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)