In more than three decades, I have discovered that one of the greatest reasons for downturns and downfalls of organizations is their inability to effectively train their leadership. Many of these organizations actually have programs that they refer to as leadership training, while others do not.
Far too often, organizations call their informational or orientation programs leadership training. Since many leaders, as well as many paid staffs are improperly, or not fully trained, leadership training is often difficult, and even the importance of the concept is often overlooked. Whether it is because of the egos of some of the individuals who ascend to leadership, yet possess few of the important leadership skills, or because of "cluelessness," those organizations that do not address leadership development head on, often fail to make necessary evolutionary changes.
Organizations and their popularity are often cyclical in nature. Reasons such as economics are certainly one reason, yet, even when economies are down, some organizations fare far better than others. Those organizations whose leaders exhibit a vision for the future, understand planning, creating an action plan, and understand how to make a decision in an organized manner, are the most successful. I have observed countless organizations that spend far too much time on unimportant and trivial issues, while often either ignoring or procrastinating when it comes to issues related to what should be understood as the "big picture."
Leadership training must begin at the earliest stage of identifying potential future leaders, qualifying them, and nurturing them. It must be an ongoing process that continues through lower tier leadership positions, then to intermediate, and then continues through elite leadership positions. All leaders need constant leadership refreshing, and need to learn how to self- evaluate.
Enjoy the Home of the RICH IDEAS, + RICH BRODY'S TAKE, w/ Blogs about RE, negotiations, finance, etc., Leadership Planning, politics, etc. While there are many points of view, this blog is intended to "cut through the spin," and provide a unique, innovative and provocative insight into current issues. The intent of the blog is to be updated several times per week. Real estate info: http://PortWashingtonLongIslandRealEstate.com and the PLAN2LEAD website: http://plan2lead.net
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
What Makes Someone A Leader?
Organizations often refer to the officers and the Board of Directors of their organization as their "leadership." Unfortunately, while many of these individuals are placed in positions of leadership, they are not leaders. Dictionary.com defines "lead" as "to guide by going before or with; to influence." It then goes on to say that when it is used as a verb, it refers to taking the initiative. Dictionary.com also defines "leader" as someone who "guides, conducts, is at the head of. Then Dictionary.com clarifies even further by stating that "leadership" implies "the position or function of a leader; ability to lead; act or instance of leading; guidance; directions." Therefore, based on the true meaning of what it means to lead, and thus be a leader, simply maintaining a position is merely a very small component of leadership.
Unfortunately, the reality is that very few individuals are "born leaders," and require training and hands-on experience to develop the skill set and expertise necessary to be truly effective leaders. Since most individuals in volunteer positions\, for any of a number of reasons, are often unwilling to take the time and put in the real commitment necessary to effectively lead. In the past three decades, I have notices that most individuals thrust into positions of volunteer leadership are well-meaning and well-intentioned individuals, with deep attachments and feelings for their organization. These individuals are generally people-oriented, and are proficient at what they do full time. Unfortunately, all the intelligence in unrelated fields, good intentions, and emotional attachments, often is insufficient to create an effective leader. Since most organizations have been unwilling to commit the time, resources, planning and continuity, required for effective leadership training, there are very few organizations that conduct and maintain adequate leadership training.
I have heard many "leaders" tell me that they envision their position as somewhat ceremonial, and believe that paid staff is the way to go. While theoretically that may sound like an effective plan, the greatest strength of many organizations, particularly small to medium sized ones, is the "personal touch." By and large, organizations are impacted to the greatest degree by the relationships and deference between leadership and members. With few exceptions, when organizations become staff oriented, they lose that "personal touch," which to so many of their members is one of the most essential ingredients. In addition, in evaluating paid staffs of organizations for three decades, the reality is that most paid staffs have weaknesses, and some have severe weaknesses. Paid staffs also have turnover, which harms development building. Another obstacle to being overly staff oriented is costs, because the less volunteers do and the more paid staff does, the more costly it is. In addition, most staffs of organizations suffer from the same challenges that volunteer leaders do - - insufficient and inadequate relevant training.
The optimum situation for an organization would be to train their staffs from the inception, train leadership at the entry level. mid-level, and elite level, and do so on a continuous basis. To be an effective leader, individuals often must "check their egos at the door," and not expect to be complimented for their hard work, but to often shoulder blame for anything that is perceived as going imperfectly. I recommend that anyone considering taking on a leadership position understand that one of essential necessities of a leader is the need for inner strength and fortitude.
Organizations require effective leadership, not just individuals who want to be treated as leaders. Leadership requires commitment, strength, and self-motivation. That is partly the reason that there are so few effective leaders.
Unfortunately, the reality is that very few individuals are "born leaders," and require training and hands-on experience to develop the skill set and expertise necessary to be truly effective leaders. Since most individuals in volunteer positions\, for any of a number of reasons, are often unwilling to take the time and put in the real commitment necessary to effectively lead. In the past three decades, I have notices that most individuals thrust into positions of volunteer leadership are well-meaning and well-intentioned individuals, with deep attachments and feelings for their organization. These individuals are generally people-oriented, and are proficient at what they do full time. Unfortunately, all the intelligence in unrelated fields, good intentions, and emotional attachments, often is insufficient to create an effective leader. Since most organizations have been unwilling to commit the time, resources, planning and continuity, required for effective leadership training, there are very few organizations that conduct and maintain adequate leadership training.
I have heard many "leaders" tell me that they envision their position as somewhat ceremonial, and believe that paid staff is the way to go. While theoretically that may sound like an effective plan, the greatest strength of many organizations, particularly small to medium sized ones, is the "personal touch." By and large, organizations are impacted to the greatest degree by the relationships and deference between leadership and members. With few exceptions, when organizations become staff oriented, they lose that "personal touch," which to so many of their members is one of the most essential ingredients. In addition, in evaluating paid staffs of organizations for three decades, the reality is that most paid staffs have weaknesses, and some have severe weaknesses. Paid staffs also have turnover, which harms development building. Another obstacle to being overly staff oriented is costs, because the less volunteers do and the more paid staff does, the more costly it is. In addition, most staffs of organizations suffer from the same challenges that volunteer leaders do - - insufficient and inadequate relevant training.
The optimum situation for an organization would be to train their staffs from the inception, train leadership at the entry level. mid-level, and elite level, and do so on a continuous basis. To be an effective leader, individuals often must "check their egos at the door," and not expect to be complimented for their hard work, but to often shoulder blame for anything that is perceived as going imperfectly. I recommend that anyone considering taking on a leadership position understand that one of essential necessities of a leader is the need for inner strength and fortitude.
Organizations require effective leadership, not just individuals who want to be treated as leaders. Leadership requires commitment, strength, and self-motivation. That is partly the reason that there are so few effective leaders.
Ineffective Leaders Rarely Get The Job Done
One of the greatest frustrations in my three decades of observing and consulting to not-for-profits, has been observing how ineffective leaders never seem to get anything productive accomplished. While almost all these individuals spout off about their accomplishments, most of the items spouted are more custodial in nature, than accomplishments. Many of these individuals spend most of their time concentrating on "menial," inconsequential, or non-priority type items, and far too little of their time trying to evolve the organizations. Leaders must realize and react to the reality that any organization that does not continuously evolve, while at the same time maintaining its identity and mission.
Some of the reasons that so many leaders are so ineffective, and seem to "never get it done" include:
(1) Many ineffective leaders are inadequate or untrained decision makers. Many are either not skilled enough to come to a well thought out decision, or are merely either untrained or unwilling to be trained. One of the most important attributes of effective leadership is being comfortable with the decision making process, as well as making a decision.
(2) Many leaders lack certain necessary skills. Organizations must realize that there are specific skills and attributes needed to be an effective leader, and that is why it is so essential to prioritize leadership training.
(3) Ineffective leaders often become excuse makers. They will come up with any number of reasons why "it couldn't be done." I refer to this as the "excusitis syndrome."
(4) Ineffective leaders tend to blame others. The "blame game" is almost never productive!
(5) Many ineffective leaders say, "It's not my job." They insist that someone else needs to do it, and they often love to say that it is important for leaders to "delegate" to others. Of course, since there is often a dearth of leadership or skilled individuals, the individuals that are delegated to, are ill-equipped, or ill-prepared to do what is needed effectively or productively.
(6) If I had a dime for every time I've heard an ineffective leader say that he didn't want to step on someone else's toes, or didn't want to offend, I'd have a fortune. These explanations are usually merely excuses for ineffective leadership.
(7) Ineffective leaders either do poor (inadequate) planning, or don't plan at all.
(8) Ineffective leaders either don't properly formulate an action plan, or don't work that plan.
(9) There are far too many "Talk the talk, but don't walk the walk" "leaders" involved. I generally judge a leader on actions instead of words.
(10) Many ineffective leaders do not understand, or often, even get the concept of the "big picture."
(11) Ineffective leaders often spend more effort on procrastinating than acting. If only they would spend more time and effort than delaying, many organizations would get much more accomplished.
(12) Many ineffective leaders seem to concern themselves more with their popularity than with doing whatever is necessary to help their organization.
Obviously, there are far more ineffective leaders than effective ones. Until organizations truly make a concerted effort to improve their leadership qualification process, as well as their leadership and pre-leadership training programs, organizational growth and progress will continue to get stymied by ineffective leaders who get so little accomplished.
Some of the reasons that so many leaders are so ineffective, and seem to "never get it done" include:
(1) Many ineffective leaders are inadequate or untrained decision makers. Many are either not skilled enough to come to a well thought out decision, or are merely either untrained or unwilling to be trained. One of the most important attributes of effective leadership is being comfortable with the decision making process, as well as making a decision.
(2) Many leaders lack certain necessary skills. Organizations must realize that there are specific skills and attributes needed to be an effective leader, and that is why it is so essential to prioritize leadership training.
(3) Ineffective leaders often become excuse makers. They will come up with any number of reasons why "it couldn't be done." I refer to this as the "excusitis syndrome."
(4) Ineffective leaders tend to blame others. The "blame game" is almost never productive!
(5) Many ineffective leaders say, "It's not my job." They insist that someone else needs to do it, and they often love to say that it is important for leaders to "delegate" to others. Of course, since there is often a dearth of leadership or skilled individuals, the individuals that are delegated to, are ill-equipped, or ill-prepared to do what is needed effectively or productively.
(6) If I had a dime for every time I've heard an ineffective leader say that he didn't want to step on someone else's toes, or didn't want to offend, I'd have a fortune. These explanations are usually merely excuses for ineffective leadership.
(7) Ineffective leaders either do poor (inadequate) planning, or don't plan at all.
(8) Ineffective leaders either don't properly formulate an action plan, or don't work that plan.
(9) There are far too many "Talk the talk, but don't walk the walk" "leaders" involved. I generally judge a leader on actions instead of words.
(10) Many ineffective leaders do not understand, or often, even get the concept of the "big picture."
(11) Ineffective leaders often spend more effort on procrastinating than acting. If only they would spend more time and effort than delaying, many organizations would get much more accomplished.
(12) Many ineffective leaders seem to concern themselves more with their popularity than with doing whatever is necessary to help their organization.
Obviously, there are far more ineffective leaders than effective ones. Until organizations truly make a concerted effort to improve their leadership qualification process, as well as their leadership and pre-leadership training programs, organizational growth and progress will continue to get stymied by ineffective leaders who get so little accomplished.
Common Event Planning Mistakes
There are so many different types of event held by so many different organizations for a variety of purposes. Some hire individuals who represent themselves as "event planners," but in most case are glorified room decorators. Some decide to do it themselves, with varying levels of success.
While there are some excellent event planners, who are truly professional and knowledgeable, the wide majority misrepresent their expertise and what they can and will do. There are also some individuals who are detailed, organized, have common sense, and work hard, who can and do run a successful event, but the majority of others do not have and/ or use those skills.
Some of the most common event planning mistakes are:
(1) Not knowing upfront what your needs or requirements are. It is extremely difficult to effectively produce an event if you don't know what your goal is.
(2) Many events are inadequately promoted. Event organizers must have a budgeted amount devoted for advertisement and promotion. Too many are totally dependent on e-mails and E-Blasts, which often is tantamount to failure. How is this event going to be described to "capture the imagination," and set it apart. If this event is a conference or convention, how much detail is going into the flow sheet/ schedule, to show potential attendees perceived value.
(3) Many organizers lack negotiating expertise. Before agreeing to hold an event in a particular place, organizers should use Request for Proposals (RFP) to assure that the location can adequately meet the needs, and deliver at the needed price level.
(4)Many organizers simply either do not know what to ask, or don't ask the right questions. Many events require considerable amounts of audio visual, and the costs can often be astronomical, if not negotiated properly.
(5) There is a need to evaluate when to purchase something versus when to rent it. Often it costs far less to buy something than the rentals will cost.
(6) Many organizers don't understand that almost everything is negotiable. A group does not have to go along with the pre-packaged food and beverage menus, nor believe that there is no flexibility in pricing.
(7) Many planners do not spend enough time assuring that attendees first impression and contact with the event is a positive one. There must be a friendly and welcoming Welcome Committee, who are trained and willing to be "meeters and greeters." A smile goes a very long way.
(8) One of the most common errors is spending too much time on menial or less important items, and insufficient time on the priorities. Event organizers must fully understand how and why to prioritize.
(9) if using an Event Planner, it must be clearly spelled out what the expectations are, and what the planner's duties will be.
(10) Perhaps, most importantly, an organization must clearly understand and identify what it wishes to achieve from this event.
Of course, these are just some very basic things that should go into the overall process to ensure optimal success from an organization's event.
While there are some excellent event planners, who are truly professional and knowledgeable, the wide majority misrepresent their expertise and what they can and will do. There are also some individuals who are detailed, organized, have common sense, and work hard, who can and do run a successful event, but the majority of others do not have and/ or use those skills.
Some of the most common event planning mistakes are:
(1) Not knowing upfront what your needs or requirements are. It is extremely difficult to effectively produce an event if you don't know what your goal is.
(2) Many events are inadequately promoted. Event organizers must have a budgeted amount devoted for advertisement and promotion. Too many are totally dependent on e-mails and E-Blasts, which often is tantamount to failure. How is this event going to be described to "capture the imagination," and set it apart. If this event is a conference or convention, how much detail is going into the flow sheet/ schedule, to show potential attendees perceived value.
(3) Many organizers lack negotiating expertise. Before agreeing to hold an event in a particular place, organizers should use Request for Proposals (RFP) to assure that the location can adequately meet the needs, and deliver at the needed price level.
(4)Many organizers simply either do not know what to ask, or don't ask the right questions. Many events require considerable amounts of audio visual, and the costs can often be astronomical, if not negotiated properly.
(5) There is a need to evaluate when to purchase something versus when to rent it. Often it costs far less to buy something than the rentals will cost.
(6) Many organizers don't understand that almost everything is negotiable. A group does not have to go along with the pre-packaged food and beverage menus, nor believe that there is no flexibility in pricing.
(7) Many planners do not spend enough time assuring that attendees first impression and contact with the event is a positive one. There must be a friendly and welcoming Welcome Committee, who are trained and willing to be "meeters and greeters." A smile goes a very long way.
(8) One of the most common errors is spending too much time on menial or less important items, and insufficient time on the priorities. Event organizers must fully understand how and why to prioritize.
(9) if using an Event Planner, it must be clearly spelled out what the expectations are, and what the planner's duties will be.
(10) Perhaps, most importantly, an organization must clearly understand and identify what it wishes to achieve from this event.
Of course, these are just some very basic things that should go into the overall process to ensure optimal success from an organization's event.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Common Sense Economic Discussion Is Needed
It seems that everywhere I turn, I hear another theory as to what the cause of our present economic situation is, and whose fault it is. Everyone seems to find someone to blame, from the President, to his advisers, to the banks, to our federal elected officials, to our local officials, to joblessness, to outsourcing, or to a multitude of other factors. However, while everyone seems to find it simple to blame something or someone, I rarely hear a viable solution or alternative.
I feel that there is little doubt that much, if not all of our political system and the way our governments are run, is highly dysfunctional. This dysfunctional behavior appears to be non-selective when it comes to the level of government, or to the elected official. It is certainly a rarity when any government agency or body gets anything productive accomplished.
Of course, it is easy to blame President Obama, because he is the visible leader. He has not only been blamed for things he's done, but also for things done by his predecessors, or by others. His opponents are always quick to criticize, and obviously in these economic times, it is easy to blame, but what is the solution.
There are many people who are critical of the government bailouts, but what might have occurred had their been none. What would have happened if some of these "too big to fail" institutions actually failed? Obama supporters paint one picture, and opponents paint a far different one.
President Obama points to a slowing of job loss as evidence that his plan is working, but what would have happened otherwise? We can speculate, but we really do not know.
I have yet to see anyone from either side of the political spectrum really develop a plan to address both the economy and the joblessness issues. Obviously, they are interrelated. Wouldn't it make sense to encourage investment in industries that address things that have heavily contributed to this economic mess, and will continue to if not addressed? Most would agree that the high cost of energy, and our lack of energy independence are major contributors to these economic times. Why not give incentives to businesses to hire and expand in industries that will address the energy issue, such as solar, wind, natural gas, domestic energy exploration, etc.? That would address joblessness, the economy and the future. Of course, that would probably make too much sense, so we can't expect our political leaders to follow that course of action.
When will political leaders stop playing political games, and actually address issues? Only, when the public demands it!
I feel that there is little doubt that much, if not all of our political system and the way our governments are run, is highly dysfunctional. This dysfunctional behavior appears to be non-selective when it comes to the level of government, or to the elected official. It is certainly a rarity when any government agency or body gets anything productive accomplished.
Of course, it is easy to blame President Obama, because he is the visible leader. He has not only been blamed for things he's done, but also for things done by his predecessors, or by others. His opponents are always quick to criticize, and obviously in these economic times, it is easy to blame, but what is the solution.
There are many people who are critical of the government bailouts, but what might have occurred had their been none. What would have happened if some of these "too big to fail" institutions actually failed? Obama supporters paint one picture, and opponents paint a far different one.
President Obama points to a slowing of job loss as evidence that his plan is working, but what would have happened otherwise? We can speculate, but we really do not know.
I have yet to see anyone from either side of the political spectrum really develop a plan to address both the economy and the joblessness issues. Obviously, they are interrelated. Wouldn't it make sense to encourage investment in industries that address things that have heavily contributed to this economic mess, and will continue to if not addressed? Most would agree that the high cost of energy, and our lack of energy independence are major contributors to these economic times. Why not give incentives to businesses to hire and expand in industries that will address the energy issue, such as solar, wind, natural gas, domestic energy exploration, etc.? That would address joblessness, the economy and the future. Of course, that would probably make too much sense, so we can't expect our political leaders to follow that course of action.
When will political leaders stop playing political games, and actually address issues? Only, when the public demands it!
Weight Loss Options, But Which Is For You?
Because there are more overweight and obese Americans than any other people in the world, it is not at all surprising that weight loss, diet products, and diets are such a tremendous industry. Especially today when the obesity rate is the highest that it has ever been! There are numerous varieties of diets, but most diets fall into one of three types: (1) Low calorie; (2) Low carbohydrate; or (3) Low fat. There are numerous proponents of each type of diet, and certain individuals have more success with one type than another. Some of the factors determining which diet is for a specific individuals include: (1) willpower; (2) food preferences; (3) discipline; (4) hunger; (5) how often one needs to eat; (6) health considerations such as blood pressure, high or low bloo9d sugar (diabetes, hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia.
Many conventional practitioners are major proponents of low calorie diets. These practitioners claim that weight loss or gain is dependent on the balance between caloric intake and how many calories one burns through exercise, work, etc. Unfortunately, many individuals do not do well on low calorie diets because these individuals feel the need to eat more food than the caloric limitations permit. In addition, many individuals find it difficult to reduce caloric intake for prolonged periods,. so if there is a need for a significant weight loss, many people get frustrated and therefore do not stay "true" to low calorie philosophy.
Others speak glowingly of low fat diets, and speak of the health implications of fats. However, many individuals on low fat diets do not lose significant weight.
Many dieters find eating prepared foods the best way for them to lose weight. While many of these plans are quite effective, they generally do not foster the development of good, effective and proper eating habits, and thus these people often experience the "yo yo syndrome," losing and gaining weight repeatedly.
One of the most misunderstood diets is the low carbohydrate diets. Originally made popular by the late Dr. Robert Atkins, this diet emphasizes reducing carbohydrates significantly, in order to bring the body into a condition known as ketosis (fat burning). Low carbohydrate dieters use the fats in their diet to generate and supply the energy and "power" for their bodies. Several studies have recently indicated that while all of these types of diets, if adhered to, will create weight loss, statistically low carbohydrate dieters lose a little more weight than others, maintain the weight loss longer, probably because this diet teaches a lifestyle change, and does a better job of lowering bad cholesterol numbers as well as triglycerides. Opponents of this diet have long insisted that there are negative health implications, but studies have shown that if a low carbohydrate diet is followed properly, that low carb diets are as safe or safer than other varieties. In addition, Dr. Atkins used to point to a large study by Duke, as well as "60,000 plus case studies" that show how effective his diet was.
Having been privileged to have known Dr. Atkins, both as a colleague and as my personal physician, I am able to personally testify to the fact that the low carb diet is both relatively easy to follow, as well as works. Over the past fifteen years, I have done what many people my age have done - - "accidentally" gain "just" a couple of pounds a year. Because of that I decided that I wanted to lose about 25 pounds. In the past three and a half months, following the "Atkins diet," I have lost thirty pounds, while eating three full meals, and two snacks daily. I am never hungry, my hypoglycemia is totally controlled, and I lost weight. This diet has four stages: (1) Induction - very low carbs, not to exceed 15 net grams per day for a minimum of 2 weeks; (2) Stage 2 - When one gets to approximately 80% of the desired weight loss, carbs are increased to a level of approximately 20-25 grams per day; (3) Stage 3- Begun at approximately the 95% progress mark, carbohydrate intake is gradually increased to approximately 40 grams per day; (4) Life Maintenance - method of keeping weight steady, where carb intake is gradually increased with "good carbs" until a weight level maintenance point is reached. For some individuals, this level can be approximately 100 net grams per day, while others need to limit their carb intake to a slightly higher or lower degree.
If you've tried other diets, and either not been successful, or lost weight only to regain it in the future, I suggest that you try the low carbohydrate approach. I suggest reading up on the diet, and adhering strictly to its principles. I believe you will be glad you did!
Many conventional practitioners are major proponents of low calorie diets. These practitioners claim that weight loss or gain is dependent on the balance between caloric intake and how many calories one burns through exercise, work, etc. Unfortunately, many individuals do not do well on low calorie diets because these individuals feel the need to eat more food than the caloric limitations permit. In addition, many individuals find it difficult to reduce caloric intake for prolonged periods,. so if there is a need for a significant weight loss, many people get frustrated and therefore do not stay "true" to low calorie philosophy.
Others speak glowingly of low fat diets, and speak of the health implications of fats. However, many individuals on low fat diets do not lose significant weight.
Many dieters find eating prepared foods the best way for them to lose weight. While many of these plans are quite effective, they generally do not foster the development of good, effective and proper eating habits, and thus these people often experience the "yo yo syndrome," losing and gaining weight repeatedly.
One of the most misunderstood diets is the low carbohydrate diets. Originally made popular by the late Dr. Robert Atkins, this diet emphasizes reducing carbohydrates significantly, in order to bring the body into a condition known as ketosis (fat burning). Low carbohydrate dieters use the fats in their diet to generate and supply the energy and "power" for their bodies. Several studies have recently indicated that while all of these types of diets, if adhered to, will create weight loss, statistically low carbohydrate dieters lose a little more weight than others, maintain the weight loss longer, probably because this diet teaches a lifestyle change, and does a better job of lowering bad cholesterol numbers as well as triglycerides. Opponents of this diet have long insisted that there are negative health implications, but studies have shown that if a low carbohydrate diet is followed properly, that low carb diets are as safe or safer than other varieties. In addition, Dr. Atkins used to point to a large study by Duke, as well as "60,000 plus case studies" that show how effective his diet was.
Having been privileged to have known Dr. Atkins, both as a colleague and as my personal physician, I am able to personally testify to the fact that the low carb diet is both relatively easy to follow, as well as works. Over the past fifteen years, I have done what many people my age have done - - "accidentally" gain "just" a couple of pounds a year. Because of that I decided that I wanted to lose about 25 pounds. In the past three and a half months, following the "Atkins diet," I have lost thirty pounds, while eating three full meals, and two snacks daily. I am never hungry, my hypoglycemia is totally controlled, and I lost weight. This diet has four stages: (1) Induction - very low carbs, not to exceed 15 net grams per day for a minimum of 2 weeks; (2) Stage 2 - When one gets to approximately 80% of the desired weight loss, carbs are increased to a level of approximately 20-25 grams per day; (3) Stage 3- Begun at approximately the 95% progress mark, carbohydrate intake is gradually increased to approximately 40 grams per day; (4) Life Maintenance - method of keeping weight steady, where carb intake is gradually increased with "good carbs" until a weight level maintenance point is reached. For some individuals, this level can be approximately 100 net grams per day, while others need to limit their carb intake to a slightly higher or lower degree.
If you've tried other diets, and either not been successful, or lost weight only to regain it in the future, I suggest that you try the low carbohydrate approach. I suggest reading up on the diet, and adhering strictly to its principles. I believe you will be glad you did!
Getting Older Is A Fact of Life, And Beats The Alternative
At some point in life, each of us must come to the realization and accept that we are not "as young as we used to be." Regardless of how good one's physical condition, nobody remains twenty years old forever. As one gets into his fifties, he realizes his hearing, eyesight, strength, and stamina are rarely "what they used to be." However, it usually takes some sort of incident or event to get us to finally admit the fact to ourselves.
This past fall, my twenty-one year old son was getting ready to move back to school, and as I have in the past, I volunteered my assistance in helping "move some of his stuff." Since my car is larger than my son's, I packed more of his "stuff" into my car than he did in his. My wife and I also decided we would leave earlier and take care of whatever we felt was necessary, unload our car at my son's apartment, and then relax. Like nearly all of the 21 year olds, my son would get up later, say his farewells to his friends, and bring the rest of his stuff with him in his car.
Of course, the best laid plans still don't always work out as anticipated. What should have been an approximately two-and-a-half hour trip, ended up taking about four hours, because, of course we met unbelievable traffic. We arrived at my son's apartment, which is a very large one bedroom apartment. It is in a great location, large, airy, light - - a great apartment for a college student. However, the apartment is on the third floor, up an outside thirty-seven steps staircase. When you're 21, this really doesn't impact you much, and can even make it more fun. However, when you are in your late fifties, have been riding in a car for four hours, and the temperature outside is approximately ninety degrees Fahrenheit, and you need to make approximately ten trips up and then of course ten trips down, therefore traversing approximately 740 steps, you begin to realize why the words to the song, "You're not a kid anymore," are more than merely words.
My wife, however, realized that it would be too much to do this trip back and forth in one day. Instead, we got a hotel room, equipped with a whirlpool that we took full advantage of. Therefore, you realize that there are certain advantages to not being as young - - one begins to develop better judgment than when one is 21. We had a leisurely dinner and relaxes, and decided that we would meet up with our son the next day, enjoy a good meal together, help him with some needed shopping, running some errands together, and of course climbing those 37 steps up and down a few more times. Despite the aches and pains, however, neither my wife nor I would have it any other way. This is truly what life and our life cycles are all about.
For more than a decade, I have complained of pain in my shoulder, but preferred to put off doing anything than facing the facts. Back then, I was introduced to a procedure known as prolotherapy, and for more than a decade, my shoulder has been feeling far better. About a year ago, it started hurting again, and then last week, I shocked my wife by asking her to call the orthopedist to get me an appointment. My wife knew that it must have really hurt if I was going to the doctor. I went to the orthopedist, and he examined it an took an x-ray, and determined, it was a Rotator Cuff problem. He sent me for an MRI, and then, when I returned to his office for the results, I knew I was in for it when the doctor began, "I have good news and I have bad news." As one ages, there are aches and pains. Everyone gets them somewhere!
One can either get older or not. I personally believe aging beats the alternatives. Now, if only we could somehow combine the judgment we gain as we get older and hopefully more mature, with the fearlessness and vitality of our youth, we would certainly enjoy the best that life could be!
This past fall, my twenty-one year old son was getting ready to move back to school, and as I have in the past, I volunteered my assistance in helping "move some of his stuff." Since my car is larger than my son's, I packed more of his "stuff" into my car than he did in his. My wife and I also decided we would leave earlier and take care of whatever we felt was necessary, unload our car at my son's apartment, and then relax. Like nearly all of the 21 year olds, my son would get up later, say his farewells to his friends, and bring the rest of his stuff with him in his car.
Of course, the best laid plans still don't always work out as anticipated. What should have been an approximately two-and-a-half hour trip, ended up taking about four hours, because, of course we met unbelievable traffic. We arrived at my son's apartment, which is a very large one bedroom apartment. It is in a great location, large, airy, light - - a great apartment for a college student. However, the apartment is on the third floor, up an outside thirty-seven steps staircase. When you're 21, this really doesn't impact you much, and can even make it more fun. However, when you are in your late fifties, have been riding in a car for four hours, and the temperature outside is approximately ninety degrees Fahrenheit, and you need to make approximately ten trips up and then of course ten trips down, therefore traversing approximately 740 steps, you begin to realize why the words to the song, "You're not a kid anymore," are more than merely words.
My wife, however, realized that it would be too much to do this trip back and forth in one day. Instead, we got a hotel room, equipped with a whirlpool that we took full advantage of. Therefore, you realize that there are certain advantages to not being as young - - one begins to develop better judgment than when one is 21. We had a leisurely dinner and relaxes, and decided that we would meet up with our son the next day, enjoy a good meal together, help him with some needed shopping, running some errands together, and of course climbing those 37 steps up and down a few more times. Despite the aches and pains, however, neither my wife nor I would have it any other way. This is truly what life and our life cycles are all about.
For more than a decade, I have complained of pain in my shoulder, but preferred to put off doing anything than facing the facts. Back then, I was introduced to a procedure known as prolotherapy, and for more than a decade, my shoulder has been feeling far better. About a year ago, it started hurting again, and then last week, I shocked my wife by asking her to call the orthopedist to get me an appointment. My wife knew that it must have really hurt if I was going to the doctor. I went to the orthopedist, and he examined it an took an x-ray, and determined, it was a Rotator Cuff problem. He sent me for an MRI, and then, when I returned to his office for the results, I knew I was in for it when the doctor began, "I have good news and I have bad news." As one ages, there are aches and pains. Everyone gets them somewhere!
One can either get older or not. I personally believe aging beats the alternatives. Now, if only we could somehow combine the judgment we gain as we get older and hopefully more mature, with the fearlessness and vitality of our youth, we would certainly enjoy the best that life could be!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)