MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
Prohibition 2007
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

marcrph

Portugal

Many years ago the Federal Government in their unfathomable wisdom, decided my forefathers could not make alcohol in the Appalachian mountains, and other places across this country we call America. What had been mostly law-abiding people were now considered criminals, and were thus hunted down and prosecuted for making "moonshine".

Many years have passed, and the result of all that malarkey was that people probably drink more than ever. I do not know the statistics, nor do I care! All I know, if one picks up a bottle of rum at the beverage store, the cashier is always busy! I do know many famous people got RICH during the Prohibition, and many poor mountaineers got put in jail.

Today, the New York City Board of Health voted unanimous to ban trans fats in restaurants. I am 100% against eating any form of trans fats, but I have strong feelings about government banning anything. Yes I hope this works out to everyone's good. But, history shows the fallacy of depending on the government.

Marc
Open User Options Menu

Trandahl

Tennessee, USA

Hmm...
Which is the lesser of the two evils?
Increased government control or decline of American health?
I know it's impractical, but could higher taxation of hydrogenated oils do the trick?
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

People should try to avoid eating trans fats, or at least limit their intake to only a very, very small amount, but it is up to the individual to decide what they will or won't eat, and up to the business owner to decide what food they will or won't serve.

The government has neither the responsibility nor the right to do this.
Open User Options Menu

davise

Agreed....if you take away my free will, I'm just a robot mindlessly doing what the government tells me to do.
Open User Options Menu

mentzerfan

It's time for a revolution, smash the state brothers!
Open User Options Menu

saseme

Things will never get better, only worse. All smoking in resteraunts in Ohio I think it was ceases soon.

Dietary supplements will be next, regulated as medicine and ensuring the pill pushing doctors and pharma companies more business.

Check out the film at this link.

Also watch the doco 'Why we Fight'.

http://video.google.com/...277175242198&q=

The system will collapse, it's only a matter of whether you'll still be alive to see some action. These things move insidiously slowly. Governments have learnt the lessons of Hitler and Stalin. When the degrees of change are so small and so gradual not enough changes in ones lifetime by enough or quickly enough to engender and kind of revolt, and then the nextr generation is born into it and so knows no better.

As Gore Vidal said, 'We are the United States of Amnesia'.
Open User Options Menu

mentzerfan

"It was a bright, cold day in April and the clocks were striking thirteen......"
Open User Options Menu

frostyF

Arkansas, USA

What`s next? Will the gov`t want to restrict our portion sizes when we eat out?
Leon
Open User Options Menu

Gluteus Maximus

I applaud this move by NYC, this is a public health issue. Right up there with second hand smoke. Diabetes, heart disease and health care costs are thru the roof with no end in sight. Trans fat is hidden in food, you can't see it. And too many just don't care. Way to go NYC!

Next we need to focus on limiting or modifying our saturated fat consumption. That kills too.
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

The problem is, like I said before, the government has neither the right nor the responsibility to tell people what they can or can not eat, and definitely not to tell business owners what they can or can not sell.

There are many things that are unhealthy, but it's not up to the government to tell people they can't do them, provided it doesn't impose on others without their consent.

Smoking is different. If someone is smoking, it directly affects everyone around them. If someone is eating a lot of trans fats, it only affects them (or should).

However, while the government may have the right to legislate smoking in public places, they have no right to tell business owners they may not allow smoking within their businesses (indoors), as that should be up to the business owners, and then up to potential customers whether to choose to do business there or not.

Health care costs should not be an issue, because the rest of us should not have to pay them. Again, people should be made to be responsible for their own actions, and those of us who aren't stuffing our faces with twinkies and big macs should not be expected to pay one extra dime in either taxes or insurance to subsidize those who do.

More government is almost never the solution to a problem, and typically only makes the problem worse or creates more problems. Look at how prohibition affected organized crime (both during prohibition in the earlier part of the last century and the current "war" on drugs), and the results of various social programs.

The best kind of government is a very, very limited one.
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

Tacitus wrote:
"It was a bright, cold day in April and the clocks were striking thirteen......"


It's not that bad. Yet.
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

I'm going to revolt if they take my Nautilus machines and barbells.
Open User Options Menu

Gluteus Maximus

Drew Baye wrote:
The problem is, like I said before, the government has neither the right nor the responsibility to tell people what they can or can not eat, and definitely not to tell business owners what they can or can not sell.

There are many things that are unhealthy, but it's not up to the government to tell people they can't do them, provided it doesn't impose on others without their consent.

Smoking is different. If someone is smoking, it directly affects everyone around them. If someone is eating a lot of trans fats, it only affects them (or should).

However, while the government may have the right to legislate smoking in public places, they have no right to tell business owners they may not allow smoking within their businesses (indoors), as that should be up to the business owners, and then up to potential customers whether to choose to do business there or not.

Health care costs should not be an issue, because the rest of us should not have to pay them. Again, people should be made to be responsible for their own actions, and those of us who aren't stuffing our faces with twinkies and big macs should not be expected to pay one extra dime in either taxes or insurance to subsidize those who do.

More government is almost never the solution to a problem, and typically only makes the problem worse or creates more problems. Look at how prohibition affected organized crime (both during prohibition in the earlier part of the last century and the current "war" on drugs), and the results of various social programs.

The best kind of government is a very, very limited one.



But you ARE paying for it!

Does heroin addiction only affect the individual? Does alcohol abuse? Does obesity? Are there NO public health issues? Should there never be regulation in any way shape or form?
Open User Options Menu

Swedish Viking

California, USA

no...the best government is that one that governs least. It's up to all of us to not consume that which is not good for us and to let others know that we don't like breathing the smoke coughed up from their chimneys/mouths.
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

Gluteus Maximus wrote:
But you ARE paying for it!

Does heroin addiction only affect the individual? Does alcohol abuse? Does obesity? Are there NO public health issues? Should there never be regulation in any way shape or form?


Yes, we are paying for it, but we shouldn't be.

Regulation should be very strictly limited. Government has grown way too large. Both the federal and state governments need to have their powers severely restricted.
Open User Options Menu

eintology

California, USA

Tacitus wrote:
It's time for a revolution, smash the state brothers!


Valiant Warrior Tacticus,

For it is I, Warlord of Mesopotamia ... by way of Marina Del Rey.

My sword is drawn to the East.

Wait, hold on just a second, I have to break out my compass.... Now my sword is drawn to the East!

I beseech you. No, I command you; in the name of the glory and honor that was once our people, to do battle with Swedish Viking and enemy of the state, Gluteus Maximus!

And if you should happen to lose?

You will be forever sentenced to a life of Mucho Thai of Tijuana.

So, I suggest you win.

W.O. Mesopotamia
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

Drew Baye wrote:
The problem is, like I said before, the government has neither the right nor the responsibility to tell people what they can or can not eat, and definitely not to tell business owners what they can or can not sell.

There are many things that are unhealthy, but it's not up to the government to tell people they can't do them, provided it doesn't impose on others without their consent.

Smoking is different. If someone is smoking, it directly affects everyone around them. If someone is eating a lot of trans fats, it only affects them (or should).

However, while the government may have the right to legislate smoking in public places, they have no right to tell business owners they may not allow smoking within their businesses (indoors), as that should be up to the business owners, and then up to potential customers whether to choose to do business there or not.

Health care costs should not be an issue, because the rest of us should not have to pay them. Again, people should be made to be responsible for their own actions, and those of us who aren't stuffing our faces with twinkies and big macs should not be expected to pay one extra dime in either taxes or insurance to subsidize those who do.

More government is almost never the solution to a problem, and typically only makes the problem worse or creates more problems. Look at how prohibition affected organized crime (both during prohibition in the earlier part of the last century and the current "war" on drugs), and the results of various social programs.

The best kind of government is a very, very limited one.


Have you thought about running for President?

Marc
Open User Options Menu

frostyF

Arkansas, USA

This NYC bull%*#@ is just the first step.Soon,parents of chubby kids will be forced by the gov`t to go into counseling for child abuse.
Leon
Open User Options Menu

saseme

frostyF wrote:
This NYC bull%*#@ is just the first step.Soon,parents of chubby kids will be forced by the gov`t to go into counseling for child abuse.
Leon


Not the first step at all. Everything is related and this country has never really been free, even from the beginning, it just seemed that way by comparison. The American way born out by history is exploitation. The Indians were first and then with the writing of the Constitution there was a chance to abolish slavery.

It was voted down. Abraham Lincoln's first impulse was to maintain slavery to avoid the war, having written letters to the governors of the states who were anti-slavery to try and get them to pipe down so there wouldn't be a war. Only when he saw he couldn't get them to compromise their values of freedom for all did he agree to go to war on what he thought was going to be the winning side.

And then even after that blacks were segregated, and now there's overshoot, reverse racism where generation who neither engaged in slavery are made to pay for it to people who were never slaves. But it's not what Abe's remembered for. He had a good agent I guess.

So no, not the first step, but ceratinly not the last.

Open User Options Menu

saseme

marcrph wrote:
Drew Baye wrote:
The problem is, like I said before, the government has neither the right nor the responsibility to tell people what they can or can not eat, and definitely not to tell business owners what they can or can not sell.

There are many things that are unhealthy, but it's not up to the government to tell people they can't do them, provided it doesn't impose on others without their consent.

Smoking is different. If someone is smoking, it directly affects everyone around them. If someone is eating a lot of trans fats, it only affects them (or should).

However, while the government may have the right to legislate smoking in public places, they have no right to tell business owners they may not allow smoking within their businesses (indoors), as that should be up to the business owners, and then up to potential customers whether to choose to do business there or not.

Health care costs should not be an issue, because the rest of us should not have to pay them. Again, people should be made to be responsible for their own actions, and those of us who aren't stuffing our faces with twinkies and big macs should not be expected to pay one extra dime in either taxes or insurance to subsidize those who do.

More government is almost never the solution to a problem, and typically only makes the problem worse or creates more problems. Look at how prohibition affected organized crime (both during prohibition in the earlier part of the last century and the current "war" on drugs), and the results of various social programs.

The best kind of government is a very, very limited one.

Have you thought about running for President?

Marc


There are no sides in government. All governemnt desire to control the populace. They would never allow a third party candidate any real success, especially becoming president, and even if he did the congress and senate could overtun and block all he did until his time was up.

The existence of third parties simply provides the illusion of choice, as does more than one party, a lesson learnt from the failures of the Reich and Politburo.
Open User Options Menu

mentzerfan

eintology wrote:
Tacitus wrote:
It's time for a revolution, smash the state brothers!

Valiant Warrior Tacticus,

For it is I, Warlord of Mesopotamia ... by way of Marina Del Rey.

My sword is drawn to the East.

Wait, hold on just a second, I have to break out my compass.... Now my sword is drawn to the East!

I beseech you. No, I command you; in the name of the glory and honor that was once our people, to do battle with Swedish Viking and enemy of the state, Gluteus Maximus!

And if you should happen to lose?

You will be forever sentenced to a life of Mucho Thai of Tijuana.

So, I suggest you win.

W.O. Mesopotamia


The Gladius of my Centurion Bigus Diccus and I, thirst for the blood of the wild, uncivilised northlanders you speak of. They shall know the rule of Glorious Rome!
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

marcrph wrote:

Have you thought about running for President?

Marc


I'd probably be assassinated.
Open User Options Menu

Drew Baye

Florida, USA

The American Civil War was not about slavery. For some reason, it's always presented as being about freeing the slaves, which it was not. Slavery was a side issue. The Civil War was about states' rights versus increasing federal powers, and the good guys did not win.

Slavery is certainly a horrible thing, and it should never have been allowed in this country, but that was not the issue.

As far as the whole race issue with slavery, it is absolutely ridiculous. For a black person today to have any gripe with whites about slavery would be as ridiculous as me having an issue with Italians because the Romans enslaved people from Germanic tribes since I'm part German, or for a Jew to still have issues with the Egyptians for having enslaved the Israelites.

Fact: Blacks were not the only people who've been enslaved.

Fact: The vast majority of people in this country did not own slaves when it was legal, only a few of the very wealthy and plantation owners. To hear some people tell it, you'd think every white person in America owned a slave, which is nonsense.

If a person is so concerned about slavery, rather than bitching about it and demanding reparations for something that never happened to them personally from people who never did it to anyone, they should volunteer with organizations like Anti Slavery International and do something about the slavery that still exists in many parts of the world today
Open User Options Menu

Madcow2

Drew Baye wrote:
The problem is, like I said before, the government has neither the right nor the responsibility to tell people what they can or can not eat, and definitely not to tell business owners what they can or can not sell.

There are many things that are unhealthy, but it's not up to the government to tell people they can't do them, provided it doesn't impose on others without their consent.

Smoking is different. If someone is smoking, it directly affects everyone around them. If someone is eating a lot of trans fats, it only affects them (or should).

However, while the government may have the right to legislate smoking in public places, they have no right to tell business owners they may not allow smoking within their businesses (indoors), as that should be up to the business owners, and then up to potential customers whether to choose to do business there or not.

Health care costs should not be an issue, because the rest of us should not have to pay them. Again, people should be made to be responsible for their own actions, and those of us who aren't stuffing our faces with twinkies and big macs should not be expected to pay one extra dime in either taxes or insurance to subsidize those who do.

More government is almost never the solution to a problem, and typically only makes the problem worse or creates more problems. Look at how prohibition affected organized crime (both during prohibition in the earlier part of the last century and the current "war" on drugs), and the results of various social programs.

The best kind of government is a very, very limited one.


Drew, you make some very high quality and astute points throughout this thread.

I only wish we had more independent thinkers in the world - right or wrong in their ideas. The two party system in the US is just alternative platforms and that's an issue for me specifically because of the lack of real thought, creativity, and effective solution and problem solving. On the other hand, you have alternatives where there are so many parties and splits that post election you wind up saddled with a choice that 90% of the people absolutely didn't want.

I wish I had answers but I don't other than health care needs to be reigned in for the betterment of all. While I certainly feel horible for someone suffering due to malpractice or imagined malpractice, there needs to be some reasonable limits. Bad things happen all the time to people, out of proportion enrichment only produces more lawyers and skyrocketing costs for all of us.

For transfats, people need to be educated and I'd agree that if one was to serve them, it should be indicated maybe for each item on the menu where they are present (and mandating this would serve the same purpose to a very large extent).


Open User Options Menu

eintology

California, USA

Tacitus wrote:

The Gladius of my Centurion Bigus Diccus and I, thirst for the blood of the wild, uncivilised northlanders you speak of. They shall know the rule of Glorious Rome!


Tacticus Great Warrior of Valor,

I shall summon Remus and Romulus to assist you on your journey of truth and exoneration.

Having been raised as wolf cubs, they are familiar with the rugged terrain ye shall encounter in the nether regions that has become your foes.

Don't let Remus or Romulus chew on your backpack, with their sharpened fangs; for it shall be chalked full of trail mix and trans fats to sustain, and provide coating for your fur, against the frigid northern winds and waters that surround Lake Shore Drive.

Hearken, for we know the enemy that assails you. They shall use Cunning, and her sister, and a Lufthansa Stewardess, or two; to gain vital information, and perhaps tour bus directions from you.

Maybe you should give in, as I did, last time I was in Stockholm.

Use your discus wisely my brother.

My sword is drawn in the direction of Victory....

Set our people free!

Warlord
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy