Philotic Web

because, you know, going to gym is, er, fun. yeah.

Actually a lot of the crossfit workouts that I do are enjoyable because they're so different from typical weight training.

and anyway I've been going and doing almost every workout since the beginning of the year (I'm on three days then one rest day, repeat), having only missed a couple which is really good.

Except the catering at work is really tasty which means I really can't miss any workouts, because I inevitably will overeat on the grub (I did manage to not eat any of the pizza tonight which is a minor triumph).

but yeah yesterday's workout was:

complete as many sets in 12 minutes as you can of: 1 pullup, 4 pushups, and 7 squats). I think I got 15 sets in, which is no improvement over the last time (except my pullups were better) that workout came up and I wasn't as exhausted, but that just means I didn't push myself as hard, I could have gotten 17 if I'd tried.

Tomorrow's a rest day! Yay!

Wow, 15 sets in 12 minutes. That's awesome!

..I wish I could do pullups..

Almost what I do.. modified Simplefit for me. Pullups, dips, ring pushups, and pistols (one legged squats). Since I decided to take this week off and rest, last weeks closest comparison was 1 pullup, 1 dip, 2 pushups, and 3 one legged squats -- 14 in 20 minutes. I can do 10 pullups, 10 dips, 21 pushups, and 21 one legged squats in about 7 minutes.

I also HIIT run and for my diet I do intermittent fasting.

Um, I lift some weights in my basement regularly... That's about as descriptive of my workout as I can be. Other than push-ups and bicep curls and crunches I don't even know what most of the exercises I do are called.

Okay, screw you catering, I lost five pounds in January, which was my goal. but I gained ten in february. guess when they started bringing in the catering at work? yep, february. time to get back on the wagon and ignore those tasty ribs and delicious potstickers etc. Perhaps I can continue to eat the lettuce wraps though...

btw, www.crossfit.com for where I get my workouts. they also have GREAT videos on the proper form and execution of most exercises, from pushups to dead lifts, it's a great site. Unfortunately I can't do the actual crossfit workouts without scaling, so I use the scaling found at this site: http://forum.brandxmartialarts.com/viewforum.php?f=16 I still do the puppy workout but I think I will graduate myself to the pack scale at the end of march. that won't be fun.

locke: Zone diet. It's what Crossfit recommends anyways. When I was doing that I was eating a s*** load of food and still losing tons of weight. Also, if you don't have access to barbells and rings I'd recommend Simplefit. It's essentially a loosely based crossfit workout with pushups/pullups/squats. Crossfit doesn't recommend cardio -- you're already doing a ton of work normally anyways -- but I love running. Really awesome seeing the body improve cardio-wise week to week.

Right now I eat loosely paleo (I have probably one cookie a day if that), except I don't cut out milk and I only reduced grains. Trick is: Don't eat fast food. Everything else is fair game. I'm not sure anyone knows what intermittent fasting is, but it is essentially eating your daily calorie intake in 4-6 hours. I'm probably doing about 1400-1800 calories a day right now. I've lost about 10lbs in the last 4 weeks.

Nutrition isn't hard, just don't eat junk. I still have cookies, chips, and ice cream but I eat very little of them very rarely. Give the body what it wants. No soda or sports drinks or crap like that. Even if you have that quarter pounder, don't fret about it. Just don't go eat it again and again.

I don't even know what a pot sticker is but if it's anything like what normally sticks to a pot I'd probably eat it too.

I'm not sure anyone knows what intermittent fasting is, but it is essentially eating your daily calorie intake in 4-6 hours.

That sounds like it might wreak havoc on a person's blood sugar. I've always been borderline hypoglycemic and if I go too long without eating I get shaky. I'm guessing that intermittent fasting thing wouldn't work for everyone?

Then again, I really should be trying to gain weight. I have a hard time getting up to 1200 calories a day. If only I could eat out at every meal...I tend to be a very lazy eater when I have fend for myself.

That is not a kind of diet that would do well for me. I'd probably first get sick from eating so much so suddenly, and then get sick from not having enough to eat recently enough.

I'm not sure anyone knows what intermittent fasting is, but it is essentially eating your daily calorie intake in 4-6 hours.

That sounds like it might wreak havoc on a person's blood sugar. I've always been borderline hypoglycemic and if I go too long without eating I get shaky. I'm guessing that intermittent fasting thing wouldn't work for everyone?

Then again, I really should be trying to gain weight. I have a hard time getting up to 1200 calories a day. If only I could eat out at every meal...I tend to be a very lazy eater when I have fend for myself.

Actually from all the sources I have read there are a ton of people who have done this and have it actually help maintain blood sugar (and even "cure" type 2 diabeties).

In a nutshell (obviously I'm no doctor here and I'm sure most doctors would rape me with a medical book on this, as well as how I'm probably botching up the more scientific terms and what not, but there are studies by doctors also): Intermittent Fasting allows the body to do other things that it would normally be having to split resources on with digestion of food. When you eat normally the blood sugar increases quite a bit while the body digests the food and slowly returns to a normal (and for some a too-low) level. Not eating as often causes the body to have to more strictly regulate blood sugar -- stabilize it throughout the day.

Fasting is generally thought to be a bad thing when working out because the brain needs glycogen which is stored in the muscles. Within 24 to 48 hours of a fast the body can normally completely deplete the stores of glycogen and one of the fastest ways to make more is to catabolize muscle. However, since the goal here is to not go past 24 hours without eating, it is generally no big deal. Glycogen can be restored in your "eating window" by allowing the body resources to create more glycogen in less muscle-harmful ways.

I'm sure most here are familiar with the benefits of a caloric restriction: lowering cholesterol, lower fasting blood glucose levels, and reduced blood pressure. Intermittent fasting has been shown (in studies, only one or two limited human trials have been done and they show essentially the same thing) to provide these same results without the need to reduce caloric intake. Other benefits include a more constant energy level throughout the day, better control over stress, and obviously a liberation from the need to constantly eat throughout the day.

There are two general ways to "Intermittent Fast": Eat for 4-6 hours, eating your daily calorie needs and then fast for the remaining 18 to 20 --Or: Eat for 24 hours, eating two days worth of your caloric needs and then fasting for 24. I've done both and personally like the former to be more to my liking. This is my second go on this, and the first time it was fairly difficult to adjust. The first few nights I got severe headaches but those went away by about the third day however this go I have not had that problem at all. My concentration is very, very good all day however I find that a new development is my need to sleep more than 8 hours -- I've been doing about 9 to 10 this last week. In terms of exercise -- I exercise before I break my fast and my workouts are easily the strongest and overall best I've had when working out. I'm quickly and easily making progress -- though more than I would by eating a 6-small-meal I could not say. I am loosing body fat but am gaining muscle. The hardest part for me is my... desire to eat food within 3-6 hours after my last meal for the day.

I'm not recommending it to everyone -- I know just how crazy it sounds. Both my parents thought I was insane the first time I did it; they kept telling me they expected to find me dead in the workout room one of these days. The first time I stopped was because my mother forced me to go to a "sports nutritionist" and they couldn't stop attempting to pound in to my head how the 6-small-meals is better, how it's proven, and how I could be damaging my digestive organs. If you wish to try it then obviously your best bet would be to slowly ease in to it. Slowly increase the time between meals for a few weeks and see how you do. I'm more one to just jump in cold turkey and see how it goes, but I don't have any problems with my blood sugar or have any medical problems that I am aware of.

</pseudo-science doctor impersonation>

I feel and do better through the day. If this is bad then my body has a strange way of showing it. Google it.. lots of stuff comes up.

I'm not sure what I think about IF yet. I will need a lot more convincing (and human trials) before I believe it. I can see how it might help type II diabetes though, except that obviously most people with diabetes wouldn't be able to withstand the periods of fasting.

Also, the glucose you need for your brain comes from liver glycogen. Muscle glycogen is stored there so that muscle (duh) can use it and have quick access to it. And actually, muscle proteins are the ONLY way (not just the fastest) to make more glycogen once it is depleted; fatty acids are used to generate energy that organ systems other than the brain can use.

Ahh, see, I was somewhat close.

No Zone for me, no paleo. The last time I ate fast food was months or years ago. I can't even drink soda anymore (sprite tastes like coating my tongue in karo syrup now). And it's not like I gained ten pounds of fat. That's mostly all water weight, maybe a two pound gain over all. still I hate set backs. My true downfall is the fact that work also stocks the kitchen with all that candy. and it's tough to resist a bite size reese's cup or kit kat. but I've succeeded at resisting before so long as I eat right in the first place. I don't eat a lot of white flour type of stuff, lots of fish, meat, veggies, fruit and dark chocolate. chocolate is my downfall. Do we have a chocolate thread?

wanders away thinking about chocolate.

..I wish I could do pullups..

Pullups just take practice. you can start with Jumping pullups, where you jump most of the way (or all the way) up to the bar and then let yourself down slowly. That will build up the muscles that let you do a pullup. within a month you'll be able to do at least a single pullup and maybe several.

For starters, a person with a normally acting pancreas should not have blood sugar spikes after eating. If you are in perfect health, eating 3 square meals (or 6 smaller meals) will keep your blood sugar pretty stable throughout the course of the day. If anything, this intermittant fasting deal would accentuate any abnormalities in a person with any abnormal insulin production; and could even be dangerous for someone such as that.

As far as caloric restriction goes; that's something that we've been sold as a society for years and though at it's most basic level it's true, the long and short of it is that adding up 1200 calories of coke will never do the same for your weight loss as 1200 calories of broccoli will. Intermittent fasting didn't invent a new way to lose weight without lowering your calorie intake, it's successful in people because it forces them to focus on one proper meal and doesn't allow for impulse snacks and the like.

I'm going to take a leap of faith and say that there is no way that this intermittent fasting thing does anything for you that properly portioned meals (of similar caloric and nutritional values) can't do. To add to that, this type of plan can prove dangerous to anyone who has even a hint of hypoglycemia or diabetes. I'll even go as far as to suggest that by doing this you are doing more harm to your body than good, pushing it towards starvation mode between "meals" and then engorging yourself on 2,000 calories in a single sitting (or across a span of 4 hours, as you suggest)

None of this is to say that I haven't done similar, eating one large meal and using it to fuel me for the day; however the only value I can see to switching to a "diet" that works this way is a get-thin-quick crash diet that forces your body to use up fat stores between meals. You don't think that sports nutritionalists have just a hint of knowledge about what they're talking about? Maybe just a bit more of one than you do with all of your intarblag knowledge off the wikitubes?

Five hours, actually. I believe you're focusing more on the "Warrior Diet" side of things and I find that to be a very dumb diet. Of course it's not good to stuff as much food as you possibly can in your belly and then not eat for 23 and a half hours. Four to six, I find, is ideal; four is pushing it.

I never said the blood sugar "spiked", I just said it increased quite a bit (I actually wrote spiked first ). From what I understand (not a doctor here, doctor (or doctor in training *hint hint*) input welcome) the blood sugar does increase upon eating and slowly but surely decreases as the body uses up the nutrients that have been digested. IF simply forces the body to adapt and regulate it at a more constant level through the day.

Google search. Recently there have been literally tons of studies and trials (personal and in lab, but more personal) that shows type TWO (very specific here: TYPE TWO) diabetes actually stabilizes more with an IF type diet than eating "normally". Also, as a result of the body having to maintain a much more stable blood glucose level, some have found it to HELP with hypoglycemia. I have neither of these, so obviously I can't say much on the subject. I've read from multiple sources that it helps, and have spoken (on other forums) to those who have had those two distinct problems and they claim it has helped. As I said, if you wish to give it a shot and you have either of these, take it slowly and carefully.

Why do you assume when I spoke of caloric restriction I meant restricting your diet to junk? That's just silly and what you said should have been completely obvious. No, it didn't invent a new way to diet. The best diet I've been on is one that restricted a macro-nutrient split very precisely. I feel my best, and everyone who has done also feels their best, when they stop drinking soft drinks and limit the "junk food" intake. Junk food is also subjective. Sugar is not bad. Caffeine is not bad. High fructose corn syrup is bad. All artificial sweeteners are bad. Most preservatives are bad. "Junk food" -- that bag of corn puffs, that soft drink (only in the USA, of course), that big mac with cheese -- are all BAD. Some chocolate: not bad. Home-popped popcorn: not bad. Home-cooked anything: not bad. Corn chips and cheese: not bad. Obviously they're not as good as a handful of meat, a small amount of fruit, a virtually unlimited amount of vegetables, nuts, etc -- but they're not BAD BAD.

What I meant to imply by speaking of caloric restriction was this: If you eat less than normal (normal being maintenance), there are certain health benefits that have been observed. I listed the most obvious... many just believe CR -> Longer life. It's not necessarily that simple (or that proven) but from a science point of view it has some very... interesting results. IF just... increases the first-impression effects of CR without having to restrict caloric intake. I just recalled something else which I'm not too familiar with, but CR and IF also reduce the oxidation of cells within the body which, if I remember correctly, is another apparent cause of (premature) aging.

I suppose it is starvation, but not nearly in any solid sense of that word. Starvation implies that you aren't eating. If you are, you are not providing the body with the nutrients it needs. The body is eating itself to live. Intermittent fasting is not doing this: You are eating everything you need to live and prosper. You are simply doing it in a smaller period of time. Logically, I fail to see how this could be harmful on your digestive system. An analogy, perhaps: Is it better for your car to start and stop it at every light, or to simply leave it idling between reds? Obviously you use more gas, you're wearing down the spark plug, using more battery power, etc every time you start the car... so it seems it would be easier ON THE CAR to just leave it running.

I will agree with you, however, that the effects on dieting (dieting makes it seem like a short term "omg lose 10 lbs" thing, not a lifestyle) between IF and a proper 6 meals is probably very minimalistic from a bystanders point of view. HE gets to eat all day while THAT GUY only eats for five hours. What an idiot. People that have done it claim great things. Science currently says it shows promise, and obviously science changes pretty quick. For all we know in 50 years it might be recommended, or we could find it did more harm than good. I could be getting a sort of placebo affect... but as I said I feel good. It's just one of those "try it on and see how it feels". To others it's crazy. To those who try it they swear by it. Do with it what you will.

(Didn't mean to write that much again...)

Working out is fun, eh? Am I the only one who gets bored trying it? I mean, even lying around doing nothing I don't find very boring, but while running/exercising, I can't even relax.

That sounds like it might wreak havoc on a person's blood sugar. I've always been borderline hypoglycemic and if I go too long without eating I get shaky.

Hmm, this kind of sounds like me. Sometimes I start shaking before I even feel hungry. Should I get checked for this or something?

the first research done on caloric restriction was in the early 1940s, done on conscientious objectors (who volunteered for the study) to simulate the sparse food conditions likely to be encountered by soldiers in Europe. The men were put on a diet of about 1800 calories (they were average men). They lost a small amount of weight initially (10lbs, give or take 5), then their weight stabilized despite carrying a caloric deficit for many months they maintained the same weight. When they were put on a 1200 calorie diet they again lost weight initially (about another 10lbs, give or take 5) and their weight once again stabilized over several months but many of the men became suicidal, all became depressed. One conclusion of this study (and every scientific study that has studied caloric restriction as a weight loss strategy with controls on the multi variables involved) has been that caloric restriction is not efficacious for weight loss. Scientifically in order to induce fat loss you've got to have the right balance of hormones and blood sugar levels circulating, otherwise your body can't access the fat stores for energy, hence the concept of six balanced meals. The boom/bust adjustments your body makes for your diet, Wil, may produce results but probably isn't sustainable over a period of decades. Additionally, you're not a reliable witness because of selection bias and confirmation bias. This is not a slight against you, the scientific method is designed to minimize the impact of those biases because absolutely everyone does them unconsciously, even scientists. these biases are responsible for why caloric restriction continues to be presented as a weight loss strategy despite the monumental body of evidence discounting it's effectiveness.

"From what I understand (not a doctor here, doctor (or doctor in training *hint hint*) input welcome)

I wish I had time right now to think about this more! I am really interested in this stuff and I'm even thinking about going into endocrinology.

When they were put on a 1200 calorie diet they again lost weight initially (about another 10lbs, give or take 5) and their weight once again stabilized over several months but many of the men became suicidal, all became depressed.

Congratulations, you now understand 80% of women over the age of 25. (Made up statistic, but probably still true.)


I just wanted to add that I enjoy exercising and do so about 4x a week (except for exam weeks). In undergrad I had time for cardio and lifting, but I've since sacrificed lifting (unfortunately) because I can study on the elliptical.

Working out is fun, eh? Am I the only one who gets bored trying it? I mean, even lying around doing nothing I don't find very boring, but while running/exercising, I can't even relax.

That sounds like it might wreak havoc on a person's blood sugar. I've always been borderline hypoglycemic and if I go too long without eating I get shaky.

Hmm, this kind of sounds like me. Sometimes I start shaking before I even feel hungry. Should I get checked for this or something?

I think you and I were separated at birth, zero.

I too hate exercise and have never found one that isn't horribly boring! Unless it's an activity that happens to be exercise in disguise. As far as the hypoglycemic thing, if the symptoms significantly impact your life I would ask your doctor to have you tested. Otherwise, you are probably just borderline, in which case they don't do anything for you. Read up on it at wiki or somewhere and you'll find some self-help measures you can take.

(Too lazy to use quotes here)

To locke:

I'm assuming that the people in this study were active working adult males since they were not getting paid for this. I'm also assuming that in the 1940's the sort of jobs they had was more labor intensive than sitting at a desk. If so 1200 calories is wayyyy too low for them. 1800 was probably about bare minimum.

To zeroguy:

Workout becomes fun when you notice how you're changing and you wish to continue to change. It's more of an adventure to see what you can do from day to day. It makes you feel better when you're not working out. It just takes some getting used to.

I believe this is the study that locke was referring to and, if so, he got some things wrong:

Minnesota Starvation Experiment

The men were initially given 3200 calories and then reduced to a "semi-starvation" level of 1800 for 6 months. "Their meals were composed of foods that were expected to typify the diets of people in Europe during the latter stages of the war: potatoes, rutabagas, turnips, bread and macaroni...the subjects received two meals per day designed to induce the same level of nutritional stress for each participant. Since each subject had distinct metabolic characteristics, the diet of each man was adjusted throughout the starvation period to produce roughly a 25% total weight loss over the 24-week period."

Also, as far as their level of activity during this period, "Throughout the duration of the study, each man was assigned specific work tasks, was expected to walk 22 miles each week and required to keep a personal diary. An extensive battery of tests was routinely administered including the collection of metabolic and physical measurements, X-ray examinations, treadmill performance, and intelligence and psychological evaluation."

I first learned about this study in regards to eating disorders. I found it fascinating that even perfectly healthy (mentally and physically) people can become eating disordered after being undernourished for long enough. So, sometimes the lack of eating can CAUSE an eating disorder which can then take on a life of it's own.

I go through periods where I don't feel normal hunger. I feel full and then very suddenly I get shaky and ill-feeling. It's a real problem because at that point I'm actually too hungry to eat, so I look for anything emotionally/mentally appealing enough to get me back to "normal" - which usually tends to be something greasy and fatty and bad for me. That just plays havoc with my blood sugar and the cycle starts again.

If I pay very careful attention to when and what I eat, I can control it. When I eat healthily - lots of whole grains, fruit, veg, as much from scratch as possible - I can really tell a difference. It's a sad thing to get happy that your body is feeling plain old everyday hunger pangs, because it's an achievement you have to work for. But in the end it's worth it, I guess.

thank you, that's the study, and I was pulling it out of memory rather than looking it up.

today's workout was sets of 15, 12 and 9 of deadlifts and bridged hand stand pushups. ugh. hopefully I'll be able to do freestanding hand stand push ups eventually.

I'm not a big fan of formal workouts. I get bored really, really easily. Instead, I just make it a point to walk as much as possible (not a problem, since I don't have a car) and throw in some sit-ups.

I do prefer to walk with others (exercise is the one thing that really brings out the social creature in me), but I'll do it alone. I'd still be running if I had some running partners who were willing to run at my pace, or at least be patient while I worked myself back up to something resembling my former speed.

I'm going to be travelling to Ohio for work in a week, and will probably have very little - if any - actual work to do there; so I'm planning on making quite a bit of use of my hotel's workout facilities.

I'm really looking forward to it. I've always been scared of going to a gym here because it means paying for a membership, then going in and knowing dick-all about what I'm doing there.. A hotel gym seems like a much better way to ease myself into a healthier lifestyle.

today was five rounds of max (to failure) of pushups, pullups.

I got
26/4.5
24/4
19/4
16/3
13/1.5

Okay. Have started doing exercise video and lifting (little teensy baby) weights regularly (well, semi-regularly. For two weeks.) I have this weight routine of ten exercises, ten reps each that a friend gave me, and then I add a couple I got somewhere else. Starting to notice some changes. Minor, but enough to keep me going. It could just be my imagination but I don't think so -- my upper arm is definitely starting to develop a bit of definition, and my weight routine is much easier, so SOMETHING's happening. When I began, I couldn't do more than two reps of the last exercise with the 5lb weights, and today I manged the whole thing. I'll probably up some of the easier exercises to 8 or 10lb weights, soon. Also, I pinch the flab at the sides/front of my hips daily, which may sound weird. I do this pretty much every day, completely unconsciously. I don't even notice, it's just shower, pinch, sigh, remind self to lose weight, forget, go about day. So, today I started to pinch it, and, um, it wasn't there. This makes me very happy, as that was one of the first signs of grad-school weight gain I really acknowledged (I've gone up 2 sizes in grad school. This depresses me. I am vowing to go back down by the time I'm 30. Not that I was ever skinny, and not that I'm not fairly satisfied with my body, but I resent this whole experience too much to let it affect my physicality, damnit.)

I have decided that tomorrow I am going to get over my shyness and start swimming in the University's pool. It's the logistics that scare me more than any thing -- lockers? How many people are there? What do I take my stuff in? I have this underlying social phobia that tends to rear its head when I want to do new things. But I want to swim. I am very sick of workout tapes. I can't wait till the roads have cleared a bit more and it's warm enough to take my bike out.

rest today but there's a battle at work, so far I think the score is:

Reese's peanut butter cups - 5
Adam - 2

scores determined by whether or not I resisted candy or gave in. It sucks when Craftie supplies unlimited candy, it really lets you know, with no mercy, just how strong your will power is. I would like to report that I am 100% victorious in the infamous doughnut campaign though. This Reeses front has been giving me fits.

There's a simple solution for that. Donate all your junk food to your local black hole, aka me.

Other solution: Make a rule that if you eat one Reece's cup, you have to eat 3-5 (whatever number you actually could eat, but is high enough to alarm you). And stick to this rule, no exceptions. Mercilessly.

It's easy to say, "Oh, well, I'll just have one." Your intellect will let you rationalize that. But if you know that if you have one, you have to have five your better sense will be alarmed enough to kick in.

~~~

In other news, I did it! I went and swam for forty minutes today (with several short breaks)! I haven't swam laps in I don't know how long. Maybe a decade. It was awesome. Best thing -- this is North Dakota, so everyone ignores everyone else. Also, swimming, when you aren't on a team or playing around, is a very asocial sport. This calms me hugely. Honestly, I owe my boyfriend and his best friend's wife a ton for making me wear shorts and a swimsuit this past summer, and his best friend's family for being incredibly kind and sensitive. (Note: It's not just "regular" body issues, although those are there. I have some serious scarring on my arms and legs that I'm very self-conscious about.)

I was actually on a swim team in 8th grade. I wasn't much good then, though I think I'd've improved had I stuck with it. Anyhow, I have gotten INCREDIBLY rusty. Particularly at turning. Tried to do a flip turn for the backstroke and when I kicked off the side I shot myself straight down to the bottom of the pool. Needs work. However, it was a great workout. And, really, one of the best parts is that after swimming, even though you smell like chlorine, it does not feel NEARLY as gross as feeling all sweaty and smelly after a non-aquatic workout. I'd forgotten how ravenous it makes me.

I was planning on saving swimming for Tuesdays/Thursdays but I may go again tomorrow for a half-hour, just for the hell of it.

Put on an old skirt that I couldn't wear anymore. I still wouldn't wear it, yet, but it definitely looks better. Also, the very pretty skirt that I bought earlier this winter that was a little too big will need either strategic safety-pinning or actual alteration for me to wear it.

Biceps are continuing to develop. I'm even starting to suspect I have triceps somewhere. Bought 8lb weights and used them for my "easy" exercises, used 5lb for all the others. The 2lb weights are relegated now for use with walking.

I should resume the small attempt I was making to exercise before the Evil Bronchitis decided it would pummel me for a while.

Swimming is my physical activity of choice, too. I've been trying to psych myself up enough to use the elliptical machines or something at the fitness center on campus, but I usually just end up going swimming (the pool is in the same building, so that's something, right?).

Unsure as to why some of you are still so worried about a bit of candy...

I want to start swimming again. I really need a job. Meanwhile, when I am no longer sick, I will get myself running and biking again. I miss having easy access to elliptical machines.