Post by thread:[OT] Caloric expenditures

> http://www.foodcomm.org.uk/latest_calories_Apr04.htm > Is it enough to merely don the garments and stand on a pitch, or > do I need to be bowling, or what? Help me out here. Yes, you're on to it, all you need to do is wear a set of whites. That's the magic of cricket (a little secret - just the intention of playing cricket, even in jeans and a T, is enough to melt melt melt those pounds off) > I suppose walking around the office in full-on cricket gear might > increase my caloric usage through sheer embarassment and > quickened pace to get back to my office, especially as I'm in Iowa. You have to be pretty nimble to out-run hurled swivel chairs when wearing pads and carrying a lump of wood. Don't ask But seriously, I saw this piece on er, TV, the other night about the new generation of teens. Quite plainly there are a couple of issues that weren't around 20 years ago First is that you get and expect reward for participation rather than achievement. Entering the work force can come, according to employment recruiters, as a nasty shock to those fresh out of school who don't automatically become the office darling/heroand find they actually have to produce something to gain recognition Second is the trend towards sedentary entertainment. Ask a kid to go outside and play and they probably won't know what to do ____________________________________________

Jinx wrote: > But seriously, I saw this piece on er, TV, the other night about > the new generation of teens. Quite plainly there are a couple of > issues that weren't around 20 years ago > > First is that you get and expect reward for participation rather than > achievement. Entering the work force can come, according to > employment recruiters, as a nasty shock to those fresh out of school > who don't automatically become the office darling/heroand find they > actually have to produce something to gain recognition "Wasn't around 20 years ago"? I believe similar sentiments have been found recorded on ancient Sumerian tablets. *Every* generation in every society seems to believe that about the generations that come after it. It never seems to believe that about itself or its preceding generations. I'm pretty sure this is just the effect of our brains' default cognitive biases and attribution errors, all the things that Sir Francis Bacon eloquently called "idols." That's not to say that such problems don't exist, but they always have and there's no real evidence that they're *worse* today. > Second is the trend towards sedentary entertainment. Ask a kid to > go outside and play and they probably won't know what to do Parental anxiety may contribute to this. One of the effects of the mass media has been to make the world *scary* out of all proportion to the actual level of *danger*. You get parents who won't let their kids walk to school because they saw a story about a kidnapping that took place thousands of miles away. That's the cognitive distortion of emotional reasoning. In fact, today's kids are at substantially *less* risk of being kidnapped than the kids of 20 years ago; not only are there *fewer* kidnappings in absolute number, but there are a lot *more* kids. ____________________________________________

> Parental anxiety may contribute to this. One of the effects of the mass > media has been to make the world *scary* out of all proportion to the > actual level of *danger*. You get parents who won't let their kids walk > to school because they saw a story about a kidnapping that took place > thousands of miles away. That's the cognitive distortion of emotional > reasoning. In fact, today's kids are at substantially *less* risk of > being kidnapped than the kids of 20 years ago; not only are there > *fewer* kidnappings in absolute number, but there are a lot *more* kids. Read a book called "Culture of Fear" it analyzes how we fear things that have very low risk of happening, while we do not fear things with higher risk. More people die in car wrecks each year than died in the Vietnam war. Compare the risk of flying in an airplane to the risk of getting hurt in a car wreck - cars are far more dangerous. Yet you hear about every plane wreck on the nightly news. -- Lawrence Lile, P.E. Electrical and Electronic Solutions Project Solutions Companies http://www.projsolco.com > {Original Message removed}

>-----Original Message----- >From: spam_OUTpiclist-bouncesTakeThisOuTmit.edu [.....piclist-bouncesKILLspam@spam@mit.edu] >On Behalf Of Lawrence Lile >Sent: 21 October 2004 14:32 >To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. >Subject: RE: [OT] Caloric expenditures > >Read a book called "Culture of Fear" it analyzes how we fear >things that have very low risk of happening, while we do not >fear things with higher risk. More people die in car wrecks >each year than died in the Vietnam war. > >Compare the risk of flying in an airplane to the risk of >getting hurt in a car wreck - cars are far more dangerous. >Yet you hear about every plane wreck on the nightly news. I would think that is because we would feel we had some control of the risk in the case of a cars, the vast majority of wrecks are caused by human error so we can minimise that risk if we want to. In a plane you have no control at all, and are entrusting someone you don't know with your life. Regards Mike ======================================================================= This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use, forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or services. ======================================================================= ____________________________________________

It is the attention paid in the media to relatively low risk dangers that was the thesis of the book. Child abductions by strangers are another example - an extremely rare event. However what Parent isn't afraid of it? Head injuries are much more common and nearly as devastating, and parents let kids ride bikes and skateboard with no helmet all the time. The reason is we see these things on the news constantly. Did you ever see a piece about head injuries? I can name four or five friends whose lives were destroyed by this, none whose kids were abducted by a stranger, yet I have only rarely heard a piece on head injuries on the news, except in connection with ex-superman actor Chris Reeves. -- Lawrence Lile, P.E. Electrical and Electronic Solutions Project Solutions Companies http://www.projsolco.com 573-443-7100 ext 221 > {Original Message removed}

> > First is that you get and expect reward for participation rather > > than achievement > > "Wasn't around 20 years ago"? I believe similar sentiments have > been found recorded on ancient Sumerian tablets I think the major difference is that in schools now "everyone's a winner", for fear of hurting feelings, reducing self-esteem etc. Of course encouragement and a thumbs-up is good, but I compare my schooling with current and it is very different. Some people here would be familiar with the UK programme "That'll Teach 'em" http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/T/teachem2/index.html which "exposed" modern education. Not my words, but it's generally perceived/accepteed that the PC-leftie-liberal-treehugging-sandal- wearers are well and truly in control. Hence my comment about participation being viewed as or more important than achievement ____________________________________________