With all the travel and eating out, I just felt like I wanted a DO OVER with eating. So I decided to do the Dr. Oz 3 day cleanse just to see if I would feel better and reset my body as promised. Normally, I am leery of any type of cleanse. But I watched Dr. Oz explain it and felt comfortable trying his plan. Take a look at it as he recommends Omega 3, Probiotic and Multivitamin with this cleanse.
Hey, it’s only 3 days of my life, right?
Here are my thoughts after Day 1. My husband decided to join me which made it easier. My kids are back at college and I don’t have to cook. The two of us can cheer each other up. And we did. We called each other when we had to drink the lunch shake and tried to figure out how to make that experience better!
Day 1: Begins with the green tea, stevia and lemon slice.
When I went to the kitchen to turn on my coffee pot, I just stared at my Coconut Creme coffee longingly. Actually the green tea was a nice alternative and gave me that warm, wake up feeling. I did have a bit of a headache for the next few hours, thinking it must be related to my lack of caffeine.
Breakfast: Ingredients: 1 cup water, 1 Tbsp flax seed, 1 cup raspberries, 1 banana, 1/4 cup spinach, 1 Tbsp almond butter, 2 tsp lemon.
I had to grind my flaxseed before I put it in the shake. It smelled awful and I was worried. But it was great in the shake. I love bananas and raspberries so this really worked for me.
Lunch: Ingredients: 4 celery stalks, 1 whole cucumber, 1 cup of kale, ½ green apple, ½ lime, coconut oil, almond milk, 1 cup pineapple
I took one sip and had flashbacks of drinking the horrible solution before my colonoscopy! I was overwhelmed by the celery taste and wondered if I could cut the amount back. It was a lot of bulk to drink and had a thick, chunky consistency even though I continued to blend it endlessly. I threw it back in the blender several times, grabbed a spoon and started eating it. It was too thick to drink–sort of like a wet salad. I didn’t like it at all, but forced myself to get through half of it and then ate the other half later in the day. I didn’t like it any better later, but thought colonoscopy and downed it. Honestly, I am not looking forward to drinking this for 2 more days! This may be a deal breaker!
Snack: I opted for the breakfast shake because the the thought of the lunch shake one more time, nauseated me. I might try freezing the raspberries to make it colder, but it still tasted good and really filled me up.
Dinner: Ingredients: ½ cup mango, 1 cup blueberries, 1 ½ cup coconut water, 1 cup kale, 1 tbsp. lemon, ¼ avocado, ¼ teaspoon cayenne pepper, 1 Tbsp Flax Seeds
I’m afraid of the cayenne pepper so forgive me Dr. Oz, but I am going to leave it out. There are some things I cannot do like Cayenne Pepper. This is why I will never be a Survivor contestant. I’ll taste my husband’s first. He loves Cayenne Pepper and puts it on everything. If it is awful, I will completely leave it out. OK he tasted it and said it had a little fire. He liked it so I won’t. I made mine sans le Cayenne and it was much better.
Night time: Took the recommended bath in Epsom Salt and Lavender oil. Smelled like a spa in the bathroom. It was soothing and relaxing. Nice way to end the day.
For Day 2:
I froze all the fruits to make the shakes colder.
I am going to cut back on the huge cucumber and celery amounts and cut everything into tiny pieces to make the lunch shake drinkable.
Even though one day feels like enough, I am going to keep going. I’ll keep you posted.
So you are at that dinner party and you feel like you are carrying the conversation. As a woman, it’s the most natural thing to be entertaining others through verbal sparring and lively conversation. Your husband comments on how much at ease you were talking to his boss. Honestly, you didn’t think about it as it seemed like the most natural thing to do during the evening. The reason has to do with women having something more than men.
It’s true. The brains of men and women are wired differently. And no where is that more evident than when we talk about talking!
Most women love to talk. Most men think talk is overrated.
From an early age, we know that baby girls make more sounds and gestures than baby boys.
And as they age, girls tend to have bigger vocabularies than boys.
Truth is, women speak an average of 20,000 words a day–Men, 7000. That is a big difference. Researchers at the University of Maryland will tell you why.
They studied children and rats. Interestingly, male rats are more vocal than females. So what accounts for these differences in both humans and rats?
In female humans and male rats, the brain has higher levels of a protein called FOXP2. This protein is linked to verbal communication. The more we have, the more we talk!
So more FOXP2 accounts for our higher number of words. I’m not saying more is better, just that more means more….words that is. You decide about the better and give us women a break! Chatty Cathy is chatty for a reason!
A typical question I get asked is, “Why can’t I just avoid conflict? It makes me uncomfortable. If, for example, my mother is driving me crazy, can’t I just ignore her? Or, if I get too upset talking to my ex over visitation, can’t I just ignore him?” Questions like these can be answered by looking at the consequences of avoidance. Your physical health may be affected.
Obviously, you can choose to ignore conflict and make it through life. People do it all the time. For example, your mother-daughter relationship won’t fall apart if you ignore conflict with her once in a while. But a pattern of ignoring conflict can hurt relationships. Avoiding is not the best choice or a way to grow your relationships. The “I don’t want to rock the boat” attitude may work in the short–term, but not in the long-term.
A number of studies point to physical problems when people choose to avoid conflict. One study noted that while people feel better avoiding at the time of the conflict, they don’t feel better the next day. In the study, physical symptoms and negative well-being were higher the day after the conflict in conflict avoiders than in people who confronted problems. In other words, the impact showed up after the fact.
In another study, researchers at the University of Michigan looked at conflict as it relates to longevity of life. They concluded that people who deal with conflict live longer. Specifically, they observed that when both partners in a couple relationship felt unfairly attacked and suppressed their anger at the other, they died earlier than couples who communicated their anger. In fact, having a good fight with your partner may keep your marriage alive. Keep in mind that out of control fighting is not recommended! That type of fighting ruins a relationship.
There is an exception, a time when avoiding conflict might be best. This involves confronting someone who can physically hurt you. When someone is so angry and cannot calm down, and you are at risk for a physical altercation or explosion, a time-out or break is recommended. You can’t deal with conflict, nor should you, when someone is physically threatening or unable to get control of his or her emotions. At those times, the parties involved need to wait until they are able to calm down and until it is safe to confront.
Birditt, K.S. (Oct 2010). Marital conflict behaviors and implications for divorce over 16 years. Journal of Marriage and Family. 72 (5), pp. 1188-1204
Marital Pair Anger Coping Types May Act as an Entity to Affect Mortality: Preliminary Findings from a Prospective Study (Tecumseh, Michigan, 1971-88). Ernest Harburg, Niko Kaciroti, Lillian Gleiberman, M. Anthony Schork and Mara Julius. Journal of Family Communication. Volume 8 (2008). doi: 10.1080 / 15267430701392172.
This week, a New York State judged overturned Bloomberg’s controversial ban on the consumption of large sugary drinks. Correction, Bloomberg calls it a “portion control measure”, not a ban. The ban was to go into effect on Tuesday of this week and and would have limited consumers of sugary beverages to less than 16 ounces.
Listen, I am glad Bloomberg’s is concerned about the childhood obesity problem. But his approach is wrong on so many levels. Here is a link to his remarks.
1) Arbitrary and capricious. Bloomberg is right when he observes that when people are presented with a big drink, they drink more. The same is true of food –the presence of never ending chips at Mexican restaurants, the all you can eat bread sticks at Olive Garden, how about the gallon of ice cream, or the dozen donuts that might cause you to overeat, etc. Are we now going to limit portions of food as well? And the proposed ban did not include diet soda, coffee drinks, milk or milkshakes, fruit and vegetable juices or alcoholic beverages. Singling out one item is arbitrary and capacious-the reason the ban was overturned.
2) Promote healthy eating but don’t send the Twinkie Police. I do see a role for government when it comes to overseeing programs it pays for, promoting healthy eating and exercise. We should know what is in our food and be given education about food. But come on, sending the Twinkie Police to my house…go fight real crime!
3) Deprivation as a food strategy doesn’t work. Even if we could be successful in getting carrot sticks in all school vending machines, this doesn’t mean kids will eat them. I’m not opposed to the idea, but think that the more you make a big deal about deprivation, the more people want it. When we are told we can’t have something, we want it all the more. Before the ban was overturned, I wouldn’t be surprised if people were stockpiling 2 liter bottles of soda!
4) Look at WHY we eat. Most of us overeat and grab the unhealthy choice because we are tired, bored, happy, sad, or feeling any number of emotions. We eat to calm stress, to deal with rejection, to celebrate the job, etc. Getting at why we eat is part of the battle too. When food works to calm us down or soothe us and we don’t have other ways to do those things, we probably aren’t going to make better choices. More education doesn’t fix emotional issues.
5) Obesity is a complicated fix. There are multiple contributors to this problem. Regulating sodas isn’t going to fix it. It’s going to take Hillary Clinton’s village again…We need the food industry to cooperate, schools to do better, parents to take responsibility, science to contribute to a better understanding of why some people struggle more than others, etc. There are so many pieces to this puzzle. Government can educate us and keep promote healthy habits, but we have to examine our own lives and decide what to do and what kind of help we need. Some people need support to lose weight, not a ban of sodas; others need medical intervention, exercise programs, approaches for stress reduction, access to better foods, playgrounds that are safe, bike paths in their communities, etc.
Bottom Line: Give us the tools to make informed decisions, but don’t make them for us.
So mayor, keep informing us, print the calories and keep the food regulators honest, but don’t overstep your reach.