[email protected]

In a message dated 10/18/2002 12:38:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
> REALLY! :-)
>
> Yes, I mean healthy in the sense that their bodies are working at
> their *optimum* level. I'd say easily less than 1% of people I know
> or have met or seen are *healthy*. <<<


"Optimum". As in optimum schoolwork? Whose definition?

I know I'm 45-50 lbs overwieght. I *could* eat better. Mostly I eat anything
that doesn't eat me first (except for peas and sweet potatoes and eggplant).
I "exercise" by living my life. It's a busy life. I occasionally walk. I've
tried running (yech!). I have a pool---but the boys are in it way more than I
am.

But could I get up: "at 5:00 in the morning, milk three cows,
carry the pails of milk back to the house, churn the cream into
butter, split the firewood, walk 6 miles to town to get the supplies
you need <<<

That actually sounds like an EASY day! I've done more on a Tuesday! <g>

>>to sew all the dresses for your family for the next year?"

In one day??? <G> I have all boys! <G>

Your great-grandma may have HAD to do that! I don't HAVE to, but if I must, I
could! I got up every morning at 5:30 and worked a conference ALL DAY until I
collapsed after midnight, hardly eating---for FIVE days straight. I'm still
standing---and obviously healthy ENOUGH for what I DO. And I don't do that
every day, but I would if I had to. And THAT would MAKE me healthier, I
suppose.


>
> The health club I used to go to did Body Age testing, where they
> tested your body fat, evaluated your diet, put you on a treadmill and
> ramped it up until you fell apart, tested your VO2Max (oxygen use),
> etc. and then they told you what your actual bodily age was - as
> opposed to the number of years you've lived on the planet.
>


Sounds like SCHOOL!
I don't have much time for what other folks THINK I must do or be. REALLY no
time for it. Who decides what my chronological vs bodily age is anyway? I
know people who could live on and on and on who look pretty out of shape.
Others have dropped dead running and eating organic. Do you REALLY hold with
"body age"? What if you die tomorrow? Will it tell you THAT? In advance?

>>>Surprisingly, even most people who were tested there (people who had
bothered to go to a health club and be active in the first place) had
a bodily age *above* their chronological age. Often well above.<<<

But that's not REAL life. It's a simulated, run 'em into the ground
experiment. REAL life is chasing Jalen around for four days! (right, Ren?)
>
> I'd say healthy means that if someone asked you to climb a mountain
> tomorrow, you could do it.


I could do that. Might be slow, but if my son's life depended on it? YOU
BETCHA!!!

>>You could walk 20 miles if you needed to.

Uh huh. I'd get a good pair of shoes and some blister bandaids.
>
> Healthy means being able to do anything a body your age should be
> able to do.


I can do that. But I don't "DO" pretend stuff. I'll do real life things. And
do them well.

>>It means not getting every cold that comes along.

I'm hardly EVER sick. I've missed two days of work IN MY LIFE from illness.
My 14 year old NEVER was absent from school with illness (other than chicken
pox)---8 years!

It > means getting up every morning and feeling vital and alive.

I do that too. Bright, sunny, and cheer-y! Can anyone vouch for me? <G>

I heard a > woman, a healthy-looking woman, at the gym yesterday telling her
> friend that every morning she had to have two cups of caffeine and
> three ibuprofin or the stress she's under gives her a monster
> headache. *every day*.


Maybe she shouldn't spend so much time in the GYM! <G>

That's not healthy. Out of a friend's 6 > siblings (all in their 30's or early
> 40's), one has had a heart
> attack, two already have diabetes, all are out of shape and
> overweight. That's not healthy. But they're very typical Americans.


Of me and MY sibling. We're both going strong in our 40's. No illnesses. No
broken bones. I'm a diet caffeine-free coke junkie---that's what I lived on
through the conference. I was tired, but NEVER unavailable. And I think I
smiled most of the time! <G>

> If Americans overall were healthy, the diet
> industry wouldn't be a multi-billion dollar industry, there wouldn't
> be an entire 50-foot-long aisle in the supermarket filled with
> antacids, cold remedies, aspirin, ibuprofen, acetominophen, etc.


How about let's think about unhappy, unfulfilled people with controlling
parents who thought they were never good enough and didn't accept them for
who they are???? Who need feel-good drugs to ummmm....feel good?

How 'bout being told they NEED these things and not being able to make
decisions for themselves?

>
>
> I'd guess that my definition of healthy is maybe more rigorous than
> what many people consider healthy. I'm not talking about just "not
> sick" though, but optimum health. So yes, almost no-one.


Optimum is what you make of it. Unschooling is optimum for us---and that
includes out health as well. Where we are right now is "optimum". We are
quite healthy. I think genetics plays a HUGE role. My husband and I are
extremely healthy. Our boys are too. I can do anything I want to do. If I
needed to run a marathon, I could. I might take a while to finish <G>, but
I'd get there!

Maybe I hang around amazing people who are rarely sick, who have remarkable
lives (many of you met them this weekend). Maybe they're doing things they
love, so they're not stressed and miserable. Maybe there are different
definitions of optimum health. I don't know the folks you're talking
about---and I don't want to. How many do you know?


Kelly


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

<< >>>Surprisingly, even most people who were tested there (people who had
bothered to go to a health club and be active in the first place) had
a bodily age *above* their chronological age. Often well above.<<<

<<But that's not REAL life. It's a simulated, run 'em into the ground
experiment. >>

Moreover, it was a "test" designed to convince people they needed LOTS of
expensive spa/coach/dietary supplements or whatever all that "health club"
was selling. Imagine the electrical bills and the cost of liability
insurance and ever-replacing new exercise equipment. They have something to
sell, and they can sell it better to people who are afraid, so they make
people afraid.

<<It > means getting up every morning and feeling vital and alive.

<<I do that too. Bright, sunny, and cheer-y! Can anyone vouch for me? <G>>>

I can!!

I met Kelly on an extended stress-fest weekend, and she was bright, quick,
patient, efficient, and happy. Would she be healthier if she woke up
feeling vital and alive, ready to go to the health club and build up her
stamina in case she needs to climb a mountain?

And by the way, "climbing a mountain" covers a range of levels of "climbing"
and "mountain." There's a foot trail up the front of the Sandia Mountains.
That's a mile vertical increase in elevation. I don't know how many miles
the trail is long. Five or seven maybe? I really don't know. People don't
need ropes or equipment. They hike. That is not considered mountain
climbing. It's hiking.

Health doesn't create knowledge or interest in mountain climbing, which has
much to do with equipment not even available until the past few years.

http://www.laluztrail.com/
(I see those mountains out my library window)

http://internet.cybermesa.com/~swede/Lodge66/Trails/Veredas/laluz.html

http://www.flash.net/~drcoles/285/2000ph_ll.html


I don't hike the La Luz trail, but have lots of friends who have and who do.

It's a mountain, for sure, but it's not "mountain climbing."

Sandra

the_clevengers

--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., kbcdlovejo@a... wrote:
> "Optimum". As in optimum schoolwork? Whose definition?

The person's, who else's would matter? I would doubt that most people
would describe themselves as being optimally healthy.


> I know I'm 45-50 lbs overwieght. I *could* eat better. Mostly I eat
anything
> that doesn't eat me first...<snip>


Like I said, I wasn't talking in specifics, but in generalities. If
you believe you're in optimum health or don't, but are comfortable
with what you feel like, then good for you.

> Sounds like SCHOOL!
> I don't have much time for what other folks THINK I must do or be.
REALLY no
> time for it.

I think you're missing my point, which is not that arbitrary other
people should decide who is healthy and who is not, but that in *this
one example*, people who were *already* attending a gym (and, BTW,
the gym was free to all of us, because our employer paid for it, so
the gym wasn't trying to sell us any new services, they were only
trying to help people see where they could improve their health and
do so), were finding out that their health could be improved. These
were people who volunteered for this, they certainly weren't forced
into it by some arbitrary health police :-)

>Who decides what my chronological vs bodily age is anyway? I
> know people who could live on and on and on who look pretty out of
shape.

Yeah, and George Burns smoked and lived to 100, so smoking doesn't
really cause any health problems either. Maybe I should go light up
again. <vbg>
Whether or not *some* healthy people live longer or don't is
beside the point. Health *for me* is not just about how long I'll
live, but about the quality of life I have right now. If I can do
anything I set my mind to doing, and am not restricted by my body, I
feel great. And if in the meantime, I can spend more years enjoying
this planet and my family, that's great too.

> But that's not REAL life. It's a simulated, run 'em into the ground
> experiment. REAL life is chasing Jalen around for four days!
(right, Ren?)


Right, but measurable quantities, like VO2Max, whether you believe in
them or not, will determine how long you can chase your kids around
before dropping to the ground. Whether you ever want to get it
measured or not, your body (as is everyone's) is bound by whatever
level you can process oxygen at, process glycogen from your cells to
feed your muscles, etc. We *are* biological, physical machines at the
most basic level. As someone who has an interest in this sort of
thing, and as a sort of engineering geek type person, it's
interesting to me that there are measurable things (like Vo2Max) that
I can improve on, that actually make a difference in how I feel, or
how my body will perform. As with everything else in unschooling, I
don't expect my interests to be your interests, or anyone else's. If
it's not interesting to you, you obviously wouldn't sign up to do it.

> > Healthy means being able to do anything a body your age should be
> > able to do.
>
>
> I can do that. But I don't "DO" pretend stuff. I'll do real life
things. And
> do them well.


I'm not sure what pretend stuff is. Mountains are real, running is
real, swimming is real. For people who enjoy those things, they bring
great fulfillment. For people who don't, they don't. That doesn't
make them any less or any more real.


> I heard a > woman, a healthy-looking woman, at the gym yesterday
telling her
> > friend that every morning she had to have two cups of caffeine
and
> > three ibuprofin or the stress she's under gives her a monster
> > headache. *every day*.
>
>
> Maybe she shouldn't spend so much time in the GYM! <G>

It was her first day. She wanted to try something different, other
than the ibuprofen routine.

> How about let's think about unhappy, unfulfilled people with
controlling
> parents who thought they were never good enough and didn't accept
them for
> who they are???? Who need feel-good drugs to ummmm....feel good?

Yep, there's a lot of those out there too. The mental drug industry
is just as big, and mental health is a huge component of physical
health.


> How 'bout being told they NEED these things and not being able to
make
> decisions for themselves?


Not sure exactly what you're talking about here. No-one is saying
that anyone else *needs* to be anything.


> Optimum is what you make of it. Unschooling is optimum for us---and
that
> includes out health as well.


I agree. Unschooling is, and always has been, the way we want to live
our lives. It gives our kids the time to just exist, be happy, play,
run around. I'm sure it helps their mental, emotional, and physical
health as well, on many levels. Which, of course, is only one reason
we've walked this path of unschooling.


Where we are right now is "optimum". We are
> quite healthy. I think genetics plays a HUGE role. My husband and I
are
> extremely healthy.

That's great. My husband's father died at age 42 of a heart attack
(when my DH was 7), and his brother had a heart attack at 31, so he
doesn't have the best genetics going for him. Me, I'm really grateful
he gets out there and runs, bikes, plays raquetball, or whatever
keeps him fit and his heart working *optimally*, I'm glad he eats my
vegetarian chili instead of a big ol' steak and potato with lots of
butter dinner, because I don't want our kids to miss him as much as
he misses his dad. Even if he has some congenital heart problem and
his diet and lifestyle choices prolong his life 10 years, or 20,
myself and his children will get that many more years to be with him.

> Maybe I hang around amazing people who are rarely sick, who have
remarkable
> lives (many of you met them this weekend). Maybe they're doing
things they
> love, so they're not stressed and miserable.

Sounds exactly like the people I hang around. Spent yesterday with 19
homeschooling (mostly unschooling) kids and their folks, all of whom
I adore. Fun!

> Maybe there are different
> definitions of optimum health. I don't know the folks you're
talking
> about---and I don't want to. How many do you know?

It's not who I know, and who I choose to hang around with. I choose
to hang around with other vibrant, alive, funny, happy, energetic
people. My assertion about "most" people being unhealthy had nothing
to do with the people I hang with on a daily basis. Indeed, I
probably live in one of the healthiest sections of one of the
healthiest cities in America. I've got 5 organic groceries within
biking distance of my house, and miles of biking and running and
hiking trails surrounding us. But that doesn't mean that all the rest
of America is healthy. I still stand by my assertion that *most*
people in our country are unhealthy. Like I said, if you walk into a
shopping mall or some other random place in the middle of the U.S.
somewhere, what you don't see is a whole bunch of healthy, fulfilled,
happy people bouncing around. What you see is stressed, pallid,
unhealthy people. Living in such a health-filled place, perhaps it's
even more of a contrast when I go somewhere else, who knows. And
really, it doesn't matter to me if anyone else cares what my
definition of healthy is. Like I've said, it's what I think of when
our family makes food choices, or activity choices. We like to be
healthy, we like our bodies to work in healthy ways, so we make
healthy choices. And we're happy. 'Nuff said.

Blue Skies,

-Robin-