• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
sarahbell

Fitness push by council

Recommended Posts

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/105012/off-with-the-heels-on-with-the-trainers



They also discovered what - and what not - to wear and Lauren added: "When we played badminton, some of them had heels on or flip-flops so they couldn't take part. But they all swapped shoes so everyone could have a go."

The women also had a private swimming lesson, to address concerns about being seen by men, and a cycling lesson in Alexandra Park with Transport for Greater Manchester.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, sarahbell said:

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/105012/off-with-the-heels-on-with-the-trainers



They also discovered what - and what not - to wear and Lauren added: "When we played badminton, some of them had heels on or flip-flops so they couldn't take part. But they all swapped shoes so everyone could have a go."

The women also had a private swimming lesson, to address concerns about being seen by men, and a cycling lesson in Alexandra Park with Transport for Greater Manchester.

From the article, including spelling mistake:

"...may of whom speak little or no English."

ffs how much is this costing the tax payer. When do we/us THE FUCKING TAXPAYERS stop paying for all of this?  

Apols.  Angry. I want to go away and live in a cave. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, One percent said:

From the article, including spelling mistake:

"...may of whom speak little or no English."

ffs how much is this costing the tax payer. When do we/us THE FUCKING TAXPAYERS stop paying for all of this?  

Apols.  Angry. I want to go away and live in a cave. 

I'm sure they will grow to be productive, contributing, net tax paying members of society with some free (to them...  paid for by some other mug) badminton lessons.

Don't get me started on trying to go swimming as a working male in my region... so many special classes and women only sessions in the pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a council run sports centre near to where I work. 

Now for a pass, you have to pay around £12 for just one day!!

I paid that once and once only. I now just stroll in and no-one questions it. The place is always empty as well, no wonder at £12 a pop. 

Make it cheaper to use and maybe people might actually fucking use it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Thombleached said:

There's a council run sports centre near to where I work. 

Now for a pass, you have to pay around £12 for just one day!!

I paid that once and once only. I now just stroll in and no-one questions it. The place is always empty as well, no wonder at £12 a pop. 

Make it cheaper to use and maybe people might actually fucking use it. 

My local council one is £20pm 9-4 or £30pm 6am-10pm. Includes all classes and access to pool, racquet courts and gym. 

It's pretty good value for money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Generation Game said:

My local council one is £20pm 9-4 or £30pm 6am-10pm. Includes all classes and access to pool, racquet courts and gym. 

It's pretty good value for money. 

Annual passes round here are a few 100, GF has one as its cheaper for the 2 classes a week she attends over paying £4 a pop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Northern Welsh Midlander said:

 

Don't get me started on trying to go swimming as a working male in my region... so many special classes and women only sessions in the pool.

Yeah same round my way.  I'd quite like to go for the odd swim but available times are shit and I'm not keen on paying £5 a pop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate this sort of thing.

It makes everyone think:

  • Physically active = going to gym, swimming, organised sports, having a personal trainer -- to tell you what to do because it is terribly difficult stuff.

It isn't complicated.  Just be more active.  Everyone knows what active means.  No need to speak to a trainer, have a 10 week introduction to being active, having special sessions because it is all complex and someone might see you or something.

Just walk.  Cycle to work.  Do some gardening.  Whatever.

In my paranoid state I sometimes wonder if they're trying to monetise everything -- you must go to the gym to be physically active, so pay for staff (employment), VAT, etc.  Oh, and even better, drive to the gym (VAT and tax on the fuel).  See, they could just jog to the gym and then immediately jog home -- but where's the government income if you do that?

[I don't really have a problem with Gyms.  It works out for some people.  But for too many people I know 'joining the gym' is a proxy for actually doing the exercise.  As though it is the thought (and the willingness to pay the monthly fees) that counts, not so much the actually working out.  Oh, they'll go twice a week, but not this week as I usually go on a Tuesday but I've got a friend over from Spain this week (or whatever), but that's not enough -- much better to just be more active in life.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dgul said:

I hate this sort of thing.

 

In my paranoid state I sometimes wonder if they're trying to monetise everything -- you must go to the gym to be physically active, so pay for staff (employment), VAT, etc.  Oh, and even better, drive to the gym (VAT and tax on the fuel).  See, they could just jog to the gym and then immediately jog home -- but where's the government income if you do that?

 

brave new world.

expensive equipment for recreation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dgul said:

I hate this sort of thing.

It makes everyone think:

  • Physically active = going to gym, swimming, organised sports, having a personal trainer -- to tell you what to do because it is terribly difficult stuff.

It isn't complicated.  Just be more active.  Everyone knows what active means.  No need to speak to a trainer, have a 10 week introduction to being active, having special sessions because it is all complex and someone might see you or something.

Just walk.  Cycle to work.  Do some gardening.  Whatever.

In my paranoid state I sometimes wonder if they're trying to monetise everything -- you must go to the gym to be physically active, so pay for staff (employment), VAT, etc.  Oh, and even better, drive to the gym (VAT and tax on the fuel).  See, they could just jog to the gym and then immediately jog home -- but where's the government income if you do that?

[I don't really have a problem with Gyms.  It works out for some people.  But for too many people I know 'joining the gym' is a proxy for actually doing the exercise.  As though it is the thought (and the willingness to pay the monthly fees) that counts, not so much the actually working out.  Oh, they'll go twice a week, but not this week as I usually go on a Tuesday but I've got a friend over from Spain this week (or whatever), but that's not enough -- much better to just be more active in life.]

Cant outrun a fork. Best way to lose weight is stop eating so much.

Walking is best exercise.

15 hours ago, sarahbell said:

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/105012/off-with-the-heels-on-with-the-trainers



They also discovered what - and what not - to wear and Lauren added: "When we played badminton, some of them had heels on or flip-flops so they couldn't take part. But they all swapped shoes so everyone could have a go."

The women also had a private swimming lesson, to address concerns about being seen by men, and a cycling lesson in Alexandra Park with Transport for Greater Manchester.

Flipflop, high heels.. Youd think that Oldham was full migrants whod just come over from the aeseend of niwhere and signed on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, spygirl said:

Cant outrun a fork. Best way to lose weight is stop eating so much.

Walking is best exercise.

Flipflop, high heels.. Youd think that Oldham was full migrants whod just come over from the aeseend of niwhere and signed on.

Would disagree in terms of weight control. Only recently I've started to walk a fair distance each day - work and back. I've never had some hunger in any other activity. I'm talking longish walls here - 45 mins+

I have one pal who literally walks  everywhere he can. He's the fattest of us all by a mile. 

I think it is very good for you in general. But in terms of weight? No chance imo. 

I can swim, run or box for an hour and my hunger is literally 10% if what it would be if I walked for the same time.

I could just be unique - but all my pals say similar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2017814_134127.jpg

" THE presentation of certificates marked the completion of Richmond Women's Project with co-ordinator Lauren Whaley pictured back centre "

....just in case you couldn't spot which one of them was the 'project co-ordinator'.

Edited by JoeDavola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

2017814_134127.jpg

That pic was the first thing I looked at when I read that the swimming sessions were private to cater to some of the womens' worries about being seen by men. I presume the caucasian in the middle back row is the organiser. However, I note that 25 participated but only 16 are photographed, so the group could have been more multicultural to reflect modern Britain better.

Still, nice to see they are all holding certificates. What was it, kindergarten ?

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

2017814_134127.jpg

" THE presentation of certificates marked the completion of Richmond Women's Project with co-ordinator Lauren Whaley pictured back centre "

....just in case you couldn't spot which one of them was the 'project co-ordinator'.

I've already said this, but I'm sick of paying for this stuff.  Meanwhile, kids are leaving university with 50K debt.  Fucking madness, just madness.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hopeful said:

That pic was the first thing I looked at when I read that the swimming sessions were private to cater to some women';s worries about being seen by men. I presume the caucasian in the middle back row is the organiser. However, I note that 25 participated but only 16 are photographed, so the group could have been more multicultural to reflect modern Britain better.

Still, nice to see they are all holding certificates. What was it, kindergarten ?

If you look closely the organizer is also wearing some sort of fancy garb over her standard clothing to 'fit in'.

Just now, One percent said:

I've already said this, but I'm sick of paying for this stuff.  Meanwhile, kids are leaving university with 50K debt.  Fucking madness, just madness.  

Cultural and national suicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, spygirl said:

Cant outrun a fork. Best way to lose weight is stop eating so much.

Walking is best exercise.

Flipflop, high heels.. Youd think that Oldham was full migrants whod just come over from the aeseend of niwhere and signed on.

Hmm.  Another issue I have.  The current fashion for equating being overweight with the requirement for exercise.  This fashion groupthink then suggests the reciprocal -- being notfat suggests that you're doing fine activity wise.

---------------

I've decided (without any evidence whatsoever) that the propensity for fatness can be categorised into 3 groups.

  • People who are skinny.  These people have a resistance to putting down fat reserves.
  • People who are normal.  These people will put down fat reserves when there is an overabundance of fat
  • People who are fat.  These people have a propensity to putting down fat and will do so whenever possible.

Consequences...  Well, I suppose there is this moral thing that goes on by the first first and sort-of second groups about how fatties are awful and should control themselves... just like what I do.

In the meantime, the only group with an incentive for exercise is the third group.  Oh, there are a % of groups 1 and 2 that are activity freaks (for want of a better expression) that do the exercise, but in the main they're under-activity folk that feel authorised to moralise by virtue of being notfat.
Now, the fancy bit is that these groups are only partially set by genetics* -- that defines when the fatness thing kicks in.  But beyond that, the group you're in keeps sliding downwards (in the progression I've used above) as you age.  I think it is to do with liver function with a diet high in sugar, but could be lots of things (but almost certainly to do with diet, rather than activity levels)**.  

So the 'normal weight' type of person is fine until their 30s, at which point they suddenly notice that they've become fat (despite their 'best efforts' before of being sufficiently active -- which they weren't).  And the skinny person is the same, only they notice that they've become fat at about 50.

But, they weren't being sufficiently active before -- they just thought they were by virtue of being notfat.  So it isn't easy for them to become sufficiently active, as they weren't sufficiently active before.

Finally, you also have this 'people are fat because they're inactive' thing.  I've a feeling it is the other way around -- people are inactive because they're fat.   Being fat mucks about with your energy metabolism and makes it more difficult to be highly active.  So once you've got fat (at whatever age) it will become relatively more difficult to increase your activity/exercise to counter it.  

So -- moral of the story / TLDR... Just be active.  It is quite important -- but it is important for everyone, not just for fatties.  If you're skinny or normal weight you're very likely to be insufficiently active even though you're notfat.  If you wait until you get fat then you'll find it difficult to be sufficiently active.  

[* or something like that.  Perhaps epigenetics.  I do wonder why this is necessary.  Sometimes I think that it is about the genetic ancestors' access to food -- if they're from an area prone to famine then there might be a need for fat storage.  Or perhaps environment -- cold and wet needs the insulation.  Or perhaps it is random -- any given mini-tribe needs the ability to bounce back in the event of famine, so why not have a % of the population that'll have a physiological need to put down fat so that they can be the ones to survive the famine, while the other 2/3rds of the population don't have this and thus eat a little bit less of the resource-limited foodstuffs.  Dunno.]

[** Great.  I've managed to get this far into the post only to agree with the post I'm responding to, even though I've actually started by saying that the point of their post is 'something I have an issue with'!]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dgul said:

I hate this sort of thing.

It makes everyone think:

  • Physically active = going to gym, swimming, organised sports, having a personal trainer -- to tell you what to do because it is terribly difficult stuff.

It isn't complicated.  Just be more active.  Everyone knows what active means.  No need to speak to a trainer, have a 10 week introduction to being active, having special sessions because it is all complex and someone might see you or something.

Urgh, don't get me started on this shit.

I'm a member of a gym at home as well as using the freebie at work. Every time I go in there there's someone being schooled in the art of how to use a CV machine. Really? Someone's paying out £££s to tell them how to use a fucking machine??

I get the personal trainer thing for free weights and general mat exercise, but I reguarly see people spending half an hour on a treadmil/X-trainer whilst a 'personal trainer' is chatting to them while they meander into a workout which doesn't even break a sweat (and often completly pointless as they drink their sugar rich energy drink which contains far more calories than they're burning off)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, ccc said:

Would disagree in terms of weight control. Only recently I've started to walk a fair distance each day - work and back. I've never had some hunger in any other activity. I'm talking longish walls here - 45 mins+

I have one pal who literally walks  everywhere he can. He's the fattest of us all by a mile. 

I think it is very good for you in general. But in terms of weight? No chance imo. 

I can swim, run or box for an hour and my hunger is literally 10% if what it would be if I walked for the same time.

I could just be unique - but all my pals say similar. 

I lost loads by walking two hours every evening, fast walking (natural fast walker and pushing it) with a lot of hills.

I was eating and drinking more because of the exercise but the net effect was that it came off at a rate of knots.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

I lost loads by walking two hours every evening, fast walking (natural fast walker and pushing it) with a lot of hills.

I was eating and drinking more because of the exercise but the net effect was that it came off at a rate of knots.  

This is it.

Going for a stroll is ineffective. You have to burn energy during walking as you do with any exercise. It takes effort to burn a lot of calories. Burning energy, in this case calories, generates heat, and so you notice if you are 'exercising' by getting hot.

It just takes more effort with walking, on the flat you have to speed walk, on hills you can't stop half way up.

I think the recommendation was always 20 minutes brisk walking a day. Few people know what brisk means.

If just 'walking around' was effective exercise there would be fewer fat shop retail workers. These people will rightly complain they are tired at the end of a shift, but they haven't been exercising; shuffling around all day is just more tiring than a 30 minute run.

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

This is it.

Going for a stroll is ineffective. You have to burn energy during walking as you do with any exercise. It takes effort to burn a lot of calories. Burning energy, in this case calories, generates heat, and so you notice if you are 'exercising' by getting hot.

It just takes more effort with walking, on the flat you have to speed walk, on hills you can't stop half way up.

I think the recommendation was always 20 minutes brisk walking a day. Few people know what brisk means.

If just 'walking around' was effective exercise there would be fewer fat shop retail workers. These people will rightly complain they are tired at the end of a shift, but they haven't been exercising; shuffling around all day is just more tiring than a 30 minute run.

One of the most knackering bits of "non-exercise" I've done was a National Trust walk identifying coastal wildflowers.  The distance itself was trivial, two or three miles, but three quarters of those on it were in their 70s or 80s.  Great that they're getting out and all that but I found the walking incredibly hard because it was walking a few steps at an artificially slow pace and then stopping whilst the queue negotiated a stile or somesuch.  It wasn't irritating me, I enjoyed the experience and learning about flowers, but I could not believe how tired my legs were afterwards from several hours of very unnatural slow walking / stopping.   It felt like I'd just done about fifteen miles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

One of the most knackering bits of "non-exercise" I've done was a National Trust walk identifying coastal wildflowers.  The distance itself was trivial, two or three miles, but three quarters of those on it were in their 70s or 80s.  Great that they're getting out and all that but I found the walking incredibly hard because it was walking a few steps at an artificially slow pace and then stopping whilst the queue negotiated a stile or somesuch.  It wasn't irritating me, I enjoyed the experience and learning about flowers, but I could not believe how tired my legs were afterwards from several hours of very unnatural slow walking / stopping.   It felt like I'd just done about fifteen miles.

Don't get me started on the NT and the coast again :Jumping:

(They've just ripped out all the traditional wooden stiles on a coastal path near me and replaced them with small galvanised metal gates, not even wooden gates. This work is on a path that is so narrow and steep in parts that it is totally inaccessible to anyone but the physically fit and able)

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frank Hovis said:

One of the most knackering bits of "non-exercise" I've done was a National Trust walk identifying coastal wildflowers.  The distance itself was trivial, two or three miles, but three quarters of those on it were in their 70s or 80s.  Great that they're getting out and all that but I found the walking incredibly hard because it was walking a few steps at an artificially slow pace and then stopping whilst the queue negotiated a stile or somesuch.  It wasn't irritating me, I enjoyed the experience and learning about flowers, but I could not believe how tired my legs were afterwards from several hours of very unnatural slow walking / stopping.   It felt like I'd just done about fifteen miles.

It is interesting to see how efficient your natural cadence can be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Frank Hovis said:

I lost loads by walking two hours every evening, fast walking (natural fast walker and pushing it) with a lot of hills.

I was eating and drinking more because of the exercise but the net effect was that it came off at a rate of knots.  

Well that sounds like fairly intensive walking so I can see how that might be different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Frank Hovis said:

One of the most knackering bits of "non-exercise" I've done was a National Trust walk identifying coastal wildflowers.  The distance itself was trivial, two or three miles, but three quarters of those on it were in their 70s or 80s.  Great that they're getting out and all that but I found the walking incredibly hard because it was walking a few steps at an artificially slow pace and then stopping whilst the queue negotiated a stile or somesuch.  It wasn't irritating me, I enjoyed the experience and learning about flowers, but I could not believe how tired my legs were afterwards from several hours of very unnatural slow walking / stopping.   It felt like I'd just done about fifteen miles.

It is the standing around not the walking.

That is why visits to Art Galleries and Museums are so tiring

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.