Re: Re: focus on the deficit ...

[Guest guest]

The " eat more / eat less " thing seems contradictory at first glance,

but either way your weight loss stalls because you're NOT creating a

calorie deficit. In one case it's because you're eating too many

calories, and in the other case it's because you're not burning enough

- as in, your metabolism has rolled over and died.

Either way, you have to get the deficit happening again in order to

burn body fat. You can make your metabolism faster with more fuel and

more activity, or you can make your calorie intake smaller with less

food, but you have to widen and maintain the deficit in order to see

changes.

The more weight you have to lose and the higher your calorie intake,

the more likely you're still consuming too many calories, hence

Hussman's advice. The leaner and more athletic you are, and the harder

you train, the more likely you've cut your calories too low for your

activity level and put the brakes on your metabolism.

I hope that makes some kind of sense. It's a mind-bender for sure, but

if the goal is fat loss, " focus on the deficit " is the correct advice

in either situation.

> Joni,

> I constantly focus on the deficit. The challenge is whether I'm

> cutting too low, although I didnt think that was really possible since

> I'm eating more than 1200 cals/day, I'm only 5'1 " . I thought that

> since figure competitors and bodybuilders do this, why not me? But it

> seems that I am losing lean mass as much as the fat now, so the advice

> I'm getting is to increase calories. I find this to be a scary

> proposition because I don't want to gain fat and get back to where I

> started. I find this whole 'calories in vs out' thing annoying because

> it really isnt that simple.

>

> When I hit a plateau, I get more aggressive and cut back a bit more,

> or increase activity a bit more, or reduce carbs a bit, etc. But this

> just leads to another plateau. Eventually I'll be down to eating

> sawdust if I keep it up!

>

> Anyways, I'm upping my calories lately and we'll have to see how much

> damage I do to my progress. lol

>

>

> > From the Hussman website, something to remember ...

> > " Now, if you've gone for more than about 6 weeks, working out

> > consistently, without any measurable fat loss, you're probably

> asking

> > What's wrong with me?!!! I've seen this problem hundreds of times.

> > Trust me. Nothing is wrong with you. There's only one reason you're

> > not losing fat, and it's that you aren't creating a persistent

> caloric

> > deficit. FOCUS ON THE DEFICIT. "

> > The rest of the article 'Unleash The Secret Weapon' is here:

> > http://www.hussmanfitness.org/html/TSSecretWeapon.html

> >

> >

> >

> > joni

> >

[Guest guest]

Eating more revives your metabolism. If you have a fast metabolism,

your body burns more calories both at rest and during training, and

that metabolic boost is what makes the deficit bigger. It doesn't

necessarily involve increasing your activity or reducing your

calories, it involves convincing your body to burn more.

There are plenty of people training 2 hours a day and living on

lettuce who's body only burns 1000 calories per day. They can either

cut their calories to 800 and add a couple more hours of exercise, or

they can ease up on the calorie restriction and allow their metabolism

to recover to the point that it's burning the 1,500, 1,900 or 2,400

calories that it should have been burning in the first place at that

activity level.

Once your metabolism is back in action, you're able to start losing

again at a higher calorie level.

> , it makes sense to me that a more athletic, active person

> would be burning more calories (ie. more lean mass, harder

> training). But once a plateau is reached, it seems that one would

> have to (a) increase activity to burn more or ( reduce calories to

> get the deficit. I don't have any more time or energy to burn more

> with activity (i.e. I'll be overtraining for 'me'), so it would seem

> I need to cut calories. But I'm being told to eat more....I can't

> get my mind around how 'eating more' produces the deficit. My mind

> won't seem to bend. lol

>

>

>

> >>>>> The " eat more / eat less " thing seems contradictory at first

> glance,

> > but either way your weight loss stalls because you're NOT creating

> a

> > calorie deficit. In one case it's because you're eating too many

> > calories, and in the other case it's because you're not burning

> enough

> > - as in, your metabolism has rolled over and died.

> >

> > Either way, you have to get the deficit happening again in order to

> > burn body fat. You can make your metabolism faster with more fuel

> and

> > more activity, or you can make your calorie intake smaller with

> less

> > food, but you have to widen and maintain the deficit in order to

> see

> > changes.

> >

> > The more weight you have to lose and the higher your calorie

> intake,

> > the more likely you're still consuming too many calories, hence

> > Hussman's advice. The leaner and more athletic you are, and the

> harder

> > you train, the more likely you've cut your calories too low for

> your

> > activity level and put the brakes on your metabolism.

> >

> > I hope that makes some kind of sense. It's a mind-bender for sure,

> but

> > if the goal is fat loss, " focus on the deficit " is the correct

> advice

> > in either situation.

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

reminds me of ph and his Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat.......

At 11:52 AM 6/5/2006, you wrote:

>Here is now I try to look at the " eat more to loose fat " thing....

>

>Imagin you are beseiged. In your 'keep' you have people, some live

>stock, grains and water. You could keep the livestock, feeding and

>watering it, so that you have protein later, but by doing that you end

>up, eventually with a bunch of hogs and no grain or water.

>Alternately you can slaughter the same bunch of hogs now, preserve the

>meat, and have meat, grain and water to sustain your people for a much

>longer period of time.

[Guest guest]

HaHa!

Man I love that musical lol

Re: Re: focus on the deficit ...

reminds me of ph and his Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat.......

At 11:52 AM 6/5/2006, you wrote:

>Here is now I try to look at the " eat more to loose fat " thing....

>

>Imagin you are beseiged. In your 'keep' you have people, some live

>stock, grains and water. You could keep the livestock, feeding and

>watering it, so that you have protein later, but by doing that you end

>up, eventually with a bunch of hogs and no grain or water.

>Alternately you can slaughter the same bunch of hogs now, preserve the

>meat, and have meat, grain and water to sustain your people for a much

>longer period of time.

[Guest guest]

5'6, 126 pounds? Ha! Sorry, but I'm 5'4 and my LEAN BODY MASS is 125 lbs so my

brain can't wrap around that number at least not for me... But, I've always

been 'stocky' and muscular... I used to want to weight 125, just so I could say

I lost 50 pounds, but once I realized that I would have to malnourish my body

and lose 15 pounds of muscle, I changed it to wanting to be 140... I mean yeah I

GUESS I'd like to say I'm 125 pounds, but I feel like I would always have to add

a 'And I lost 15 pounds of muscle to weigh this little, isn't that great!! "

after I say I'm 125... BUT, I know there are plenty of women out there who

weight 158 and have a lean body mass of 103, so 125 or 118 would be a good

weight for them...

My point is, it's all about BF% and body shape, and we shouldn't try to match

each other's WEIGHT because we all are going to look different at the same

weight...

Re: focus on the deficit ...

Hi Barabara, a 'rule of thumb' is usually about 3 lbs for every

inch, so 124 lbs would be the magic number at 5'6 " . The thing is

there are so many variables: bone structure, bodytype, bf%, etc etc,

that it is crazy to compare this way.

I understand where you are coming from, but part of this is having a

vision & goal in mind and wanting to achieve it. I thought I'd be

satisfied at a certain bf% but I'm not. I'm looking to get rid of

the last bit of 'roll' on my tummy, and the cellulite off the back

of my legs. I don't know the magic bf% that will get me there, I

just know how I want to look!

True, scale weight is meaningless, but it still plays tricks with

our minds. When I have a sister who weighs 100 lbs, being 116 lbs

seems too heavy. There is no doubt I am muscular and stocky (my

husband told me last night I should train for a natural

bodybuilding competition because he thinks I could do it). In my

minds eye, I would prefer to be thin and lean, so it is aggravating

that I put on muscle and don't lose scale weight.

I looked at your calorie estimates, and when I plug in numbers for

me (I'm not Jen), Fitday estimates about the same number as the

standard TDEE formula. The BMR for the standard formula & Hussman's

site are the same at about 1300 cals. But the activity factor is

higher for someone following BFL and doing some extras, so total

daily cals is 2240 not 1980 (Hussman's estimate). To get 3500 cal

defecit/wk, Jen should aim for 1700-1750 cals per day, which is

quite a bit higher than 1400. This 300-350 cal difference is the

gap I am experiencing in my calculations too, which is why I think

Jen & I are separated at birth. lol

>>>>>>> Jen, at 5'4 " and 118 pounds how much more fat do you have to

loose?

> I'm 5'6 and only plan on getting down to 140.

>>>>>> I hear people talk about struggling and being dissapointed in

their

> progress, then I hear they are size 6 or 118 pounds and I get

> confused. Maybe it's just because I've always been so fat (I was

106

> pounds in the fifth grade!) so I don't know what a woman 'ought' to

> weigh or what size a woman 'ought' to be. And I know different

body

> types carry weight differently.

>

> I guess at your current place the thing you want to be looking at

is

> bf% entierly. The scale really is meaningless because you are

> OBVIOUSLY not over weight, but if you are not happy with your bf%

you

> have a goal to work on.

>

> I think that Fitday gives too high a daily caloric need figure. I

put

> some stats into the Hussman site, making some assumptions about you

> because I don't remember all of your stats. If you are a 34 year

old

> female with 20%bf at 118 pounds and 5'4 " Hussman says your BMR is

> between 1290 and 1390, and your daily caloric 'burn' if you are

active

> is around 1980. He recommends 1120-1420 calories a day for fat

> burning, but to build lean mass you would want to go a little

higher,

> 1550-1900ish.

>

> So, if your observation is that having lower than 1400 calories a

day

> helps you burn off some fat, then you are probalby correct. You

are

> probably also correct that you might loose some lean mass if you

are

> going too low. Body builders always say that you can't build lean

mass

> while burning fat, and it may be that you are at 'that' stage of

the

> process.

>

> I don't think that cycling calories has to be all that complicated

or

> time consuming to plan. You don't have to add all that many to

make a

> difference, and we already do a bit of cycling with the free day.

>

> Barbara

>

>

> > > > > , it makes sense to me that a more athletic, active

person

> > > > > would be burning more calories (ie. more lean mass, harder

> > > > > training). But once a plateau is reached, it seems that

one

> > > would

> > > > > have to (a) increase activity to burn more or ( reduce

> > > calories to

> > > > > get the deficit. I don't have any more time or energy to

burn

> > > more

> > > > > with activity (i.e. I'll be overtraining for 'me'), so it

> > would

> > > seem

> > > > > I need to cut calories. But I'm being told to eat

more....I

> > > can't

> > > > > get my mind around how 'eating more' produces the

deficit. My

> > > mind

> > > > > won't seem to bend. lol

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > >>>>> The " eat more / eat less " thing seems contradictory

at

> > > first

> > > > > glance,

> > > > > > but either way your weight loss stalls because you're

NOT

> > > creating

> > > > > a

> > > > > > calorie deficit. In one case it's because you're eating

too

> > > many

> > > > > > calories, and in the other case it's because you're not

> > burning

> > > > > enough

> > > > > > - as in, your metabolism has rolled over and died.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Either way, you have to get the deficit happening again

in

> > > order to

> > > > > > burn body fat. You can make your metabolism faster with

more

> > > fuel

> > > > > and

> > > > > > more activity, or you can make your calorie intake

smaller

> > with

> > > > > less

> > > > > > food, but you have to widen and maintain the deficit in

> > order

> > > to

> > > > > see

> > > > > > changes.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The more weight you have to lose and the higher your

calorie

> > > > > intake,

> > > > > > the more likely you're still consuming too many

calories,

> > hence

> > > > > > Hussman's advice. The leaner and more athletic you are,

and

> > the

> > > > > harder

> > > > > > you train, the more likely you've cut your calories too

low

> > for

> > > > > your

> > > > > > activity level and put the brakes on your metabolism.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I hope that makes some kind of sense. It's a mind-bender

for

> > > sure,

> > > > > but

> > > > > > if the goal is fat loss, " focus on the deficit " is the

> > correct

> > > > > advice

> > > > > > in either situation.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

[Guest guest]

Jen -

Are you following a nutrition plan geared to " LOSE THE FAT " or a nutrition

plan geared to " BUILD THE MUSCLE " ?

n

At 11:07 AM 6/6/2006, you wrote:

>Barbara,

>

>I think 5-7 pounds of fat would be all I should lose to stay within

>healthy ranges and not drop below 13%. The problem is, I have been

>weight training for about five years now. Three of that I was

>pretty casual about it, not keeping records, no goals, doing what I

>felt like each workout. Then I got serious about it two years ago.

>Even though I have made tremendous strength gains, I cannot discern

>whether or not I have gained lean mass even though I have been

>keeping track of of my body fat since I got calipers two years ago.

>One week my LBM will be 98 pounds, the next week it's 100, and back

>and forth with no discernable trend. Because of hormonal

>influences, creatine, birth control pills, and water, I tend to

>think the lower readings are more accurate. So that would mean I

>have about 97-98 pounds of muscle.

>

>As far as why I want to lose any more fat...I just cannot see muscle

>definition. I still have flab and I keep thinking if I lose a

>little more fat, maybe I'll see muscle? But then I only have 98

>pounds of LBM. So not much muscle at all. That could also explain

>why I seem to burn fewer calories than others on this board and why

>I gain weight when I average more than 1600 calories per day or so.

>And I am WAY active. I am a stay-at-home mom with an in-home

>daycare and I do decorative painting on the side. Instead of

>watching TV at night like other families, we are playing sports,

>riding bikes, hiking, etc. So I should be burning a lot of

>calories. I see others with my BF% or higher and I see muscle! So

>where is mine???

>

>Take , for example. She is a bit taller than I am, and

>outweighs me by about 20 pounds and we wear about the same clothing

>size. Her body fat % is right around mine. But her muscles are

>popping out all over the place. I hope when I have been training

>for as long as she has I have that kind of definition, but I am not

>real optimistic. *Sigh* There I go comparing myself again. But

>seriously, I would have to gain a lot of muscle to have them pop out

>at my current body fat levels. So my warped thinking says " so lose

>more fat! "

>

>I am definitely at the stage where I cannot build muscle and lose

>fat at the same time. I stopped trying to lose fat for awhile in

>March and April and tried my first bulking phase. I took creatine,

>trained like a madwoman, upped my protein, and still gained nothing

>but fat. I am strong though :-) But my muscle appears to be

>weightless (or darn near). I really hope I am not reinforcing

>your " oughts " with my neuroses. But I truly think my

>dissatisfaction has little to do actually with weight and more about

>my self-image. They don't automatically go away when the weight is

>gone.

>

>So anyway, I have gone about as far as BFL alone can take me--now I

>get to the tweaking and Venuto stuff. But honestly, I am spending

>so much time planning meals, cooking, and exercising, I don't feel I

>have time to do anything more. I have cut out starchy carbs after

>noon. I don't do free day because I have a tendency to binge, but

>high-calorie days happen naturally every 3-4 days when I slip and

>cheat or there's a family get-together involving food. But this

>week I have FINALLY seen some progress, both on the scale, the

>calipers, and the way my clothes are fitting. And I have little

>muscles popping out in my arms :-)

>

>Jen

[Guest guest]

Jen,

Those were a couple of really good, insightful posts. I'm sure that

there are plenty of people in the same situation who can relate. I

was in almost exactly the same predicament when I started my serious

fitness journey about 10 years ago. I was also a waify little

bird-like kid. I'm also really fine-boned with fingers that wrap

waaaay around my wrist. And I also started with 99 pounds of lean

mass.

Back then, I couldn't eat very much without gaining, or see any real

definition even though I was small. I had just gotten my personal

trainer certification but I was completely bugging because I didn't

feel that I looked the part. I can so relate to the frustration, the

confusion about how to approach it, the endless comparisons to

everyone around you.

I wish I had some simple advice about how to accomplish your goals or

change your perception, but I'm just as muddled up and conflicted as

the next person. During that 10 year period, I did manage to gain 20

pounds of lean mass, but that's an average of only 2 pounds per year.

It's literally like watching paint dry. And during that whole time I

was having the " eat more, no, eat less " debate.

You have to eat a fairly shocking amount in order to gain muscle, and

when you're eating that much, you're going to gain several pounds of

fat along with your fractions of pounds of lean mass. Then you have to

diet the fat off while protecting the new lean mass. Then you have to

repeat that sequence over and over again without losing faith or going

completely insane.

You might possibly be onto something with the idea of losing 5-7

pounds of fat and leaving it at that. Just know that if you get there

and find you can't maintain it, all is not lost. You can eat for

muscle for a few weeks or months and then take another shot at seeing

how lean you can comfortably get. I went back and forth like that, and

at first it was totally unintentional. I'd just diet my brains out for

as long as I could stand it, then I would swing back over to the " I'm

an athlete. I need fuel " camp. Then I would gain a few pounds and go,

" GAH! I'm fat! " and I would start leaning out again.

This was before I had any real grasp of deliberate bulking/cutting

cycles. I just thought I was screwing up and making myself crazy. It

turned out ok though, because the end result (after a decade of

bumbling) was that I managed to put on some serious muscle and still

lose about 10 pounds of fat. I also managed to totally wean myself of

fitday, food journals, note cards, calculators, and nutrition

software. You're right, you can't reasonably expect to live that way

forever. At some point (maybe now), you'll already know the nutrient

breakdown of absolutely everything you eat. You'll already know what

your portions should look like. You'll know if you need more calories

and carbs today, or more protein and vegetables. You'll learn to trust

yourself.

Be proud of everything you've accomplished so far, and know that even

though the changes may seem small and slow in coming, they do add up!

>

> As far as why I want to lose any more fat...I just cannot see muscle

> definition. I still have flab and I keep thinking if I lose a

> little more fat, maybe I'll see muscle? But then I only have 98

> pounds of LBM. So not much muscle at all. That could also explain

> why I seem to burn fewer calories than others on this board and why

> I gain weight when I average more than 1600 calories per day or so.

> And I am WAY active. I am a stay-at-home mom with an in-home

> daycare and I do decorative painting on the side. Instead of

> watching TV at night like other families, we are playing sports,

> riding bikes, hiking, etc. So I should be burning a lot of

> calories. I see others with my BF% or higher and I see muscle! So

> where is mine???

>

> Take , for example. She is a bit taller than I am, and

> outweighs me by about 20 pounds and we wear about the same clothing

> size. Her body fat % is right around mine. But her muscles are

> popping out all over the place. I hope when I have been training

> for as long as she has I have that kind of definition, but I am not

> real optimistic. *Sigh* There I go comparing myself again. But

> seriously, I would have to gain a lot of muscle to have them pop out

> at my current body fat levels. So my warped thinking says " so lose

> more fat! "

>

> I am definitely at the stage where I cannot build muscle and lose

> fat at the same time. I stopped trying to lose fat for awhile in

> March and April and tried my first bulking phase. I took creatine,

> trained like a madwoman, upped my protein, and still gained nothing

> but fat. I am strong though :-) But my muscle appears to be

> weightless (or darn near). I really hope I am not reinforcing

> your " oughts " with my neuroses. But I truly think my

> dissatisfaction has little to do actually with weight and more about

> my self-image. They don't automatically go away when the weight is

> gone.

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, I can say that I'm finally happy and confident in my skin. I'm

5'8 " , 144 lbs, 17% body fat, 120 lbs lean mass, eating around 2,300

cals a day and taking free weekends.

When I got serious 10 years ago I was 134 lbs, 26% body fat, 99lbs

lean mass and eating around 1,400-1,500 calories every day.

I'm not stressing about anything or trying to change anything. I'm

sure that I will continue to make gradual improvements over the years,

but I don't have any new numbers in mind, and I quit freaking out

about the cellulite and spider veins a long time ago. All it takes to

fix that is sunless tanner and good lighting. :-)

It also helps to remember that even swimsuit models have cellulite,

stretch marks, acne, large pores, and spider veins. Even fitness

competitors deal with that to some degree. There's a reason you dunk

yourself in ProTan, dehydrate anything that might jiggle or dimple,

and flex and pose to show the most flattering angles. It's all part of

the illusion.

Most people don't have any real grasp of just how much magazine,

television, and movie images are retouched and altered. Here is a good

example. Click on the thumbnails and then mouse over the big pictures.

http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/bikini/index.html

http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/blonde/index.html

When you have a bazillion women trying to live up to those digitally

perfected images, it's no wonder we're all neurotic.

> Cool!

> So ?

> At 5'7in.

> your lean body mass is something like 120 lbs?

> which in turn, keeps your maintenance daily calories above 2400?

>

> Are you happy with the composition now?

>

> :0)

>

[Guest guest]

Am I a terrible person that those pics made me feel much better about myself?

lol..thanks for helping us keep it all inperspective . How do you measure

your bodyfat ? I'm wondering how close my Tanita athlete mode scale is.

Skwigg wrote: Yes, I can say that I'm finally happy

and confident in my skin. I'm

5'8 " , 144 lbs, 17% body fat, 120 lbs lean mass, eating around 2,300

cals a day and taking free weekends.

When I got serious 10 years ago I was 134 lbs, 26% body fat, 99lbs

lean mass and eating around 1,400-1,500 calories every day.

I'm not stressing about anything or trying to change anything. I'm

sure that I will continue to make gradual improvements over the years,

but I don't have any new numbers in mind, and I quit freaking out

about the cellulite and spider veins a long time ago. All it takes to

fix that is sunless tanner and good lighting. :-)

It also helps to remember that even swimsuit models have cellulite,

stretch marks, acne, large pores, and spider veins. Even fitness

competitors deal with that to some degree. There's a reason you dunk

yourself in ProTan, dehydrate anything that might jiggle or dimple,

and flex and pose to show the most flattering angles. It's all part of

the illusion.

Most people don't have any real grasp of just how much magazine,

television, and movie images are retouched and altered. Here is a good

example. Click on the thumbnails and then mouse over the big pictures.

http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/bikini/index.html

http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/blonde/index.html

When you have a bazillion women trying to live up to those digitally

perfected images, it's no wonder we're all neurotic.

> Cool!

> So ?

> At 5'7in.

> your lean body mass is something like 120 lbs?

> which in turn, keeps your maintenance daily calories above 2400?

>

> Are you happy with the composition now?

>

> :0)

>

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

I use calipers. If you're physically measuring something, it's easy to

see the changes and trust the readings. I don't have a lot of faith in

the invisible electric voodoo that the Tanita uses. It's too easy to

completely throw it off. I pretty much use it for entertainment

purposes and trend-spotting. I wouldn't use it as your only testing

method.

> Am I a terrible person that those pics made me feel much better about myself?

lol..thanks for helping us keep it all inperspective . How do you measure

your bodyfat ? I'm wondering how close my Tanita athlete mode scale is.

[Guest guest]

good book for this

" the quest for peace love and a 24 " waist "

i saw it on skwiggs site and requested from the libraryy

good book

> and everyone, thanks for putting up with me & Jen and our

> crazy series of posts....the mental part really is the biggest

> battle for me. Clearly, I need to get a truckload of sunless tanner

> and remove the flourescent lights around me --- that should solve

> all my problems. lol

>

> I will keep reading my affirmations. One day my head might just be

> screwed on right. ;-)

>

>

>

>>

>> Yes, I can say that I'm finally happy and confident in my skin. I'm

>> 5'8 " , 144 lbs, 17% body fat, 120 lbs lean mass, eating around 2,300

>> cals a day and taking free weekends.

>>

>> When I got serious 10 years ago I was 134 lbs, 26% body fat, 99lbs

>> lean mass and eating around 1,400-1,500 calories every day.

>>

>> I'm not stressing about anything or trying to change anything. I'm

>> sure that I will continue to make gradual improvements over the

> years,

>> but I don't have any new numbers in mind, and I quit freaking out

>> about the cellulite and spider veins a long time ago. All it takes

> to

>> fix that is sunless tanner and good lighting. :-)

>>

>> It also helps to remember that even swimsuit models have cellulite,

>> stretch marks, acne, large pores, and spider veins. Even fitness

>> competitors deal with that to some degree. There's a reason you

> dunk

>> yourself in ProTan, dehydrate anything that might jiggle or dimple,

>> and flex and pose to show the most flattering angles. It's all

> part of

>> the illusion.

>>

>> Most people don't have any real grasp of just how much magazine,

>> television, and movie images are retouched and altered. Here is a

> good

>> example. Click on the thumbnails and then mouse over the big

> pictures.

>>

>> http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/bikini/index.html

>>

>> http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/blonde/index.html

>>

>> When you have a bazillion women trying to live up to those

> digitally

>> perfected images, it's no wonder we're all neurotic.

>>

>>

>

>

>

>

>

>