- Product highlights
- Brainpower tip
- Time tip
- Finance tip
- Security tips
- Health tip/Fitness tip
- Thought for the day
1. Product Highlights
Overcome Compulsive Eating|
The caloric binging and
gorging during the holidays is a health hazard you don't need. Americans who
gain fat during this period nearly always keep it. So, if you gain five pounds
this holiday season, that's five pounds of fat you'll carry into the next
holiday season. In ten years, you're fifty pounds overweight.
Thus, it's appropriate to offer
this course at this time. There are reasons why some folks "break" during the
holidays and overeat.
This course methodically walks you through how to identify and solve
what's driving you to overeat. Even if you don't overeat during the rest of the
year, the underlying problems emerge during the holidays. Deal with those
problems, and you can happily sail through the holidays without the damage of
added fat. No more pigging out and then feeling bad about it later or feeling
bad because of its effects later.|
If you are fighting the "battle of the
bulge," this course is one of the best investments you'll ever make. You can
avoid spending thousands of dollars on medication and surgery, plus feel better
and live more fully.
begin reigning in your waistline, click on the photo above. Or use this link:
2. Brainpower tip
How we deal with the information we do have is often more important to proper decision-making
than whether we have all of the pertinent information. In fact, you are unlikely to
have all the facts to support any decision. Most of the time, you just
have to go with what you've got. This doesn't mean put your finger to the wind
and hope for the best.|
- Interpolate. Fill in missing information--facts between the facts. For
example, plot a trend on a graph. The endpoints are known, but the middle is
not. Looking at the graph, you can interpolate the information regarding the
middle. Note that this can be very misleading, if the surrounding facts
don't support the interpolation.
- Extrapolate. Extend missing information--facts that are natural
extensions of the facts. For example, plot a trend on a graph. The endpoints
are known, but a new endpoint farther along the trajectory of the trend line
is not. Looking at the graph, you can extrapolate the information
regarding the new endpoint--where it will be. Note that this can be very
misleading, if the surrounding facts don't support the extrapolation.
- Extend. Follow the logic to its natural conclusion. For example, ask,
"If everyone did this then what would happen?"
- Speculate. Apply the absurdity of the circumstances to an even more
absurd set of circumstances, to illustrate absurdity. For example, "So, what
are they going to search next at the airport? Rectal cavities?"
There are other techniques you can use to "fill in the blanks." The problem
with any of these techniques is they all require judgment. If you are merely
looking for "facts" to support a foregone conclusion, then you can fabricate
the "facts" to be whatever you want. For you to arrive at a sound conclusion,
however, you must approach the thesis with an open mind. One method of doing
this is to use the same methods to both attack and support that thesis.
- To support the thesis that airports should cut back on searches: "So,
what are they going to search next at the airport? Rectal cavities?"
- To attack the thesis that airports should cut back on searches: "So, how
are they going to smuggle in weapons and bombs next? In rectal cavities?"
Keep in mind that the proverbial knife cuts both ways. Using ridicule to
prove a point opens the door to use ridicule to disprove it. To avoid that,
use reasonable metaphors.
- To support the thesis that airports should cut back on searches: "So how
many bombers or hijackers have they caught thus far this way?"
- To attack the thesis that airports should cut back on searches: "Do you
want to be on the one plane where a bomber or hijacker got past security?"
There's a whacky thesis that I like to apply another method to. This method
is called "Comparison to known outcomes."
The thesis is that if you disarm potential crime victims then you--by some
magic--lower the rate of crime. I've never understood the "logic" behind this
thesis, so I can't argue on its "prove" side. There's no "there" there. It's
sort of like asking someone to argue that the earth is flat or gravity doesn't
Anyone who's ever watched an episode of "Wild Kingdom" knows that the tiger
always kills the antelope--not the other way around. Why is this? It's
called the balance of power. Tigers have all the power. The outcome is
Now, let's apply this to another predator. Let's say it's a 230lb serial
murderer, about to confront and assault a 110lb woman. Is the outcome known? That depends on
whether the government has put in place "gun laws" that deny her the basic
human right of self defense and whether she is cow-towed enough to follow
If she lives in Florida, for example, and takes advantage of her right to
carry, the predator does not have all the power. If she lives in New York,
Chicago, Australia, or other places where the right to survive a criminal
attack is banned by the government, then she's either a defense weapon toting criminal or she's
going to be dead.
The specious "argument" that somehow the predator will also be neutralized
by these laws is simply absurd. By definition, a criminal is someone who
breaks the law. A "gun law" is not going to make a criminal say, "Gosh, it's
getting tough to murder someone these days, because I would have to obtain a
gun illegally to do that so I guess I won't get a gun. In fact, I'll stop
killing." Yeah, that's going to happen.
Ah, but we can argue on the "prove" side on this point. And we can do that
by extending the gun ban effect. By extension, we can say that if we do enough
gun banning, then even criminals won't have guns. So, what is the outcome of
such an effect? The predator simply selects a different weapon. In fact, that
is exactly what is going on in gun-banning Japan, which is why garroting and
knifing are at incredibly high levels. The advantages of using a garrote are
now so apparent to Japanese killers that it's unlikely they would choose a
firearm if the government gave them one. Nice going, folks.
Fact: Most murders in the US are committed with weapons other than
firearms (source: FBI). As with Japan,
"banning" such weapons merely deprives the innocent victims of any real hope
of a balance of power. They become the antelope, rather than an equally
I like to use the gun ban "arguments" as examples, because they defy
conclusions based on simple observation of the world around us. But of course,
there are many other false theses circulating around. Most of them have some
merit on some point or another. Unfortunately, the proponents of this or that
false thesis refuse to analyze the thesis either in its entirety or outside a
vacuum. Don't fall into that trap!
3. Time Tip
This is another installment in our series about saving time with e-mail.
In this issue, we'll briefly discuss the bcc: field.|
Some people bcc: "everyone" on an e-mail. The thinking is they don't want
to leave out someone who might possibly want to be included in the
distribution if the stars align just right or Publisher's Clearinghouse
Sweepstakes declares them a winner.
The results of such an approach include:
- A whole bunch of folks get an e-mail that doesn't apply to them.
- You make yourself "fair game" to being copied on e-mails you have
little or no interest in.
- You expand the number of people who will reply to you with questions
- Your e-mail address gains that much more exposure to being hijacked.
- You may annoy people to the point that they just delete or block all
of your e-mails.
- You look unprofessional and undiscerning.
So, don't over-use the bcc: field. Copy only to people to whom that
e-mail really applies.
Failing to use bcc: On the flipside of over-use, you have
under-use. Failing to copy a person whose input is critical is a huge
mistake. But why not just cc: all of the people who should get that
e-mail? Well, that's OK if they have all given you permission to share
their e-mail addresses with everyone else on the list (or you want
everyone to have the ability to reply to everyone else on the list,
thereby generating a blizzard of e-mails). But until you have
such permission, use the bcc: field to protect people's privacy. You save
time by not needing to reply to angry e-mails from the offended parties.
When to use bcc:
- The message applies to everyone on the list ("the list" being the
address of the recipients in the bcc: field).
- Not everyone on the list has given permission for everyone else on the
list to have their e-mail address.
- You don't want any person on the list to respond to the
Sending e-mail properly--whether Reply All, cc:, or bcc:--simply
requires a little planning and consideration. By reducing confusion and
heading off potentially huge problems, it can save you--and everyone
else--quite a bit of time.
4. Finance tip
I just got my f---ing property tax bill. Yeow! The pain gets more intense
each year, even though local politicians brag about their not having given
us a rate increase.|
So, what gives here? City, state, and
county governments know how to manipulate improvements and other things
that jack up home values and thus raise the rates without a politically
unpopular rate increase. In some cases, these improvements are worthwhile.
In others, they are strategically placed to raise the "value" of a
particular neighborhood so that tax revenue increases.
Some basic facts:
- No American owns a home. Why: We rent our homes from the government,
and the rent is in the form of property taxes. Refuse to pay this rent,
and see how long you get to live in "your" home.
- Many retired people now pay more in property taxes than they paid in
mortgage payments when they bought their home.
- For most of us, property taxes go in one direction. Hint: It's not
Right now, we have a "bubble" in the home market. It's been letting out
some air in some places. But you can expect property taxes to continue to
rise over the long term. Both home "owners" and renters pay property taxes--the latter bunch
through higher rent.
So, what can you do about this? Many financial experts advise fighting
the valuation. Some people are successful with this, and some end up
getting an even higher valuation for their trouble. I suppose if shutting
the barn after the horse gets out makes sense to you, then you should do
A more effective approach is to take a seat on your city planning
commission. Work hard to limit the improvements done near your home to
just what's absolutely necessary. Your road's a little rutted? Well, if
your residential speed limit is 25 MPH, then my question is, "So what?" A
few bumps and ruts won't hurt your car, but they will slow down speeders
and the rough road is one more item against increased valuation. Your city
wants to put "improvements" in a nearby park? Tell them no.
Cities talk about "investment" when they talk about the various
projects they want to inflict on the residents. And they are correct to
talk about these things as investments. The residents "may" get some added
value. But the real return on the investment is for the city. They spend
$X to inflict an improvement upon the residents, then they reappraise
property values to raise taxes so they get back $X times ten and then some.
It's a great scam if you can run it, and
city governments can.
I'm not on my city planning commission, though I have been asked to
serve. I am on several other boards right now, and just don't have the
time. But it's on my radar. At this time, all the "improvements" in my
area have already been inflicted on us. In a couple of years, that may
change as new ideas for making our homes unaffordable arise. In the
meantime, we just had a sales tax increase and we have these growing
property taxes to help pay for the unnecessary.
If you are at a different point on the cycle of this spend and tax
scam, get on your planning commission and oppose as much "investment" as
5. Security tip
How do you know if a terrorist has
boarded your train or bus? Well, you can ask each person you see, "Excuse
me, but do you work for the IRS?"|
That's one way.
But there are other terrorist
organizations out there, so you have to be a bit more encompassing. The
key here is to be aware.
Most of us are not aware of
what's going on around us. We're busy yakking on our
cell phones, fuming over the boss' latest insulting assignment, wondering
who farted, etc.
Look around at your fellow passengers, without staring
or glaring. Someone who is "wrong" will, most of the time, "pop out." This
person may not be a terrorist, but may have some other issues. Still, be
aware of that person without making that person aware of you.
If this person seems to be
"adjusting" something under his/her bulky outer garment, that's not a good
sign. Still might not mean anything, but it's not a good sign. If the
person is perspiring or looks unduly agitated, that's also not a good
sign. If both signs are present, and the person appears to "fit the
profile," you need to exit at the next stop--even if this means a delay for
But most importantly, if you
are calm and in a state of awareness, that person's "bad energy" will
reach be almost palpable to you. If you're immersed in today's loud video
culture, you may need to take meditation classes or yoga so that you can
develop this awareness.
If you're on a plane and a
fellow passenger sets off your "red light," what should you do? Well, you
obviously don't want to make this person aware of you. My advice would be
to note the person's seat number and then walk to the back
of the plane--without making this person aware of you.
When you get to
the back, quietly and calmly tell the flight attendant that the person in
seat 13B (or whatever the seat number is) is making you really nervous and
you feel this person needs watching. Explain what you saw. Acknowledge
that it may be nothing and you don't know this person. But you have a bad feeling and it may be there for a reason.
Tell the flight attendant you don't need any feedback, and your only goal
is to alert the crew to a possible danger so they can do whatever it is
they are trained to do. Then, use the
bathroom to effect discretion.
Today's crews are trained in
what to do, if they get the heebie-jeebies about a passenger. Your
pointing out that you get the heebie-jeebies about someone is really no
reflection on that other person--the two of you have not interacted, and
you are not accusing anyone of anything. You are just suspicious. I'm not
an expert on what to do on a plane in such an event, but those are my
thoughts. You might want to mull this over, so you are prepared in such an
event. The key to all of this is making yourself aware. That's a principle
that goes back several thousand years in the classic martial arts.
Of course, this detection
method is not definitive and being aware doesn't mean you'll catch
everything. But hunches are quite often correct. There's an
evolutionary reason why we have "gut instincts," and those of us who
ignore such instincts do so at our own peril. And maybe that of other
6. Health tip/Fitness tips
Following the demise of the Atkins Diet--which never made any
sense--what macro nutrient will be demonized next? Well, before the
demonization of carbohydrates, it was fat. So my guess is we're going to
hear about the dangers of protein next. As if.|
Researchers at the
Summa Health System (a health plan and network of health-care
facilities, and research centers in Ohio) recently conducted a study
that confirmed plain old common sense. In a nutshell: Eat more, weigh
That's a bit of an oversimplification. Yes, what you eat does matter.
For example, eating highly processed grains is not a good idea--doing so
ratchets up your appetite. Eating nutrient dense foods that aren't
calorie-dense is the correct approach.
But the biggest factor in maintaining a lean body composition is to
control your portion size. Rather than take huge portions and eat until
you are full, take small portions and stop eating when they are gone.
In this two-year study, nearly half of the folks trying to lose
excess body fat were successful when they practiced portion control.
Those who failed to practice portion control got fatter.
If you struggle with portion control--especially over the
holidays--see our Product Highlights in this issue.
Please forward this eNL to others.
This issue's factoid: 40,000
Americans are injured by toilets each
year. What's the toll from firearms--something like 4,800 Americans?
Chuck Schumer wants to ban firearms--I can hardly wait until he starts
See: Special Offers (expired link now removed).
8. Thought for the Day
Given the health ramifications, losing excess body fat
should not be a weighty decision.
Wishing you the best,
The views expressed in this e-newsletter are generally not shared by criminals, zombies, or brainwashed individuals.
Except where noted, this e-newsletter is entirely the work of Mark Lamendola. Anything presented as fact can be independently verified. Often, sources are given; but where not given, they are readily available to anyone who makes the effort.
Mark provides information from either research or his own areas of established expertise. Sometimes, what appears to be a personal opinion is the only possibility when applying sound logic--reason it out before judging! (That said, some personal opinions do appear on occasion).
The purpose of this publication is to inform and empower its readers (and save you money!).
Personal note from Mark: I value each and every one of you, and I hope that shows in the diligent effort I put into writing this e-newsletter. Thank you for being a faithful reader.
To subscribe, change your e-mail address, offer your own tidbit, tell
us how much you love this eNL, ask how to put us in your will <grin> or to (gasp) unsubscribe, write to
comments @ mindconnection.com (paste that into your e-mail client, and remove
Let other potential
readers know what you think of this e-zine, by rating it at the Cumuli Ezine