Fat Fuel

Soo good:

For a time, Beverly Hills doctor Craig Alan Bittner turned the fat he removed from patients into biodiesel that fueled his Ford SUV and his girlfriend's Lincoln Navigator.

A gallon of grease will get you about a gallon of fuel...according to Jenna Higgins of the National Biodiesel Board.

Some back of envelope math*:

- 300 MM in the US, 25% children, leaves 225 MM people. link
- 1/3 of population (75 MM) has BMI between 25-30, which is overweight. link
- 1/3 of population (75 MM) has BMI over 30, which is obese. link
- Average US male height 5'9"; average US female height 5'4"; average height 5'6.5". link

Some BMI stuff based on the average 5'6.5" height:

- Average weight midpoint = BMI of 22.5 = 141 lbs
- Overweight min = BMI of 25 = 157 lbs
- Obese min = BMI of 30 = 188 lbs
- Arbitrary cap on max obesity = BMI of 35 = 220 lbs links

So:

- 75 MM overweight Americans carry an additional 1.2 - 3.5 BN pounds of fat
- A different 75 MM obese Americans carry between 3.5 - 5.9 BN pounds of fat

Then convert units:

- 1 L of fat weighs 0.92 kg link so 1 gallon of fat weighs 7.68 lbs

Solve for our energy needs:

- Overweight and obese Americans carry somewhere between 482 MM and 1.2 BN gallons of excess fat.
- Assuming the rough 1-to-1 conversion holds true, we are carrying 1.2-3.1% of the annual US diesel consumption (40 BN gallons) on our backsides. link
- Or to frame it another way, we carry one to three times the amount of 2007 annual US biodiesel consumption (450 MM gallons) on our rears, and sometimes ankles. link

* I excluded children from the calculations out of respect for parents. We don't want kids to feel entitled to liposuction, they should earn it through good behavior.

Oh, Norway....

Sometimes, I just really dig Scandinavia. I find new music that I like. I somehow tap into a ring of Swedish personal fashion blogs. (Well, and some Finns.)

Oh, the Muppets...Always A Good Way to Kill 20 Min

Best

Several years ago I came across an interesting article about success--that decades of deliberate practice, not innate talent, is what separates the truly great from the also-ran. I believe the article was popular because it's elevated stick-to-it-iveness above genetics. I reshaped the message: if I finally get serious about things, I can truly be great. The author of the article has a new book out. I will probably buy it, in more ways than one. A review here.

I have re-reshaped the message even further to hew closer to how one Nobel chemist explained his success. I forget his name. He freely admits that he is not the brightest mind in his field. His colleagues think he is a jerk. So far we seem to have a lot in common, well, besides that Nobel thing. He explains how he competes with more gifted colleagues by noting that while his "best" is not better than their "best," most people don't do their best. Invariably, your "best" will be better than the half-hearted attempt of someone brilliant.

Eyring discusses a related concept--the law of increasing returns. This is directly the opposite of the economic concept of the law of diminishing returns, that an increase in effort yields marginally less results. Rather many things in life are governed by this law of increasing returns. Pick any analogy. In physics, it is critical mass. In the dismal science, it is economies of scale. In literature, it is what post-structuralism reveals about the relativity of truth...er, ok, not any analogy. Simply stated, you put in hard work up front and things work out.

This year, rather than trying to bet my way into a faster race time, I think I will just try to absorb these principles. Besides, if you decide to not measure things, how can you fail?

Food: Coping Strategies

I realize that I love food (specifically sweets) and will probably never change. So what to do? Some ideas:

Running. I learned from running that while you are on the move, depending on your body mass, you can only absorb approximately 250 calories per hour. So contrary to old wives tales, right after dinner is precisely the time you should go running. The longer you can maintain that limited caloric intake mode the better. You are taking the fight to the terrorists in your stomach--never giving food shelter or rest! (Lack of commas intentional.) You not only burn calories and increase your metabolism, but also prevent the absorption of new calories. Plus, all that jumping up and down has to do something to improve "traffic."

Caffeine. Wikipedia lists one of the side effects of caffeine as "gastrointestinal disturbance." More like gastrointestinal bonus. Am I the only one that notices negative effect that it has on digestion? Less digestion equals few calories. Add, of course, the increased exercise due to caffeine--walking (sometimes running) to the john more frequently, incessant leg bouncing, and that awkward facial tick.

Sleep. Science claims that it is essentially a restorative and regenerative process--your muscles rejuvenate, your immune system repairs itself, your follicle system makes your beard grow, your brain reviews the day to establish memory, and your digestive system does its thing. Go without it. It is addiction. Sure, you may have to give up being "strong" and "healthy," but is that too high a price to not only not absorb those 1000 calories in that apple fritter, but also not even remember eating it? If you are on the fence, think of the time you spend shaving.

Binging. The natural corollary to a maximum rate of caloric intake while running is that there must be a max caloric intake while not running (my preferred state). While simple sugars diffuse across the stomach and intestinal linings rather quickly, complex carbs must be broken down by enzymatic reactions. To varying degrees, both cases present opportunities to limit caloric intake through the shock and awe of incredible food consumption by strategically overwhelming your body's capabilities. Complex carbs are Gulf War I--it's easy to deploy elite units of grains and vegetables because like Sadam's regular forces, enzyme production is easy to overwhelm. The problem is that like stopping at the Kuwatii border, grains and vegetables aren't very satisfying.

Simple sugars are more Gulf War II-esque. Every cookie you eat is a drive to Baghdad. Cram 'em in. You're patriotic. Blowing &#*@ up just feels good! Nevermind the side effects, if you don't feel like you are winning arrange for a surge. May I recommend pumpkin pie? I'm the decider--it's my job to down this pie.

Cellulose. This next one will have you questioning if I get my banana shakes at Jack-Out-of-the-Box it is so revolutionary! Corn never digests in part because I don't chew it, but also because we lack the enzymes necessary to break down the celloluse membrane. So, why not wrap everything that is bad for you in cellulose? Think of it--petite chocolate eclairs injected into the hollow shell of corn kernel. Why waste though? I have been choking down donuts wrapped in corn shuckings for weeks.

Stanford

The tone of this article has been consistent with my experience, so far. I haven't exactly been blown away by anything here. Quote:

Traditional colleges and universities aren’t about to die, of course. But their attractions—and especially the enticements of the Ivy League schools, Stanford, Berkeley, and such private four-year colleges as Amherst and Oberlin—will largely derive from the status that they convey, the career advantages that accrue from their brand-name diplomas, and the unspoken allure of networking and associating with others of a similarly affluent and privileged class. They are becoming social entities, private clubs for young people, certification and proof of career seriousness, but hardly centers for excellence in undergraduate education in the classical sense. For all the tens of thousands of dollars invested in yearly tuition, there will be no guarantee, or indeed, even a general expectation, that students will encounter singular faculty or receive a superior liberal arts education—let alone that they will know much more about their exceptional civilization than what they could find on the Internet, at religious schools, or on CDs and DVDs

.