Stupid TV!

"Why are thin people not fat?": this is the programme I watched last night; I don't know why, because I'm not fat, I guess this is just a programme made for fat people in an attempt to make them feel slightly better about being fat.

In place of a well-documented documentary backed by scientists, I found myself almost gagging with disgust: the programme picked a group of thin people in their twenties who claimed that they could not get fat and fed them an abnormally high amount of calories every day over a period of time. what happened? Well I got kind of bored looking at this rubbish programme so I kind of fell asleep but it looked like the people did put on some weight (which it seems they lost after the end of the experiment). So what's the deal with the title? Maybe the programme should be called "why are people who stupid enough to try dangerous experiments that might ruin their lives?" (I'm thinking, what if one of these people happened to develop an eating disorder after doing this programme?)

First mistake: why did they pick everyone from the same age group? I used to be the same way in my twenties, finding myself too skinny and wanting to add a few curves to my body shape (I looked like a stick, not very attractive for a girl); I later realized that, as I was trying to get pregnant, I did put on a bit of weight, I didn't get fat but I was looking healthier. then, after my second pregnancy, I found myself wanting to lose weight and not being able to shift the pounds that mattered (jelly belly and love handles!). So, skinny people, don't worry if you can't get fat: a time will come, when you get older and your metabolism slows down, when you will put on some weight; so if you're healthy now, stay that way!

I was also horrified to see young children (4 or 5 years old) being used in another "experiment" and being fed fatty and sugary snacks on a full stomach! The children weren't force-fed, they coould choose to eat or not to eat but even if parents gave their authorization, what a way to use children!

I'm now thinking of making my own TV programme called: "Why is bad TV so addictive?"

Tonight, I'm going to bed early and snuggling up in the covers with a good book.

Oops, almost forgot to add a few tips for overweight people who are genuinely interested in losing weight and not looking for excuses to stay fat by watching crappy TV programmes:

- Don't starve yourself, but replace unhealthy foods in your diet by healthy ones (feel like a chocolate bar? eat a fruit instead);
- Drink lots of water: sometimes, thirst manifests itself by a feeling of hunger;
- Walk as much as possible, if there is a sport you enjoy doing, do it and don't get discouraged by setting the bar too high in the beginning. If you live in a town, sell your car and try to walk past a few bus stops everyday.

Or alternatively if you'd like help to get started on a new healthy way of life, try
The Diet solution Programme: it comes with 6 free bonuses including a Diet Solution Recipe e-book, a 4 week work-out plan to become a yummy mummy and more. Go on, you know you want to try it!

What Makes Me Really Angry

I bet I was not the only person who was shocked at hearing the news this morning of an alcoholic mother of 6 who was due to be judged today for forcing her children live in filth, malnutrition and even sexual abuse.

I can't help wondering why social services didn't take action sooner to remove the children from this monster: apparently this went on between 1998 and 2004; six years is a very long time in the life of a child (the youngest was said to be 6 and the oldest 15 when this started). I have read that the "mother" got financial help from a Catholic right-wing group in order to stop the children from being taken into care in 2000. I would like to know who are these people, I think they should be investigated in order to find out what was their motive for protecting the woman (I suspect the worst but I guess publishing my suspicions would be seen as libel).

The children were school-goers, so what did the school do to help them? As for doctors, I guess the poor kids were not brought to them very often (if ever). What about neighbours? Local people must have known what was going on; did the staff from the pubs the woman frequented just turn a blind eye? I just can't understand!

What angered me even further was that she was given a total of 10 sentences (fair enough) ranging from 18 months to 7 years of prison to run concurrently (not that fair)! Out of disbelief I had to check an online dictionary and yep, it means what it means: concurrently means that she only has to serve the longest prison sentence of the 10, so that "thing" (I can't bring myself to call her a mother or even a woman at this stage) will get off after serving only 7 years of jail? Let me remind you that that she has ruined the lives of 6 innocent children who might or might not recover from being treated horrifically by the person that would be normally protecting them from harm.

I hope the children get bucketfuls of counselling and that they can eventually regain their self-esteem and learn how to live as normal human beings, but if they don't, this leaves the country with a potential extra 6 sex-offenders.

Just as I thought, the depression card was outed at her trial; I am sorry but being depressed should NOT become an excuse for shortening a prison sentence . Genuine depression is a disease for which the persons affected should seek help but suffering from depression doesn't mean that you are allowed to hurt other people. I find that too many people use this disease to get out of their responsibilities: lock that woman up and throw away the key, she deserves a life sentence!

7 years? Come on judge, you can do better than that! Even if that animal gets all the abuse from other women at the prison that she deserves, 7 years of free rehab are far from being enough for destroying the lives of 6 children who lived in fear for over 6 years and will bear the consequences for long years to come.