The human limits

The human limits. These are some limits that we should know.

How to shrink a pimple

How to shrink a pimple.

Got myself a Nordictrack T1 Treadmill as a gift for my birthday

My old treadmill has died. Did a lot of miles on her but it is time to buy a new one. So I went to Fitness Concept and browsed around. Found this particular model from Nordictrack, the T1 with the product code SKU: NTA-T917. It costs RM7,990 retail but got some sweet discounts for it.

Got a special Chinese New Year discount as well as a trade-in for the old treadmill.

This new machine allows one to adjust the speed and the incline with quick-touch in handle controls. The run surface is a large 20" x 60" treadbelt at speeds of up to 22 km/h while the Intermix Acoustics 3.0 system enables listening to music. It also comes with the 3.0 CHP DurX™ Commercial Plus Motor that allows one to run faster for longer. An auto-breeze dual speed CoolAire workout fan keeps users cool during workouts.

QuadFlex cushioning offers protection and comfort whilst running. Four sets of cushioning reduce impact on your joints with this air-based, shock cushioning system on this extra-long treadbelt, relieving pressure on knees and back.

Below is a brochure on the product.

Nordictrack T1 Treadmill by Meor Amri

I can't wait to get it this weekend.

Foot pressure points

For those into foot reflexology, here is a simple diagram that shows the pressure points on a foot that correlates to problems in our body.

Parts of your body where drugs affect

Moral of the story: DON'T TAKE DRUGS!!!

A table showing some natural remedies for ailments

The location of a pain can tell you a lot about what you may be suffering

This is a diagram that could have you pinpoint health problems that you may be facing. Do seek professional help regardless what you may infer from this.

Got my official timing for my 12 km run at the Men's Health Putrajaya Night Run 2012

Got the official time sheet for the Men's Health 12km Putrajaya Night Run 2012 that was held on 14 July 2012. Under the Junior Veteran Category, I was placed as the 220 runner based on the GunTime (the last column). However, based on NetTime (the second last column), my time is actually faster than  number 219.

The first time column is for the 4.5 km timing, next is the 8.5 km timing, next is the NetTime and finally the GunTime.

NetTime is the time taken when you cross the starting point until you cross the finishing line;
GunTime is the time taken when the starting gun is fired until you cross the finishing line.


Klmhsr2012-Mens Jnr Veteran

Chocolate may help keep people slim, a new research suggest (By BBC)

See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17511011

Saw this article in the BBC recently. Now I wondered why I am able to keep my figure (ha ha). Exercising is also an important ingredient!!! Have a read.

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




People who eat chocolate regularly tend to be thinner, new research suggests.

The findings come from a study of nearly 1,000 US people that looked at diet, calorie intake and body mass index (BMI) - a measure of obesity.

It found those who ate chocolate a few times a week were, on average, slimmer than those who ate it occasionally.

Even though chocolate is loaded with calories, it contains ingredients that may favour weight loss rather than fat synthesis, scientists believe.

Despite boosting calorie intake, regular chocolate consumption was related to lower BMI in the study, which is published in Archives of Internal Medicine.

The link remained even when other factors, like how much exercise individuals did, were taken into account.

And it appears it is how often you eat chocolate that is important, rather than how much of it you eat. The study found no link with quantity consumed.

According to the researchers, there is only one chance in a hundred that their findings could be explained by chance alone.

Lead author Dr Beatrice Golomb, from the University of California at San Diego, said: "Our findings appear to add to a body of information suggesting that the composition of calories, not just the number of them, matters for determining their ultimate impact on weight."

This is not the first time scientists have suggested that chocolate may be healthy for us.

Other studies have claimed chocolate may be good for the heart.

Consumption of certain types of chocolate has been linked to some favourable changes in blood pressure, insulin sensitivity and cholesterol level.

And chocolate, particularly dark chocolate, does contain antioxidants which can help to mop up harmful free radicals - unstable chemicals that can damage our cells.

Dr Golomb and her team believe that antioxidant compounds, called catechins, can improve lean muscle mass and reduce weight - at least studies in rodents would suggest this might be so.

Mice fed for 15 days with epicatechin (present in dark chocolate) had improved exercise performance and observable changes to their muscle composition.

They say clinical trials are now needed in humans to see if this is the case.

But before you reach for a chocolate bar, there are still lots of unanswered questions. And in the absence of conclusive evidence, experts advise caution.

While there's no harm in allowing yourself a treat like chocolate now and again, eating too much might be harmful because it often contains a lot of sugar and fat too.

And if you are looking to change your diet, you are likely to benefit most from eating more fresh fruits and vegetables.

Went to the Gym during lunch time

It has been a along time since I visited the gym. So today, I decided to go back and hit the gym for about 20 minutes. For the last one year, there were so many things to do in the house after getting home that no time was available to go the gym.

For the 20 minutes I had, I decided to spent the whole time on just on cardio work. Used the elliptical machine and I don't want to injure my knees.

Sweat profusely and based on my Suunto watch, I've burned 308 calories. Felt really good after that.

Weekend of cleaning

This weekend found some time to do some cleaning up for the Putrajaya house. Did the vacuuming and mopping. Forgot how much cardio work cleaning can do for your body. Feel refresh after the few hours of work and sweat.

Sometimes I wonder why people still insist of getting maids. If one thinks housework as a form of exercise, we'll save a huge amount of foreign exchange and minimise the requirement for foreign maids.

Do you think it is healthy to drink from ceramic mugs?

Do you think it is healthy to drink from ceramic mugs? I ask this question because there is now a tendency for restaurants to use ceramic mugs, especially colourful ones as a form of differentiation to their offering.

Chemically, it is difficult to bond colours to ceramics to make it inert unlike glass.

The Men's Health Putrajaya Night Run last Saturday - completed it with ease!

Went to the night run in Putrajaya organised by Men's Health. It was fun. Saw a couple of my university mates there as well. Completed the 12.3 km run with ease. That is what one year of training can help you do!

Couldn't take any pictures then as I didn't have a chance to carry a camera. However, I got a photo of the goody they gave out. Quite a number of good stuff in the bag.

Suicide rates in Europe 'linked' to financial crisis

The link above is to a BBC website. Money makes the world go round. Have a read. Moral of the story: always be thankful with what you have!

Morning walkaton organised by the Damansara Height's Mosque

Last Sunday, the Damansara Height's Mosque Committee organised a walking road race around the area. The youngest participants was 5 years old and the oldest was 80+! The route was just 3 km. This was part of its week long family day programme.

Here is the registration counter.

Participants warming up before the release.

The race is about to start!

Briefing by the course marshal.

Summary of EPA and Other Programs on the Potential Carcinogenicity of Diesel Exhaust

I owned a Ford Ranger Turbo Diesel for the last 10 years. It was a brilliant car with fuel efficiency numbers that can be deemed impossible. I have been reading Jeremy Clarkson for sometime now and he mentioned a couple of times in his books the dangers of diesel fumes. It got me thinking and I did my own investigation.

What I found was very worrying. Below is an excerpt from a US EPA report which states the following:
"Emissions from diesel engines are a complex mixture of gaseous vapors and soot particles. The soot particles are a public health concern because they are of a respirable size and contain organic compounds adsorbed onto their surfaces. Many of these compounds can damage the cellular genetic material (DNA), and have been shown to cause cancer in laboratory animals....."


Anyway, below is the report from the US EPA.
Diesel Cancerous

Registration Form for the Mens Health/Shape 2011 Putrajaya Night Run

Below is the registration form for the Mens Health/Shape 2011 Putrajaya Night Run. I've entered the event. For RM50, you get a chance to exercise and get loads of give-aways. Anyway, I am taking part in the 12.3 km race under Junior Veteran.

Registration Form Nightrun

Yesterday made two major birthday purchases plus one

Yesterday, I made 2 major birthday purchases for my wife and first born. For my wife, I got her the Suunto T3d heartmonitor/jogging counter watch and for my eldest daughter, I got her a Brother electronic sewing machine.

The plus one is a new handphone for my wife. Her's of 3 years, a Nokia 2600 finally died due to intense battering. That phone endured injuries that required the following: changes to the casing (2 times), new LCD screen and new key pad. Due to the extreme likelihood of a similar fate to the replacement phone, I got her the basic Nokia 2690. Let's see how long this last.

Myths about alternative energy technology - what is the real truth?

Recent events in Japan has gotten me thinking about our energy security going forward. There are talks about introducing nuclear energy in Malaysia but the arguments and counter-arguments for it has becoming political without any scientific justification given. As a concerned citizen (we should all be!), we must tackle this problem head-on without being embroiled in political in-fighting.

I found this article written by Popular Mechanics (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/debunking-myths-about-nuclear-fuel-coal-wind-solar) which provides a very subjective reasons for embracing (or not embracing) a particular fuel technology. I took the liberty of pulling interesting parts of the article for you to browse through.

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

The road to clean energy is full of enticing opportunities—and perilous pitfalls. Picking the best path requires avoiding both starry-eyed hype and cynical fatalism. In this special report, PM debunks 10 of the most pernicious myths that could derail our progress.

Nuclear Power Isn't a Safe Solution
 

In a recent national poll, 72 percent of respondents expressed concern about potential accidents at nuclear power plants. Some opinion-makers have encouraged this trepidation: Steven Cohen, executive director of Columbia University's Earth Institute, has called nuclear power "dangerous, complicated and politically controversial."

During the first six decades of the nuclear age, however, fewer than 100 people have died as a result of nuclear power plant accidents. And comparing modern nuclear plants to Chernobyl—the Ukrainian reactor that directly caused 56 deaths after a 1986 meltdown—is like comparing World War I fighter planes to the F/A-18. Newer nuclear plants, including the fast reactor now being developed at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), contain multiple auto-shutoff mechanisms that reduce the odds of a meltdown exponentially—even in a worst-case scenario, like an industrial accident or a terrorist attack. And some also have the ability to burn spent fuel rods, a convenient way to reuse nuclear waste instead of burying it for thousands of years.

Power sources such as coal and petroleum might seem safer than nuclear, but statistically they're a lot deadlier. Coal mining kills several hundred people annually—mainly from heart damage and black lung disease, but also through devastating accidents like the April mine explosion in West Virginia. The sublethal effects of coal-power generation are also greater. "The amount of radiation put out by a coal plant far exceeds that of a nuclear power plant, even if you use scrubbers," says Gerald E. Marsh, a retired nuclear physicist who worked at Argonne National Laboratory. Particulate pollution from coal plants causes nearly 24,000 people a year to die prematurely from diseases such as lung cancer. Petroleum production also has safety and environmental risks, as demonstrated by the recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

INL nuclear lab's deputy associate director, Kathryn McCarthy, thinks the industry can overcome its stigma. "It's been a long time since Chernobyl and Three Mile Island," McCarthy says, "and people are willing to reconsider the benefits of nuclear energy." Nuclear plants emit only a tiny fraction of the carbon dioxide that coal plants do, and a few hundred nuclear facilities could potentially supply nearly all the energy the United States needs, reducing our dependence on fossil fuels.

Sure, Corn Ethanol is Problematic—But Switchgrass Will Save the Day

The renewable energy movement's darling for years, corn-based ethanol has fallen out of favor for not making good on its promises of efficiency. Cellulosic ethanol—made from plant parts containing cellulose, such as grass and wood chips—seems poised to be the next star of the biofuel circuit. Its fuel crops require less fertilizer and use water more efficiently than corn. Plus, it can be created from waste products like lawn clippings and tree branches.

But the upstart fuel will have to surmount sizable environmental and financial challenges. For one, it takes a tremendous amount of cellulose to produce ethanol in industrial quantities, which means a lot of land would still have to be devoted to fuel production. "The low density of the supply is a problem," says Tad Patzek, a chemical engineer at the University of Texas at Austin. "To supply fuel to, say, the Bay Area, you would need an area of switchgrass that is larger than all the agricultural land in California."

And since cellulose is tough and fibrous, it requires heavy-duty enzymatic decomposition processes to convert the plant matter into simple sugars that can be fermented into ethanol. These processes consume large amounts of energy and are so pricey that a study in Bioresource Technology last year concluded that cellulosic ethanol won't be competitive with gasoline unless oil prices remain above $90 a barrel.

When that day comes, cellulosic could play a modest role in boosting supplies. And that's worth more research today. But hopes that grass clippings will end our oil habit are overblown.

Wind Power is Far Too Unreliable 

First things first: Wind power is intermittent; it's just the nature of, well, nature. Due largely to the unpredictability of weather, turbines typically generate only about one-fifth of the energy they'd make if they actually ran 24/7. That said, energy planners have devised tactics to make wind power reliable.

One of the best ways to balance wind's now-it's-here-now-it's-not quality is to construct grid connections between different regions of the U.S. "We have monitoring systems that show us the winds as they proceed through different regions," says George Van Hoesen, a managing partner at Global Green Building, an environmental consulting firm in Missouri. "We understand the currents and the flows." Armed with this data and computer models, utilities can plan to shunt surplus power generated in one part of the country to areas that need it.

Science supports that strategy. A recent Stanford University study found that when many wind farms are interconnected through the grid, about one-third of the electricity they generate can be counted on as a reliable source of around-the-clock power. (Less reliable wind energy sources can still be put to profitable use—to charge batteries for electric vehicles or produce hydrogen transportation fuel, for example.) And a University of Delaware study published this spring concluded that an offshore grid, connecting wind generators along the East Coast, could provide relatively stable output. Over a simulated five-year period, power never petered out entirely.

"In the eastern United States, storms typically move along the coast," says Willett Kempton, a lead author. "Thus, if offshore wind farms are connected by a transmission line, the power from the whole set is more consistent."

Still, even the savviest grid connections have limits. The most optimistic projections calculate that wind can supply about 30 percent of the planet's electricity by 2030, so power sources like nuclear, hydropower and solar will be needed as supplements. It might not be a great idea to place all bets on wind, but with the latest turbines able to generate pollution-free electricity at less than 5 cents per kilowatt-hour, it wouldn't be smart to let wind go by the wayside while we invest in less sustainable fuels, either.

Algae Grows Anywhere, So Turning It Into Fuel Will Be Cheap 

It grows in ponds. It grows in streambeds. It even grows in your sink if you forget to scrub it. Algae is so omnipresent that startups like Solix and Aurora Biofuels make it easy to envision the microscopic green organisms meeting all the transportation needs of the planet at pennies a gallon for eternity.

But in-depth experimentation suggests that algae-fuel supremacy isn't going to come easy. The strains of algae that work best for biodiesel are specialized lipid-producers that won't thrive in just any circumstances. Algae-fuel researchers have tried growing the organisms in open ponds for decades, but the water often becomes contaminated with native algae, which quickly outcompete lipid-rich strains.

Closed bioreactors come with their own set of issues. "Even relatively inexpensive ones are going to add dramatically to capital costs," says biochemical engineer John Sheehan, who worked on a stalled National Renewable Energy Laboratory algae-fuel project. Plus, as bioreactors scale up, decreased surface-area-to-volume ratios often make it difficult for all the algae to get the solar energy they need, making them subpar for fuel production. Algae fuel may eventually take off, but it's going to require a lot of testing, technical tweaking and expensive infrastructure to get there.

Tidal Power is a Lost Cause

As the sea level rises and falls, tides roll in and out twice a day, unfailingly. It's hard to imagine a more predictable source of power. Yet tidal power's showcase project in the United States, an array of underwater turbines anchored in the East River in New York City, hasn't exactly been an overnight success. Two initial turbine designs flopped over the course of several years; blades and hubs snapped off because they weren't strong enough to withstand the near-constant force of the water.

Still, it's too soon to give up on tidal power. The Rance tidal power plant in France has an installed capacity of 240 megawatts and has been in continuous operation for more than 40 years. Its axial-flow turbines are capable of operating as the water flows in both directions. And after several false starts, Verdant Power's array operated for more than 9000 hours in a 2008 trial, delivering 70 megawatt-hours of energy to two end-users. This summer, the startup Natural Currents Energy Services plans to install proprietary turbines in two projects that will power marinas in New Jersey. "We're talking about the entire ocean moving in one direction or another," says Global Green Building's Van Hoesen. "The sheer volume of energy makes it very attractive."

Clean Coal Can Clear the Skies of Emissions

The phrase "clean coal" has recently entered the argot of energy planners and political candidates, implying that coal—in addition to supplying cheap, reliable base-load power—can be an environmentally friendly energy source. Energy Secretary Steven Chu endorsed this viewpoint, announcing that the Department of Energy would spend more than $3 billion to fund facilities that capture carbon dioxide from coal and stash it underground, reducing air pollution.

Unfortunately, clean, cheap coal is still a pipe dream. According to the National Energy Technology Laboratory, the cost of capturing carbon dioxide from coal plants and storing it in underground locations will increase the price of electricity from 30 to 100 percent, depending on the method used. In addition, coal-fired power plants that perform sequestration burn one-quarter more coal than their unimproved counterparts to produce the same amount of electricity. That means more destructive mining operations, more CO₂ emissions from transportation and more coal ash, the toxic byproduct of all coal-burning. "We have implemented some technologies that are cleaning the air," says Mary Fox, an environmental scientist at Johns Hopkins University, "but that has led to a displacement of some of those waste products into solid waste."

That displacement can lead to serious health consequences, as in the case of the coal-ash slurry that broke through a dike in Tennessee, sullying water supplies with mercury, lead and arsenic. Disposing of toxic ash responsibly could cost in excess of $5 billion annually, so efforts to pass more stringent federal controls on solid waste have stalled. For better or worse, coal produces roughly half of the nation's electricity, so technology for next-gen facilities is worth developing. But no breakthrough will cause the nearly 500 plants already operating in the U.S. to magically clean up their act. 

The Risk of Earthquakes makes Deep Geothermal Unrealistic

Horror stories about deep geothermal drilling began circulating after a series of earthquakes shook the city of Basel, Switzerland, in 2006. And, in fact, a scientific analysis concluded that a geothermal system likely set off the quakes, causing a similar project in California to be scuttled.

But deep geothermal, also called enhanced geothermal, has distinct advantages too. Because it taps into the hot, dry bedrock miles below the surface, drilling could be widespread. A recent study led by MIT identified 200,000 exajoules of extractable deep geothermal energy, which could supply more than 2000 times the nation's annual energy use.

Odds are very low that enhanced geothermal power would ever cause a quake on the scale of, say, the recent shake-up in Chile, says Colin Williams, a geophysicist on the U.S. Geological Survey earthquake hazards team. Even the largest quake in Basel, a 3.4 on the Richter scale, caused only minimal damage. And experts say that if enhanced geothermal plants are constructed farther away from cities—in rural areas of Europe or the western U.S., for example—any induced seismicity would have even less effect on the human population. "Should we say the technology is dead?" says scientist Domenico Giardini, who analyzed Basel. "Absolutely not."

U.S. Shale can Provide Energy Independence 

Shale oil hasn't gotten too much attention since the oil crisis of the 1970s. But today, proponents are once again pointing out that there are more than a trillion barrels of oil locked in the shale deposits of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, more than all the proven crude-oil reserves on the planet. That would be enough to meet current U.S. oil demand for an entire century.

The problem, then and now, lies in the financial and ecological costs of extracting the oil. Shale oil naturally occurs in the form of kerogens, solid, waxy substances with a texture similar to that of ChapStick. Once the kerogens are heated to over 500 F, they exude hydrocarbons, which must be treated with hydrogen in order to be processed into usable fuel—a highly energy-intensive process that releases large amounts of CO₂.

And just to get at these kerogens, energy companies would have to mine and process millions of tons of shale from the earth—leaving behind toxic heavy metals and sulfates that could seep into groundwater. "There's a water contamination issue," says Olayinka Ogunsola, an engineer at the Department of Energy. "There's also a land reclamation issue—[mining] would create a lot of disturbance in the area." Mining and processing shale also require vast amounts of water—producing 2.5 million barrels of shale oil per day would require 105 million to 315 million gallons of water daily. That might be the biggest deal breaker of all for parched western states.

So while extracting the oil from U.S. shale may be technically possible, the scale of such an enterprise, as measured in acres and natural resources, may never make it worthwhile.

Solar Energy Will Never Pay for Itself

 

Solar panels are certainly expensive—about $100 per square foot for a typical installation—but eventually, you're destined to end up on the positive side of the equation.

According to the California Solar Electric Company, it may take from eight to 12 years to recoup in saved energy costs the investment put into a basic residential photovoltaic (PV) solar array. But this estimate varies greatly depending on factors like the size of the array and the amount of sunlight that hits it, and advances in PV technology continue to shorten the payback period.

"The shortest payback with new thin-film cells is less than a year," says Burr Zimmerman, a chemical engineer and co-founder of the Kairos Institute, which ushers new technologies into the marketplace. Thanks to ramped-up production and cheaper materials, up-front costs continue to plummet as well; the price of solar cells has fallen fifteenfold since 1980.

After a solar array's initial payback period, you start to reap some serious financial benefits. Assuming solar cells have an average life expectancy of 30 years, more than 50 percent of the power solar cells generate ends up being free. "There are maintenance issues," Zimmerman says, but over time, "solar cells are definitely making you money."

We Have to Drill Our Way Out of the Energy Dilemma

Discussions of America's energy future tend to focus on increasing production. There's no question that more mining and drilling can modestly increase overall supply—but, as recent accidents have shown, at a steep human and environmental cost. Renewable sources show promise but will take time and money to implement. "I'm a big advocate of renewables, but I'm also an advocate of common sense," says David Hughes, a fellow at the Post Carbon Institute. "Radical conservation has to be number one."

The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that, under existing policies, total energy consumption will grow by 14 percent by 2035. That doesn't have to be the case. A report published last year by McKinsey & Company calculates that widespread deployment of energy-efficiency measures can decrease consumption by 23 percent of projected demand by 2020. What's more, such measures would result in $1.2 trillion in savings, far more than the $520 billion investment required to implement them. The corresponding reduction of greenhouse gas emissions would be like taking an entire U.S. fleet of passenger vehicles off the road.

Personal actions certainly help: A 2008 trial by Baltimore Gas and Electric showed that customers who had smart meters reduced their energy use by up to 37 percent during peak periods. And semiconductor-powered light-emitting diodes (LEDs) have the potential to reduce lighting-related energy consumption to one-sixth of its current level. The DOE estimates we could be well on our way to that goal by 2025, cutting lighting energy use by 29 percent—and collectively saving $125 billion.

There's also ample room for industry to streamline its energy consumption. If plants like oil refineries and steel mills convert exhaust heat into electricity via cogeneration, they could reap an extra 100 gigawatts, reducing CO₂ emissions by about 400 million metric tons. Energy saved, it turns out, is the cheapest new source.

New wrist-watch for my collection: The Suunto Training watch

Got the Suunto S1C heartbeat monitor and training watch.

This watch comes with a heartbeat monitor band that you strap around your torso near your heart. It will be able to generate a universal signal that can be read by most, if not all, training machines that have a heartbeat monitor.

It is also waterproof (should be, otherwise the sweat will kill it!). This is the third wrist-watch in my collection.