Summer in March, 2012, draws to a close

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 4:54 PM GMT on March 23, 2012

Share this Blog
51
+

The most incredible spring heat wave in U.S. and Canadian recorded history is finally drawing to a close today, after a ten-day stretch of unprecedented record-smashing intensity. Since record keeping began in the late 1800s, there have never been so many spring temperature records broken, and by such a large margin. Airports in fifteen different states have set all-time records for March warmth, which is truly extraordinary considering that the records were set in the middle of the month, instead of the end of the month. The 29.2°C (85°F) measured at Western Head, Nova Scotia yesterday was the third warmest temperature ever recorded in Canada in March, according to Environment Canada and weather records researcher Maximiliano Herrera (top two records: 31.1°C at Alberini Beaver Creek BC on March 29th 1926, and 29.4°C in 1921 at Wallaceburg.) Michigan's all-time record for March warmth was toppled on Wednesday, when the mercury hit 90°F at Lapeer. The previous record, 89° at Lapeer in 1910, was matched at three stations yesterday--Ypsilanti, Dearborn, and Lapeer. The duration, areal size, and intensity of the Summer in March, 2012 heat wave are simply off-scale, and the event ranks as one of North America's most extraordinary weather events in recorded history. Such a historic event is difficult to summarize, and in today's post I will offer just a few of the most notable highlights.


Figure 1. Clear skies over the Eastern U.S. caused by a blocking ridge of high pressure on March 21, 2012, are apparent in this visible satellite image. The comma-shaped cloud pattern over the Central U.S. is associated with a "cut-off" low pressure system. This low is moving over the Eastern U.S. today through Saturday, and will bring an end to "Summer in March" over the U.S. and Canada. Image credit: NOAA's Environmental Visualization Lab, and modified by Andrew Freedman of Climate Central.

Low temperatures beating previous high temperature records for the date
I've never seen a case where the low temperature for the date beat the previous record high. This happened on at least four occasions during "Summer in March, 2012":

The low temperature at Marquette, Michigan hit 52° on March 21, which was 3° warmer than the previous record high for the date.

The low at Mt. Washington, NH on March 21 (44°) beat the previous record high for the date (43°.)

The low temperature for International Falls, Minnesota on March 20 bottomed out at 60°F, tying the previous record high for the date.

The low temperature in Rochester, Minnesota on March 18 was 62°F, which beat the previous record high for the date of 60°.

Breaking all-time April records for warmth in March
Not only did many locations in Canada set records for their all-time warmest March day during "Summer in March, 2012", a number also broke their record for warmest April day:

St. John, New Brunswick hit 27.2°C (81°F) on March 21. Previous March record: 17.5°C on March 21, 1994. April record: 22.8°C.

Kejimkujik Park, Nova Scotia hit 27.9°C on March 21. Previous March record: 22.5°C on March 30, 1986. April record: 25°C on April 27, 1990.

Yesterday, I reported that Halifax, Nova Scotia hit 27.2°C (81°F) on March 22, 2012. Previous March record: 25.8° set the previous day. April record: 26.3°C, set on April 30, 2004. However, Rob Paola, a meteorologist with Environment Canada's Prairie and Arctic Storm Prediction Center in Winnipeg, Manitoba, wrote to tell me that Halifax did not break its April record: In fact, Halifax recorded a temperature of 29.5°C on April 28, 2009. For some reason, that stat does not show up on EC's normal/extremes climate site for Halifax, which only has data up to 2006 for extremes. More details on my blog at http://robsobsblog.blogspot.ca/

Breaking daily temperature records by more than 30°F
It is exceptionally rare for a weather station with a 50+ year period of record to break a daily temperature record by more than 10°F. During "Summer in March, 2012", beating daily records by 10° - 20°F was commonplace, and many records were smashed by over 20°. Two stations broke records by more than 30°F, which is truly surreal. Western Head, Nova Scotia hit 29.2°C (85°F), yesterday, breaking their previous record for the date (10.6°C in 1969) by 18.6°C (33°F.) Yesterday's high temperature was 24°C (44°F) above average. Pellston, Michigan in the Northern Lower Peninsula--dubbed "Michigan's Icebox", since it frequently records the coldest temperatures in the state--hit 85° on March 21. This broke the previous record for the date (53° in 2007) by 32°, and was an absurd 48°F above average.

Breaking daily temperature records nine consecutive days or more
It is extremely rare for stations with a 50+ year period of record to break a daily high temperature record for seven or more days in a row. The longest such streak of consecutive high temperature records at International Falls, Minnesota, was a 5-day period March 3 - 7, 2000. The city has tied or broken their high temperature for the date ten consecutive days, as of yesterday. This streak will likely end today, as the high is predicted to be 60 - 65, and the record high for the date is 66. Chicago, Illinois has tied or broken their daily high temperature record the past nine days in a row. This ties the nine-day streak of record highs set on August 26 - September 3, 1953. Other cites that have set daily high temperature records the past nine days in a row include Fort Wayne and South Bend, Indiana. Numerous cities have broken high temperature records on seven consecutive days during "Summer in March, 2012", including Gaylord, Pellston, and Traverse City in Michigan.


Figure 2. All-time high temperature records set in March 2012 for the U.S. The grey icons show locations where the March record was broken on multiple days. Image taken from wunderground's new record extremes page, using data from NOAA's National Climatic Data Center.

The big picture: the impacts of "Summer in March, 2012"
I've always said living in Michigan would be much more bearable if we could just get rid of March. March weather here is always horrible, with brutal cold, high winds, damaging ice storms, heavy snow, interminable cloudy stretches with no sun, all interspersed with a few teasing warm spells. Well, this year, I got my wish. This March, we started with twelve days of April weather, followed by ten days of June and July weather, with nine days of May weather predicted to round out the month. This has been a huge benefit to the economy--vastly reduced heating costs, no snow removal bills, and far fewer traffic accidents due to icy roads. However, there is major downside to the "Summer in March, 2012" heat wave. The growing season is now in full swing, five weeks early. A damaging freeze that will severely impact the fruit industry and other sensitive plants is very likely. Indeed, the forecast calls for lows in the upper 20s in the cherry-growing region of Michigan near Traverse City on Monday night. The exceptional March warmth has also melted all the snow in the northern U.S. and southern Canada, drying out the soils and setting the stage for a much warmer than average summer, and an increased chance of damaging drought conditions. The early loss of snowpack will also likely cause very low flow rates in the major rivers in late summer and early fall, reducing the amount of water needed for irrigation of crops. Low flows may also cause problems for navigation, limiting commercial barge traffic on Midwest rivers.

Links
Andrew Freedman of Climate Central interviewed a number of climate scientists who are experts in studying the link between extreme weather events and climate change for his post, Global Warming May Have Fueled March Heat Wave Odds.

Wunderground's weather historian Christopher C. Burt will be posting a more comprehensive summary of the "Summer in March, 2012" heat wave this weekend.

Have a great weekend, everyone, and I'll be back Monday with a new post. I expect I'll be hard at work this weekend, mowing my lawn for the first time ever in March!

Jeff Masters

2012 03 22 Neighbor's Magnolia Tree drops its blossoms (gatyamgal)
Because of our week of record breaking Temps here in Bettendorf, IA, the neighbor's tree bloomed and lost its blossoms 3 weeks early. What will April bring?
2012 03 22 Neighbor's Magnolia Tree drops its blossoms
Spring Landscape (thebige)
Spring Landscape
Jefferson Memorial (KEM)
Cherry blossoms in Washington DC.
Jefferson Memorial

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 302 - 252

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24Blog Index

Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

I'm all stomach, no arms. :P


yeah, im taking it a step at a time. once i get a vehicle...ima buy me some bench pressin material!back towards 2011 summer, i had a faint 6-pack...but i quit doing frequent sit-ups n stuff and they kinda faded away, so...

i git em back soon! :D
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4481
Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's HORSIES!!!
Member Since: August 21, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 4860
Quoting NavarreMark:
I see folks here are now tryin to run Levi off too. Pretty sad. There are other places to go to discuss weather.
What are you talking about? In the words of the great Rick James: Link
Member Since: July 22, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 3842
Quoting Levi32:
151. Some1Has2BtheRookie

My views are not that the basic physics are wrong. It is a fact that CO2 has a large E-M absorption band at wavelengths of about 11-15 micrometers, which intersects the E-M spectrum of the Earth. It is a fact that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is increasing. It has to have some effect. What I still think is unclear is exactly how much impact the CO2 increase has within the very complex Earth-atmosphere system.

You will ask why I don't believe the current "consensus" on the subject. I dislike the unbelievable politicization of the issue. It doesn't matter what "side" you're on. Politics has ruined this aspect of modern science. From where I'm sitting the IPCC could be correct, and we will see as time goes on if they are, or they could be overestimating the effects.

We're watching people run around all the time blaming AGW for any weather event under the sun, which is getting ridiculous. My position is that we should be aware that the Earth has been on an overall warming trend over the past century, and that there is a possibility that humans have influenced it, and that for many reasons besides just the weather, we should pursue clean and renewable energy around the globe. However, at the current politicized state that the science is in, I'm obliged to be skeptical.

And that is my two cents.


That may be your 2 cents, Levi32, but when it comes to your disproving the physics and the chemistry, you are a dollar short.

You are trying to use politics as a scapegoat. The scientist did not start the political process on climate change. The scientist are just now getting into the political aspects of it. They are only doing so to defend their scientific studies from those that have waged unwarranted and invalid attacks against them and their scientific studies.

We do see people running around and blaming every weather event on AGW. What you do not see is the climatologist making these claims. That is a BIG difference.

You are allowed and even obligated to be skeptical. Scientific theory and experiments require skepticism. However, you read as if it is all about the politics. Fine. You are a very bright person and have had scientific training. Remove the politics from your own thoughts and look at just the science. What does the science tell you?

Truly, are your own thoughts that it is all too political for you to state that your opinions are more noteworthy than the consensus of the climatologist? All I have asked of you is to show us the scientific studies you have found that turns The Laws of Physics inside out and destroys all we know about Chemistry. I ask that you do this and to not just revert to saying that it is too political be trusted. You do not have to agree with the AGWT, but until you can provide evidence that disproves it, you should not be so eager to suggest that it is irrelevant.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4737
Yay! Spring Break! I can finally stop stressing out about school and get some time to sit back and relax for the next 10 days. :D
Member Since: August 9, 2009 Posts: 10 Comments: 4946
Quoting Levi32:
151. Some1Has2BtheRookie

y position is that we should be aware that the Earth has been on an overall warming trend over the past century, and that there is a possibility that humans have influenced it, and that for many reasons besides just the weather, we should pursue clean and renewable energy around the globe.


Climate change is not magic. You can't just say "well climate has been in a warming trend, so that's why we are in a warming trend." Climate changes because something pushes it to change. A large portion of the warming from the late 1800s into the early 1900s has been shown to be due to solar activity. Solar activity is now no longer supporting a warming climate, in fact, the opposite is true. So what else added the heat to the system post 1950?
Member Since: September 28, 2002 Posts: 5 Comments: 3190
Quoting nigel20:

Moisture is quite abundant......what's up hydrus?
Trying to do to many things at once..Looking down the road at the next system. It may put down some rain in already damp areas. We shall see.
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 20977
A little bit of wisdom for weather and climate debates

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NavarreMark:
I see folks here are now tryin to run Levi off too. Pretty sad. There are other places to go to discuss weather.


Nobody is trying to run Levi off from what I have read. However, I think he is a little out of his league trying to talk about climate change. Neap and others are tough in that subject lol.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31893
Quoting KoritheMan:

My family really doesn't buy healthy foods (I'm working now, and could theoretically buy my own healthy food to consume, but I have other plans), so what I do is I eat in moderation.


You're so right. The key word to sensible eating is "moderation".
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
So...on my list of things to do starting Monday.
  • Stop biting nails
  • Start drinking water
  • Stop procrastinating
  • More exercise, less computer/games
I don't know...I just don't like going outside because of the bees. I am allergic and highly afraid of bees, wasps, yellowjackets, hornets...
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31893
Quoting BaltimoreBrian:


in all circumstances?


Looks like something my Chihuahua would do.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31893
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

I know how to do a push-up, thank you. :P


in all circumstances? ;)

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
287. skook
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

I'm going to start drinking water on Monday. I may not like it because it doesn't have a taste, but it has many benefits, and I don't want to become unhealthy.



I drink alot of water at work, and 50% of the time I mix it with MIO, its pretty good, and has some mixed reviews, but using something like mio to flavor your water might help you make the transition imo.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Lol, yeah.
sorry...I can do a few..:)
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 20977
Quoting hurricanehunter27:
Then your not doing them correctly or in a sufficient amount. Maybe even both.

I know how to do a push-up, thank you. :P
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31893
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

I don't know. I feel like push-ups do not really do anything for me.
Then your not doing them correctly or in a sufficient amount. Maybe even both.
Member Since: July 22, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 3842
Quoting nigel20:

If the SOI continues to increase we are likely to see below average. SST's in the tropical pacific

The SOI is expected to rise. As you can see from that chart, it goes through little rises and falls. Its peak will not be as high as previously this year and last, and it will fall a lot more each time.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31893
Quoting hydrus:
Can you do any?

Lol, yeah.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31893
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:
The 30 day SOI continues to go up,tonight at +7.2.


If the SOI continues to increase we are likely to see below average. SST's in the tropical pacific
Member Since: November 6, 2010 Posts: 11 Comments: 7978
Quoting caribbeantracker01:

Neutral conditions predicted through out the hurricane season....evening again guys, I've been in and out of the blog today
Member Since: November 6, 2010 Posts: 11 Comments: 7978
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

I don't know. I feel like push-ups do not really do anything for me.
Can you do any?
Member Since: September 27, 2007 Posts: 1 Comments: 20977
Quoting washingtonian115:
That's good try to stay in shape as a kid. Don't worry your body is still developing so you shouldn't be worrying to much about that.Just do push ups everyday if you can.

I don't know. I feel like push-ups do not really do anything for me.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31893
Quoting TomTaylor:
got an interesting shape to it



Should you look closely at the center of that hailstone, you can see Old Man Winter's face. ... And he looks dazed and confused.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4737
This year's tornado season has already cranked out an estimated $1-2 billion in damages.

The disturbing this is, we are not even close to the peak.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31893
What a Big low into Conus....

Member Since: August 2, 2010 Posts: 21 Comments: 9788
Quoting Barefootontherocks:


I'm tired of theory.

How about a list of what can be done within current technology? Things that will actually have an impact. Mankind has mowed down forests. Should we plant trees? Seems to me what this world needs is a new, clean power source. Got any ideas what that could be?

Thirty years ago, this country was environmentally aware enough to pass a law that anyone generating by solar, wind and hydro, who knows how else, more power than needed for hisself could not only sell it to the local power company but the power company was required to buy it. What happened? Solar and wind technology is already more than 30 years old. Why don't people use it. Expense? Oil's still cheaper? (add: Coal is cheaper?)

Did you know you can get a nice Federal tax credit for a geothermal setup on your central heat and air unit? Ends up using about 1/5 the electricity of a standard unit. How many individuals do this when many can (edit) barely afford groceries, let alone central heat and air?

I don't think anyone's denying that the climate is warming. As I have said here before, 15,000 years ago, Puget Sound was glaciers. I have seen the retreat of Alaskan glaciers with my own eyes.

Academic rhetoric is one thing. My question is this: Now, Right Now, just what can mankind do to stop it?

All rhetorical questions, of course, unless you or others who like to harp about the problem actually have answers.


Thank you, Barefoot. I fully agree with you. The time has come to quit talking about the game and to start dealing the cards. You are spot on with this observation.

"Now, Right Now, just what can mankind do to stop it?" .... I sense that this is your pressing question. Your question is quite literal and so will be my answer. ... Nothing. There is absolutely nothing that we can do "right now" that will "stop" the process. The system has been charged, so to speak. Much in the same way that an automotive battery has been charged. Should you not add any additional charge to this battery and just allow it to "sit", then it will slowly discharge on its own. The amount of CO2, the "charge", that we have already put into the atmosphere will slowing be drained from the system. This will only happen after we quit applying a charge the system. Once we quit charging the system it will still take 2-3 decades for it to "discharge" on its own. We must keep in mind that the greater the "charge" we have applied, the longer it will take to "discharge" the system, when allowed to just "sit". The reason to quit charging the system now is not to instantly discharge the system, but, rather, to quit applying a charge to the system that will delay its ability to naturally discharge itself.

"Mankind has mowed down forests. Should we plant trees?" ... Yes, but not just trees. Any plant can sequester carbon from the atmosphere as its food. I would discover which plants are native to your region and plant these types of plants. Some plants are better than others at sequestering CO2 and I would concentrate more on planting these types of plants. Also, as an added benefit, you could find out which fruit trees and berry bushes grow best in your region and enjoy the fresh fruits and berries.

"Thirty years ago, this country was environmentally aware enough to pass a law that anyone generating by solar, wind and hydro, who knows how else, more power than needed for hisself could not only sell it to the local power company but the power company was required to buy it. What happened? ... Nothing "happened". This is still available to you.

"Why don't people use it. Expense? Oil's still cheaper? (add: Coal is cheaper?)" ... Yes, to all that you have already noted as to why people don't use it. There is more that goes with this though. The upfront cost to install these type of system are not cheap. I recently saw a showing of, "This Old House". The home owner had entered into a contract with a solar panel company. The solar panel company supplied, at no charge, the home owner with the solar panels. The home owner paid for the installation and entered into a 30 year contract to pay the solar panel company a low, fixed rate for the electricity that the solar panels provided. This is not available to your location? Consider talking with your neighbors to see if they would be interested in such a plan and then contact a solar panel company/companies to see if they are willing to do this. I see this an excellent business adventure that you may wish to start yourself. Remember, the details are in the contract you sign. Get the best deal that you can before entering into any contract and make sure there are no "gotchas" built into it.

"Did you know you can get a nice Federal tax credit for a geothermal setup on your central heat and air unit? Ends up using about 1/5 the electricity of a standard unit. How many individuals do this when many can (edit) barely afford groceries, let alone central heat and air?" ... Yes, there are alternatives to solar and solar may not be the best option for your location. Geothermal and wind may be cheaper and a better source of power for your area. How do you get the best return of investment, for your location? This will always be key when you are making your decision. And, yes, you are correct. Many times the upfront costs are too cost prohibitive right now. I do not see this be the case for too much longer. The "cheap" oil has long been discovered and worked through the system. Future oil reserves will be more costly to extract and process. They will also require more energy to produce. There will be a time when the new reserves require too much energy and there will be little net gain in their use.

"Now, Right Now, just what can mankind do to stop it?" ... We have come full circle. We are back at your most pressing question. What can we do now, right now? Well, I have a default answer to this question - Consume less, conserve what you consume and recycle what you discard. You save money when you do this and have the potential to make some money through recycling. How sweet is that! But, that is not all. You can also do the following:

1. Plan your trips so commutes to where you are not going to do just one thing. Plan ahead and accomplish as many tasks as you can, with just one trip.

2. Keep your tires properly inflated. This does make a difference. Keep in mind that over inflating your tires does not help to further reduce drag and wears your tires out faster.

3. Keep your car tuned according to the manufacturer's suggested intervals to do so. The filters are big player in the efficiency of your vehicle.

4. Carpool whenever possible. When you are going to town to shop, see if your neighbors need anything and ask them to do the same for you. OK, you have to like your neighbors and they have to like you, but saving a little money helps to make friends fairly quickly. ;-)

5. When the time comes to replace your vehicle, do so with the most fuel efficient vehicle you can afford.

6. Adjust your home thermostat. You can save a lot of money and energy by adjusting your thermostat 2-3 degrees.

7. Wash only full loads of dishes and clothes. Hand wash any few items you need now. Turn the "dry" cycle off on your dishwasher. Wash your clothes with the coldest water setting that it takes to get your clothes clean.

These are just a few suggestions. I feel that you can even add to this list in short order, with just a little thought.

I hope this answers your questions for you. Partially, anyway.
Member Since: August 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4737
Quoting SPLbeater:


I used to do 50 pull ups each day, till my biceps got to where i was satisfied. then i began 110 dips each day to strengthen triceps...so basically everything i consume i burn off that same day :D
That's good try to stay in shape as a kid.
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

I'm all stomach, no arms. :P
Don't worry your body is still developing so you shouldn't be worrying to much about that.Just do push ups everyday if you can.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Cyclone2012:


Keep it rising, baby. That's what I wanna see. No EL NINO anytime soon, ^_^.


lol well if la nina were to occur again this yr i wonder what effect it cud have?
Member Since: May 21, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 556
Quoting SPLbeater:


I used to do 50 pull ups each day, till my biceps got to where i was satisfied. then i began 110 dips each day to strengthen triceps...so basically everything i consume i burn off that same day :D

I'm all stomach, no arms. :P
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 31893
Quoting washingtonian115:
I exercise and still keep physically active even though I'm getting older.It's feels good to have a flat tummy :).


I used to do 50 pull ups each day, till my biceps got to where i was satisfied. then i began 110 dips each day to strengthen triceps...so basically everything i consume i burn off that same day :D
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4481
Quoting KoritheMan:

I hear ya. I'm proud of my stomach even in comparison to two months ago. I think I'm actually starting to get the initial stages of a six pack.
I'm not near a pack(that's what having 6 kids will do to ya).I try to stay in shape.I usually buy lot's of veggies and fruits and limit the soda in the house.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting washingtonian115:
I exercise and still keep physically active even though I'm getting older.It's feels good to have a flat tummy :).
I hear ya. I'm proud of my stomach even in comparison to two months ago. I think I'm actually starting to get the initial stages of a six pack.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting yqt1001:


I might try the water thing tomorrow.
If you're serious about consuming a lot, I would advise two things: first, don't consume it all at once. Water toxicity does exist, and at minimum can result in organ damage, and at worse, death. Second, drink it out of the biggest cup you have. I find that makes it easier than periodically drinking several small glasses. I have a 44 ounce cup from the local gas station that once contained soda.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KoritheMan:

Firstly, I never claimed to be a dietitian, but thanks for the flattery. :P

Secondly, without knowing the full extent of the amount of candy you are consuming on a daily basis, I would say the former. If you are consuming three Hershey bars, however, I think the latter would be worse, especially when you factor in the overall fat content.

I'm just trying to take care of myself since I used to be very overweight (not that I'm pointing fingers at any of you and saying you are, mind you). I can't tell you what to do, but I'm hoping to at least open new avenues of perspective.
I exercise and still keep physically active even though I'm getting older.It's feels good to have a flat tummy :).
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KoritheMan:

I'm just trying to take care of myself since I used to be very overweight (not that I'm pointing fingers at any of you and saying you are, mind you). I can't tell you what to do, but I'm hoping to at least open new avenues of perspective.


Yeah, I'm not near the overweight side yet, but I am heading there now that I have stopped growing taller. Although I must admit I have been looking more closely at what I am eating so I might be able to avoid diabetes and being overweight (you probably had a lot to do with this :P). I might try the water thing tomorrow.

Who knows, 30 years from now I could be thanking you. ;)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting yqt1001:


That has to be probably the greatest argument against healthy foods. Unhealthy foods are way to cheap while healthy foods are expensive.
That's precisely why I have simply adapted. My family really doesn't buy healthy foods (I'm working now, and could theoretically buy my own healthy food to consume, but I have other plans), so what I do is I eat in moderation. Typically start the day off with (sugar free) cereal, come home and workout, eat whatever dinner happens to be that night, and then if I get hungry again, eat a sandwich or something.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:
However, at the current politicized state that the science is in, I'm obliged to be skeptical.

And that is my two cents.


The science, meaning the peer-reviewed papers in reputable journals are not very politicized at all. My two cents is that you should read the science, ignore blogs, mb posts (except this one, of course!), editorials, op-eds, magazines, TV, newspapers, and so forth, and simply read the science.

I would be amazed if you could read all the science and remain "skeptical".

I couldn't, and I had an opinion very much like yours four years ago.

And that there is my dos centavos. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
The 30 day SOI continues to go up,tonight at +7.2.

Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14214

Quoting yqt1001:
Kori, since you claim to be such a dietitian, what's worse for the body: pop (1-3 a day) or candy (a similar amount),
Firstly, I never claimed to be a dietitian, but thanks for the flattery. :P

Secondly, without knowing the full extent of the amount of candy you are consuming on a daily basis, I would say the former. If you are consuming three Hershey bars, however, I think the latter would be worse, especially when you factor in the overall fat content.

I'm just trying to take care of myself since I used to be very overweight (not that I'm pointing fingers at any of you and saying you are, mind you). I can't tell you what to do, but I'm hoping to at least open new avenues of perspective.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting KoritheMan:


Money is another reason it is advisable to stop.


That has to be probably the greatest argument against healthy foods. Unhealthy foods are way to cheap while healthy foods are expensive. Now water is mostly free...people for some odd reason prefer bottled water which is probably the most expensive thing ever made to drink.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SPLbeater:


No

Quoting KoritheMan:

Sugar is terrible for you.


No

Quoting washingtonian115:
I love sunkist.But I havn't had one in over a year and a 1/2.

You all got it all WRONG!!! 4 sunkist a day MINIMUM!!:D:D:D:D



Money is another reason it is advisable to stop.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Member Since: May 21, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 556
Kori, since you claim to be such a dietitian, what's worse for the body: pop (1-3 a day) or candy (a similar amount),

Realistically, my parents limit my candy consumption (and now I am setting limitations for myself on my own) but I never had any limitations on pop and can consume maybe 1-2 cans a day (mostly diet though). Curious as to what would be worse. For the record, I love milk and have more milk per day than pop though so I'm unsure as to what form of calcium I'm missing if any. :P
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Cyclone2012:


Is this recent? Cause the one that was posted just yesterday, was painting an entirely different picture.
yup have a look

Link
Member Since: May 21, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 556
Quoting KoritheMan:


It's better to start and small and work your way up to that, but yes.

Look at it this way: I drink at least 100 ounces a day. It's really not that difficult after awhile.


Look at it this way. I drunk atleast 70 ounces of sunkist today

lol
Member Since: August 4, 2011 Posts: 46 Comments: 4481

Viewing: 302 - 252

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.

Local Weather

Mostly Cloudy
72 °F
Mostly Cloudy