Dubbed “An Apostle for Fitness” in her profile in the Wall Street Journal, Carole has been a featured guest on more than sixty radio and television shows, including NBC’s Today show, CBS’s Early Show, MSNBC’s Countdown, and CNN News. Carole has been featured in magazines such as American Fitness, Diet & Exercise Magazine, and Today’s Health & Wellness, as well as in newspapers such as the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Tampa Tribune, Sacramento Bee, Baltimore Sun and the Los Angeles Times. Carole’s book, From Fat to Fit, was named a finalist in the health and fitness category of the National Best Books 2007 Awards, sponsored by USA Book News.

Besides teaching and consulting, Carole has produced a weekly community television show, The Tipping Point and a reality show, Go Fat to Fit.

Have you noticed the number of articles bombarding us with conflicting information about the possible toxic effect of using plastic bottles manufactured with the industrial chemical BPA ( bisphenol A )?

While we’re waiting for the jury of scientists to return with a definitive conclusion, I’d like to spotlight a more immediate threat to our well-being and emotional health—human toxins. Poisonous social contagions are invisible, hard to measure and difficult to defend against. Yet they can easily pollute our outlook and sabotage our efforts to make positive lifestyle changes, including weight loss.

I’m referring to the words we say to ourselves and the words others say to us. Just as a smile can lift our spirits, a self-critical, undermining thought or an unexpected outburst of anger can suck the joy right out of the day.

The inner voice we hear—the one no one else can hear—is speaking to us most of our waking hours. The voice explains what is going on and how we should react. The voice emerged when we were children and is ever present.

In his book Hard Optimism, Price Pritchett asserts that we recognize our internal negative thoughts about 30 percent of the time; the preponderance of our negative thoughts remains outside our awareness but nonetheless influences our outlook and the choices we make. Gaining mastery over the voice requires that we step back, analyze its perspective and, where appropriate, update its messages to more positive ones. If all else fails, we can thank our inner jerk for sharing and ignore the message.

Our internal negative thoughts, however, are only one source of toxins. Additional potent sources are those ingested through contact with poisonous personalities. The bullying boss who rails at his employees, the speeding driver who weaves in and out of traffic during rush hour, the hurtful comments of a rebellious teenager or a cutting comment from a spouse can easily poison our mood.

Toxins from within as well as the ones others target at us can paralyze. The remedy is to be prepared. Arm yourself with your own pharmacy of antidotes. Here are strategies I use and recommend to train and condition the mind to remain balanced, stable and mentally fit (FIT):

F Find alternative ways to interpret the negative event. Seek to find something positive in the experience. Focus on improving yourself rather than on obsessing over the shortcomings of the person who wronged you. Laugh it off—some encounters aren’t worth fretting over.

I Invest your time in a constructive, creative effort rather than in regret for the past. Resist the impulse to get even. A well-lived life and a tranquil persona are the best responses to others’ dysfunctional behavior. When difficulties arise, consider the event an opportunity to practice your newfound equipoise.

T Take the time to allow the full range of emotions to surface. Being present and aware on a moment-to-moment basis, even during the tough moments, speeds up our ability to throw off toxins. Take a minivacation—read a book, listen to your favorite music or go for a walk. Tell your friends and family if you are having a tough time and need some extra tender-loving care. Few of us get through life without occasional rough patches. Allow others to comfort you.

You can also practice social selectivity—that is, you can remove people who regularly wreck havoc from your world. Granted, this step is a difficult one to take—particularly if a friend or relative is involved—but extreme behavior calls for an extreme solution.

Managing our internal voice and sustaining an optimistic outlook are mental muscles you can strengthen with practice. When you are tackling weight loss and fitness, a positive mind-set is the most valuable tool you can have. I work hard to guard mine. What are your strategies?

Discover Your Athlete Within

Carpool is an underrated parenting tool. True, you have to be willing to trade your clean car and peaceful commute for chaotic chatter and OKR (other kids’ residue), but I have found that it is well worth the sacrifice. Why is that? Because carpool has taught me more about my children than any other school related activity. Carpool is the legal equivalent to truth serum. From the bowels of the back seat, children reveal incredible things. If you just listen long enough without interrupting or prompting them, you’ll find out more than you ever thought possible about their friends, their teachers, and their views of the world.

The other day after school, I picked up my kids and two of their friends, Dana and Delaney Markert. After the usual shuffling and maneuvering of 80 lb. bookbags and cumbersome musical instruments, we got situated and buckled in.

At first, the conversation from the back was like any other. Talk of crushes from the older ones and disgusted protests from the younger set. I had the radio on and a local DJ was commenting on the primary results here in Georgia that took place earlier this year. He mentioned that Barack Obama had won the Democratic primary and began taking calls concerning all the Presidential candidates.

As soon as the DJ finished his commentary, my 8 year old son piped up and said, “Yes! He won! I love ‘the rock Obama’. He’s just so cool.”

I was simultaneously surprised by Brandon’s enthusiasm for the candidate and amused by his mis-hearing of Obama’s name. I was about to correct him when my daughter beat me to the punch – but for a reason far different than mine.

With a horrified gasp and raised eyebrows, our 5th grader Hannah lunged toward her brother. And with all the urgency and seriousness she could muster, she whispered through clenched teeth, “Brandon!!! …..He’s a Democrat!”

“So?” came his reply.

“So?!?! Democrats just wanna take our money and send it to people in other countries!” replied my obstinate offspring.

I wanted more than anything to jump in and correct her horrible misconception (and his Freudian slip), but I just bit my lip and continued to listen with the utmost curiosity, wondering what his retort would be.

I didn’t get a chance to hear it because before he could reply, the second eldest politician in the car chimed in, “Plus, Brandon, Democrats don’t believe in God.”

I couldn’t believe what was taking place – full on propaganda from the innocent little prepubescents in the back seat! I knew it was time to step in and carefully straighten things out, but I didn’t want to make the girls feel bad for simply repeating what they’d heard. After all, suburban Atlanta is one of the most Republican counties in the country. It makes sense that kids would hear some disparaging comments about Democrats in one way or another, but this was ridiculous.

Suddenly I started to think about what our children may be hearing on the radio, or the tv, or at school. I felt compelled to try and straighten things out. So, I took just a moment to compose my thoughts before laying out a careful explanation.

“Girls, that’s just not true. There are millions of both Republicans and Democrats who believe in God and see their political choices as a way to serve God. And both Democrats and Republicans have lots of different views – even amongst themselves - about money and trade with other countries. I know it’s sometimes hard to understand, but instead of just assuming something about all Republicans or all Democrats, it’s always best to get to know the individual and what they believe in. After all, everyone has their own beliefs – and that includes you, even though you’re young. You should figure out the things that matter to you and find out what the candidates believe about those before you make up your mind.”

Dead silence filled the air from the back.

I was pretty proud of my little speech and how articulate I had been. I peeked in the rearview mirror to see how well I had actually done. Some had blank looks of acceptance on their faces while others carried looks of confusion. Delaney, however, the youngest of the group, had a deeply pensive expression and I could tell she wanted to ask a question. I was sure that I had struck a chord with her and made a real impact on her young political mind – until I heard her question.

“So, do Democrats believe in unicorns?”

My turn for dead silence.

“Umm…I don’t think so, sweetheart.”

“Well then, I’m a Republican, ‘cause that’s what matters to me.”

I relayed these events to Hal and after a good laugh, we thought some about how most parents tend to steer clear of political discussions with their kids. Because of that, children are on their own to splice together the bits and pieces they get from the airwaves and in the hallways. We decided to be a little more proactive ourselves and we came up with three principles of politics to live by at our house. They are:

1. Model What You Don’t See Enough--Our kids will catch most everything we say, so let’s try to model political conversations the way we wish politicians would do it—calmly centered on the issues at hand. Besides, there’s nothing like a little conversation with a child to sharpen your own intellect. They will want to know why you feel a certain way, so be ready to tell them.

2. Let Our Kids Disagree with Us—encourage them to do so. Not only will such discourse grow their thinking skills, it will drastically increase their respect for you.

3. Fight for the Right to Fight --Whether we disagree (with our spouses, friends, or kids) is not the issue—whether we can freely disagree without violence or hatred or dirt is the issue. Think of the change for this world if our kids grow up practicing ScreamFree politics.

Like I said, I learned a lot that day. I learned that kids hear and pick up on more than you think. I learned that they need guidance in sorting out all of the stuff that they think they understand. I learned that apparently, that my skills in unraveling complicated political intricacies need some work. And I learned that by matter of default, if nothing else, Republicans have a staunch supporter in the 2nd grade who is really hoping for a win this November, for the sake of all the unicorns out there.

Do You Label Your Children?

Scream Free Doesn't Equal Cancer Free

This morning, over breakfast, I was listening to an NPR story about the Prague Spring with my son 8-year-old son, Tasman. We got into a conversation about the former Soviet Union, a bit of world history, the Cold War, and Stalin. I decided to advance the notion of deep ecology to him using Stalin’s horrific genocidal killings as a prybar.

In order to explain the root notion of deep ecology, namely the earth as super-organism, I started with the notion of consciousness. I told Tasman that when living things reach a certain level of complexity, they achieve something called consciousness, which we could call an awareness of self as distinct from the world around that self. He asked me whether worms have consciousness and I said I didn’t know. He asked me whether his pet salamander had consciousness, and his pet snakes, and I said I thought they did. He asked me whether a snake, crawling over a mirror, would know it was a snake for the first time by seeing its reflection. I said it was a great question, and that the answer was probably that it might be able to learn something new about itself by seeing its reflection, perhaps because what it saw resembled the sight of others of its own kind, which it would have to be able to recognize in order to mate and thereby propagate its species. He said that bees probably were conscious because they could recognize other bees and make a hive, and ants that make nests and termites that make mounds. He mentioned a friend of his that he thought probably did not have too much consciousness. This led to a discussion of the idea of the development of consciousness, and whether it was possible to increase it. We talked about meditation and other forms of experience as means of increasing consciousness.

Then I looped back to the idea that since consciousness was probably a result of the a certain level of complexity in an organism, and since the earth contained all the organisms on it in much the way the body contains brain cells and other cells, including symbiotic bacteria and even symbiotic fungi, it was likely that the earth had a kind of super-consciousness, by which I mean an overarching consciousness that includes the “lower” or “smaller” consciousness of people and animals and maybe–who know–some plants. If we are aware of such things as atoms and constellations and evolution and more, who knows to what cosmic secrets the consciousness of the Earth might be privy?

Once we had agreed that such a thing was possible I asked him what a super-conscious being might do if it saw a piece of itself growing wildly out of control, and by virtue of that uncontrolled growth harming itself deeply, even fatally. He said the super-conscious being would want to cut out the part that was growing too fast and too big, or at least slow it down.

Once he accepted that idea, I introduced the idea that the human race was a sort of growth on the planet­–that it had gone wildly out of control and was harming the planet deeply. He asked if by this I meant killing other parts of the planet like the natural environment, rivers, streams, oceans, mountains, and of course plants and animals. I said that was exactly what I meant.

After that we discussed different ways in which the earth could combat the out-of-control growth of the human population. He said maybe diseases that killed people. I said yes. He said maybe war, because that killed people too. I said yes. He said maybe crazy leaders who killed the people of their own country. And that was how we got back to Stalin and a discussion of how much of what we do to each other and the earth is wholly unacceptable and awful, and how we have much to do to learn and change and grow in our own consciousness about our place in nature and the world.

I told him there are other ways of looking at things people do to each other and to the earth, but that this is a pretty good and useful one. He said we need to not do this stuff, and to protect the earth so we won’t kill it and it won’t kill us.

I thought it was a pretty good breakfast conversation.

Usain Bolt's Greatest Contribution

Sanya Richards Takes The Bronze

Dr. Mark Goulston is a former UCLA professor who helps high performing leaders, senior management and sales people reach their full potential using skills he learned training FBI and police hostage negotiators. He is a member of the National Association of Corporate Directors and the Worldwide Association of Business Coaches and writes the weekly Tribune syndicated career advice column, "Solve Anything with Dr. Mark" and columns on leadership for FAST COMPANY and Directors Monthly and is an expert at People Jam. He is frequently called upon to share his expertise with regard to contemporary business, national and world news by television, radio and print media including: Wall Street Journal, Harvard Business Review, Fortune, Newsweek, Time, Los Angeles Times, ABC/NBC/CBS/Fox/CNN/BBC News, Oprah, and Today. Mark Goulston is the author of The 6 Secrets of a Lasting Relationship, Get Out of Your Own Way: Overcoming Self-Defeating Behavior, Get Out of Your Own Way at Work and PTSD for Dummies. For more information visit: www.markgoulston.com.

Devastating illnesses can bring patients to the brink of a seemingly agreeable suicide. The role of the psychiatrist can be to look coldly through the pain and determine if there is a way to save the patient’s life and make it worth enduring. Then the clinician must be prepared to enact what he perceives.

In 1986, a well-known suicidologist asked me to see a patient that he had consulted on. Before I did, he told me the following:

The patient was a 64 year old man, housebound from end stage Parkinson’s disease. He had requested to be put out of his misery. He not only desired to be allowed to die, but had asked for help to accomplish the deed. He was unable to get out of bed to retrieve his stockpile of pills or his handgun.

This man previously had been a successful professional athlete. He had also been an example of fortitude and persistence to his wife of 30 years and to his four sons. He had continued as a coach, hiding the early signs of Parkinsonism from his players and children, saying he did not want to be pitied. For six years; he functioned-fairly well. But during the last two, he had deteriorated drastically.

He had exhausted most of the benefits of the anti-Parkinsonism drugs and was obtaining progressively less relief for his tremor while having increasing negative side effects - severe involuntary movements (athetosis) - from the L-dopa. His neurologist had confirmed that the disease was indeed progressing and the L-dopa becoming less effective. But the neurologist did not feel the disease had reached an end stage, believing it might not for several more years.

“They probably want you to talk me out of doing away with myself.
They think I’m depressed. I’m not. I’m just realistic.
How do you think you’d feel, if you were a hostage to this disease?”

After hearing a history and description of this difficult situation, I phoned the patient and his wife to arrange a house call. Then I drove the 45 minutes it took to reach their home. The weather was roasting and my air conditioner was on the fritz, so I found my anxious anticipation becoming mixed with irritation.

When I arrived, the patient had been “readied” for my visit, I discovered, by having been moved from bed. He had donned a robe and was sitting in the darkened living room. He had a wizened, almost emaciated appearance, was unshaven, and generally looked awful. In the room, I caught glimpses of early photos of this man. In them he looked vigorous.

I introduced myself and said I had come at the request of the previous doctor and of the patient’s wife. The continual bob and weave of his head was as unsettling to observe as it was for him to talk through. I asked him why he thought I was there. He replied, “They probably want you to talk me out of doing away with myself. They think I’m depressed. I’m not. I’m just realistic. How do you think you’d feel, if you were a hostage to this disease?”

I didn’t know what to say. I asked him, “Why did you go along with having this visit?” (Privately, I wished I were back in the safety of my office with patients who wanted to be seen.) He answered, “I have to admit, I did feel better after I saw the other doctor. He was so kind to come out to the house that, when he insisted I see you, I went along with him.”

Then he proceeded to tell me much about himself - particularly how he always had been a man of action, a doer rather than a thinker. Now he could do very little, and had been reduced to a housebound invalid. “They would take it badly if I killed myself. But each day lasts forever, and I don’t know how much longer I can hold on,” he related in a beaten voice.

I wanted to buy more time, so I asked if he could promise me not to take any drastic action until I saw him again. The next time I wanted to see him with all his children and their spouses. We arranged this meeting for the following Sunday, giving his children from out of town time to come. As a final note, after I felt some rapport had developed, I quipped to him that if I were going to make the effort to drive this long distance in this awful heat with a bum air conditioner, I, would expect him to be shaven, groomed, and fully dressed for the family meeting.

Before this second session, I tried to establish in my mind a common goal for this family. It seemed important to each member to believe that he or she had given his or her best effort. There would be less guilt to haunt them, thereby, after he died. It was imperative to enable each person to understand all the others’ points of view. A helpful beginning technique would be to ask different persons what they believed other family members felt about this meeting. This empathogenic technique usually keeps interest of all participants high because they are allowed to hear how other family members view them.

The family meeting began with me being surrounded by a clean shaven, well groomed, street clothed patient; his wife; four sons; and four daughters-in-law.

I selected the oldest son to speak first, asking him how his father probably felt about this meeting. He replied that he felt his father went along with it to satisfy other family members, but was skeptical that anything positive would be accomplished. When asked what he had hoped his father might feel and what he feared his father may feel, he replied, “I hope my father will find a reason to live. That he will realize that he doesn’t have to do anything to earn our love. I’m afraid that he’ll nod, or agree to what we want now, but then he’ll go back on it as soon as his suffering increases.”

Other members of the family expressed similar sentiments. The youngest son’s wife wept continually throughout the meeting. The patient’s wife spoke very little. The patient nodded agreement frequently, but in an obligatory, insincere manner. Multiple suggestions were made as to how the patient might usefully spend his time. On several occasions, I tried to translate different persons’ points of view, to make them comprehensible to the others. It seemed important that the patient know he was loved but, yes, he was a burden. He was not imagining that. It was emphasized that he himself was not the burden, rather it was his illness. As he felt helpless against his illness, his family felt helpless against his despair.

Furthermore, it seemed clear that the family wanted to believe him, but distrusted him. They believed that he still would end his life, if he had the chance. When confronted with this, he promised not to attempt to end his life, and to give a psychological approach to his suffering a chance.

The meeting lasted about 90 minutes. By its end, the family felt a good deal more unified, as all of them had expressed their personal fears and hopes. I left the family with two books to continue to help them understand each other.

I gave The Diary of Anne Frank to the patient. Like Anne Frank, he was in an occupied country, occupied by his unwelcome disease. I emphasized that, just as she was forced to create a new world for herself, behind her bookcase in Amsterdam, he was now challenged to learn a new way to enjoy and appreciate life, now that physical mobility no longer was available to him.

I gave Death Be Not Proud by John Gunther to the eldest son. I told him that this book might help him appreciate the struggle to keep hope alive and despair at bay. Gunther had depicted this so poignantly, telling of his son who would die of a brain tumor shortly after he tenaciously completed high school. The book also might help him and other family members to balance savior-like zeal with a realistic goal of reducing suffering.

The days passed, the disease progressed. The patient accepted a trial of antidepressants, but developed urinary retention and a urinary tract infection. He was hospitalized, and felt even more demoralized and suicidal.

The eleventh hour had been reached, and I arranged another family meeting. At it, every family member agreed to allow the patient to take his life. In that meeting, I suggested that until shock therapy (ECT) was tried, not all reasonable options had been exhausted.

They were aghast at the suggestion of such a “primitive” ‘method of therapy. But I told the family my belief that in years to come ECT would probably be shown to be a very effective treatment in properly selected patients. Since it was now available, I argued that the controversy prominent in the media should not prohibit its use. It would be a shame, I concluded, to see it confirmed as a therapeutic modality, as I believed it would be, and to be concurrently haunted by the knowledge that it had not been tried before their loved one was allowed to commit suicide. The family agreed to allow it to be tried. In a unified confrontation with the patient, they “insisted” he give it a try, if not for himself, then for them.

Before the therapy was tried, I consulted with other psychiatrists, who agreed that ECT was indicated. Then a course of inpatient ECT was given. I was pleased and vindicated that there was a striking remission of not only the patient’s depression, but of many of his Parkinsonism symptoms as well.

Maintenance ECT since, at a frequency of one treatment per month, has kept the patient’s functioning at an optimum level. At present, the patient and his wife continue outpatient psychotherapy.

And now they come to my place.

SUMMARY

This was a man of obvious physical and emotional talents who had his “normal” life taken away by Parkinson’s disease. He easily could have lost his life, even with the sad agreement to this by his beloved family - his suffering being so great. My duty was to wait, to play for time, then to provide a forum for all involved, and to help all members understand themselves and each other. Then came the most difficult part of the “therapy”: To offer an unexpected, resisted, frightening treatment, and to do so with confidence and hope. In this case, the life of the patient and the emotional survival of the family depended on the practitioner’s knowledge and insistence on its complete use.

Psychiatrists Shrink Away From Doing Psychotherapy

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder--Statistics Are The Real Cost of War

Update on Aug 21, 2008 by Editor

Reuters! 

Washington Post Link!

  For more than 20 years Michelle DeAngelis has been taking on impossible corporate challenges, solving them in record time and redefining corporate and personal coaching in the process.

Michelle started her own management consulting firm, where she does strategic planning, manages national projects for Fortune 500 companies, coaches executives and gives powerful presentations to bring a healthy dose of reality and life-affirming change to corporate America.

Michelle’s meaningful and practical methods enable people to tap their authentic passion and purpose, magnifying creativity and productivity on both a professional and personal level. Her proprietary Joy Quotient quiz is essential to the process as it measures the gap between people’s thoughts and their actions. Perhaps even more important than IQ or EQ, this Joy Quotient, (JQ) gives clients a game plan to generate joy, close the “Gap” and “Get A Life That Doesn’t Suck."  Michelle lives in Santa Monica, CA and begins joyriding each morning when she looks out her window at the Pacific Ocean and the ferris wheel on the Santa Monica Pier.

Michelle DeAngelis--

I have a simple answer for how to deal with the challenges that show up in our lives: Get B.A.C.K. on Track! I know, I know. When those “oh crap” or “oh wow” moments show up – a flat tire, a missed flight, an overdue bill – those are the times when it’s tempting to lose your cool. We’ve all been there. But rather than reacting without thinking, why not respond in a specific way that is easier on you and everyone around you?

Here’s how to get B.A.C.K. on Track.

• Breathe.
• Acknowledge.
• Choose.
• Kick into gear.

For example, if you have one of those “oh wow” moments then get B.A.C.K:

1. Breathe. Deeply. Do not react. Note that this is an “oh wow” moment.
2. Acknowledge what you feel as a result of that “wow.” That’s right. You can react now, on the inside. She makes me craaazy when she does that.
3. Choose to feel differently. Choose your response. You have some important choices to make: What is your desired outcome? And what do you not want to happen?
4. Kick into gear. Act on your choice once you answer the question, “What would the best me do to get that desired outcome?”

It sounds really simple, but it is surprisingly powerful, and here’s why: research done back in the 70’s at the University of California San Francisco showed that there is a delay of 0.2 to 0.5 of a second between stimulus and response, so it is during this fraction of a second that your brain lets you choose how to respond to any urge. That’s right. It is a choice. The B.A.C.K. Technique takes advantage of this time lag. That is when you “hit the brakes” and get B.A.C.K. on Track.

This is fast! Doing steps 1 through 3 takes just a few seconds. Step 4 can take a little longer, but before long, you’ll be “kicking into gear” and acting on things much more quickly. You can r-e-s-p-o-n-d thoughtfully and consciously, rather than react on emotional autopilot.

And in spite of life’s challenges, you’ll know how to get back on track. 

Can You Deal With Life's Crises?

Update on Aug 18, 2008 by Editor

Washington Post Link!

Jenni Schaefer is a singer/songwriter, international speaker, and author of Life Without Ed: How One Woman  Jenni SchaeferDeclared Independence from Her Eating Disorder and How You Can Too (McGraw-Hill). She writes regularly for national publications and is a contributing author to books in the Chicken Soup series. A consultant with Center For Change and a Board Member with the Eating Disorders Coalition of Tennessee, Jenni is a regular guest on national radio and television, including appearances on Dr. Phil and Entertainment Tonight. Jenni was recently appointed to the Ambassador Council of the National Eating Disorders Association --- joining other NEDA Ambassadors, including Paula Abdul and Sara Evans.