New Year's resolutions are great, unless you don't really resolve to do anything. Then they become a list of wishes. Unless you are going to determine steps to make your wishes turn into goals AND you're going to follow through with those steps, you probably should not make New Year's resolutions. Full disclaimer before we completely dive in: I'm not against setting goals. I have always been a goal setter and sometimes even a goal achiever. If you're the same, you may enjoy this audible, or if you're interested in developing and achieving SMART goals try this e-book or this book. Why You Shouldn't Make New Year's Resolutions You'll probably write the same things on a sheet of paper that you did the year before. Some of the common resolutions we've all heard are: Lose weight, exercise, spend less, save more, travel, go to church, and so on and so forth. There's a reason these are common. We hear them (or write them) time and time again andnothing changes. By mid-January, they'll be long forgotten. Maybe even before January 15th, they aren't a thought in our minds. They were good ideas two weeks prior (and the years before that), but that's what they have remainedideas. You didn't think of a route to your destination. Saving money sounds great, but do you know what you're already spending? Do you know what you need to cut and where you'll put that amount? Have you factored in your new gym membership? What will you do with it? Will the autodraft payment that comes out each month help you shed those pounds? What churches are in your area? Do they have programs your family will be interested in? Do you know when the services are? You're overwhelmed. You try to better yourself constantly. Maybe. Let's say some of you try to better yourselves constantly. Which can be a good thing. But it can also be the reason you fail yourselves time and time again. You say yes when you should say no, sign up when you should wait a few more months, and have a list of ten New Year's resolutions when you should focus on two. Resolutions probably last A. A few seconds B. A few days C. not enough information D. A few weeks
D

Called the PURE (Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology) study, this was a very large observational study looking at the link between fat and carbohydrate consumption and longevity in 18 countries across 5 continents. Running for 7 years and involving over 135,000 people, this was a very big study so its conclusions are right to take notice of. The key finding from the work that attracted the most media attention was that a high carbohydrate diet was linked with a higher risk of earlier mortality, whereas total fat and individual types of fat were related to a lower risk of earlier mortality. Digging deeper into the study, the research team found that global diets consisted of 61 percent energy coming from carbohydrates and 24 percent energy from fats. And while those in the highest carbohydrate consumption group (a whopping 77 percent of energy) had a higher risk of earlier death, it wasn't cardiovascular disease they were dying from. What those other causes of death were exactly is unclear. Perhaps getting hit by a car running for a Mars Bar was one of them as a recent commenter on my Facebook page theorised. A paradigm shift? Not quite Does this study turn on its head 'everything we knew about nutrition?' Not quite. And here's why. Before the PURE study, there were many studies showing the opposite link between carbohydrates and longevity. So, when a conflicting study comes along, this grabs the media spotlight for the day. Here is just one example a major systematic review and meta-analysis from 2013 involving 17 individual studies and over 242,000 people showing a higher risk of earlier mortality as carbohydrate intake decreased. And this is the problem at times with observational research in that two studies can give polar opposite results so the findings of the PURE study should be seen through this filter. I'm not going to pick apart the PURE study for its flaws. Such issues are consistent across all observational studies no matter if the conclusions support consensus views or not. What is of value to... Who was eating? A. the authort B. the participants in the study C. not enough information D. the researchers
B

*Question*
This week I shot my Interview with Claire Bridge. Myself and Riah travelled, I would say all the way out too Wheelers Hill, but it's really not that far away, unless you live on the North side, which we both do. Riah and I carried our gear on two trains and 1 bus to get to Claire's studio out in Wheelers Hill. I can see why Claire lives here as it's a pretty beautiful place, it's still suburban but there are trills, hills and birds everywhere, and for someone that's passionate about the environment I can see why she lives here. Meeting Claire was awesome, after having spoken via phone or email for so long, it was nice to speak to her in person. The filming of the interview went extremely smoothly, I'd put this down to having planned out everything, such as all the questions I was going to ask prior to the interview. By this stage I had helped Riah film as well as Elise and it was noticeable how much smoother Riah's interview went because she had pre-planned her questions. Rather than spending an hour asking various questions that you might not use anyway, it's much more efficient to spend 20 minutes covering exactly what you want to cover. By this stage I'd also had practise setting up lights, doing sound and getting camera shots for people's portraits so I already knew everything I wanted to shoot. Our setup was pretty simple, two large lights, one on Claire's front right and one on Claire's front left, two Canon EOS 60D DSLR's at different positions (one straight on, one to the side), a Sony H2N handy recorder and a lapel mic. Everything ran super smoothly, we did the interview first then myself and Riah shot various things in Claire's studio. Whilst shooting various things in Claire's studio we also got a chance to both speak to her which was nice, discussing what it is like to be a woman in Melbourne's art scene and finding out who some of her favourite artists were. Overall the experience was also, I have a lot of friends who are artists so I hope to do more artist portraits in the future. Why did the interview go smoothly? A. not enough information B. They spoke on the phone prior C. various questions were asked D. everything was planned out
**Answer**
D