This is part two of a four part series on Inner Wisdom Eating (IWE) The 4 steps of Inner Wisdom Eating (or eating like a thin person) are exactly the same as those promoted by Intuitive Eating. Eat when you're hungry Eat what you want Eat consciously Stop when you are full The difference lies in the approach and the detail. I will discuss each step in this four part series. EAT WHAT YOU WANT DOES YOUR FOOD SING TO YOU? Have a look in your fridge and cupboards. Does the food in there sing to you, does it call your name, and are you looking forward to eating it? Do you eat it because you enjoy it or because you think you should? By choosing only to eat what sings to me, I have discovered (again!) that I am not a big fan of meat and would rather eat a predominantly vegetarian diet. Occasionally I'll eat chicken leg and I love bacon but beyond that I'm not fussed. FOOD DOES NOT HAVE A VALUE There are no good and bad foods. There are no trigger foods or forbidden foods. There is nosuch thing as junk. There is a place in your diet for your favourite indulgences in moderation. Believe me that when you let yourself eat cheesecake, chocolate and hot chips, the novelty soon wears off. I mostly eat unprocessed food, not because it's "good" but because I love the taste and prefer how it makes me feel. YOU CAN STILL EAT DIET FOOD Low fat ice-cream, Diet Coke and protein powder are still in my diet but I eat them because I prefer the taste over their 'real' counterparts. I can still ask for dressing on the side and no butter on my sandwich not because I'm counting calories but because I can't see the point in eating food I don't actually want. Question: What does the author believe about food? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- People should use lots of butter because it is healthy
- Some foods are no good for people
- people can make choices and eat well if they eat in moderation
- not enough information
people can make choices and eat well if they eat in moderation
--
Facebook has a long track record and sordid history of abusing their users' trust and privacy, including the most recent and egregious cases currently making headlines with Cambridge Analytica as well as election meddling in the US and Britain. As if that wasn't enough, it then came to light that they have also been tracking and storing users' phone call and text message data, including "who contacted whom, what time, and how long the conversation was." This is nothing new, as we can see from this 2012 "study" in which they deliberately manipulated news feeds to influence users' emotional state. And again with their settlement with the FCC back in 2011 (that they likely violated with their recent offenses) over deceiving consumers by telling them their information was private, but then repeatedly sharing it and making it public. And then there's The Ugly Memo, in which a FB exec justifies growth at any cost in the name of connecting people, even if that results literally in people dying: We talk about the good and the bad of our work often. I want to talk about the ugly. We connect people. That can be bad if they make it negative. Maybe it costs a life by exposing someone to bullies. Maybe someone dies in a terrorist attack coordinated on our tools. And still we connect people. The ugly truth is that we believe in connecting people so deeply that anything that allows us to connect more people more often is *de facto* good. And up until this most recent Cambridge Analytica scandal, Facebook was negotiating with various healthcare organizations to share patients' health data with FB so they could match it up to your social circle to allegedly provide better health care. Um yeah right. Each time this stuff happens, they issue an apology (or a justification for their behavior) and promise they will take steps to better inform users and protect their privacy, but it's clear that this is just lip service at this point. Question: How did the facebook exec try to justify the Ugly memo? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- Connecting people is de facto good
- not enough information
- It would improve health care
- It was in response to the FCC settlement
Connecting people is de facto good
--
The popularity of lip pencils and crayons is soaring, I suspect it's because they're just so easy to use. I've been trying out two new ones to see which I prefer. In the red corner we have MAC Patent Polish Lip Pencil and in the blue corner we have NARS Velvet Matte Lip Pencil. So let's get ready to rumble while I put them through their paces. Although the packaging of these two is quite similar the formulation and finish of the lip colours are very different MAC Patent Polish is a light gloss and NARS Velvet Matte has a stark matte finish. So whether you prefer your lips sheer and glossy or pigmented and matte there should be something for everyone here. MAC Patent Polish Lip Pencil this is the first lip pencil that I've tried from MAC (apart from lip liner) and I'm really impressed with it. As the name suggests the finish is a very shiny gloss that gives an almost patent shine, it has the feel of a lip gloss but it's not sticky. The colour is called Spontaneous, MAC describe it as a 'soft plum with pearl'. It's definitely a plummy shade, although I can't really detect any pearl in there. It looks quite dark as a crayon but as it's very sheer it appears much more natural once it's on the lips. It's a great way to introduce darker lip colours to your make-up bag if you're not used to them. MAC Patent Polish Lip Pencil is a bit like a fabulous giant tinted lip balm! The crayon itself is chunky and easy to hold, the nib is quite chunky and not great for precision application, but you could use a lip brush to apply it. I love to apply MAC Patent Polish straight from the crayon, it's quick and easy, and as it's very light and sheer it's easy to wipe away any mistakes and re-apply. Question: Why is the MAC Patent Polish Lip Pencil recommended to buy for people who aren't used to darker shades? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- Because people don't wear darker lip colors can wear something that's dark but pigmented
- Because people who do wear darker lip colors can wear something that is dark but pigmented
- not enough information
- Because people who don't wear darker lip colors can wear something that's dark but sheer
Because people who don't wear darker lip colors can wear something that's dark but sheer
--