The Radical Crash 3-Day Diet

Try the 3-day diet for immediate but short-term results. But only if our career depends on it and not done regularly. A 3-day diet has sure result but not aimed at better health – so it is adviseable to stick with 3 days only and to get back up on vegetables and carps after the diet schedule has ended.

There are people who need to lose weight fast for a short term. The so-called 3-day diet is most convenient and effective for them.

Is there really an effective 3-day diet? Yes, there is. And it’s really quite simple because it’s mostly about cutting back on calories-and it’s just for three days. The shorter it is the more workable it becomes. Definitely, we cannot prolong this type of diet over 3 days. Some people need this for a specific and momentary purpose.

Hence, a 3-day diet is not for everyone. Neither is it for life, unlike other diets. It’s not a healthy thing to do habitually either. People who do 3-day diets do it to pass certain weight or fitness requirements for the time being. Like boxers. Professional boxers are categorized according to their weights. To qualify for a weight division, overweight boxers-even those who just go slightly past the standard weight-have to loose weight fast.

There are times when 3 days before a fight, some boxers find themselves a bit overweight. Some resort to drastic weight-reducing drugs. But others prefer a 3-day diet. The trick here is to simply eliminate all calorie-rich foods and reduce liquid intake for 3 full days. It’s something similar to partial fasting. A tip here is that, it’s the cut on water intake that really makes this diet effective.

Another example is fashion models. Sometimes, on short notice, they are made to wear super fitting getups. To cope up, they undergo a rigid 3-day diet prior fashion modeling day to lose more excess weight and size and look extra slim. Thus, a 3-day diet is not really geared towards better health but better looks and qualification.

Diuretic beverages like tea and coffee make up most 3-day diets. Cruciferous veggies like cabbage, lettuce, broccoli, and cauliflower are, of course, excellent. Lean beef meat plus fish and chicken, some egg white are also possible. Important also are veggies and fruits high in fiber like squash, carrots, and papaya.

But bear in mind that the veggie and fruits should be taken sparingly in a 3-day diet. They should just slightly supplement a basically liquid diet mostly of diuretic drinks to flush out liquids and fats and reduce calories considerably within three days. After 3 days it’s back to regular eating. And the danger is that the yoyo effect afterwards may result to double weight gain.

Thus, a 3-day diet should not be done regularly to avoid getting in to the yoyo effect. And most especially, this diet is certainly no for everybody as it is a hard slimming program.

John Grant is a the author for a diet fads site where he is writing articles about the 3-Day Diet.

Related Blogs

You like your fish food dish as much as I do ? However !

 

The steadily increase in consumer demand for seafood and the concurrent depletion of many wild fish stocks, aquaculture, or “fish-farming,” is now used to produce almost half of the world’s seafood.1 In fact, aquaculture is currently the fastest growing sector of global food production; as wild fisheries continue to be overexploited and mismanaged, aquaculture production is expected to double by 2050.2

Unfortunately, the industrialization of aquaculture has resulted in many of the same environmental and human health problems currently created by livestock factory farms. As in the case of industrial livestock production, many of the harmful impacts of industrial aquaculture stem from the concentration of large numbers of animals within small facilities. In addition to polluting aquatic ecosystems with the enormous volume of waste produced by the fish they confine, aquaculture facilities threaten the environment and human health by releasing hazardous substances such as pesticides, antibiotics, and other drugs into the aquatic environment. Industrial aquaculture operations can also harm natural fish populations by introducing diseases and non-native species into the ocean.


Pollutants Emitted by Aquaculture Facilities

Open water industrial aquaculture facilities typically confine fish within cages or netpens, which allow fish waste, uneaten feed, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and other pollutants to pass directly into the surrounding water.

Fish Feces.
As in the case of livestock manure, when large quantities of fish feces enter an aquatic ecosystem, nutrient levels in the water increase. As described in the Environmental Impacts section, the influx of excess nutrients induces algal growth, and can ultimately lead to eutrophication and the reduction of aquatic biodiversity.3

Uneaten Feed
The constant release of uneaten feed causes similar problems; when feed accumulates on the seafloor, it is eventually decomposed by bacteria, which consume oxygen dissolved in the water and can thus create hypoxic “dead zones” below aquaculture facilities.4 The environmental damage caused by fish feces and uneaten feed is particularly severe in enclosed waters with low water exchange rates (ex. lakes, slow-moving rivers, and shallow bays).

Pesticides and Pharmaceuticals.
In attempt to prevent disease and epidemics of parasites, industrial aquaculture operations use large quantities of drugs, pesticides, and other chemicals. Although the environmental and human health impacts of many of these substances are not well understood, their use is poorly regulated, reporting requirements are insufficient, and federal oversight is inadequate.5 While some chemicals threaten consumers’ health by leaving harmful residues in fish, drugs and pesticides can also wreak havoc on the environment since many are toxic to aquatic plants and animals.6,7 For more information, read Food & Water Watch’s detailed analysis,


Misuse of Antibiotics
When thousands of fish are confined in a small space, it’s easy for disease to spread quickly. Often, industrial aquaculture facilities address this problem by utilizing the same irresponsible antibiotics practices as industrial livestock operations; rather than reducing the density of fish, fish farms continuously administer subtherapeutic doses of antibiotics. This promotes the proliferation of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which can infect humans.8 The problem is exacerbated by cages and netpens allowing antibiotics and antibiotic-resistant bacteria to pass freely into surrounding waters.


Escapees and Biodiversity
Aquaculture facilities also threaten natural ecosystems by facilitating the introduction of nonnative marine species (or domesticated varieties of native species) into the surrounding environment. As a result of net damage from storms, industrial accidents, and attempts by marine mammals to catch farmed fish, many aquaculture facilities release substantial numbers of fish into the environment. For instance, the David Suzuki Foundation estimates that in British Columbia, an average of 90,000 farmed salmon escaped each year between 1990 and 2000.9

Fish that escape from aquaculture facilities pose a significant threat to the viability of existing wild populations – particularly to sensitive populations that have already suffered from overfishing or habitat loss. While nonnative fish species threaten native populations by competing for food and habitat, farmed varieties of native species also pose an environmental threat; after having escaped from pens, farmed fish may breed with their wild counterparts, thereby introducing farmed genetic traits into the gene pool of wild populations. This can dramatically reduce the genetic diversity of the given species in a short period of time.10


Parasites and Disease
Despite intensive use of antibiotics and pesticides, crowded conditions within aquaculture facilities foster the proliferation of parasites and disease, which can spread to wild marine species.11 The large number of fish within industrial aquaculture farms provides ample hosts for parasites such as sea lice; epidemics can decimate farmed fish, and also affect wild populations – especially when aquaculture facilities are situated along migratory routes of wild fish.12

Aquaculture facilities can also introduce viral and bacterial diseases into wild fish populations – disease can be spread by live fish that escape from pens, contaminated equipment, fish parts, sea lice, and humans who handle contaminated fish.13 The risk of disease transmission is increased when imported, unprocessed fish are used as feed. For instance, imported pilchards fed to tuna farmed in Australia are thought to have caused viral outbreaks in 1995 and 1998 that killed 75 percent of the wild adult pilchard population in South Australia.14


Depletion of Wild Fish Stocks
Some aquaculture facilities use massive quantities of wild fish, which are processed to create feed for carnivorous fish species such as salmon, trout, tuna, cod, and grouper. For instance, experts estimate that 2.7 to 3.5 pounds of wild fish are used to produce one pound of farmed salmon;15 as many as 20 pounds of wild fish are consumed to produce a pound of tuna.16 This resource-intensive form of production depletes the stock of small fish such as anchovy, sardine, pilchard, and mackerel, which can ultimately disrupt aquatic ecosystems by adversely affecting predators such as large fish, marine mammals, and seabirds.17 Researchers are looking for ways to minimize the use of wild fish in feed, but not all the alternatives are positive. Soy is increasingly used to add protein to fish feed; a practice which could encourage the industrial production of mono-cropping genetically engineered soy.


Sustainable Alternatives
Fortunately for seafood lovers, certain forms of aquaculture can be conducted without creating ecological disaster. Re-circulating land-based farming operations are able to raise fish in closed systems without emitting pollutants into the surrounding environment; many of these fish farms refrain from using antibiotics, hormones, or chemicals. Small-scale aquaponic operations raise fish and vegetables/herbs in the same system, using the plants to filter out waste and use it as fertilizer. Sustainable aquaculture facilities can also choose to raise omnivorous or herbivorous fish species such as catfish, tilapia, or carp to minimize (or even eliminate) the use of wild fish in feed. In conjunction, sustainable aquaculture and better management of wild fisheries can provide us with long-term access to seafood.


Did You Know?
In 2002, more than 630,000 salmon escaped from aquaculture facilities in Norway – that’s more than the total number of Atlantic salmon that spawned naturally in Norway’s rivers!18

In 2005, 51,953 Atlantic Salmon Escapes from a Sites in Scotland  treated with Slice/Emamectin Benzoate 22

 

15 to 20 percent of all feed can pass into surrounding waters uneaten, thus creating a substantial stream of waste.19

Currently, Asia is the world leader in aquaculture, representing over 90 percent of total tonnage, while North America produces only 1.6 percent.20

More than 80 percent of the seafood consumed in the United States is imported, and the U.S. exports about 70 percent of what is caught or farmed here into countries with higher import standards than are maintained in the U.S.2121

For More Information:
Food & Water Watch Fish Program (www.foodandwaterwatch.org/fish)
Information relating to open ocean aquaculture, seafood safety, oceans management and sustainable solutions for aquaculture.

Aquaculture Network Information Center (ANIC)
Created by the USDA Extension Service, this site provides access to an extensive selection of national and international electronic aquaculture resources.

SeaWeb Aquaculture Resources
A comprehensive collection of regularly updated aquaculture resources from SeaWeb, a nonprofit organization that works to promote ocean conservation.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Veterinary Medicine – CVM and Aquaculture
The FDA is responsible for overseeing the use of drugs administered to fish within aquaculture facilities. This site includes the Guidance documents, sections of the Policy and Procedures Manual, research projects, and other information used in support of CVM’s aquaculture program, as well as drugs approved for use in aquaculture.


Consumer Guides to Buying Seafood:
Provides guidelines for choosing clean, green, safe seafoods. Includes a printable seafood substitutes card for sustainable alternatives to popular seafood choices, a cookbook with sustainable seafood recipes, and detailed information on why various types of seafood are or are not good choices for consumers.

Food and Water Watch
Basic guidelines for purchasing safe, sustainably raised fish. Also includes a printable restaurant card, which can be used to request that your favorite restaurant switch to wild-caught seafood.

 

Sources

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The Role of Aquaculture in Sustainable Development. FAO September 2007. Medical News Today, “Sustainable Aquaculture Critical to Feed the World,” Feb 21, 2007. Scottish Association for Marine Science and Napier University. Review and Synthesis of the Environmental Impacts of Aquaculture. Scottish Executive Central Research Unit. 2002. Weber, Michael L. What Price Farmed Fish: a review of the environmental & social costs of farming carnivorous fish. SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse. 2003. Food & Water Watch. Yuck! Harmful Aquaculture Chemicals and Waste. Food & Water Watch. May 2008. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Fish and Fisheries Hazards and Controls Guidance: Third Edition. Accessed June 2008. Weber, Michael L. What Price Farmed Fish: a review of the environmental & social costs of farming carnivorous fish. SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse. 2003. Cabello, Felipe C. “Heavy use of prophylactic antibiotics in aquaculture: a growing problem for human and animal health and for the environment.” Environmental Microbiology. Vol. 8, 7. July 2006. The David Suzuki Foundation. Escaping Farmed Salmon Pose Risks. 2007.

10.  Weber, Michael L. What Price Farmed Fish: a review of the environmental & social costs of farming carnivorous fish. SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse. 2003.

11.  Scottish Association for Marine Science and Napier University. Review and Synthesis of the Environmental Impacts of Aquaculture. Scottish Executive Central Research Unit. 2002.

12.  Weber, Michael L. What Price Farmed Fish: a review of the environmental & social costs of farming carnivorous fish. SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse. 2003.

13.  Weber, Michael L. What Price Farmed Fish: a review of the environmental & social costs of farming carnivorous fish. SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse. 2003.

14.  WWF, the World Conservation Organization. Aquaculture Problems: parasites and disease. 2008.

15.  David Suzuki Foundation. Net Loss of Wild Fish to Produce Farmed Salmon. Accessed June 2008.

16.  SeaWeb Aquaculture Resources. Aquaculture Feeds. Accessed June 2008.

17.  SeaWeb Aquaculture Resources. Aquaculture Feeds. Accessed June 2008.

18.  WWF, the World Conservation Organization. Aquaculture Problems: Exotic Escapees. 2008.

19.  Weber, Michael L. What Price Farmed Fish: a review of the environmental & social costs of farming carnivorous fish. SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse. 2003.

20.  FAO, “Regional Review on Aquaculture Development/ 7. North America – 2005.” 2005.

21.  Calculations conducted by Food & Water Watch based on data from: “Fisheries of the United States 2007.” Office of Science and Technology, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, MD, July 2008. For methodologies, please contact jwilliams@fwwatch.org
Please note that statistics listed here are based on 2007 data, which is the most current available in synthesized form from the NOAA Fisheries Office of Science and Technology. The most up-to-ate statistics on U.S. aquaculture production, which are included in these calculations, are taken from the USDA 2006 census.

22.  Summary of self-reported data on open cage net-fish farming Companies in Scotland (Raw Data Provided By Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and Scottish Executive)

 

He has a background as civil engineer and geoscientist. He has worked mainly within the oil and gas industry from the mid 1980s. He has written a few fictional novels as well as being the author of some professional litterature within oil and gas sector, he is now an editor of some web sites.

Related Blogs

Fishing and Nigeria’s 2020 Goals

The image is a strikingly ironic symbol of the state of Nigerian fishing in general. The country enjoys more than 850 km of coastline, besides an enviable number of well-stocked rivers, inland lakes, lagoons and creeks. The topography, soil composition and rainfall patterns in this portion of sub-Saharan Africa support an abundance of aquatic life across freshwater, brackish and saltwater ecosystems. However, tilapias, catfish, carp and other freshwater species make up 80% of all cultivation in Nigeria, with commercial maritime trawling and deep-sea fishing remaining relatively under-exploited operations. Though credible data on the sector is extremely limited, media reports indicate the fishing business contributed $60 million to the national economy in 2008, or roughly 4% of total agricultural output. The sector currently accounts for 40% of the country’s total animal protein intake and offers employment and livelihood to more than 3 million people, although its contribution to the economy is minimal.

Estimated annual fish cultivation was pegged at 120,000 tonnes in the 1960s. The figure had halved by the beginning of the next decade and continues to fall; current domestic production hovering around just 400,000 tonnes. The sudden change in fortune came about with the oil boom of the 1970s, when the discovery of vast oil and natural gas reserves radically altered official priorities. Economic diversification was stalled as Abuja kept pumping back millions in oil profits into further exploration, to the neglect of all other sectors. Endemic poverty descended over large parts of rural Nigeria as traditional livelihoods began to wither away. The absence of inclusive growth flared ethnic tensions and provoked decades of civil war and recurring military takeovers towards the end of the last century. Despite its considerable foreign exchange earnings, human development indicators plummeted across the board as the Nigerian economy grew increasingly oil-dependent and unsustainable.

National ambitions were renewed with the reinstatement of civilian rule in 1999, when Abuja embarked on an extensive programme of economic reform and restructuring. The government under former president O Obsanjo adopted a comprehensive roadmap premised on the objective of making Nigeria a significant player in regional and global affairs. Specifically, Obsanjo’s Vision 2020 document mandates sector-wide initiatives to propel Nigeria into the top 20 global economies in a time-bound manner. The present dispensation under President UM Yar’Adua remains committed not just to achieving the 2020 objective, but also the UN Millennial Development goals of universal basic human rights.

It is in this connection that the fishing sector presents unique opportunities as both a poverty alleviation strategy and a tool for rapid entrepreneurial growth. Present levels of fish cultivation satisfy only a fraction of local requirement, with exports having to fill in for almost 95% of annual demand. Nigeria is in fact the top importer of fish in the African continent, sourcing more than 1.5 million tonnes of fish annually from international markets. Unofficial estimates suggest less than 10% of the country’s fish farming potential is currently being utilised, with as much as 60,000 hectares of unused land available for expanding the sector. The fact remains that Nigeria’s vast natural resources and human capital can be leveraged to promote extensive fishing as a means of ensuring not only exports but also food security. In principle at least, the Nigerian fishing industry has a lot to look forward to.

Because of its extensive coastline and tropical climate, Nigeria has the potential to develop a diversified ecology for a range of commercially viable varieties of fish. The economic appeal behind fishing is tremendous, considering the secondary and tertiary enterprises it can generate. More efficient methods of inland cultivation and coastal trolling, executed in an export-oriented environment, can spur rapid growth of down-the-line industries. Fishing, by itself, has the potential of driving considerable enterprise development, transforming rural economies and generating direct and indirect employment opportunities in the process. Abuja’s primary responsibility lies in providing opportunities for export of fish and fish products to international markets. Although viable data on the subject is lacking, the aggregate economic loss due to reduced local fish production is significant and needs focused policy initiatives to correct.

The enterprise potential of this sector is made doubly significant by the nature of the business. Fishing relies heavily on small and middle scale ancillary industries like canning, net-making and boat building, while supporting an additional base of activities in storage, processing and marketing. The net scope for employment generation, business development and poverty eradication through these allied activities make fishing deeply relevant to Nigeria’s quest for inclusive economic growth.

Here are some of the most pressing arguments in favour of a rapid expansion of fishing activities:

I. Aquaculture provides opportunities for optimal land use, allowing areas unsuitable for crops to be developed into economically productive ponds and fisheries.
II. Focussed expansion of artisanal and small-scale fishing can help turn around rural economies rapidly by generating jobs and sparking enterpreneruial activity.
III. In development-deprived areas and among rural communities, sustainable fish farming can help improve both nutritional and living standards.
IV. Nigeria’s highly diversified tropical ecology makes fishing in brackish and fresh waters almost a zero opportunity-cost endeavour with infinite growth potential.

Early in 2008, the fishing industry in the coastal Nigerian state of Akwa Ibom was paralysed in a wave of extortion and boat capture unleashed by sea-borne pirates. The attacks forced trawlers to go on an indefinite strike, bringing the local economy to a standstill and causing terrible loss of revenue to the regional council. While this particular situation was eventually resolved, security remains just one of several momentous challenges restraining the expansion of Nigerian fishing:

o The absence of a sustainable and progressive fisheries policy represents a fundamental hurdle, with lax government regulation routinely forcing small-scale operations out of business.
o Population expansion in coastal areas is giving rise to over-fishing and unscientific practices, destroying marine ecosystems and threatening underwater environments.
o Organised fishing attracts high capital expenditure in Nigeria as most of the necessary equipment, boats, feed, technology and know-how has to be imported.
o Infrastructure deficits severely hamper the storage, transport and marketing of fish in rural areas, making profitable urban markets unavailable to traditional fishing communities.
o Despite specific government efforts, commercial deep-sea fishing is out of reach for local entrepreneurs; the activity remains limited to the purview of foreign-owned companies.

Although the sector continues to receive sporadic government nudging and funding, the impact of these measures has been considerably restricted thus far due to lack of insight and effective implementation. Special schemes to promote fishing in target communities have also failed because of a low awareness about profitability in the business. Turning around this mindset could well prove to be one of the deciding challenges facing the Nigerian fishing industry. The nation’s history and unique circumstances will undoubtedly test its resolve to achieve formidable goals. Hopefully, the fervour of the Argungu fishermen and their quest for the biggest fish will provide some creative inspiration!

Peter Osalor is a multi-skilled director, chairman of trusts, proprietor and consultant. Peter Osalor has been a successful entrepreneur since 1992 when he formed Peter Osalor & Co and which has since grown to a very large client base with a turnover of millions. He is currently a fellow of the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Nigeria (ICAN). Peter is also a member of the Chartered Tax Advisors and the Chartered Institute of Taxation in Nigeria (CITN).

Related Blogs

Football Trading System 2009/2010

Newly Updated for 2009/2010. New sales page converting at an amazing 36%. Higher affiliate commission rate for 2009.
Football Trading System 2009/2010

Related Blogs