Think you've left it too late to lose that lard? Kate shed FOUR STONE in mid-life... and it's not just her figure that's been transformed
By KATE BATTERSBY
Last updated at 10:06 AM on 19th May 2011
Comments (94)
Add to My Stories
Share
A few months ago, an old friend got in touch who I hadn’t seen in ten years, and we agreed to meet for a drink. As I arrived at the bar, my mobile rang. It was Jonathan. He was there too, but he couldn’t find me even though I could see him.
‘Turn around,’ I said. ‘You’re standing ten feet from me.’
I watched as he scanned the faces near him until his gaze settled on mine, smiling straight at him — then his eyes moved on. Laughing, I walked up to him. He looked at me blankly. Then it dawned. To say he was shocked doesn’t quite cut it. His jaw actually dropped open, as if he was in a third-rate sitcom.
Looking great: Kate, aged 47, at 9st 9lb, left, and overweight in her thirties, right
‘Kate?’ he queried in disbelief. ‘My God. You look . . . different. Really great. Absolutely fantastic, in fact.’
Rare is the woman who could hear such words and not feel good about herself — I felt fabulous. Such is the effect of losing more than 4st in middle age, after more than a decade in Fat City.
Only a few days before, I was obliged to reintroduce myself to a male colleague who I hadn’t seen in five years, after I twigged that he kept blanking me because he literally didn’t grasp who I was. When I enlightened him, he peered at me for several seconds and said: ‘Really? I would never have known you were you.’
More...
How to look as fab as Fonda at 73 (warning: it's a lifetime's work)
Michelle Mone: You should wear whatever makes you feel good
I am 47, and it is three years since I arrived at 9st 9lb, a weight I had not visited since I turned 21. (Like many women, I can recall what the scales have told me on a weekly basis since age dot.) In childhood and my teens, I was reed-like, and for most of my 20s I hovered around 10st. It was only in my 30s that my personal flab acquisition got out of hand.
I’d like to claim that it was eating the children’s leftovers that did it for me, but as I don’t have any children, I can’t use that old chestnut. The unglamorous fact is I just ate too much. Some people like to unwind with a drink at the end of a stressful day. Others have a cigarette. I eat.
'The winning formula comprised just three steps — eat less, move around more and don’t lie to yourself'
Before 30, I could get away with it. Afterwards, not so much. Greed plus habit equals fat, ultimately translating in my case to 13st 10lb of it, and a size 18.
I became steadily disenfranchised from the clothes most women want to wear. Identifying what I liked wasn’t a problem. Tracking it down in my ever increasing size was trickier. But the killer was trying clothes on.
This was the time when the High Street was beginning to plaster its changing rooms with multiple mirrors, all the better for seeing oneself from every ghastly angle. At least it simplified the shopping process, to approximately nil. I didn’t want to see what I looked like, and I didn’t want to be seen. I mastered the fat person’s signature of swathing myself anonymously in shapeless garments.
Every day, I ticked one of three mental boxes. Either I (a) made an overwhelming effort not to think about what I looked like; (b) invented some nonsensical rationalisation as to why I was overweight; or (c) lied to myself that I didn’t care. As you might imagine, (a) and (b) were way too difficult, leaving me with (c).
Yet in the end, it was the lying that proved my saviour. It was so futile. Nobody listened to these lies but me. Wouldn’t it be simpler all round to stop?
In the summer of 2006, at the mighty age of 42, I reached the point where I knew I did care. Without fanfare, I made a start. I had no target weight in mind. My only goal was to feel better.
I kept things simple, doing only what I could sustain. I realised there were a surprising number of healthy foods I liked, so I ate them instead of the junk. If I lapsed and ate too much for a day or a week, I did it guilt-free, with enjoyment. Then I went back to the good stuff.
Weight Katey: The pounds crept up on her as she got older
The idea of going to the gym bored me — I knew I would never stick with it. Instead, my dog was thrilled by my new-found taste for brisk hour-long walks every afternoon. The mental relaxation was as valuable as the exercise.
The winning formula comprised just three steps — eat less, move around more and don’t lie to yourself. Not quite in the league of Jean Paul Getty’s famous advice on getting rich — ‘rise early, work late, strike oil’ — but our slogans have something in common. The key point in both is the third. By not lying to myself, I struck oil.
To lose just over 4st took two years. Each pound off was a pleasure. I remember the strange confusion the first time none of my clothes fitted. It took me a while to figure out the problem. I needed a size down.
Going from an 18 to my current 8/10 was an expensive business, since on the way down I had no desire to wear the flapping costumes I had acquired on the way up. That was when I discovered eBay. Excellent.
Whenever I became discouraged, I followed the marvellous advice of my best friend. ‘Go to the supermarket,’ she said. ‘Fill up your basket with the amount you have lost in lard. Even a little will look like a lot. Then carry it around for a while and remember that all that horrid gunge used to be welded to your body.’
That was how I came to be at Sainsbury’s cramming two baskets with 55lb of lard. Butter won’t do. It has to be lard, the sheer volume of the glistening white goo (even in a wrapper) makes you want to heave.
The baskets were so heavy I could barely pick up them up before I had to put them down. But two years before there was no setting the burden down.
Many women in their 40s know the experience of becoming apparently invisible. My journey has been in the opposite direction, and even now its effect has the power to surprise me. If I become aware of others looking at me, I assume I have paint in my hair or spinach in my teeth, before it occurs to me they might be looking in appreciation.
But the pleasure of losing weight in my 40s is that I want to enjoy it. Even those changing-room mirrors can’t hurt me now.
Just as important, in the last month I have discovered there is most definitely such a thing as being too thin. A sudden illness saw my weight drop to 9st and concerned friends have left me in no doubt that it is too low.
Happily, I am not seduced by this sight on the scales or in the mirror. While — oh irony! — it is proving difficult to regain weight, I am looking forward to being back at 9st 9lb.
So is being thin the perfect answer to all life’s ills? If only. I still battle daily to straighten my haystack hair, and without make-up I look just as much like a boiled egg as ever. Work is a tad unpredictable, ditto my love life. But what I can say is that being thin is the perfect answer to being fat.
Three years down the line, I still get a buzz all over again when I remember I don’t look too bad for an old broad.
‘You’re a hot catch,’ insisted a male friend the other day, adding brightly: ‘I mean it. Possibly second only to Pippa Middleton.’
And ladies, which of us would not settle for that?
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1388465/Think-youve-left-late-lose-diet-Kate-shed-4-STONE-mid-life.html#ixzz1MnFmZN6j
Thursday, May 19, 2011
jokes on us
Joke's on us if we can't make fun of pollies
Craig Reucassel
May 19, 2011
Comments 141
Comedians gagged, pollies protected
Comedians wanting to poke fun at the parliamentary antics of federal politicians are hobbled by archaic laws from a different political era, says Tim Lester.
Video feedbackVideo settings
When The Chaser was banned from using the broadcast of the royal wedding for satirical purposes, some suggested the ban was un-Australian. Kevin Rudd said the BBC should "lighten up" and "get an Australian sense of humour". Nick Minchin said that although he wouldn't have watched it, "taking the mickey out of things is such a great Australian institution".
In fact the ban was not un-Australian. It was entirely Australian. And both Rudd and Minchin have been protected by the very same kind of law. Because as the Federal Parliament's resolution on broadcasting of proceedings specifies: "Broadcasts . . . shall not be used for . . . satire and ridicule.'' This restriction has existed since proceedings were first televised from the Senate in 1990 and the House of Representatives in 1991.
The political commentator Annabel Crabb says most politicians "tend to be utterly surprised to learn of the rule's existence. I suspect most Australians would be similarly surprised, and more than a little cheesed off."
Advertisement: Story continues below
Sealed with a kiss ... but the Chaser were prevented from satirising Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge's wedding. Photo: AFP
Television producers are certainly aware of the rules. The ABC has consistently denied parliamentary footage to Chaser programs, even election shows, and to Hungry Beast, a show that does contain comedy, but also some of the best journalism going around today.
Even Channel Ten's 7PM Project, which offers a mix of news and comedy for a younger audience, feels constrained by the rule. The host, Charlie Pickering, admitted to me that they no longer watch Parliament because their lawyers fear that if they use footage, Ten News could be denied access to it.
This rule doesn't prevent shows that aren't categorised as comedic or satirical from broadcasting the gaffes, funny clips and earwax snacking. News programs, from Today to Insiders always play the mess-ups of the week.
Kevin Rudd said the BBC should "get an Australian sense of humour". Photo: Alex Ellinghausen
Parliamentary footage is regularly used in satirical and humorous mash-ups that are forwarded endlessly around the internet and featured on news websites. So the embarrassing footage gets out anyway. What this law does prevent is thorough satirical analysis of the issues dealt with in Parliament.
Viewers of the American Daily Show will be aware of Jon Stewart's masterful melding of comedy and in-depth analysis of Congressional issues. Perhaps the best example of this was the debate over healthcare for the September 11 rescuers. A bill seeking to give healthcare to those who first arrived at the World Trade Centre was being filibustered by Republicans because it raised the $7 billion needed by cutting a tax loophole for foreign companies. The mainstream media had been ignoring it, but Stewart covered the story repeatedly in considerable detail. Yet at all times the audience was laughing. Satire was being . . . satired. And yet no one was being misrepresented. By contrast, a Fox News commentator covered it by saying: "I have no idea what they are talking about."
And there is one of the problems with the satire-versus-news dichotomy imposed by the Australian regulations. As in the September 11 rescuers case, humour can sometimes be a better way of dealing with a complex issue, because it can keep people's attention while dragging them through the boring procedural subsection that is actually ruining their life.
Outspoken ... Craig Reucassel. Photo: Marco Del Grande
What can we do about this? Now that he's the Leader of the House, Anthony Albanese - another of those who was surprised to learn of the restrictions - has told me he will write to the procedural committee to ask for reform. "Anything that stops The Chaser hiding in bushes is a good thing," he said.
Across the divide, the manager of Opposition Business, Christopher Pyne, disagrees. "I haven't noticed the rules regarding the broadcasting of Parliament have slowed down the fun comedians have with pollies. So I don't see any reason to revisit them."
His point may be partly right - that comedians' fun has not been reduced - but their capacity to critique has been.
Illustration: Edd Aragon
Nor is it an adequate substitute to use footage from politicians' press conferences and doorstops. Those ''staged for the news'' events generally contain as much substance as a wrestler's stage patter. Ironically, many question time stunts are designed to be funny so they make the 6 o'clock news, creating the impression that Parliament is always that glib. But there are other occasions where substantial policy debate occurs and this is the kind of material that comedians and satirists should be covering as thoroughly as possible.
This is not to imply that comedians are our greatest political analysts. We like an earwax-eating pollie as much as the next person, but the most valuable function of satire is it allows a critique to be communicated to a different audience. To prevent the use of parliamentary footage for satire denies the younger audience that watches 7PM Project, Hungry Beast or The Chaser from finding out more about an institution in which we should be encouraging their interest.
The rule is a tired remnant of the days when monarchs were untouchable and should be removed. Giving our politicians the protection of parliamentary privilege, so they can say what they like without fear of legal sanction, but then seeking to protect how their decisions are discussed is total hypocrisy. It is far more ''un-Australian'' that satirists can't sink their teeth into their own Parliament than a stupid royal wedding.
Craig Reucassel is a member of The Chaser and a writer of self-serving opinion articles.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/jokes-on-us-if-we-cant-make-fun-of-pollies-20110518-1esyb.html#ixzz1MnAQNBEy
Craig Reucassel
May 19, 2011
Comments 141
Comedians gagged, pollies protected
Comedians wanting to poke fun at the parliamentary antics of federal politicians are hobbled by archaic laws from a different political era, says Tim Lester.
Video feedbackVideo settings
When The Chaser was banned from using the broadcast of the royal wedding for satirical purposes, some suggested the ban was un-Australian. Kevin Rudd said the BBC should "lighten up" and "get an Australian sense of humour". Nick Minchin said that although he wouldn't have watched it, "taking the mickey out of things is such a great Australian institution".
In fact the ban was not un-Australian. It was entirely Australian. And both Rudd and Minchin have been protected by the very same kind of law. Because as the Federal Parliament's resolution on broadcasting of proceedings specifies: "Broadcasts . . . shall not be used for . . . satire and ridicule.'' This restriction has existed since proceedings were first televised from the Senate in 1990 and the House of Representatives in 1991.
The political commentator Annabel Crabb says most politicians "tend to be utterly surprised to learn of the rule's existence. I suspect most Australians would be similarly surprised, and more than a little cheesed off."
Advertisement: Story continues below
Sealed with a kiss ... but the Chaser were prevented from satirising Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge's wedding. Photo: AFP
Television producers are certainly aware of the rules. The ABC has consistently denied parliamentary footage to Chaser programs, even election shows, and to Hungry Beast, a show that does contain comedy, but also some of the best journalism going around today.
Even Channel Ten's 7PM Project, which offers a mix of news and comedy for a younger audience, feels constrained by the rule. The host, Charlie Pickering, admitted to me that they no longer watch Parliament because their lawyers fear that if they use footage, Ten News could be denied access to it.
This rule doesn't prevent shows that aren't categorised as comedic or satirical from broadcasting the gaffes, funny clips and earwax snacking. News programs, from Today to Insiders always play the mess-ups of the week.
Kevin Rudd said the BBC should "get an Australian sense of humour". Photo: Alex Ellinghausen
Parliamentary footage is regularly used in satirical and humorous mash-ups that are forwarded endlessly around the internet and featured on news websites. So the embarrassing footage gets out anyway. What this law does prevent is thorough satirical analysis of the issues dealt with in Parliament.
Viewers of the American Daily Show will be aware of Jon Stewart's masterful melding of comedy and in-depth analysis of Congressional issues. Perhaps the best example of this was the debate over healthcare for the September 11 rescuers. A bill seeking to give healthcare to those who first arrived at the World Trade Centre was being filibustered by Republicans because it raised the $7 billion needed by cutting a tax loophole for foreign companies. The mainstream media had been ignoring it, but Stewart covered the story repeatedly in considerable detail. Yet at all times the audience was laughing. Satire was being . . . satired. And yet no one was being misrepresented. By contrast, a Fox News commentator covered it by saying: "I have no idea what they are talking about."
And there is one of the problems with the satire-versus-news dichotomy imposed by the Australian regulations. As in the September 11 rescuers case, humour can sometimes be a better way of dealing with a complex issue, because it can keep people's attention while dragging them through the boring procedural subsection that is actually ruining their life.
Outspoken ... Craig Reucassel. Photo: Marco Del Grande
What can we do about this? Now that he's the Leader of the House, Anthony Albanese - another of those who was surprised to learn of the restrictions - has told me he will write to the procedural committee to ask for reform. "Anything that stops The Chaser hiding in bushes is a good thing," he said.
Across the divide, the manager of Opposition Business, Christopher Pyne, disagrees. "I haven't noticed the rules regarding the broadcasting of Parliament have slowed down the fun comedians have with pollies. So I don't see any reason to revisit them."
His point may be partly right - that comedians' fun has not been reduced - but their capacity to critique has been.
Illustration: Edd Aragon
Nor is it an adequate substitute to use footage from politicians' press conferences and doorstops. Those ''staged for the news'' events generally contain as much substance as a wrestler's stage patter. Ironically, many question time stunts are designed to be funny so they make the 6 o'clock news, creating the impression that Parliament is always that glib. But there are other occasions where substantial policy debate occurs and this is the kind of material that comedians and satirists should be covering as thoroughly as possible.
This is not to imply that comedians are our greatest political analysts. We like an earwax-eating pollie as much as the next person, but the most valuable function of satire is it allows a critique to be communicated to a different audience. To prevent the use of parliamentary footage for satire denies the younger audience that watches 7PM Project, Hungry Beast or The Chaser from finding out more about an institution in which we should be encouraging their interest.
The rule is a tired remnant of the days when monarchs were untouchable and should be removed. Giving our politicians the protection of parliamentary privilege, so they can say what they like without fear of legal sanction, but then seeking to protect how their decisions are discussed is total hypocrisy. It is far more ''un-Australian'' that satirists can't sink their teeth into their own Parliament than a stupid royal wedding.
Craig Reucassel is a member of The Chaser and a writer of self-serving opinion articles.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/jokes-on-us-if-we-cant-make-fun-of-pollies-20110518-1esyb.html#ixzz1MnAQNBEy
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Twitter outings undermine 'super injunctions'
May 10, 2011 - 3:27PM
Jeremy Clarkson ... at the centre of an injunction storm. Photo: Craig Abraham
Twitter revelations of alleged attempts by British celebrities to cover up sexual indiscretions show that "super injunctions" to gag the press are unsustainable, lawyers say.
A Twitter user posted details on Sunday of six instances of what the blogger said were injunctions obtained by television and sports stars to cover up affairs or prevent the publication of revealing photographs.
One of the celebrities named, socialite Jemima Khan, used her own Twitter feed to deny an allegation that she had obtained a super injunction to prevent intimate pictures of her and TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson from being published.
"OMG - Rumour that I have a super injunction preventing publication of 'intimate' photos of me and Jeremy Clarkson. NOT TRUE!" she tweeted.
Super injunctions prevent the media from reporting not only details of a story but even the existence of the injunction.
They have their legal basis in Britain's 1998 Human Rights Act but have given rise to concerns of a creeping privacy law made by the courts and favouring the famous and wealthy.
"It's rich man's justice," said media lawyer Mark Stephens, a partner at London-based law firm Finers Stephens Innocent, noting that not a single woman was known to have obtained such an injunction.
Stephens estimated that 200 super injunctions had been issued in the past three to four years. Their cost of more than £100,000 ($152,000) each puts them out of most people's reach.
Public debate over super injunctions was rekindled last month when prominent BBC journalist Andrew Marr confessed that he had obtained one in 2008 to prevent reporting of an extra-marital affair he had had.
Stephens, an outspoken pro-media lawyer who has represented celebrities including WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, said incidents such as the weekend Twitter leak showed the super injunction was outdated.
"The superinjunction is becoming unsustainable because people are just breaking it," he said.
His sentiments were echoed by intellectual property and media lawyer Keith Arrowsmith, a partner at Manchester-based law firm Ralli Solicitors.
"The fact that anyone can set up these feeds without anyone checking the identity of the author undermines the credibility of super injunctions. People on Twitter feel as though they can publish anything and it doesn't matter," he said.
Twitter had no immediate comment on the matter. The tweets were still on the site on Monday afternoon, almost 24 hours after they were first published.
Echoes of spycatchers
Both lawyers compared the current situation with the notorious 1980s Spycatcher case, in which the British government tried to ban former intelligence officer Peter Wright from publishing his autobiography.
The book was published in Australia and in many other countries and was smuggled into Britain. The British government eventually gave up its attempt to ban it.
One of the best-publicised uses of a super injunction was the case of shipping company Trafigura in 2009, which forbade discussion of allegations the company had dumped toxic waste in Ivory Coast.
"The underlying problem with the current law is that the courts are being used to conceal the truth," Liberal Democrat member of parliament John Hemming wrote in an email. Hemming is compiling a report on super injunctions.
"I know of a number of cases where the truth that is being concealed involves serious misbehavior by the authorities rather than the peccadilloes of celebrities. That is where there is a real danger in the current position," he added.
Stephens said the author of the weekend tweets could expect "a knock on the door from the lawyers" in the next 48 hours for contempt of court.
But Arrowsmith stressed that this would not help the people who had been outed.
"In the past, for example, if someone had got wind that the News of the World was planning to break a story on Sunday, we could try to agree a way forward, and, if that failed, approach the court for a ruling."
"With international instant messaging it's too late, the cat is out of the bag," he said.
Arrowsmith said Twitter itself, as a US-based organisation, would be hard for British courts to pursue.
"If you're going to have a super injunction, you've got to have a international super court to enforce it," he said.
Reuters
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/twitter-outings-undermine-super-injunctions-20110510-1eg7r.html#ixzz1LwLwyLlr
May 10, 2011 - 3:27PM
Jeremy Clarkson ... at the centre of an injunction storm. Photo: Craig Abraham
Twitter revelations of alleged attempts by British celebrities to cover up sexual indiscretions show that "super injunctions" to gag the press are unsustainable, lawyers say.
A Twitter user posted details on Sunday of six instances of what the blogger said were injunctions obtained by television and sports stars to cover up affairs or prevent the publication of revealing photographs.
One of the celebrities named, socialite Jemima Khan, used her own Twitter feed to deny an allegation that she had obtained a super injunction to prevent intimate pictures of her and TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson from being published.
"OMG - Rumour that I have a super injunction preventing publication of 'intimate' photos of me and Jeremy Clarkson. NOT TRUE!" she tweeted.
Super injunctions prevent the media from reporting not only details of a story but even the existence of the injunction.
They have their legal basis in Britain's 1998 Human Rights Act but have given rise to concerns of a creeping privacy law made by the courts and favouring the famous and wealthy.
"It's rich man's justice," said media lawyer Mark Stephens, a partner at London-based law firm Finers Stephens Innocent, noting that not a single woman was known to have obtained such an injunction.
Stephens estimated that 200 super injunctions had been issued in the past three to four years. Their cost of more than £100,000 ($152,000) each puts them out of most people's reach.
Public debate over super injunctions was rekindled last month when prominent BBC journalist Andrew Marr confessed that he had obtained one in 2008 to prevent reporting of an extra-marital affair he had had.
Stephens, an outspoken pro-media lawyer who has represented celebrities including WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, said incidents such as the weekend Twitter leak showed the super injunction was outdated.
"The superinjunction is becoming unsustainable because people are just breaking it," he said.
His sentiments were echoed by intellectual property and media lawyer Keith Arrowsmith, a partner at Manchester-based law firm Ralli Solicitors.
"The fact that anyone can set up these feeds without anyone checking the identity of the author undermines the credibility of super injunctions. People on Twitter feel as though they can publish anything and it doesn't matter," he said.
Twitter had no immediate comment on the matter. The tweets were still on the site on Monday afternoon, almost 24 hours after they were first published.
Echoes of spycatchers
Both lawyers compared the current situation with the notorious 1980s Spycatcher case, in which the British government tried to ban former intelligence officer Peter Wright from publishing his autobiography.
The book was published in Australia and in many other countries and was smuggled into Britain. The British government eventually gave up its attempt to ban it.
One of the best-publicised uses of a super injunction was the case of shipping company Trafigura in 2009, which forbade discussion of allegations the company had dumped toxic waste in Ivory Coast.
"The underlying problem with the current law is that the courts are being used to conceal the truth," Liberal Democrat member of parliament John Hemming wrote in an email. Hemming is compiling a report on super injunctions.
"I know of a number of cases where the truth that is being concealed involves serious misbehavior by the authorities rather than the peccadilloes of celebrities. That is where there is a real danger in the current position," he added.
Stephens said the author of the weekend tweets could expect "a knock on the door from the lawyers" in the next 48 hours for contempt of court.
But Arrowsmith stressed that this would not help the people who had been outed.
"In the past, for example, if someone had got wind that the News of the World was planning to break a story on Sunday, we could try to agree a way forward, and, if that failed, approach the court for a ruling."
"With international instant messaging it's too late, the cat is out of the bag," he said.
Arrowsmith said Twitter itself, as a US-based organisation, would be hard for British courts to pursue.
"If you're going to have a super injunction, you've got to have a international super court to enforce it," he said.
Reuters
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/twitter-outings-undermine-super-injunctions-20110510-1eg7r.html#ixzz1LwLwyLlr
Canadian Blogger last post
Canadian blogger Derek Miller's final message draws millions
Charmain Noronha
May 10, 2011 - 9:14AM
Derek Miller's about page on his blog. Photo: Screenshot by Fairfax
A Canadian blogger's moving last message of love and hope published after he died from colon cancer last week has drawn millions of hits from people everywhere inspired by his grace.
Derek Miller, 41, ends it with a declaration to his wife of 16 years: "I don't know what we'd have been like without each other, but I think the world would be a poorer place. I loved you deeply, I loved you, I loved you, I loved you."
The message entitled "The Last Post" was added to his site penmachine.com last Wednesday, one day after Miller died in Burnaby, British Columbia.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Derek Miller, 41, died from colon cancer last week. Photo: AP Photo/Courtesy of the Family
Miller, who been blogging for 10 years, had been one of the best known bloggers in British Columbia. He was diagnosed with stage four metastatic colorectal cancer in 2007.
Miller's post-mortem message May 4 went viral, drawing 143 comments from friends and strangers. The heavy traffic caused the site to crash, forcing a friend of Miller's to move the site to another server.
"Here it is. I'm dead, and this is my last post to my blog. In advance, I asked that once my body finally shut down from the punishments of my cancer, then my family and friends publish this prepared message I wrote the first part of the process of turning this from an active website to an archive," read the post.
"It turns out that no one can imagine what's really coming in our lives. We can plan, and do what we enjoy, but we can't expect our plans to work out," he wrote in his final post.
"I think and hope that's what my daughters can take from my disease and death. And that my wonderful, amazing wife Airdrie can see too. Not that they could die any day, but that they should pursue what they enjoy, and what stimulates their minds, as much as possible they can be ready for opportunities, as well as not disappointed when things go sideways, as they inevitably do."
His wife, Airdrie Miller, said she believed the site had about 3 million hits after his last post. Alistair Calder, the friend who moved the site to a larger server after it crashed, said it could have been as high as 8 million hits, but it was hard to pin down the number because of the crash.
Airdrie Miller, who also blogged about her experience dealing with his cancer at talkingtoair.com, said her husband had lost his voice for the past two months and his blog helped her cope, knowing that though he couldn't speak, his mind was still active.
"When he lost his voice is when I really started reading his blog so I could know what was going on in his head. We used text messaging, Twitter, all forms of social media to connect," she said. "And even now, when my daughter is finding it hard to cope, she'll text me in the middle of the night and sometimes I wake up to 43 texts from her. All these modes have allowed us all to communicate while going through such a difficult time. His blog will become a memorial for me."
Friend and fellow blogger Mark Blevis said Miller's death caught him off guard.
"I didn't expect his decline in health over the last few months to be so fast. More importantly, you realise how small the world has become and how close we've all become through our online relationships, which become real world relationships," said Blevis.
Miller wore many hats in his lifetime. He had a marine biologist degree, but had worked as a writer and editor since the 1980s. He was also a musician and photographer.
In his blog's bio section, he wrote that he discovered his cancer was terminal late in 2010 and that he expected it to kill him sometime in 2011 or early 2012.
The father of two daughters, aged 11 and 13, blogged about everything from getting his voice back to sipping cherry cola at 3am in his hospital bed to his realisation that death was impending.
In a post entitled "A wondrous place" Miller wrote, "The world, indeed the whole universe, is a beautiful, astonishing, wondrous place. There is always more to find out. I don't look back and regret anything, and I hope my family can find a way to do the same."
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/canadian-blogger-derek-millers-final-message-draws-millions-20110510-1egaa.html
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/canadian-blogger-derek-millers-final-message-draws-millions-20110510-1egaa.html#ixzz1LwLGTtBW
Charmain Noronha
May 10, 2011 - 9:14AM
Derek Miller's about page on his blog. Photo: Screenshot by Fairfax
A Canadian blogger's moving last message of love and hope published after he died from colon cancer last week has drawn millions of hits from people everywhere inspired by his grace.
Derek Miller, 41, ends it with a declaration to his wife of 16 years: "I don't know what we'd have been like without each other, but I think the world would be a poorer place. I loved you deeply, I loved you, I loved you, I loved you."
The message entitled "The Last Post" was added to his site penmachine.com last Wednesday, one day after Miller died in Burnaby, British Columbia.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Derek Miller, 41, died from colon cancer last week. Photo: AP Photo/Courtesy of the Family
Miller, who been blogging for 10 years, had been one of the best known bloggers in British Columbia. He was diagnosed with stage four metastatic colorectal cancer in 2007.
Miller's post-mortem message May 4 went viral, drawing 143 comments from friends and strangers. The heavy traffic caused the site to crash, forcing a friend of Miller's to move the site to another server.
"Here it is. I'm dead, and this is my last post to my blog. In advance, I asked that once my body finally shut down from the punishments of my cancer, then my family and friends publish this prepared message I wrote the first part of the process of turning this from an active website to an archive," read the post.
"It turns out that no one can imagine what's really coming in our lives. We can plan, and do what we enjoy, but we can't expect our plans to work out," he wrote in his final post.
"I think and hope that's what my daughters can take from my disease and death. And that my wonderful, amazing wife Airdrie can see too. Not that they could die any day, but that they should pursue what they enjoy, and what stimulates their minds, as much as possible they can be ready for opportunities, as well as not disappointed when things go sideways, as they inevitably do."
His wife, Airdrie Miller, said she believed the site had about 3 million hits after his last post. Alistair Calder, the friend who moved the site to a larger server after it crashed, said it could have been as high as 8 million hits, but it was hard to pin down the number because of the crash.
Airdrie Miller, who also blogged about her experience dealing with his cancer at talkingtoair.com, said her husband had lost his voice for the past two months and his blog helped her cope, knowing that though he couldn't speak, his mind was still active.
"When he lost his voice is when I really started reading his blog so I could know what was going on in his head. We used text messaging, Twitter, all forms of social media to connect," she said. "And even now, when my daughter is finding it hard to cope, she'll text me in the middle of the night and sometimes I wake up to 43 texts from her. All these modes have allowed us all to communicate while going through such a difficult time. His blog will become a memorial for me."
Friend and fellow blogger Mark Blevis said Miller's death caught him off guard.
"I didn't expect his decline in health over the last few months to be so fast. More importantly, you realise how small the world has become and how close we've all become through our online relationships, which become real world relationships," said Blevis.
Miller wore many hats in his lifetime. He had a marine biologist degree, but had worked as a writer and editor since the 1980s. He was also a musician and photographer.
In his blog's bio section, he wrote that he discovered his cancer was terminal late in 2010 and that he expected it to kill him sometime in 2011 or early 2012.
The father of two daughters, aged 11 and 13, blogged about everything from getting his voice back to sipping cherry cola at 3am in his hospital bed to his realisation that death was impending.
In a post entitled "A wondrous place" Miller wrote, "The world, indeed the whole universe, is a beautiful, astonishing, wondrous place. There is always more to find out. I don't look back and regret anything, and I hope my family can find a way to do the same."
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/canadian-blogger-derek-millers-final-message-draws-millions-20110510-1egaa.html
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/canadian-blogger-derek-millers-final-message-draws-millions-20110510-1egaa.html#ixzz1LwLGTtBW
Monday, May 2, 2011
Travel solo ideas!!
Adventure need not be solo
Michael Gebicki
April 3, 2011
I am single and in my 40s. Can you recommend websites or other means of finding travel partners of a similar (ish) age?
- A. Michaels, Potts Point.
Sites such as Travel Friend (travelfriend.com.au) or Travel Buddy (travbuddy.com) might help you track down a suitable partner. Another option is Singles Travel Connections (singlestravel .com.au), which operates singles-only, small-group tours. Then again, you might not need a special website or tour company that caters specifically to single travellers. The simplest solution is to join a group adventure tour.
The reason is that most adventure tour groups consist of single travellers. Couples are in the minority and comparing blisters from paddling a kayak or fighting over the last chapati in a Nepalese yak-herding village is a fantastic bonding exercise.
Adventure tours come in all possible configurations. While some are hardcore treks, there are plenty that require nothing more strenuous than an occasional stroll from your converted fishing boat to the nearest bar.
If you would prefer to travel in a group with more males or more females, call the adventure travel operators and see what they suggest. Hit the websites of World Expeditions (worldexpeditions. com), Peregrine Adventures (peregrineadventures.com) or Intrepid Travel (intrepidtravel.com) and see what appeals.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/travel/traveller-tips/adventure-need-not-be-solo-20110331-1ch8s.html#ixzz1LEj9K9hK
Michael Gebicki
April 3, 2011
I am single and in my 40s. Can you recommend websites or other means of finding travel partners of a similar (ish) age?
- A. Michaels, Potts Point.
Sites such as Travel Friend (travelfriend.com.au) or Travel Buddy (travbuddy.com) might help you track down a suitable partner. Another option is Singles Travel Connections (singlestravel .com.au), which operates singles-only, small-group tours. Then again, you might not need a special website or tour company that caters specifically to single travellers. The simplest solution is to join a group adventure tour.
The reason is that most adventure tour groups consist of single travellers. Couples are in the minority and comparing blisters from paddling a kayak or fighting over the last chapati in a Nepalese yak-herding village is a fantastic bonding exercise.
Adventure tours come in all possible configurations. While some are hardcore treks, there are plenty that require nothing more strenuous than an occasional stroll from your converted fishing boat to the nearest bar.
If you would prefer to travel in a group with more males or more females, call the adventure travel operators and see what they suggest. Hit the websites of World Expeditions (worldexpeditions. com), Peregrine Adventures (peregrineadventures.com) or Intrepid Travel (intrepidtravel.com) and see what appeals.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/travel/traveller-tips/adventure-need-not-be-solo-20110331-1ch8s.html#ixzz1LEj9K9hK
Traveling solo
Solo travel will boost your confidence. Photo: Getty Images
Travelling solo brings challenges from luggage logistics to long-distance navigation.
Whether it comes naturally or not, most people could use a few tips when it comes to hitting the road on your own.
Solotravelgirl.com's Jennifer Huber has travelled on her own through Afghanistan, Cuba and the United States. Huber took the plunge after realising how many adventures she was missing out on by waiting for people to follow through on plans. This is her advice to fellow solo travellers:
Advertisement: Story continues below
CONFIDENCE
You may need to start with baby steps, but solo travel will definitely boost your confidence, according to Huber. So take yourself out to lunch, see that museum on your next business trip or take a brief road trip on your own. Before you know it, you'll be taking a page from Huber's book and camping in California or hopping on a plane to Kabul.
DRIVING
Planning and preparation are particularly important for road trips, warns Huber, who never heads out without a GPS or having Google Maps loaded on her smart phone. She also believes in tyre and fluid checks, as well as an old-fashioned road map for backup in case of technology failure. When road tripping in the United States, Huber stresses the power of AAA memberships for discounts and tyre-changing support.
SAFETY
Huber advises common sense for the budding solo traveller. "If something doesn't feel right, it probably isn't," she says.
To avoid risks during hotel stays, Huber only books rooms with interior entries and makes sure the desk staff doesn't mention her room number out loud while she checks in. Journeywoman.com's Evelyn Hannon also sees hotels as a hot spot for safety concerns, and cautions against telling new friends where you are staying. If you want to meet up for an activity, says Hannon, choose a neutral and busy spot.
DINING
Hannon has faced the solo-dining conundrum and suggests that until you're comfortable eating alone in restaurants, reading materials will help pass the time. They are also, says Hannon, a helpful conversation starter. She advises that while eating in a cafe, solo travellers keep an English language book or newspaper on their table. English is an international language, and if you have reading materials close by, someone will inevitably strike up a conversation. Likewise, says Hannon, you can be the first to initiate an exchange if you notice someone with a book title you've previously enjoyed.
MCT
Follow Traveller on Twitter @FairfaxTravel
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/travel/traveller-tips/top-tips-for-solo-travellers-20110414-1dfa9.html#ixzz1LEix56Zm
Travelling solo brings challenges from luggage logistics to long-distance navigation.
Whether it comes naturally or not, most people could use a few tips when it comes to hitting the road on your own.
Solotravelgirl.com's Jennifer Huber has travelled on her own through Afghanistan, Cuba and the United States. Huber took the plunge after realising how many adventures she was missing out on by waiting for people to follow through on plans. This is her advice to fellow solo travellers:
Advertisement: Story continues below
CONFIDENCE
You may need to start with baby steps, but solo travel will definitely boost your confidence, according to Huber. So take yourself out to lunch, see that museum on your next business trip or take a brief road trip on your own. Before you know it, you'll be taking a page from Huber's book and camping in California or hopping on a plane to Kabul.
DRIVING
Planning and preparation are particularly important for road trips, warns Huber, who never heads out without a GPS or having Google Maps loaded on her smart phone. She also believes in tyre and fluid checks, as well as an old-fashioned road map for backup in case of technology failure. When road tripping in the United States, Huber stresses the power of AAA memberships for discounts and tyre-changing support.
SAFETY
Huber advises common sense for the budding solo traveller. "If something doesn't feel right, it probably isn't," she says.
To avoid risks during hotel stays, Huber only books rooms with interior entries and makes sure the desk staff doesn't mention her room number out loud while she checks in. Journeywoman.com's Evelyn Hannon also sees hotels as a hot spot for safety concerns, and cautions against telling new friends where you are staying. If you want to meet up for an activity, says Hannon, choose a neutral and busy spot.
DINING
Hannon has faced the solo-dining conundrum and suggests that until you're comfortable eating alone in restaurants, reading materials will help pass the time. They are also, says Hannon, a helpful conversation starter. She advises that while eating in a cafe, solo travellers keep an English language book or newspaper on their table. English is an international language, and if you have reading materials close by, someone will inevitably strike up a conversation. Likewise, says Hannon, you can be the first to initiate an exchange if you notice someone with a book title you've previously enjoyed.
MCT
Follow Traveller on Twitter @FairfaxTravel
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/travel/traveller-tips/top-tips-for-solo-travellers-20110414-1dfa9.html#ixzz1LEix56Zm
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)