Extremely Disrespectful Zealot - Is it really n=1?

Dr. Guyenet has really become unglued on his blog site lately, and the purpose of this post is to clear some things up and set the record straight.

Dr. G said on one of his posts that there are many examples of folks gaining weight on a low carb diet.  Now, I know plenty of people who have lost lots of weight on a low carb diet, and plenty of people who gradually gained a few pounds of that weight when they went into maintenance mode.  My theory, if you will, is that that so-called maintenance mode the low carb diet authors promote is unworkable for many.  That maintenance mode includes, surprise, more carbs!

For the record, I NEVER GAINED WEIGHT ON A LOW CARB DIET.  I ONLY GAIN WEIGHT WHEN I ADD IN MORE CARBS.  (OK, now for the inside voice.)  I seem to lose the low carb magic after about three days of eating a typical carb-laden whole foods diet, and it is especially worse if that diet includes wheat or corn.  If I go back on a low carb diet, I can usually lose the added weight quickly, but this seems to be harder in the winter and summer.  It works better in spring and fall.  For me, at least, I seem to leave my ability to burn fat very quickly.

I am annoyed at Dr. G's current attempt to discredit and belittle anyone who has data points that do not correspond with his theories.  Despite his insistence that he removes "extremely disrespectful" posts from his blog, I have only seen him do this with people who disagree with him.  Not with all the other "extremely disrespectful" posters that populate the paleo cesspool.

This issue came up for me well before the famous G-T dust-up at AHS11.  There were some particularly "disrespectful zealots" that IMHO were so bad that I called out by name here on my blog.  One gained the title through her continual bashing of anyone interested in Jack Kruse and an award for the most creative use of moderatorship, and the other gained the title through his constant and creepy support of Dr. G on various websites.  You can read about it here and here and here. Note that both the zealots came by, and instead of offering an apology, continued with more denial and lies.  Go read the comments for yourself lol.  It was during the comments section of Dr. G's blog where I first read Woo.  I have continued to read her blog because despite the wackiness and mis-placed passion, she continues to supply good information in an entertaining fashion.

And just a shout-out to the other zealots.  Carbsane has never gone after me, anywhere, as far as I can tell, so, like Woo, she gets a free hall pass.  But, Jack!  Quit hatin' on Jimmy and his struggles with weight.

Well, Gee....

I am still reading Dr. Kruse's latest blog post, but this one has been bugging me so I'll discuss it now.

Jack says that the 4G phones are so bad because of all that high frequency stuff.

The "G" in the phone is not gigaherz, or even grounding, gravity, goose liver.  It's GENERATION.

A long long time ago, back when electronics was all analog, different folks were allocated various amounts of bandwidth to do all their fun radio and cosmic ray stuff.  The voice radio we all know and love has a fairly wide band, to make sure that voice quality is adequate.

As radios became more sophisticated and bandwidth availability became tight, it became easier to design phones and other devices with faster less-error-prone data transfer while keeping the bandwidth as small as possible.  Back in the old ham radio days, everyone knew that you could transer Morse code messages much farther distances with the same power than a full voice, because they were basically just clicks.

Later and later generations of cell phone data protocols went from a digital/analog combo to full digital, with increasing improvements in speed.  The way this was done was to go from full voice to just a bunch of really fast clicks.  Along with the explosion in the use of wireless devices, additional bandwidth at higher frequencies was allocated, but again, the overall power of the devices was minimized compared to the earlier models.  Every time the changes were great enough, a new Generation was named.

Oh, heck, what do I know?  I don't have a cell phone.  I have a land-line with a handset with a real cord with power supplied from the phone company.  Why you ask?  OK, this home is a geekdom, we have all sorts of phones and wireless devices, and of course that wirefull phone we use during an earthquake when the regular power is down and we want to call mom and tell her we are still alive.

The Answer to the Universe - Why I am not a Webinarian

Jack Kruse posted his epic ("I promise") blog post today.

I'll admit that after scanning it I was unimpressed, but after sleeping on it, I decided to give it a good read-through before I blast it to pieces.  What I can say about it now is, "Jack! Get an editor!!!"  And gee, get a physicist.

OK, I have lots to say on this topic, and in case you were wondering, as a "Known Follower Of Jack Kruse" I do still read him and pay attention to lots of what he says.  He always makes more sense when he is talking over when you are reading him.

This post is more of a place-holder than anything, but I will leave my careful readers with a little story.  A buddy of mine used to have a high-powered job.  Lots of money.  Lots of deadlines.  Lots of frequent flyer miles.  You get the picture.

Eventually the stress and circadian disruption affected his sleep to the point he was unable to sleep at all.  And I know you are thinking, this can't be good, and it wasn't.

Pressured by his friends and business associates to take a break, he planned a visit to an exciting, bustling mega-city.  At the last minute, he cancelled his trip to go to some unnamed solitary place.  When a friend suggested Arizona, he agreed that it might be a good choice.

Arizona is the home of many beautiful places, and after visiting a few places, he headed to Sedona.  After a day at Sedona, he cancelled the rest of his trip.  He had the most amazing night of sleep, and longed to go back to the place that allowed him to start to regain his health.

After the trip to Sedona, my friend changed his whole way of life in exchange for his health.  It seemed like a good trade-off at the time.  Later on, as opportunities to re-enter his former crazy life appeared, he resisted.

Since that time, I have followed my friend's lead.  I have changed my whole way of life, too.  Every once in awhile I think it wouldn't be so bad to have another crazy job and make a ton of money.  But I have been able to rearrange my career so that I have the flexibility to wake up with the sun, go to bed with the sunset, visit the beach on a whim if the waves are right, and remove myself from "neo-lithic agents of disease" like cell-phones, TPS reports, high-heeled shoes, traffic jams, cube farms and fluorescent lighting.  Is all the extra money worth it?

Following my path has also meant a change in finances.  I just had to laugh when Jack said that the original cost of his webinar was about the same as a theater ticket.  Does he have any idea the size of my infotainment budget?  (I do get to the theater from time to time through trade, barter, freebies and other generosities from random and assorted people.)  My choice of lifestyle enables me to get to the beach and put my toes in the water, but I haven't a clue what my Pg/E2 ratio is.  I am one of the unwashed masses who "did not take the initiative" to become a member of one of the precious metals klubz along with thousands of dollars of quarterly testing.  I am afraid I can only afford the aluminum klub membership.  My cholesterol report does not even include the fluffy kind.

Jack may know all about quantum biology and all that stuff, but he seems to have hit a snag on seeing the difference between not having any money and living in poverty.  I think that while many in the paleo cesspool have re-thought that old idea that all fat people are lazy and stupid, I don't think all of us have extended that same line of thought to poor people.  Are all people who don't buy the webinars lazy, stupid and unmotivated?

I was encouraged by Jack's recent decision to offer the leptin reset to all levels of membership.  This is a wonderful start.

One week on MY Diabetes Prevention Program

Even though I had 6 months to do it, after only one week, I reached the halfway point for the weight loss goal outlined in the Diabetes Prevention Program.  I went through chapters 2 and 3 of the program, and everywhere it said to identify all the foods with lots of fat.  I did that.

Then I did the opposite of what they suggested and ate more of it.  This week I enjoyed soup made with ham bits and the all the fat around the edges and around the bone.  I actually cooked bacon and greens in the bacon fat, and then added additional butter to cook my breakfast eggs.  I ate it all and then licked the plate and didn't leave any for my cat.  I actually ate half a stick of butter with my dinner.

Here's a great quote from the handbook.  "Eating too much fat is what makes us fat." So I am sure that what is happening is the over three percent of the body weight I lost was just me gaining lots of fat like the experts say, and then correcting that gain through loss of even more water weight than usual.

Stay tuned.

In case I forget

Five years ago today I was at my highest weight, and after finally finding myself sick enough of it and having enough time, I started on a weight loss plan.

First, I got up for Denise Austin's TV show.  I know, people really make fun of her, but for several years I had been in school and working seven days a week in front of a computer and wasn't even doing basic exercising.  The last straw was when I found it was even difficult to turn over in bed.  How did it get so bad when I wasn't looking?

I started walking and following a low fat diet like they recommend.  This was very difficult, and it took me quite a bit of time to lose even 10 pounds and keep it off for more than a few weeks.  I struggled for two more years, stopping when I became unmotivated and then restarting, usually at a higher weight than before.

Twenty eight months ago I started a lower carb diet, and then lost the rest of my weight.  I haven't maintained all of the loss, but I did lose and keep off over 18% of my body weight.  (I also lost my long-term vegetarian lifestyle.  How eat-crow-ish that was.)

This week I have been pouring over the Diabetes Prevention Program and other studies, and have seen first-hand in the data how difficult it is for people to lose weight and keep it off.  It is easy to get discouraged.

But, then I look back at some of my older records of weight, and realize that I am already in the tails of the distribution of weight loss outcomes.  For that, I am pleased.

Oh and P.S. Coca-Cola.  Some calories are more equal than others.  Just sayin'

Week one on MY diabetes prevention program

 My HbA1c went from 5.8 to 5.4 after a year on a lower carb diet.  Does a low carb prevent diabetes over the long haul?  Stay tuned!

My first full day on the DPP went OK.  I exercised 70 minutes, under-dressed in the cool sunshine.  I ate a tasty and satisfying diet consisting of 60% artercloggingsaturated fat.

I already lost two percent of my body weight.  I heard Jenny Ruhl say that you can lose tons of water weight on a low carb diet.  OK, I am going to clarify that.  There is losing weight due to a reduction in glycogen storage, but probably much more due to a reduction in inflammation.  Either way, I am already at 1/3 of my goal, and at this rate I'll be there by next week.

I visited the NDEP site and found the script for the mandatory seminars (or here) that the lifestyle intervention arm had to sit through.  A dreadful pile of training documents, explaining the purpose of other documents.  Simply dreadful!  This is where I learned that this was all to prevent diabetes, not a weight-loss program.  Then they started in with the main intervention - weight loss!  I started in with section one of the "Lifestyle Balance Introduction Manual" while having Total Quality Management flashbacks.

Step one - Meet the Lifestyle coach.  This is where the coach coo's something like, "Oh, I'm your lifestyle coach.  Isn't that faaaaaaabulous?  We'll get to know each other soooooooo well during this program, like fer years, almost like we're sistas or something.  I am SOOOOOO happy to meet you!  Soooooo, lets all sit in a circle and hold hands and get to know each other, just like we did at summer camp.  Sooooooo, how do you all feel about being the chosen few in this treatment arm?  Isn't it soooooooo wonderful that you were chosen at random for the best arm?  If you are having trouble with anything, we can meet one-on-one and I can solve any problem for you.  Any questions?"

Of course, this conversation was just a little reverie for me, since I am in the low carb arm and there is no lifestyle coach for the low carb diet.  Coach [redacted] made it very clear that she was to remain as hostile and un-supportive as possible.  Other registerd dietitians made sure that it wouldn't be Steve Cooksey or other internet provider.  So, I am going to be my own coach.

Here's what else my coach made me do.  I received my lifestyle book. I had to discuss how I felt about all this.  I had to choose between starting with weight loss or exercise.  I had to sign an agreement with my coach.  First I chose the exercise part, but then realized that the order of the classes would work better if I chose to focus on weight instead.  I promised to work as a team.

Off to that section.  Here is a memorable comment in the script:  "eating too much fat is fattening."

OK, what did I eat?  I wrote down everything I ate and then, as instructed, I circled everything that I thought was high in fat.  Eventually I just circled the whole darn food log.  I am going to talk about my circling decisions next week, when my coach will work with me without hostility or ridicule.

Go team!!!!!!! (Oh, I do have a team, but it is private.  The members have decided to wall themselves off from the general nasty diet community so that we could be free to discuss our low carb path without ridicule and interference from others.)

MY OWN diabetes prevention program

This little story caught my attention, and I am surprised that it didn't reach the radar of others, like Eades, who follow the news feeds pretty well.

Now it is this type of article that brings out the libertarian in many a low-carber.  Seems that the diabetes prevention program, based on a clinical study program of the same name, "proves" that their preferred lifestyle modification is superior to doing nothing.  Is it superior to a low carb plan?  Hmmm, I guess with these people in charge, we will never know.  The really sucky thing is that now, as a taxpayer, I'll be forced to fund this make-work-program-for-registered-dietitians as it gets implemented throughout the entire Obama-care-o-sphere.

Seems like these researcher folks have proved that intensive one-on-one "coaching" and united-front eating recommendations have helped people.  But I think I can do better on low carb.

Here's the 5th arm of the study.  (n=1)

I followed a lowish carb diet (no more than 150 grams on most days, even though I tried to shovel it in).  After a couple of months, I went lower carb.  By 6 months in, I had lost 17 percent of my body weight.  After one year, I had maintained most of that weight loss, and was in at 15 percent overall.  During the second year, I quit exercising regularly.  During the third year, I started progesterone and went off regular use of my appetite-destroying sleep medication and was on a good LC diet only about half the time.  My weight did go higher, but the overall weight lost was still above 7 percent.  That 7 percent was the aim of the study.  The folks in the lifestyle intervention arm did lose 7 percent of their initial weight, but gained much of it back, even though they were attempting to follow the diet program and still exercising 100 minutes a week.  The metformin group lost 4 percent, but gained it all back by 2.8 years.

Here's a little table showing the percent weight lost with the treatments across time.

treatment group              6 months        12 months        28 months      33.6 months
lifestyle intervention           7 %                  7 %                                       4 %
metformin only                                          4 %                                        0 %
control                                                      0 %                                        0 %
ME!                                 17 %               15 %                7 %

So here's what I am going to do.  I am going to exercise my "restart" as outlined in the diabetes prevention program.  Let's see how well I do by 33.6 months.  Even though I have not been diagnosed with pre-diabetes, at the start of my lower carb diet, by fasting bg was 101 and my HbA1c was 5.8.  I think those numbers are high enough to take action.  Both numbers were better after a year, but I haven't gone to the doctor or taken any type of test since, except for blood pressure at the blood donation center.  My blood pressure has continued to go down, as well as my waistline, despite the weight gain.

I am only showing out to the 2.8 years, because at that time, the study was stopped and the control and metformin groups were offered the lifestyle modification, and I haven't gotten out that far either.  What I found really interesting is that when they compared the weight loss 10 years out between groups, they broke it out by age. (Go to this study and check out table 2.) The group similar to mine (C and G) had weight losses of diddly-squat over the entire time span.  I bet I'll do better.  I think Dr. Gardner's study showed that the low carb diet did better for women in my age group than the other types of diets.

Stay tuned!

This Just in for 2013 - Atkins beats out Paleo for the best diet

Yippie!, for the low carb diet!  (OH, as a woo-fueled low-carb jihaddist, I just had to start with this.  Sorry, and now, where was I?)

US News and World report has released it's yearly popularity poll comprehensive study of the best diets.  This year was even better, since the panel of experts did exhaustive and robust research.

The result?  The Atkins beat out the Paleo diet.  In fact, the Paleo diet came in dead last this year.  Na na na na na.

I sure am glad the research was so robust as to winnow all that mess down the bestest and highest diets, like the experts own DASH diet, which for most of us, just means that clothing store the Kardashians have in Calabasas, not something you do so your butt will look smaller.  And THANK GOODNESS doe's beechs of paleo weeeeded out that awful dangerous and disastrous epi-paleo guru before that disastrous and dangerous epi-paleo diet entered into the running.

There is an interesting category this year, the best diet for type 2 diabetes.  It is interesting because it finally outs what researchers have been hiding from us all along, and that is the great results that diabetics have been having on the diets that are on the top of this list.  The experts polled seem to have an affinity for the vegetarian plans.  I guess the cat is out of the bag that eating meat causes lots of problems with your insulin.  Here's the study.  [Note:  I'll have to fix that link as soon as some sort of study like that actually gets published, Ed.]

While I can certainly understand why the weighty obesity and diet experts are cautious about recommending any diet that does not have the gold-standard, crossover, multi-attitudinal, randomized, blind clinical study, I was not aware of all the great studies that have been going on at the leading edge of the oncoming wave of the tsunami that is obesity research.  Diets such as the "Biggest Loser", "Flexitarian" and "Engine 2" diets have washed up onto the scene only recently, and the trials have resulted in positive results for obesity, heart disease and type 2 diabetes.  This is why they received much higher scores than those scantily-data'd lower carb diets.  You can read about all these studies here here and here. [Sorrrrry again, maybe someday I'll get around to fixing this, Ed.]

One take-away I got from this groundbreaking and robust study is that it exceeded even my expectations of a study where the percentage of registered dietitians exceeded 50 percent.

Yes, Dr. Lustig, I really NEEEED to be this extreme

What?  Where do people come up with this?

Dr. Lustig is on the soapbox again, with a weird new piece on dieting.  Here's an interesting quote: 

"All successful diets share three precepts: low sugar, high fiber (which means high micronutrients), and fat and carbohydrate consumed together in the presence of an offsetting amount of fiber. Anything after that is window dressing."

I guess he gleaned all that information out of Dr. Gardner's A to Z study, which showed the Atkins diet to be the most successful.   Despite the fact that the Atkins diet doesn't require one to take great pains to be sure that they are mixing their fat and carbohydrate together in the correct ratio that Dr. Lustig inadequately specifies, I am sure Dr. Gardner managed to sneak that part into his study, and that is the sole reason for the superior results on Atkins over the Ornish, Zone and "Mediterranean" diets.

Could it be that the Atkins dieters achieved results by eating all that window dressing?  Nom, nom, hope the dressing was high fat, or at least from the window frame instead of the glass, providing as much of the fat-melting woody fiber as you could get from a piece of industrial high-fiber bread back when you were eating it.  Hey, chopsticks anyone?

Dr. Lustig thinks we shouldn't be so extreme as to embrace the Atkins diet.  Why?  Hey, cause there's no MILK, he says!  No milk, no vitamin D!!  That is because all the cheese that those stooopid low carb jihadists are eating on the Atkins diet must have had all the vitamin D removed or never added.  But somehow, the Paleo Diet (OK, where's my trademark key on this font??) gets a free hall pass, even though it specifically bans the essential food, even during the "ongoing weight loss" part of the diet.

Newsflash Dr. Lustig!  The Atkins diet does not ban milk.  The Paleo diet does. Now, which is more extreme?  Oh, by the way, lets take a look at all the REAL foods that people on the Atkins diet are eating that contain vitamin D.  If you follow the above link, you will see a list of really great foods that are staples of the diets my friends on Atkins eat. (Personally, I eat epi-paleo, an even more extreme diet. No Vitamin D there, either.)  You will also notice that the list contains a sprinkling of foods that are usually not high on the list for Atkins or Paleo.  Things like FORTIFIED milk, FORTIFIED soymilk, FORTIFIED cereals, etc.

Hey wait a minute!  FORTIFIED MILK??????  What Dr. Lustig is telling us to do is to be careful about "extreme" diets that contain really great sources of vitamin D, and recommends diets that contain vitamin D supplements instead.  How about a gob of FORTIFIED margarine with that FORTIFIED cereal?  When did this form of fake eating become not only typical, but preferred?  Just because it is typical doesn't mean it is optimal.

Dr. Lustig ends with this:

"All real food is inherently good. It's what we do to it that is bad. Food processing is the Mr. Hyde of the obesity pandemic. The way to reverse it is to do the opposite, to stop altering food and instead consume it in its natural state." 

Great idea, but I am pretty sure that doesn't include drinking altered milk products.


Here's my advice for Dr. Lustig, if he really wants to navigate through the diet mess.  First, read some of the clinical studies.  Second, learn a bit about biochemistry and human body systems.  I have stated recently on another blog that I am not a biochemist, but even I know that fiber is that stuff that goes through your intestines without getting broken down.  Micronutrients are nutrients you need in small quantities.  These are two different things.  High fiber doesn't necessarily provide a high number of micronutrients like Lustig contends.

It IS the end of the world, and here come the zombies!

I have trouble keeping it straight.  Oh gosh, I go from being a suspected neo-Nazi because I refuse to trash people I haven't been bothering to track since the 60's or whatever, to see how badly-behaved they continue to be, and then I am publicly outed on the interwebz as a known follower of Kruse.

Destruction fer sure, my tent is destroyed, my curtains in a moment.

Thankfully, there is a new guru, shimmering in the distance, in a different time zone and state of mind.  Lord Peter and his high-fat diet will save me.  And I am included with the "yous guys" pit of vipers as I do not waver for one minute from my allegiance to my beloved guru.

Now I am searching on Youtube at this late hour, for a Peter webinar, or maybe in another time when he was a kid and played the guitar badly and thought it would be OK to post it anyway, or off to Etsy for a handmade Peter plush toy that I can cuddle with late at night when the carb demons call, and my computer room echoes the chants and rants of all the trolls disguised as obesity researchers, who taunt and ignore me on various blogs and websites I both despise and visit regularly.  And yet I am fixated on the purpose of oscillating secretions.  And how Lord Peter turned compost into whole eggs, water into wine, white fat into brown, while the evil one turns Peter's staff of merry followers into snakesssssss.

P.S. Dear Peter, Yes!  I have unconditionally accepted everything that you have said, even though your brilliance has blinded me with pseudoscience.  And maybe you are totally wrong on most points, but the only biochemist I could find to review all the posts and tweets is currently in the lair of Joel Fuhrman, and he probably won't come around and start reading them until his health starts to improve, and that may be awhile so I hope everyone else is patient with me.

And, taking a stroll over at the video bin, I found this great vid from the latest "Pit of Vipers" conference.  Look at all the clinicians and crazy people there.  I have finally come home.

Or, is it really just a dream?

2012 Year in Review

And, Oh!  What a year it has been.  And now, I have cycled right back to where we were, both sidereally and weightwise.

I started out with a bang in January, with the leptin reset and Robb Wolf's recommendations.  This success led me to being fired by my rheumetologist.  Yay!  I didn't keep good records, but the 5-week experience plus the later month-long "Paleo on 100 dollars a month" challenge left me 15 pounds lighter.

Then I started CT in earnest.  Yay!

But, then summer crept forward, the garden carbs called me, I started a half-assed compliance program.  My mindless following of my guru was stalled when he was made to walk the gangplank.  He then circled his wagons, with a paywall all around, and I lost both the new community and my enthusiasm. Walked away from all the paleo crap, too.  When I got into dietary trouble, I'd just fire up the cold tub and fix it.  OK, that worked for awhile.

Eventually, this C-student attitude got me into gaining all the weight back.  (But wait!  It wasn't "and then some.")  I kept getting serious for a week or so, then eating a bunch of wheat or bbq sweet corn, and gain a few pounds.

By fall, as a result of my big mouth and my insistence on speaking truth to power, I was walking the gangplank as well, right off that [redacted] site and into the cold, deep blue sea.

So, lets recap.  I was on a half-assed diet for most of the year, I didn't do any more aerobics than my active lifestyle already affords.  If someone handed me a piece of cake, I ate it.  If someone didn't, I didn't eat it.  I didn't eat on little plates.  I didn't chew my food thirty times.  I didn't starve myself.  I didn't log in every day and spin a stupid wheel.  I didn't eat potatoes.  I didn't not eat potatoes.  I didn't troll neo-nazi sites to see what they were eating.  I didn't track my food, I just salted it, buttered it, just ate it.  And, when I was full, I quit eating.  I didn't do testing.  I didn't sign up for personal coaching.  I didn't count my satfat grams.  I didn't even count my carbs, except for grins.  I didn't pay for a webinar.  I didn't go to a Paleo convention or make any paleo brownies.  I did no crossfit.  I did not give up or butter my coffee.  I did not sous vide or confit anything. No monthly hormone panels, no 23andme, no suitcases full of supplements, no dopamine-enhancing drugs to swallow every morning.  I did not buy a single bag of ice.

This fall, after spending a year fixing things hormonally, and reading more of Dr. Kruse and Dr. B G, I started on progesterone.  I feel wonderful on it, and just gained a few pounds, each pound being incredibly worth it.  I started having a more normal response to carbs, a resiliency to physical activity (and a hot climate!) I haven't enjoyed since menopause, but learned that I must be very careful with carbs in order to keep out of a hormonal imbalance.  I got more skin tags and aches and pains.  There is more water weight in the mix, and I haven't sorted it all out yet.  But there is also the fact that I completely stopped my sleep medication (yea, that one that caused me to quit eating and lose all that weight and appetite).  Before progesterone, I found that I couldn't go for more than 2-3 days without the sleep medication, or I would lose sleep, gain weight and get a bit cranky.  This time, with the progesterone, I was able to go through a couple of weeks, with moderate crankiness only after a few days of high-GI carbs like cake and cookies.

And what happened with my weight?  Nothing.  (This has never happened before.  I either gained or was miserable trying to lose or tread water.)  My belly fat is less, people still ask me if I lost weight, my skin is so much better, and I have fallen in love with CT.

My plan for 2013 is to continue with my fixed hormonal system and CT, continue to eat meat and veggies with few grains, increase my aerobic exercise and see what happens.  I will probably throw in another "100 dollar challenge, we'll see if the dollar amount goes up though.

Happy New Year!!