It seems like at least once a year, the topic of “BMI,” or “body mass index,” being a flawed measuring system for fat mass and health comes up in conversation. Experts will explain how BMI leads to an incomplete perspective at best—since it doesn't take into consideration several key factors that influence a person’s body composition—and at worst, actual health risks, affecting eligibility for things like weight loss medications, insurance rates, joint-replacement surgery and fertility treatment. And then life moves forward. And yet, despite the constant debunking, the belief in BMI still marches on. And this time, it was hurled at the USA rugby star and Olympian Ilona Maher.More specifically, someone commented “I bet that person has a 30% BMI” on one of Maher’s TikTok videos. Could this person have simply been pointing out the inherent flaw of BMI? Saying that Maher, an elite athlete, would be considered “overweight” using this system? Perhaps. But this is the internet we’re dealing with, so Maher (and others) interpreted it to be an insult. And under that context, Maher wasn’t having it, and chose "not to just ignore the haters." “Hi, thank you for this comment. I think you were trying to roast me, but this is actually a fact. I do have a BMI of 30. Well, 29.3 to be exact,” Maher said in response video…which became something of a roast itself. Maher talked about how she had been considered “overweight” her entire life, and even recalled being “so embarrassed” to turn in a physical form to the office which had “overweight” written on it. “I chatted with my dietician, because I go off facts, and not just what pops up here. You know, like you do.” she quipped while tapping her temples. See on Instagram Maher is 5-ft.-10-in. and 200 lbs, which is considered “overweight” by BMI standards. But as she explained, about 170 of those 200 pounds are “lean muscle mass.” “Do that math in your head…you probably can’t,” Maher said sarcastically. It’s easy to see through this example how bogus BMI really is, especially for athletes.Essentially, “BMI doesn’t tell you what I can do.”“It doesn’t tell you what I can do on the field. How fit I am. It’s just a couple of numbers put together,” she said. “It doesn’t tell you how much muscle I have, or anything like that.”Maher concluded by faux lamenting, “I do have a BMI of 30. I am considered overweight. But alas, I am going to the Olympics, and you’re not.” While Maher’s clapback was certainly satisfying, it also provided some much needed reassurance to folks. So many commented on how this outdated concept has affected (or still effects) their own body image of that of a loved one. “How can I get my teenage daughter with a high BMI (but fit!) to understand this?! She feels shamed even at the doctor for her BMI.”“Dancer here, I'll never forget at 13 being told I had the BMI of 24 of ‘overweight.’ I broke down and the nurse said it didn’t mean anything and all I could think was then WHY are you making me do this?!”“I had to ask the doctor’s office to put a note on my child’s file to not bring up/talk about BMI in her check ups. It isn't an accurate representation of health!”“Thank you for sharing your weight, bc seeing lbs numbers in different bodies has been so helpful in me loving mine. I’m nowhere near an athlete's body but damn, the numbers really do us in.”Until a more affordable solution pops up, BMI will continue to rear its ugly head in doctor’s offices and in our psyches. Maybe this is a reminder that our bodies are so much more than height and weight every now and again is a good thing. And if it comes from an Olympian…even better.

For much of Olympic history, women were excluded from competing. Women weren't allowed to compete in the Ancient Olympic games at all, and the first women to compete in the modern Olympics in 1900 only made up 2% of the total athletes. That percentage has slowly increased in the decades since. The 2012 Olympics were the first games to have women competing in every sport, and the 2024 Paris games—for the first time in Olympic history—has a 50/50 ratio of male and female athletes.That gender parity makes a difference, not only for athletic opportunity but for how the games themselves are managed. More women competing means more mothers with babies competing, and thanks to some key advocates with experience in that area, the Olympic Committee has made two big moves at the Paris games to support those athletes.Take breastfeeding, for example. If an elite athlete is breastfeeding a baby, there are all kinds of logistics that can make competing at the Olympics a challenge. But with proper support, it doesn't have to prohibit them from competing in top form. One way the Olympic organizers are making competition more doable for moms is by offering breastfeeding athletes and their families hotel rooms near the Olympic village. Children have always been banned from the Olympic village with very few exceptions, and the dorm-type rooms with single, twin-sized beds are not exactly conducive to breastfeeding families' needs anyway. According to La Leche League International, breastfeeding athletes can thank fellow Olympian Clarisse Agbegnenou for the the hotel accommodations, The French Judo champion who became a mother in June of 2022 advocated for the accommodations, saying, "To put things in perspective, I've decided to breastfeed my daughter until she's weaned. She hasn't yet, so I'm following her. I've made sure that I feel good physically, because of course there's an element of tiredness. But as a mother who needs to be very present for my daughter, I asked for the opportunity to have her with me during the Olympics."Agbegnenou nursed her baby, Athena, while training for—and subsequently winning—her sixth world championship title. Clearly breastfeeding itself isn't holding her back in her sport, but not having proper accommodations would make competing in the Olympics unnecessarily harder.French Olympic Committee secretary general Astrid Guyart told reporters of the hotel accommodations, "It's unprecedented and it's something we want to make permanent, so it's not a one-off because it's the Olympics in Paris." Thanks to the advocacy of another Olympian mom Allyson Felix—who also happens to be the most decorated track athlete in history—the Paris Olympics also has its first nursery. Felix, who is now retired from competition, approached the International Olympic Committee and her partner Pampers about supporting athletes who are competing while parenting babies and young children.“I just knew how difficult it was to compete at the top level after I had my daughter, and some practical things were really hard,” Felix told CBS Mornings. “And so when I became on the athletes Commission of the IOC I really wanted to be that voice for athlete moms and just take away one less thing for them to worry about in the pressure of competition.”The nursery, supported by Procter & Gamble, sits in the heart of the Olympic village and includes a space to breastfeed, a play area and access to Pampers products. Felix said it gives parent athletes a place to step away from the noise and have some private time with their children.Check out one Olympic family making use of the nursery: @thewroster How is this the first time they thought of this ?? #olympics #momlife #australia #oioioi ? Keesja Gofers In the past, athletes were often made to feel that becoming a mother meant the end of their sports career, but Felix pointed out that that was just a narrative that was being placed on them. Accommodations like the nursery for athletes marks a new chapter in a new narrative.“I think it really tells women that you can choose motherhood and also be at the top of your game and not have to miss a beat,” said Felix, adding, “It's really a starting out place. I would love to grow this even more.”Here's to the athletes blazing the trail for themselves and those who've come after them to ensure that moms don't have to make false choices between motherhood and being at the top of their sport.

Josh and Jase are a British duo who’ve become famous on social media for documenting their travels across America and sharing what they’ve learned about each region's unique culture. “Originally, I thought we’d appeal to the British audience, and they’d find it interesting. But actually, it’s gone more the other way, and Americans say that they appreciate their country a little bit more because we go to these cool places that usually a lot of people don’t go to,” Jase told KRQE. Recently, the pair traveled to Texas, and Jase quickly learned that the Lone Star State has its own phrases that you won’t hear often, if ever, in the UK. So, he decided to share them with his audience while trying out his American accent, which sounds a lot like Matt McConaughey. @jaseinamerica How did i do? ? 1. “Y'all” —"No one says, 'you all," it's y'all." 2. “Bigger'n Dallas” — A term Texans use to describe something "really big." 3. “Bless your heart” — This means that someone feels "sorry for you" or it's a "hidden insult." Jase is still learning the difference. 4. “Broke bad” — A person raised by a good family but winds up becoming a "naughty individual." 5. “Come hell or high water” — A saying that means "to do something, regardless of what's in your way." 6. “Corn-fed” — This is a term to describe someone who is "really big." 7. “Dag gum it” — A kinder way of saying, "Goddamn it." 8. “Fixin’ to” — To plan to do something. 9. “Might could” — Basically, it's the same as saying could: "They might win the game if they had their regular quarterback fit." View this post on Instagram A post shared by Josh & Jase (@joshandjase)

A force of nature. The post Lemmy on why he loved Randy Rhoads: “He took risks” first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

by Mish Shedlock, Mish Talk: New Rule: When Jackasses demand money, they should have to state where the money comes from. Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen on Climate Change Please consider Remarks by Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen at the Goeldi Museum in Belém, Brazil Good afternoon. I am very glad to be here at […]

from PatrickByrne: TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

  From the beginning of July to the end of September 1941, the German military conducted one of the most ambitious and impressive actions in history. Part of Operation Barbarossa—the invasion of the Soviet Union—Army Group South achieved one of Germany’s greatest victories of the Second World War when it encircled the city of Kyiv and crushed the Soviet resistance in the area.   It was a battle that was marked by German military might, Soviet inadequacies, and sweeping tank maneuvers, as well as one of the most infamous atrocities of the war.   The Battle of Kyiv (at the time known as Kiev) in 1941 marked the highpoint of German military ascendancy before it was quickly checked by Soviet resistance and the bitter winter that soon followed.   The Drive into the Ukraine Marshal Semyon Timoshenko. Source: mil.ru   On June 22, 1941, the Germans launched the biggest invasion in history. Over three and a half million German personnel crossed the border into the Soviet Union, thus beginning the phase of the Second World War that would be characterized by the most intense brutality.   Army Group North struck out towards Leningrad while Army Group Center drove for Moscow. Army Group South, under the command of Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt, drove towards the area of the Ukraine. This was where the most powerful Soviet defenses lay, with no fewer than four armies protecting it, under the command of Marshal Semyon Budyonny, Marshal Semyon Timoshenko, Colonel General Mikhail Kirponos, Commissar Nikita Krushchev, and Mykhailo Burmystenko, Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR.   Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt, who commanded Army Group South. Source: Encyclopaedia Britannica   The German army surged forward at an unprecedented speed, taking casualties but inflicting many more as confusion and bad leadership ruled supreme in the Soviet efforts to defend their borders. Just four days after the invasion, the city of Lutsk fell, and the Germans pressed eastwards towards the Pripyat Marshes and Kyiv. Spearheading the attack was the powerful Panzer Group 1 under the leadership of Colonel General Ewald von Kleist, consisting of 799 tanks split between five panzer divisions and four motorized divisions, two of which were Waffen-SS.   This spearhead dealt the Soviets a stunning blow at the Battle of Brody from June 24 to June 26, where 750 German tanks defeated 3000 Soviet tanks. On June 30, Lviv fell to the Germans.   General Heinz Guderian. Colorized by Cassowary Colorizations. Source: Wikimedia Commons   With much ground to cover, the road to Kyiv was a difficult one, especially as the Soviets had posted the bulk of their forces there. Harassed by flanking maneuvers, the Germans pursued their objectives in the south.   By August 8, the Germans had managed to encircle two Soviet armies south of Kyiv in the Uman pocket, where 100,000 Soviet troops were trapped. Meanwhile, German troops also laid siege to Odesa to the west of Crimea.   Despite the massive gains made by the Germans and the incredible losses and blunders made by their enemy, the Soviets continued to pour troops into the area, and Soviet defense began to stiffen.   Meanwhile, Army Group North also ran into rugged resistance just short of Leningrad. With these developments, Hitler decided to peel off a substantial number of divisions from Army Group Center in order to bolster the German forces on the northern and southern flanks. His generals protested this move, believing that for the operation to be successful, the capture of Moscow was of prime importance. Hitler, however, was vehement about his decision. He firmly pressed his strategy, believing it would deny the Soviets of their production facilities.   On August 21, he issued a directive ordering the capture of the Crimean Peninsula in the Donetsk Basin. Heinz Guderian, in charge of Panzer Group 2, was sent to aid the Germans in Army Group South.   The disposition of the forces when this decision was made would mean that Guderian would drive on Kyiv from the northeast while Von Runstedt was pressing in from the west. It was a perfect opportunity to attempt a massive encirclement of the Soviets in and around the well-defended city of Kyiv.   The Encirclement An unauthorized photo of Stalin, the moment he learned of the fall of Kyiv by Stephen Kotkin. Source: Komsomolskaya Pravda via Rare Historical Photos   By the end of August, the encirclement began to take shape. Fifty Soviet divisions were situated in a triangular area from Roslav in the north to Karosten in the west to Dnepropetrovsk in the southeast. At the points of the triangle were German armies all closing in, shrinking the area of Soviet control.   Realizing their situation, the Soviets began spirited counterattacks to slow down the encirclement, but these attacks weren’t enough to stop the relentless assaults of the German war machine. Piecemeal, uncoordinated attacks from the ill-prepared Soviets failed.   German troops entering Kyiv. Source: WW2 History Book   As their predicament got worse, the Soviet commanders, which included Nikita Khrushchev in command of the Kyiv garrison, reviewed their situation. Marshal Budyonny sent a telegram to Stalin requesting that armies be allowed to pull back from Kyiv. This request was denied by Stalin, and at the request of Marshal Zhukov, Budyonny was replaced with Marshal Timoshenko.   By the time this request was finally granted on September 17, it was far too late, and the Germans had already closed the noose.   Spanish map of the Eastern Front from June to September 1941. Source: Wikimedia Commons   On September 12, Panzer Group 1 crossed the Dnipro River and advanced north. The Soviets, focusing their attention on the rapidly advancing Germans from the north, were attacked from the rear.   Guderian’s Panzer Group 2 kept up the steady pace, advancing south. The two groups met on September 16, 118 miles east of Kyiv. Three days later, Kyiv fell, but this was not the end of the battle.   Occupied Kyiv. Image: Bundesarchiv via Russia Beyond   Half a million Soviet soldiers were trapped but continued to fight. The German armies pressed relentlessly, reducing the size of the cauldron each hour. Rugged resistance and spirited counterattacks from the Soviets failed to cause any opening in the enemy defense. On September 20, Kirponos died while attempting a breakout. Tired and spent, the Soviet armies surrendered on September 26.   Babyn Yar Memorial at the Babyn Yar ravine. Source: Wikimedia Commons   When German forces took control of Kyiv, the worst was still to come for the city’s residents. The Soviets had organized a surprise for the Germans when they took control, and two large explosions rocked the German headquarters in the newly occupied city. This gave the Germans a pretext for the barbarism that ensued.   The brutality was genocidal and immediate. It is estimated that approximately 20 percent of Kyiv’s population was Jewish at the time. This accounted for around 160,000 Jewish people. SS soldiers from the Einsatzgruppen took care of the extermination. In the first two days, they killed 33,771 Jews, Roma, communists, and Soviet soldiers.   The victims were marched to Babyn Yar, a ravine to the northwest of the city, and shot. Over 100,000 people were murdered and disposed of at this location by the Nazi regime. It is the site of one of the biggest massacres in the Second World War.   Casualties A Ukrainian Jew being executed by a member of the Einsatzgruppen. Source: Library of Congress/United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Washington DC   Among conflicting reports from German and Soviet forces, it is difficult to establish an accurate figure of the number of casualties suffered in and around Kyiv in 1941. The German reports at the time stated that 665,212 prisoners had been taken, along with 824 tanks destroyed or captured and 3,436 artillery and anti-tank guns destroyed or captured.   The official Soviet claims were that no more than 222,000 soldiers were captured. There is no official record of German losses, but they are believed to have been significant, although nowhere near as devastating as the Red Army losses. According to ww2stats.com, the Germans suffered 12,728 killed, 46,480 wounded, and 2,085 missing.   Whatever the truth, four Soviet field armies were completely destroyed and removed from the battlefield.   A woman fleeing a Nazi-supported mob in the city of Lviv. Source: Radio Free Europe   Among civilians, the casualties would be immense during the German occupation. Those immediately targeted by the Germans were wholesale slaughtered, while in the following months, the Germans implemented a policy of slow starvation, which they would try to blame on Soviet food policies.   Despite Hitler’s order that the city be completely razed, Kyiv was spared. Unsurprisingly, this failure to follow his orders infuriated the Führer. German commanders could find no pretext to carry out this order, as there had actually been no fighting in the city.   In the rest of Ukraine, the Germans used the Holodomor as a propaganda tool to rally Ukrainian nationalist sentiment against the Soviets, whom the Germans linked to Jewish people. As a result, many Ukrainian nationalists provided support for the Nazi regime.   Aftermath The furthest extent of the Third Reich. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The encirclement of Kyiv was a complete and unprecedented disaster for the Soviets. It was their biggest defeat during the war and Germany’s biggest victory. It caused the complete collapse of the Soviet defense on the southwestern front, and troops had to be pulled from the defense of Moscow to reinforce what little was left in the south.   At this point, the German war machine seemed completely invincible. Morale plummeted among the Soviets, while for the Germans, their belief in their superiority seemed to be vindicated. This resulted in an overconfidence that led the Germans to make huge mistakes. Hitler referred to the battle as “the greatest battle in the history of the world.”   The silver lining for the Soviets was that the operations around Kyiv resulted in the German advance on Moscow being delayed for an entire month. When the German advance continued, the autumn rains turned the roads to mud and slowed the advance to a crawl as vehicles became bogged down.   After this, the winter and the iron will of the Soviet people stopped the German advance, and Moscow avoided being captured.   The Battle of Kyiv represents the last great breakthrough of the German forces. They would never again see such a stunning victory, while the Soviets recovered in the following months and years, going from strength to strength, pushing through 1942, and experiencing significant victories against their enemies at Stalingrad and Kursk in 1943, which completely turned the tide of the war. 1943 also saw the liberation of Kyiv as the Soviets pushed the Germans back.   Soviet troops marching through liberated Kyiv in 1943. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The Battle of Kyiv was Germany’s last great victory. Ensuring this victory, however, meant that German forces had to be taken from Army Group Center. It has been argued by strategists and academics that this move cost Germany the war.   On a strategic level, it was Hitler’s greatest success and his greatest blunder.