India as a sporting nation

[Aditi]

Aditi, Just to be clear: what do you mean by all of us second-gen desi kids?

Yeah I meant ABCDs...sorry, should have been more clear.

[yoda]

Yes I had issues with that too. As also Kalpana Chawla(RIP) celebration by India. They are Americans, let them be. xxx

She is of Indian Origin. That does count for something. Nothing wrong in Indians being proud of her and celebrating her success. Her parents and brother are in India, IIRC.

[Guest HariSampath]

Here I disagree. For two reasons: 1) There is no conclusive study which says veggie lifestyle is better. By any Athletic journal research you will have an emphasis on meat/egg etc. And yes since I am here talking about Sports I am going to worry about Athletics Journals and not a Yoga book. 2) The issue of health, as you define it, is for average people. Not the athletes. If you have an American X with bulging quads and ripped core there is no point comparing him to an Indian man with puny legs simply by claiming the latter has better Blood Quality. Who cares? The former runs 100m inn 9.85, the latter in 10.7 seconds. Point being - if you are fighting it with the best, get yourself the fittest of the lot..and by that I mean physically, mentally and everything else..Of course once you are past 40 year or so go veggie by all means, heck just breath Oxygen for all I care. xx

There is also the factor of Sporting Intelligence, recognised as one of the 8 types of Intelligence and termed Bodily Kinesthetic Intelligence, by the University of Oxford, and is largely nature and can be nurtured on top of that

[fineleg]

Yeah I meant ABCDs...sorry' date=' should have been more clear.[/quote'] Thanks for clarifying that. One more clarification sought: ok, so are you saying ABCDs dont want to take up sports? Becos they have "indianess" in their genes or something like that?

[Lurker]

She is of Indian Origin. That does count for something. Nothing wrong in Indians being proud of her and celebrating her success. Her parents and brother are in India' date=' IIRC.[/quote'] Of course but it should not get over the top is all I am saying. I can certainly understand a newsline on 4th page of a National daily but to make her the Headline on most media and invite her to big functions..what was that about?

[Aditi]

Thanks for clarifying that. One more clarification sought: ok, so are you saying ABCDs dont want to take up sports? Becos they have "indianess" in their genes or something like that?

I guess studies took a higher importance than taking up a sport professionally did.

[Guest HariSampath]

NRIs started emigrating from 70s in large numbers from India. Most first gens still can't get India out of them. Look at how many of us still loiter around ICF talking about cricket (which we suck so much). Now' date=' may be the second gens and third gens can change this attitude and we can see so many NRI sec/third gens taking up sports at a higher level. It has already happened in the caribbean, where Indians have lived there for centuries. You can see how many Indian-origin players in the WI now.[/quote'] Which also means that if sufficient number of Dads take their young boys to the club cricket games they play in the bay area, maybe we will see more "Indian origin" Americans take to the game, so that they can play for USA in the world cup after 20 years and then we as usual in India can invite them all back to a ticker tape welcome, after they win it ( btw, and still the argument on whether Sachin should retire or not will be on here :D)

[Bongosamaj]

1) There is no conclusive study which says veggie lifestyle is better. By any Athletic journal research you will have an emphasis on meat/egg etc. And yes since I am here talking about Sports I am going to worry about Athletics Journals and not a Yoga book.

i don't give a rat's a$$ about athletic journals. I base my comments purely on nutrition studies and medical journals which does see fair presence in my library. Harvard along with a few german universities have already established that people who ate a good mix of predominantly vegetarian diet along with minor diary and fish products had the BEST health standards from the age of 35 and above. The balanced diet ensured ALL necessary vitamins, protiens and carbs were consumed but a lack of meet ensured that the mass of free radicals, cholesterol and trans-fat were significantly reduced, leading them to have far better liver health, heart condition and circulation. Ofcourse, it goes without saying that the contrasts were made in people who have similar activity lifestyle..ie a veggie cyclist vs non-veggie, veggie couch potato vs non-veggie etc etc.

Who cares? The former runs 100m inn 9.85, the latter in 10.7 seconds.

you should care. For blood-chemistry is the ultimate health-guage. There is little sense in persuing senseless and itty bitty sporting goals at the categoric degeneration of one's body (which an inferior blood chemistry most definitely is). With your line of argument, why not make dopes legal too ? much like heavy meat-eating, they too destroy your body in the long term while giving quick short-term results. Oh and another thing- keep in mind i am not approaching this discussion of 'better eating habits' like the 'my way is right,hence do it' type of nonsense you know who propagates here. I will be the first one to tell you that I LOVE to eat meat and i enjoy its taste too much to give it up. But at the same time, i have come to see the FACT that cutting out meat is far better for us in the long term but less convinient- meat has a$$-loads of vitamins that we'd have to eat 3-4 different stuff to replace but it is a fact that the hormones, free-radicals produced from trans-fat and animal protien digestion , etc. are highly damaging to the human system.

[fineleg]

I guess studies took a higher importance than taking up a sport professionally did.

That does not have anything to do with whether they can excel in sports because they are indians or not indians. Also, it does not mean sports interest wont be there in "indian kids". There are indian families in usa who support kids going into sports too.

[yoda]

Of course but it should not get over the top is all I am saying. I can certainly understand a newsline on 4th page of a National daily but to make her the Headline on most media and invite her to big functions..what was that about?

First Indian origin woman in space is 4th page news to you? No way. It is tops for me for that day. Inviting for big functions, yea, we do tend to overdo the celebrity thing.

[Lurker]

i don't give a rat's a$$ about athletic journals. I base my comments purely on nutrition studies and medical journals which does see fair presence in my library.

Well then you should give a rat's a$$ perhaps. There is little point in following a Sports Generic book to talk about cricket is it not? Similarly little point in following Medical Journal and not Athletics Research.

you should care. For blood-chemistry is the ultimate health-guage. There is little sense in persuing senseless and itty bitty sporting goals at the categoric degeneration of one's body (which an inferior blood chemistry most definitely is).

No I wont. You are free to say having a better blood quality is good but I would much rather have a 9.85 runner than a 10.7 one. Simple.

With your line of argument, why not make dopes legal too ? much like heavy meat-eating, they too destroy your body in the long term while giving quick short-term results.

Because dopes are chemicals, not natural. They are also illegal. Last time I checked eating meat was neither un-natural nor illegal. xxx

[Bongosamaj]

Similarly little point in following Medical Journal and not Athletics Research.

We are talking about what is healthier. In terms of health, Medical Journal >>>> Athletic journals/tabloids in every aspect. Credibility, research capacity AND reliability.

No I wont. You are free to say having a better blood quality is good but I would much rather have a 9.85 runner than a 10.7 one. Simple.

So you'd much rather have a meaningless 9.85 run by someone due to DELIBERATE harm to their body than a fully healthy person running a 10.7. Shows how f*cked up your priorities are when you go advocating meaningless sporting/athletic pinaccles at the expense of the health of the individual. Look- chase all records as you want- but do it without f*cking over your own body in the long term. Thats the bottomline.

Because dopes are chemicals, not natural. They are also illegal. Last time I checked eating meat was neither un-natural nor illegal.

1. Most dopes used are actually naturally occuring ones made in massive quantities in labs. 2. Its not whether it is legal or illegal, the issue is one of what attitude you are advocating. In my opinion, it is a demented attitude, because you are saying one should chase the 9.6 100m record by consuming lot of meat, fully knowing that it will DESTROY your own health later on, instead of giving it all, taking the healthier options and gettig a 10.2 Essentially you are saying that it is okay to knowingly harm one's body at the expense of a completely arbitary record ( how the F*CK does it matter if the record is 9.6 or 9.8 ?) . If you are arguing that,then might as well argue that lets use drugs for performance. For it is essentially the same argument of 'take the path that gives you better performance despite negetive results later on'.

[Guest HariSampath]

Of course but it should not get over the top is all I am saying. I can certainly understand a newsline on 4th page of a National daily but to make her the Headline on most media and invite her to big functions..what was that about?

Frenzy and hysterical, thats how it was, some 8 hrs of TV time in the major English channels with all sorts of questions ranging from "how does India look from there" to what it was to do potty in space, with she saying one had to aim ....uuggh, I would have told all these media folks and kids those things, after all I had been to Lyndon Johnson space center NASA to see the International space station and touched a moon rock as well, and to answer Qs like that it doesn't even need such trips :tounge_smile:

[Guest HariSampath]

First Indian origin woman in space is 4th page news to you? No way. It is tops for me for that day. Inviting for big functions' date=' yea, we do tend to overdo the celebrity thing.[/quote'] So the first Indian origin woman pooping in space, explaining how one aims is treated as the second coming ? :omg_smile:

[Guest HariSampath]

We are talking about what is healthier. In terms of health, Medical Journal >>>> Athletic journals/tabloids in every aspect. Credibility, research capacity AND reliability. So you'd much rather have a meaningless 9.85 run by someone due to DELIBERATE harm to their body than a fully healthy person running a 10.7. Shows how f*cked up your priorities are when you go advocating meaningless sporting/athletic pinaccles at the expense of the health of the individual. Look- chase all records as you want- but do it without f*cking over your own body in the long term. Thats the bottomline. 1. Most dopes used are actually naturally occuring ones made in massive quantities in labs. 2. Its not whether it is legal or illegal, the issue is one of what attitude you are advocating. In my opinion, it is a demented attitude, because you are saying one should chase the 9.6 100m record by consuming lot of meat, fully knowing that it will DESTROY your own health later on, instead of giving it all, taking the healthier options and gettig a 10.2 Essentially you are saying that it is okay to knowingly harm one's body at the expense of a completely arbitary record ( how the F*CK does it matter if the record is 9.6 or 9.8 ?) . If you are arguing that,then might as well argue that lets use drugs for performance. For it is essentially the same argument of 'take the path that gives you better performance despite negetive results later on'.

Look Its a question of priorities. Consuming meat or its advocacy for better performance in sport is hardly comparable with encouraging the unethical use of steroids and banned substances , to gain an unfair advantage in sporting contests. And if anyone wants to increase or improve sporting performance by taking meat there is nothing wrong in promoting it ( I am a staunch eggetarian by the way, and I had always been a sportsman at school and university levels including cricket and I know that meat certainly helps). Javagal Srinath was a vegetarian for a major portion of his career, but he was encouraged to take to a meat diet to improve his physical ability to bowl fast, and he agreed, the improvement showed too. Krish Srikkanth was always a staunch vegetarian who was also asked at least 2 times to change to a meat diet, and he declined , making a value based decision to stick to his own diet ( smtimes even self cooked !!) , and both these instances are perfectly valid .

[Lurker]

So you'd much rather have a meaningless 9.85 run by someone due to DELIBERATE harm to their body than a fully healthy person running a 10.7.

That only shows an extreme lack of sporting knowledge. For one you are assuming that a 9.85 second guy will almost always be in bad health than a 10.7 one. What is the reason for such a stellar lack of faith may I ask?

Shows how f*cked up your priorities are when you go advocating meaningless sporting/athletic pinaccles at the expense of the health of the individual.

All powers to you my friend. If I am in love with my body then I better stay on the sideline and get my a$$ whooped. Reminds me of the time I saw an Indian gymnast scoring a 7.2 or something(out of 10) and falling off the Pammell Horse. Sorry I would much rather score a 10 than be that bloke(not suggesting he was a veggie, just suggesting in sports you are in there to win).

1. Most dopes used are actually naturally occuring ones made in massive quantities in labs.

Give an example. And also the reason why that particular dope is illegal so we can reach somewhere.

2. Its not whether it is legal or illegal, the issue is one of what attitude you are advocating. In my opinion, it is a demented attitude, because you are saying one should chase the 9.6 100m record by consuming lot of meat, fully knowing that it will DESTROY your own health later on, instead of giving it all, taking the healthier options and gettig a 10.2 Essentially you are saying that it is okay to knowingly harm one's body at the expense of a completely arbitary record ( how the F*CK does it matter if the record is 9.6 or 9.8 ?) . If you are arguing that,then might as well argue that lets use drugs for performance. For it is essentially the same argument of 'take the path that gives you better performance despite negetive results later on'.

Lets nail this now. Do me a favour and pull out a list of sub ten 100 m runners, actually do 9.9 seconds so they are less in numbers. Now tell me how many of them you have heard have suffered from bad health. If it is as common as you are making out sure we should hear of some occurences. xxx

[Guest HariSampath]

Well Lurks, I would simply argue it this way. Anyone making a conscious choice to take up meat or diff diet in order to do the 100 in 9.8 is actually making an informed choice. While the actual impact on the health of that particular individual is debatable and would a variable, it is certainly just that the runner knows it, wants to run the 100 in 9.6 and be known all their life as so, instead of living a few extra years ( perhaps, that is) and enjoy better health as someone who ran the 100 just like the Boston marathon

[Bongosamaj]

Now tell me how many of them you have heard have suffered from bad health.

I don't follow running as a sport ( its too stupid for my taste) but as far as i know, QUITE A LOT OF olympic athletes throughout history have suffered from major health problems in their 40s. My point is very simple, i am saying that deliberately eating a sh!tload of meat only because it will give you a slightly better sporting advantage at the expense of reducing your overall long-term health seems like a very pathetic sort of attitude and putting way too much importance in something that is and always will be a leisure/side-activity in human society.

[Bongosamaj]

just suggesting in sports you are in there to win

No. You are there to have fun and to entertain people. Winning/losing is secondary. Sports is nowhere near important enough or worthwhile enough to be deliberately sacrificing long-term health simply to chase a 'win'. If thats your perspective, i have to disagree because to you winning in a rather meaningless human persuit ( sport) seems to be more important than overall individual health.

[Lurker]

My point is very simple, i am saying that deliberately eating a sh!tload of meat only because it will give you a slightly better sporting advantage at the expense of reducing your overall long-term health seems like a very pathetic sort of attitude and putting way too much importance in something that is and always will be a leisure/side-activity in human society.

Again that is just your thinking Bongosamaj and I certainly disagree with it. To be the world's best, in any sporting event, you need to be disciplined in your workout, diet, lifestyle. If you can not do that then you do not belong in there, simple. Yes you can follow what you perceive is healthy lifestyle and come as 67th ranking country in Olympics(which we were in 2004 Athens). You may like it I certainly dont. xxx