body for life

I have to disagree with you on this one. Although she looks good before I
think she looks better and healthier with the additional muscle.

Paul
300/206/175

"Ignoramus5568" wrote in message
...
My opinion: this woman started off looking better than she is ended
up.

http://www.nicoleweeks.com/2000challenge.html


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.631 / Virus Database: 404 - Release Date: 3/17/04

"Ignoramus5568" wrote in message
...
My opinion: this woman started off looking better than she is ended
up.

http://www.nicoleweeks.com/2000challenge.html

I can't agree with you on this one. I think the girl looks fantastic in
the after pics. She was nice looking in the before pics but she's fab in
the after! I don't care for massive muscles on a woman but she seems to
have just about the right amount.

Beverly

In article , Ignoramus5568
wrote:

2000challenge.html

I disagree--I think she looks great! 'Course, a nice
tan and an oil-job do wonders for any body.

She had a nice, proportional figure to begin with--I
have a lot more to work with (against) than she did.

Amy

I like her new look - except for the fake painted on tan. Hate those tans.

Elise.
"Ignoramus5568" wrote in message
...
My opinion: this woman started off looking better than she is ended
up.

http://www.nicoleweeks.com/2000challenge.html

Hark! I heard "Paul" say:
"Ignoramus5568" wrote in message
...

My opinion: this woman started off looking better than she is ended
up.

http://www.nicoleweeks.com/2000challenge.htm

I have to disagree with you on this one. Although she looks good
before I think she looks better and healthier with the additional
muscle.

Paul
300/206/175

Or she would look better, sans tan and oil (yuck!). But that's a female
opinion...


--
J.J. in WA State
(251/241/150)

"Paul" wrote in message
...
I have to disagree with you on this one. Although she looks good before I
think she looks better and healthier with the additional muscle.

Paul
300/206/175

I have two opinions on this. The first is that I think the 'after' pic
looks better. It is a higher quality photograph and really defines her
progress. On a personal level, I like the before pics. I appreciate the
desire to be healthy but (strike me dead for saying this) there is a certain
woman who is so self absorbed that how she looks is tantatmount to all. In
my own life, looking good is secondary to being healthy (and there are
always improvements I can make).

I guess I would have to say that I would need to more about the woman
pictured before I could come up with a real opinion.

Am I making sense?

j

"Ignoramus5568" wrote in message
...
My opinion: this woman started off looking better than she is ended
up.

http://www.nicoleweeks.com/2000challenge.html


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.631 / Virus Database: 404 - Release Date: 3/17/04

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 20:58:37 -0500, "Elise Converse"
wrote:

I like her new look - except for the fake painted on tan. Hate those tans.


I agree on both counts. But if her bodyfat percentage is really
12.27, that's an unhealthy level for a woman. Women at that bf% can
develop amenorrhea, osteoporosis, and cardiac problems.

Chris

"Julianne" wrote in message
news:xz86c.6638$F91.796@lakeread05...

"Paul" wrote in message
...
I have to disagree with you on this one. Although she looks good
before I
think she looks better and healthier with the additional muscle.

Paul
300/206/175

I have two opinions on this. The first is that I think the 'after' pic
looks better. It is a higher quality photograph and really defines her
progress. On a personal level, I like the before pics. I appreciate the
desire to be healthy but (strike me dead for saying this) there is a
certain
woman who is so self absorbed that how she looks is tantatmount to all.
In
my own life, looking good is secondary to being healthy (and there are
always improvements I can make).

After reading the website I think her before pic is after her first
challenge in 1999. She did two challenges. The link took us to the second
one. She was heavier in her first challenge.



I guess I would have to say that I would need to more about the woman
pictured before I could come up with a real opinion.

Am I making sense?

j

"Ignoramus5568" wrote in message
...
My opinion: this woman started off looking better than she is ended
up.

http://www.nicoleweeks.com/2000challenge.html


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.631 / Virus Database: 404 - Release Date: 3/17/04

Chris Braun wrote:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 20:58:37 -0500, "Elise Converse"
wrote:


I like her new look - except for the fake painted on tan. Hate those tans.



I agree on both counts. But if her bodyfat percentage is really
12.27, that's an unhealthy level for a woman. Women at that bf% can
develop amenorrhea, osteoporosis, and cardiac problems.

The Body for Life winning strategy involves severe cutting during the
last four weeks. She's exactly the person who wins this sort of thing:
she didn't actually have any WEIGHT to lose, she just needed to build
some muscle and dehydrate herself and get professional posing. If you
look at her stats she stayed at about 130 pounds the entire time.

Dally

Ignoramus5568 wrote:

I looked at her solely from personal attractiveness standpoint. I
would prefer to have sex with the woman on the first photograph, than
on the last (with fake tan). On the fits one, she looked very hot.

It turns out that actual women care about things other than what body
fat percentage is most appealing to you, Igor.

Dally