Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

More straps?

21,719 просмотров • 1 год назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

I’ll admit it. This isn’t the cutest baby video I’ve ever posted. But it might be one of the most important. So let’s talk for a moment about car seat safety. As you know I’m always on the lookout for videos that illustrate important aspects of child development. But today I want to alert you to a trend I’ve seen across an alarming number of online posts: incorrect car seat installation and usage. Car seats protect babies from injury. They save lives. But in order to do their job they have to be used properly. And this proper use involves both: 1) how the seat itself is installed in your vehicle, and 2) how your child is buckled in. Installing a car seat’s base can be REALLY difficult. It needs to be snugly attached to the car, allowing no wiggle room. Whether it’s your individual strength, the odd geometry involved, or both, it can be very difficult to tighten the seatbelt to manufacturers recommendations. But if you find the base isn’t yet securely attached (and can be wiggled from side to side, for example) it’s important never to settle for “as tight as I can get it.” Seek out a friend or neighbor to assist. Or better yet, go to a car seat clinic or police department where trained and experienced experts are often available to assist with proper installation. In the event of an accident or sudden stop, you don’t want your child’s car seat in motion. Yet I’ve run across a ton of videos recently in which seats clearly aren’t securely attached. More common still, are videos in which children aren’t securely harnessed inside - and/or where straps or chest clips are incorrectly positioned. Obviously you don’t want your baby so tightly restrained as to cause discomfort, but it’s equally important that straps themselves aren’t too slack. They should be snug enough to pass the “pinch test” shown in this video. (If there’s enough extra seatbelt to bunch any up between your fingers, it’s too loose.) The chest clip should always be positioned at the same height as your baby’s armpits. And don’t forget that you’ll need to adjust the positioning of straps as your baby grows to ensure they are properly placed. Know a new parent? I hope you’ll share this post with them. We can all play a role in helping to keep babies safe. This great demo was shared to IG by snugglebugzbaby.

Dan Wuori

74,057 просмотров • 1 год назад

Tom Haviland is stronger overall, especially in strongman-style lifts, due to superior lower body power, leverage, and event-specific training. Andrey Smaev (aka Andre Samev, "Russian Hulk"): ~6'1"-6'2", 330-340 lbs at ~27 years old. Insane upper-body density with 26" arms and massive forearms. Mind-blowing feats include ~660-700+ lb bench (raw/paused, including 200 kg for 25 reps), heavy weighted pull-ups/muscle-ups, and monster rows/curls. He crushes pressing and pulling volume but rarely trains heavy squats or deads as an adult (solid teen PRs only). Tom Haviland: 6'8", 330-350+ lbs at ~38. Australian farm strongman built like a giant. Verified monster lifts: 1003 lb deadlift (deficit/straps), 811 lb squat x3, 600 lb bench, 750 lb Zercher, 1200 lb yoke walks, and brutal carries. Trains with minimalist, brutal basics (Zercher squats, yoke, shrugs) outdoors on the farm. Exceptional strength for his extreme height and long levers. Why Haviland wins: Strongman metrics (deadlift, squat, yoke, carries) heavily favor him—he consistently moves more total tonnage in full-body events. Smaev’s shorter range of motion and upper-body bias let him dominate bench and rows, but he lacks recent heavy lower-body proof. At similar bodyweights, Tom’s height + verified pulls give him the clear edge in broad "who’s stronger" terms. Smaev might still take raw bench or pure arm strength. Both are genetic freaks on gear who shouldn’t exist in our era—Smaev’s cartoonish density vs Haviland’s towering power. Haviland takes it for raw functional strength.

🚫👁️Drinks on Saturday🇺🇸

244,337 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Sally Ann Howes as Truly Scrumptious singing “Doll on a Music Box” in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968). “Doll on a Music Box” is a song originally from the 1968 musical film, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. It was subsequently performed in the 2002/2005 stage musical Chitty Chitty Bang Bang as well. It is both a musical and lyrical counterpoint to the more free flowing, legato song, “Truly Scrumptious”. In the song, Truly is disguised as a wind up music box doll, metaphorically and actually on a pedestal. In the song, Truly sings about herself and her rigid nature, all behind the mask of the “doll” she is portraying. In the motion picture, the part of Truly was played by actress Sally Ann Howes. In the stage musical version, the part was re-created by 19-year-old London actress, Emma Williams. In 2005, the Broadway “Truly” was portrayed by actress Erin Dilly, who was nominated for a Tony Award that year for the role. Wardrobe Truly Scrumptious sports a dirndl in this sequence consisting of a forest green satin bodice (trimmed in black velvet and accented with stitched crisscrossed red ribbon straps down the front and gold buttons), white blouse (the sleeves are double puffed done in delicate white silk satin; there are three yellow ribbons stitched to the sleeves for added detail; the collar is also trimmed in lace), full, printed (in the shape of gold diamonds) cotton red skirt (a tea length petticoat) and white, cotton apron (with a German inspired floral motif). Truly also wore white tights and black pumps (with a silver buckle near the toe area) with a Tyrolean hairstyle incorporating both pigtails and braids. “Doll on a Music Box” was written by Robert B. Sherman & Richard M. Sherman.

Hollywood Golden Age of Cinema

32,968 просмотров • 23 дней назад