quote:

---

So I would sum it up to both. We citizens of the USA are lazy.

---

quote:

---

I violently disagree with Stan's last post.

---

You could've just said that you disagreed. I feel like @$$ now.
 

---

Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
 
In general :

Our activities (work, play) tend to be more sedentary than they were a generation or two ago and our eating habits have not caught up. We have to make a special effort to waste calories.
 

---

Posted by Yank (Member # 2514) on :
 
Silly robots, doing all our work for us. That's what it comes down to. Machines do all the heavy work in the factories, on the farms, and even construction sites. Granted that construction work is very physically demanding (been there, done that; helped build a log cabin and done concrete-and-paver work as well) but not anything like what our ancestors went through to build a house. We just don't need to physically exert ourselves to survive anymore.

Blame the Robots! Human Power!

 

---

Posted by Kettricken (Member # 8436) on :
 
I think the way some cities are designed plays a part. If it is difficult to walk or cycle then people are going to use the car even for short distances. The problem is, once you have a city that relies on cars then it is likely to spread further, making cars even more of a necessity.

If more people were able to walk or cycle to work I think their general level of fitness would improve as people who would not go to the gym still get some exercise every day.
 

---

Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
 
I was going to say design too. And sprawl. It makes us structure our lives in a way that it makes no time or opportunity for eating right or exercising.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stan the man:

quote:

---

I violently disagree with Stan's last post.

---

You could've just said that you disagreed. I feel like @$$ now.

---

I did say that I disagreed. Do you object to the violently part? I meant it in response to your last statement - that a lifestyle where someone doesn't exercise = lazy. Americans work more hours than anyone else in the world. They are not lazy. What we have done is construct a society where getting exercise is extremely inconvenient. That's bad planning, except it wasn't planned.

In a country where getting enough exercise happens while they are shopping and getting to work, it's easier to do so than in a place where it means joining a gym and carving out an hour+ a day from leisure time that is already limited because they are working so much.

I also hate blaming it on laziness because it means that anyone who is overweight is clearly so because of moral failings. Besides being wrong, that's very cruel - hence the adverb.
 

---

Posted by Yank (Member # 2514) on :
 
I remember I was suprised that my German friend in High School didn't intend to get his driver's license until he was 21; his response was, "We don't get into our cars every time we need to pee like you Americans." Me, I love a good walk, and will quite happily walk a mile or two to get where I'm going even when a car is available. I think that the therapeutic benefits of walking is largely lost on our culture today. I even like walking home in the rain.
 

---

Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
 
<Is slightly entertained, considering it's in this thread, that the "violence" in kat's post was remarkably sedentary.>
 

---

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
 
I violently diagree with kat's post. Her explanation completely ignores childhood obesity.
 

---

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
 
I don't think it has as much to do with laziness as portion sizes. We take in far more than we need to. Americans gorge themselves, rather than just eating enough to sustain themselves. If we all left the dinner table slightly hungry, we'd be a lot better off, rather than eating until we feel like we will burst.

That and excersize, but that could be partially negated by simply eating less, and that doesn't include taking more care of what we are actually consuming.

Americans aren't as lazy as many think, they are pressed for time. I don't hop in my car to go to 7-11 because I'm too lazy to walk the two miles, I do it because I simply don't have the half hour to walk there and back, I have too much to do. And I certainly don't have time for a two hour lunch like some European workers take.

That's also another small reason why Europeans are slimmer. They take longer to eat their meals, thus resulting in smaller portion sizes. That's because when you eat really fast, your stomach isn't sending the correct signals to your brain to indicate that you are full, so you don't know you're full. When you take more time to eat, your brain receives the correct signals, and you stop eating sooner, and end up eating less. My average lunch is probably eaten in ten minutes, not 100 minutes, but my stomach is the size of a petri dish, so I end up eating small portions anyways.

Europeans place too much emphasis on the "Americans are lazy" stereotype. I don't know why, maybe it makes them feel better about themselvs, in the same way that kids with low self esteem in grade school will make fun of others to raise their own self image. But I think there is far less truth to it than they generally believe.
 

---

Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
 
-High Calorie, low nutirient food is heavily advertised and served to kids from early in life. Even in families that do have access to fruit, you often hear "My kid won't eat fruit, just fishy crackers". Kids spend way too much time in front of TV.

The vast majority of public schools offer pure crap. Again, high fat, refined carb stuff. At the same time they are often cutting PE time to make time to meet NCLB standards.

We're a culture of convenience foods and electronic entertainment. I can't tell you how many folks I've worked with who consider it normal to walk across the parking lot for coffee.

I know there are some people who have a biological issue, and others who really can't help the lifestyle factors that make them fat, but they're in the minority.
 

---

Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
 
I wouldn't blame the kids, it's the parents who let them eat what they eat and allow the habits of non-exercise and eating "wrong" which then are cultivated as the kid grows.
 

---

Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
 
I don't blame the kids.

Here's a patehic story.

I had a teenage volunteer once whose family ate a LOT of fast food- several nights a week. She once asked me why I don't eat fast food, so I told her. The next time her family went out to eat (at Taco Bell) she said she didn't want to eat it and that she wanted to start eating healthier. They told her she would eat Taco Bell or starve, and they were pissed at me.
The whole family is really large.
 

---

Posted by BaoQingTian (Member # 8775) on :
 
For example, a mother I know used the bottle as a substitute for good parenting. Whenever the baby cried it got fed. Soon the mother of this 1 year old got told by the doctor that her kid was extremely overweight. The habit has continued. I think this is wrong for so many reasons. Not only is the (now 3 year old) still overweight, but she had difficulty crawling and then walking. Even more disturbing is the psychological effect. I can picture this little girl feeling the urge to eat whenever she is unhappy. So unfortunately it seems as though eating disorders are partially formed before the poor kids can form complete sentences.
 

---

Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
 
Why do people ask silly questions?

Obesity rates are rising *everywhere*, not just America.

Not all Americans are overweight.

And not all overweight people have a "because".

I hate discussions like this. *leaves to hopefully sober up (in other words, my drunken emotions are driving this post. Just thought I'd put that out there)*
 

---

Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
 
AND "AMERICANS" DOES NOT HAVE AN APOSTROPHE.
 

---

Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
 
There was an interesting article in the New Orleans paper over Thanksgiving talking about the psychological effects of growing up in the "there are starving children in china" generation.

I remember being told as a child to clean my plate and not waste. While my parents fed me proper portions as a kid, what stuck was the idea that leaving food on a plate was BAD. But when that thought is mixed with bad portions as handed to kids by their parents, or dining in a restuarant, etc, you get people overeating.
 

---

Posted by Stan the man (Member # 6249) on :
 
I know my previous words read out pretty harsh, but it's a little late to take anything back. An I'm wouldn't anyway, but to at least say it was an overt generalization.

(((Princess Leah))), mmm I wouldn't necessarilly post while drunk. I've done it before...let's just say I could've done without. Hope you are doing ok though. I'm stuck in a rut myself.
 

---

Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
 
Funny you should ask, because I'm (avoiding) writing a sociology paper on this very topic.

First, there is simply an over-abundance of food produced in the country today. And 16 million people can only eat so much of it. So the laws of supply and demand kick in: food becomes cheaper, and portion sizes have become progressively larger in order for food providers to compete.

As has already been mentioned, I think a lot of it also has to do with our much more sedentary culture. Fear of crime discourages parents from letting kids run around outside, so they play video games. I'm from the South, where we have some fabulous food -- which were perfect when we picked cotton all day, but those days are long gone. It doesn't stop people from eating the food they grew up with, hence why some of the highest BMIs are with the deep south.

Another thing I think has contributed is the smaller number of families cooking dinner from scratch and cooking/eating as a family. Children (boys *and* girls) learn poor eating habits and have a hard time changing them because they never learned cooking or basic nutrition.

Then there are the cola wars: Colleges, high schools, middle schools, and now freaking *Elementary* schools get fought over 'pouring rights' -- whether Coke or Pepsi has the right to sell them calorific sodas. The strategy is to latch them onto a brand while they're young so that they'll buy the product *for the rest of their lives*.

There are tons of other factors that work into it, too. Yesterday I first learned of all the government subsidies that go into corn, which is found in just about every processed food in the form of corn oil and corn syrup. Freaky stuff.
 

---

Posted by foundling (Member # 6348) on :
 
There is a woman who rides the same bus as me pretty much every day on my way to work. She has two little girls who are normally with her, but sometimes it's just one or the other. These kids are so poorly behaved that I will get up and move as far away from them as I can as soon as they get on the bus, even though I cringe to do it because I feel rude. But the children are HORRIBLEY spoiled, and have actually come up to me while the bus is going and shoved a half eaten lollipop in my face. The mom never does anything.
OK, so, the kids are brats. They are also pretty intensly overweight. Both little girls are at least 40-50lbs bigger than seems healthy for their age. The mom isnt particularly heavy, and neither is the dad from what I've seen of him.
As far as I can tell, the only reason these kids are so big is because their mom uses candy and pop as a motivator for EVERYTHING. I've sat there and watched her threaten them with not buying them candy if they dont sit down, shut up, stop hitting each other, stop bugging the bus driver, and any other number of things that drive the rest of us mad. They always have candy of some sort in their mouth, and guzzle pop constantly. The only time I actually saw the mother follow through with a threat to take away the candy, the youngest child thru such a fit that the bus had to stop for fear of her hurting herself. The mom gave her her candy back.
I sit there and FUME, furious that this woman is allowed to be a mother, that these kids are being so thoroughly screwed for the rest of their lives because the moms too lazy to be a good parent, and that there is really nothing I can do about it.
And then, one day she sat next to me before I could move, so I lifted my Harry Potter book as high as I could, covering my face, and prepared to ignore as much as I could. But then, she started talking to me about my book. She was rhapsodizing about how much her and her kids love Harry Potter, and asking me if I've read the latest and what I thought of it. I couldnt ignore her. I started talking to her, and eventually actually looked her in the eyes. She was the most tired looking human being I've ever seen. Even when she was screaming at her kids, her expression never changed. Her shoulders were permantely slumped, and her face was just... slack. You know the look that a truly old human gets when they live in their own world? Thats what her face was like. It made me sad. Her little girls, while obnoxious, were actually really smart. Their constant chatter was often imaginative and funny. Annoying, but funny.
I couldnt stay mad at her after that. I couldnt put all the blame for her kids issues on her anymore. I dont know why she seemed so defeated, but looking at her you could understand why she always chose the easiest way. It was sad.
I'm not saying she wasnt responsible. In fact, I'm not really sure what I'm trying to say. I guess, it's that it was easy for me to assume that her poor parenting and messed up children was a direct result of laziness and stupidity. I still dont know if that is actually the case, and I'm giving her too much sympathy. EIther way, I didnt have the right to judge her.
 

---

Posted by LadyDove (Member # 3000) on :
 
I had a friend from Italy who complained that the reason Americans are fat is because our breads are too soft. He said that Italian and French sandwich breads are mostly crust with a little bit of soft, filling; while American breads were skimpy on the crust and heavy with the soft white carbs.
 

---

Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
 
well, they're *all* carbs, it's just negative calories through all the chewing.
 

---

Posted by Verily the Younger (Member # 6705) on :
 
I'm trying very hard not to be angered by the wording of the question. The implication that Americans, as a people, are inherently a fat people might be the part that offends me more. Or it might be the implication that only Americans are fat, and that other nationalities have miraculously managed to avoid obesity problems. Both sides of the question are gross overgeneralizations, and they are both demonstrably false.

The majority of "fat people", leaving aside those with glandular conditions and so on, are fat because they eat too much and exercise too little. It's that simple.

Humans enjoy having delicious food to eat. And they enjoy having an easier life. So for millennia, humans have done whatever they could to A) make sure they had a food surplus, altered in whatever ways possible to be even more delicious and bountiful (selective breeding to improve flavor and size has been with us for thousands of years, and the relatively recent creation of artificial sweetening is a difference of degree, not of kind) and B) develop ways to get work done faster and with less effort.

The wealthiest peoples tend to have the best capacity for acheiving both of these ends. America, being a very wealthy nation, finds it easy to create vast quantities of ultra-delicious foods, and has (building from thousands of years of pre-American humans doing precisely the same thing) a great deal of ability to turn strenuous activity over to machines.

Therefore, Americans have a greater access to large amounts of food--much of it unhealthy--and larger numbers of ways to get work done without much physical effort. This condition encourages obesity, because obesity comes from eating too much and exercising too little. Even in earlier times, obesity could always be found in the higher classes, who could afford a lot of food and slaves or servants to do their work for them. In Renaissance Europe, the ideal of the beautiful woman was one with some meat on her bones, because it meant she was rich enough to not have to work. The working classes simply couldn't afford to get fat, but the wealthy classes could, and did.

To oversimplify, we're fatter because we're rich enough to afford to become fatter. But look elsewhere in the world. There is obesity in all of the major developed nations. The richer they get, the faster they catch up with us.

And you'll also notice that a thundering lot of Americans are not fat. Some are just young people with lightning metabolisms, and some are too poor, personally, to have much access to excess food and simpler labor. But a lot of people aren't fat because they watch what they eat, or they work out, or both. Having a wealthier nation only unlocks a greater potential for the individual to slide into obesity. It doesn't mean it's necessarily going to happen.
 

---

Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
 
Fat people are always full of excuses about why they're fat, when the simple answer is that they eat too much and don't exercise enough. Yeah, there are genetic and other exceptions, but I'm speaking about the majority. Canadians aren't any different, and for the most part neither is anyone from any country who is obese. You can complain about your career taking up all of your time, but if you're not willing to take care of your health, then what's the point of the career? You're not going to live long enough to enjoy the fruits of your labor.

I work 8 hours a day, and often I'll put in some overtime, and yet somehow I still manage to get a fair amount of exercise. A 30 minute walk with the dog after supper (or a solo walk if you don't have a dog). Some light weight-lifting. Tennis, soccer, football, or anything else I can play with my friends. An hour of exercise a day isn't a lot, even for those with the busiest schedules. Hell, you can exercise while watching television, if that's how you spend your evenings.

And the point about Americans being fat because they have so much food just seems ridiculous to me. There are a lot of us who have access to the same amount of food, and yet we choose to eat in moderation. We all indulge once in a while, but if you're eating more than what you need to satiate your hunger on a regular basis, then you need to recheck your thinking.

In any case, I have nothing against overweight people. If you're comfortable in your own skin, then more power to you, but I've never known an overweight person who didn't genuinely want to lose weight, and almost everyone I've known who has really put an effort into shedding some pounds has succeeded. I think all it takes is some moderation and common sense.
 

---

Posted by Verily the Younger (Member # 6705) on :
 

quote:

---

And the point about Americans being fat because they have so much food just seems ridiculous to me. There are a lot of us who have access to the same amount of food, and yet we choose to eat in moderation.

---

quote:

---

And you'll also notice that a thundering lot of Americans are not fat [. . .] because they watch what they eat, or they work out, or both. Having a wealthier nation only unlocks a greater potential for the individual to slide into obesity. It doesn't mean it's necessarily going to happen.

---

Stating the fact that we have more food than most societies in the world have historically had was not an excuse. It was a fact. If the Assyrians had had the same amount of food we have, and the same labor-saving devices, there would have been a lot of fat Assyrians.

It is not that the existence of large amounts of food makes anyone fat. It just allows people who are inclined to eat more than they should the opportunity to do so. A lot of people respond by eating too much. A lot of other people don't. I don't see where that's making excuses. It's a very simple fact.
 

---

Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
 
It's very simple. Americans are fat due to the excessive use of apostrophes. This leads to a lascivious excess in all other things, inclusing eating. When the Grammar Communist Revolution arrives, obesity will be among the many problems it will solve. No more fatsos in the Grammarian Paradise!
 

---

Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
 
Hey, Verily, good to see you around again.
 

---

Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
 
You know what bugs me? Skinny people. We have so many skinny people here in America, with BMI's under 18. It's disgraceful. It's ugly and it makes it harder for them to function, but most importantly, it's unhealthy. And yet it's so easy to gain healthy weight! All you need to do is eat more. Yes, of course there are those with high metabolisms and other such issues, but they're in the minority. Most people who are skinny are just too lazy or self-centered to eat properly.

Look at what you're saying. Turn the argument around. Don't be sizeist.
 

---

Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
 
Verily, I wrote my post before reading yours, and I concede to and agree with your point, in so far as having the excess creates the potential to indulge.

My argument is that having access to the food isn't a reasonable excuse for over eating. Saying "I eat too much, and that is why I am overweight" is still an excuse. It is an attempt to explain a fault; a justifcation. I guess a better question is "Why do some people eat much more than they require, and yet are unwilling to compensate for their indulgence with exercise?"
 

---

Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
 
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, Leah. It's obvious you were being sarcastic, but yes, being too skinny can also be unhealthy, and I don't think you'll get any arguments about that here. Also, I don't think anyone called overweight people "ugly," so maybe you don't have to get so offended and confrontational.
 

---

Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
 
I'm overweight and I'm not lazy. I walk nearly 2 miles every day, and I work a minimum of 50 hours a week.

It's not sitting in front of a computer or anything, either. It's running around, doing things.

Sometimes I literally am running. Now, I'm sort of healthy, I guess. My mind is clear, I don't get tired easily, I-- just... just...

It's the food.
 

---

Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
 
Fitz, Fitz, Fitz...

Why am I so offended by what you've written in this thread?

Am I the crazy one?
 

---

Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
 
I'm not fat, and I'm American.

But it's hard to find places you can walk to that are worth going to. We don't use public transport much. The way to control weight, if you're white-collar, is to set aside time for exercise -- not to go about daily life. Many of us have other priorities.
 

---

Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
 
Call fat people ugly? Not here they didn't, you're right. That was an overreaction on my part. I'm just angry by the blame and the guilt that seems to be okay to lay on large people. Look in the "Anorexia" thread. Google a little. The underlying sentiment behind this sort of discussion is the one that allows perfect strangers to think it's okay to tell me how many calories are in a Coke to "save me from myself", to discuss MY body in public, to assume that I don't excercise, and to blatently mock me because I'm a fat@$$. Fat-bashing still appears to be okay to do loudly and in public without fear of being opposed, and I do not want that to continue.

The argument I'm trying to make is that for many people, size is not controllable. Are people ridiculed or blamed for being too skinny *all the time*, in the media, in their homes, while in public? No. Is excess weight unhealthy? Yeah, it is. But don't you think that those of us who carry it around know that?

To quote a friend of mine currently combatting binge eating disorder, "just because I'm fat doesn't mean I'm stupid." She's diabetic. *I* am diabetic. We know how to use the glycemic index to make food absorption take longer. We know what foods have enough fat in them to muck with short-acting insulin. Give me a food, I bet I can tell you its carb content off the top of my head.

It's funny that this thread is going on when earlier today there was a thread about how sad it was that children of 8 or 9 years were frequently diagnosed with anorexia. Where does the attitude come from that lets the issues of control and helplessness be worked out towards food?

A few years back, a friend and I took one of those moronic online quizzes that you do when you're bored. One of the questions was "Would you rather be obese or anorexic?" We both answered anorexic. And we'd both had the experience. And we were both dealing with bulimia at the time.

Since then, I"ve been able to stop purging, and I no longer dangerously restrict my food intake. But I've been unable to stop binge eating, and as a result, I've gained quite a bit of weight. I wear a size 12 right now. There is a huge difference in the way I've been treated since I stopped slowly starving myself to death and destroying my esophagus. And that hurts.

There is nothing inherently wrong with being overweight. There is no reason to mock or insult or discriminate against someone because of thier size. There is no reason why fat people somehow must lose weight just because society sends millions of subtle or blatent condemnations of anyone bigger than Keira Knightly in a corset.

If you're worried about health, that's nice. Very sweet. But you don't encourage someone by telling them that thier problem is their own fault. Obesity is not just a question of a person eating too much and not excercising. It's not just a "lazy" thing. Don't place unwarrented blame.

quote:

---

Taking the easy way out.

We citizens of the USA are lazy.

fat because they eat too much and exercise too little. It's that simple.

people aren't fat because they watch what they eat, or they work out, or both.

the simple answer is that they eat too much and don't exercise enough.

I've never known an overweight person who didn't genuinely want to lose weight, and almost everyone I've known who has really put an effort into shedding some pounds has succeeded. I think all it takes is some moderation and common sense.

---

quote:

---

Hey, Verily, good to see you around again.

---

quote:

---

Verily, I wrote my post before reading yours,

---

Ah, okay. I wasn't sure. Didn't mean to sound confrontational; I thought maybe you were responding to my explanation and had just missed part of it.

For my part--and this is in response to the idea that people are equating "fat" with "ugly"--I think our society does place too much emphasis on being "thin". Thin is not necessarily healthy, and as a matter of fact, in lean times, it's the thin people who die first. Those of us with a bit of excess on us can last a little longer.

And I certainly do think people should be free to choose. If somebody honestly doesn't mind being overweight, then I'm not going to cast judgement on them for that. It's their body, so they are the ones who have the right to choose what to do with it. The fact that I personally feel nasty walking around with my excess and am attempting to adjust my diet and have joined a gym in an effort to shed said excess does not mean I think people who prefer to keep theirs are necessarily ugly or are morally bad people.

But there are a lot of people who are overweight, and complain about being overweight, yet never do anything about it. If you don't like being overweight, then there are things that can be done. And whatever the miracle pill snake-oil salesmen tell you, the only way to lose weight is by some combination of eating less and exercising more. Granted that it's easier for some people than for others, so some people will have to work harder at it in order to get real results. But either way, you have to actually work at it to get any results. Nobody can burn enough calories to lose the weight they want to lose by sitting around complaining about how fat they are.
 

---

Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
 
For the most part, the discussion in this thread has been regarding those who are overweight, but can prevent that condition. I don't think anyone is denying that genetics play a part in obesity, and if someone is overweight despite their best efforts then that's unfortunate. However, I wouldn't presume to feel sympathy with those who are overweight for reasons beyond their own control.

In any case, I apologize for any offense that I caused. Some of my earlier comments probably had an accusatory and condescending tone.

quote:

---

There is nothing inherently wrong with being overweight.

---

quote:

---

If you're worried about health, that's nice. Very sweet. But you don't encourage someone by telling them that thier problem is their own fault.

---

quote:

---

I've never known an overweight person who didn't genuinely want to lose weight, and almost everyone I've known who has really put an effort into shedding some pounds has succeeded. I think all it takes is some moderation and common sense.

---

quote:

---

I wouldn't presume to feel sympathy with those who are overweight for reasons beyond their own control.

In any case, I apologize for any offense that I caused.

---

quote:

---

I'm sorry, but in many cases it is the fault of the person who is overweight. There are those who over eat, eat fast food on a regular basis, and do very little exercise. Who else can be held responsible when one's obesity is not a result of factors beyond their control? Sometimes we just have to take responsibility for our actions.

---

quote:

---

quote:
If you're worried about health, that's nice. Very sweet. But you don't encourage someone by telling them that thier problem is their own fault.

******************
I'm sorry, but in many cases it is the fault of the person who is overweight. There are those who over eat, eat fast food on a regular basis, and do very little exercise. Who else can be held responsible when one's obesity is not a result of factors beyond their control? Sometimes we just have to take responsibility for our actions.

---

quote:

---

Why do you have to keep saying the same thing over and over? You made your point.

---

quote:

---

Taking responsibility is not a matter of saying, "huh, I guess I should not have eaten at McD's everyday for the last month because now I have gained 20lbs." That helps no one.

---

quote:

---

It doesn't matter whose "fault" it is. Taking responsibility has nothing to do with that. If we assume that the "responsible" thing to do is to try and lose weight in order to become healthier, then what good is it to tell a person working hard to solve a problem that the problem is all thier fault in the first place for "over ea[ing], eat[ing] fast food on a regular basis, and do[ing] very little exercise."

---

quote:

---

If you think that I'm being callous, then you're welcome to shrug me off as nothing more than a jerk.

---

quote:

---

My hesitance to feel sympathy with overweight people has more to do with political correctness. One will often get their head bitten off for daring to be sympathetic.

---

quote:

---

With the realization that eating at McDonald's everyday for a month was unhealthy, one can perhaps avoid eating there on a regular basis in the future.

---

quote:

---

It's the people who eat too much and eat poorly and don't try to do anything about it who I believe have a problem.

---

quote:

---

But anyone with a little self discipline and commitment to their health can lose weight.

---

quote:

---

But anyone with a little self discipline and commitment to their health can lose weight.

---

quote:

---

Congrats on trying, and if you tell me what you're doing I can tell you why it doesn't appear to be working.

---

quote:

---

What do you do with someone who is big but not unhealthy? I'm talking about someone who would be considered overweight, perhaps even obese, and yet has no health problems. Their heart is in great shape, they have low cholesterol, low blood pressure, no problems with diabetes.

Should they lose weight? Do they have any reason to other than aesthetics? What if they're happy and their husband loves them and thinks they are sexy and beautiful? Should they undertake the effort to lose weight, especially since we have evidence that dieting and losing and re-gaining weight is harder on people than just maintaining a steady weight, even if it's heavy?

Should we start looking at something other than weight to measure fitness? I certainly think so, I mean my daughter Emily is overweight on paper. She also was the top scoring 1st grade girl on the physical fitness test, and can do 8 pullups in a row. She's overweight because she's solid muscle, but isn't there something wrong with our chart system when a kid like her who is as healthy as can be and in excellent shape looks overweight on paper?

---

quote:

---

I feel a lot of (probably unjust) hate toward the thin people in this thread who have lots of neat little theories. I can't help but think that many thin people eat just as much as many fat people, but have genetically better metabolisms. I'm probably wrong, but I don't care. I don't want to talk to always-thin people about being fat.

---

quote:

---

Umm, I'll just give you a hint.

You answered your own question in your first sentence.

My question to you would be why do you binge eat? Do you eat when you're sad, or lonely? Are you used to huge meals (aka you're hungry if you don't eat that much)?

---

quote:

---

Stop blaming your job, your commute, your kids, medical conditions, and everything else that makes it hard.

---

quote:

---

The other thing is that people who've been overweight their whole lives are hypersensitive about it. So it's hard to have an honest discussion about it because people react emotionally.

---

quote:

---

People who need to lose weight and aren't trying can't be all that concerned about their health. The risks of being overweight are undeniable.

---

quote:

---

All that sentence meant was that the two components necessary for weight loss are self-discipline and concern for your health.

---

quote:

---

if you tell me what you're doing I can tell you why it doesn't appear to be working.

---

quote:

---

I've seen people in the gym, who obviously hadn't been there long, misusing equipment because they were too embarassed to ask anyone how to use it.

---

quote:

---

Well, they're not. I happen to believe that those who are are in the minority.

---

quote:

---

I was 45 pounds overweight, and I lost it all in 4 months doing nothing more than monitoring my diet and exercise routine. Now that was hard. If I had to do a similar thing now (while working fulltime) it'd take twice as long. My metabolism sucks (I eat about what Kat does a day and I'm quite a bit bigger).

So if I'm insensitive, that's why. I know it can be done because I've done it, and I've helped other people do it.

---

quote:

---

I am minimizing the effort required a little, because saying it's an insurmountable challenge doesn't exactly send people running for the gym. It can be easier than you make it sound, though

---

quote:

---

Just make sure not to compare yourself to other, more healthy people.

---

quote:

---

You wouldn't believe how surprised my best friend was when I convinced him to give up soft drinks for 3 weeks (the kid keeps Coke in business -- 60+ ounces a day) and he lost 14 pounds.

---

Great story. Touching. I haven't consumed soda or any carbonated drink since I was eight, not counting a handful of occasions where it was the only thing available to me. Yet I'm still heavy. Weird, huh?
 

---

Posted by Princess Leah (Member # 6026) on :
 
I'm going to go ahead and retire from this conversation now.

JT, I'm in agreement with some of what you say. I oppose some of it. I greatly oppose the way you've said most of it.

I'm sorry if anyone felt like I was attacking them personally. It was probably unwise of me to get involved in an issue that is so personal and painful right now (the day after my 2nd appt. at an E.D. clinic). I still think I'm right , but I don't think I'm up to the argument.
 

---

Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
 

quote:

---

I work 8 hours a day, and often I'll put in some overtime, and yet somehow I still manage to get a fair amount of exercise.

---

quote:

---

A lot of people don't have control over how much they work, if they want to keep their jobs.

---

quote:

---

It turns out that being a little overweight may actually be the healthier option - but how can this be? New Scientist investigates
"I HAVE a great heart and great legs but the rest of me is hopeless," says Stanton Glantz cheerfully. The 59-year-old professor of medicine from the University of California, San Francisco, is just a few supersize colas away from being officially obese, but he reckons he's in tip-top condition. "I just got back from a 350-mile bike trip all over the south-west of the United States," he says. That must have burnt off a few pounds? He laughs. "I lost no weight whatsoever. I was eating like a pig I was so hungry all the time."

The received medical wisdom is that Glantz's weight puts him at risk of a slew of illnesses, from osteoarthritis and cancer to diabetes, hypertension and heart disease. But he is confident that as long as he keeps his weight stable with exercise and eats a sensible diet, the risks are not nearly as serious ...

---

 

---

Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
 
Fitz, my snort was specifically in response to your claim that anyone can find time to exercise because you work a whole eight hours a day and you can easily spare 30 minutes to take a walk.

Bully for you. I know people who work longer hours than I do, so I'm not quite so dismissive of the argument that some people can't find time to exercise.
 

---

Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
 
Alright, I accept your snort. It still doesn't change my opinion. Those who are willing to put forth the effort to lose weight will find the time. Perhaps it's just a matter of priorities.
 

---

Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
 
I wonder what it would take to make someone like Fitz say to himself, "Maybe I *am* being a jerk, if I'm offending this many people," and just stop it.

Probably a lot.
 

---

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
 
Yes, Fitz. Let's put "exercise" above work, sleep, and sustenance. That's healthy.

-pH
 

---

Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
 
I wonder, though, if anyone's made a scientific estimate of the percentage of overweight people who are that way due to their own laziness.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
I wish people would stop using the word lazy. It could be due to their own choice to do other things than exercise, but exercise is not the only way to measure industry or work ethic.

Lazy is a pejorative term. Stop using it in this context.
 

---

Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
 
TL, I simply try to make it a point to respond to any post in which I am addressed. And pH, you can set your priorities at any level with which you feel comfortable, it's no skin off my back. I'm just stating some ideas, and if you don't like them, again, you're free to simply ignore me.
 

---

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
 
So, you think it's healthier to focus on exercise than the methods by which you are able to feed your family and keep a roof over your head?

-pH
 

---

Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
 
Well, I don't think you have to make exercise the main focus of your life in order to stay healthy. Also, you're speaking as though I've suggested that exercise is the only way one can lose weight. A small amount of exercise everyday, even every other day, plus eating well and in moderation, will usually do the trick.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
What is a small amount? 30 minutes of excercise can take an hour when you factor changing clothes and, often, driving to the gym. Add in taking a shower afterward, and it is no small matter to exercise. You could exercise lightly so you don't need other clothes or break a sweat, but that isn't as effective and has to be done for much longer to be useful.

An hour or slightly more than an hour every day is a huge committment. It means someone can't go straight from work to anything that night, cutting back on work, or waking up much earlier. Quid's already talked about how cheating sleep to exercise to lose weight is a dumb idea - that doesn't work.

I do think it is possible, and it is actually simple, but it is NOT easy.
 

---

Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
 
When did I ever say it was easy? I know it's hard for people to lose weight. I'm not suggesting that it's something which is undertaken lightly. I've said many times that it's something which requires "effort." From my perspective, with some good time management exercise can be an extremely joyful and rewarding activity. I like to spend as much time with my family and friends as the next guy. So I'll go play tennis with my brother. Or I'll go for a walk with my girlfriend. If you're unable to exercise without a long trip to some facility, there are certainly ways in which you can be creative. A lot of exercise can be done right inside the home. Go to bed an hour earlier than usual, then you can wake up earlier, do some exercise and then have your shower. I'm not suggesting that these ideas work for everyone, but you could probably come up with your own regiment that suits your schedule.

Listen, I'm sorry if I seem judgemental. I'm not trying to harp on anyone. If you don't have time, then you don't have time.
 

---

Posted by BaoQingTian (Member # 8775) on :
 
Fitz may be annoying many of you and even passed the line into rudeness, but the number of "What ifs" is really getting kind of ridiculous. All he is saying is that for people that really do value their health, then perhaps an examination of their priorities would be in order. I mean, since many low income people I know find a way to stretch their dollars to afford 200 channels on the Dish, perhaps the poor in time could find a way to budget some of our extra minutes to our health. There's an old Arab proverb that goes something like, "He who has health has hope; He who has hope has everything."

I've gained 25 pounds in a year due to a change to a more sedentary lifestyle-and its all gone to my belly. I also work a salaried job. This thread has helped motivate me to get going to the gym again. Weight loss is not my goal--good health is.

So now I'm a 6'3 skinny guy who looks like he's 4 months pregnant. I could make excuses about stress from my engineering job, moving, and other major problems in my life creating cortisol and locking the fat in about my midsection, and that its really not my fault. Or I can accept the fact that its my life and I can do something about it.

Bottom line I guess is if you don't want to accept the generalizationsthat Fitz and ET have made then thats fine. But they've both said they're aware of the generalizations, and that there are exceptions. I found whether its abuse, rape, or most other things (obese is a new one to me though) as long as someone has the mindset that they are a victim, they will remain so. Those that overcome such trials change from victims to victors.
 

---

Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
 
Someone said earlier that they believed that skinny people ate the same as other people but just had faster metabolisms (and I know they said it slightly tongue-in-cheek).

I just thought I'd share my experience: I was skinny through high-school and the first few years of college. Size 4 skinny. And I ate what I wanted and didn't really exercise.

I have gained 35 pounds in the 4 years since then. I'm not happy with my body at the moment - I'm short, and I am overweight for my height. I have a high body fat.

The thing is, I kept saying to myself "But I'm not doing anything different - it must just be my metabolism changing".

Until I decided to actually do something about it and started keeping a food diary. Turns out I am eating (and drinking) about 800 calories more a day than I used to, without even realising it. One day I ate 3000 calories and thought I was being healthy! (Uh, no.) I've gotten into bad habits, I'm eating bigger portion sizes (I'm sure moving in with my husband didn't help with that one) , my previous "occasional" treats have become more like weekly treats and I'm moving even less than I used to.

But I managed for four years to fool myself that that wasn't the case - that I was still eating as healthily as I was.

I think what I'm trying to say is two-fold:

1. You might not be eating as well as you think you are. Obviously if you are counting (all) your calories, fat grams and sat fat grams and know they're within good limits then this isn't the case. But if you're not, and you're overweight, give it a go. You might be surprised. I certainly was.

2. For me at least, to stay at a healthy weight I have to eat healthy. Really healthy. And that kind of sucks because I love some unhealthy food - good cheeses are a particular weakness of mine. But if I go buy some good french brie and roquefort every week and eat it, I will get fat. If I have an afternoon chocolate fix every day I will get fat. Being a healthy weight means eating differently to how I am now.
 

---

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
 
imogen, I'm not overweight, but in about three months, I've gone from being, uh, rather underweight (size 2 jeans at about 6') to a bit pudgier than I've ever been (size 10ish jeans). I've probably put on 25lbs. The thing is, I don't think I've made much of a change in my eating habits either, but I recently realized that over the summer, I didn't have access to late-night food. Since I've moved, my eating habits have shifted to afternoon-evening-night-late night instead of noon-afternoon-evening-night. I think that's made a big difference. So I think the time you eat can make a huge difference, too. Also, I think people tend to ignore what they eat late at night.

Another thing that made a difference for me was that I stopped taking some sleeping pills I'd been prescribed, which previously made it a whole lot easier to sleep on a less-than-full stomach.

-pH
 

---

Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
 
I tend to eat more late at night, also.

I am very aware that some people have issues which means losing weight is extremely hard. Heck, I find losing weight extremely hard and my biggest issue is I like food and wine way too much!

But, everytime I hear people say "But I eat so heathily" I think - have you checked?

I know that for some people this will be the case, that they are fully aware and conscious of all that they eat.

But for others, it is perfectly possible to honestly think you are eating heathily when in fact you are eating way more fat and calories than you should.

(It was illuminating when I started actually reading the sat fat grams on things. One of my favourite takeaway pies, from a place that is considered fairly healthy, had over 2/3 of the daily recommended fat grams. One little pie! I haven't had one since I found that out - I have much better things to use those grams on. Cheese.... )
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
Hmmm. I chalk it up to excessive amounts of sugar, particularly high fructose corn syrup, and transfatty acids. They will not only make you fat, they will increase the likelyhood of diseases correlated with weight-gain. Salty snacks don't help either.

I don't think it is excessive laziness. I think if we are moderately active and return to natural, whole foods, we will be a slimmer nation.

There may be an American tendancy to overeat in general as well. American restaurant portions are notorious for being excessive when compared to other countries. We seem to feel that "stuffing ourselves" is a right.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
I have an extremely hard time not overeating.

I can eat a *large* meal, and in two hours I am ravenously hungry again. If I eat when I am hungry, I will eat an appalling amount of food -- the equivalent of over six full meals a day.
 

---

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
 
I'm the same way, mph. But one doctor claimed I was hypoglycemic. I'm trying to retrain myself to not eat until I'm completely, loosen-the-belt full. I don't even know how I got into that habit, really.

-pH
 

---

Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
 

quote:

---

I don't even know how I got into that habit, really.

-pH [/QB]

---

Me neither. I know I didn't use to eat till I was stuffed (groaning, can't move, belly ache stuffed) but at some stage I started doing it more and more.

And then you get used to it, and just start eating more all the time.
 

---

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
 
Yeah. I've been telling myself for the past couple of months that I was going to get out of the habit. Tonight's the first night I've actually made a conscious decision to go to bed hungry.

The first night is always the hardest. It gets much, much less difficult after that, in my opinion.

-pH
 

---

Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
 
We're fat too...

Australia has moved from the second most obese nation in the world to the sixth. We are fourth in the world when you count in terms of both overweight and obese people.

What I find scary is this:

quote:

---

About 25 per cent of Australian children are obese or overweight, as well as about two thirds of adult males and around half the nation's women.

---

Two thirds of men, half the women and we're still only fourth ?! That is astounding. And scary.
 

---

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
 


Wow!

-pH
 

---

Posted by cheiros do ender (Member # 8849) on :
 
I'm Australian and am disappointed by that article. They just don't seem to understand it's not a matter of weight, it's a matter of health and how people feel about themselves.
 

---

Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
 
Why exactly are you disappointed by that article?

quote:

---

In short we need a changed behavioural pattern among our children – more physical activity and a more balanced, healthy diet," he said in a paper presented to the forum.

"And, equally as important, we need changed attitudes among parents and guardians. It's that simple."

---

I thought it definately portrayed obesity as a health issue, which needs to be overcome as a health issue.

Which is why the Health Minister launched the forum.
 

---

Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
 
I've stopped listening to my stomach when eating. I'm the boss, not him.

I eat when it's time to eat, hungry or not. When I've had a big enough dinner I stop eating, no matter whether I've finished everything on my plate.

In restaurants, I make it a rule to leave some food on my plate.

When I barbeque, instead of the two or three big burgers I used to eat, I now eat one.

It takes some time for the "I'm full" message to get from stomach to brain. Twenty minutes is the number I heard. In other words, if you eat till you're stuffed, you've actually eaten 20 minutes past that point.
 

---

Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
 
Again, I think we need to stop focusing on weight and focus on health.

If someone did a survey of child medical records and counted the number of children who were heavy based on the chart system, then my daughter is overweight. That would be my daughter the gymnast who is in extraordinary shape for her age.

My overweight aunt has low blood pressure and low cholesterol - by every diagnostic test she's healthy. My size 6 sister-in-law is thin but the opposite - her labs are terrible.

I know I need to lose some weight because my PCOS puts me at a higher risk for diabetes. But that's the only reason I care about losing weight because I'm not all that uncomfortable with how I look. My body carried and gave birth to four children, my husband thinks it's sexy, why would I not like it? I do want to prevent future health problems and losing weight is part of that, but other than the risk for diabetes there's nothing wrong with my health. With the exception of that cancer thing.

I really, really dislike relying on weight charts to determine how healthy a group of people are - the whole "Which nation is the fattest?" argument is rather pointless, I think.
 

---

Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
 
Belle - I might agree with you in terms of people being overweight. Certainly I agree in terms of people who have muscle, as opposed to fat.

However, in terms of obesity I really doubt that anyone can be at a weight that is medically obese and be healthy. And being obese is different to being simply overweight.

I think the reason health professionals focuses on weight is it's easy to measure. You can tell people "If you weigh [x] for [y] height then you are obese" and they can work that out at home. But most people don't have access to working out their blood pressure and cholesterol and lung capacity and all the other tests to determine if one is healthy at home.
 

---

Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
 
I've been thinking about fast food, lately.

Now, I don't think McDonalds and Taco Bell are the sole cause of obesity in America. They're just a piece of the puzzle... Along with the half-hour lunch break, the prioritizing of cars over pedestrians in many communities, the nature of office jobs, the role of computers their video game cousins.

Still, as a periodic caffeine addict (the only drug I've ever taken habitually), I can't help but note: Oh look, with a value meal I can get my addictive substance of choice and a huge amount of food, all for one low price. What a deal.

So... You have a lot of Americans getting seven hours of sleep or less, dependent on caffeine, with a very short lunch hour, all having cars. Hello, fast food.
 

---

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
 
Belle, how tall is your daughter for her age? I've noticed that height/weight charts tend to vary from doctor to doctor. Also, one of my doctors told me that for weight, they are less accurate for people who are tall or short.

I should probably not weigh 170lbs, but by my first shrink's calculations, that was my "ideal weight." He agreed with me that that was ludicrous.

-pH
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
I think, that while mothers do need to make children eat their vegetables, and eat healthy food, most of us don't listen to our bodies enough. In the US culture, we haven't truly been trained to listen to our bodies enough and that's how our appetite gets out of sync with our biological needs. It is also an area where going out of sync can happen very easily, because we have such a complex array of biological appetite triggers.

I suspect that I'm extroardinarily lucky in that in the food arena my body is very good at communicating with me. I don't think my metabolism is any better or worse than anyone else's. (Oh yeah and I have PCOS too.) It just communicates well. Particularly with "Not Hungry" and "I'm Full" when necessary. I used to swim a mile a day. My caloric intake was huge as a result. If I didn't eat enough, I could feel the weakness in my muscles, not to mention my stomach rumbling loudly enough for others to hear in public places.

However, when I stopped that level of excercise, my appetite dropped dramatically, within a couple of months. I was at college, and didn't have my mother yelling at me to clean my plate, so I ate as much or as little as I felt like at meals. Since it was cafeteria food I didn't feel any particular need to finish any particular portion and I'd often throw food away.

Over five years of college, I gained a total of 7 lbs. I was 148 when I entered, and 155 when I left. (For reference, I'm 5'8".) Once major stressors were removed I started slowly dropping lower to 153. Then I had a year of four major illnessess. Particularly with the mono I did more "comfort eating" than I ever had in my life, eating because it was more interesting than being totally bored while crashed on the couch. I skyrocketed up to 168. I had to buy pants in a larger size. Then, after I was recovered I kept up the "comfort eating" habit without realizing it.

In another 4 months I hit 173. All of a sudden my energy levels dropped. But, when that happened, all of a sudden my appetite did too. The desire to comfort snack disappeared. I wasn't hungry enough to justify it. I only ate when I was hungry. (Even though it meant getting teased by coworkers for "forgetting" about lunchtime. I literally wasn't hungry so I wouldn't think about eating regardless of the time of day.) Again the amount of what I actually felt like eating (regardless of the size served) went down. And the pounds started dropping back off. It's been about two years since I was at 173. I'm down to 150.

I haven't done any major lifestyle changes or increased my amount of exercise. And I eat a lot of junk and high-carb food if I'm hungry for it. The only thing I've done is listen to my body, and only eat when I was actually hungry and stop eating when I was full. If I'm a guest and I say "it tastes delicious but I'm full, I can't eat another bite" I mean it. I don't eat two more bites just because it tastes delicious. If I eat a McDonalds meal, when I'm not in an extremely active mode (like at a dog show, I'm going to be running around and burning tons of calories then I'll get hungry again) I'm simply not hungry for 10-12 hours.

AJ

[ December 02, 2005, 05:09 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
 

---

Posted by Griffin (Member # 7166) on :
 
BannaOj, could you tell me more about "forgetting" to eat. My dad "forgets" to eat, and can get very moody when it happens. I've even seen him eat a candy bar in the check out line because he "forgot" to eat for so long. It consumes him.. and I would like to know how it didn't affect you, or at least your post implies it didn't.


Griffin
 

---

Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
 
Me, I'm fat as part of my efforts to curb global warming. I just refuse, in these times of global angst and shrinking ice shelfs, to burn more calories and release their heat into the atmosphere.

Somebody pass the nachos, I just can't get up.
 

---

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
 

quote:

---

I think, for most people, it is possible to lose weight.

It is also a tremendous endeavor. It doesn't take a little self-discipline. It takes a lot of discipline. It takes time - for most people, to lose a pound, they must create a debt of 3500 calories. That means to lose a pound a week takes the following:

1. Determine normal number of calories burned in a day. For me, that's about 1800. A piece of cake with icing can be 400. That means there's not much room for any yummy stuff.
2. Eat 250 fewer calories than burned in a normal day. For me, that's 1550 calories a day. This is NOT very much.
3. Burn 250 calories with exercise. I can't run because of my knees and because I hate it, so that means 30 minutes to 45 minutes of intense aerobic exercise.

---

This isn't actually true. You're neglecting the changes to resting metabolism that comes from exercise. Depending on the type and intensity of your workout, you could have a higher metabolism, and thus burn more calories for 4 hours after you finish exercising.

The muscle built from exercise also adds to your overall metabolic rate.

Exercise also acts as a pretty effective stress reliever and anti-depressant, which cuts down on your cortisol again raising your metabolic rate, as well as preventing the urge to eat that often accompanies these conditions.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Griffin, what "forgetting" to eat means to me, is bsaically that I'm involved in something else absorbing, and my stomach is not growling or behaving in any sort of uncomfortable manner to remind me that I'm hungry. By contrast when I was a competitive athlete and I had a class scheduled during what was normally my lunchtime, it would complain, both loudly and painfully. And if I went too long without food I would feel weak and shaky.

Now, because my metabolic needs aren't as demanding it rarely makes me physically uncomfortable, but it will make it abundantly clear that I need to eat, if I don't eat by 1 and get to about 2:30 pm... I will feel weak and shaky. At that point I go "oh duh, I forgot to eat" and promptly eat what I brought for lunch and then I'm fine. I would only eat a candy bar under those conditions when I couldn't get anything else, because the sugar rush isn't really what my body needs. It would make me feel better temporarily, and if it would tide me over in an unusual circumstance I might. My body needs actual nutrition!

It is a somewhat hypoglycemic response, and different people's bodies can respond differently. YMMV. I'm not talking about a person *with* diabetes and/or hypoglycemia. Metabolically speaking, if a normal healthy person hasn't anything in 8 hours, a hypoglycemic response is reasonable. It's the body's way of going, "I need energy. I'm feeling weak so you can't ignore the situation any longer! Feed Me!"

AJ
 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
I posted this on a different thread, but I see I should have posted it here!

Think you eat okay?

Check this quiz out:

Portion Distortion

Scary quiz, eh? One of the things I am trying is to just ditch one-half of whatever I'm served when I eat out, drink a large glass of water first (I spice it up with lemon), and eat as many vegies or salad as I want right now.


Also as a side note: Getting 30 minutes of moderate physical activity each day does NOT mean going to the gym and getting all sweaty.

Think of how you can add extra steps to your everyday life - how you can add exta bounce to your everyday activities.

For example: Park far away from the grocery store door and walk instead of jockeying for close parking spots. (This is sooooo hard to do in the rainy PacNW)

Take the stairs for at least 1-2 flights rather than the elevator.

Walk twice around the block on your 15 minute break. Get a half-hour lunch break? Walk for part or all of it.

Housecleaning? Put on some music with a quick beat and boogie while you work.

Standing at the stove stirring a slow-boiling pot? Do some leg lifts while you stand there.

The point is - start with what's manageable. Change takes time - and there are MANY phases to change. Thinking about it, preparing for it, trying it - and failure and success are both equally okay.


 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
Hungry Planet

Now, this is a thought provoking article - check out the pictures of a week's worth of food for people from differnt areas of this world.
 

---

Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
 
By most standards, I'm a healthy guy. I'm cyclically poor. (Never on the dole because I have a manly disdain for and fear of paperwork, but sometimes I'm cold and hungry) I've been degradedly poor and and comfortably rich enough in their variances to chart my eating habits.

I'll start by saying that I have a problem cooking for myself seven days a week. Time is precious, and I don't cook well and since I don't have much in the way of a sense of smell, all of my cooking tastes the same.

I grew up an athlete with a romantic's share of paranoia that the wrong bite of food will make me a less of an athlete and thereby not get the girl. My attitude towards food has changed in my 28 years, but the principles are the same, a trim healthy body, decent in strength and agility, comes in handy in saving my black ass. The same can be said of good skin.

The problem is that when I go through a poor phase- or when I see one on the horizon- I find myself eating at McDonald's. It's like crack, cheap and convenient, gets you through the day and tears up your body in the process. But they have that Dollar menu with double cheeseburgers and the mcchicken on it, and when I know that the next months are going to be rough, it looks awful tempting. I'm in good financial stead now so I eat spinach salads and real chicken, but for me anyway, planned disposable income is the most important variable which decides the quality of my meals. Now if I had the will to cook and shop and everything else that goes in to it, then I could eat well for the same price, but I don't.

A reason why I eat better than most is because I only eat when I'm hungry, I don't drink, and since I can't really taste what I'm eating, I haven't developed a lust for fatty foods.

[ December 08, 2005, 04:49 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Go to Wendy's instead of McDonalds. Much healthier dollar menu. I can eat more cheaply there than McDonalds any day of the week. And it's healthier too.
 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
Broccoli/Cheese Stuffed BAked Potatoes.

Chili.

Frosty's . . . *grin*
 

---

Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
 
Just looking at the photos of the German family and the Sudanese family - wow.

What a discrepancy in food. Of course, I know being in a refugee camp isn't going to lead to a healthy diet, but still.

Looks like the Guatemalan family eat the most healthily - certainly they have the most fresh vegetables.
 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
The interviews on NPR are pretty interesting, too, imogen.
 

---

Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
 
I found the difference between the Germans and the Americans more interesting. Note that the Germans have a bunch of stuff that needs preparation, veggies to be chopped, almost no bright-and-colourful packaging. The Americans are looking at almost 100% plastic and precooked.
 

---

Posted by jd2cly60 (Member # 450) on :
 
nutrient-empty calorie-ful food in large portions makes any moderately sedentary person fat in the long run.
 

---

Posted by jd2cly60 (Member # 450) on :
 
Belle:

quote:

---

If someone did a survey of child medical records and counted the number of children who were heavy based on the chart system, then my daughter is overweight. That would be my daughter the gymnast who is in extraordinary shape for her age.

---

If you read between the lines, it probably means your daughter has exceptional bone density and above average muscle mass for her age--in other words, excellent health.
 

---

Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
 
I thought the Germans would have had more veggies, actually.

Then I remembered German food. (Meat, potatoes, meat, cabbage, meat and bread. )
 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
The amount of food for a couple of the families actually made my tummy feel somewhat nauseous.
 

---

Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
 
I don't know if this has come up in the thread so far. But what do people think about a little government regulation pertaining to health standards in food

Primarily I would be in favor of some legislation to encourage healthy food production especially for children. It seems the government is in every facet of our lives but this one, and this is where they could really do some good. I remember going to public school in San Francisco and eating things like nachos, chili dogs, and pizza everyday as part of my standard school lunch. Does this seem ok to everyone?

In a time when we don't want to let anyone do anything unhealthy: smoking, drinking, drugs, unprotected sex, we seem to be very lax on what we allow children to eat. I would even be in favor of laws which encourage fast food companies to stop serving the horrifically fatty foods they offer to children, in order to encourage a pallet for health food as a youngster.

Is this too much to ask of our government? Something we would all benefit from in the short and long term? I realize this problem with kids should be 99 percent taken care of by concerned parents... but we must face facts and realize that there are some parents out there that don't know or care how healthy their kids' diets are.
 

---

Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
 
It seems like it all comes down to vices. Some people have a vice for food. Other people have their own material sins, their own addictions. I don't eat a lot, I'm pretty thin, but I'm don't lead a healthy lifestyle, because I smoke and don't exercise much (a coincidence, perhaps?) So I think an important question should be is gluttony more prevalent today as a sin - and I mean sin in a practical, not biblical sense - than greed, alcoholism, or hate? I don't really think so.
America's affluence certainly has to do with overeating. we can afford to eat more, so we do. Any other people in similar circumstances would experience similar results, I think.
As to legislating healthy eating, I think if there can be anti-smoking laws there can be anti-eating laws. If i'm hurting other people through second hand smoke and will be spending taxpayer dollars when I get lung cancer and have to spend weeks in the hospital, then I can live with paying $3 in taxes per pack. But if there are obese people are overeating, and wasting food, denying it to the millions of starving people around the world, and experiencing worse health effects then smokers, then they ccan pay for their vice as well.
When I can see as many god-awful anti-eating ads on TV as I see for anti-smoking, I'll be satisfied.
 

---

Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
 
Just tell your mom you weren't watching her because you were stuffing your face with fast food. She'll understand.

R E S P O N S I B I L I TY
My anti-food.

-pH
 

---

Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
 
The mental image that conjures up is just fantastic.
 

---

Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orincoro:
Primarily I would be in favor of some legislation to encourage healthy food production especially for children. It seems the government is in every facet of our lives but this one, and this is where they could really do some good.

---

quote:

---

I don't know if this has come up in the thread so far. But what do people think about a little government regulation pertaining to health standards in food

Primarily I would be in favor of some legislation to encourage healthy food production especially for children. It seems the government is in every facet of our lives but this one, and this is where they could really do some good. I remember going to public school in San Francisco and eating things like nachos, chili dogs, and pizza everyday as part of my standard school lunch. Does this seem ok to everyone?

In a time when we don't want to let anyone do anything unhealthy: smoking, drinking, drugs, unprotected sex, we seem to be very lax on what we allow children to eat. I would even be in favor of laws which encourage fast food companies to stop serving the horrifically fatty foods they offer to children, in order to encourage a pallet for health food as a youngster.

Is this too much to ask of our government? Something we would all benefit from in the short and long term? I realize this problem with kids should be 99 percent taken care of by concerned parents... but we must face facts and realize that there are some parents out there that don't know or care how healthy their kids' diets are.

---

this can only go so far and only addresses the symptoms. Without fertile soil rich in nutrients the full benefits of food can't be reached. We need a better, and fully unbiased scientific system of soil fertility than the program of NPK used for most farms throughout the country. There's ongoing interest by the wine community in Brix, foliar feeding, sea mineral/seaweed supplementation (etc), and some are investigating how the sucrose ratios of brix analysis are related to actual nutrient levels but there's very little hard varified science in this field unless you go back to Albrecht's Missouri studies in the 30s-50s. This is all very marginal stuff too, so there are wackos coopting the science to serve their health agendas. But you can't improve food quality by a noticeable degree without improving soil quality--and that goes for the meat we eat as well, because if they're raised on low nutritional quality plant feed, it's going to result in lower quality meat for people.

And the government will never admit that sugary, floury empty foods are bad for people. the legalized bribers known as lobbyists will see to that. look at the latest food pyramid, it was held up for a year by the sugar lobby because they didn't want even a very vague negative to sugar included. And the resultant pyramid is joke, marginally better than the dangerous pyramid that preceeded it. There's too much money in keeping america, especially kids, eating junk food, and lots of junk food. These industries will howl and bitch and moan and not hesitate to pour 1, 10, 100 billion dollars into Washington to fight even the slightest reduction by government regulation of their products' consumption.

Ever since the Reagan administration created the saturday morning cartoon by deregulating what could be advertised to children the junk food industry has been unbelievably profitable. Coincide this with the growth of the fast-food industry and more dual-income homes (less home prepared food) and the money levels are mindboggling. Greed will prevent that ever being changed and my generation will reap the rotten fruit of paying the costs as we get older, fatter and even more unhealthy.

government regulation would immediately head in the wrong direction, spend a great deal of money that is minimally short term effective but does very little at long term solutions and will be compromised at every single stage by the food industry with financial incentives to keep American on their products.
 

---

Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
 
I am working on some mineral supplements for small home-gardening or indoor stuff. I have a friend who owns a hydroponics business. We have some ideas, but we both work for a living, so it is slower going. The problem is, you can't learn a lot of the necessary info in any academic program.

I am self-teaching. If anyone knows of sources of funding or information....leeyousee@gmail.com is my email.
 

---

Posted by WntrMute (Member # 7556) on :
 
As if this is only an American problem.
 

---

Posted by WntrMute (Member # 7556) on :
 
Oh, and the other thing is that the BMI is a singularly poor metric for evaluating a 'healthy weight.' I am, by the BMI, just shy of being considered 'obese.' I am 5'10', 195 lbs for a 28 BMI -- 30 is considered obese. I also have a 45 inch chest and a 34 inch waist. Not only am I not nearly obese, I am not fat. Almost anyone who does weight or resistance training is going to get tagged for having a higher BMI, because muscle is denser and weighs more than fat.
 

---

Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
 
This has been mentioned several times in the course of this thread.

BMI is almost useless if you have any muscle mass.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Um... most of the micronutrient data is out there in several comprehensive references on hydroponics.
http://www.discount-hydro.com/books.asp

I would strongly reccommend Hydroponic Home Food Gardens by Howard M. Resh. It is the abreviated version of his longer and more expensive 'Bible' on the subject, known as Hydroponic Food Production.

You will find most of what you want to know about micronutrients in the first, and everything you need to know in the second.

And hydroponically grown vegetables do taste far better because they have more micronutrients in them. My dad and I built our own hydroponic vegetable garden system that worked sucessfully for several years. I couldn't keep it up when I went to school however.

AJ
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
I'd also strongly reccommend General Hydroponics Flora Bloom, Flora Grow and Flora Micro hydroponic nutrient system. They can be combined to support a variety of crops, particularly if, like me you like growing mutiple kinds of veggies together in your system.
http://www.altgarden.com/site/fertil/generahydro/htmldocs/feed_chart.html

you can supplemnt with their other products as necessary.

AJ
 

---

Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
 

quote:

---

And hydroponically grown vegetables do taste far better because they have more micronutrients in them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by WntrMute:
Since I am from the south, it is my observation that all vegetables taste nearly the same after you deep-fry them.

---

 

---

Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by quidscribis:

In my family, we have large muscles and dense muscles. We are (some of us, at any rate) strong. In grade 10 phys ed, I could leg press and bench press (and every other kind of weightlifting that was available there) more weight than any of the guys in my class, including the football players. Shocked the heck out everyone. On a bet, one day, I picked up the front end of my car - a 1980 Honda Civic, so yeah, a backpocket car - and got it a few inches off the ground. None of the guys in university could do that, not even the jocks.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Omega M.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quidscribis:

In my family, we have large muscles and dense muscles. We are (some of us, at any rate) strong. In grade 10 phys ed, I could leg press and bench press (and every other kind of weightlifting that was available there) more weight than any of the guys in my class, including the football players. Shocked the heck out everyone. On a bet, one day, I picked up the front end of my car - a 1980 Honda Civic, so yeah, a backpocket car - and got it a few inches off the ground. None of the guys in university could do that, not even the jocks.

---

Hey, can you still do the car thing?

---

quote:

---

On a bet, one day, I picked up the front end of my car

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stan the man:

quote:

---

I violently disagree with Stan's last post.

---

You could've just said that you disagreed. I feel like @$$ now.

---

Don't. Just because someone strongly disagrees with you doesn't mean you are completely wrong.


Although I agree more with kat's following points than I do with your inital statement.....so THERE!


I think in some ways we are, at least compared to the past. However, that isn't the only contributing factor, IMO. Just because we aren't as physically active doesn't mean we are lazy. They aren't the same thing.

Looking for ONE reason for a general pattern of behavior doesn't always pan out. Usually it is because of a number of factors.

We aren't as physical as we used to be....but we also eat out a ton more than our parents did. Most families had dinner at home, not at a fast food place. Portion sizes are larger, and the way we process food, usually because of the volume needed, has changed as well.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
Oh my stars, I remember that incident - wasn't that at least a year ago?
 

---

Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
 
"You could've just said that you disagreed. I feel like @$$ now."

I love that line. I know Stan was being funny, but....I love it. I'm going to make a religion of it.
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
Of feeling like an a**?
 

---

Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
 
Well, I was joking.

What I found funny was that Stan made the implied statement that is rarely said in arguments. Of course you feel like ass when someone disagrees with you. Saying it is naturally incongruous, since it's usually assumed. Incongruity is often funny.

I mean, I don't know.
 

---

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott R:

quote:

---

On a bet, one day, I picked up the front end of my car

---

Shades of Les Miserables, here.

---

Heh.
 

---