Post by: Paddy on January 11, 2008, 06:34:03 PM
WASHINGTON (AFP) - As adult obesity balloons in the United States, being overweight has become less of a health hazard and more of a lifestyle choice, the author of a new book argues.
ADVERTISEMENT
click here
"Obesity is a natural extension of an advancing economy. As you become a First World economy and you get all these labor-saving devices and low-cost, easily accessible foods, people are going to eat more and exercise less," health economist Eric Finkelstein told AFP.
In "The Fattening of America", published this month, Finkelstein says that adult obesity more than doubled in the United States between 1960 and 2004, rising from 13 percent to around 33 percent.
Globally, only Saudi Arabia fares worse than the United States in terms of the percentage of adults with a severe weight problem -- 35 percent of people in the oil-rich desert kingdom are classified as obese, the book says, citing data from the World Health Organization and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
With the rising tide of obesity come health problems and an increased burden on the healthcare system and industry.
"But the nasty side-effects of obesity aren't as nasty as they used to be," Finkelstein said.
"When you have a first-rate medical system that can cure the diseases that obesity promotes, you no longer need to worry so much about being obese," he told AFP.
"With our ever-advancing modern medicine there helping to save the day (at least for many people), are government and the media blowing the magnitude of the 'obesity crisis' out of proportion?" his book says.
A study in which Finkelstein and colleagues at the RTI International, an independent research institute in North Carolina that works on social and scientific problems, asked overweight, obese and normal weight people to predict their life expectancy came up with a total difference of four years.
Normal weight respondents predicted they would live to 78, the obese to 74, and the overweight 75.5.
Other studies that looked at death data back the conclusion that people who carry excess weight tend to die slightly earlier, the book says, and draws the conclusion that "many individuals are making a conscious decision to engage in a lifestyle that is obesity-promoting."
"People make choices, and some people will choose a weight that the public health community might be unhappy about. Why should we try to make them thinner?" Finkelstein said.
Linda Gotthelf, a doctor who heads research at Health Management Resources, a private, nationwide firm that specializes in weight loss and management, agreed that Americans now live longer but stressed that quality of life declines with age.
"People are living longer but with more chronic diseases," Gotthelf told AFP.
"That brings a diminished quality of life, especially for the obese who have more functional limitations as they age and tend to be on multiple medications."
Obesity is not a choice for Alley English, a 28-year-old mother from Missouri who has struggled with a weight problem all her life.
"If you knew that you could be what society considers normal, why would you not choose to do that?" English told AFP.
"As we get older, life does get more rushed and we do tend to make the easier choices sometimes," English, who currently weighs 392 pounds (178 kilograms), told AFP.
"But you can't say if you quit going to the drive-through, exercise more and eat more vegetables, you'll lose weight. There are so many more factors involved."
Gotthelf also disagreed that people choose to be obese.
"There are studies in which people have said they would rather lose a limb or be blind than obese. Being obese is not a desire," she said.
"For many, this is a problem they have struggled with for many years... it gets discouraging after a while," she said.
"I would not doubt that if you asked obese people if they could push a button and not be obese, close to 100 percent would say they would push the button."
Finkelstein says he wrote "The Fattening of America" to "encourage discussion of what I understand is probably an uncomfortable position for a lot of people."
Even if private industry and government take steps to protect society against the costs of obesity, many Americans "will likely continue to choose a diet and exercise regimen that leads to excess weight," because losing weight requires too many lifestyle sacrifices, his book warns.
Meanwhile, frustrated by years of unsuccessful dieting and weight loss programs, English has opted to join a growing number of Americans who have gastric bypass surgery -- hailed in Finkelstein's book as "the best-known treatment for severe obesity."
"I have a higher risk of developing diabetes or hypertension if I don't have the surgery," English said.
"I don't care if I end up with a body like whoever-in-the-media thinks I should look like; I just want to be healthy and able to participate in my daughter's life," she said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080110/hl_afp/lifestyleushealthobesity_080110170913
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 11, 2008, 06:59:34 PM
Why would anybody choose to be a fat waddling mutha at risk for diabetes and heart disease?
Because it's easier at first? It might be harder later on, but it's easy to get that way. That's why.
Post by: CAnnoneer on January 11, 2008, 07:16:30 PM
Post by: mtnbkr on January 12, 2008, 03:02:11 AM
I don't think there's anything terribly wrong with the food pyramid. What's wrong is people's perceptions of a "serving". A "serving" is a little tiny thing. When was the last time you ate only a "serving" of steak? That would be a piece of meat roughly the size of a deck of cards, not the 10oz monster Outback serves. If people at honest servings, kept their calorie intake around 2k (adjusting for activity), and got some modest exercise, most folks would not be obese. That's all it takes for me.
Ok, in the interest of full disclosure, I did just scarf down a French toast concoction consisting of a peanut butter sandwich made with double fiber wheat bread, dipped in an egg and milk mix and cooked like French toast. It's hardly low-cal, but it did provide 1/2 my RDA of fiber. I'll burn the excess calories when I leave for my 20mile bike ride in 40 minutes.
Chris
Post by: Jamisjockey on January 12, 2008, 04:14:11 AM
Quote
Why would anybody choose to be a fat waddling mutha at risk for diabetes and heart disease
Because its easier to sit on the couch than exercise.
Because cheese pizza tastes better than broiled chicken salad.
Because there are more McDonald's than health food stores.
Obesity is a disease of the lazy and the poor. It comes from eating low quality foods in high quantities, sedentary lifestyles and convinience.
Sure, for some people, its not a choice. There are almost always exceptions to the rule. They have a condition that makes them gain weight. They are most certainly the exception.
Hey chris where are you riding today? I'm hooking up with the club this morning.
I just put over 20 races in my wife's calendar for the year. Its a little ambitious, and will probably end up being 12 or so.
Post by: One of Many on January 12, 2008, 04:44:56 AM
That may be true for some people that are overweight, but not all people fit that characterization. Some overweight people have metabolic disorders, hormonal imbalances, medication side effects that affect weight, genetic predispositions, etc. People with disabilities or handicaps may not be able to be as physically active as those that have normal body functions. The answer is not as simple as the author of this book, and those posting here before me, have stated.
The attitude exhibited by this author and previous posters here, is a justification for discrimination based on weight, and a way to justify efforts to control the rights of other people. You would think that a group of gun owners, who are constantly being attacked for the crimes of others who illegally possess and use guns, would be more astute and sensitive to the underlying message here. If you want to control people, you find a way to make their actions look bad to everyone else; make them seem to be weak minded, or mentally abnormal. If it works for people that carry "excessive" weight, then it will work for people that carry guns. Just say that anyone that owns guns is a latent criminal, unable to control their base desires of a violent nature (like the base desire to eat), then you can justify taking control of that persons life. The overweight can be controlled by limiting their access to food, and forcing them into exercise programs; the gun owners can have their guns confiscated (like food) and forced into rehabilitation programs at the psychiatric hospital.
When you start to justify discrimination on the basis of abnormality, it becomes a matter of WHO defines what is normal behavior. Gun owners need to be more aware of the trap that they are walking into, when they start making snide remarks about people that exceed an arbitrary determination of "normal" weight vs height.
Post by: Manedwolf on January 12, 2008, 05:26:16 AM
Obesity is a disease of the lazy and the poor. It comes from eating low quality foods in high quantities, sedentary lifestyles and convinience.
And an ironic one. For most all of human history, only the rich could afford sweets and fats, and were the only ones to get fat.
There were some notable cultures of antiquity that stressed health, where the rich were often as tall and healthy-looking as today, such as the Egyptian nobility, Roman nobility, Greek, etc...but there were plenty of round nobility too, especially in Europe.
The poor ate mostly fish, lean meat, and veggies if they could get them. They might have had vitamin deficiencies and were rather short, but they were slender.
In the latter half of the 20th century, we've reversed that. Lean meat and good veggies cost the most, whereas the cheapest food is processed carbohydrates and hydrogenated oils, both of which, if consumed exclusively, will make people fat. So the poor are more likely to be fat, while the rich, with a personal nutritionist and trainer and access to the most expensive lean meats and organic veggies, are more likely to be thin.
Ironic, indeed.
Post by: seeker_two on January 12, 2008, 06:17:14 AM
Why would anybody choose to be a fat waddling mutha at risk for diabetes and heart disease?
Because it's cheap and easy and tastes great.....
Besides, I gotta die of something....might as well enjoy the process......
Post by: AJ Dual on January 12, 2008, 06:22:39 AM
Obesity is a disease of the lazy and the poor. It comes from eating low quality foods in high quantities, sedentary lifestyles and convinience.
And an ironic one. For most all of human history, only the rich could afford sweets and fats, and were the only ones to get fat.
There were some notable cultures of antiquity that stressed health, where the rich were often as tall and healthy-looking as today, such as the Egyptian nobility, Roman nobility, Greek, etc...but there were plenty of round nobility too, especially in Europe.
The poor ate mostly fish, lean meat, and veggies if they could get them. They might have had vitamin deficiencies and were rather short, but they were slender.
In the latter half of the 20th century, we've reversed that. Lean meat and good veggies cost the most, whereas the cheapest food is processed carbohydrates and hydrogenated oils, both of which, if consumed exclusively, will make people fat. So the poor are more likely to be fat, while the rich, with a personal nutritionist and trainer and access to the most expensive lean meats and organic veggies, are more likely to be thin.
Ironic, indeed.
Yep, you nailed it in one.
Post by: 280plus on January 12, 2008, 07:09:04 AM
Post by: Fly320s on January 12, 2008, 07:30:58 AM
It sure is easy for skinny people that can eat any thing in any quantity without gaining weight, to say that heavy people are to blame for their weight problems, and that it is just a matter of self control.
That may be true for some people that are overweight, but not all people fit that characterization. Some overweight people have metabolic disorders, hormonal imbalances, medication side effects that affect weight, genetic predispositions, etc. People with disabilities or handicaps may not be able to be as physically active as those that have normal body functions. The answer is not as simple as the author of this book, and those posting here before me, have stated.
The attitude exhibited by this author and previous posters here, is a justification for discrimination based on weight, and a way to justify efforts to control the rights of other people. You would think that a group of gun owners, who are constantly being attacked for the crimes of others who illegally possess and use guns, would be more astute and sensitive to the underlying message here. If you want to control people, you find a way to make their actions look bad to everyone else; make them seem to be weak minded, or mentally abnormal. If it works for people that carry "excessive" weight, then it will work for people that carry guns. Just say that anyone that owns guns is a latent criminal, unable to control their base desires of a violent nature (like the base desire to eat), then you can justify taking control of that persons life. The overweight can be controlled by limiting their access to food, and forcing them into exercise programs; the gun owners can have their guns confiscated (like food) and forced into rehabilitation programs at the psychiatric hospital.
When you start to justify discrimination on the basis of abnormality, it becomes a matter of WHO defines what is normal behavior. Gun owners need to be more aware of the trap that they are walking into, when they start making snide remarks about people that exceed an arbitrary determination of "normal" weight vs height.
That may be true for some people that are overweight, but not all people fit that characterization. Some overweight people have metabolic disorders, hormonal imbalances, medication side effects that affect weight, genetic predispositions, etc. People with disabilities or handicaps may not be able to be as physically active as those that have normal body functions. The answer is not as simple as the author of this book, and those posting here before me, have stated.
The attitude exhibited by this author and previous posters here, is a justification for discrimination based on weight, and a way to justify efforts to control the rights of other people. You would think that a group of gun owners, who are constantly being attacked for the crimes of others who illegally possess and use guns, would be more astute and sensitive to the underlying message here. If you want to control people, you find a way to make their actions look bad to everyone else; make them seem to be weak minded, or mentally abnormal. If it works for people that carry "excessive" weight, then it will work for people that carry guns. Just say that anyone that owns guns is a latent criminal, unable to control their base desires of a violent nature (like the base desire to eat), then you can justify taking control of that persons life. The overweight can be controlled by limiting their access to food, and forcing them into exercise programs; the gun owners can have their guns confiscated (like food) and forced into rehabilitation programs at the psychiatric hospital.
When you start to justify discrimination on the basis of abnormality, it becomes a matter of WHO defines what is normal behavior. Gun owners need to be more aware of the trap that they are walking into, when they start making snide remarks about people that exceed an arbitrary determination of "normal" weight vs height.
One,
It is a generalization. Generally speaking, most obese people are obese because of the choices they have made. Book writers, newscasters, talk show hosts, and APS participants can't always say or write "everyone who is obese chose to be that way, except for... yada, yada, yada." It takes up too much time. And as a general rule, we humans are lazy. So, we generalize. We do the same thing for all groups of people. That's how stereotypes get started. No, it isn't right or accurate, but for the most part, it works.
I agree with you that this could lead to "discrimination based on weight, and a way to justify efforts to control the rights of other people." In fact, I predict that exact thing to happen once national healthcare takes root. And frankly, I'm all for it. If my money is going towards your health care (generalization), then I want a say in what you eat. If you don't like it, keep your hands out of my pockets (again, a generalization, and it is not directed at you personally).
Post by: Tecumseh on January 12, 2008, 07:38:13 AM
Obesity is a disease of the lazy and the poor. It comes from eating low quality foods in high quantities, sedentary lifestyles and convinience.
And an ironic one. For most all of human history, only the rich could afford sweets and fats, and were the only ones to get fat.
There were some notable cultures of antiquity that stressed health, where the rich were often as tall and healthy-looking as today, such as the Egyptian nobility, Roman nobility, Greek, etc...but there were plenty of round nobility too, especially in Europe.
The poor ate mostly fish, lean meat, and veggies if they could get them. They might have had vitamin deficiencies and were rather short, but they were slender.
In the latter half of the 20th century, we've reversed that. Lean meat and good veggies cost the most, whereas the cheapest food is processed carbohydrates and hydrogenated oils, both of which, if consumed exclusively, will make people fat. So the poor are more likely to be fat, while the rich, with a personal nutritionist and trainer and access to the most expensive lean meats and organic veggies, are more likely to be thin.
Ironic, indeed.
Post by: Tecumseh on January 12, 2008, 07:42:44 AM
Post by: lwsimon on January 12, 2008, 08:26:32 AM
I'm 6'3", and I weigh 300#. I'm out of shape, although I get a fair amount of exercise for my generation. My issue is that I simply have not been able to break the habits I've formed. You have to do something for 3 weeks before you form a habit -- so far, I've not been able to stay motivated that long. I'll stop drinking all soda for a week or so at a time, but eventually, I'll find myself out to eat with my wife, and order a soda without thinking. Then, if I even realize what i've done, I rationalize "Well, one soda won't hurt anything". It immediately sets me back to where I started.
Yes, it is a matter of willpower, but I daresay those that have never dealt with it don't have a clue. I've fought my way back from a very deep depression, where suicide wasn't a far thought from my mind. I've gone from failing out of college and not having a job for six months or more, to working for a Fortune 500 company, owning a home, and starting a family.
Changing my lifestyle will take somethign drastic - I'm not sure what that will be. To this point, I seem to be unable to do it alone.
Post by: Fly320s on January 12, 2008, 08:36:20 AM
Real polite conversation so far guys...
I'm 6'3", and I weigh 300#. I'm out of shape, although I get a fair amount of exercise for my generation. My issue is that I simply have not been able to break the habits I've formed. You have to do something for 3 weeks before you form a habit -- so far, I've not been able to stay motivated that long. I'll stop drinking all soda for a week or so at a time, but eventually, I'll find myself out to eat with my wife, and order a soda without thinking. Then, if I even realize what i've done, I rationalize "Well, one soda won't hurt anything". It immediately sets me back to where I started.
Yes, it is a matter of willpower, but I daresay those that have never dealt with it don't have a clue. I've fought my way back from a very deep depression, where suicide wasn't a far thought from my mind. I've gone from failing out of college and not having a job for six months or more, to working for a Fortune 500 company, owning a home, and starting a family.
Changing my lifestyle will take somethign drastic - I'm not sure what that will be. To this point, I seem to be unable to do it alone.
There are professional programs available, if you choose to go that route.I'm 6'3", and I weigh 300#. I'm out of shape, although I get a fair amount of exercise for my generation. My issue is that I simply have not been able to break the habits I've formed. You have to do something for 3 weeks before you form a habit -- so far, I've not been able to stay motivated that long. I'll stop drinking all soda for a week or so at a time, but eventually, I'll find myself out to eat with my wife, and order a soda without thinking. Then, if I even realize what i've done, I rationalize "Well, one soda won't hurt anything". It immediately sets me back to where I started.
Yes, it is a matter of willpower, but I daresay those that have never dealt with it don't have a clue. I've fought my way back from a very deep depression, where suicide wasn't a far thought from my mind. I've gone from failing out of college and not having a job for six months or more, to working for a Fortune 500 company, owning a home, and starting a family.
Changing my lifestyle will take somethign drastic - I'm not sure what that will be. To this point, I seem to be unable to do it alone.
It seems to me that you are well on your way. You've already recovered your love life, and business life. You're heading in the right direction.
You're right, it takes will power and motivation, but there are lots of "crutches" out there. Friends, family, churches to name a few. Turn off the TV and computer for an hour and walk around your neighborhood. Don't eat while watching TV. Don't eat fast food. Take your lunch to work. Eat slowly.
There are a million ways to make a difference, but they all start with you.
Post by: Jamisjockey on January 12, 2008, 08:39:58 AM
Quote
It sure is easy for skinny people that can eat any thing in any quantity without gaining weight, to say that heavy people are to blame for their weight problems, and that it is just a matter of self control.
But therein lies the rub. I suffer from bad genetics. At the height of my slovenness, I weighed 200lbs. I'm 5'3". I carry my weight from the waist up. skinny legs, no ass, nice big beer gut and moobs at the height of my nastyness.
Firstly, I eliminated soda. All Soda. Sweet tea, too, because its full of sugar.
I stopped drinking beer whenever I felt like it.
Now I allow myself the odd soda or beer here and there, but I'm 165, which is my winter "fat" weight.
if you know someone is an alcoholic, wouldnt you tell them to get help? food addiction and laziness are just the same in my book.
- Don't eat that second twinkie, fatass.
- Eat a salad before dinner.
- don't eat that second slice of pie.
- Soda is the devil's candy.
- Be a social drinker. Don't drink alone.
- Eat before you go to the grocery store. Make a shopping list AND STICK TO IT.
- Get a good cookbook. Weightwatchers has some good ones. But almost any home cooking will be better than fast food or resturant food
- Don't eat out every day.
- Treat yourself on a schedule. One day a week for fast food, out to eat, or whatever.
- Eat before you go to a party.
It ain't that damn hard. And being a bit overweight is fine. Being healthy is the key. Getting regular exercise, and not eating a box of twinkies in one sitting. And Soda is the bane of the devil.
I'm still a chunky little monkey. My Resting heart rate is in the 40's. My last BP reading was 117 over 70.
lwsimon:
Replace soda with unsweet tea or crystal light. Drink alot of water. Buy a nagalene bottle and take it to work. keep it full. do not take extra loose change with you.
One thing I found to help myself when I worked a normal job was to stop carrying cash. I felt like an ass using my debit card for a candy bar at the gas station, I couldn't use the candy or soda machine at work, and so I'd drink water and eat the healthy snacks I brought with me.
Tecumseh:
Quote
What is scary is some of the fatties I see at the gunshows. They terrify me...
Usually they are wearing a "Sniper" "special forces" or "vote from the rooftops" tshirt, too. Post by: Jamisjockey on January 12, 2008, 08:52:42 AM
About 165#....but I was drinking alot last winter, so I think I was bloated up....
about 155#
I forgot to mention. In my first full week off soda, I lost 5lbs. Yes, I said 5lbs! I was drinking about 4-6 cans of soda a day at that point.
When I stopped drinking beer 4-5 days a week, that was good for another 5lbs in 2 weeks. No exercise involved at that point...well...except for at work I stopped taking the elevator and began using the stairs.....all 12 flights worth.
About the best thing I can recommend is to buy a decent bicycle. Start cycling. It takes less of a toll on the body than running. And if you get addicted, it can be a real winner. I burn about 2000 calories on some of my rides.
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 12, 2008, 09:39:47 AM
Youtube's also got the original, full-length Bad video, for those of us who grew up without MTV.
More reasons to despise Wesley Snipes, as if we needed them.
1) He had a speaking role in a Michael Jackson video.
2) In which he was punked out by Jackson and his army of prancing ghetto fairies.
Anyway, back to your fat-guy talk.
Post by: mtnbkr on January 12, 2008, 10:21:28 AM
It sure is easy for skinny people that can eat any thing in any quantity without gaining weight, to say that heavy people are to blame for their weight problems, and that it is just a matter of self control.
Whatever. At 5'11" and 185lbs, I'm hardly skinny. Three years ago, I was 220 and certainly not skinny or even slightly overweight (I have a slender frame and should be closer to 170lbs). My problem was definitely overeating and underexercising. I worked hard to get where I am now. I go as far as measuring portions to make sure I'm not overeating. Nothing's more enjoyable than eating a salad or teeny steak while everyone around is eating a slab of cow with a monster potato on the side. I'd love to have the steak and 'tater, but I know I'll pay for it later, so I munch my greens. Ask Jamis what I got to eat after we went hunting the other day. It was a Subway kid's meal with no mayo or cheese. Just a little meat and lots of veggies (about a 4" or 5" sub). I had raisins instead of chips and washed it down with unsweet iced tea. There have been many times where I could gnaw the bark off a tree I'm so hungry. I have to resist because I know I have no willpower with regards to food. I love to cook and eat. Easy my arse...
Sure, there are a lot of folks who have legitimate reasons for their weight. I have family members who put on weight because of medicines, or lack of mobility, etc. There are just as many who stuff double quarter pounders down their gaping maw while washing it down with a quart of soda.
Quote from: Jamisjockey
Hey chris where are you riding today?
I rode with some folks in DC. We took the Potomac bike path to the Capital Crescent and rode to Bethesda. During the planning stages, it was supposed to be a casual 15-25 mile ride with some rough sections. It was said that regular road bikes would be tasked because of the condition of the trail. I decided to take the fixie mtb with narrower tires. Everybody else brought regular road bikes. The "casual" ride turned into a hammerfest with me struggling to keep up. The 15-25 miles ended up being 31 miles with my preride (got there early). Nothing like keeping up with roadies on a fixie mtb with offroad gearing. I was spinning my arse off and only doing 17mph.
Chris
Post by: Jamisjockey on January 12, 2008, 10:26:51 AM
Quote
I rode with some folks in DC. We took the Potomac bike path to the Capital Crescent and rode to Bethesda. During the planning stages, it was supposed to be a casual 15-25 mile ride with some rough sections. It was said that regular road bikes would be tasked because of the condition of the trail. I decided to take the fixie mtb with narrower tires. Everybody else brought regular road bikes. The "casual" ride turned into a hammerfest with me struggling to keep up. The 15-25 miles ended up being 31 miles with my preride (got there early). Nothing like keeping up with roadies on a fixie mtb with offroad gearing. I was spinning my arse off and only doing 17mph.
Yeah I got it handed to me this morning, too. should've been an easier pace, no drops. Instead, I got spit out the back on a climb at 22mph, and never could get back on. finished with 32 miles and 17mph avg.
I'm thinking about going out to the park once a week, maybe tuesdays, morning or early afternoon. You interested?
Post by: mtnbkr on January 12, 2008, 10:41:28 AM
Can't do anything other than night rides during the week. Why not join us for the regular night rides?
That said, they're on hold right now until the trails dry out more. Things are still soupy.
Chris
Post by: mtnbkr on January 12, 2008, 10:46:11 AM
I put in nearly 8 miles before this track was recorded. Average speed is slow, but because this group consisted of 2 geared mountain bikes, one roadie who took pity on us, and my dumb self on a fixed mtb. The main group on road bikes probably averaged a good bit faster (I was struggling to keep up at 17mph during the "warmup" phase of the ride).
Chris
Post by: Jamisjockey on January 12, 2008, 11:16:25 AM
I would've been ok had I been on a road bike or at least a bike with gears. 32x17 on the road is asking for punishment.
Can't do anything other than night rides during the week. Why not join us for the regular night rides?
That said, they're on hold right now until the trails dry out more. Things are still soupy.
Chris
Can't do anything other than night rides during the week. Why not join us for the regular night rides?
That said, they're on hold right now until the trails dry out more. Things are still soupy.
Chris
I still need to get new lights, and Jan is the month we don't get paid
If I don't get any tuesday interest out of my club, I'll plan on hitting some Feb-March tuesday night rides.
BTW, starting with DST, we hit the Wed eve rides pretty hard at the park. With your base fitness, you'd get pretty fast pretty quick. It'd give you some kick when need it.
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 12, 2008, 12:04:11 PM
Quote
It sure is easy for skinny people that can eat any thing in any quantity without gaining weight, to say that heavy people are to blame for their weight problems, and that it is just a matter of self control.
Okay, how about a former fatass saying it? I will state, in no uncertain terms, that being overweight IS a matter of self-control and heavy people ARE to blame for their weight problems. I was one of them. Are there some people who truly do have a medical reason for their obesity? Yes. But you are talking in terms of tenths-of-a-percent of the obese population ... 1 in a couple thousand. Everyone else has no one to blame but themselves.
Chances are those "skinny people who eat anything" have a fairly active lifestyle. By "active" I don't mean at the gym or mountain climbing or whatever. I mean they are up doing stuff most of the time, even at work or at home. Their "higher metabolism" is higher not because of genetics, it's because they maintain a higher level of activity throughout the day and make sensible dietary choices.
As of today I'm down 61 lbs. Know how I did it? I stopped stuffing my face with food I "liked", started eating sensibly, and began a regular exercise routine. I never went on a diet. I made a change of lifestyle. In other words, I chose not to be the slobby fat guy any more and made myself do something about it. I stopped blaming everyone and everything else and looked in the mirror. Do I still have the cravings? Yes. Would I like to go and put a serious hurt on the nearest pizza buffet? Absolutely. But I choose not to. I. Me. I suck it up and tell myself 'No'. It's a pain in the rear. All the time. And I'll never be free from it. But I still choose not to and make myself stick to the decision. Not doing so would be a cop-out to myself and an excuse to go back to the old, convenient, feel-good habits.
Brad
Post by: Jamisjockey on January 12, 2008, 12:27:19 PM
Quote
Do I still have the cravings? Yes. Would I like to go and put a serious hurt on the nearest pizza buffet? Absolutely.
Quote of the day for sure!!!!!
Post by: CAnnoneer on January 12, 2008, 02:40:19 PM
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 12, 2008, 02:45:00 PM
However...
You are talking about an adult male, age approximately 20-21, in college. That usually means lots of being up and around along with a generally active lifestyle. When we were that age many of us could eat like that and get away with it. Look him up in a couple of years (say, when he turns 40 or so) and see what the results are. I'd put good money all that ice cream and whatnot has caught up with him. My ex BIL was like that, all trim and cut even though he feasted on double cheeseburgers and pizza with abandon. Fast forward fifteen years and he looks less like Schwartzeneggar and more like Schwartzkopf.
Brad
Post by: 280plus on January 12, 2008, 03:02:29 PM
Somehow, Wierd Al seems to cover what's going on here...
Besides, I think this one is pretty good.
(Always did like Wierd Al)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO08cs2r0kg&feature=related
Post by: grislyatoms on January 12, 2008, 03:45:19 PM
The folks who raised me (my Mom's "adoptive parents") did not feed me breakfast. They did not give me lunch money, or try to make sure I had access to lunch. Usually, they were too hung-over to care.
Consequently, when dinner time rolled around I was extremely hungry.
"Look at this damned kid, stuffing his face, he's gonna eat me out of house and home."
"Stuffing your face again, huh? Worthless little POS, get out of my sight."
"Typical stupid kids. Have a child and then expect someone else to foot the bill."
I used to hide in a closet when I heard a car pull in the driveway, afraid it was THEM.
I also learned to eat as much as I could right after school when I was home alone. Babysitters, friend's houses, neighbors, whatever I could find. Things would get worse by degrees if THEY found food missing.
I lived like that for 10 years.
It has been very difficult unlearning that behavior. I have had fair to moderate sucess, but I got it by the horns now. Especially with no more cerveza.
(On a better note, I did get to spend summers with my Grandparents. Only little bit of peace I had back then.)
Point is, folks might want to consider other issues for circumstances before making blanket statements and knee-jerk judgements.
"Lifestyle Choice", indeed.
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 12, 2008, 03:53:28 PM
I feel for you, buddy. Really. Sounds like your situation well and truly sucked. But, again, it's the exception and not the rule.
Brad
Post by: grislyatoms on January 12, 2008, 03:58:07 PM
And anyway, I didn't post that 'cause I want sympathy, only to try to make a point. But I hear ya.
It's all water under the bridge, now.
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 12, 2008, 04:09:43 PM
And anyway, I didn't post that 'cause I want sympathy, only to try to make a point. But I hear ya.
I know, and point taken. That's why I've been very careful to always except those individuals with truly mitigating circumstances like yours.
For the rest of us fatties it still boils down to a simple issue of practicing self-control, eschewing excuses, and general getting it through our thick skulls (and guts) that our weight problems are no one's fault but our own.
Brad
Post by: Finch on January 12, 2008, 05:47:24 PM
Quote
But you can't say if you quit going to the drive-through, exercise more and eat more vegetables, you'll lose weight. There are so many more factors involved.
So let me understand something. You quit eating bad foods, increase your exercise, and eat healthier, you're not going to lose weight?
Post by: Gewehr98 on January 12, 2008, 06:23:11 PM
What was the purpose of starting this thread?
IOW, you've been on a rant lately about big-*expletive deleted*ss this, and fat-*expletive deleted*ss that.
What's the real deal?
Post by: CAnnoneer on January 12, 2008, 07:07:13 PM
Post by: Antibubba on January 13, 2008, 12:11:07 AM
Quote
Globally, only Saudi Arabia fares worse than the United States in terms of the percentage of adults with a severe weight problem -- 35 percent of people in the oil-rich desert kingdom are classified as obese, the book says, citing data from the World Health Organization and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
It's the robes--I tell ya, if they had to squeeze into a tight pair of jeans before leaving the house, those numbers would drop by ten percent.
Quote
Gris, not to be brutal, but your situation is SO aberrational as to be irrelevant to the discussion. Your situation was one of a unique (and very negative) social conditioning far outside what most of us will ever know
Grisly's specific story might be unusual, but the negative social conditioning is not. I've dated a lot of "fat girls" (because jutting hip bones and ribcages aren't one of my turn-ons), and what I've discovered is a lot of them were sexually abused as children. When they went from adorable little girls to fatties the "attention" went away. I'm certainly not claiming this to be the reason in every single case--some of them were "fat" in the same way that Marilyn Monroe would today be considered "plus-size". Certainly the addition of high-fructose corn syrup to every processed food on the market hasn't helped any.
Post by: 280plus on January 13, 2008, 03:02:15 AM
I'll give you an example of how powerful a logo is. I used to drive all over the Northeast to service the HVAC in big name stores. Payless Shoes, A&W, Pizza Hut. I got so good at finding these places in the commercial district of virtually every big town up here that I could spot the specific logo / street sign of the business from miles away as long as my eye could make contact with it. It was uncanny. I'd be driving down the commercial strip in a place I'd never been before and way off in the distance the distinctive charactertistics of that specific logo would just pop right out of the scenery. Even though I couldn't make it out clearly there was something about that sign that said "Payless Shoes" way off into the distance. It got so that's the way I used to work, I'd find the commercial section of town and just drive around till I spotted the right sign. Usually it never took be more than a few minutes.
Now, apply that concept to the Golden Arches. Probably the single most recognizable logo on the planet. Subconciously, from MILES away, that logo will be like a shining beacon to all, a siren song of greasy salty goodness that has been specifically designed and promoted to lure us all to our untimely and gruesome deaths, if only we would submit... (how am I doing
)Apparently brown and gold make you hungry. I don't know why, but you can be sure the food industry does.
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 13, 2008, 03:15:14 AM
Post by: 280plus on January 13, 2008, 03:19:29 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake's
I like Funny Bones a lot too. Mostly casue they come three in a package.
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 13, 2008, 03:20:50 AM
Post by: 280plus on January 13, 2008, 03:22:54 AM
Post by: Jamisjockey on January 13, 2008, 04:14:13 AM
Brad, I ran into the human stove again some years ago, seven years after graduation. He was still a 6-foot twig, although I don't know if he kept up the icecream binging.
Can you speak to his actual health? You only know that he is skinny. If he still eats like a garbage disposal and doesn't exercise, he's just as doomed as a sedentary fat body.
Post by: mtnbkr on January 13, 2008, 04:46:47 AM
Can you speak to his actual health? You only know that he is skinny. If he still eats like a garbage disposal and doesn't exercise, he's just as doomed as a sedentary fat body.
Yup. There's more to health than your bodyfat percentage. Prior to my brother's gastric bypass, his blood chemistry and cardiovascular health was better than mine, yet he was over twice my weight. I'm not sure what it is these days though. Even with my diet and exercise, my BP is "high normal".
Weight is just an quick visual indicator, but not the most important one.
Chris
Post by: CAnnoneer on January 13, 2008, 07:01:22 AM
Where the heck are you again?
IIRC, fistful is in St Louis.
Post by: 280plus on January 13, 2008, 07:54:02 AM
Post by: 280plus on January 13, 2008, 07:55:34 AM
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 13, 2008, 09:44:22 AM
When it comes to brand names, you guys really live in your own little world. No TasteeCake's here, either.
Post by: 280plus on January 13, 2008, 01:56:34 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 13, 2008, 02:33:12 PM
Post by: 280plus on January 13, 2008, 03:00:12 PM
Post by: CAnnoneer on January 13, 2008, 04:07:15 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 13, 2008, 06:29:50 PM
Post by: Sergeant Bob on January 13, 2008, 07:53:26 PM
I think it's the chicken-fried steak and mashed taters, with the whole plate smothered in gravy, that keeps us going.
I thought it was snoots that you were fond of in St. Louis.
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 13, 2008, 08:08:29 PM
I assume you are referring to pig snouts. I don't know about that, but you can find pork rinds in most gas stations (or at least some facsimile thereof). Not my cup of tea.
Oh, and toasted ravioli is supposed to be especially popular around here. I don't know why they wouldn't be popular everywhere. Other cities have Italian districts, too. Besides, have you ever had un-toasted ravioli? Yuck.
Post by: Sergeant Bob on January 13, 2008, 08:27:07 PM
Post by: Bogie on January 13, 2008, 08:36:05 PM
In a situation where the majority of food available is high in sugars, the body learns to process and store them more efficiently. So you get a lot more insulin production, funky lipid profiles, etc... Until your body's biological insulin factory blows a gasket, and you either die, or the doctor puts you on a substitute.
I'll wager (nobody knows at the present) that it's going to turn out to be a genetic condition also... If you are in a "normal diet" environment, you may get a trifle pudgy, etc., but if you're in a "mac & cheese every night" environment, where you also run into "feast or famine" situations where the body has no idea when it's going to get fed again, you're gonna have problems.
FWIW, there's a LOT of research into the concept of continuing treatments, but very little toward a cure - not a lot of money in people who don't need meds... And most of the "public" R&D money is going toward political diseases, like HIV or breast cancer.
Post by: GigaBuist on January 13, 2008, 09:10:15 PM
I assume you are referring to pig snouts. I don't know about that, but you can find pork rinds in most gas stations (or at least some facsimile thereof). Not my cup of tea.
Most pork rinds I've seen contain zero carbs. Aside from the fat content they're not a horrible snack IMHO.
If you want to lose weight quit eating so much. My girlfriend is quite overweight and it's just a combination of how much she eats and how little she exercises. As for myself, I've never been overweight. I'm currently as fat as I have ever been at 5'9" and 145lbs. I have a coffee for breakfast. She has a double-mocha latte and a McMuffin on the way into work. We order pizza and I eat two slices... she sucks down four of them.
It's just simple math and biology. When the calories going in exceed those coming out you're going to gain weight. Once you're heavy your body is going to want those extra calories just to keep its reserves in place.
To her credit she's started working out with my family 2 nights a week. That's all her work schedule really allows. My brother, at 6'1" and 210lbs decided it was time to get back in shape and started pushing weights. When my parents built a new house a year ago they put in a weight room, stocked it up, and gradually we've all found a way to make it over there at 5pm every week night. My brother dropped to 156lbs within a year but he's back up to a healthy 172lbs now, about half of that gain was pure muscle. Dad and mom haven't really lost any weight, but they weren't too fat to begin with, just toning up their muscles. As for me, I'm hoping to get back up to my "fighting" weight of 155lbs and lose a little fat in the process.
It isn't rocket science when it comes to controlling your body. You get out of it what you put into it. That isn't to say that genetics never plays a role in it. Not everybody can run a 4 minute mile, genetics plays a role in that to be sure, but I'd wager that just about as many people are genetically set up to wander around with 40% body fat. Not many.
Post by: CAnnoneer on January 14, 2008, 08:06:08 AM
Did Gollum ask that? I don't recall. Or maybe you don't know what "tater" means?
The quote is from the second movie. And the name is "Smeagol".
Post by: Iain on January 14, 2008, 08:11:34 AM
Solid advice for your next trip to the English coast. Cept possibly the raw bit, up to you. Definitely not wriggling for me.
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 14, 2008, 08:42:15 AM
Quote
Most pork rinds I've seen contain zero carbs. Aside from the fat content they're not a horrible snack IMHO.
What will surprise you is how few calories they actually have. They are, after all, mostly air.
Brad