Obesity has become a global issue

And this brings up another driving factor... no pun intended..;).....

With the proliferation of handicapped parking spots at all the malls, groceries, etc,etc.... It has led to a unintended byproduct of obesity... Instead of parking far away from the store, most fat people get themselves their little blue tag for their rear view mirror, park right in front of the door of the store and waddle in...:mad2::mad2::mad2:..

Think I am kiddin,,, just pay attention to who gets out of all the cars/trucks parked in handicapped spots.... Hint,,,99.992% will NOT be in a wheelchair...:no:....:(
You want to up your hatred for fatties go to a large store with a broken leg hobble around on crutches and nearly get run over by the fatties in the electric carts.:mad2::mad2:
 
How about those electric carts with extra large cupholders for a giant Mountain Dew?
 
You gotta distinguish between the 5-10lbs over crowd... which is almost everyone at some point, the "hefty" crowd, and the OMG HOW IS THAT EVEN POSSIBLE levels of fat.

With the latter, I simply am unable to envision how you couldn't look at yourself in the mirror and be so horrified that you pushed yourself to go to whatever extreme it took to change it. I'm not a health nut or weight obsessed and I find people who are annoying to say the least.... but my god when you can't even walk across a store or fit in normal chairs how can you just accept that?
 
Bryan's observations about portion size are on point, and CJane and I have started to split portions, with the same effect Bryan notes - no sense of being underfed at all. I don't mind the split-plate charge.

---

When I was college age, I could literally eat all the food I could stand to cram into my gullet, and gain no weight over my nominal (and "nominal" was not fat). Such is no longer the case (and has not been for some time), though, and habits are hard to change. It is difficult to change learned behavior - I love big, hearty food, the satisfying sensation of eating a big, thick burger, a rich, butter-and-sugar-dripping cinnamon roll.

On the other hand, I dislike the sense of being stuffed that so often accompanies eating even remotely like I have traditionally done, and I am trying to effect change... with limited success.

Eat less and exercise. Sounds simple, doesn't it?

---

Bill's story about the neighbor driving down the driveway to pick up the mail would sound ridiculous - in fact, it does sound ridiculous - but I've seen similar and worse.

Likewise here. College diet included almost everything.

A couple of factors:
1) Our metabolisms slow as we get older. Other changes occur in the body chemistry that affect how we metabolize food.
2) Portion sizes have gotten larger. "All you can eat" and "more food is better" dominate restaurant thinking. Compare the portions you get at an average restaurant here vs one in Europe.
3) Desk jobs and lack of exercise. 'nuff said. And as we head toward all-the-time-working with mobile devices, it gets worse.
4) Fat and sugar taste good. They stimulate the body into wanting more. Food producers know this - it adds to the portion size problem above. Stimulate demand by making the food taste "good" with fat and sugars.
5) TV, computers, games, other devices: you're not out exercizing, walking, exploring, flying, etc if you're sitting in a chair watching TV or on the computer.
6) Exercise is not "easy". It requires effort. Yet the modern population is constantly bombarded with messages that one should expend less effort or have things done *for* them. We want (or have become convinced to want) someone else to do things for us, a guaranteed utopian state.
7) Grains can be quite good, and they don't need to be bleached white bread or refined grains. Quinoa is a grain, but largely protien (not carbs). Brown & Wild Rice are grains. Corn can be considered a grain, but contains sugars. Those are healthy grains, but like everything else need to be eaten in moderation. "Good" grains can lower cholesterol and improve blood pressure (as part of a good diet).

Finally - this thread seems to have become a free-for-all against overweight folks. Rather than tossing insults, why not come up with ideas on how to solve the problem?
 
Finally - this thread seems to have become a free-for-all against overweight folks. Rather than tossing insults, why not come up with ideas on how to solve the problem?

It's simple, but people won't do it.

If it is too difficult to eat 'right', exercise more.
If it is too difficult to exercise, limit your calories to 1200/day.

I dropped 30lbs in six weeks last year by doing the second half of each of the above sentences.
 
Oversimplifying by a hair, but...

...basically, calories in vs. calories out.

Excess in = weight gain. 3,500 calories excess in will equal 1 lb. of gain.

Excess out = weight loss. 3,500 calories excess out will equal 1 lb. of loss.

100 calories a day change will equal a pound in either direction every 35 days - and it can really add up over years and decades.

The exact balance of carbohydrates/proteins/fat is not that big a factor - humans can deal with a wide range of proportions in these macronutrients. Within reason, of course.

Yes, in theory....but not necessarily in practice. You body reacts differently to different sources of calories.

http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20120626/all-calories-not-created-equal-study-suggests
 
It's simple, but people won't do it.

If it is too difficult to eat 'right', exercise more.
If it is too difficult to exercise, limit your calories to 1200/day.

I dropped 30lbs in six weeks last year by doing the second half of each of the above sentences.

Likewise. While I don't hit 30 in 6 weeks, I have accomplished 4 pounds per week at times.

Yes, in theory....but not necessarily in practice. You body reacts differently to different sources of calories.

http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20120626/all-calories-not-created-equal-study-suggests

Yes, you body reacts differently to the kind of food intake. I like a low glycemic-index diet, and ones with more grains. That said, as Steingar points out, if your caloric intake is below your burn rate, you will lose weight.
 
...
Finally - this thread seems to have become a free-for-all against overweight folks. Rather than tossing insults, why not come up with ideas on how to solve the problem?

I think it almost always come down to personal responsibility.

Sometimes obesity is medically related - in those cases, the individual needs to be responsible for considering whatever medical advice he or she has been given.

Sometimes it's genetics - in those cases the individual needs to be responsible for whatever methods make a difference.

Sometimes it's lifestyle related - in those cases the individual needs to be responsible for changing that lifestyle

I think in all cases - being brought up by parents that teach the ethics of personal responsibility and hard work is a really good start.

Communities all over have parks, walking trails, playgrounds, fitness programs, dietary programs, health and well-being programs, that are either free or relatively low cost. How many people take the personal responsibility to participate?
 
I think it almost always come down to personal responsibility.

Sometimes obesity is medically related - in those cases, the individual needs to be responsible for considering whatever medical advice he or she has been given.

Sometimes it's genetics - in those cases the individual needs to be responsible for whatever methods make a difference.

Sometimes it's lifestyle related - in those cases the individual needs to be responsible for changing that lifestyle

I think in all cases - being brought up by parents that teach the ethics of personal responsibility and hard work is a really good start.

Communities all over have parks, walking trails, playgrounds, fitness programs, dietary programs, health and well-being programs, that are either free or relatively low cost. How many people take the personal responsibility to participate?
Haha. Lived in VT briefly when my kid was a toddler, the state sent their 'nutrition counselor' or some around to library story times to teach nutrition. This woman was huge, not just big, but not fitting in chairs big. She addressed it, I guess she had to being in front of kids, by saying she ate too much of the 'right foods.' If the right foods at any quantity can do that they ain't the right foods. Anyway pathetic to have the state sending a fat lady around talking about eating healthy.
 
Haha. Lived in VT briefly when my kid was a toddler, the state sent their 'nutrition counselor' or some around to library story times to teach nutrition. This woman was huge, not just big, but not fitting in chairs big. She addressed it, I guess she had to being in front of kids, by saying she ate too much of the 'right foods.' If the right foods at any quantity can do that they ain't the right foods. Anyway pathetic to have the state sending a fat lady around talking about eating healthy.


That's funny and sad at the same time. That's where the "those that can, do and those that can't, teach" saying comes from. I don't expect to see gaunt vegans running those programs, but it sure does help to have a role model leading the class.
 
As Euro guy living here, I've often wondered where these giant portions come from. It's a huge part of the problem. I'm half Italian and there they eat 3 meals each dinner (one of them a pasta dish), yet very few people are fat. My other half is Swedish where almost all meals are sturdy farmers meals and contain potatoes and cream sauces - yet again very few people are fat.

Portion size and mobility must be the reason.

I think the American "eat all you can eat"-mentality stems back from the settler days. The pioneers were eager to show the people back home how much produce there was, how America was the land of abundance etc. It was also a way for many of these poor immigrants to distance themselves from poverty (which was fresh in their minds), by not having to limit or deny themselves ever again. I'm guessing. And it stuck and became part of the American way of doing things. "Everything is big in America".

We're paying the price now.

For me personally, it gets surreal almost every time I go to get a coffee. A small coffee at Starbucks is about the size of something I would classify as large in Europe. When I ask if I can get my coffee in that secret-small-cup-they-don't-advertise-and-will-almost-deny-they-have-until-you-push-them-hard they look at me funny. "It will cost the same as a tall", they say as if I'm missing out or maybe a little daft. Yeah, but I don't need 20oz of hot liquid with milk right now. Even then, that small secret cup is probably 5x bigger than a real espresso cup.

Or go to the cinema and the smallest soda cup is like 30oz. The smallest Milk Dud box is enough to feed a family etc.
 
Last edited:
I think there's a parallel to be drawn, in that all the **** beers that the American "mainstream" brewers crank out are encouraging excessive consumption also.

If I'm out working outside on warm Saturday afternoon, I can easily drink four of five Bud Selects because it's like water. But if I pop open a real beer---my current favorite is Schlafly's Golden Ale, a Belgian ale---I can't drink over one or two and I'm done for the day.

So I stay away from American "mainstream" beers just like many should stay away from 64 oz fountain drinks.
 
For me personally, it gets surreal almost every time I go to get a coffee. A small coffee at Starbucks is about the size of something I would classify as large in Europe. When I ask if I can get my coffee in that secret-small-cup-they-don't-advertise-and-will-almost-deny-they-have-until-you-push-them-hard they look at me funny. "It will cost the same as a tall", they say as if I'm missing out or maybe a little daft. Yeah, but I don't need 20oz of hot liquid with milk right now. Even then, that small secret cup is probably 5x bigger than a real espresso cup.

Or go to the cinema and the smallest soda cup is like 30oz. The smallest Milk Dud box is enough to feed a family etc.

First, coffee has like 0 calories, so I don't get the issue.
"I'd like a small water - I'm watching my calories"
"But sir, the large water has the same calories as a small water."
"But I'm from Europe, these sizes are too big."
"OK, here's your zero calorie small which has the same calories as the large."

Second, don't go to the movies. I think the last time I was in a movie theater was 2008.
 
First, coffee has like 0 calories, so I don't get the issue.
"I'd like a small water - I'm watching my calories"
"But sir, the large water has the same calories as a small water."
"But I'm from Europe, these sizes are too big."
"OK, here's your zero calorie small which has the same calories as the large."

Second, don't go to the movies. I think the last time I was in a movie theater was 2008.

Not when you drink them like I do - with half and half and sugar!
 
As Euro guy living here, I've often wondered where these giant portions come from. It's a huge part of the problem. I'm half Italian and there they eat 3 meals each dinner (one of them a pasta dish), yet very few people are fat. My other half is Swedish where almost all meals are sturdy farmers meals and contain potatoes and cream sauces - yet again very few people are fat.

Portion size and mobility must be the reason.

I think the American "eat all you can eat"-mentality stems back from the settler days. The pioneers were eager to show the people back home how much produce there was, how America was the land of abundance etc. It was also a way for many of these poor immigrants to distance themselves from poverty (which was fresh in their minds), by not having to limit or deny themselves ever again. I'm guessing. And it stuck and became part of the American way of doing things. "Everything is big in America".

We're paying the price now.

For me personally, it gets surreal almost every time I go to get a coffee. A small coffee at Starbucks is about the size of something I would classify as large in Europe. When I ask if I can get my coffee in that secret-small-cup-they-don't-advertise-and-will-almost-deny-they-have-until-you-push-them-hard they look at me funny. "It will cost the same as a tall", they say as if I'm missing out or maybe a little daft. Yeah, but I don't need 20oz of hot liquid with milk right now. Even then, that small secret cup is probably 5x bigger than a real espresso cup.

Or go to the cinema and the smallest soda cup is like 30oz. The smallest Milk Dud box is enough to feed a family etc.

Why pollute the coffee? Skip the milk.
 
If it's Starbucks coffee, you can't make it any worse ;)

Your half Italian part probably dies a little with every cup of that stuff you drink.
 
Want to know just how easy it is to be "obese," not just overweight?

bmi-chart2.jpg


Dan
 
I feel sorry for kids nowadays. Many of them probably have never tasted good food.

We would dig our own potatoes, onions, beets, carrots, snap beans, etc ... and cook them up that day. There's no describing it. When you cook fresh dug potatoes, it smells up the whole house with a delicious smell.

Fresh pork from a hog killin' is the same way. The smell permeates the entire house. Makes your tongue beat your brains out! :lol:
 
I feel sorry for kids nowadays. Many of them probably have never tasted good food.

We would dig our own potatoes, onions, beets, carrots, snap beans, etc ... and cook them up that day. There's no describing it. When you cook fresh dug potatoes, it smells up the whole house with a delicious smell.

Fresh pork from a hog killin' is the same way. The smell permeates the entire house. Makes your tongue beat your brains out! :lol:

We also walked 3 miles to school every day, even in the snow. ;)

Seriously, though, the food from the grocery store is not all that tasty. I got my first chance to go to the farmers market last week - been munching on tasty local zucchini, asparagus, cukes, and tomatoes all week. Huge difference in flavor.
 
We also walked 3 miles to school every day, even in the snow. ;)

Seriously, though, the food from the grocery store is not all that tasty. I got my first chance to go to the farmers market last week - been munching on tasty local zucchini, asparagus, cukes, and tomatoes all week. Huge difference in flavor.


Only 3 miles? man... you had it easy. :rofl:
 
Lack of willpower isn't the whole story. Of course you can control the amount of food you put in your mouth and swallow, but some people have appetites and cravings which other do not have. I'm convinced your appetite is regulated by something physiological because it can be affected by medications and other conditions. I have never had a hard time pushing back from the table, so to speak, in fact I have, at times had the opposite problem. I know it's not my iron willpower which keeps me on the thinner side. If you think restricting yourself from eating is difficult, wait until you know you should be eating but nothing appeals to you.
 
Reminds me of a Chris Rock joke from many years back: "We've got too much food in America! We've got so much that we're becoming allergic to it. Do you think anyone in Rwanda has a 'lactose intolerance'?"




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Reminds me of a Chris Rock joke from many years back: "We've got too much food in America! We've got so much that we're becoming allergic to it. Do you think anyone in Rwanda has a 'lactose intolerance'?"

Primary adult lactose intolerance in the Kivu Lake area: Rwanda and the bushi

Abstract
In order to investigate the ethnic differences of lactose intolerance in the Bantu and Hamitic races, lactose loading tests were performed on the populations living around Kivu Lake in central Africa. In addition to the blood sugar rise the identification of the urinary sugars after the loading test was found to be a useful criterion for the diagnosis of lactose intolerance. Two out of 27 Tutsi (7.8%), 21 out of 36 Hutu (58%), 17 out of 22 Twa (77%), and 27 out of 28 Shi (96%) were lactose intolerant. These frequencies are not linked with the actual milk-drinking habits. Of 3 Twa families, 2 were mostly lactose intolerant, whereas the third was predominantly tolerant. For 11 mixed-bred Hutu-Tutsi the frequency of lactose intolerance was 55%. The results are in favor of a genetic origin of lactose intolerance.​
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01844941

 
Last edited:
Doesn't matter. More calories out than in and you loose weight. Run the equation the other way and you gain.

Again, true...but a little simplistic. If your body quickly and easily converts one source of calories into fat, but expends more energy processing a different source of calories, the end result is not the same.

We've over-emphasized the wrong sources since the 60s, and we are seeing the results in obesity.
 
Again, true...but a little simplistic.

Yes, and I prefaced my original remark about "calories in vs. calories out" with that caveat.

Yes, there is a difference between 100 calories of celery vs 100 calories of lard, for the reason you stated.

But I would recommend ignoring that difference to keep things simple.

Weight loss is simple. But that's not to say its easy. The way we're wired can make it horrendously difficult - were it not so everyone would be at their ideal weight.

Calories in vs. calories out is a close enough approximation. No need to complicate it unnecessarily.
 
That also avoids satiety. Eat two eggs cooked in butter some salsa 250 calories maybe, or try eating 250 calories of Doritos. Big difference in how hungry you will still be immediately and in the near future. Also big difference in what your body does with carbs vs fat.
Yes, and I prefaced my original remark about "calories in vs. calories out" with that caveat.

Yes, there is a difference between 100 calories of celery vs 100 calories of lard, for the reason you stated.

But I would recommend ignoring that difference to keep things simple.

Weight loss is simple. But that's not to say its easy. The way we're wired can make it horrendously difficult - were it not so everyone would be at their ideal weight.

Calories in vs. calories out is a close enough approximation. No need to complicate it unnecessarily.
 
The answer seems simple to me.

Pass a law requiring that there be live tapeworm larvae in all sodas, fast foods and other "empty calorie" foodstuffs.

Why is it that I always have to come up with all the answers in life?
 
Lack of willpower isn't the whole story. Of course you can control the amount of food you put in your mouth and swallow, but some people have appetites and cravings which other do not have. I'm convinced your appetite is regulated by something physiological because it can be affected by medications and other conditions. I have never had a hard time pushing back from the table, so to speak, in fact I have, at times had the opposite problem. I know it's not my iron willpower which keeps me on the thinner side. If you think restricting yourself from eating is difficult, wait until you know you should be eating but nothing appeals to you.

Are you of the opinion that this phenomenon is limited to the last 30 or so years?

The reality is that as a society we've become sedentary at work and at home. Also, we eat more convenience food, which is typically of higher calorie value than what it replaced.
 
The answer seems simple to me.

Pass a law requiring that there be live tapeworm larvae in all sodas, fast foods and other "empty calorie" foodstuffs.

Why is it that I always have to come up with all the answers in life?

We're just lucky you're here. ;)
 
In weight control, that almost always guarantees failure. Understanding the complexity of good calories vs. bad calories is ultimately the key.

http://blog.foodnetwork.com/healthyeats/2012/02/27/good-calories-bad-calories/

I disagree.

Hypothetical conversation:

"I really need to lose some weight!"

"Simple - eat less calories and/or burn off more and you will lose weight".

"But I hear there are different kinds of calories."

"Maybe. But just eat less calories and/or burn off more and you will lose weight".

"But what's all this I hear about Atkins and Paleo and low carb?"

"Don't worry about those, just eat less calories and/or burn off more and you will lose weight".

"But what about glycemic index? Satiation quotient? Exercising in my fat burning zone?"

"Disregard all that, just eat less calories and/or burn off more and you will lose weight".

"No, its all too complicated. I've tried everything and nothing works."

"Well, have you tried just eating less calories and/or burning off more?"

"No. If only it were that simple!"

Unfortunately, making is seem more complicated than it is is a good way to sell books.
 
Last edited:
I disagree.

Hypothetical conversation:

"I really need to lose some weight!"

"Simple - eat less calories and/or burn off more and you will lose weight".

"But I hear there are different kinds of calories."

"Maybe. But just eat less calories and/or burn off more and you will lose weight".

"But what's all this I hear about Atkins and Paleo and low carb?"

"Don't worry about those, just eat less calories and/or burn off more and you will lose weight".

"But what about glycemic index? Satiation quotient? Exercising in my fat burning zone?"

"Disregard all that, just eat less calories and/or burn off more and you will lose weight".

"No, its all too complicated. I've tried everything and nothing works."

"Well, have you tried just eating less calories and/or burning off more?"

"No. If only it were that simple!"

Unfortunately, making is seem more complicated than it is is a good way to sell books.


Man. You MUST know our former family doctor. Those are his words of wisdom, exactly.

Once we moved from an agrarian society, to a manufacturing society, people expended FAR less calories a day but eating habits are like sleeping habits. You grow into them and that's that.

If we all farmed, raised, mined, or manufactured by physical labor - instead of sat at desks and typed code, answered calls, wrote reports, or other sedentary tasks, like riding/driving trucks, more burning of calories would replace the fat with toned muscle.

With the helicoptering of children, we have moved to a society where parents who encourage unstructured playing, of any kind, are considered suspicious, so why would children grow up any way but overeating and under exercising?
 
Weight loss is simple. But that's not to say its easy.
That is a very important distinction. Some of the people that say it is easy to lose weight most likely would be a fat slob if it was as hard for them as it is for some others.


Calories in vs. calories out is a close enough approximation. No need to complicate it unnecessarily.

But I still don't think it is quite that simple. I would like to see a study where they follow pairs of people. Take two people of similar height, race, gender and other similar factors, except that one is obese and one is skinny. Have them perform perform as similar exercise as possible. Have them get the same amount of sleep. Feed them identical diets. Then measure the effect on their weight and fat content.

Some of us "heavy" people are convinced that we can eat less and exercise more than some skinny people and still gain weight. I'd like to see that put to the test. If it turns out that weight really is directly and proportionately related only to the diet and exercise, then we lose an excuse (and excuses make bad behavior easier and/or more acceptable). Has there ever been a study like that? I do know that there have been studies of identical twins that were separated at birth and raised in different circumstances and they invariably grow up with the same general weight and health profile. So genes definitely play a part. But how much, I don't know.
 
Back
Top