Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Health nazis (rant)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:32 AM
Original message
Health nazis (rant)
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 04:36 AM by undergroundpanther
When I see shit pushed under the banner of public health..Items like women must live like they are"pre-preganant forever ,Or the FDA wants to control portion sizes in restaurants, All the junk science about weight and fat.. I can't help but think back to the NAZIS and their obsessions with public health,appearance"purity"and reproduction..

Nazis were "health obsessed" among other sicko things ... and the shit I see being touted by the FDA and some self righteous fat phobics is too similar to what the NAZIS tried to push onto germans for their own good years ago.There are similarities in the control tactics used.. Do we really want the state nosing in,regulating what we eat and how much ,what we do and when,how much we can weigh,who we have sex with,what we can and cannot do for "our own good"??,Do you really want to give the state the permission to force us all into a " divine order" where everyone does as the state says ,do you want everyone forced to be skinny,do you want the state making us into their leaders self serving model of the perfect pure super body while the rest who can't fit this'ideal'suffer for their inability to "measure up" to some crazy ideal of what a "healthy" person of "good stock" might be in some social engineer assholes' mind??

People who feel morally superior to fat people ought to get off their moral ego trip and realize obesity isn't JUST about SELF CONTROL.Nobody knows why some people get fat. IT is not SIMPLE. IF it was as simple as dieting,than people would not be fast after dieting.90 percent of dieters REGAIN it. What's really happing is the state is seeking a way to INTRUDE into our lives under the banner of"public health"...And You squawking self righteous fat phobics are opening the door when you support this"health based" "for your own good" bullshit as if it was the state's job to tell people you think take up too much space how to live .
**************************************************************
But this is NOT a coincidence. The following logic closed-loop quite simply explains the identity, which exists regardless of the political credo:

* Public health needs a strong state.
* The strong state needs broad powers in order to implement public health. Personal liberties and freedom of choice are the largest obstacles to such implementation, and they must be eliminated by submitting them to public health values at first, and by eventual abrogation when they are sufficiently weakened.
* The strong state needs to justify its actions. For political reasons, that justification must appear rational. This is where junk science, for example, comes in.
* Of course, public health, even when the issue is in the ascendant, is not necessarily the sole or primary motivation for those who seek to build a strong state. Public health is, however, the perfect rationalization for the state intrusion into the lives of citizens. Such intrusion is essential for those who seek, for whatever reasons, to expand state power.
* The strong state also needs healthy citizens to maximize income and minimize expenditures.
* For all the above reasons, the strong state needs public health. Any long term social consequences are of no concern for the politicians in power today.


http://www.forces.org/writers/bookcase/files/morenazi.h...



Notice in particular how the elimination of homosexuals and other forms of sexual deviance is treated as a matter of public heath. This isnt just a moral issue, its a question of medical science: elimination of sexual deviance is like the elimination of parasites, viruses, and bacteria. In this way, itss no longer necessary to feel any human compassion for those who are targeted by the state. They arent people, they are a disease. Their suffering is necessary for the greater good.
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/223362.htm

Be careful what you ask for from the state on behalf of OTHER PEOPLE'S OWN GOOD..,you might get more than you bargained for!!!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. Eating another box of cookies right now.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:52 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. LOL!
I want some really fattening cheese. Got any Brie? :9



:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:58 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Mmmmm, brie and camembert.... llllllaoaolllllllllllllllllll
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Do ya got anything to say about the POINTS I was making?
Or are you gonna be SNARKY?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:12 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. hey hey hey, ok look, if they are trying that, then that is bad, but I
don't really know much about the subject, I am the Random_Australian after all.

Anyway, for the generalisable points you made: Of course weight loss isn't all about self control; in fact that is taken as given here, so I did not think I needed to add anything to it; the rest of it is outta my scope - would you know about 'portion control' here? Though I must admit that now I hear of it, it does seem a little weird.

That said, I would also like to say this:
- America has the worlds highest obesity rates.
- Obesity is generally considered a small-to-moderate health risk

Therefore, some measures at some point out to be taken to do something. However, I would not agree to the reduction of civil liberties for that purpose.

There you go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:17 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. Cool
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:27 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. Is weight control = self control really something people think over there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #17
34. Yes, indeed it is
And people are belittled, chastised and ridiculed for their lack of self control.

What's the common Australian perspective on this? I'd love to hear!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
conflictgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #17
100. Absolutely, but it's even worse than that
Being overweight is presented as not a mild to moderate health risk, but a very serious health risk here. I have had doctors tell me when I was 11 pounds above my "ideal" weight according to some medical chart that I was obese and needed to lay off the McDonalds. Obviously I never went back to that doctor!

People here have such an extreme attitude toward weight and I think that's one reason this nation is so obese. (The other big cause I suspect is the processed food.) And yes, anyone who is overweight is viewed by many as having a lack of self-control and a general weakness. There is a pretty horrible moral stigma attached to being overweight here, despite the fact that the statistical majority of us *are* overweight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:05 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. Swamp?
Do you got anything to say about tHE STATE telling us what to eat and how much? or is that kind of state intrusion OK with you, is it because you are not fat you make snarky jokes ? or you don't care,or what? Just askin. I didn't post this so people could make food/fat snarks.Or health consious nannies could bash people ok?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:18 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. I guess I'll leave your thread then
:hi:

At least I kicked it for you.

:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #10
35. I think the attitudes you mention are a big problem
And I think the food manufacturing corporations should be held accountable for the synthetic and over-processed crap they pass off as food.

You can't say anything about a person's sex, color, religion or nation of origin, but fat jokes are always allowed.

We are a very, very sick and twisted society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varkam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:40 AM
Response to Original message
2. The data that I've seen...
concludes that 64% of the variability in body weight is accounted for by genetics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
132. And also, being fat isn't dangerous
Unless you're morbidly obese, it's not actually dangerous.

What is dangerous is weight fluctuation. It's very, very dangerous. It leads to things like heart disease.

Heavy people are more likely to have weight fluctuation because we keep pushing them to lose weight.

"Scientists" say over and over that being heavy is dangerous but the data don't say that. The data very, very, painfully, embarrassingly clearly say that weight fluctuation is what is dangerous. But nutritionists for whatever reason have what one scientist called an "anorexic ideation" that is, to be blunt, killing people all the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:16 AM
Response to Reply #132
158. Weight fluctuation can indeed be dangerous.
The hormones or whatever crap is in the body doesn't don't know what to do with constant change, sometimes, you need to remind it hey change happens all the time, you'll cope... the body can do weird things.

Even healthy weight loss can have complications. I went from maybe 225 down to 185 in a little over a year, really do feel a lot healthier, but my gallbladder needs to be removed, I had some little chest pains like pin piercing my right side, got fluroscopy and it was a bad gallbladder.

My doctor said it was the wieght loss, that I was doing everything right. I was already eating the recommended way to avoid gall bladder problems, I eat very low levels of fat, mostly the good fats at that, and though I drank lots of coffee that was actually something that was associated with less gallbladder problems. The only thing I did that was linked to the gallstone/sludge issues was loose weight.

But it's no big deal, the gallbladder surgery will be in and out, I won't even have to stay overnight in the hostpital or anything.

But I can imagine what crap my body would be giving me if I went on fad diets every year or so, gained and lost, gained and lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HipLibMom Donating Member (8 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. I soooo agree with you...
When I saw that stuff on the news the other day about regulating portion control in restaurants, I was like, "WTF???"

I don't need a nanny gov't telling me how much I can or can't eat - If I want to eat a whole effin' pizza, I will - but I know better, and I know when to say "when"... but there are times that I do want that monster ice cream cone from Cold Stone Creamery, and I don't want Big Bro telling me that I can't have it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:50 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. The Nazis wanted to have perfect stock
For their human breeding programs..
When I see the state telling doctors to treat all women of breeding age as pre pregnant and I see all the health obsessions ,the haughty self righteous smug people and all this pseudoscience..People putting this obscene emotional pressure on each other as kids and adults to be like this ideal image of "healthy" or thin ..it damn well looks like nazi social engineering to me,all so the state can build their perfect race.And considering Bush's questionable ties to Nazis I'm not calling it a mere coinkidink.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #5
24. Hitler started first anti-smoking campaign
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taxloss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #24
95. There were anti-smoking campaigns in England in the 1600s.
So that can't be the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #24
130. Hitler was King James I of England?
...Because his "Counterblaste to Tobacco" (1602) was the actual first (recorded) official anti-tobacco campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
49. The Nazis treated human beings like animals
as breeding stock to be controlled as if they were a preferred purebred breed of horse, dog, or cattle. The neocons are trying to replicate that.

Remember: Liberals treat animals like people; conservatives treat people like animals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bumblebee1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
135. I am still learning when to say "when."
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 12:51 PM by bumblebee1
Both my husband and co-worker know when I get full before I do sometimes. I have this look on my face that says, "Should I finish it or not?" I don't want a nanny state telling me what, when and how much to eat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #3
182. One thing I wish restaurants would do is to offer different portion sizes
While it's nice to have a doggie bad for lunch tomorrow, I do wish that they offered a "small" and "large" when ordering dinner at restaurants.. Often, by the time I finish my sald, I am not even hungry, and end up taking most of my dinner home.. :)

Some places, my husband and I have split a dinner.. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:45 AM
Response to Original message
4. Here's some more to ponder..



It's interesting to think of the obesity/poverty/stress/size stigma and starvation/obesity issue in a bigger framework than the usual stuff you hear about the demon of obesity and the magical willpower games people play to be thin or bash fat people with....

It's worth asking questions about coorelations..I bring up some here considering the levels of depression and obsessive compulsion and other"disorders" in America,and the way obesity is linked to a reaction to starvation now that dieting since the 1960's has been popular ever notice the obesity statistics have gone up in the population ? Maybe this"obesity epidemic all began with "twiggy"?And has grown the more thin became"in" culturally..
Coincidence? I dunno but it's pretty damning evidence to me.
Did you know a 1600 calorie diet was considered a starvation level food intake in the 1940's? And most average diets focus on 1200 calorie limits nowadays.Starvation diets dip as low as 500 calories..Why is that..have people'evolved'to use less calories since the 1940's or have they been socially engineered regarding their beliefs about food and conditioned by diets and fat phobic peers to lower their own bodies calorie burning set point and hate themselves for it?? Profit soars when people are unhappy.

Could it be thin is in is a way to not only profit off misery but to keep a population irritated messed up psychologically and sick enough to not be able to bond with one another as equal human beings.just enough to reduce brainpower and dumb us down in teen years,just enough to keep us desperate,on a biochemical level so we never become a threat so the'elites' can feel secure dominating us all?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lindisfarne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. I agree with the part of the rant about serving sizes in restaurant
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 05:13 AM by lindisfarne
but although genetics plays a role, the availability of food, as well as the SUGGESTION of food everywhere on billboards, windows, etc. does play a role, as does serving size. The French worship food, yet their serving sizes are smaller, and research shows that people will eat until the plate is empty (they've had sneaky bowls that kept refilling themselves vs. regular bowls and people with the sneaky bowls just kept eating; same is true for amount of food on a plate).

I lived in a 3rd world country for a while and lost a whole lot of weight. My genetics didn't change at all. What changed was 1) how easy it was to obtain food; 2) the amount of processed food; 3) the number of food advertisements I was exposed to; and 4) the amount of energy I expended in a day (fewer elevators; walked everywhere; etc.). Had I chosen, I could have simply bought food where all the westerners did and it would have been fairly easy (albeit much more expensive) to obtain food (much of it processed). I didn't do this. I also, however, noticed the lack of advertisements suggesting I ate made a huge difference to my hunger level.

That being said, I'm not sure the attempt to reduce serving sizes at fast food restaurants is going to make a difference. People can always order 6 hamburgers. Even at Burger King or McDonalds, you can make healthy choices, but people don't - the only way they will is through education and lack of availability of the unhealthy choices. I don't often hit these places, but a $1 Whopper Junior, minus the mayo (and onion), with extra pickle, isn't really any different from the hamburgers people make at home (maybe they buy the extra lean ground beef and a whole wheat bun, but many don't). Of course, you forgo the fries, the apple pies, the shakes, etc.

I also have chosen to not own a car because that way, I'm forced to bike or walk for errands (with an occasional rental to handle things that are difficult otherwise - although most people would be amazed how much they can carry in a backpack). I'm probably 20 pounds lighter as a result of this decision over the years.

I meant to reply to the OP but as for the message I replied to: people were more active decades ago, thus they needed more calories. Starvation occurs when your caloric intake is lower than your caloric need over a long enough time. If someone burns only 1200 calories a day, they don't need more than that as intake. (Of course, it's pretty hard to get enough nutrients on that many calories so it's best to up your energy output so you can up your energy intake).

Genetics doesn't change this equation - although there are some who seem to burn more calories simply sitting than do others (but this is complicated, as a very muscular person will burn more than someone with little muscle mass simply because muscle burns more energy; also, some studies have suggested that at least some people who tend to not have weight problems burn off weight through fidgeting, standing when someone else might sit, etc.) It's not simple, I'll give you that: I'm one of those people who would have done well 400 years ago as my body is a very efficient user of food energy - which means I tend toward putting on weight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:15 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. well...


< The French worship food, yet their serving sizes are smaller, and research shows that people will eat until the plate is empty (they've had sneaky bowls that kept refilling themselves vs. regular bowls and people with the sneaky bowls just kept eating; same is true for amount of food on a plate).>

Well do you think the STATE should regulate this?

<I lived in a 3rd world country for a while and lost a whole lot of weight. My genetics didn't change at all. What changed was 1) how easy it was to obtain food; 2) the amount of processed food; and 3) the number of food advertisements I was exposed to. Had I chosen, I could have simply bought food where all the westerners did and it would have been fairly easy (albeit much more expensive) to obtain food (much of it processed). I didn't do this. >

Well maybe your body responds to calorie restriction, HOw much dieting have you done in your life?Some people who diet repeatedly lower their set points to the level where 500 calories is enough to gain.And when metabolism gets that slow it is impossible to lose.


<I also, however, noticed the lack of advertisements suggesting I ate made a huge difference to my hunger level.>

Than should we get companies to Curb ads? Should we deny them billboards and TV time?

<I also have chosen to not own a car because that way, I'm forced to bike or walk for errands (with an occasional rental to handle things that are difficult otherwise - although most people would be amazed how much they can carry in a backpack). I'm probably 20 pounds lighter as a result of this decision over the years.>

Not everyone can make those lifestyle choices because the options are not there..You cannot blame them for this. Not everyone can live such a lifestyle some people don't live in places conducive to a lifestyle like yours.
Also some people exercise alot but do not lose fat.Your body is unique and yours deals with weight better than others do ,everyone is not the same genetically personality,life situations,metabolisms,nutritional needs etc. and they cannot be treated as carbon copies..When people think in one size fits all it sometimes hurts people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lindisfarne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #12
97. You seem to have missed this statement: That being said, I'm not sure the
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 09:04 PM by lindisfarne
attempt to reduce serving sizes at fast food restaurants is going to make a difference. "

You seem to think I'm hostile to your criticism of the FDA regulating food size. I don't think my reply indicated that at all. My reply did suggest that while genetics is certainly a factor, it doesn't totally explain weight gain.

Many people have said to me when I've moved to a new city: you won't be able to make it without a car. Indeed, I've proven them wrong (and I myself had doubts when I first moved to Southern California). My commitment to my own health and my commitment to the environment made it possible. The vast majority of the world's population gets by without cars; it is indeed a choice people can make (or they can choose to have only 1 car, or they can choose to walk (pulling a wagon or wearing a backpack) to buy groceries or do other errands. These are choices. If you have kids, they can walk with you. My sister has 2 kids and makes these kinds of choices, although none of her neighbors do (they would claim it's impossible, yet she manages - the kids get exercise and more importantly, grow up thinking that walking places is normal. I really respect how much she does to ensure her kids get regular exercise. Time spent walking as family also accomplishes far more than getting exercise - it's time to talk with one another as well.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lindisfarne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #97
112. 50 years ago, a far smaller percentage of the US pop. was obese.
A change in genes cannot explain the increase in obesity. Lifestyle changes must. That isn't to say that some people don't have a genetic propensity to use food energy efficiently (which means they have a tendency to gain more weight than someone who doesn't have this genetic propensity). But 50 years ago, their ancestors had this same genetic propensity, yet as a population, weren't as obese as we are now. Lifestyle factors such as types of food eaten, amounts of food eaten, and physical activity explain the change over time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deFaultLine Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:49 AM
Response to Reply #8
19. You would be surprised at which genes...
play a crucial role in how much weight a person gains and it's a direct cause from the environment that triggers much of what goes on.

I'd suggest doing some reading about the effects of vitamin d upon weight gain and other health problems. The main stream health care in this country is decades behind of where we should be...you can't trust anything they say.

Also take a look at the effect of trans fats on health as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lindisfarne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #19
98. You missed my statement: "although genetics plays a role"
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 09:09 PM by lindisfarne
I didn't deny that genetics plays a role. I can assure you that genetics isn't the only factor although it is certainly a factor.

Unfortunately, some people do use food energy very efficiently which does translate into a tendency to gain weight, whereas others use it less efficiently. This fact, however, doesn't offset the dangers of being overweight: these people simply have to find ways to balance their energy intake (calories) with their energy output in order to avoid putting on excess amounts of weight. Increased exercise is a way to increase one's energy output so that someone doesn't have to severely limit their food intake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deFaultLine Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #98
106. Likewise...
you missed my point. I won't bore you with my qualifications to make any statement about health, just that I have formal education about it.

Reread my post and think about why people lose weight in the summer and gain it in winter. Energy expenditures should be higher in winter with the body burning calories to stay warm.

Further, I would ask anyone as to whether hypovitaminosis D can lead to obesity.

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/79/5/820

Metabolic Syndrome X is rampant in the US with Type 2 diabetes being detected in kids as young as 10 years old.

It ain't what you think it is...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lindisfarne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #106
109. Sorry, I still don't understand. I'm sure you're not saying genetics
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 12:55 AM by lindisfarne
accounts for 100% of obesity.

I'm quite unclear as to what you are saying with your short statements. Genetically, Americans aren't very different from the people in countries from which Americans have come. Researchers have compared various groups of people who live in the US vs. people who live in the country of origin of their ancestors. Dietary differences and amount of physical activity have explained why the Pima Indians of Arizona as a group are so much more overweight than the virtually identical group who live in Mexico. The same has been shown with Japanese and Chinese immigrants.

Clearly, although genetics can contribute to a person's propensity to gain weight, it isn't the only factor contributing to obesity - life style factors also play a very important role. A far smaller percentage of the US population was obese just 50 years ago - surely you don't claim that significant genetic changes have occurred in such a small time span? Clearly, lifestyle changes must contribute to the rise in obesity over this time.

For example (http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/pima/obesity/obes... )
Scientists use the "thrifty gene" theory proposed in 1962 by geneticist James Neel to help explain why many Pima Indians are overweight. Neel's theory is based on the fact that for thousands of years populations who relied on farming, hunting and fishing for food, such as the Pima Indians, experienced alternating periods of feast and famine. Neel said that to adapt to these extreme changes in caloric needs, these people developed a thrifty gene that allowed them to store fat during times of plenty so that they would not starve during times of famine.

This gene was helpful as long as there were periods of famine. But once these populations adopted the typical Western lifestyle, with less physical activity, a high fat diet, and access to a constant supply of calories, this gene began to work against them, continuing to store calories in preparation for famine. Scientists think that the thrifty gene that once protected people from starvation might also contribute to their retaining unhealthy amounts of fat.

The Pima Indians maintained much of their traditional way of life and economy until the late 19th century, when their water supply was diverted by American farmers settling upstream, according to Ravussin. At that time, their 2,000-year-old tradition of irrigation and agriculture was disrupted, causing poverty, malnutrition and even starvation. The Pima community had to fall back on the lard, sugar and white flour the U.S. government gave them to survive, says Ravussin.

During this century people world-wide experienced more prosperity and leisure time, and less physical work. Since the 1920s, all Americans have consumed more fat and sugar and less starch and fiber. The greatest changes have occurred in consumption of fat. In the 1890s, the traditional Pima Indian diet consisted of only about 15 percent fat and was high in starch and fiber, but currently almost 40 percent of the calories in the Pima diet is derived from fat. As the typical American diet became more available on the reservation after the war, people became more overweight.
===========================================================================================
"The only way to correct obesity is to eat less fat and exercise regularly," Ravussin says. Recently, Ravussin visited a Pima community living as their ancestors did in a remote area of the Sierra Madre mountains of Mexico. These Mexican Pimas are genetically the same as the Pima Indians of Arizona. Out of 35 Mexican Pimas studied, only three had diabetes and the population as a whole was not overweight, according to Ravussin.
===========================================================================================
"We've learned from this study of the Mexican Pimas that if the Pima Indians of Arizona could return to some of their traditions, including a high degree of physical activity and a diet with less fat and more starch, we might be able to reduce the rate, and surely the severity, of unhealthy weight in most of the population," Ravussin says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deFaultLine Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #109
145. Thrifty genotype...
I am familiar with Neel's Hypothesis and all I can say is that it is based on the idea that humans evolved to store fat for times of food shortage. There is no debating this since humans are fairly chubby as far as large mammals go. However, the problem arises since humans in a forager culture did not experience starvation and the mythical feast and famine cycle did not exist for these humans.

The hypothesis arose from a mistaken belief about the conditions of human evolution in that it was not based upon actual observation. The observed facts are that skeletal specimens such as Cro-Magnons and Neandertals were robust...starvation was not a condition that drove human evolution.

Neel had to re-write his original 1962 publication after it was discovered that Type 1 diabetes was due to an immune response to a viral infection. At this point in time, the hypothesis is limited to Type 2 diabetes. I believe that in time the hypothesis will be completely abandoned and I am part of this effort myself.

I am also aware of the Pima Indians as they have been extensively studied. The problem I believe is that while the studies that have been done on them do demonstrate that Pima north of the border do have higher rates of diabetes than those south of the border, the controls are lacking to actually prove anything since there are many variables introduced when Pima became settled. One of these variable is the probable decrease in Vitamin D levels with the decrease in sun exposure. Another variable with the introduction of commodity foods was the was the high trans-fat content in the foods. There is also a significant correlation with trans-fat intake and the incidence of Type 2 Diabetes.

For something about this:
http://www.ajcn.org and look for Jorge Salmeron to get a good look at total fat intake and the lack of correlation with diabetes. However, the trans-fat intake does increase the risk significantly.

Another reference you may find interesting is found in the Current Anthropology:

The Non-Thrifty Genotype
John S. Allen, Susan M. Cheer
Current Anthropology, Vol. 37, No. 5 (Dec., 1996) , pp. 831-842
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #4
36. You may have something there
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 10:00 AM by Juniperx
You know, a tan was once something considered to be a sign of a lower class... workers who had to be toiling out in the sun all day got a tan, not the dandy folk who were lounging in the shade all day being catered to and spoiled.

Then one day Coco Chanel came home from a vacation in the south of France with a tan, and it all became so very vogue.

Additionally, it was once a sign of upper-crustiness to be fat. Only the wealthy could afford enough food to be fat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:22 AM
Response to Original message
15. So when are you going to rant at the corporations that push product?
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 05:23 AM by Hekate
By now I reflexively distrust anything that comes out of the Bush mal-administration. But having said that, here's my own rant on the commodification of food by corporations.

Food has become product sold by corporations, whose only reason for existence is profit.

THAT is the source of the problem. We can argue forever about Personal Responsibility versus Big Brother and still end up nowhere.

Ask yourself my favorite question: Who does it serve? Or as my friend the accountant says in her gentle voice: Follow the money.

FOOD HAS BECOME A CORPORATE PRODUCT. ALL ELSE FOLLOWS FROM THAT.

Corporations exist to make money. Holding steady seems to be anathema to them -- they have to show continually-increasing profit or they feel they're failing. They've abandoned the idea that they exist to provide necessary goods or services -- now they all believe their only reason for existence is to provide profit to their shareholders.

How do you endlessly increase profits for your industry in a relatively stable population?

You push product by advertising.
You push product by increasing demand for increased portion size.
You push product by product placement (soda machines in schools).
You push product by adding the ingredient you manufacture (high fructose corn syrup, corn starch, corn syrup solids, dextrose, maltose, sucrose, fructose, etc.) into everything possible.

Ever really LOOK AT the Carl's Jr. ads?

Who does it serve?
Follow the money.

Personally, I want corporations heavily regulated, because they don't act responsibly without it.

Then you can talk to me about the average person's personal responsibility for what they put in their mouth.

Hekate

stupid typo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #15
40. I agree with you
I also think we need to end government subsidies for growing corn. That is why corn syrup is so prevalent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #40
140. No--corn syrups
are used because of price supports on cane sugar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:25 AM
Response to Original message
16. I agree. People should be left the fuck alone about their personal choices
as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult. Food, drugs, sex, porn, etc. That goes for all kinds of things which get the moral nanny state crowd -of all varieties- worked up in a frenzy.

But I don't think the FDA is going to be regulating portion sizes in restaurants any time soon. Shit, not in this country.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:40 AM
Response to Original message
18. Let's assume the motives are for public health & not control:
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 05:45 AM by rucky
This we know:

Obesity is increasing.
Portion size is increasing.
There is a correlation between the two.

Obesity is a health risk.

We ask the government to reglate industries when they pose a public health risk. It becomes public when there are items offered in the marketplace that contribute to obesity that the general public is not aware of.

We ask the government to regulate industies that pollute.
We ask the government to regulate pharmaceutical products, and anything else people put on their skin and in their mouths - because we would like to know that it is safe, or how much constitutes safe.
We ask the government to make a minimum age for smoking and put warning labels on cigarettes.

A business can make something that is safe to consume at recommended levels, but unsafe beyond those levels.

The trouble is, there are waaaaaay too many factors involved in determining a proper portion size - BUT there are foods offered as a single portion that can obviously be seen as a health risk.

How about this as a "portion control":

Businesses cannot serve a single portion of food that exceeds the RDA for sat. fat & cholesterol. But restaurants serve beyond those levels of fat & cholesterol all the time in a single portion. As for RDA-s, there is a TON of clinical work done to determine them.

Would it be "nazi" like to stop that practice? If you want to eat more, nobody's stopping you from buying two meals(which is what most people are eating anyways) or every item on the Dollar menu.

I don't buy the slippery slope on this issue. Nutrition science is NOT junk science - unless you are taking the phrase literally (the science of junk).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #18
157. The voice of reason.
I knew it would be here somewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMMNG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:58 AM
Response to Original message
20. I find it obscene
That the political party that complains about the "nanny state" Democrats is the one that:

-Tells women to consider themselves "pre-pregnant" from the time of their first menstrual period until they hit menopause, and to treat their body as a shrine for fetuses by never eating wrong/taking substances that might harm potential fetuses/acting in a way that might harm potential fetuses.
-Insists on "abstinence only" sex education that denies teenagers facts that can protect them from deadly diseases, and tells them what they can and cannot do with their own bodies.
-Is shutting down womens' access to medical procedures and birth control state by state, hospital by hospital and pharmacy by pharmacy via laws and religious rhetoric.
-Is writing discrimination into state Constitutions and making a second attempt to write it into the federal Constitution.

etc, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
allalone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #20
94. yeah you know
treat your prepregnant body like a shrine, like the bush daughters do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMMNG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #94
103. Yeah
Any babies they have will likely be victims of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. :cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemExpat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 06:07 AM
Response to Original message
21. I don't at all mind good governments actively promoting good health,
but I agree that the way in which these people go about it is totally disgusting, condescending and offensive.

DemEx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #21
62. Yup, that says it all
Most people in this nation are utterly clueless on the most basic of health issues; what to eat, what to eat in moderation, even things as basic as counting calories.
The real issue is education-- and getting rid of HFCs in every damned thing :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cactusrose Donating Member (59 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 07:07 AM
Response to Original message
22. I agree with you
And the obsession with thinness has been one of the major factors in the rise in obesity. When people don't get the nutrition they need, they will tend to overeat. Unfortunately, in the US food usually is over processed so someone can make more money off it. Contrary to what corporations and the ad industry wants people to believe, eating something like a fruit roll-up is NOT the same as eating an apple or some other fruit.

The Chinese have a far more sophistical and accurate understanding of weight than allopathic doctors in the West have. For one thing, the Chinese recognize that there can be many different causes for a person being underweight or overweight. One of the possible causes of obesity is Qi deficiency. Qi, pronounced "chee", is roughly though inadequately translated as "energy". You know how Westerners repeat "if you want to lose weight, exercise" like it's some sort of catechism? In cases of Qi deficiency, the energy to be more active simply is not there. People often will try to get more energy by consuming more food. Forget having enough energy to exercise. These people desperately are trying to get enough energy just to do the things they have to do each day. This pushing themselves to get through the day when they really need better nutrition AND REST is a snowballing situation. Pushing oneself to keep going can be very hard on and weaken the Spleen. (I'm talking about the TCM concept of the Spleen, not the anatomical spleen.) Since the Spleen plays a major role in Qi production in the body, as it gets weaker and weaker from the person pushing him/ herself, there is less and less Qi available. Since the Spleen also plays a major role in digestion, the person is getting less and less nutrition in spite of how much the person eats. It's a snowballing situation.

The Chinese also don't go by some magic size number. The proper weight for an individual isn't based on what size someone else thinks the person should be but on what's best for the individual. This can vary a lot. TCM (Traditional Chinese Medicine) looks at the total picture. As long as the person doesn't have any health imbalances, the person is healthy regardless of the person's size.

Westerners tend to regard obesity as a cause of various health problems. TCM looks at obesity as just one of many symptoms. In other words, even though obesity and high blood pressure tend to occur together (there are exceptions), it's not the obesity causing the high blood pressure. Both the obesity and the high blood pressure are coming from the same underlying cause or what the Chinese call a "Root". They're both "Branches" of the same Root. This has some very important ramifications for health.

Say for example that a person manages to lose weight through an overly restrictive diet. That's only taken care of a symptom. The underlying Root is still present, and it's going to continue to manifest in various other symptoms until the Root is addressed. Putting a person on a diet to lose weight and not addressing that underlying Root can result in the death of the person. Especially when that diet is making the underlying Root worse.

This is a complex subject that I've barely touched upon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
23. I'm sick to death of being preached at 24/7 by talking heads,
planted news stories and the inevitable Newsweek half-a-magazine-filled-with-drug-related-crap articles. Since when has the diet tip of the day deserved a spot on national news coverage? Oh yeah, I forgot, it was right after Brangelina's baby and just before coverage of Iraq. Anyhow, I've had it with the food police and drug ads. There's a way to lose weight. We all know it. Eat less, exercise more. And, by the way, who feeds the super-obese? Just wondering. Every now and then there's a sad, sad story about a 900 lb. guy who can't get out of bed. One guy said he doesn't eat a bowl of cereal for breakfast, he eats a box. Not in my house, bucko.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #23
63. You sound like a fat phobic
bigot who has NEVER had a weight problem. Too smug you seem.

Fat people DIET all the time.then when the diet fails it REBOUNDS and they get fatter.Doesen't it concern you when young kids sometimes even kindergarteners take your simplistic"advice" and live a life of being overweight and hungry because people like you scare them and make them feel like moral failures?

But I am not expecting empathy out of the self rightous


What Are Big Girls Made Of?

The construction of a woman:
a woman is not made of flesh
of bone and sinew
belly and breasts, elbows and liver and toe.
She is manufactured like a sports sedan.
She is retooled, refitted and redesigned
every decade.
Cecile had been seduction itself in college.
She wriggled through bars like a satin eel,
her hips and ass promising, her mouth pursed
in the dark red lipstick of desire.

She visited in '68 still wearing skirts
tight to the knees, dark red lipstick,
while I danced through Manhattan in mini skirt,
lipstick pale as apricot milk,
hair loose as a horse's mane. Oh dear,
I thought in my superiority of the moment,
whatever has happened to poor Cecile?
She was out of fashion, out of the game,
disqualified, disdained, dis-
membered from the club of desire.

Look at pictures in French fashion
magazines of the 18th century:
century of the ultimate lady
fantasy wrought of silk and corseting.
Paniers bring her hips out three feet
each way, while the waist is pinched
and the belly flattened under wood.
The breasts are stuffed up and out
offered like apples in a bowl.
The tiny foot is encased in a slipper
never meant for walking.
On top is a grandiose headache:
hair like a museum piece, daily
ornamented with ribbons, vases,
grottoes, mountains, frigates in full
sail, balloons, baboons, the fancy
of a hairdresser turned loose.
The hats were rococo wedding cakes
that would dim the Las Vegas strip.
Here is a woman forced into shape
rigid exoskeleton torturing flesh:
a woman made of pain.

How superior we are now: see the modern woman
thin as a blade of scissors.
She runs on a treadmill every morning,
fits herself into machines of weights
and pulleys to heave and grunt,
an image in her mind she can never
approximate, a body of rosy
glass that never wrinkles,
never grows, never fades. She
sits at the table closing her eyes to food
hungry, always hungry:
a woman made of pain.

A cat or dog approaches another,
they sniff noses. They sniff asses.
They bristle or lick. They fall
in love as often as we do,
as passionately. But they fall
in love or lust with furry flesh,
not hoop skirts or push up bras
rib removal or liposuction.
It is not for male or female dogs
that poodles are clipped
to topiary hedges.

If only we could like each other raw.
If only we could love ourselves
like healthy babies burbling in our arms.
If only we were not programmed and reprogrammed
to need what is sold us.
Why should we want to live inside ads?
Why should we want to scourge our softness
to straight lines like a Mondrian painting?
Why should we punish each other with scorn
as if to have a large ass
were worse than being greedy or mean?

When will women not be compelled
to view their bodies as science projects,
gardens to be weeded,
dogs to be trained?
When will a woman cease
to be made of pain?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #63
75. OMG - I just spewed my chocolate chip cookie crumbs all over
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 03:30 PM by Vinca
the screen. I was born fat, had to get special shorts for Girl Scout camp at age 8 and have fought fat my entire life. No excuses here. I like to eat and not grapefruit slices if you get my drift. And I'm not a fan of exercise. Soooooooo . . . self righteous and smug I am not. I'm also not delusional. When I cut calories and haul my fat ass around the block a few times I lose weight. When I chow down cookies and sit at the computer, I gain weight. At the moment I'm somewhere in between ideal weight and total slob (and I've visited both ends of the spectrum). Now, tell me again about all those people who eat a thimbleful of food 3 times a day and gain weight. Baloney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #75
77. defensive?

I'm also not delusional. When I cut calories and haul my fat ass around the block a few times I lose weight. When I chow down cookies and sit at the computer, I gain weight. At the moment I'm somewhere in between ideal weight and total slob (and I've visited both ends of the spectrum). Now, tell me again about all those people who eat a thimbleful of food 3 times a day and gain weight. Baloney.

Ok fine. Exercise diet to your hearts content. But please do not degrade other fat people because you feel self righteous of YOUR choices ok? Just because you want to diet does not mean every other fat person has to do it with you .You can bark at yourself about your own weight call yourself a fat ass all you want,but don't dehumanize other fat people like you seem to do to yourself....How much time do you spend thinking about food?

Why do you think that is?

Oh you disdain people who eat thimblefuls of food and the super obese.. Does those definions of consumption and super obese change as your weight fluctuates?

Look I think you are more than a body,you might be fat but you are a HUMAN BEING first.I refuse to degrade your body for being as it is..Additudes and insults fat phobia and verbal abuse I will speak up about.

And this part of your post I copied below, was a fat phobic response to another's body,it was aimed at chastising their alleged lack of control and that attitude helps no one..
It is verbally abusive.

"And, by the way, who feeds the super-obese? Just wondering. Every now and then there's a sad, sad story about a 900 lb. guy who can't get out of bed. One guy said he doesn't eat a bowl of cereal for breakfast, he eats a box. Not in my house, bucko."

I don't bother chastizing... I feel sad for the guy,I wonder why, what made him so heavy and I wish I could comfort him so he would not feel so trapped .I wish he felt better and I am not the one to force him to by barking and shaming him He probably shames himself more than anything I could do....I don't smugly say,not in my house bucko..because I know life is not always controllable,and bodies are not always predicctable..and free will does not rule over all.Free will is interfered with plenty in this world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #77
84. Last post on this topic - you're hopeless.
A. I'm not putting down fat people, especially since I count myself among them. B. People need to face reality. How many people subject themselves to bariatric surgery, risking their lives, and discover they actually lose weight when they eat small portions? They could have bypassed the surgery and just eaten small portions. C. The 900 lb. guy got your goat. I feel sorry for him, too, but mostly because no one loves him enough to bring him a bowl of cereal rather than a box. The bottom line is, you take responsibility for your own life. If you're comfortable heavy, that's fine. If you're not, change things. The topic of the original post had to do with the food police and that was what my original response was in reference to. The 900 lb. guy remark was snarky and I do apologize to the 8 people on the planet who suffer from a rare genetic disorder that causes them to gain weight uncontrollably. And one last thing. Wasn't your first response to me a nasty, personal attack on a stranger you had no way of knowing had a weight problem? You're later response is a tad "holier than thou," wouldn't you say?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #84
85. ok
but you started with holier than thou stuff talking about how much astheticism you endure as if eating grapefruit you can't stand makes you better than fat people who can't or don't want to live as you do.You started with the old puritan work ethic moralisms of the"pull yourself up by bootstraps" rhetoric common aamong deluded libertarians and other deluded types of hypocrites. Alot of fat people struggle with weight loss,and they do portion control and excercize and it FAILS them,from NO FAULT ofvthier own this is WHY people get stomach surgery they have tried and tried so they cut thier stomach in two..The body has a will of it's own sometimes and the Shaming super ego sometimes cannot bash it into obedience..You can get all self rightous as you please about yourself but some people are not sucessful at the diet tactics and harsh self depreciation route.
I never called you a fat ass,you called you a fat ass..and I was trying to say that additude is part of the problem.
Now if you want to make assumptions go ahead. I was not making assumptions about YOUR weight personally... I was angry at what snot you said about the 900 pound guy which you appologized for thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
conflictgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #75
104. It's not always about calories, it's what those calories come from
I ate between 1000-1400 calories a day (no exercise) and was still 30 pounds overweight. I actually kept track of my calories too, I wasn't rounding down or anything.

The problem was that the calories from the things I did eat were from processed food. Eggo waffles or Frosted Mini-Wheats for breakfast (the latter of which contains high-fructose corn syrup, BTW), Lean Cuisines for lunch, rice-a-roni and a chicken breast for dinner. No second helpings and reasonable portion sizes. I'd split a bag of light butter microwave popcorn with my husband for a snack and have a diet soda with it. I could not lose weight at all even though my actual caloric intake was low.

I actually lost weight when I increased my caloric intake slightly (to about 1500-1800 calories a day) when the food I ate was unprocessed. I could make homemade ice cream with whole milk, baked potatoes with butter, and ate all kinds of stuff that the experts tell you not to eat. But it wasn't processed stuff and I think that's what makes the difference.

So I do know first-hand that it is very possible to consume small portion sizes and have a low calorie diet, and still gain weight. It depends a lot on what specifically you're eating.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GirlinContempt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #75
126. There is a rise
in people who have conditions, usually linked to hormones in some way, who can't lose weight. Even with exercises and diet changes, they can not lose weight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #126
148. And there are TONS of hormones in food
and water,on veggies,things endocrine disruptors ect.

http://www.ourstolenfuture.org /

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
conflictgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #63
102. Is that a Marge Piercy poem?
I'm pretty sure I recognize it, it sounds just like her.

I was a guest at a dinner with her a couple months ago when she came to read at my university. Delightfully feisty and a little crabby. ;-)

Anyway, to bring it back on topic, I agree with you. We need to have less processed food and stop making obesity a moral issue, because I believe the combination of the two factors worsens obesity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:19 AM
Response to Original message
25. Some things ARE protective
like those labels on our food so we know what we're eating if we are concerned enough about our own health to read them. Those were a great idea. Another thing is protecting people from choking clouds of cig smoke in enclosed spaces. You guys have a right to smoke, but not to send me into a severe asthma attack. I'd like to see some portion guidelines in restaurants, with todays gigantic portions kept for people who want them, but I'd love to be able to dine out somewhere and finish my dinner, not leave half of it on the plate or request a doggie bag and hope the microwave doesn't destroy it. If we could order half portions, I'd be delighted, I'd do it. If the FDA manages to encourage restaurants to do this, it'll be time well spent.

However, legally mandating behavior that isn't particularly protective is just plain silly, futile, and ultimately cruel. Telling all women under 40 that they need to be ascetics because they might get pregnant is just one of the more egregious examples. Most of us who got here in the 50s survived alcohol and cigarettes in utero and aren't that much the worse for wear. Likewise, obese people who are active are much healthier than thin people who are not. Our bodies are designed to withstand imperfection.

Truly,the strong Puritan urge this country has always had would be far better spent in trying to get us all basic single payer health care. That would do much more for our health than a million proclamations out of Washington about what all those OTHER people need to do to be fit Christian soldiers.

(Oh, and the health Nazis I really love are the New Age types who try to blame me for crippling arthritis. Folks, I got sick when I was fourteen, I didn't want to and I don't enjoy it, and if you don't want a knuckle sandwich via twisted hands, you'll can the "But your UNCONSCIOUSLY wanted a lifetime of pain and disability!")
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #25
66. New agers who say that shit
are insidious blame the victim for being hurt by something in thier life..as if being raped or being fat or stuck with crippling arthritis is the victims fault..oh no there cannotr be anyything interfering with"free will;" this is BULLSHIT everything interferes with free will.Silly new age fools IMHO.
They dehumanize and are rude and mean with thier crackpot theories of the unknown andI also agree they need some knuckle sandwiches when they say that crap,I reply they chose to get a fat lip whenever they blame a victim for causing thier own pain.Doesn't feel good on the reciving end as it does from the self rightous end does it?

Blame a course in miracles. THe Neuro lingustic nightmare written by a sadistic shrink to destroy people.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
26. I disagree with the focus of your rant...
although I agree that the state can go too far in regulating things-- and regulate for the wrong reasons.

It was only a hundred years or so ago that we fully accepted the government's interest in public health, and pure food laws, the CDC, and other efforts have been considered enlightened efforts. I doubt anyone wants to go back to blue milk, rotten meat, and aflatoxin in peanut butter.

So, somwhere along the line, various agencies came up with dietary guidelines and, as long as the science is correct and there's no bias, there's no problem with advisories on nutition. There's also no problem with labelling, either. We are all able to pig out on any crap we like, and we can read the labels or not.

If the government were to outlaw Moon Pies or put a limit on cheeseburger consumption, that would be a problem, but I don't see that happening. If the government were to get tougher on food processors for nutritional content and additives, that may or may not be a problem since it gets complicated, but I don't see that happening any time soon, either.

What I do see are health and nutrition professionals looking at the American diet and seeing far too much of the wrong things being eaten-- a problem that wealthy societies have had at least since the Romans. We can argue all day about whether or not obesity is a bad thing (it's often been considered a sign of health, success, or character-- "Crassus is a thin man. I trust him not.") but I think we can all agree that diabetes, heart disease and cancer are bad things, and the extent that diet is responsible for them should be examined and made as public as possible. Rickets and scurvy were easy to solve with diet-- the other stuff is complex.

There are food nazis on all sides-- from the meat and Twinkie haters on the one side to the processors who will feed us any shit they can make a buck on. Somewhere in the middle is the truth that we should be after, no matter whose ox is gored.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #26
69. Absolutely.
Someone has to lead the way to get Americans to live healthier. I don't think those who suggest guidelines for human behavior and nutrition are being "Nazis."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #69
78. beat up the people
for eating what is available

Oh but never criticize the corporations polluting food the air,the water..Never criticize the emotional abuse spewed at fat people,never question the bigotry of our culture and the pseudo science used to prop up the bigotry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #78
141. It's not "beating up people" to suggest how to live better.
I have plenty of criticism for corporation, anti-fat bigotry and the like. The issue in question, however, is whether it's reasonable for the government to put out guidelines for nutrition and behavior to curb a national health epidemic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #141
149. Epidemic?
Bash people who are fat to cure them? Make more laws and rules Can you say nanny state nazi? Do you want big brother telling you how to live,Car crashes kill more people that fat does. Maybe we should outlaw cars...Waitaminute that means we all might have to change..
Peak oil might change it for us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 02:24 AM
Response to Reply #149
150. I highly doubt..
...car crashes kill more people than diseases caused by overweight. And yes, it's an epidemic. We have record numbers of people who are significantly overweight. And one can advocate changes in how people live without "bashing" them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
27. America is a schizophrenic nation when it comes to food
On the corporate side, food is pushed hard. Eat more, eat less healthy, eat, eat eat. An example, I was a kid when the first Quarterpounders came out, and we all thought that was a huuuuge burger. Now it looks downright puny compared to the monster burgers being put out now. We are, as a society, almost literally having food shoved down our throats 24/7. And sadly, looking at the rising obesity rates in adults and children, this corporate mantra is having an effect.

Yet on the other hand, that of societal expectations, we are constantly bombarded with messages to be thin, thin, thin, unhealthy thin. Twiggy was just the beginning of the anorexic look, it has been taken to new heights by todays' models and celebrities. Is it any wonder that we have an epidemic of eating disorders.

I think what we need to see is a movement towards a healthy lifestyle. Get rid of the false rubric of the BMI, and other unattainable goals. Rather stress that a person eats a diet that is of proper proportion and is balanced, low on processed foods, and preferably organic. Also, a weakness that I've had to work to overcome, teach people to eat slower. It has been shown that people who eat quickly feel less full and thus are prone to overeating. Less processed foods are healthier and contain more nutrient value than their processed cousins, as does organic foods. And yes, encourage people to be physically active. Our sedentary lifestyle has been a direct cause of our epidemic of obesity in this country.

We have two different forces in this country trying to tear the public apart. Rather than going with one or the other, let's take the happy, sensible middle. Stop glorifying the anorexic look in our cultural icons, yet let us also stop shoving food down society's' throat with constant commercial bombardment and increasingly large restaurant portions. Time to take the sensible middle course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nobody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
28. Ever notice....
Women's magazines: On the front cover of almost every one, you see in huge letters: "DIET! TIPS! LOSE! LOSE! LOSE! FAT! FAT! FAT!" right next to a scrumptious-looking chocolate fudge cake.

Another poster mentioned advertising. You can't leave your house without seeing food or pictures of food everywhere. We can resist temptation, but resist temptation 24 hours a day, every day? Willpower isn't meant to be an eternally ongoing struggle.

There was a movie preview I saw that exemplified the social aspect of fat. It didn't do this intentionally. The male characters were all shapes, sizes, and ethnicities. The females were all skinny, gorgeous, like they came out of a modeling catalog. The movie was about acceptance. But this isn't the only movie that allows men to be all shapes and sizes and women have to be cookie-cutter thin.

The point in all this is:

I'm damn sick of mixed messages!

(By the way, I don't have a problem with restaurants serving whatever they want in the amounts they wat, and people eating what they want. I have a problem with constant bombarding of advertising, no matter what it is that's being hawked. Ads should be: I have a product. This is what it does. This is how much it costs. I'm weird that way. I have a screaming dislike of unrealistic expectations.

I hate band-aid solutions that go nowhere to address the real issue behind it!

The government getting involved in controlling portion sizes in restaurants? They should be out there ensuring that every American has health care coverage and that insurance companies cover preventative measures.

Horror story for you that has nothing whatever to do with food: Health insurance company refused to cover the removal of pre-cancerous cells that were an early detection of one of the more deadly forms of cancer. She is now permanently in debt because the insurance co wouldn't pay the much less expensive procedure. Had those cells been a malignant tumor, they'd have covered a hefty chunk of much more expensive chemotherapy.

All these idiotic, unenforceable mandates and attempts at legislation are nothing more than bandaids to cover a gaping internal wound. And that gaping wound is our health care situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #28
52. Size discriminaton can also be sexist
There was a movie preview I saw that exemplified the social aspect of fat. It didn't do this intentionally. The male characters were all shapes, sizes, and ethnicities. The females were all skinny, gorgeous, like they came out of a modeling catalog. The movie was about acceptance. But this isn't the only movie that allows men to be all shapes and sizes and women have to be cookie-cutter thin.

Why do women have to be rail skinny, while it's OK for men to be bald, fat, and ugly and still be regarded as desirable? It's time for heavyset women to demand acceptance--and to be militant about it, too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #52
67. Hell YES!
Lets demand equality on all levels. Nothing else will do!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alphafemale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
29. I'd prefer smaller portion sizes being available in restaurants
I generally eat about half or less of what is served on what is served on those gargantuan platters, and most restaurant foods don't taste that well taken home and re-heated.

So for me it's money and food wasted.

I'm not wanting a law to mandate such things though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cactusrose Donating Member (59 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. Why can't you order a child's plate
if you want smaller portions? That's what I do when I want smaller portions. (Which I usually don't.)

It seems to me that that would be the thing to do. Instead of mandating a restaurant's portion sizes, patronize restaurants that offer a child's plate to adults who want limited portions for whatever reasons. That way you and others won't be paying full-sized prices for smaller portions. You don't really expect that most businesses are going to lower their prices if they are forcced to lower their portion sizes do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. Or just don't eat it all and take the rest home!
You're just buying food, not the restaurant to be a nanny and control your portions for you. Much less the government.

The idea of someone else must keep me in line is at bottom here. It shows up in other places, too, automatic withdrawals because we can't trust ourselves to make payments, etc.

Having our employers pay our taxes for us is a pet peeve. People who work for others barely understand that they pay taxes and think the money the government runs on comes from nowhere and expect the government to do everything for them.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alphafemale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #31
57. Much restaurant food doesn't reheat well.
And I'm not wanting mandates. I'd just prefer choice in ordering.

We eat out more for lunch more than dinner. The servings are generally more reasonable then.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
conflictgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #31
107. But what about the wastefulness aspect?
I cannot finish the portions at restaurants either, they are almost always way too large. And I agree with the other poster who said that many restaurant meals do not reheat well at home.

I don't want the government to tell me what I can and cannot eat, but I would like to see incentives (somehow) for restaurants to serve smaller portions. I have also had trouble when I've tried to order a 1/2 size order of something or get a child's meal or share with my husband. Many restaurants give DISincentives to people who want to control portion size. These days we can't afford to eat out very often anyway, but it used to really bother me that it was so difficult to get smaller portions. Because I didn't want to take it home because it wouldn't reheat well, that food I didn't eat was all wasted. I have no problem with the self-control aspect, but I really hate wasting all that food.

The solution for many of us is either to clean your plate, or know that you're wasting a lot of food (assuming that it's something that won't reheat well at home, which is usually the case). The government doesn't necessarily have to step in, but restaurants should really make it easier for people to order smaller portions. The "solution" of only having the option to order this gargantuan portion and throw away half of it when you can't eat it all is not a solution at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #107
144. Who Cares? What Ya Don't Finish, Just Throw Away.
Unless you want to take it home. But if ya don't, then the busboys chuck it. Pretty simple really. I really don't see the problem here. I mean, if you didn't get enough to eat and wanted bigger portions, I could see a problem. But getting too much? So what? Just throw it away!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #30
37. The children's plate is usually kiddie food
It's fried, it's cut into cutesy shapes, there are few or no veggies, and no thank you. I am not a child. I am an adult with an adult palate, thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cactusrose Donating Member (59 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #37
45. It's not at the restaurants I've eaten at.
I'm not bothered by it being a kid's place. Nobody ever says anything. I suspect they see other adults ording kids' plates from time to time. Even if somebody did say something, I wouldn't be bothered by it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alphafemale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #30
54. Rubbery chicken nuggets? Cheeseburger from pre-formed patties?
The kind with the painted on grillmarks?

No thanks.

Rare are the places that offer adult food in reasonable portions.

Well, lunch portions are usually more in line, but those aren't sold after 2 or 3pm in most places.

And I already said I don't want portion size mandated by government.

And I can dwell in the valley of the culture of gluttony without taking part in it.

I'd rather the SUPERSIZE portions weren't shoveled at me in many sit-down restaurants, (hell even the salads have more than a days worth of food in them,) but I deal with it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cactusrose Donating Member (59 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #54
81. I'm talking about restaurants, not fast food places
As I've said, I've never had any problem finding restaurants that will serve their regular food in smaller portions if you ask for a child's plate. Nobody's ever acted like there was anything odd about the request.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alphafemale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #81
83. That is the typical food on a child's menu at any restuarant.
Even most ethnic restaurants have very Americanized, fast-food on the kid's menu.

If you're requesting something off-menu, smaller portioned that's another thing.

Maybe it's a regional thing, but around here they look at you cross-eyed if you request such a thing.

"We can't serve lunch portions after 3PM."

And many restaurants ban food-sharing. A $5 surcharge for sharing at some places...the bastards.

Except for Chinese restaurants, where entree sharing is traditional.

And Asian food is one that reheats well. The ones not deep-fried anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cactusrose Donating Member (59 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #83
92. It's the regular food only smaller portions.
It must be a regional thing.

A $5 surcharge for food-sharing is horrible. It's also dumb from a business standpoint. I mean if I try something I like that way, I'm more likely to come back in the future just so I can order it. When my husband and I go to our favorite Italian restaurant and I sometimes order a side salad in addition to a couple of slices of pizza, they automatically bring a saucer and fork for him in case we want to split the salad.

I've never seen smaller lunch portions around here. Unless you count lunch specials like two slices of pizza and a drink. They're big slices of pizza. The big thing around here are lunch buffets. Even some of the pizza places have them. Dinner and Sunday buffets cost more than regular lunch buffets, but they serve more expensive items. Like more shrimp dishes.

I love Chinese food! And Mexican. And Somoan. And Southern. And ... well, I've never met a cuisine I didn't like.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malachibk Donating Member (780 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
32. Almost totally disagree
As a public health official here in NYC, I can attest to the fact that obesity is perhaps the largest public health problem facing the United States. The increase in juvenile diabetes alone is staggering, not to mention CVD.

And you are right that it can't be solved via self-control. Hence the state steps in.

On an ecologic level, Americans eat FAR larger portions than do, say, Europeans (a 24oz steak as a single portion?!). And we eat food that is very, very bad for us. Food devoid of any nutritional value. Restaurants should tell consumers what's in their food, thereby allowing Americans to make informed decisions.

The state should also reintroduce recess and gym in public schools.

The state should also increase health education funding.

The state should also explain why it is virtually impossible to buy fresh, organic produce in inner-city minority neighborhoods but easy as pie (pun intended) to find a Wendy's McDonald's Burger King etc.

As humans, and Americans in particular, CULTURALLY move away from exercise, hunting/gathering, preparing our own food, growing vegetables etc we forget that we are BIOLOGICALLY unprepared for that kind of lifestyle. We are programmed to eat when we can to store energy for when food is scarce. Food is not scarce here. BAD food is not scarce here. The state, while of course allowing for freedom of choice, should do all it can to make sure that the American people understand this and have enough info to make the right decision.

Obesity, while of course a 'natural' state for some people, is not supposed to affect upwards of 40% of a country's population. It just isn't. That's an 'epidemic'. And it's deadly.

On a slightly different note, make sure your ire is directed at the fed. funding mechanisms and not "NAZI-esque" public health officials. We do/research/address the issues WE CAN GET MONEY TO ADDRESS. That's why only 1 of my HIV-research friends is still in HIV research -- it's hard to write a grant without the words 'condom' or 'sex' when you're studying an STI.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #32
39. The whole thing makes no sense
If the portion sizes are state controlled, there is nothing stopping people from ordering two portions.

I don't know if it's a state or Fed thing, but the restaurants in California are required to give full nutritional disclosure when asked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #32
50. What are your thoughts on public transportation and a reduction in the use
of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in processed foods?

While I think that restaurants should, in fact, allow patrons the option of buying half sized portions at half the price, two of the large differences I've observed while spending time abroad (aside from smaller portions)is the availability of great public transportation and the lack of HFCS in processed foods.

I always lose weight after two weeks in,say,Paris. The Metro system is efficient but also requires a good bit of walking (not much, I'm sure, to a Parisian, but to an American it's a lot). In the past I didn't know that it was HFCS that was spiking my blood sugar and making me ravenously hungry and hour after consuming anything that contained it-so I just thought that there was something about European vacations that nearly killed my appetite. Since then, I've found that by simply eating like a European-mostly unprocessed foods without HFCS, enriched white flour, or much refined sugar-keeps my appetite low. I would probably be at an ideal weight today if I just walked a little more, but my city has the second highest pedestrian death rate in the nation. Few sidewalks or bike lanes, and very little in the way of any public transportation. I really think that if the department of health pushed for fewer corn subsidies and a national rail system (both high speed and light), obesity in this country would drop considerably. Big Oil, of course, would not be pleased....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
conflictgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #50
108. Unfortunately they will probably NEVER get rid of HFCS in our food
The government is giving huge subsidies to farmers to grow all this corn that we don't need, so they're finding new uses for it - including HFCS. Have you read The Omnivore's Dilemma? The author details all this and it's really pretty surprising.

These days it's almost impossible to find anything without HFCS in it, unless I buy organic. And I'm on an extremely low budget right now. But the things I have recently found containing HFCS, that I wouldn't have expected would contain it: yogurt, ketchup, Nutri-grain bars, bread, barbecue sauce, spaghetti sauce, salad dressing, and canned fruit.

Overly large portion sizes and sedentary lifestyles have a lot to do with the obesity epidemic, I'm sure, but I honestly believe that it's the HFCS that is causing most of the dramatic increase in the type-2 diabetes rate. It isn't metabolized the way normal sugar is, and it's in absolutely everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 03:14 AM
Response to Reply #108
151. I listened to a long interview with the author on a KCRW podcast
Edited on Tue Jun-06-06 03:20 AM by Lorien
he said that Americans are "the corniest people on earth"-corn is even becoming a part of our DNA! He stopped short of saying that HFCS is a threat to public health-but I believe that it is.

I also live on a very tight budget, but I only buy organic whole foods (except bread-I do buy baked bread because I'm short on time). Typical meals are salads (no dressing), veggie omelets, a bowl of berries, a handful of nuts, etc. I have fibromyalgia, ADD, and hypoglycemia-and HFCS makes ALL of those conditions worse, so I must stay with my very boring but healthful diet. :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:36 AM
Response to Reply #108
160. There's plain yogurt and there's home made salsa, too, though
Making a batch of something and avoiding the bottled bbq, can help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:34 AM
Response to Reply #50
159. I avoid high fructose corn syrup, I think it is pretty nasty stuff
I don't think bodies know what to do with it, at least probably not my body and definitely not some other people's bodies.

I not only feel healthier when I avoid over-processed foods and try to buy stuff without high fructose corn syrup, but It did seem to result in some weight loss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
33. Maybe they should put out some rules
About the artificial ingredients and sugars in processed foods. These are the real culprits, IMHO.

Oh, wait. That would be saying something negative about corporations. Mustn't do that! :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
38. Hitler was a vegetarian. - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yewberry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #38
43. No he wasn't
and your post has no relevance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #43
53. Yes he was.
And your false correction has no relevance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yewberry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #53
56. If vegetarians eat ham, sausage, caviar, and stuffed squab, sure.
But most of us wouldn't consider that person a vegetarian.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #56
58. You can enjoy your version of history if you want, but you're wrong. -n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
livinginphotographs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. What a comeback.
I'm in awe. Really, I am. :eyes:

http://www.slate.com/id/2096259 /

Oh, and by the way, Ghandi was also a vegetarian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. Oh no! And you are the one I was trying to impress!
Please! Your opinion is so important to me! And your links! Waaaaaaah!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
livinginphotographs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. Not my fault you're wrong.
I know, and my links. God forbid I actually back up what I'm saying.

I accept your apology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #61
122. Ooo, bip! You got me there! You're so cool! - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 03:19 AM
Response to Reply #61
185. Eh, best to avoid feeding the flamethrowing thread hijackers n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yewberry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #58
64. Payne's "Life & Death of Adolf Hitler" & I
(among other sources) are enjoying reality very much, thanks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:37 AM
Response to Reply #43
161. I heard he couldn't bear to think of the poor cow's eyes when he saw beef
Didn't stop him from making lampshades out of people's skin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 03:18 AM
Response to Reply #161
184. Got a link for that?
We all know about the vile lampshades, but I'd like to see a link for the rest of your assertion. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yewberry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #184
190. The poster is mistaken.
Hitler did *cut back* on meat during part of his life, but it was because he had digestive problems, not because of any kind of moral qualms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlackVelvet04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
41. All the hype about health issues
we hear every time we turn on the "news" is making this a nation of neurotics.

Since when did nagging work?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
42. Public health naysayers
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 10:57 AM by depakid
are a cause of a great deal of unnecessary suffering in this country- and most often I find that they lack sufficient information (or science education) to form responsible opinions about public policy.

Instead, they toss out loaded language or toss around conspiracy theories.

Public health gets so little support from Republicans that it's especially sad to see coming from people who might seem otherwise to be progressives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #42
79. Public health
is no excuse for a fat phobic bigotry.
And this bigotry is laced throught "public health" messages language.Until the bigoted launguage stops,and science really figures out why people are getting fat,and the cultural bullshit is curtailed I will not trust the motives to be about my well being. Sorry.I see too much confusion and lack of knowlege on sciences part,every day it's a new finding trans fats bad,carbs bad,carbs good..What is deemed healthy today changes like the weather tomorrow.Diets don't work for most people.

90% of dieters regain thier weight and a little more. This tells me science has not figured out why people are fatand why dieting does not work . This"public heath" shenanigans focuses on the individual "self control" puritanical based model too much. They don't look at other factors like rampant pollution, traumatic abuse, social factors ,the tainted chemical laced hormone infested food supply or medication effects enough in thier number crunching .

ALOT of drugs cause weight gain as a side effect. I got my fat from being in a psychiatric ward, where someone made alot of money holding me there longer than I needed to be..Thoriazine and alot of other psych drugs and other non psych drugs will put weight on you! And considering how many peoplke take drugs it is suspicious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raccoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #79
125. Amen/Ramen to that,
"ALOT of drugs cause weight gain as a side effect. "

SSRI's do too, for lots of people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
44. Obesity is not a problem of individuals, it's a problem of society.
By calling fat people lazy and weak willed you are falling for the same libertarian-pushed fallacy behind the "poor people are lazy" meme. The main problem is that people are surrounded by food ads and comercials from birth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #44
55. I think we'll (at least in other parts of the world) eventually find it
isn't so much the pushing of food, for that takes place everywhere, it is what's in our food that is the difference. We are essentially forced to consume the corporate swill that is available, while other countries protect their citizens from it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
46. If they really want to regulate obesity, they could start by
regulating our food supply to begin with. I truly believe the way we raise and kill our livestock has a lot to do with it. The growth hormones and chemicals packed into your hamburgers and hot dogs certainly must have and effect on our children and pregnant women. Some one needs to do a study on this.

I looked at pictures of my classmates back in the forties and fifties. There was always one fat kid in the class but the rest of us were pretty skinny. But back then our food was more organically produced. I remember finding wormholes in my apples sometimes with the worm still there. My mother just cut them out and we then ate them.

However, I look at the kids in the playground and coming out of schools these days and about half of them are overweight. It can't all be due to careless, busy mothers.

However, this brings up another point about state run day care centers to help working parents cope. These are the things the government should be doing, not interfering with individual choices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:42 AM
Response to Reply #46
162. And if state run care centers serve high fructose and MSG?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
47. Obesity has several causes
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 01:13 PM by StopThePendulum
People who feel morally superior to fat people ought to get off their moral ego trip and realize obesity isn't JUST about SELF CONTROL.Nobody knows why some people get fat. IT is not SIMPLE. IF it was as simple as dieting,than people would not be fast after dieting.90 percent of dieters REGAIN it. What's really happing is the state is seeking a way to INTRUDE into our lives under the banner of"public health"...And You squawking self righteous fat phobics are opening the door when you support this"health based" "for your own good" bullshit as if it was the state's job to tell people you think take up too much space how to live .


Obesity has several contributing factors: genetically-determined slow metabolism, in that the system of a fat person can be described as the "economy model"; intermittent starvation, common among poor people who don't eat periodically because they either can't afford nutritious food and instead eat what's cheap and filling; people who take medications that cause an abnormal slowing of overall metabolism, excessive drowsiness, and/or an abnormally voracious appetite; or compulsive overeating, which occurs only in a small minority of obese people. This last group fits the stereotype.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
48. I wish the State would use it's powers
to regulate industries/businesses from polluting/poisoning us.


And leave us to make our own decisions.

Some people seem to think that businesses should be allowed to market poisons and it's up to people to see through the marketing crap and not buy it. I think there should be limits to what kind of nonsense/toxins are pushed on people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:45 AM
Response to Reply #48
163. But knowing how to read, and reading the damn label, helps
So I'd suggest it should be easier for people to get accurate information on how to read the labels that are already there.

Then maybe adding some more things to such labels, or changing the way some things are written so it is easier to see the many varieties of MSG, for example, could make things better.

Knowing how to read, and not reading the damn label, won't help.

Knowing how to read, but not understanding what the f*ck we should be getting from the label anyhow, won't help.

Screwing around with the lable to make it look like there isn't MSG in it because the related chemical name is obscure, won't help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
area51 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
51. "The strong state also needs healthy citizens..."
Apparently, it doesn't, b/c if they really wanted healthy, more productive citizens, Congress would be pulling all-nighters trying to put universal healthcare into place like the civilized nations have.

But the discrimination against overweight people here in the states concerns me.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #51
65. Thank you
It's almost as like the self righteous bullies among us..if they can't humiliate and degrade women,blacks, gays or other religions and can't get away with it like years ago..at least they can hate fat people freely. The hatred of fat people is a very sick sad symptom of what's wrong in our culture.Our culture HATES softness it sees anything feminine as "weak" it's ripe for Nazism on so many levels.. Just look at some of the bigoted posts when fat issues come up some people here are rape apologists even... And until THIN people really get past their bigoted perceptions and understand the plight of fat people and get off their"moral high horse" things will not change because there will not be enough public outrage to leash poison peddling corporations.What these self righteous fat bigots forget is ANYONE can become fat if the right factors combine and it isn't about food.It is also interesting how people ignored the stuff I posted about the starvation study.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #51
70. I see it as going deeper than mere prejudice.
We have two gigantic industries as regards obesity problems in the United States: the food manufacturers and the diet industry. The food manufacturers push high-calorie, unhealthy food on us all the time. It's much more expensive to actually buy healthy food (say, fruits and vegetables) than it is to buy processed crap from fast-food restaurants and grocery stores. At the same time, we have a vast industry of diet pill makers, weight loss clinics, health clubs and so on. Basically, I see a process by which society encourages people to indulge in unhealthy food, then encourages them to find a quick-fix solution for weight gain without going through the intermediate step of education on how to improve their lifestyle. We end up with a society full of people who are pushed from one extreme from another, bleeding cash in their attempt to appease people in society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #70
76. Yes
but the emotionbal ABUSE heaped upon fat kids does not help.People who have been wounded and traumatized sometimes build body armor with fat,to keep agressive horney men AWAY,or they get fat to avoid the carping sniping critics who are envious of another's body away.There is alot of factors that could make a person heavy,dieting causes rebound weight gain. I have seen it in my own life.
I have ceased dieting,and I will NEVER diet again..and my weight however it is over the anorexic BMI level, ,has stayed steady.The last diet I did I gained ten pounds after all was said and done,after every diet cycle I gain 10 pounds or more .. my set point metabolism has slowed.. So I quit dieting and I have quit gaining.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/15/health/main57...
http://www.shs.uwo.ca/publications/mindbody/fphobia.htm

Some interesting thoughts...
Le'a Kent, drawing on the work of Julia Kristeva, takes this concept one step further by describing the fat body in terms of abjection. "In the public sphere," she writes, "fat bodies, and fat women's bodies in particular, are represented as a kind of abject: that which must be expelled to make all other bodily representations and functions, even life itself, impossible" (Kent 135). In other words, the fat body is necessary to the existence of the thin female body. Kent argues, "the fat body rings the margins of the good self, haunting them as it helps create them. The fat body must be repeatedly evoked at the margins, drawn in and then expelled, in order to continue taking the weight of corporeality off thin bodies" (136). Therefore, the fat body represents all that is nasty, unsightly, and unspeakable about the body. It represents poor health, disease, and death. It is what allows the thin body to exist as the ideal, because it assumes the negative qualities that all bodies, in reality, possess.

http://www.iiav.nl/ezines/web/GenderForum/2005/No12/gen...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #76
139. Tell me about it.
I was one of the fat kids growing up. The amount of ribbing I took from my peers was unbelievable. I'm firmly convinced there are no sadists in the world like children, at least with how they treat others of their own age group. It is terrible the stigma placed on the overweight, doubly so the stigma placed on overweight children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindPilot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
68. If being fat is genetic, then why has obesity increased so much so fast?
DNA doesn't change significantly over a couple generations so there must be other causes. I don't think our eating habits have changed that much over the past couple of generations either. And from what I see day-to-day people are much more health-conscience than when I was young. So there is something else going on because there are a hell of a lot more fat people than there used to be. There are a hell of a lot more developmentally disabled kids too. Is it the pollutants or is it maybe the quality of the food, additives or processing?

I agree about the health & safty nazis, I'm really tired of the constant barrage of clean-living messages coming from everywhere from my workplace to my government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #68
71. Evolution can happen fast
And we have to adapt to constant bombardment of pollution,chemicals in our food and in the environment .Chemical pollution has been concentrated,it has occurred very fast too,marked changes have occurred even since the 70's.

This may be part of the problem.Nobody is looking at it because it would harm precious corporations,but isn't interesting how corporations are"prepared" to survive a legal onslaught,recently through legislation passed in the dead of night and "tort reform".

They know what evil they do. And they make damn sure we never find out. They start up a fat phobia bullying game and nobody looks for the real cause while they have so much"fun" being distracted and getting an ego massage pickin' on the"fatties" and blaming the victims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #71
73. I can assure you that evolution is not behind this increase in obesity
There are a number of genetic components to this issue, but it alone is not the cause of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #73
80. What is the cause?
You got it figured out? Lets hear it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #80
86. See post #72
My explaination is based in basic biology-- heavily processed crap like refined startches, HFCs +lack of physical activity + increase in poverty = a massive increase in weight, resulting in obestiy. Many of these factors can be corrected, and please do NOT read that as I am blaming individual's for obesity, because I myself am quite overweight and know that in most cases the individual is NOT TO BLAME.
But as a scientist, I recognize that there is a valid, biological reason for the increase in obesity we see in all developed/developing counties that have Western "luxuries"

The mental anguish of being anything but a twig creates stigma and pain which must be stopped. Having a government pushing stupid, ineffective plans to combat obesity does not help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #86
88. Ok
I agree with your points but I also think it goes deeper even,
Into pollution toxins in our air water and food,
You know as a scientist why living things adapt right pressures in the environment..right? Pressures to survive..Well using that idea the body bursden of all the pollution stress and toxins must be doing SOMETHING to us..right..well check out these links with other scientists thoughts..about obesity and tell me your thoughts. I am curious as to what a scientist like yourself thinks..I'm no scientist,but I can think.Not always articulate,but I am intellegent enough to question things..

Obesity diabeties & air pollution
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/07/0207310808...

In Utero genetic damage done by pollution(kids genes changing before they are born in response to pollution)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retri...


Is it obesity causing all these heart failures or pollution?
http://pakistantimes.net/2003/11/20/health.htm

More..
http://www.azer.com/aiweb/categories/magazine/23_folder...


A Virus?
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/07/28/fat.virus.ap/...

Messed up Gut flora?
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/health_science/article... /
Genetic theory
http://pub.ucsf.edu/newsservices/releases/200410127 /

Psych drug side effects?(this one affected me personally)
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=...

Endocine disruption..and a VERY GOOD site about pollution.
http://www.ourstolenfuture.org /

I look forward to hearing what you think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #88
90. one thing that stands out to me...
...is the one about the virus/parasite/internal bacteria makeup. There is a theory that my genetics professor talked about that is about how in most developing countries, most of the population has some sort of internal parasite that can suck up to 30% of the individual's calories a day. Humans compensated by eating more than they would normally need parasite free so that they still get the needed nutrition. Well, in developed nations, since the problem of internal parasites is pretty much nill, those extra 30% calories we consume are unneeded-- but we still eat it. I don't know how I feel about this theory personally.
Psych drug affects are well documented-- my SO gained a lot of weight from Paxil and is currently losing it. Considering how many Americans are on various medication, it doesn't suprise me. Heck, *I* gained 20 pounds from the Pill :o
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. A couple of points:
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 03:16 PM by WindRavenX
1)DNA doesn't change significantly over a couple generations so there must be other causes. It's not so much the DNA, it's the life habits of Americans-- too much poor quality food, too little exercise. This isn't entirely a person's choice, because our cultural in large has created a lifestyle were it is extremely hard to eat well, exercise, etc, unless you have time and money-- I've gone through this myself as a poor ass college student. You can't eat good food on 10$ a week. You just can't.
2) I don't think our eating habits have changed that much over the past couple of generations either

Disagree strongly on this. The amount of processed food, the decrease of time to prepare good meals, and the increase in high fructose corn syrup in food is staggering. Combine this with a lack of physical exercise, many people, especially young people, are getting simply unhealthy amounts of sugar and refined carbohydrates-- the rise of acquired diabeties(Type II) is a strong indicator of the components of our food is a huge problem. And the lack of physical activity only makes it worse.

But looking to the government to simply control these issues isn't right-- instead, I suggest:

1.Sharp reductions of HFCS and other highly processed components
2.Increase of public transportation
3.PE/recess time for everyone-- not just kids :) Run around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:49 AM
Response to Reply #72
166. Except that forced PE/Recess leads to issues of bullies
I don't think any child should be forced to put up with bullies at recess or in gymn class.

If a school can't combat the bullying, they are part of the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 04:22 AM
Response to Reply #166
173. Bullies ARE the problem
It's easy to blame a victim,blame a fat person who is scapegoated who already hates them self for not being thin enough..What takes guts is to empathize with the victim , listen to the fat person and feel what they feel and care about them and help them at the pace they can,to build them up,to befriend them to comfort them and DEFEND them from attacks.. Too many bullies in this country,too many meddling snots,bystanders and enablers.Too many chicken shit conformists.To many health fascists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #68
134. Refined sugars and canola oil
That's most of it.

There are some great studies of the introduction of western diets, particularly processed foods, to populations. The best is probably Pottinger's cats (google it). There are also some great dental studies of African tribes and the rural Swiss.

Pottinger's cats went something like this (several generations of cats were fed processed foods only):

First generation on processed foods: teeth fell out, early death
Second generation on processed foods: obesity, autoimmune disorders
Third generation on processed foods: blindness and insanity
Fourth generation on processed foods: infertility

Which, incidentally, sounds a lot like the generations of most dynasties of Roman emperors...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
74. Your statements are a little strong.
I don't want to be nanny-stated any more than anyone else here. However, there is a huge problem in the United States right now with preventable deaths leading from poor diet choices. I view it as a positive step that the government is encouraging people to live healthier lives. There's a medium between the government doing little about the health of its citizens and the government being an autocrat and I think the government is inching, ever so slowly, toward this medium.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #74
82. Obesity is todays boogyman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #82
87. If I may...
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 05:41 PM by WindRavenX
I will attempt to answer your question.

In the first two links, both individuals in question who are overweight are also active-- this is an important difference when discussing these links and the obesity issue in America because this seems to be one of, if not the, biggest factor. Today's society is too busy or too suburban (where often the only option is to own a car and communities are not walking friendly) to allow adequate physical activity. Clearly, and this has been shown in scientific journals I have read, that physical activity regardless of weight is beneficial and prolongs the life of the individual. A highly active, albeit overweight, individual will in most cases be more healthy than a highly lethargic but normal weight person.

As to the final link, there is evidence that having a few extra pounds prolongs life-- that's been known for many years especially with regards to the elderly. But again, there is a difference between this and the obesity issue we're seeing today with many young people. Many young people are unable to be active and many are not getting proper nutrition, in which case this is a negative effect on the persons health.

I hope that helps :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #87
89. I agree with most of what you said..
But,there are more factors to consider. A fat phobic public does not distinguish healthy fat from unhealthy,they are just bigoted..
And emotional abuse can make someone seek comfort in food.
There is the body burden,of pollution,and many other factors in unique combinations in each person contributing to obesity.What if obesity was inflammation caused by air pollution made by our use of cars and industry pollutants belched everywhere..what then? Because the way towns are built around cars,the economy would collapse if we stopped using cars..so it's easier to blame the victim for being fat than really fix the problem causing this..Our society is not about to give up their own comforts to help a victims of the love affair with the car get better. Americans are into that NImby game quite a bit...Nope, oil has to run out before we change habits.And if it does run out, we will NEVER know if it was the air pollution or what else that caused the obesity epidemic.
Because the Earth is so polluted it will be a long time before the toxins are processed out,by then civilization will be long gone.And maybe us too..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #89
91. what you said:
A fat phobic public does not distinguish healthy fat from unhealthy,they are just bigoted.

Agree 100%. The first step is to get this country more mentally healthy about their bodies-- it's making us nuerotic. I still haven't escaped it fully myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #82
93. Those links don't prove anything...
..other than all thin people are not necessarily more healthy than all overweight people. It is the opinion of the vast majority of doctors that being overweight is a serious risk factor for cardiovascular disease, diabetes and other health problems. It is not a boogeyman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #93
116. I disagree with you than
I think the doctors are grasping at straws. They'd rather blame the individual and go the EZ route rather than challenge the status quo and who funds the grants.You know what happens when maverick scientists go against the prevailing "scientific"trends? They get shamed,pooh poohed,called silly and discounted by rigid minds invested in old ideas ... Sometimes it goes on for years until the rigid mainstream of science wakes up figures out the maverick was onto something and realizes they were wrong.It has happened before,it will happen again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #116
128. That's not quite fair.
Scientists are more than willing to go out on a limb if the data backs their findings. It's how they become famous and get recognition. Scientists are more committed to fairness and accuracy in their professional beliefs than about anyone else in society. The current peer-reviewed suggests obesity is a significant contributor to health problems and is something we need to reduce in modern society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:53 AM
Response to Reply #128
167. How about science really isn't sure about weight
It seems to me they really don't know why people yo yo after successful dieting and excercize.

Some combination of psychology, biology, excercizing, and detoxification, and maybe medication or correcting bodily imbalances may help, but it may be so individual that scientists can't really explain this kind of thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #74
120. do you think these people are so STUPID they do not KNOW
already what your healthy lifestyle is. how arrogant of you to decide that they just do not know, and simply are waiting for you and govt to inform them what they are doing wrong. they make a choice. it is theirs. your job in this stupidly crazy world is to embrace them as fellow man. that is it. no more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #120
129. Strawman much?
People may know behavior X is unhealthy, but there may not be the beginnings of a positive national change toward better health until some societal factor is involved. As far not knowing, I think many people have some idea of how healthy being overweight is, but they're not the people for whom the information is intended. I've known plenty of smokers in my lifetime, for example, who didn't know smoking can be a mitigating factor in cancers outside of the lungs and mouth.

There is an epidemic of obesity in the United States and the government should do what it can to inform people on how to life healthy lifestyles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #129
137. strawman bullshit. tired of this one too. dont like what someone says
pee your friggin pants yelling strawman. and the audacity to think people dont know food=health. bullshit. what arrogance. the strawman is actually trying to convince someone that people dont know being fat MAY or MAY NOT be an issue in health so we need society to "pressure" them to "guilt" them into the perfect little being you deem society should be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #137
138. If you don't like it..
..then don't attack a position someone doesn't hold to advance your opinions. You can hold whatever position you want, but do not assail a false version of my own opinion. It's not the fault of others you are unskilled in the methods of debate and discussion. And you just made another strawman, saying I feel people in society should fit some "perfect" ideal.

And, I say again, it's still valuable to promote healthy living, even if people are aware of the consequences. The point of the government suggesting healthier guidelines for diet and personal exercise is to get the discussion of the issue more out into the public forum, in a manner similar to what happened with cigarette smoking. I know it's hard to lose weight: I was once fairly overweight myself. It's still important for the government to be a part of the societal discussion on healthy living and what we can all do together to help people live better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
96. FDA can shove their mommy government!
You know what? The government can start regulating my food choices as soon as they pay for my health care!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terran1212 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:11 PM
Response to Original message
99. Considering how unhealthy America is, the "health nazis" havent been too
successful, now have they?

We aren't exactly at our "Wiemar Moment"!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 03:27 AM
Response to Reply #99
117. It could have something to do with this:
Strict parents often raise pudgy kids


CHICAGO "Clean your plate or else!" and other authoritarian approaches to parenting can lead to overweight children, a new study finds.
Strict mothers were nearly five times more likely to raise tubby first-graders than mothers who treated their children with flexibility and respect while also setting clear rules.
But while the children of flexible rule-setting moms avoided obesity, the children of neglectful mothers and permissive mothers were twice as likely to get fat.
"The difference between the different parenting groups is pretty striking," said the study co-author, Dr. Kay Rhee of Boston University School of Medicine. The study of 872 families appears in the June issue of Pediatrics, released Monday.

...

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/06-06/06-05-06/03f...


"authoritarian parents" being the 6 o'clock news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
101. The human body is a work of art to me
Different sizes, shapes, colors all blend into a beautiful whole.

I work in health care. In a public hospital. In fact I work on a unit where some of the conditions could be considered self-inflicted, such as liver failure from alcohol abuse. I've seen ruined hearts from cocaine addiction. I've seen diabetics ignore their condition to the point of total kidney failure and limb loss.(I guess my point is there are many ways to abuse our bodies that doesn't directly involve food.) As a nurse and a human being I find my way past any judgment to care for these people, find beauty and worth in them, to humbly accept the lessons they offer, which aren't about health at all, but about life, sometimes perseverance in the face of all odds.

I've also seen the some of the poorer outcomes of gastric-bypass surgery, a surgery to lose weight, that both men and women will try if they get desperate enough.
My husband, who has Multiple Sclerosis and CAN'T exercise-not much- despairs over his weight, taking on blame and shame that doesn't belong to him. And that's where the line is I think. Why can't we accept round bodies, larger shapes, the less abled, as worthy?

The morbidly obese, who eventually DO get life-threateningly ill, struggle and struggle, and look at a size 16 or 18 (women's) as an impossible goal. The size 16's despair and go on every diet possible because they want to be a size 10. The size 10's, judging by one comedians recent weight loss, want to be a size 6. Nothing is ever thin enough. And size is NOT about health. It's about some bizarre unnamed competition we've been coerced into playing.
The government reflects society in many ways, and definitely manipulates our fears.
Were we more supportive of each other, standing less in judgment, it would be good. It could remove the shame, and the blame. Those who reach out would actually find someone at the other end. In sickness and in health. No matter what size or shape.
I believe in trying to be as healthy as possible. I learned that partly from my husband, who has so little choice at times. I DON'T believe in one size fits all. Health or beauty wise. And the judgment you are talking about literally kills people, starting from the inside. This too, I've seen happen.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #101
111. man i MISS people in life today that have this abiltiy
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 01:27 AM by seabeyond
"As a nurse and a human being I find my way past any judgment to care for these people, find beauty and worth in them, to humbly accept the lessons they offer, which aren't about health at all, but about life, sometimes perseverance in the face of all odds"

i have just been so bothered the last handful of months, mainly on this board listening to all demanding of all, that we must live one way and one way only to be a valuable person to this society

why cant we find the worth in the drunk or addict or smoker or person that uses food for pain, or whatever. or the cell phone user, or the shy person that i pods it in crowds, or the repug or flaming liberal,.... black white gay woman man

why.... cant we have more people in this world that can love the addict, smoker, cusser, fat person

we have become such a harsh and demanding society. i am sad for what my children will have to endure. and it is not just the liberals. i have been on a repug and dem board. all the things we are wanting freedom for on this board, they are demanding laws,. all that they dont, we demand the laws.

just put a friggin chip in us and remote us thru life to make all of us clones stepping perfectly in a beautifully perfect way.

and those that are genetically less, the ugly or the one that doesnt have at least an above i.q. they are disposal, of no value, worthless in our society that we create

ok.... i ranted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwin Donating Member (499 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #111
113. Ok, I'll give you all of those
except for the cell phone users...specifically while driving. Those people are WMD's with drivers licenses. Hate 'em, I want lots of laws banning 'em, and the death penalty...er...ok...life in prison, for the second violation :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #113
114. lol lol lol
thanks for the laugh

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:45 AM
Response to Reply #111
115. I cry about this..
I cry for the people who can't be perfect enough not for society or in them self, this hateful hard culture that demands to be worthy of love,attention or even human dignity that they fit in,act in perfect poise in difficult circumstances...or else..I cry for those who can't lose weight,can't get off a drug,can''t endure this world and are chewed up and spat out by the snotty ones the"perfect" ones the"beautiful" popular shallow people who when I look into their eyes remind me of whited sepulchres...raising themselves to sit in judgment of everyone else..How I hate that game.

I cry for them because I cry for myself too.. This world is so fucking evil.It is hell. And the smug people who are not accepting of others because of various flaws they have well, that haughty arrogance and ill stolen confidence is evil too, and it scars the human spirit,this sickening cowardly social rejection, this elitism and stigma and I HATE it..Yet people do it and they NEVER stop. Because scapegoating soothes and elevates the savage ego by tearing a tender wounded soul apart and I HATE it..

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #115
118. thank you underground. how perfectly eloquently you speak
we use to be in the majority. it hasnt always been this way. i hate it to.

i was talking to a friend and she says, talking to a friend, the friend says, people that sing in their cars REALLY bother me.....

really bother her.... what, cause they are happy. cause they are bolting out sound. because they dare to walk out of her tight ass position of how we are suppose to appear.

the teenager that dyes the hair, tattoos the body and pierces everything, i smile, i say wow. i say you go person. they know they are asking for rejection, but the grander gift instead of giving them what they expect..... give them acceptance. cause really what they want is for soemone to be able to go beyond our rigidness and still accept them.

the dirty pooor who keep their eyes down because they know they are lower in our society. i reach and touch, make the eye contact, smile love to them. i think i give to them. but what goes thru my heart, really.... it is all for me.

more people should try it. and see what they receive in return. the next time the thought of disgust or disdain is present when eyeing someone, go past that and embrace the person,.... and see what we get. be selfish, truly selfish and see what we get when we love all....really an awesome gift. so i guess the moral of the story, i wish people would truly be more selfish to receive gift instead of deny themselves and project a darkness onto another. a person who may not be sittin in darkness, but in our mind. creating dark to live in ourself.... effecting our world, not theirs that we decide who are less.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #115
119. another story. a woman in the library.
she had to be a good 150-200 pounds over weight. wasnt pretty. toothless. not much hair. oxygen thing out of her nose. arms scaling with some skin disease. i specifically zeroed in on her, and put hand on should and asked for her help. i was looking for a good mystery writer and she was just thrilled, thrilled to particpate in my selection. and her daughter was just thrilled to have a person from outside of her world, come in. we talked for a while. she was so happy to help.

you know what it does for my boys to watch me go to the rejects, the disposibles in our society time and again?

i am one. they have already learned. and they love me so much. yet i am one. they see it everywhere. i dare to be hooked on cig. they see how i am rejected. how all that i am, is a smoker. all the love they receive, all the knowledge and wisdom i give them, all the confidence i build, all the grace we live in, the pure love in family safety and security, dismissed and i am throw away, because

i dare to be hooked on cigs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #119
146. Unlike most " fanatics of healthy"
I don't mind cigs. I'll say something only when it really makes me uncomfortable..If I have smokers over I ask 2 things of them..If there is more than one smoker,that they don't light up all at the same time..or chain smoke continually , because when the air has hit a certain saturation point,my eyes will burn,and if I have a sore throat because of my bone spurs I ask they don't smoke when I have a throat infection..I am a non smoker.And if a smoker is over I don't force them out in thunderstorms and blizzards, I crack a window first and wait until the air hits that point before I ask. ..why? because I don't want them to feel unwelcome,or like scum,I enjoy thier company and respect them as people ,and alot of people are addicted to something or 'nother in this hostile world , and there are addictions that can make a relationship impossible or dangerous like crystal meth.So looking at the situation so what's a little smoke,it will not interfere with a relationship If I have any say.At least it is not crack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #146
155. i dont
smoke in my home or someone elses that is a non smoker. i go out in the blizzard, but.... we are probably in good conversation and they come out with me. i have anti smoker, hardlline friends. when we first got together i would hear the abrasive stern judgement. yet i would go to have a cig, and they would follow along in conversation. until i saw, ..... it didnt bother them. all mouth. i dont like smoke. i cant breathe in it. i dont like the smell. right now at kitchen table i have four windows opened. window and sky roof in car opened. i cant stand the smoke not being cleared out. i am certainly empathitic to a non smoker sitting in smoke

but that is my point, your post. it is what it is. you dont make it into a drama that a whiff of the smell, will put you out. the end. death.....

thanks for your post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #119
154. wrong place
Edited on Wed Jun-07-06 09:09 AM by seabeyond
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spacelady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 11:09 PM
Response to Original message
105. I am a short female, I have been bullied.
Somehow it seems more comfortable to me to be bigger than is considered fashionable and I also like to be stronger and faster than a mosquito, so if I am unhappy about my weight, I just think about the man who is my soulmate, my daughter who loves me and my family who sees me as their wonderful, smart relative. Then I feel good for a while until some fashion afficianado makes me feel like a troglodyte.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
allalone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:00 AM
Response to Original message
110. hey
I count on those big portions to make my meal for the next day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 04:03 AM
Response to Reply #110
169. Bastards will probably want to charge the same for less food dammit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
121. I agree..
... the FDA should learn how to catch dangerous drugs like Vioxx before they reach the market, and stop worrying about bullshit they will never have any control over, i.e. portion size at restaurants.

Fact is, the size of burgers has been steadily declining since I was a kid. Answer, now I buy 2.

Trying to regulate behavior the way the FDA seems to have in mind is a waste of everyone's time and money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
123. neo-victorians and the new criminalizing through medicine
All states of mind, all lifestyles will soon be medical conditions that
involve mandatory treatment in prison. The new medicine is so very very old.

(r coupladaysago)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #123
176. You got it right!
The whole point of this thread!! Thank you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
otohara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
124. I'm Glad The McDonald's of This Country
and the crap food sold in grocery stores were FORCED to make nutritional info available, finally in 1994. As a person with some food allergies and I choose not to eat anything with high fructose corn syrup and other sugar additives, I'm quite glad.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
127. Sometimes the slippery-slope, is real.
This is why, as a non-smoker, I'm against all public smoking bans.

It's easy to stand by and ignore your rights being taken away when it's something you agree with.

Sooner or later they'll encroach on something you disagree with.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
131. When "half portions" are offered, I usually select them.
Or I'll order a tasty appetizer rather than a huge meal. I also walk a lot. So I'm in decent shape--although I've never been skinny in my life.

Smoking bans don't bother me at all. Houston restaurants have been non-smoking since September & are doing fine.

The guidelines for women who might get pregnant can be ignored by those who are 100% sure they'll abort any unplanned pregnancy. Most of those guidelines are just basic good sense. One reason they were presented is to convince insurance companies to cover young women.

Restaurants have found that many people want huge portions--so I doubt the government will really try to stop them.

Live your life as you wish. I won't try to stop you.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spinoza Donating Member (766 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
133. Great rant.
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 12:07 PM by Spinoza
It's a little known fact just how health obsessed the Nazi culture actually was. 'Physical Culture' was strenuously advocated and encouraged throughout Germany. Hitler himself was a strict vegetarian, hated smoking and would not permit the use of tobacco in his presence. We now know (the unpublished Mein Kampf II) that had he won the war he was planning to ban tobacco worldwide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 04:10 AM
Response to Reply #133
170. Nazism was flesh-obsessed, reactionary politics is organism in action
Fascist culture is all about the flesh, its hormonal urges, the basest instincts, reactions.

The right as well as the left, in America, are far too reactionary, far too body obsessed, far too much about ordering everyone or indulging hormones.

Falwell can't reign in his flesh enough to be polite to people who think differently.

Ann Coulter can't reign in her hormones enough to stop creating melodramas.

Many liberals obsess on the type of food they eat, the type of exercise they do, the superficial aspects of language.

It's all about a certain type of order, and the body.

Part of it, I think, is made worse by the stress of 9-11, etc.

But the world has been changing at ridiculous rates, information overload came years ago, and America is the super power and its culture seems to absorb the currents of the world and manifest them for all to see.

I think Europe probably has some of these tendencies. Musslims riot over cartoons and the response in free secular countries is to consider blasphemy laws.

It is rather non-rational, rather unprincipled in its pragmatism, the culture affecting the entire world right now.

America just does it in its own way, apparently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
136. Unhealthy food is slow poison, plain and simple
Heart disease is the biggest killer around today. You would probably have no problem eradicating polio - why not eliminate heart disease?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
142. A distraction from dealing with the uninsured & cutting research funds
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 05:14 PM by OzarkDem
The GOP's idea of dealing with health care issues is to blame people for getting sick.

It makes it easier to rationalize throwing people off Medicaid, gutting regulations for health insurance and cutting funding for medical research.


Keep up the drumbeat, it makes everyone uncomfortable, but we have to "raise awareness".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
143. 'Nobody knows why people get fat'...NONSENSE.
People get fat because their caloric intake exceeds their body's needs. Americans in particular are fater than the citizens of any country in the world because most of us lead sedentary lifestyles, drive rather than walk or bicycle even to go short distances, and eat unhealthy high-fat, carbohydrate-rich processed foods in portions approximately DOUBLE what's normal in most of the rest of the world and drink soft-drinks like they were water.

Go to continental Europe; you don't see many fat people. The contrast between the number of overweight people one sees in any European city and in any American city is startling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #143
147. Simplistic...
It isn't always so simple in a complex world.Every body is unique.

I have lost and gained many times my metablism is fucked from dieting. Dieting does not work if it did we would all be thin.
In europe certain foods are banned. In europe cities are planned around people not cars. In europe there is more regulations on pollution than the US..Also in europe there is not such vicious fat phobics..for starters..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 03:44 AM
Response to Reply #147
152. Actually, I have to agree with SJ
and I've struggled with weight issues my entire life. You're right-diets don't work at all. Diets are temporary, and once you go off a diet your metabolism, which has reset itself to the lower calorie intake, slows down so that it requires fewer calories to maintain the same weight. Thus you gain weight after ending a diet.

The key, I've found, is to make PERMANENT changes in your diet. For me that means eliminating ALL sugars, corn syrup, artificial sweeteners, processed foods, white enriched flour, fried foods, trans fats, and caffeine. I have fibromyalgia, CFS, ADD, and hypoglycemia-if I don't stick to this diet then I can't function. That's a pretty strong incentive to make it permanent.

No way of eating is one size fits all, of course. Have you spent much time in Europe? I have to wear a fucking ionic air purifier when I spend much time in Paris-or nearly any major European city. Nearly everyone smokes over there and there are a lot of diesel vehicles; on some days you can almost eat the air with a spoon.The portions sizes ARE a good bit smaller (except at the fast food establishments), and you do need to walk A LOT more to get around there than you do here. If I spend just two weeks over there I can expect to lose around six pounds. That's no accident. That's a change in lifestyle.If we demand decent public transportation in this country, pedestrian friendly streets, and eat smaller portions of healthier foods then at least 80% of us who struggle with our weight will get thinner.Sometimes the answers are fairly simple, but that doesn't make putting them into practice easy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #147
153. You mention dieting--but you did not mention exercise.
Most Europeans eat well. But they get more exercise. I live in Houston--definitely planned for the auto age. But I manage to walk--because I get off my ass & do it.

What foods are banned in Europe--besides GM crops?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #143
171. Can you read, dammit
High fructose corn syrup is more prevalent in US processed foods than elsewhere.

MSG also is very prevalent.

Both can contribute to weight gain, and MSG in particular goes by many names, it can be difficult to track it down on labels.

For those who are actually allergic to MSG or something, it can be a challenge. Especially if they don't know that.

I.e., they can control calories, but if they are eating something they are alergic to, or something that has been known to make rats obese, and don't know it, it's all a crazy game, now isn't it.

Sorry for being snarky but I'm rather irritated at ignorance right now, and yours seemed willful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 03:12 AM
Response to Reply #171
183. I don't eat either, but I still gain weight when I don't exercise
I don't eat processed foods, HFCS, MSG makes me sick, so I've avoided it for 20 years. I don't eat meat, white flour, sugar,fried foods, much dairy, caffeine,or artificial anything...but I still gain weight if I don't exercise. If you don't control what and how much you eat you'll gain weight. If you have an average to slow metabolism and you don't get daily exercise you'll gain weight. Yes, HFCS can create a blood sugar imbalance that will eventually cause weight gain, but what Spider Jerusalem wrote sure as hell isn't "ignorant"; it's true in most cases.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
156. The real cause of skyrocketing health costs may be the obesity epidemic.
Massive corporations and fast food companies peddle the worst possible shit they can, and stupid Americans addict on it.

Fat, salt, sugar, but no nutrition. No nutrition.

To the point that their bodies cannot support the weight and their systems begin breaking down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoSheep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:46 AM
Response to Reply #156
164. And I have higher insurance premiums because of it. I understand the OP's
point...I don't want the state telling me what I can and can't do. But one must not use that tact to make an excuse for ignoring the cost to their own life and society because of these particular problems. I am a smoker. I know it is killing me and I know that smokers raise the cost of health care across the board. Therefore, when a television commercial points it out...I can't deny it. It sucks. I'm an addict.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:48 AM
Response to Original message
165. As cold as it sounds.....
I'm beginning to believe that fat folks really don't care about the facts, they're simply concerned about not being blamed.

I'm flame ready, but as far as I can see (help to see beyond would be appreciated), the only interest fat folks seem to have is to avoid being blamed.

I know folks think I'm anti-fat-people (or whatever the phrase might be). I'm not. I treat fat folks no differently than I do others (with 1 or 2 fair exceptions). But as much as folks wanna yell at me for whatever, they might do well to address the PERCEPTION, which is NOT unique to me, that fat folks' only interest is to avoid blame.

It really IS a common perception. And yelling at people with that perception REINFORCES the perception. If you wanna eliminate the perception, address it directly.

If you don't care, that's fine as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 04:17 AM
Response to Reply #165
172. Your ignorance..
You said
I'm beginning to believe that fat folks really don't care about the facts, they're simply concerned about not being blamed.

Blame point a finger and scapegoat yeah that'll help demoralized fat people become perfect bodies in the master race now won't it. Ignore pollution medication side effects,the emotions,traumas,HFCS and additives in food,Ignore air pollution contamination and stress, Lets blame the victims it's the EASIEST way out!

Talk about turning a "health issue" into a medieval style MORAL problem right out of the dark ages church that has no place in a modern culture.
Attitudes like yours is at the heart of alot of bigotry.One upmanship,blame the victim,ignore information you don't like....I blame YOU for your ignorance of the EXPERIENCES fat people go through and your failure to empathize,and your greed..Believe me fat people are SCAPEGOATED already,your blame is a drop in the bucket of HATE and discrimination they face everyday,and it is not ALWAYS their fault,it's bigots like you who are keeping the hate alive and excusing it. Thanks for being so ignorant,bigoted,so self righteous so everyones rights can get eroded by health police "for their own good" .. All so you can blame someone else instead of empathize with them like human beings..It takes guts to care,to listen and to empathize ..blame is the game of cowards bullies and authoritarians.If you don't like how you look change it.Quit blaming and start caring,listening and empathize.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #172
178. A perfect example of what I said....
(1) Everything you said is aimed at, and ONLY at, "don't blame fat folks". Nothing else apparent to the eye is of interest to you.

(2) I didn't blame fat folks (not for being fat, at any rate). You (all) keep SAYING I do, but I just didn't.

(3) You (all) remain completely unwilling to address the PERCEPTION (of which I am far from the only holder) that fat folks' primary, if not unique, interest is in avoiding blame. Indeed, you REINFORCE that perception, in virtue of your response to my request that the perception be addressed being "quit blaming".

I could give a rat's ass about blaming. I just think it would be helpful to address the question "Why is there a PERCEPTION that fat folks' primary interest the avoidance of blame? Is there any truth to that PERCEPTION? If not, what can be done to attenuate the perception?

Ok, that's a few questions, but they're closely related at least...

The PERCEPTION of blame-avoidance is NOT the same thing as *blaming*. It just isn't.

If the perception of blame-avoidance, to the neglect of all other issues, were lessened, I think that would be a significant step to getting better camadaerie from non-fat folks.

(shrug) Maybe not, though - just seemed like a promising line of attack to me...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carl_pwccaman Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 04:39 AM
Response to Reply #165
174. ALL? Perceptions about ALL fat folks? Overgeneralizing?
It seems to me that whether or not someone is sensitive or defensive, one might ask WHY?

Some people may be over-sensitive, defensive, but is it because?:


  • They have been bullied in the past?

  • They are unable to find a way to change something?

  • There are complications others don't seem to understand?

  • They are being mischaracterized by people who really don't know them/the situation?

  • The issue is being over-simplified?

  • Large numbers of people are being over-simplified and stereotyped?



Those are some serious possibilities.

Someone capable of complex thought, who has some discipline in their mind, should be able to:


  • Read

  • Understand some of the subject headers

  • Read some key posts

  • Figure out that MSG and High Fructose Corn syrup can be allergies or whatever

  • Figure out that certain medications cause weight gain

  • Figure out that not every over-weight person fits the same mold

  • Figure out that saying 'fat people' without qualifications is simplistic



You should be able to figure out that stereotyping 'fat people' without at least qualifying which ones, is sort of like saying something about Blacks, women, gays, Arabs, or Jews, without specifying anything more than 'you people'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 04:40 AM
Response to Reply #174
175. Thank YOU!
Smile...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:54 AM
Response to Original message
168. Ban junk food in schools
http://www.channel4.com/life/microsites/J/jamies_school...

Hey, I know it sounds crazy, but maybe if we teach some of our children to eat healthy and appreciate actual good food, instead of deep fried processed crap with a ton of sugar pumped into it, they might grow up to eat healthier?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mars67 Donating Member (5 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
177. ...hate to be inconsiderate BUT...
...Thin people in MOST societies are judged to be more attractive and more desirable. Many studies agree with this assertion (look 'em up for yourself as they are numerous)and it is a result of evolutionary biology. Although many cultures (even when considering various historic periods/societies) differ in what is considered attractive two primary factors are universal: 1. Body Symmetry and 2.Body Mass Index (mass vs.structure). After reading many of the posts on this topic I can't help but think that there are many here who are overweight and feel they must defend their size, diet and lifestyle.I might have been among you at one time. I was, two years ago, 100lbs overweight, had high cholesterol level, high blood pressure, knee problems from the weight and fatty liver syndrome. I decided to make a change and began working out regularly and completely changed my diet. I decided to go vegetarian (later vegan) and work out 3-4 days per week (now 6-7). I began by walking, then jogging, now running/hiking and a weight lifting program. I actually spend much less money on food after changing my diet and use what I save for gym fees (I am a social worker and earn around $28,000 in the great state of GA.). I now have no health problems, lost 105 lbs. and have never been in better shape (my Dr. says I have the cardiovascular system of a well trained athlete!). I look great and people treat me completely different than when I was fat. And you know what, I like it and feel no guilt about this particular societal peculiarity. Nope, none at all. I realize that there are some folks who have medical (physical/mental health) conditions, take medication etc.. which prevent them from losing weight. However, many, many folks here in the States eat too much (and eat high calorie, high saturated fat, high cholesterol diets) and exercise too little. Obesity IS rampant and all it takes is to look around a bit when in public. We are a nation of (increasingly) large people whose health problems are put in check by prescription medications in order to prolong life. I feel that almost anyone,regardless of race, class and budget AND if properly motivated, can take charge of their lives and lose weight (if you are 20 or more lbs overweight generally). The way society (generally speaking) treats overweight people (I have seen the scowls, the snickering and head shaking myself) may be unfair but hey, sorry, it's how things go. Given our society is also very unhealthy/overweight this makes us a bunch of hypocrites but we are also products of our genetic/evolutionary tendencies. Here is a pretty good link about "attractiveness" on Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #177
179. Antime some one prefaces a post with
"hate to be inconsiderate..but..

It means they are inconsiderate,,a preface does not a bigot earse sorry. You could be more sensitive and choose words better but no you chose to be inconsiderate hence you apologized before you were rude but that does not earse your intention and choice of words.A bully is a bully even when the bully is pretending to listen or care,It';s a GAME you play.
And because you statrted your post with a game,I'll disregard the rest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-09-06 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #177
180. bullshit...

...Thin people in MOST societies are judged to be more attractive and more desirable. Many studies agree with this assertion (look 'em up for yourself as they are numerous)and it is a result of evolutionary biology. Although many cultures (even when considering various historic periods/societies) differ in what is considered attractive two primary factors are universal: 1. Body Symmetry and 2.Body Mass Index (mass vs.structure).


Culture is learned

Human infants come into the world with basic drives such as hunger and thirst, but they do not possess instinctive patterns of behavior to satisfy them. Likewise, they are without any cultural knowledge. However, they are genetically predisposed to rapidly learn language and other cultural traits. New born humans are amazing learning machines. Any normal baby can be placed into any family on earth and grow up to learn their culture and accept it as his or her own. Since culture is non-instinctive, we are not genetically programmed to learn a particular one.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/culture/culture_2.htm


So who teaches kids to fear and hate fat and food and thier bodies? Who makes big money of the diet/health/fashion racket?


I remember watching David Letterman narrating a still shot of rotund pitcher Terry Forster. Savouring each phrase, he described Forster as a "load", a "silo", a "fat tub of goo".

Aside from its complete assholery, the striking thing about this vitriol is how popular it was. "Fat tub of goo" was briefly a national catch phrase, such was the hilarity to all--except to Terry Forster, out of baseball a year later and now appearing on worst-athletes lists despite his years as an ace reliever with a .397 lifetime hitting average.

It's easy to find jokes like this, or instant-sumo outfits, or Web sites devoted to sidesplitting (ho-ho) inveigling against fat people. The difficult bit to accept is that it's not just comedians, "the media", or bad people taking shots at fat people. The bigot could be anyone.

Someone like me.
http://www.straight.com/content.cfm?id=2793

Food will forever be connected with nurture, with the sacrificial act of care, of painstaking preparation, the treat (the bar of chocolate that awaited me on the sideboard on arriving home from an arduous day at school). My daydream interrupted by a passenger taking the seat next to me on the bus, grudging the intrusion of a small part of my thigh over the arbitrary dividing line.

The social penalties of obesity are distressing and debilitating. We are subjected to a thousand petty ostracisms from seat sizes to the contents of clothes racks stopping before our size (segregated shopping for garments thus depriving us of one of womanhoods sanctioned pleasures, the group outing to the High Street. The feelings of awkwardness at dragging them into the cramped quarters of our specialised outlets compounding the sense of exclusion they are oblivious to when we are expected to shower them with approval as they emerge from the changing rooms in a seemingly limitless succession of fashions. In stark contrast moreover to the three or four outfits that suit us if we are lucky). Constant prods to remind us (as if the looks of disgust and barbed comments from strangers did not constantly torment us) that our bodies exceed normal boundaries....
The holy grail of guaranteed weight loss, holding out the hope not of eternal life but the more earthly consolation of an eternally swelling bank balance has fired the imaginations of inventors since fat phobia was elevated to respectability.

http://www.redemptionblues.com/?p=201

And here are some people brave enough to break fat phobic cultural taboos and be true to thier desires.. Are THEY deviants to you?

http://www.answers.com/topic/fat-admirer
http://www.deviantdesires.com/askme/fas.html
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/4984/fatadmirers.h...

WE live in such a sad fucked up world and cultural conditioning has made it all worse.. At least for those scapegoated by it.

But than again I don't expect people so invested in fat bigotry to sympathize with fat people,understand them or care . For it is fat people (maybe gay transgender disabled or black,it could be anyone outside of the perfect cultural "norm" that we all must fit into or die trying whom they exploit to feel good about themselves,they might risk losing"status"....

And bTW this is how NORMAL came to be..

In tracing the linguistic development of the word "normal," we can expose the instability of the concept on which many interventions, including the surgical treatment of intersexuality, rest. The word has its English language origins in the seventeenth century when "normal" served to label the carpenter's tool, also called a perpendicular. Early meanings of the word were attached closely to measurement. Notions of measurement carried through to the nineteenth century in the sciences of chemistry and physics in terms such as "normal reaction" referring to the expected chemical reaction and "normal state" referring to the usual state. The turn in meaning in the mid-nineteenth century reflected a shift from measurement of external physical phenomena to measurement of the human body and its characteristics. Beginning in the 1840s, the word "normal" came to mean "constitutive, conforming to, not deviating or differing from the common type, regular or usual" (Oxford English Dictionary). But it is this use of "normal" in reference to the human body and its characteristics that has significance for the creation of the category of Other and the construction of deviance.

Several important developments, including the use of "medical statistics" paralleling the shift in the meaning of "normal," occurred in the mid-nineteenth century. Medical statistics sought to ascribe numbers to bodily characteristics. Borrowing from error theory in astronomy, the French statistician Quetelet proposed that human characteristics, like height and weight, fall into a distribution and could be averaged to create l'homme moyen, the average man. The concept of the average man that emerged from statistical science can be contrasted with the classical philosophical aesthetic concept of the ideal body.

http://www.phen.ab.ca/materials/het/het10-01b.html

And this NOrmal game is what made scapegoating people that are not"normal" so important.It's sad and scary when you see who PROFITS off of this Normal game and how readily people bought into this lie..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mars67 Donating Member (5 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #180
181. AND BULLSHIT right back at you!
Wow, you are quite perceptive. I guess the all caps "BUT" gave away the fact that I was not really hating to be inconsiderate. Not much escapes you (except the spell check function. You misspelled the word erase twice!). I thought it was really funny how in your first reply you said you would not "play my game" then in your SECOND post you decide to do just that and add your "borrowed" text and links. Hey, thanks for playing my game! You may want to re-read my post again because nowhere in it did I argue that culture was not learned. This is something you decided to pick up on because you had some good links to someone else's' writing which you "borrowed" or linked to without giving due credit (I believe that is called plagiarism. Maybe you should look it up or at least spell check it). In fact your entire post and replies are basically the writings and thoughts of others because you do not have the capacity to do the research and then formulate your own analysis and opinion. I can only guess that (based on "your" passionate writing) you are obese. You seem VERY defensive and touchy about being large and can only lead me to believe that deep down you are sad, unhappy, whatever, about your weight. I have been there (see my post) and did not like myself very much so I decided to do something about it. You can try all day with all your evidence ( really it's just junk science and apologist nonsense mixed with pseudo sociology/anthropology). The simple fact is:being overweight is NOT HEALTHY. The overwhelming majority of physicians will tell you that being significantly overweight leads to: high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, diabetes, joint/tendon fatigue, stroke and ultimately an early death. Of course you are free to eat excessively and abuse your body, hell, the majority of Americans do it every day. Another incontrovertible fact is (barring any serious disease/disability) that you can lose the weight. Calories in vs. calories expended. It's as simple as that and me and millions of others are living proof. Eating right (balanced diet of healthful foods) and exercise (using more calories than you take in) will lead to weight loss. You can try to prove me wrong but you will just come off looking ridiculous and nutty. Also, your example of human learning (yes, culture IS learned but biological evolution and genetic programming is not!). Here is where your argument turns to bullshit: Did you LEARN to be straight or gay? No. You did not, you were born that way, hardwired if you will. This same type of genetic predisposition has played a role in human evolution for thousands and thousands of years. We are a species who has a genetic compulsion to find a mate who is the healthiest, most successful, most symmetrical MOST DESIRABLE in order to propagate with. Now, of course, through cultural learning we know that we don't have to mate with another or even at all so there is no burden to enact these hardwired predispositions. Also, can you explain how throughout MOST cultures and societies in the world thinner/healthier people are considered more desirable? I realize there are some exceptions but by and large thinner (therefore more symmetrical/proportional) people are judged to be more attractive and desirable. This is not only due to media images of the thin because many societies who don't have the daily barrage of thin models, actors etc... STILL are shown to prefer thinner/symmetrical/proportional humans. It's been awhile since my college days but I still remember a lot of those anthropology and sociology classes and they all taught the information I have just shared. It may be a hard reality for you to face but being healthy (not being obese, generally more than 20 lbs over ideal weight based on body structure) is not healthy (mentally or physically) or attractive. Most of the rest of the world thinks of the U.S. as a nation of fat people. We already have enough problems with our image around the world and I for one am not going to be part of the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 03:27 AM
Response to Reply #181
186. Yep I am fat and I think fat people are human beings
Who are entitled like ALL the other people in the world to being respected ,listened to andnot abused. I don't give a crap what you think of me or my weigt .Got a problem with that?Yeah I write passionately about subjectsd that effect me LIKE ANYONE ELSE that has an issue that effects them personally..Duh! At least I am not an asshole to people who are not assholes.Get over youirself, grow up and read through my typos and cope with it..Are you that BAD of a reader with such poor comprehensiuon skills you can't read past typos?? If so,.., you ain't worth running a spell check for.

All Obesity information out there in this country is rife with hysteria, pseudo science, bigotry and misinformation,with a tad of good information buried in it. The world is very complex.Science does not know all there is to know about the world,the way bodies fuction and cannot figure out why people are getting fat so fat..YET. Science just does not have as many answers as they pretend to have on TeeVee. If they did the"obesity epidemic" would be over with already. Because fat people are scapegoated and nobody likes to be mistreated.People will do practically anything to avoid being a paraiah if they can help it.Even cut off an arm lose a year of life or cut out half thier stomach out to "fit" the "norms" just to avoid dealing with bigoted assholes.I have dealt with assholes over gender and weight and they all sound the same.Make the same lame self aggrandizing comments the same ignorance,and nit picks.You are just another one of the same old shit.

Diets obviously don't work when 95 percent of sucessful dieters don't keep the weight off after two years. I guess you never look at statistics that you don't agree with already .
Why do you think desperate people get thier stomaches cut in two ,because DIETS DON"T WORK . They will risk thier life more than the obesity does already ,because bigots tear them down and it emotionally hurts them worse than being fat or a risky stomach operation that could kill them . Bullies and bigots are scumbags that cost society more than obesity epuidemics do. .


In Reality looks like Science and fitness gurus can't fix the"obesity" epidemic yet.So what is it with assholes giving unwanted bad advice and these snotty snarky comments with these overbearing egos thinking by being a jerkwad to fat people that fat people will just lose weight from all the hate??. Abuse does not help ANYONE..

Learn to feel empathy or shut up,bully. That is reality. So why be a bigot to fat people? You get a rush out of this shit? Why bash them and blame ? Why get on a superiority trip here of all places ? When conditions in your life change you might find yourself gaining weight and unable to stop it and I bet ignorant people like yourself now will treat you as a lessor human being because of learned cultural bigotry you are excusing like a coward.Feel the hate yourself,than you may change your tune.


I am fat and I am not ashamed of it at all. Fat and fine feline.
My health stats are good.Deal with it.My doctor has declared me healthy.She has not mentioned any health problems.I go to an endrocrinologist and she thinks my diet is better than most people she sees who are thin and people she knows. She is mystified at why I am fat.She is trying to find out why.She told me it isn't anything I am doing.That is my story.

So that said I step in to defend other fat people..Why because so many bigots want to abuse them,blame them and scapegoat. Obesity is the last socially sanctioned scapegoat..And I want to END scapegoating. Weight problems just might NOT be the heavy person's fault at all. So I defened transpeople(like mysdelf), gays, rape victims,any scapegoated person that bigots and bullies like to tear down ..Why? Because I HATE BULLIES.

Fatness does not automatically mean bad health or imply moral inferiority in human beings..But I don't expect a morally inferior bigot and nitpicker to think that complex about an issue that he uses as a rationale to abuse people over..That's why bullies are inferior morally to fat people and anyone else they scapegoat.

Say hello to my ignore button!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mars67 Donating Member (5 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #186
188. Wow, just can't stand an opposing view can you?
So you fail to make any cogent arguments to rebut my reply and decide to use the ignore function. Are your beliefs and evidence so weak that you need to stick your head in the sand and refuse to acknowledge that others have legitimate differences? A couple points here and then I will try to move on to more open minded threads:
1. It says a lot about a poster when they don't care enough to spell check and ensure their post is easily readable. I can wade through typos and poor grammar with little effort but it reflects poorly on writers who frequently allow their posts to be riddled with mistakes. The sad part is most of your posts and replies consist of others' writings (and therefore typo free) and little of your own.
2. I am not going to let you get away with implying I am some sort of bully or bigot. Nowhere in my posts or replies will you find a hateful word about obese people. Folks are free to make any lifestyle choice they wish and I support their ability to do so. I am a well trained, highly educated Social Worker who has spent many years devoted to the service of others. I run a program which works with chronically homeless folks in order to provide them with shelter, housing, mental health services, substance abuse treatment and counseling. I am an empathetic, compassionate and professional Social Worker. I utilize studies, science, statistics and experience to do my job and the rewards are certainly not reaped with piles of money. Don't lecture me about being hateful or bigoted, I am neither. I understand the misery and hopelessness of addiction (yes, food to can be an addiction) and the trap of denial (yes, being significantly overweight often exists with denial). Many obese people are in EXTREME denial about their size and their health. It is much easier to "accept" your obesity and continue to nurture it than to do the hard work and do something about it. Try as you might to convince yourself and others that obese people are not responsible for their size and health, the SCIENCE does not back you up. HUNDREDS of studies have been done on overeating, weight, obesity, exercise and diet and the overwhelming majority of them conclude that MOST people get fat from overeating, lack of exercise and often suffer many ailments directly related to being overweight. These are facts my friend and they are based on good science and medical studies. You are foolish to try and make excuses for the majority of folks who are overweight: It is a lifestyle choice. Like smoking, like drinking, like drug abuse, overeating is also a conscious choice. Yes, some medical conditions (such as my hypothyroidism) make it tough to near impossible to take the weight off and keep it off. I and millions others are living proof that it can be done. I have traveled to many countries all over the world and can safely report that there are NO other countries with the levels of obesity seen here in the U.S. I rarely saw ANY overweight people in Europe (Germany, Scandinavia, Spain, France and England) I saw NONE in Asia (Thailand, Japan and Korea) and only a few in South America (Brazil and Bolivia). And guess what, in studies addressing obesity most researchers found that the U.S. had, by a huge margin, the largest numbers of obese people. In fact, so much so that they termed it to be of "epidemic" proportions. And I did not get my info from the "tee vee" as you have suggested but from reliable sources such as: The New England Journal of Medicine, the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, the Lancet and a myriad of other sources. Lastly, since yo enjoy links so much, here is one for you: http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoacti...
3. I never once said that "dieting" works or is an answer to losing weight and keeping it off. A consistent, healthy diet of nutritional foods and calorie monitoring along with a regimen of exercise ( cardiovascular exercise like fast walking, jogging, running, hiking, biking etc...30 Min's a day minimum, 3-7 times per week) will help you to lose weight and keep it off. It is about lifestyle and NOT dieting. Diets don't work but a healthy lifestyle does. It's not about being a "Nazi" as you put it. It's about making responsible choices to remain healthy for life and feel good about yourself. You can feel good about being overweight I guess but when I was significantly overweight I was miserable.
4. The reality of this life is that society in general does judge you on your body type (even if most of this society is overweight) and makes assumptions, wrong though they may be, about your character. I have read lots of whining here about chemicals, the air, metabolism etc... making folks obese. Not once have I read in these postings an overweight person take responsibility for their weight and lifestyle. As a good Social Worker, a good liberal/progressive, I want to help others see hat they can make positive changes and lead healthier lives. The fact that you compare me and others to "Nazis" and "fascists" destroys your credibility and weakens your arguments. Lots of folks on the right have the same attitudes as you do: labeling people they disagree with as subhuman ans evil, blaming others for their situation in life, accusing others of hatred and bigotry while ignoring/denying the real science and education they espouse. I never once in any of my posts or replies said a hateful word about overweight/obese people. You are just making shit up if you think I have.
So ignore me if you want, thats fine but you are choosing to be intellectually dishonest and running away from the possibility that you might just be wrong in your arguments and assumptions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 03:47 AM
Response to Original message
187. Public health types tend to be pinko-liberals, who hug lots of trees
and wear sandals and talk a lot about the health effects of income disparity. They want Coke machines out of schools, because kids are getting diabetes at an alarming rate, but I dont equate that with fascism. Kids aren't mature enough to make informed decisions about their health. They want universal health care for everyone, which I think is a really good idea. If you think that universal health care is a fascist plot to turn us all into better soldiers for the Furher, I dont suppose there is anyway I can talk you out of it, but I think of it as a way to give our babies a better start in life.

I think what you are objecting to is MANDATED public health, is that correct? I have no problem with allowing (adult) people to opt out of most health care. What I object to is not offering those who want health care and clean air and nutritious food and a healthy psychosocial environment what they need.

Re: women should take folic acid if they are fertile, this is not a mandate, it is an informed consent issue. Nowadays, patients expect to be informed about every aspect of their health so that they can decide. If a woman has a baby with a neural tube defect and her OB GYn never counseled her to take folic acid, there is a good chance she is going to sue him/her for malpractice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sugar Smack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #187
189. I think that you are right about up's assertion about it being mandated.
:loveya: :hi: And undergroundpanther? I love you and wish you all the best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 25th 2014, 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC