Sorry grey, but I have to get this rant out of my system, and this is the place I frequent with the least traffic. :P

When I see an Overweight American, I don't see poor impulse control, I don't see a problem that needs to be fixed, I don't see a health care nightmare waiting to happen, and a certainly don't see someone who hasn't gotten any in a while.

I see American Success. We as a country are so successful we can send the out of shape into battle and win. Our POOR people are fat. Think about that for a second. This isn't a problem, these are the signs of extreme success. I made the mistake of sitting idly by while poor science supporting the dangers of second hand smoke turned into a pogram vs legal locations one would be allowed to smoke. (When the dangers of second hand smoke have a larger effect than the pollution we get on the west coast floating over the Pacific from China, or the odds of getting in a traffic accident, or the dangers of lead from the damned reusable bags all the grocers went to because of the plastic bag ban, you can then legitimately complain about it.)

Right now the only thing limiting the amount of enjoyment we can get out of life is the number of hours we have to live, and the number of those hours we can spend enjoying a great tasting meal rather than slaving over an exercise machine is something we should strive to maximize, not minimize. Granted, we need to be fit enough to haul our fat asses around from place to place, but if I have to be on the same group policy as someone who feels the need to commit to the risks of surfing, skateboarding, and skiing to find enjoyment, I'm damn sure I'm gonna maximize those risks I find enjoyable: Bacon wrapped fried cheese. Deep dish Pizza. A Pastrami Burger, Chile Cheese Fries, and a Large Vanilla Shake, with a side of Clam Chowder. This is where I draw my line in the sand vs the nanny state. No suing fast food joints for making people fat, damnit.

Congratulations to anyone who decides to commit to an exercise program to get fit, but fuck losing weight. Know what they don't tell you? Keeping that weight on while you are gaining muscle makes it easier to continue to gain muscle. Imagine how buff you'd look if you stayed the same weight and just converted all the fat to muscle. Yeehaa!

I'd bet the average surfer / skateboarder / skier etc outlives the average obese person. Being obese is terrible for your body and it can only hold up for so long.

You might say the same is true of the somewhat dangerous physical activities you mentioned; the difference is, if you feel the effects of activities like surfing or skating, it's pretty easy to quit. It is much more difficult to quit being obese.

That said, if a person is happy being overweight, then so be it. Having been there, I find it hard to imagine. I LOVE food. I used to use it as a comfort when I felt low. But I also hated my body and began to hate myself because of it. Also, I knew that I would not live the life I could, the life I wanted to, if I was obese. That is why I lost the weight.

Our poor people being fat isn't so much a sign of affluence as incredibly skewed nutrition. You can cram people full of high glycemic food that will balloon them while keeping them stupid and lethargic, and we have succeeded.

I wouldn't so much want any legislation about what we can eat, but we have to address very serious problems with the results of our hyper-industrialized food chain. Corn should not be in everything, and the people that grow it shouldn't be paid to keep so cheap they can marginalize all other similar crops.

A nation riddled with diabetics is not success.

But Akom, Imagine how much different it would be had you concentrated purely on the muscle growth instead of the weight loss. You would have been equally as fit, and seriously buff as well! The best part? You'd be able to eat more, because everyone burns on average an extra 100 calories per day per 10 lbs of extra weight doing nothing at all!

A nation marbled with diabetics (see, I can use snarky verbs too!) can and will conquer diabetes. Better to have to work on that problem than on how to feed them in the first place.

A bunch of people losing their vision and appendages would use their rapidly diminishing faculties to cure diabetes in between dialysis sessions? A pound of cure is better than an ounce of prevention? Sorry, but that breaks too far from reality to be even remotely realistic. High blood pressure's effect on cognitive ability alone is enough to sink that plan.

The cure for diabetes is not eating like an irresponsible moron.

Focusing on a "cure" for the symptom is like designing an air conditioned sweater so you can wear it in the summer. Maybe possible, but colossally stupid regardless.

Aight Manny cant stand this pile on so back to back my man!

Blame the food all you want if you need an excuse but the truth is it's really your genetics! maybe for the first time in history the U.S. has achieved a level of feeding it's its people that is revealing a defect in genetic makeups.

I was 120# in junior high, ballooned to a whopping 135 by sophmore year and at 43 i top the scales at 150# on a good day and i could go eat 5 greasy pork sandwices topped with bacon wrapped cheese and still probably lose a pound come the morning***
I was raised by depression era grand parents who fried their dinner in the bacon grease from breakfast.
But hey this is modern america its never my fault it has to be mc donalds and the toys right! because if mickey D's didnt offer toys my kids would be begging for brussel sprouts and wheat germ for sure! right?
No one forces bad food down your throat but whats bad for you and your genetic make up might be just ok for someone else. its not the food it's you!




***Devils advocate ok. I still indulge in bad comfort foods but overall do strive to eat healthier and more sensible

Thanks to mass immigration, America is one of the most genetically diverse and intermingled countries on earth. I really have no idea what point you're trying to make.

Well, if an early grave is the bench mark of success than grats us then. Oh and don't forget that all the costs of the care get passed along to those stupid enough to be younger, healthy and within a reasonable weight standard. Seriously, between the geriatric baby boomers and the flood of fatties, how is the healthcare system going to sustain this?

Better question....should it? Do insurance firms take weight into consideration when adjusting rates? Maybe if you are overweight by X amount is it reasonable to raise them or even drop people if they are grossly obese? Give them a grace period to drop the pounds and then kick them to the curb for failure to comply?

No easy answers to this, and besides its spreading. Asia is getting fat too. Its kinda funny to see Chinese girls with a 'dunk such as the ones I laid eyes on in Shanghai the other week. There was a recent report that if everyone on the planet ate like Hong Kong does now, there would need to be the proverbial second planet just to grow all the food.

It's my understanding that heavy smokers and drinkers actually cost less to insure, because they die quicker on average. I'd imagine diabetics are a similar case. If you get type 2 and don't rectify things ASAP, your life expectancy is not good.

In fact, type 2 diabetes is the primary cause of all blindness and kidney failure in adults. It'll take you down pretty quick.

NO wonder I'm so broke. I'm skinny....=/ damn it.

That was a bit of a weird post Maniacles!

Do insurance firms take weight into consideration when adjusting rates? Maybe if you are overweight by X amount is it reasonable to raise them or even drop people if they are grossly obese? Give them a grace period to drop the pounds and then kick them to the curb for failure to comply?

People, including body builders and athletes with high muscle mass percentages, whose BMI (a measurement designed for population measurement and known to be meaningless for measuring individuals) is over a certain amount are unable to buy health insurance unless they join a group that already has a policy (by getting hired, etc.). That's right, not higher rates, just outright denied coverage. Go go health care capitalism at it's finest. /derail All health care insurance companies are in the business of fucking over their customers. They only want to sell to those who the betting prognostications tell them don't need the service they're selling in the first place.

That was a bit of a weird post Maniacles!

Been feeling the need to mount an BMI anti defamation league. The overweight aught to angrily call out their detractors and tell them to fuck off, much the same way Dennis Leary advocated that smokers do.

High blood pressure's effect on cognitive ability alone is enough to sink that plan.

And yet oxycontin and medical marijuana are accepted. Heck, so is aspirin. Don't get me started on alcohol. And yet, somehow, people who use these drugs are able to invent new things. The real question is would they care enough to bother, not whether it could be done.

Air conditioned cardigan sweaters! Why should the Mr. Rogers look be confined to the fall? Did you know he was a Marine? We all could take fashion hints from him. :)

People, including body builders and athletes with high muscle mass percentages, whose BMI (a measurement designed for population measurement and known to be meaningless for measuring individuals) is over a certain amount are unable to buy health insurance unless they join a group that already has a policy (by getting hired, etc.). That's right, not higher rates, just outright denied coverage.

Doesn't that count as a pre-existing condition now?

People, including body builders and athletes with high muscle mass percentages, whose BMI (a measurement designed for population measurement and known to be meaningless for measuring individuals) is over a certain amount are unable to buy health insurance


The BMI part is correct, I am measured on each year for my health insurance. However what your missing is, any insurance company will take a BF% test if your BMI is too high. I am 39 years old, 6'1", and land on 225-230 pounds each year. I am suppose to be in the 190-200 range however, I get a BF% test done and I land at 14%...well under the 19%-20% normal range. I just have more muscle than most at that height. This counts towards a reduction in health premiums, not a denal.

And yet oxycontin and medical marijuana are accepted. Heck, so is aspirin. Don't get me started on alcohol. And yet, somehow, people who use these drugs are able to invent new things. The real question is would they care enough to bother, not whether it could be done.

Your claim was that overindulgence is acceptable (even good?), not moderation. People who irresponsibly overindulge in opiates*, pot, and alcohol aren't much more functional than the people-of-walmart diabetic.

Aspirin is non sequitur. It's not habit forming, has positive health benefits, and the worst it's going to do is give you ulcers. I'm struggling to see your point there.

(* For an idea what you're talking about there, I'd recommend watching The Oxycontin Express (http://www.hulu.com/watch/100279/vanguard-the-oxycontin-express). Abusing that stuff isn't "acceptable" or pretty at all.)

San-

The claim is that some risks are acceptable to take. i.e. "worth it". The risk of dying in a car accident. The risk of a nuclear plant blowing up. The risk of a plane crashing. The risk that the gas pipelines in your neighborhood will explode. The risk that all these electronic waves our mobile devices use will give us brain cancer. The risk that being exposed to violent rhetoric will cause some idiot to act violently. The risk that a mine will collapse. The risk that an iron worker will die in the construction of a skyscraper. The risks I already mentioned about extreme sports. The risk of death by eating tasty food is smack dab in the middle of those.

And have you ever had heartburn or an ulcer? They hurt. Lots.

Ibudin-
Is this something you do for a group plan or one you purchase for yourself. Right now, Fat Entrepreneurs can't even buy overpriced insurance.

Your comparison is completely disingenuous again.

The average American's risk of dying from all of those things combined is far less than their chance of dying from heart disease or stroke. Heart disease alone is our country's number one killer. The only thing that comes remotely close to heart disease here is the aggregation of all types of cancer.

The white American male's average mortality rate has been increasing for a few years now. That's unprecedented in our lifetimes.

off subject but....


Air conditioned cardigan sweaters! Why should the Mr. Rogers look be confined to the fall? Did you know he was a Marine? We all could take fashion hints from him

little know fact is that he wore those sweaters to hide the Tat's. he was not just a marine! he was a beach storming certified bad ass!

The original post deserves a position in the internet Hall of Fame for inanity. Going diabetic from obesity and poor diet leads to all sorts of problems. My father gave up medicine (practicing, that is) due to his neuropathy.

Success would be having the capability to stuff our selves silly day in and out, to put on an extra hundred pounds or three, and not doing so.

A couple of you need to read this: http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/mrrogers.asp

it's amazing the lengths some people will go to to justify their narrow minded hateful judgmental attitudes. :P

Those darn facts and actual evidence are a pain in the ass when you just want to make shit up!

Which doesn't change the fact that regardless of the truth of the matter, you are backing up the position that it's ok to be an ass if the target of such assholedome is behaving in some way you find morally detrimental to his or herself.

This is like me saying "Hey prostitutes are cool people, they should stop taking shit from people for their choice of profession, legalizing their professions is good criminal policy because consensual crimes are the suck" and you coming back with facts about the dangers of being a prostitute. Not only totally missing the point, but also attempting to back a position that it's ok to act like an ass to them and that because of these facts they should just take the abuse if they are unwilling to change professions. /boggle

Not a bad discussion, I give it a 10 for out of the box thinking! Be nice to each other:) We could be living in EGYPT.

Which doesn't change the fact that regardless of the truth of the matter, you are backing up the position that it's ok to be an ass if the target of such assholedome is behaving in some way you find morally detrimental to his or herself.

This is like me saying "Hey prostitutes are cool people, they should stop taking shit from people for their choice of profession, legalizing their professions is good criminal policy because consensual crimes are the suck" and you coming back with facts about the dangers of being a prostitute. Not only totally missing the point, but also attempting to back a position that it's ok to act like an ass to them and that because of these facts they should just take it. /boggle

No. Skipping all of the slippery slopes and non sequitur analogies you keep trying to use as distraction, let's just get to the heart of your original thesis:

Right now the only thing limiting the amount of enjoyment we can get out of life is the number of hours we have to live

Ignore the fact that millions of Americans are suffering hypertension, blindness, loss of appendages, kidney failure, heart disease, stroke, and/or death right this minute as a direct result of their eating habits. Pretend that every hour they live is enjoyed to the fullest.

The undeniable fact is that our eating and exercise habits are directly contributing to an increasing mortality rate in this country for the first time in our lifetimes. So, your own reasoning suggests that this irresponsible behavior is "limiting the amount of enjoyment we can get out of life", since it's reducing "the number of hour we have to live".

It doesn't get more cut and dried than that.

Let's also ignore that millions of people are so poor they are living off government assistance too, because that doesn't dovetail with this "feed me more awesome" thing, all because it's possible to build muscle while keeping some fat? Some fat. Not hundreds of pounds of it.

No. Skipping all of the slippery slopes and non sequitur analogies you keep trying to use as distraction, let's just get to the heart of your original thesis:



Ignore the fact that millions of Americans are suffering hypertension, blindness, loss of appendages, kidney failure, heart disease, stroke, and/or death right this minute as a direct result of their eating habits. Pretend that every hour they live is enjoyed to the fullest.

Is it millions? Link please. And hypertension doesn't belong in that list. Might as well list cramps. That's padding your numbers like the anti gun folk do when they add self inflicted gunshot wounds to their gun violence statistics. Even "Heart Disease" is iffy because it's reversible. You don't DIE from heart disease. You DIE from the heart STOPPING BEATING or the brain's oxygen supply getting disrupted. Heart disease is as misnamed a condition as Alcoholism getting called a disease. Plaque build up is a CONDITION, not a disease. If people can throw themselves out of an airplane and see how low they can get on the altimeter before they pull a parachute, they should have the right to see how much plaque they can build up in their arterial walls without getting a stroke. The fact that more people die of strokes than terminal ground velocity poisoning is only a matter of opportunity.

The undeniable fact is that our eating and exercise habits are directly contributing to an increasing mortality rate in this country for the first time in our lifetimes. So, your own reasoning suggests that this irresponsible behavior is "limiting the amount of enjoyment we can get out of life", since it's reducing "the number of hour we have to live".

It doesn't get more cut and dried than that.

"Irresponsible" There we go again with the name calling. If the hours it's reducing are the hours spent keeping down lousy food and torturing oneself in the gym, that's also a fail argument. Also, it's NOT reducing the number of hours we have to live. It's increasing the nominal odds of dying in the next five minutes. Fundamental statistics error there: one very similar to using BMI for decisions about individuals rather than populations. We are a nation of daredevils tempting fate by our excess. This is something to be proud of, not worried about.

And once again, EVEN IF I'M WRONG, arguing against this position is attempting to justify one's own right to be an jerkass without being called a jerkass because of the behavior of the target of the jerkassing. "He deserved my scorn, he's a fattie" doesn't cut the mustard.

Let's also ignore that millions of people are so poor they are living off government assistance too, because that doesn't dovetail with this "feed me more awesome" thing, all because it's possible to build muscle while keeping some fat? Some fat. Not hundreds of pounds of it.
Why not hundreds of lbs of it? Now you don't need to buy that 300 lb weight set to do squats! Fat is just free exercise equipment for poor people! :P

Yes, it's millions. Where have you been for the last few decades? You seriously need to stop typing for just a few minutes and start reading: http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/factsheet11.htm

Hypertension is closely associated with obesity, heart disease, and diabetes, and it directly leads to kidney failure and stroke. It doesn't matter though. Even if you exclude hypertension, it's takes nothing away from my point (which is, of course, why you cherry picked that item and avoided the actual point).

The dichotomy you've been painting is a false one. It's easy to maintain a healthy body weight without ever setting foot in a gym or even exercising much. Healthy, nourishing food can be some of the best tasting and most enjoyable. If shitty, unhealthy food really were the "best", investment bankers would be lining up at KFC with the People of Wal-Mart (http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/).

Oooh, linky time.

Heart disease: Any disorder that affects the heart. Sometimes the term "heart disease" is used narrowly and incorrectly as a synonym for coronary artery disease (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=10267). Heart disease (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=87976) is synonymous with cardiac disease but not with cardiovascular disease which is any disease of the heart or blood vessels. Among the many types of heart disease, see, for example: Angina (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=262); Arrhythmia (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=42334); Congenital heart disease (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=2010); Coronary artery disease (CAD); Dilated cardiomyopathy (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=24226); Heart attack (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=379) (myocardial infarction); Heart failure (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=42321); Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=7845); Mitral regurgitation (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=4409); Mitral valve prolapse (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=423); and Pulmonary stenosis (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=5128).

Source: http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=31193

What the hell, How can this be called a disease and cause of death. Heart Failure is a way to die. Heart Attack is a way to die. Angina? that's just pain. and a sign that it's time to start messing with that blood thinner. And disease? where's the antigen? Arrythmia? that's just the heart beating oddly. How the hell does medicine get away with being so inexact with their terminology. The whole field of terms needs to be rewritten by lawyers, who have exact terms that mean exact things.

"Overall, the risk for death among people with diabetes is about twice that of people of similar age but without diabetes." from the fact sheet.

The only site that i could find that had an annual risk of death chart was for UK. Lets pretend that was the U.S.s

http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/Risk/dyingage.html

I have to be 65 years old before diabetes increases my chance of death this year by more than 1 percent. I call that acceptable risk.

If i lose about 100lbs i can stop taking insulin. Me being fat brought on Type 2 diabetes and I really really want it as gone as it can get. Once i was diagnosed 4 years ago and got my blood sugar in check my eye glass prescription got cut in half as far as strength goes. so to the original post, I want to be thinner :P

Oooh, linky time.

Heart disease: Any disorder that affects the heart. Sometimes the term "heart disease" is used narrowly and incorrectly as a synonym for coronary artery disease (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=10267). Heart disease (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=87976) is synonymous with cardiac disease but not with cardiovascular disease which is any disease of the heart or blood vessels. Among the many types of heart disease, see, for example: Angina (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=262); Arrhythmia (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=42334); Congenital heart disease (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=2010); Coronary artery disease (CAD); Dilated cardiomyopathy (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=24226); Heart attack (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=379) (myocardial infarction); Heart failure (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=42321); Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=7845); Mitral regurgitation (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=4409); Mitral valve prolapse (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=423); and Pulmonary stenosis (http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=5128).

Source: http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=31193

What the hell, How can this be called a disease and cause of death. Heart Failure is a way to die. Heart Attack is a way to die. Angina? that's just pain. and a sign that it's time to start messing with that blood thinner. And disease? where's the antigen? Arrythmia? that's just the heart beating oddly. How the hell does medicine get away with being so inexact with their terminology. The whole field of terms needs to be rewritten by lawyers, who have exact terms that mean exact things.

"Overall, the risk for death among people with diabetes is about twice that of people of similar age but without diabetes." from the fact sheet.

The only site that i could find that had an annual risk of death chart was for UK. Lets pretend that was the U.S.s

http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/Risk/dyingage.html

I have to be 65 years old before diabetes increases my chance of death this year by more than 1 percent. I call that acceptable risk.

What? Whether or not you like the term "heart disease", there's no way you can semantics your way around the fact that it's the leading cause of death among Americans today. Call it what you want, but I'm pretty sure that the 600k+ Americans that die from heart disease each year aren't suffering from "just pain".

You think diabetes is no big deal?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rI9gms9LG5g/TIEOjJ7FtrI/AAAAAAAAAdg/eGEvGQwfxa0/s1600/diabetes.jpg

I'm sure you're right about that person enjoying life to the fullest. Looks like it's going great.

Why not hundreds of lbs of it? Now you don't need to buy that 300 lb weight set to do squats! Fat is just free exercise equipment for poor people! :P

Gosh, I don't know, maybe I'll just have to ask every doctor and scientist in the last few hundred years, all of whom are really sure maintaining body mass over about 30% fat is not a good idea, and all of whom get more sure about it the higher that percentage goes.

http://pmnewsnigeria.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/One-the-Accident-victim.jpg
Driving accident victim. And yet I don't feel the need to stop driving.

Because you take care to avoid accidents while you're driving. If you drove as irresponsibly as you seem to advocate eating, you wouldn't be alive to post this nonsense in the first place.

Similarly, if you want to avoid having to ride around Wal-Mart in a scooter, you must take care to avoid eating yourself into an early grave.

Don't make me break out the victim pics of all the other "acceptable" activities I've mentioned.
Because we all drive the speed limit, and none of us drive drunk. if 2/3rds of all accidents are caused by drunk people, does that mean that drunk people cause more accidents or that 2/3 of the people driving are drunk? What are the percentages of drunk to non drunk people when accidents don't happen vs when they do? Oh wait, yet another abuse of statistics. Sorry, another off topic tangent.

Also, who said anything about eating the types of food I mentioned irresponsibly? I advocate eating them without regret, remorse, and a big fack j00 to anyone who gives you crap about eating them. It's a self limiting process, as savory food quickly lacks its luster when eaten in quantity.

I think there's a complete disconnect between what you've been saying compared to what you've said in the last post.
When I see an Overweight American, I don't see poor impulse control, I don't see a problem that needs to be fixed, I don't see a health care nightmare waiting to happen, and a certainly don't see someone who hasn't gotten any in a while.
Also, who said anything about eating the types of food I mentioned irresponsibly?
Overweight Americans, generally speaking, haven't eaten responsibly. Some of these people are so large that the fat on one side of their arms is not symmetrical to the other side. But in either case, you don't see a problem with overweight Americans.

Humans are designed to eat as much as they physically work. A farmer in the old days was engaged in physical strenuous activity. Given the decrease of physical activity to now, our food requirements are generally less as we work more and more sedentary jobs.

If one has diabetes and doesn't drastically change his way of eating, that's an easy recipe for an abbreviated life. If someone is so foolhardy to stay the course even as his life is in danger, there is no way to win him over to eating right.

We as a country are so successful we can send the out of shape into battle and win.
Members of the service comply with the weight standards. Being overweight is a condition that will preclude enlistment on a medical condition.

Also, who said anything about eating the types of food I mentioned irresponsibly? I advocate eating them without regret, remorse, and a big fack j00 to anyone who gives you crap about eating them. It's a self limiting process, as savory food quickly lacks its luster when eaten in quantity.

If overeating unhealthy food were "a self limiting process", we obviously wouldn't have states with 30+% obesity rates. I don't know what would possibly possess you to even bother making such an obviously incorrect claim.

Of course you've advocated eating irresponsibly. Your central point throughout this entire debacle has revolved around the idea that people should be able to eat whatever they want even if it makes them unhealthy. Between the diatribes on how "heart disease" isn't real and the claims that diabetes is no big deal, I think you'd have a better chance successfully arguing that the Earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaur fossils were put here to test our faith.

Eat as much as you want. If you die young than that is your choice. That and don't call your doctor an idiot when he or she tells you that for every pound of blubber packed on is another pound of dirt shoved out of your grave. Just don't stick me with the tab as a taxpayer and someone who hates paying huge insurance premiums.

Frankly this is one of the first threads in a while that has truely disgusted me, both for its arrogance and stupidy. You might as well be an advocate for chainsmoking and drinking a fifth of bourbon every night. Still, being fat and stupid isn't a crime even if its no way to go through life, right Flounder?

Eat as much as you want. If you die young than that is your choice. That and don't call your doctor an idiot when he or she tells you that for every pound of blubber packed on is another pound of dirt shoved out of your grave. Just don't stick me with the tab as a taxpayer and someone who hates paying huge insurance premiums.
See now you're getting it. I'm not saying the risk isn't there. I'm saying it's acceptable for the benefit provided. The fact that it's one less pound needed to provide adequate exercise during squats, pushups, or any other sort of isometric exercise seems to be ignored.


Frankly this is one of the first threads in a while that has truely disgusted me, both for its arrogance and stupidy. You might as well be an advocate for chainsmoking and drinking a fifth of bourbon every night. Still, being fat and stupid isn't a crime even if its no way to go through life, right Flounder?
...and then you lost it. Fat is fat. Stupid is stupid. There are more skinny stupid people than fat stupid people people. Perhaps I should automatically be disgusted by how inane someone looks if they don't carry any pounds. "Damn why do my eyes have to be offended by the stupidity of that stick?"

Of course you've advocated eating irresponsibly. Your central point throughout this entire debacle has revolved around the idea that people should be able to eat whatever they want even if it makes them unhealthy. Between the diatribes on how "heart disease" isn't real and the claims that diabetes is no big deal, I think you'd have a better chance successfully arguing that the Earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaur fossils were put here to test our faith.

No no no no no. My entire point is that having FAT be the biggest problem we're currently facing is a sign that we've pretty much knocked out all the IMPORTANT problems and are down to what amounts to fixing VANITY issues.

Heart disease, as defined by the very sources you put up, includes things more properly classified as "conditions" and "events" rather than disease. A condition increases the likelyhood of an event in this context, but they all get lumped in together, even those whose conditions have not yet created the events. That's like making a stat that includes gun ownership with gunshot violence (because those owning a gun are much more likely to commit gun violence than those who don't) and trying to use it to bolster the argument that people shouldn't own guns.

Diabetes being nasty has nothing to do with this discussion, it's just you putting it in. It has no more place in this discussion than AIDS has in a discussion about whether Americans should be proud of their tolerance of the openly gay. Guess what, aids is nasty. Someone against gays serving openly might put nasty pictures of aids victims up shoring up their position. And they'd be equally incorrect in the application of that fact.

So those 600k+ people that die of heart disease each year are actually living the American Dream, so long as you find a way to stick your head in the sand and come up with another name for what killed them?

This really is why we can't have nice things. We've got an epidemic that is lowering both the longevity and quality of life in our country for the first time in our lifetimes, and people like you are making excuses. As the cost of treating preventable chronic issues like diabetes and kidney failure begins to accelerate out of control in the next few decades, it will be attitudes like yours which are directly responsible.

600k is a lot when measured vs millions, but starts to look like not much when measured vs billions. And, is besides the point. Show me one study that directly links excess calories to causing diabetes and you'd have an issue. I.E. Eat X excess calories a day for Y number of days plus or minus Z days, and you get diabetes. Nothing like that exists. The best you have are percentage chances of contracting it increase, which is fine for actuary tables, but not fine for individuals. These studies DO exist for fat. Eat 500 excess calories per day for 35 days and your daily average weight will rise by 5 lbs. 500 less, lose 5 lbs. Incontrovertible evidence. Not this "percentage increase in the rate" BS which gets pumped up to OOOOH DOUBLE THE RATE OF THE SKINNY FOLK, which, when you realize that the rate of the skinny folk is 1/1000 at age 40, doesn't really mean much.

I'm just saying, when the worst disease left to fight has an average time till death of 30 years plus or minus 20 years after onset, it's time to count your blessings, and question why you are bothering fighting it rather than accommodating it.

Lets look at this reasoning yer putting here. Fat=diabetic=heart disease=death. My reasoning is Fat=don't have any more important issues to worry about=sign of success

When you are winning so hard you create your own obstacles to keep the game interesting, that still means you are winning. You just value high score more than interesting game.

Because I am fat I:

*have chronic knee and back pains, that are 100% because of the amount of weight I have carried on my body for an extended period of time. I have to take 400mg ibuprofen 3x a day just to function. (which is horrible long term for my liver)

* have type 2 diabetes. Which regardless of your argument is directly due to my weight since amazingly if I dropped al lthe weight I would not have to take insulin and could then eat pretty much whatever i want.

*cannot ride on a theme park ride with my girlfriend because none of the safety equipment fits.

*have to pray to god I get an isle seat and sit next to my girlfriend on an airplane so that I don't blob over onto another person.

*can't shop at a normal department store or even wal-mart because no one carries 5XLT and a 50x29 Pants (i have a long torse and short legs :P ). If i can find clothes at a Big and Tall store or an outlet they cost 10-15% more than normal sizes.

*use any ladders at work. Again adding to the embaracement that I have to ask one of my employees to hang anything.

*cannot jog more than 25 yards without being completely winded.

*get winded playing golf. You know how insane that is to get winded playing golf and walking to the next hole.

* have to get a table at any restaurant because 90% of booths are too small.

* am terrified to sit in plastic chairs because I have broken more than a few in my life.

I'm just saying, when the worst disease left to fight has an average time till death of 30 years plus or minus 20 years after onset, it's time to count your blessings, and question why you are bothering fighting it rather than accommodating it.

Sorry but i had onset of diabetes at 25 so potentially dying in 3 years based on the low end of your scale is not something I want to do and hell 55 is not an acceptable number to me with.

Accommodating all the things listed above make me a miserable person and it has nothing to do with vanity. It has to do with me wanting to do things with my girlfriend and future kids I may have.

So yay for american i don't have to worry about Polio, starving to death, or malaria, but I will die at 35, miserable and a ;eaving a lot of things left on the "Bucket List".

600k is a lot when measured vs millions, but starts to look like not much when measured vs billions. And, is besides the point. Show me one study that directly links excess calories to causing diabetes and you'd have an issue. I.E. Eat X excess calories a day for Y number of days plus or minus Z days, and you get diabetes. Nothing like that exists. The best you have are percentage chances of contracting it increase, which is fine for actuary tables, but not fine for individuals. These studies DO exist for fat. Eat 500 excess calories per day for 35 days and your daily average weight will rise by 5 lbs. 500 less, lose 5 lbs. Incontrovertible evidence. Not this "percentage increase in the rate" BS which gets pumped up to OOOOH DOUBLE THE RATE OF THE SKINNY FOLK, which, when you realize that the rate of the skinny folk is 1/1000 at age 40, doesn't really mean much.

I'm just saying, when the worst disease left to fight has an average time till death of 30 years plus or minus 20 years after onset, it's time to count your blessings, and question why you are bothering fighting it rather than accommodating it.

Lets look at this reasoning yer putting here. Fat=diabetic=heart disease=death. My reasoning is Fat=don't have any more important issues to worry about=sign of success

When you are winning so hard you create your own obstacles to keep the game interesting, that still means you are winning. You just value high score more than interesting game.

In that case, I guess it's bad for your argument (and our country) that those 600k deaths from heart disease each year are just the American deaths. That, of course, is out of ~300m American citizens, a proportion which you yourself admit "is a lot".

There's no need to link excess calories to diabetes. Contracting type 2 diabetes on the way to that early grave is only one route to an obesity-related death. The more fat someone carries on their midsection, the sooner and more likely they are to die. That's fact.

Moreover, obesity has even been shown to correlate with a 50-60% increase in cancer mortality rates in one long-running study (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021423). Turns out, filling yourself full of poison isn't healthy after all. Who knew?!

But poison tastes to good!

Just some background on me. When I graduated high school, I weighed somewhere between 135 lbs and 145 lbs (I am about 5'9"). My father in law died last year at 57 of a heart attack. He had type two diabetes related to being over 300 lbs for probably15-20 years. He had started to lose weight. He lost about 50 lbs, and his diabetes was getting substantially better. His feet were getting substantially better. His occasions of gout were getting substantially better. He still died at 57. I think his was more of a case of too little too late.

That said, it scared me enough to lose weight. November of 2009, I was up to 210 lbs, which on my smallish frame, made me look very fat. I'm down to between 175-180 (and still want to lose another 10-15). I am a very very very picky eater, so going on a diet is very difficult for me. I lost all my weight on portion control (I did watch what I ate to an extent, but didn't give up red meat, fast food once in a while, etc.) You can lose weight eating whatever TYPE of food you want, just not in the QUANTITY that you want. I haven't upsized a meal in a restaurant in almost 2 years. No double Quarter pounders when a single one will do. No large fries when a small will do.

I do drink much better, more coffee and green tea. Less pop with corn syrup. More diet pop when I must have a pop. It's not great for me, but it's not an empty 120 calories either. More fruits, substantially more fruits. Less cheese.

Anyhow, the moral of the story for me, is I'm an asthmatic. Other than a bout of bronchitis last fall, I haven't had to use my inhaler at all since Christmas of 2009 when some of the weight really started dropping. It's so much better that I don't even bother to take my inhaler with me anymore to work when I used to need it daily. I only take it with me on trips just in case I need it due to pollution or weather changes.

I know that's just anecdotal evidence, BUT I can say that losing some weight did something for me that my allergist couldn't. It helped me control my asthma which had horrible day to day effects on my life. Not being able to breathe is a scary thing. Breathing without difficulty can't be underestimated. I can do so much more with my kids now.

I still eat what I want. I don't NEED what I used to eat to feel fullish(i'm never "FULL" anymore completely but that's a good thing). Now, if I could just stop the munchies, the weight would REALLY drop off.

For your consideration:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Xc5wIpUenQ

How lame!, They used an electric smoker, epic fail!

OMG I think I want to be a vegan now....

Working in the health care field, primarily with the very old, very sick, and dying, has left me with a lot less sympathy for the obese. The statistics you're showing on disease and death due to obesity is grossly misleading. You see, so many people die from COPD, Sepsis, diabetes, CHF when they are obese when they would have lived years longer being thinner. I see so so many people 300+ in my hospital, on ventilators after surgery ONLY because they were obese and failed to wean, and since they're obese they become bed bound fast, develop bed sores fast, and die. Wait until you're bed bound sick in your 50's after a bout of something a thinner person could have jumped back from, and you're shitting yourself, cant roll over in bed, smell like a dead animal and then look to your caregives and say "if only I had lost this weight when I was younger". That happens a lot but the death statistic ties into the original diagnosis, not the obesity.

That's a horrible reality. It usually boils down to laziness. It's so much easier to be fat than in decent shape, especially as folks get older and older. Don't be a lazy glutton, you will pay for it in the long run.

:devil

America is becoming obese. Look around. When I was in high school, 17 years ago, the average teen boy was skinny, with a few either really heavy and maybe a couple what I would term "thick". Same with girls. Now at high schools the average girl is muffin topped and the boys are more thick than skinny. This is a problem we're going to pay for in the decades to come.

@ Trikki-- It is laziness and a lack of willpower. Think about how many people undergo Gastric Bypass surgery, or more recently, The Lap Band. Now, clinically, either method is nothing more than a surgical, mechanical way to MAKE someone not eat as much... We all know that most people that undergo this drastically lose weight, although some don't change their habits and gain it back... EACH person that drastically loses weight after undergoing these procedures would have lost the SAME weight had they just use willpower to only eat the same amount of food. So this tells me that willpower is so low that people will undergo the knife in stead of pushing the plate back.

Also I'd like to add this. It is what I call the Oprah Winfrey effect. And I cast this in a negative light. Starting in the 80's Oprah has had hundreds of overweight female guests that struggle with self esteem and ridicule. Now, I commend Oprah for taking this on and trying to help the guests with their emotional problems, But she took the stance that "Its ok to be big and beautiful".... This is both an oxymoron and medically irresponsible. I'm not taking the stance that heavier women can't be or aren't attractive. But let's be real. The average man isn't sexually attracted to the 200+ club. Some may say they are, but thats often only because they're unattractive as well and hey, gotta do what ya gotta do.

Oprah telling obese women that it's ok to be obese was a huge disservice to those women. What she should have told them is that it's not medically ok to be obese, but that shouldn't detract from whether they're valuable as a person. Instead of propping up the obese, she should have worked harder to be a role model and help them return to a normal level of fitness.

Oprah rocks, don't be dissing Oprah! :P

I think what he's looking at is the fact that back in the tribal/hunter gatherer days, an overweight person was considered a rich person. By virtue of the fact that you had a large amount of mass meant you were ready to survive possible starvation and continue the species. It also meant you were a great provider which really attracted the ladies.

It meant that as recently as the Victorian age.

I get the original idea of the post. Our success, unfortunately, is killing us. I just don't think we're doing the health of our society any justice by being overly sensitive to the obese's feelings. It really is this simple.... despite what Oprah, women's magazines, and so forth will tell you... EAT LESS! It really does boil down to that. So many people say they can't lose weight. Utter bullshit. We've gotten so weak as a society that people are undergoing potentially life ENDING surgery to force themselves out of gluttony.

I know some have faster metabolisms, some are hard losers, etc etc.. but you show me one healthy person on the planet that will continue to gain weight if they taper their diet.... it really is that simple.

Think about it... Obese cry and whine about the ridicule they endure, when they can totally fix their problem... what about those with disabilities that can't be changed and the ridicule they may endure...


I have no sympathy whatsoever for the obese.

I have no sympathy whatsoever for the obese.

LOL.... and you're a provider? Or you're just a lowly aide/assistant whose bitter about the menial tasks real nurses and doctors make you do?

I am amused by your bitterness though. If you hate your job do something else. Get off your ass and get educated or you're no better than those you hate. :p

I get the original idea of the post. Our success, unfortunately, is killing us. I just don't think we're doing the health of our society any justice by being overly sensitive to the obese's feelings. It really is this simple.... despite what Oprah, women's magazines, and so forth will tell you... EAT LESS! It really does boil down to that. So many people say they can't lose weight. Utter bullshit. We've gotten so weak as a society that people are undergoing potentially life ENDING surgery to force themselves out of gluttony.

I know some have faster metabolisms, some are hard losers, etc etc.. but you show me one healthy person on the planet that will continue to gain weight if they taper their diet.... it really is that simple.

Think about it... Obese cry and whine about the ridicule they endure, when they can totally fix their problem... what about those with disabilities that can't be changed and the ridicule they may endure...


I have no sympathy whatsoever for the obese.

Say that to just about any woman that has had significant thyroid issues previously...

Yes they are 'healthy' after thyroid surgery, but no, their metabolism is fucked. I have an aunt (well my wife's aunt), she never eats anything but salad and the like, and she's still overweight and can't lose it. She's had problems with it for 30+ years since she had thyroid surgery.

Most obese can control it by diet and exercise, but to make blanket statements that every obese person can help it is faulty.

My sister was one who despite diet and exercise could not lose weight. after Thyroid surgery she quickly went to 125 and stayed there for the last 15 years. little two and a half year old girl living on my property is two or three times larger than average despite drastic diet restrictions. metabolic imbalance is more pervasive than you think.
Honestly this problem is not going to go away until we completely revamp the food industry in this nation to stop pushing nutrition lacking but cheap products at us. the first up should be the sheer evil that is the corn products industry!
Look at the ingrediants label on a can of baby formula and the prime one is "corn syrup solids"! really?? this is what we are starting our infants out on?? and we wonder why obesity is an issue?

I certainly do think its a larger issue than personal willpower at this point. As a society we're often tempted by the faster meal options in the grocery store, but it is physically impossible to eat anything pre-packaged and not exceed your daily recommended dose of sodium or sugar.

We're fucked either way we go in the beverage department unless you are only drinking water. Juice and Soda are by design so sugary that they are full of unnecessary calories that simply aren't needed. The arms race of who's drinks are tastier has pushed all of the companies to continue to add a little bit to their recipe every few years until we reached the point we got now. Its about to the point where each oz of soda has 1 teaspoon of sugar - that's unbelievable! Diet sodas have potentially other issues such as the insulin response leading to weight gain, and while they may be the answer I'm extremely hesitant to put something such as an organochloride or other chemicals which we really don't have a solid grasp on their affects to body chemistry so I avoid them all together.

So why is 1 teaspoon of sugar enough for our iced teas at home but 12 teaspoons of sugar are needed for store bought beverages? Why do we need 10x more salt in our pre-packaged or fast foods than we would use at home? Because over time the companies continued to raise these levels slowly in order to compete and we're hooked at the levels they are now. The way I see it, the only way we'll stop the arms race is with legislation for them to slowly reduce the salt and sugar contents slowly over time back to where they were in the 40s and 50s.

Then there is also the great mystery in our store bought produce that most likely has a lot less nutritional value than the same store bought produce would have had 50 years ago. We are feeding a greater population off of smaller farm spaces, so obviously they will have less nutrients per vegetable/fruit, artificial fertilizers increase the water content of fruits and vegetables (making them bigger, but less nutritional), and ripening agents are making our fruits and vegetables seem ripe long before they are nutritionally sound. The organic movement is obviously a great step towards combating this, but that can't be everything. Our cows and chickens are eating those same lower grade (and cheaper) foods so their nutritional value has gone down too. And back to store-bought, pasteurization in salsa, ketchup, sauerkraut, jellys, apple sauce, and other packaged fruits and vegetables kills off most of the vitamins where before we used methods like lacto-fermentation for preservation (which takes longer and is thus more expensive for the manufacturers).

There is certainly a level of willpower involved, but there is also the reality that it costs a lot more for us to shop at Whole Foods or takes a lot more time to go straight to the butchers and farmers markets. Our food industry has transformed rather rapidly and not necessary for the better and that hamstrings all of us including those extremely health conscious.

It's not necessary to eat organic, free-range, vegan-approved food to lose weight and/or avoid obesity. You can eat pretty terrible food and still achieve/maintain a healthy weight if you just control the caloric intake. More expensive food is often more healthy/nutritious, no doubt, but almost any diet is more healthy than metabolic syndrome.

Its not necessary, but its easier. The poorer you are, the more likely you live in a food desert, the more likely you are obese.
The more you eat out, the more likely you are obese.
The more you eat pre-packaged foods rather than cooking yourself, the more like you are obese.

These are 3 things that are very clearly documented, and 3 things that our society could strive towards changing.

That's all orthogonal to how much you actually eat. Calorie-dense, processed foods make it easy to overeat, but it's absolutely possible to eat a diet of bad food and not get fat.

If you look at our actual consumption over the years, it's not that we started eating more bad food. We were already eating plenty of bad food, just less of it at a time. The real problem is that we ate more of everything:

http://civileats.com/2011/04/05/where-do-americans-get-their-calories-infographic/

But take a look at that graphic. Fruits and vegetables are the type of food that has grown the most and that's kinda a good thing. Added fats and sugars to the diet are a huge portion of the caloric gains, and the last part is carbs. Why would our consumption of everything stay static except for carbohydrates in 20 years?

We eat carbs (breads, pasta, potatoes, etc.) because they are more filling than most other foods. Being full feels a lot better than being hungry. And what has been the largest change in our diet to make us as a population hungrier? Salt content.

I'm not saying on a micro scale there isn't willpower involved, but on a macro level there are scientific changes to our food supply that dictate the general trends. The average weight of the population is growing at the same rate sodium and sugar are being added to our processed foods.

The problem is that processed foods are so devoid any actual nutrition and are so easily absorbed by our systems that you have to eat twice as much to prevent hunger from returning in 3 hours as opposed to 6 that you end up with more calories than you need as the body tries like hell to find a damn vitamin in there somewhere.
Easy experiment make 2 sandwiches on 2 separate days.
one using whole grain bread, real swiss cheese, fancy gourmet stone ground mustard and real ham. the other using .89 cent store bought white bread, processed "swiss cheese" slices(Oil), cheap yellow mustard and chopped and pressed ham slices (Bar S brand for the lowest possible bar there is). then see how long it is before you feel hungry again.

I have a confession. one of my all time favorite foods is corned beef hash in a can. love the stuff. can cook and eat a whole can no problem. the problem comes when you look at the nutrition label.
Servings per can:2
Saturated fat/cholesterol per serving:50% RDA
Sodium per serving:50% RDA

But take a look at that graphic. Fruits and vegetables are the type of food that has grown the most and that's kinda a good thing. Added fats and sugars to the diet are a huge portion of the caloric gains, and the last part is carbs. Why would our consumption of everything stay static except for carbohydrates in 20 years?

We eat carbs (breads, pasta, potatoes, etc.) because they are more filling than most other foods. Being full feels a lot better than being hungry. And what has been the largest change in our diet to make us as a population hungrier? Salt content.

I'm not saying on a micro scale there isn't willpower involved, but on a macro level there are scientific changes to our food supply that dictate the general trends. The average weight of the population is growing at the same rate sodium and sugar are being added to our processed foods.

At the same time, look at the added sugars as a percentage of calories consumed. It actually dropped. Tell that to someone who watches Jamie Oliver and they'd probably be shocked.

I totally don't disagree that healthy food is preferable and that it would be nice for there to be more of it available (take every penny that subsidizes corn and use that to provide cheap, fresh, green vegetables for everyone). However, it still boils down to caloric intake in the end. I think it's irresponsible to give people an easy excuse for their overeating, when our recent ancestors fared just fine on a carb-heavy diet.

Makes me laugh that you mentioned Jamie Oliver. Is he a house-hold name over there now?

LOL.... and you're a provider? Or you're just a lowly aide/assistant whose bitter about the menial tasks real nurses and doctors make you do?

I am amused by your bitterness though. If you hate your job do something else. Get off your ass and get educated or you're no better than those you hate.

Eh, you do know what they say about assumptions don't you , laddy? As a matter of fact I'm a Respiratory Therapist of 17 years that specializes in weaning patients off of Ventilators that are known to be hard to wean. My hospital carries one of the highest Vent wean rates in the United States, primarily because of the autonomy granted by our physicians due to their esteem of us. Doctor's ask my advice, so please, spare me the attempt to make me look uneducated.

Say that to just about any woman that has had significant thyroid issues previously...

That would by my definition directly disqualify that patient from being otherwise healthy, if the ailment at hand directly effects ones ability to lose weight...


I'm not shallow. I have already stated that some have a harder time than others, but science has proven that if you eat less (caloric), you lose weight. You haven't watched 50 year olds die due to their weight have you? Well I have over and over and over. It's not the physical work these patient's require that makes me feel the way I do, it's the strain on the healthcare system, families, and the deaths as a result of gluttony. More people kill themselves every year with a knife and a fork than cigarettes.... think about it. All you have to do is push back the plate.

Makes me laugh that you mentioned Jamie Oliver. Is he a house-hold name over there now?

Yeah, he had a popular TED talk about school food and then a couple seasons of a "reality" TV show where he tries to improve the food situation at different school districts.

Interesting.

We love old Jammers here. Though I don't understand this chef celebrité thang that's going on lately.

Yeah, I think his mission is a good one. I think we're definitely better off having him gaining popularity.

It's just interesting how much/often he focuses on sugar, when the proportion of sugar we consume has actually declined slightly on average (though I don't know if those number apply very evenly across age groups).

I have to agree with RaneiBard to a point. It's become social faux pas to smoke these days, but it's perfectly ok to still market crappy food.

My wife works with children who have diabetes as well as dealing with lifestyles. We have children under the age of 7 who are on medication for cholesterol and fatty liver. WTF?!?! This generation right now is the first generation not expected to outlive their parents. And it isn't smoking or drugs, it's bad diet and even worse active habits.

Think about that the next time your kids want to sit around and play PS3 for 12 hours while munching on pizza pockets.

Eh, you do know what they say about assumptions don't you , laddy? As a matter of fact I'm a Respiratory Therapist of 17 years that specializes in weaning patients off of Ventilators that are known to be hard to wean. My hospital carries one of the highest Vent wean rates in the United States, primarily because of the autonomy granted by our physicians due to their esteem of us. Doctor's ask my advice, so please, spare me the attempt to make me look uneducated.



Says all I need to know thanks for your "expert" opinion ;)

Ranei is absolutey correct, and I don't get why you are attempting to disqualify her expert opinion. You look foolish in your effort Fildien, with all due respect. The majority of health problems can be blamed on gluttony and laziness. It's far too easy to go home after working all day, order a pizza and drink a coke and snack on a bag of frito-lays chips while watching Grey's Anatomy.

A healthy diet, isn't that hard. First you need to get educated about healthy foods, then limit the bullshit you put in your bodies. Good god people, would it kill you all to get on a damn treadmill? Light to moderate exercise 3-5 times a week 30-60 mins a day. Nobody has time to do it, but everyone has time to sit on their asses and watch reruns of Vampire Diaries?

Push the plate back, it's only fuel. Don't fall in love with food. Chocolate is yummy....limit yourselves. Damn gluttons.

For the record, I like RaneiBard. She makes really solid points and is very clear in her points. 90 out of 100 Americans can do better, and that's not a real statistic, I just made it up cause it's probably close.

:devil

Fildien, your remarks amuse me. Thanks for that pick me up. The patien't I've worked with today left me melancholy. She will die soon. A few weeks ago she had a heart valve surgery. Mid 60's, morbidly obese. She came to my hospital to get her strength back. On one occasion while I was talking to her and her daughter she expressed to me that she knew she needed to lose weight to survive and we talked for around a half our about Pulmonary rehab exercises she could do at home, diet, the entire equation. She was getting stronger but she had a bed sore on her cocyx. This was as a result of diabetes which was primarily due to late life morbid obesity. The infection in this bed sore worsened and she went into septic shock.. if you don't know what that is, look it up, my expertise may not convince you of what that is. She was transferred to another hospital where she developed heart failure, kidney failure, and CHF. Due to her CHF she developed pleural effusions (fluid between the lung and chest wall). Due to her size, when they drew the fluid out in a routine thoracentesis procedure, she bled in her chest and developed a hemothorax (blood in chest). They had to do a surgical thorocotomy and do whats called a pleuradesis (talc powder in chest to "glue" the lung to the chest wall to preven re-ocuring pleural effusions.

Now shes back at my hospital. Fully alert. Severe pain in her wound. Kidney's gone. Dialysis three times a week. Chances of her coming off of the ventilator and weaning her trach is fairly low. I've had to sit with the family and explain all of this. The nearest facility she can go from here is a 6 hour drive. Nursing homes that take vent dependent dialysis patients are few and far in between. The family is in talks (heartbreaking I may add) about placing her hours away from family, bed bound in pain, or letting things take its course.

Now to you this may not qualify me to have an "expert" opinion on the effects of obesity, but had this lady been slender at the beginning of this ordeal she'd be home planting flowers... due to her size, shes terminal.

Thanks for cheering me up, was a sad conference.

Everyone is coming out with all of their anecdotal stories and that's great other than them being statistically irrelevant.

There are no statistics to claim that the world's population has gotten lazier or has worse self control, which everyone is so desperately trying to prove. I'd even say the opposite is just as likely given how it has gotten exponentially more difficult to participate in the Boston and Marine Corps Marathons over the years. There always has been people more driven, more energetic, stronger willed than others. There has always been obese and malnourished.

What has however risen parallel to the obese population is the popularity of pre-packaged foods and fast foods as well as the prevalence of sodium and sugars in these pre-packaged foods. To say "everyone is lazy they need to work out more" is all well and good but equally as effective at preventing obesity as promoting only abstinence is at preventing teen pregnancy. It will work for some, but as the food industry continues to stack the deck against us at maintaining healthy body chemistry its a losing battle.

The macro scale is something that is near impossible to tackle without government intervention, which luckily is already (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/19/AR2010041905049.html) underway (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/weightloss/2010-03-23-calories-menus_N.htm).

Preaching exercise and diet are great, but certainly not the whole answer.

Huh? Our population has grown dramatically more sedentary in recent decades. I'm surprised that anyone would dispute that.

More sedentary than in 1800s, no doubt.
More sedentary than the Mad Men era of the 60s and 70s? I am not sure anyone can statistically prove any way on that. I do remember hearing some facts, but I can't ever cite them, about Schwarzeneggar's participation back in the 90s on the President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports having a great impact on young children's activity levels.

Today there is a much greater public knowledge on fitness levels and the prevalence of a gym on every corner now, in every apartment building, and in most office buildings, something almost completely non-existent in the 60s unless you were a body builder. Marathons, Tri-athalons, etc. all have record participation. There is a waiting list for the DC kickball program for the first time ever.

I'll admit that I can't argue that we are more active than we were in the 60s when Kennedy decided we weren't active enough and started the President's Council in the first place. However, similarly no one can reliably argue that we are less active than we were in the 60s - there's no real solid stats. Even if we are less active... we aren't 30% less active than we were in 1985, but we are 30% fatter. There's obviously a lot more to the story.

Anecdotes about people running marathons and playing kickball don't really make sense the way you're positioning them. You don't see many obese marathon runners, do you? What's the point? That active people are active? Yes. Yes, they are.

Meanwhile, we've got a massive portion of the population sitting around all day, from car to office to car to couch. It's to the point that even fidgeting makes the list of ways to be more active: http://www.npr.org/2011/04/25/135575490/sitting-all-day-worse-for-you-than-you-might-think

no one can reliably argue that we are less active than we were in the 60s - there's no real solid stats.

I'm going to throw common sense into this. Sometimes it's all you need. In the 60s we didn't have the internet or HD television. We didn't have the same access to a quick meal like we do today, with the millions of fast food restaurants and mom and pop places. We didn't have vehicles as prevelant as we do today either, so there was a lot more walking. Kids were outside more often playing sports and other games that children play, they weren't inside plugged into their Playstations or PCs like chubby little vegetables. The best babysitter for most parents, is the television. Sure these aren't statistics, for you number geeks, but it is common sense. People are fatter because everything is easier and designed for the lazy in mind.

:devil

While I can't quote statistical trends and so forth, I can see with my own eyes and deduce from my own experiences what "some" of the problem is. Gluttony and laziness. As Trikki said, when I was a kid I was outside on my bike, climbing trees, working with my father on errands, and I remember arriving at the dinner table actually HUNGRY, because I hadn't eaten since lunchtime.

A more manual labor society gets more exercise annually than an air conditioned, desk prone work force even if the latter hits the gym.. It's common sense. We are a less active society now, fast food is abundant and we eat too damn much.

Ranei is absolutey correct, and I don't get why you are attempting to disqualify her expert opinion. You look foolish in your effort Fildien, with all due respect. The majority of health problems can be blamed on gluttony and laziness. It's far too easy to go home after working all day, order a pizza and drink a coke and snack on a bag of frito-lays chips while watching Grey's Anatomy.

A healthy diet, isn't that hard. First you need to get educated about healthy foods, then limit the bullshit you put in your bodies. Good god people, would it kill you all to get on a damn treadmill? Light to moderate exercise 3-5 times a week 30-60 mins a day. Nobody has time to do it, but everyone has time to sit on their asses and watch reruns of Vampire Diaries?

Push the plate back, it's only fuel. Don't fall in love with food. Chocolate is yummy....limit yourselves. Damn gluttons.

For the record, I like RaneiBard. She makes really solid points and is very clear in her points. 90 out of 100 Americans can do better, and that's not a real statistic, I just made it up cause it's probably close.

:devil


Liking or disliking is sort of irrelevant when someone is preaching this kind of vehemence and is a healthcare provider. She sounds bitter and it irks me but, the bottom line is a respiratory therapist is not someone I'd bank medical advice on especially one that sounds so very jaded and loathing of her patients.

I'll be honest, I was truthfully trying to troll her a little bit to see how far she'd blow. Her initial post stung me deeply b/c my mother is someone who went from an overactive thyroid to having it burnt out before my birth to having now an underactive thyroid and struggles with her weight day in and day out for the last 36yrs.

I'm totally not arguing that people are or are not lazy, that a good portion of obese people have none but themselves to blame..... But, it's also not always the case of obesity either. Some factors are beyond control without knowing a full history it's hard to just say someone's fat b/c they're lazy and I would be fucking pissed if one of my mom's providers came on the internet saying this stuff to a bunch of anon people.

Which BTW, were I Ranebard I'd be cautious about divulging as much info about her patients and cases and her opinion on those cases as she's doing. The company where I work actually has people employed to scower net to catch providers doing this type of thing and intervene so they don't get sued. Someone doing a google search right now on their mother, sister, aunt, wive's condition could find this thread and maybe tie two and two together and realize that the person typing is their RT and see sensitive information about their loved one on this forum out in the open for anyone to read and if they felt so inclined bring suit against her or her employer. It's a sad reality but it's the world we live in now.

Being privy to a patient's medical history allows me to determine whether a patient has an underlying condition that would exacerbate their obesity. This knowledge allows me to surmise that far and large the patient's that I am referring to are directly responsible for their obesity. I struck a nerve with you because you assumed I'd have no sympathy for your mother. This after I had already stated, and have since reinforced that some people in fact DON'T have control of their weight as much as others. I hope your mother is able to control her health and live a long productive life. Illness and disease is a horrible thing, and for that I feel for the both of you.

I also appreciate the attempt to lure me into bad behavior. I don't hate people. I just happen to have a perspective on this that the majority of the public doesn't.