I don't get it.
So there seems to be some sort of "obesity epidemic" going on, or so the news outlets shriek at us daily. I've seen recent articles on the Beeb and in the LA Times about how it's not our fault: the nasty-bad corporations and "food manufacturers" and so forth are saturating our environment with cues to overeat. This one in the LA Times (Cue the
( Read more... )
Exercise, while having indirect benefits such as reducing stress and improving sleep patterns, does not really help all that much with weight loss. It can change your dress size or improve your shape. But, the legendary increased muscle mass tends to increase the appetite, and hence may actually contribute to the Overeating issue. (and, by filling up our already busy days, makes processed food, in the shape of energy bars or the like, more likely to be guiltlessly consumed).
see this article:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,,2198862,00.html
Reply
I mean, just going by BMI, George Clooney is obese. You know that's not right. (-:
Reply
During the filming of Syriana, Clooney weighed ~215, which was obese. He has had significant health problems ever since.
His typical weight is around 170, which, for 5'11", is in the high end of the normal range. (And I suspect he weighed less than during the Rosanne years.)
People are too quick about dismissing the BMI index. From what I understand, the line for "overweight" and "obese" are based on when they notice a significant upward spike in medical issues. (Although, I can't find data to confirm that.)
Reply
I think the opposite: I think people are too accepting of it, as a single number to tell you if you're OK or not. At least that's how it seems to show up in media coverage.
I would contend that a boxer of a certain weight is probably fitter and healthier than a couch potato of the same height and weight. It's not just the number on the scale that matters; what that's made of does have some effect. "Fitness" as a concept might not even show up on the scale.
To summarize the summary of the summary: It's complicated.
It seems like people are looking for a single magic bullet that will make the problem go away for everyone, without anyone having to change their lives or put forth too much effort. I strongly suspect that approach is doomed to failure.
Reply
Verrrrrry innnnnteresting.
Reply
What stuck out for me is this (and obviously I'm paraphrasing):
"Exercise is good for you, but it probably won't help you lose weight. We still want to encourage people to exercise..."
I have an idea forming in my head, which goes something like this:
We are a results-oriented society. If you tell people "Do this because it's good for you," some of them will do it, for a while. If you tell people "Do this and you will see a result," many more of them will do it... and then stop doing it if they don't see the expected result fairly quickly. (Insert rant here about gym overpopulation in January.)
I think this might be what was separating us from the French, and why they're closing the obesity gap at last.
Reply
Leave a comment