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... )
Comments 16
Reply
(And no, I hadn't noticed the new icon until you pointed it out. Have you been replaced by your evil twin?)
Reply
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
There is a theory that high fructose corn syrup does interesting things with respect to obesity, and that is something that's changed relatively recently with how prevalent it's become.
Reply
There are many theories. (-:
I'm developing a new theory of my own, which is that we're looking at tiny bits and pieces when it would be more useful to look at the big picture. Sure, people are turning into giant blobs. Are people also getting less healthy? Is it even the same people?
Is turning into a giant blob what makes you less healthy? Or would it be more useful to look at the root causes of both things? What about the fact that different people seem to be more susceptible to different influences? (e.g. my friend's 12-year-old daughter can eat Fruit Roll-Ups all day long, but to my other friend who's diabetic, they might as well be made of poison).
Also, *which* people are turning into giant blobs? I look around the office and I say, "What obesity epidemic?" But I go to certain shopping malls and I feel like I'm in a bad movie.
Also, high fructose corn syrup doesn't explain why the British are also turning into giant blobs. Next theory please! (-:
Reply
Reply
As is the population as a whole. That might be one way to cook the numbers, if you're trying to start panic in the streets: just point out that X% of the population is now overweight/obese/whatever, which is a Y% increase over Z of 20 years ago... and, you know, if it hasn't actually changed when you break it down by age, just quietly tiptoe past that.
I wonder where one would go to find unbiased data on this sort of thing. Especially when one's supposed to be working...
Reply
advertising that is now more science than art. When an entire culture
depends on its constituents indulging in instant gratification to keep
the economy going, there's no way that said culture is going to own up
to the side effects of that indulgence.
Why tell people to be moderate when you can make money off them by
selling them a cheeseburger, then selling them a health club
membership? (and then maybe selling them a funeral, but maybe that's
*too* cynical.)
Reply
Or most to the point, when one person is trying to tell you to be moderate, and five others are trying to sell you cheeseburgers, treadmills etc, which one are you going to listen to?
People, feh. (Thanks for the ray of sunshine.)
Reply
trend are out there wouldn't be happy ones.
I'm convinced that the solution, if there is one, will involve someone
coming up with a way to keep people healthy that is easier to
implement and makes significantly more money than the current
binge/purge cycle that makes money, so to speak, coming and going.
Any attempts to engineer it from a behavioral level will fail, as long
as people are exposed to advertising. Irresponsible people are easier
to exploit; no industry is EVER going to support encouraging people to
act responsibly.
Reply
Leave a comment