Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: the big fat fat thread  (Read 4397 times)

LordBucket

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #15 on: September 14, 2014, 01:45:32 pm »

I'm particularly perplexed by his admonition of calorie counting. I mean that IS how people fight obesity, by taking in less calories. I'm on a diet myself and while I'm not calorie COUNTING, I am at least estimating my intake and attempting to take in less then average (I THINK a normal intake is 2000 a day or so?)

As the biased opinion of a naturally athletic person, I offer you an unsubstantiated opinion: it's much easier to burn more than to eat less. I don't think calorie counting or starving yourself is massively helpful. When one eats less, it can tend to be miserable, horrible, unpleasant and awful. And when you feel bad and are hungry all the time, I think that being less active is a natural reaction. If you become less active in response to eating less...that doesn't necessarily help you lose weight, it just makes you feel bad. Feeling bad doesn't help anyone.

Whereas if you simply become more active and burn more calories, you can eat just as much, treat yourself with delicious chocolate sundaes just as much...and still lose weight. And even if you eat more as a result of being more active such that you maintain caloric equilibrium despite the extra activity, it's still a net gain because at least you're building muscle from the activity. Being fat and muscular is probably better than being fat and not muscular. Plus, muscle is more energy intensive for your body to maintain, so simply by having that muscle and eating just as much will tend to result in weight loss.

Dieting doesn't work very well as a weight loss strategy. Ask any fat person who's dieted. And while you're at it, ask any thin and athletic person how closely they monitor what they eat. They probably don't. They don't need to.

notquitethere

  • Bay Watcher
  • PIRATE
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #16 on: September 14, 2014, 01:48:11 pm »

Some Discussion Points

What's causing the greater incidence of obesity?

Is obesity really such a bad thing?

Why is there a social stigma towards obesity?

Should there be a social stigma towards obesity?

If we do think it's a problem that needs a solution, what's the solution?




So my responses:

What's causing the greater incidence of obesity?
Being able to retain fat is a great thing for mammals! It allows them to store energy for when food supplies are low. Unfortunately, in an age of mass caloric availability, this power can cause problems. My understanding of the cause is that people are increasingly leading sedentary lifestyles, spending more hours of the day seated than before; this lower caloric requirement is combined with an increased caloric intake through sugar-saturation of ready meals and drinks. Longer working hours contribute to a rise in easy meals. Unhealthy food can be seen as cheaper (per weight, chips are cheaper than broccoli) though this can be contested.

Is obesity really such a bad thing?
Poor health really is the problem not body weight per se, but carrying extra pounds, and having larger fat deposits puts greater strain on people's system and makes them prone to poorer health. When someone is considered overweight, there's a tendency for people to ascribe health problems they have to the weight when those issues may in fact be unrelated. Also, there are matters of degree here. There's a big gulf between carrying an extra stone or so and being so big you can't leave the house. And being larger doesn't necessarily mean unhealthier (humans are able to store masses of fat for evolutionarily beneficial reasons afterall). Essentially there are two kinds of problems though: problems for the individual (physical activity being harder to achieve, social stigma etc.), and problems externalised onto society (costs to socialised healthcare, costs to provide additional provisions).

Why is there a social stigma towards obesity?
Obesity is seen as a moral failing. This is partly because a svelte ideal body size is pushed heavily and reinforced by culture corps like magazines, Hollywood etc. who are trying to sell things. More than that though, it's seen as a visceral sign of indulgence. People often claim they're worried about the health of the overweight, but this is just rationalisation of the existing prejudice: most of these same people won't be worried about other people who willingly engage in perceived health risks, like motorcross racers or slim people that eat junk food.

Should there be a social stigma towards obesity?
Is it acceptable to be prejudiced against the overweight? On the one hand you have people who think we shouldn't encourage unhealthy lifestyles, on the other hand we have fat activists who say being Fatist is equivalent to being racist. As recent research indicates, making people feel bad about their weight isn't very effective at helping them lose it. If people don't feel they can exercise in shared spaces without ridicule, they're less likely to do so. Something can be a discouraged lifestyle choice without castigating and shaming those that take part in it. Most nonsmokers manage to take up this kind of position with smokers: they'll tolerate smokers without berating them or constantly reminding them of the health hazards (because, of course, these people already know). Still, it's not the same class of prejudice as racism: to be racist is to be prejudiced against someone for something they have no power over, while an adult's weight is arguably something they have in their power to change. In any case, comparisons to different kinds of prejudice are besides the point, when outright prejudice isn't helpful either way.

If we do think it's a problem that needs a solution, what's the solution?
It's a structural issue that should have structural solutions. Education in schools over budgeting and learning easy healthy meals might see more poorer households realising that buying healthily doesn't need to be too time consuming or expensive. As robots take more jobs and we move further towards the post-employment leisure society that the immense wealth of the West can technically allow, everyone will have more time for physical activity and cooking. Until then, we can offer support through socialised healthcare for those that want it, spread knowledge and awareness about the facts, and hold off on the fat jokes, and you know, realise that there's no good reason to get upset about other people's appearances.
Logged

FearfulJesuit

  • Bay Watcher
  • True neoliberalism has never been tried
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #17 on: September 14, 2014, 01:49:34 pm »

I'm particularly perplexed by his admonition of calorie counting. I mean that IS how people fight obesity, by taking in less calories. I'm on a diet myself and while I'm not calorie COUNTING, I am at least estimating my intake and attempting to take in less then average (I THINK a normal intake is 2000 a day or so?)

As the biased opinion of a naturally athletic person, I offer you an unsubstantiated opinion: it's much easier to burn more than to eat less. I don't think calorie counting or starving yourself is massively helpful. When one eats less, it can tend to be miserable, horrible, unpleasant and awful. And when you feel bad and are hungry all the time, I think that being less active is a natural reaction. If you become less active in response to eating less...that doesn't necessarily help you lose weight, it just makes you feel bad. Feeling bad doesn't help anyone.

Whereas if you simply become more active and burn more calories, you can eat just as much, treat yourself with delicious chocolate sundaes just as much...and still lose weight. And even if you eat more as a result of being more active such that you maintain caloric equilibrium despite the extra activity, it's still a net gain because at least you're building muscle from the activity. Being fat and muscular is probably better than being fat and not muscular. Plus, muscle is more energy intensive for your body to maintain, so simply by having that muscle and eating just as much will tend to result in weight loss.

Dieting doesn't work very well as a weight loss strategy. Ask any fat person who's dieted. And while you're at it, ask any thin and athletic person how closely they monitor what they eat. They probably don't. They don't need to.

It depends what you eat less of, though. Rye bread, oatmeal, or rice and beans can be remarkably filling, but don't contain many calories. Of course you'll feel hungry if your diet is mostly microwaveable Hot Pockets and you cut your Hot Pocket consumption...
Logged


@Footjob, you can microwave most grains I've tried pretty easily through the microwave, even if they aren't packaged for it.

gigaraptor487

  • Bay Watcher
  • Escaped Lunatic now civilised
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #18 on: September 14, 2014, 01:49:59 pm »

I am glad somebody has contributed a means of structured debate.

In other news, I realised how relevant my avatar is to this discussion.
Logged
Hehe, you thought there would be an interesting sig here

I now run a program which brings old multiplayer games back to life : click

LordBucket

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #19 on: September 14, 2014, 01:57:30 pm »

I think a large part of the problem is the way American eating and transport habits are set up.

I'm inclined to agree. We tend to eat big meals and drive everywhere.

I spent a month in Japan a few years back, and lost a little over five pounds during that month. Why? Because I was walking and taking the subway everywhere. 2-3 hours a day of walking for a month. And when you know that you're going to have to spend 20 minutes walking and standing to get back to your hotel after dinner, you learn pretty quickly to not gorge yourself because walking with a full stomach isn't a lot of fun.

Typical night out friends in the US: drive somewhere, eat a single big meal while sitting in a booth, have lots of drinks, drive home.

Typical night out with friends in Japan: walk/ride somewhere to meet people. Walk/ride to bar. Eat 1-2 pieces of sushi and have a drink no bigger than a can of beer, sometimes smaller. Then walk 2-5 minutes to another bar and have another couple bites of food and another drink. Repeat for a couple hours, then say goodbye and walk/ride back home.

Is genetics a factor in weight? Absolutely. But behavior is absolutely a factor too. And some of those behaviors are heavily influenced by culture.

BFEL

  • Bay Watcher
  • Tail of a stinging scorpion scourge
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #20 on: September 14, 2014, 02:27:05 pm »

I'm particularly perplexed by his admonition of calorie counting. I mean that IS how people fight obesity, by taking in less calories. I'm on a diet myself and while I'm not calorie COUNTING, I am at least estimating my intake and attempting to take in less then average (I THINK a normal intake is 2000 a day or so?)

As the biased opinion of a naturally athletic person, I offer you an unsubstantiated opinion: it's much easier to burn more than to eat less. I don't think calorie counting or starving yourself is massively helpful. When one eats less, it can tend to be miserable, horrible, unpleasant and awful. And when you feel bad and are hungry all the time, I think that being less active is a natural reaction. If you become less active in response to eating less...that doesn't necessarily help you lose weight, it just makes you feel bad. Feeling bad doesn't help anyone.

Whereas if you simply become more active and burn more calories, you can eat just as much, treat yourself with delicious chocolate sundaes just as much...and still lose weight. And even if you eat more as a result of being more active such that you maintain caloric equilibrium despite the extra activity, it's still a net gain because at least you're building muscle from the activity. Being fat and muscular is probably better than being fat and not muscular. Plus, muscle is more energy intensive for your body to maintain, so simply by having that muscle and eating just as much will tend to result in weight loss.

Dieting doesn't work very well as a weight loss strategy. Ask any fat person who's dieted. And while you're at it, ask any thin and athletic person how closely they monitor what they eat. They probably don't. They don't need to.

Well my situation in particular probably calls for dieting more then most. I gained all my weight over one summer a few years back by drinking cases of Coca-Cola every day. Before that I was constantly skinny and didn't see much interest in food, but lo and behold, the moment I get fat from all that pop I suddenly discover the joys of foods.
Even then I was delivering papers every day, so the ENTIRE time I've been fat I have had 4 or more hours of walking/running/throwing every single day, without any loss because I was literally just eating/drinking enough calories for it to not matter.
I suppose in a sense I've always been "fat and muscular" instead of fully blobtacular, but I haven't seen the results you talk about because FOOD SO SEXY :P

My current "diet" is mostly things like oatmeal (I actually LIKE oatmeal now, where I didn't before) and things like plates of tuna, cottage cheese, salad (I've found I can stand salads based around red cabbage instead of lettuce) and lots of fruit. And I only drink ice water throughout the day (with one cappuccino in the mornings)

So I'm not really starving myself, I'm just eating better (before I would go out to eat all the time, drank nothing but pop, etc.) And its working for me, though not QUITE as fast as I would like, started dieting about 2 or 3 months ago and have lost upwards of 20 ibs.
Logged
7/10 Has much more memorable sigs but casts them to the realm of sigtexts.

Indeed, I do this.

freeformschooler

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #21 on: September 14, 2014, 02:38:54 pm »

It would be interesting to test the "we're all soooo sedentary!" theory by looking at cities and towns with walking and biking as the main transportation instead of cars and buses and comparing them to the obesity rate of their host country. Let's get to it!

Current U.S. obesity rate: 34.9%

City-data has this list.  I am ignoring the included air force bases as their population would almost certain skew the data since staying fit is a big part of their jobs there :) Just looking at the top three...

West Point, NY (Orange County): 57.5% walk to work, 25.9% adult obesity rate (9% less than host country)
Fort Gordon, Georgia: 53.0% walk to work, 32.8% adult obesity rate (2.1% less than host county)
Twentynine Palms Base, California: 48.0% walk to work, 27.1% adult obesity rate (7.8% less than host county)

Even a quick glance at the other cities on this list shows that it really, really varies by city, but it certainly has some correlation.

I am still at a loss to explain why obesity has risen so dramatically since the 70s. It's not like everyone started using cars all at once and never got out of them in the disco age. Maybe it's culture, or the hippies were right about corn subsidies, or...
Logged

Lagslayer

  • Bay Watcher
  • stand-up philosopher
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #22 on: September 14, 2014, 02:50:44 pm »

I am still at a loss to explain why obesity has risen so dramatically since the 70s. It's not like everyone started using cars all at once and never got out of them in the disco age. Maybe it's culture, or the hippies were right about corn subsidies, or...
I read an article recently that suggested it started right after the big push for grains/carbs instead of meat/animal fats as primary calorie intake. I'm still trying to track it down again.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2014, 02:55:26 pm by Lagslayer »
Logged

notquitethere

  • Bay Watcher
  • PIRATE
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #23 on: September 14, 2014, 02:56:21 pm »

I am still at a loss to explain why obesity has risen so dramatically since the 70s. It's not like everyone started using cars all at once and never got out of them in the disco age. Maybe it's culture, or the hippies were right about corn subsidies, or...
High Fructose Corn Syrup consumption has skyrocketed since the 70's and it adds empty calories to loads of foodstuff that didn't previously contain it.
Logged

LordBucket

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #24 on: September 14, 2014, 03:11:08 pm »

I haven't seen the results you talk about because FOOD SO SEXY :P

It's up to everyone to decide what's important to them. If somebody enjoys food and enjoys drinking and enjoys television and so forth, I'd rather not be the person to tell them not to do those things. Just understand that choices come with consequences. Maybe getting to enjoy cheesy-poofs and ice cream by the bucket is more important to someone than being thin. If that's what they want, so be it.

Being fat probably isn't healthy, but being guilt tripped and shamed into changing lifestyle choices and forcing yourself to refrain from things you really enjoy so you can avoid feeling bad about yourself...that's probably not healthy either.





If a girl really loves her ice cream and eats frosting by the can because it's what she loves...that's ok. I accept that. If she ends up 200 pounds and unhealthy as a result of choices that she made and that she's happy with, that's ok too and I accept that. If I tell her she's wrong and horrible and awful for doing what she wanted and accepting the consequences of her choices and if I guilt-trip and try to manipulate her into changing to accommodate my preferences for thin girls ...then that makes me a bad person.

But if I see that girl and find her unattractive and refuse to date her, that's also ok and she needs to accept it. If she tells me that I'm a bad person for not finding her 200-pound self attractive and tries to guilt-trip and manipulate me into changing my preferences to accommodate hers...that makes her the bad person.

Show me a person who says "I'm fat because I love eating, eating is awesome yummy nummy ice cream and candies and chocolates, yay!" I'm ok with that.

It's the "oh, it's not my fault, I can't control myself, you're bad for not loving me, all 200 pounds of me! ...those are the people I have a problem with.

But really, most fat people I've known don't fall into either group. Most fat people I've known hate that they're fat and tend to struggle with self-loathing and guilt. I can't really be angry at those people. But I sometimes wonder if they the self loathing and guilt is more unhealthy than the weight.



martinuzz

  • Bay Watcher
  • High dwarf
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #25 on: September 14, 2014, 03:40:32 pm »

Logged
Friendly and polite reminder for optimists: Hope is a finite resource

We can ­disagree and still love each other, ­unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist - James Baldwin

http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=73719.msg1830479#msg1830479

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #26 on: September 14, 2014, 03:51:08 pm »

Quote
But I sometimes wonder if they the self loathing and guilt is more unhealthy than the weight

There is something going on in Canada right now where dietitians and doctors are being instructed to no longer put people on weight loss diets but rather to put people on healthy eating diets not intended to make people lose weight.
Logged

Phmcw

  • Bay Watcher
  • Damn max 500 characters
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #27 on: September 14, 2014, 08:23:11 pm »

Not a lot to say on the topic exept that exercice seems to be the most important factor for health as long as your weight isn't too extreme and you don't overdo it. And the genetic factor seems to be about satiety. Peoples "that can eat anything" either are very active, or simply aren't hungry more than they should.

Been obese, now merely overweight. Loosing weight wasn't too hard.
Logged
Quote from: toady

In bug news, the zombies in a necromancer's tower became suspicious after the necromancer failed to age and he fled into the hills.

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: the big fat fat thread
« Reply #28 on: September 14, 2014, 08:31:39 pm »

BMI is stupid. I mean, really stupid. I'm amazed anyone ever took it seriously.

BMI is objectively better than comparing two people's weights directly though, by factoring in height. But "heavy" doesn't always mean "fat" due to different muscle tone. Also, some people say it should be divided by height cubed rather than height squared, as under the current definition of BMI tall people have higher BMI even if they're equally skinny. Fat chance redefining something that's been around for > 100 years though.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I read an interesting thing about type II diabetes, some research says skinny people who HAVE type II diabetes are more likely to die than fat people with type II diabetes. So the knee-jerk reactionzis to go "Hah! fat protects you against type II diabetes! take that skinny people!".

But that ignores the fact that fat people are much more likely to get type II diabetes (so far people as a whole are much more likely to die from this), and also, that of fat people with type II diabetes losing a few pounds massively decreases your risk. Losing too many pounds actually increases mortality though, so crash dieting isn't the answer to diabetes.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2014, 08:42:30 pm by Reelya »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]