Obesity in this country is definitely way out of control these days. I used to study this shit in grad school before I had to drop out b/c of my own health problems and let me tell you the numbers are fucking scary. As little information as there exists out there for children, parents are also grossly misinformed when it comes to information on healthy food choices (for both themselves an their kids). There is a seemingly limitless amount of money in the world that supports the delivery of junk food to our youth, and frighteningly little support for folks and companies with a genuine interest in keeping us healthy. What frightens me even more are the insane amounts of preservatives and additives that are simply a part of people's diets these days and which we still know practically nothing about. Preservatives, artificial colors, sweeteners, thickeners, and what have you are all essentially question marks we're putting in our bodies and simply hoping don't fuck shit up. Look at the list of ingredients on pretty much any snack food or cereal and see how many ingredients you can actually identify without wikipedia. Lol. It's fucking nuts.
big ol cosign
our food culture has basically been turned over to processed foods manufacturers.
coca cola, heinz ketchup, aunt jemima
corn derivative garbage lowest common denominator cheap byproduct industrial trash
but people think its dope cause it has nice packaging, lots of sweetners and a bangin add campaign
kind of expected to be underweight, or something. tall n lanky related
Kinda expected me to be underweight?
Nah - I love food and I am at the age where my metabolism has plateau'ed.
I am pretty happy with where I am right now - though I wish I had calves, defined calves just don't run in my family :(
If I'm not careful with the pasta and the rotis, the croissants and the Jameson, I'm in trouble.
(Funny - what is it about certain posts that create certain images?)
this is all common knowledge at this point (to any decently educated individual). its a governmental issue, period.
No.
Not period.
It is a governmental issue along with a personal responsibility issue. The choices we make are a part of the equation that WE can control. I know that there larger issues- for instance, lack of grocery stores in inner-cities is a major issue, and will involve larger, governmental forces- but, there are plenty of poor decisions made every day by individuals that need to change.
/had processed american cheese/sausage sandwich for breakfast
//drinking at 3:08
this is all common knowledge at this point (to any decently educated individual). its a governmental issue, period.
No.
Not period.
It is a governmental issue along with a personal responsibility issue. The choices we make are a part of the equation that WE can control. I know that there larger issues- for instance, lack of grocery stores in inner-cities is a major issue, and will involve larger, governmental forces- but, there are plenty of poor decisions made every day by individuals that need to change.
/had processed american cheese/sausage sandwich for breakfast
//drinking at 3:08
except that it is. how is the middle/lower class supposed to avoid these aditives and perservatives, when the store brand peanut butter costs 2.39 and the organic (as in real ingrediants, not just cardboard packaging) is 8.99? governmental regulation is the only way around this.
it has nothing to do with personal "choices" when its a monetary factor.
this is all common knowledge at this point (to any decently educated individual). its a governmental issue, period.
No.
Not period.
It is a governmental issue along with a personal responsibility issue. The choices we make are a part of the equation that WE can control. I know that there larger issues- for instance, lack of grocery stores in inner-cities is a major issue, and will involve larger, governmental forces- but, there are plenty of poor decisions made every day by individuals that need to change.
/had processed american cheese/sausage sandwich for breakfast
//drinking at 3:08
except that it is. how is the middle/lower class supposed to avoid these aditives and perservatives, when the store brand peanut butter costs 2.39 and the organic (as in real ingrediants, not just cardboard packaging) is 8.99? governmental regulation is the only way around this.
it has nothing to do with personal "choices" when its a monetary factor.
So the government should control the prices of food? Like they do with Corn? Boy, nothing could go wrong there.
When the government forces companies to sell organic food for the same price as factory food then there won't be any organic food.
this is all common knowledge at this point (to any decently educated individual). its a governmental issue, period.
No.
Not period.
It is a governmental issue along with a personal responsibility issue. The choices we make are a part of the equation that WE can control. I know that there larger issues- for instance, lack of grocery stores in inner-cities is a major issue, and will involve larger, governmental forces- but, there are plenty of poor decisions made every day by individuals that need to change.
/had processed american cheese/sausage sandwich for breakfast
//drinking at 3:08
except that it is, how is the middle/lower class supposed to avoid these aditives and perservatives, when the store brand PB costs 2.39 and the organic (as in real ingrediants, not just cardboard packaging) is 8.99? governmental regulation is the only way around this.
People are going to have to reprioritize. Dude, PB maybe SHOULD cost 8.99. That might be the actual cost of it. And, if you, as an individual choose to spend less and eat some bullshit, then that is a choice you make as a consumer. Frankly, voting with your wallet is the most powerful vote you have. I understand this stuff is expensive, but what exactly is the GOV'T. going to do? Your shopping?
Wal-Mart is stocking local food. Chipotle is doing it, and branding themselves as such. This is moving into a more mainstream part of our diet. That is a good thing. That won't solve everything, and yes, the government may well get involved. And, they should, and they should slash corn subsidies, and they should dismantle monsanto.
But, that said, we make choices everyday, and some of them are going to be hard, and involve real costs, and that is just that. Food is one of those.
kind of expected to be underweight, or something. tall n lanky related
Kinda expected me to be underweight?
Nah - I love food and I am at the age where my metabolism has plateau'ed.
I am pretty happy with where I am right now - though I wish I had calves, defined calves just don't run in my family :(
If I'm not careful with the pasta and the rotis, the croissants and the Jameson, I'm in trouble.
(Funny - what is it about certain posts that create certain images?)
Haha, I took that to be referring to his own expectations of himself. Cause it would be beyond creepy IMO to form mental images of forum users based on height and weight (although I do picture Faux being kinda athletic)... Almost as creepy as that "It's not creepy because I'm married" guy.
And, they should, and they should slash corn subsidies, and they should dismantle monsanto.
agree with that.
basically the govt already does subsidize the meat and junkfood industry by pouring most of its ag weght behind corn. it becomes practically dirtcheap to sweeten processed foods and run giant feedlots. the question isnt why health food is so expensive but why the other stuff is so cheap.
monsanto execs should be all prosecuted like war criminals. going back thru the countries history. poisonous practices even before their whole seed copyrighting devil shit.
industrial agriculture and meat production is all extremely reliant on oil anyway, so thats all going to have some transitioning to do in the coming decades. hopefully it will collapse
back to the original thread...sorry youre feeling fat saba. hire someone to do pushups for you or something
People are going to have to reprioritize. And, if you, as an individual choose to spend less and eat some bullshit, then that is a choice you make as a consumer. Frankly, voting with your wallet is the most powerful vote you have.
And all's well for the individual with the fat wallet to vote with.
I picture you looking a bit like that (previous post related).
People are going to have to reprioritize. And, if you, as an individual choose to spend less and eat some bullshit, then that is a choice you make as a consumer. Frankly, voting with your wallet is the most powerful vote you have.
And all's well for the individual with the fat wallet to vote with.
I picture you looking a bit like that (previous post related).
People are going to have to reprioritize. And, if you, as an individual choose to spend less and eat some bullshit, then that is a choice you make as a consumer. Frankly, voting with your wallet is the most powerful vote you have.
And all's well for the individual with the fat wallet to vote with.
god, this is stupid.
Dude, of course I'm not saying personal responsibility doesn't play a role in it. But this "it's a governmental issue as well as a personal issue" is so naive it's almost funny. You seem to forget that fat people consume a lot of food, and consumers who consume a lot quickly (fast food is ideal for that) are corporations' favorite customers. I wonder whether there's a parallel between this and the US being the world's fattest nation?
That won't solve everything, and yes, the government may well get involved. And, they should, and they should slash corn subsidies, and they should dismantle monsanto.
This would require less government involvement, not more.
The corn lobby and Monsanto have the power they do due to unfair (and illegal) regulations that favor them.
People are going to have to reprioritize. And, if you, as an individual choose to spend less and eat some bullshit, then that is a choice you make as a consumer. Frankly, voting with your wallet is the most powerful vote you have.
And all's well for the individual with the fat wallet to vote with.
god, this is stupid.
Dude, of course I'm not saying personal responsibility doesn't play a role in it. But this "it's a governmental issue as well as a personal issue" is so naive it's almost funny. You seem to forget that fat people consume a lot of food, and consumers who consume a lot quickly (fast food is ideal for that) are corporations' favorite customers. I wonder whether there's a parallel between this and the US being the world's fattest nation?
Keep in mind this all started when it was stated that the gov't was going to have to fix this. Period.
Anyway, I'm naive...
And, fat people- knowing that they are fat and eating fast food which they know makes them fat- is a government problem? And, again, I'm naive. Just want to make sure I'm clear on this.
Look, i think that on the whole, I agree with the idea that there are massive food problems in this country. We're on the same page. And, if we're talking about re prioritizing, I think that the government should be first in line to make the changes I mentioned on the last page, among others.
What I can't get behind is the idea that the gov't has to get involved to fix everything. People need to change their decision making. One of the most salient points from "Fast-Food Nation," was when he talks about the fact that McDonald's has always tried to offer salads, light food, etc. And, invariably, they get taken off the menu because no one orders them.
Keep in mind this all started when it was stated that the gov't was going to have to fix this. Period.
Yeah, I should've stated that I find that solution equally improbable.
gareth said:
And, fat people- knowing that they are fat and eating fast food which they know makes them fat- is a government problem? And, again, I'm naive. Just want to make sure I'm clear on this.
No, it's not a government problem. And I actually agree with you. It is a personal responsibility problem. The people working in these companies that "feed" other people should take responsibility and put people's health before their own wealth.
gareth said:
One of the most salient points from "Fast-Food Nation," was when he talks about the fact that McDonald's has always tried to offer salads, light food, etc. And, invariably, they get taken off the menu because no one orders them.
Ah, the good old drug dealer argument: we tried selling people vitamin pills, but they insisted on harder stuff-- that's salient? I'm sure we can at least agree that marketing influences what people buy. Did McDonald's market those healthier products like they market their best money-makers?
dollar_binI heartily endorse this product and/or event 2,326 Posts
hogginthefogg said:
crabmongerfunk said:
has anyone here gotten thinner since hitting 30?
First fatter and weaker, then much thinner and stronger.
And might I add, more delicious
I've lost a shitload of weight in the last 18 months (almost 70 lbs) and I'm in my late 30s. I literally need to get my wedding ring resized so it doesn't slip off my finger.
In my opinion, what's so vexing with dealing with obesity as a social problem (and this has become one of the main topics in my social issues/problem courses) is that people tend to want to find a simple, elegant solution to a problem that is neither.
The "simplest" explanation is that obesity has risen because Americans have both 1) increased their caloric intake and 2) reduced physical activity (that would burn off that caloric intake). Ergo, the way to decrease obesity would be to 1) decrease caloric intake and/or 2) increase physical activity.
The rub, of course, lies in figuring out how to do this on a large scale, especially when you have such strong forces - economic, political, cultural AND personal - pushing to maintain the current course (not to mention the biological/scientific arguments around the evolutionary tendencies for humans to overconsume and retain unnecessary stores of a fat in a post-agrarian society).
Trying to rely solely on individual responsibility is wholly unrealistic; obesity as a social problem didn't arise simply out of the coincidental habits of millions of people. There have been countless ways in which policy decisions, institutional practices and an array of other social forces have all gone into creating the conditions under which caloric intake rises and exercise decreases. It's not like fixing any single point is going to solve the problem as a whole. Let's say you got rid of every fast food outlet, magically. That wouldn't likely change the ratio of cheap-but-nutrition-poor processed foods in supermarkets. It would do nothing to address how overworked, over-commuting blue and white collar workers have less and less time to engage in physical activity (and how, with the disappearance of jobs that require some level of physical activity, growth has been in more sedentary work such as service, retail or hospitality).
It's also unrealistic to think the government could solve this purely on "their side", not the least of which is that there isn't enough political will to even squash smoking even though it has no public benefit and is known to be a public health issue costing billions? That's not to say they can't do more or that they shouldn't do more. But if we, as a society, expect obesity to decline, there has to be a fairly wholesale reevaluation in our personal AND social priorities and habits.
To me, this is a key point in that article:
"The government can???t ask someone to pursue a healthier lifestyle???to attain a ???normal??? BMI, to become a non-stigmatized being???if it isn???t prepared to provide that person with the foundation for health granted to some of us purely by the accident of birth. ???Increasing awareness??? about healthy lifestyles is not simply gentle paternalism; in the absence of real support, it???s immoral."
kind of expected to be underweight, or something. tall n lanky related
Kinda expected me to be underweight?
Nah - I love food and I am at the age where my metabolism has plateau'ed.
I am pretty happy with where I am right now - though I wish I had calves, defined calves just don't run in my family :(
If I'm not careful with the pasta and the rotis, the croissants and the Jameson, I'm in trouble.
(Funny - what is it about certain posts that create certain images?)
Haha, I took that to be referring to his own expectations of himself. Cause it would be beyond creepy IMO to form mental images of forum users based on height and weight (although I do picture Faux being kinda athletic)... Almost as creepy as that "It's not creepy because I'm married" guy.
oh shit, yeah sorry! i meant myself!
that would've been very weird, otherwise haha.
i'm 6'1, around 160.
i couldn't gain weight if i tried. however, i can eat as much as i want, whenever i want.
6'1" at around 150 or 160 depending on the last time I ate pizza.
To speak on the government/personal issue: its a complex situation that I don't know enough about to make any serious comment. My roommate did bring home six ears of corn yesterday that you don't have to cook though. Shit was good too.
Despite what they say about the benefits of eating numerous small portions and snacking healthy during the day - I mostly just eat one or two big meals a day. I am not a snacker but I do want to make an effort to balance the portions and spread it out through the day, but have no idea what to buy/eat. Out in the street is no problem, but I'm talking homefront.
I am also super-picky - I don't like many fruit or nuts and things like chips and frozen food are not appealing at all. I am also not really a bread person to be having a slice with PB or a spread or to keep turning to sandwiches.
What they heck to do you all eat that is small, keeps your appetite in check and isn't junky?
Comments
All you whole food shoppers keep your heads down:
http://awesome.good.is/features/009/images/buying_organic_chart.gif
:bizzo:
:lush:
Kinda expected me to be underweight?
Nah - I love food and I am at the age where my metabolism has plateau'ed.
I am pretty happy with where I am right now - though I wish I had calves, defined calves just don't run in my family :(
If I'm not careful with the pasta and the rotis, the croissants and the Jameson, I'm in trouble.
(Funny - what is it about certain posts that create certain images?)
No.
Not period.
It is a governmental issue along with a personal responsibility issue. The choices we make are a part of the equation that WE can control. I know that there larger issues- for instance, lack of grocery stores in inner-cities is a major issue, and will involve larger, governmental forces- but, there are plenty of poor decisions made every day by individuals that need to change.
/had processed american cheese/sausage sandwich for breakfast
//drinking at 3:08
except that it is. how is the middle/lower class supposed to avoid these aditives and perservatives, when the store brand peanut butter costs 2.39 and the organic (as in real ingrediants, not just cardboard packaging) is 8.99? governmental regulation is the only way around this.
it has nothing to do with personal "choices" when its a monetary factor.
So the government should control the prices of food? Like they do with Corn? Boy, nothing could go wrong there.
When the government forces companies to sell organic food for the same price as factory food then there won't be any organic food.
People are going to have to reprioritize. Dude, PB maybe SHOULD cost 8.99. That might be the actual cost of it. And, if you, as an individual choose to spend less and eat some bullshit, then that is a choice you make as a consumer. Frankly, voting with your wallet is the most powerful vote you have. I understand this stuff is expensive, but what exactly is the GOV'T. going to do? Your shopping?
Wal-Mart is stocking local food. Chipotle is doing it, and branding themselves as such. This is moving into a more mainstream part of our diet. That is a good thing. That won't solve everything, and yes, the government may well get involved. And, they should, and they should slash corn subsidies, and they should dismantle monsanto.
But, that said, we make choices everyday, and some of them are going to be hard, and involve real costs, and that is just that. Food is one of those.
Haha, I took that to be referring to his own expectations of himself. Cause it would be beyond creepy IMO to form mental images of forum users based on height and weight (although I do picture Faux being kinda athletic)... Almost as creepy as that "It's not creepy because I'm married" guy.
edit - I want to see numbers if he's talking about himself! That's what threw me off.
agree with that.
basically the govt already does subsidize the meat and junkfood industry by pouring most of its ag weght behind corn. it becomes practically dirtcheap to sweeten processed foods and run giant feedlots. the question isnt why health food is so expensive but why the other stuff is so cheap.
monsanto execs should be all prosecuted like war criminals. going back thru the countries history. poisonous practices even before their whole seed copyrighting devil shit.
industrial agriculture and meat production is all extremely reliant on oil anyway, so thats all going to have some transitioning to do in the coming decades. hopefully it will collapse
back to the original thread...sorry youre feeling fat saba. hire someone to do pushups for you or something
And all's well for the individual with the fat wallet to vote with.
I picture you looking a bit like that (previous post related).
Reynaldo looks to be pretty fit, he should have a connect.
god, this is stupid.
this is my point. it is the government's responsibility to change this, not the population's responsibility to go broke because of it...
Dude, of course I'm not saying personal responsibility doesn't play a role in it. But this "it's a governmental issue as well as a personal issue" is so naive it's almost funny. You seem to forget that fat people consume a lot of food, and consumers who consume a lot quickly (fast food is ideal for that) are corporations' favorite customers. I wonder whether there's a parallel between this and the US being the world's fattest nation?
This would require less government involvement, not more.
The corn lobby and Monsanto have the power they do due to unfair (and illegal) regulations that favor them.
Is it a local one that's actually from the Klondike?
It's made by Unilever - the manufacturers of Vaseline.
Keep in mind this all started when it was stated that the gov't was going to have to fix this. Period.
Anyway, I'm naive...
And, fat people- knowing that they are fat and eating fast food which they know makes them fat- is a government problem? And, again, I'm naive. Just want to make sure I'm clear on this.
Look, i think that on the whole, I agree with the idea that there are massive food problems in this country. We're on the same page. And, if we're talking about re prioritizing, I think that the government should be first in line to make the changes I mentioned on the last page, among others.
What I can't get behind is the idea that the gov't has to get involved to fix everything. People need to change their decision making. One of the most salient points from "Fast-Food Nation," was when he talks about the fact that McDonald's has always tried to offer salads, light food, etc. And, invariably, they get taken off the menu because no one orders them.
That is about choice.
First fatter and weaker, then much thinner and stronger.
Not me, but then again, if I had gotten any thinner, I would've been able to use a Cheerio for a hula hoop.
Yeah, I should've stated that I find that solution equally improbable.
No, it's not a government problem. And I actually agree with you. It is a personal responsibility problem. The people working in these companies that "feed" other people should take responsibility and put people's health before their own wealth.
Ah, the good old drug dealer argument: we tried selling people vitamin pills, but they insisted on harder stuff-- that's salient? I'm sure we can at least agree that marketing influences what people buy. Did McDonald's market those healthier products like they market their best money-makers?
And might I add, more delicious
I've lost a shitload of weight in the last 18 months (almost 70 lbs) and I'm in my late 30s. I literally need to get my wedding ring resized so it doesn't slip off my finger.
Lifestyle trumps age every time, we've discussed it before http://www.soulstrut.com/index.php/forums/viewthread/63996/
The "simplest" explanation is that obesity has risen because Americans have both 1) increased their caloric intake and 2) reduced physical activity (that would burn off that caloric intake). Ergo, the way to decrease obesity would be to 1) decrease caloric intake and/or 2) increase physical activity.
The rub, of course, lies in figuring out how to do this on a large scale, especially when you have such strong forces - economic, political, cultural AND personal - pushing to maintain the current course (not to mention the biological/scientific arguments around the evolutionary tendencies for humans to overconsume and retain unnecessary stores of a fat in a post-agrarian society).
Trying to rely solely on individual responsibility is wholly unrealistic; obesity as a social problem didn't arise simply out of the coincidental habits of millions of people. There have been countless ways in which policy decisions, institutional practices and an array of other social forces have all gone into creating the conditions under which caloric intake rises and exercise decreases. It's not like fixing any single point is going to solve the problem as a whole. Let's say you got rid of every fast food outlet, magically. That wouldn't likely change the ratio of cheap-but-nutrition-poor processed foods in supermarkets. It would do nothing to address how overworked, over-commuting blue and white collar workers have less and less time to engage in physical activity (and how, with the disappearance of jobs that require some level of physical activity, growth has been in more sedentary work such as service, retail or hospitality).
It's also unrealistic to think the government could solve this purely on "their side", not the least of which is that there isn't enough political will to even squash smoking even though it has no public benefit and is known to be a public health issue costing billions? That's not to say they can't do more or that they shouldn't do more. But if we, as a society, expect obesity to decline, there has to be a fairly wholesale reevaluation in our personal AND social priorities and habits.
BTW, one of the better mainstream accountings of this was in the Atlantic from the spring. Absolutely worth taking a few minutes to read: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/05/beating-obesity/8017/
To me, this is a key point in that article:
"The government can???t ask someone to pursue a healthier lifestyle???to attain a ???normal??? BMI, to become a non-stigmatized being???if it isn???t prepared to provide that person with the foundation for health granted to some of us purely by the accident of birth. ???Increasing awareness??? about healthy lifestyles is not simply gentle paternalism; in the absence of real support, it???s immoral."
oh shit, yeah sorry! i meant myself!
that would've been very weird, otherwise haha.
i'm 6'1, around 160.
i couldn't gain weight if i tried. however, i can eat as much as i want, whenever i want.
To speak on the government/personal issue: its a complex situation that I don't know enough about to make any serious comment. My roommate did bring home six ears of corn yesterday that you don't have to cook though. Shit was good too.
Despite what they say about the benefits of eating numerous small portions and snacking healthy during the day - I mostly just eat one or two big meals a day. I am not a snacker but I do want to make an effort to balance the portions and spread it out through the day, but have no idea what to buy/eat. Out in the street is no problem, but I'm talking homefront.
I am also super-picky - I don't like many fruit or nuts and things like chips and frozen food are not appealing at all. I am also not really a bread person to be having a slice with PB or a spread or to keep turning to sandwiches.
What they heck to do you all eat that is small, keeps your appetite in check and isn't junky?