Don’t bother, you posted this in Great Debates, not IMHO. Are you still interested in the original question? I thought that could be an interesting discussion.
I believe I stated my case. I did get a few good replies, notably from Mac Tech,
Alex Dubinsky, even Dangerosa and Der Trihs. But predictably it became a “dogpile on the fattie” type of game. It is a question that should be discussed seriously. Without getting personal.
I don’t believe that enhanced food manipulation should be dismissed out of hand as a reason for the increasing difficulty in losing weight and maintaining a healthy weight. I also believe some of the standards for a “healthy” weight are a bit skewed. I loathe the fear and guilt mongering used by certain individuals against those who don’t fit these arbitrary standards and are still healthy. Can’t we relax and enjoy food, for once for god’s sake?
Why all the “we” and “us” language?
If you replace all the “we’s” and “us’s” and “ours” with “I”, I think you will go a long way to understand why you are obese.
I agree, I just don’t think it’s the only reason.
Healthy height/weight charts are meant to be applied to the average person. Of course, there are people who fall outside those ranges, whether someone is healthy at a weight that is lower or higher than the ranges for their age, height, and gender. This doesn’t mean they are completely arbitrary or useless, though. They are just ONE tool you can use to help to determine a healthy weight for you, not the only one.
You can relax, enjoy food, and still be healthy - even slim.
See, now I agree with all of this. Except I don’t want to be “slim”. Healthy, yes, slim no.
OK. “Slim” isnt’ a synonym for “anorexically skinny” here, by the way.
What do you have against slim?
I don’t understand this. If you’re 5-8, I’m only a half-inch taller than you, and I feel like absolute shit at 170lbs, as a man. I’ve gained a few pounds in the last year and I’m pushing deep into the 170s, almost 180, and I feel like crap. I’m sluggish and tired and my clothes don’t fit. Parts of me that didn’t exist last year jiggle when I walk fast or up and down stairs.
Doesn’t it suck to lug around all that extra weight? I know it does for me. In my life I’ve always felt stronger, healthier and more free the less I weighed. I feel like shit at 175, but last year I felt great at under 160. I felt even better in high school at 130-140.
Right now, as I’m starting the difficult process of getting my weight under control, I am entirely baffled by someone who would prefer to stay fat. My goal is to ultimately be as skinny as I can get without destroying my muscles or becoming dangerously underweight. The first step is to lose 15 - 20 pounds to get back to where I was last summer. Ultimately I would like to aim for my high school weight, which wasn’t unhealthy at all. Do you know how fast I would run at that weight? How much farther I could hike through parks and how much more nature I could see? How low my grocery bills could be? How many young women would flirt with me? (Sorry ladies, I’m taken, but still… It would be nice to get hit on again.)
I don’t see any upside at all to either of us staying at 170 lbs.
Mainly, it’s not so important to me that I put that much work into it. I don’t really care how attractive I am or not. It’s also that growing up I was skinny, and was told so over and over and over again. By my parents’ friends, by my friends, “Beanpole” was a favorite word, I remember. It’s difficult getting to a size that people accept me at actually.
Actually, I felt quite good physically at 170 when I was. I’d like to be that again.
I just don’t see what the big deal is.
Just FYI: She’s 200 lbs, not 170. Also, claims she likes being “big” so she can “intimidate” others…:rolleyes:
How old are you, if you don’t mind me asking.
The reason I ask is that I hang with a group of people who were/are mostly overweight. And when we were younger, our bodies didn’t protest so much about being 170 instead of 150. But now we are all in our 40s (or most of us are) and the wear and tear that carrying that extra 30 lbs is starting to show. Those of us who worked to maintain a lower weight don’t have the knee/back/feet issues of those of us who were willing to accept ourselves as slightly overweight (or in some cases obese). Our willingness to accept that weight when we were young is one of our regrets of our ‘going on mature’ years.
The other thing is that while losing the weight at 40 helps, the damage to your joints has been done. So we are now a much trimmer (on average) group of women - but we complain about the weight.
Back to your OP though…this is also a group of women who has, for the most part, been early adopters of the 'crunchy, granola, eat at home, cook from scratch, don’t have soda in the house, shop for organic foods from the coop" movement. And even eating a lot of whole foods cooked at home, weight is a struggle. A huge part of it is a sedentary lifestyle - we don’t exercise for a living like we would have 100 years ago. But most of it is the psychology of food. The guilt over letting food go to waste, combined with the need to make sure there is plenty on the table. Rewarding and comforting yourself with food. Socializing with food. Keeping your hands busy with food.
I think I made that clear along the way, and by the way, have someone explain to you the concept of a “joke”, Dripping, to paraphrase the Great Cecil Adams.
I will no longer respond to such an obvious loser as yourself.
I am trying to get back to the original discussion, but I’m finding this rather difficult. Shall we discuss attitudes towards weight loss, or ideas about portion control when one leads a busy life?
Not at all, I’m 46. I have the occasional ache or pain, but nothing I can’t handle.
And it is a struggle, especially when motivation is a problem. I’ve never cared very much about my looks, and I don’t get a “runner’s high” when I exercize. I understand exercize is important, and I’m walking more than I used to, (I’m hoping to buy a bike.) but to me, exercize is just another chore. 
No such thing as “ideas about portion control”. There is either portion control, or there isn’t.
It doesn’t matter how “busy” you are. Three fig newtons is a correct portion size for a snack. The entire box of cookies is not. If you eat the entire box, it’s not because you’re “busy”, it’s because you can’t/won’t exercise a bit of willpower.
I don’t either - never understood people who enjoy a lot of exercise (I hate biking too, but I like to walk). And I’m willing to accept that there are people content to be heavy - certainly I’ve known a few.
Thank you. Actually I liked biking, but I haven’t in years. I’m thinking I could bike to work. Or maybe at first, one day out of the week.
Anyway, I understand the whole back to the earth granola-crunching movement. And that, unfortunately, is the only way to avoid the whole processed, manipulated food deal. I’d love to grow my own, like Mac Tech, but that’s just not possible right now.
I understand that this thread has gotten pretty emotional, but you’ll have to refrain from calling other posters names.
= = =
Everyone: there is no point to the sniping and sarcasm, here. Keep the discussion to the issues or go open the 12,000th fat thread in the Pit.
[ /Moderating ]
Yes, sir. Sorry sir. I even apologize to Dripping.
Exercize sucks. Portion control rocks!
Full disclosure: I’m a 6’1" 33 yr old dude weighing (at the moment) 330 pounds. For a profession I sit on my butt. For recreation I sit on my butt. I have great difficulty bringing myself to use the stationary bike, despite the fact I control the TV.
I am not some skinny dude criticizing fatties, and I’m not your enemy. That said, your 100,000 reasons to eat at Wendy’s are (parts 1-8) pathetic. Pa. Theh. Tic. At best, you’re just giving reasons not to eat tuna at all. (Dolphin safety is why you’ll eat six ounces of it, but not two? :rolleyes:)
So, you don’t like tuna. Find something else. I can’t cook and I have, since I recently started trying, been able to find things to eat that I somehow manage not to eat two tons of - despite the fact that I compulsively clear plates and empty any food container that’s sitting in reach.
It’s just not that hard to do. Despite the fact that eggs are no longer the size of marbles and corn is no longer sugar-free.
You might really enjoy reading Omnivore’s Dilemma and In Defense of Food. Michael Pollen ends up with these three rules in In Defense of Food (but Omnivore’s Dilemma is more what you are talking about - the agro industrial complex need to create more profit and its effects on diet and nutrition):
Eat Food - by food he means minimally processed things where you can pronounce all the ingredients - Twinkies are not food.
Not too much - Portion control AGAIN.
Mostly Plants - (and of those mostly leaves - i.e. grains are plants, lots of white rice and white bread and Creamette spaghetti noodles do not a healthy diet make).
When you are done with these two books, you start to wonder about buying 100 acres in Wisconsin and living off the land.