How to fight obesity

Great Debates
61

Ask yourself this: would you be bitching about your co-workers if the insurance company hiked premiums 20% based on the fact that the company had a larger than typical number of employees over 40, thereby increasing the risk that the insurer was taking on that the plan might actually receive some use?

Who would you grumble about if a premium hike was based on the number of females aged 20-35 working at the company, thereby increasing the chance of heavy insurance payouts in the increasingly expensive obstetrics area?

What if your insurer hiked premiums for the entire company after it reviewed what services they were covering for your company and came to a conclusion (because of the drugs that were being prescribed for them) that several of your coworkers had HIV?

Your taxes go toward underwriting the medical care of the elderly, disabled and indigent who rely upon Medicare and Medicaid programs. It is presumed, therefore, that because some of the elderly and indigent are obese and also make use of medical services, you’re paying for care that wouldn’t be needed if those people weren’t obese. Nevermind that the elderly, disabled and indigent are prime demographics for a number of medical problems which are frequently exacerbated by their age, underlying disability or their economic status and obesity may or may not be a factor in their illness, even when they are obese.

It’s a bad conflation of and presumption from datapoints which aren’t necessarily connected, much like the vaunted (and now debunked) “300,000 - 400,000 people die annually from obesity-related or caused illnesses” canard. In short – just because someone is sick and obese doesn’t mean that obesity is the cause or a complicating factor of their illness, even if that illness can be related to/exacerbated by overweight. The presumption which fuels the perpetuation of this idea doesn’t take the actual facts of individuals’ situations into account because it can’t, because the people drawing the conclusions – by looking at statistics – do not have access to the medical information of the fat folks in question, they just know that they’re sick and fat and that’s about it.

TVeblen really hit on something important – we can say “eat better, move more” all we want, but until we figure out why people aren’t eating better and moving more now compared to generations past, we aren’t going to be able to find ways to help people to do that. A big part of that is pretty clearly how we’re working – more than ever and further away from home than ever.

Another big part of it is the shift in family dynamics – kids with a plethora of afterschool activities which didn’t exist even a generation ago, eating up time that parents used to have in the home, leading to less time to make good meals and more tired parents.

Yet another part of it is how we’re spending what leisure time we have – because we are more harried and tired because of how and where we’re working and because of the whirlwind of family life and because there are amazing new options available to us like 100+ channels of cable TV, Super Nintendo and the web – we spend a lot more time doing inactive things now than ever, especially those of us who never had an active hobby or can no longer afford the active hobbies we once enjoyed.

Another part is the destabilization of our society. The basic foundations are shifting: things we took for granted no longer exist. Most of us are in debt, some quite deeply. There always seems to be some kind of crisis which leaves us unsettled, and which the news media really wants us to worry about, whether it’s a terrible health crisis or whether or not we’re eating too many of this or not enough of that or it’s terrorism or global warming or war or prisoner abuse or red states vs. blue states ad infinitum. It’s enough to make the strongest of us want to cuddle in bed with a glass of milk and some chocolate chip cookies (or a bottle of whiskey) and more and more frequently, that’s what we’re doing.

As in all matters of human nature it’s just not cut and dried.

62

Your post (and this isn’t a personal dig at you) is symbolic of what the root of this (and many other) problems are - reluctance or refusal to accept personal responsibility. Sure, there are many excuses but most everyone has the power to make the right choices. Blaming everyone and everything but yourself may make you feel good, but it isn’t going to solve any problems. Hey, it’s your body! The answer is to educate yourself, use common sense and accept responsibility for your own actions. Straight-forward and simple!

But of course, no one wants to hear this. Please, someone in this thread say you’re convinced you need to look out for yourself and your family, you’re going to take the bull by the horns and you’re going to make a positive change in your eating and exercise habits…

63

I’ve been lurking, and I am actively in the process of making changes in my exercise and eating habits. Have been since before this thread began. I am overweight, though not obese. However, I know I have formed some bad habits and I need to change them before they go much further. For my kids, my husband, and most of all myself.

That being said… you are oversimplifying. Don’t take it personally, so are most of the other posters in this thread. The reasons each person overeats are individual and complex. I believe I’ve faced up to the reasons I overeat, and it is not because I’m too tired or too lazy to cook real food or because our budget doesn’t stretch to cover fresh fruits and vegetables. They’re reasons I really don’t feel like sharing, except to say that they are reasons similar to those that get other people hooked on cigarettes or booze.

This is the key for a great many people, I believe - when you are eating for reasons other than hunger, you don’t eat steamed broccoli, you eat the freaking Doritos. even though you shouldn’t. A donut is a stress-reliever in a way that carrot sticks will never be.

I’ve started down what I know will be a hard road, and it’s more than a little scary. I’ve tried before and I’ve never made it this far. And to be blunt? Attitudes like yours are not exactly helpful.

64

You are kidding, right?

Without a car, you are probably either already walking/bicycling or taking public transportation to work. Which means (WAG) probably a three hour trip on a bicycle, and six or seven hours walking.

In other words, simply not feasible.

65

I think I might have a plausible answer. With the HMO’s taking over health care these days, and of course being way more about “preventative” medicine than actually worrying about curing anybody (too expensive), I think something involving exercise might work.

We know that obesity, or even being 10-15% over your ideal body weight, is bad for you. But clearly, you cannot stop people from eating. It seems you can’t even encourage them to eat better.

What I would do if I was running an HMO would be to make exercise mandatory. You have to go to the gym and you have to burn a certain number of calories/raise your heartrate into the target zone for a certain amount of time, say three times a week. Eat whatever the hell you want, but you’d better get your butt up on that treadmill, and do 3 reps of 12 on those handweights, if you want us to cover your coronary 10 years down the line.

There would have to be some sort of regulatory thing to make sure you were going, like punching in or having an HMO official sign you in/out/monitor your progress. Even the fudgers who wanted to get around the system by bribing officials or forging signatures would still have to show up there OCCASIONALLY, or at least talk to somebody in a gym. Which is better than nothing.

I hate exercising, but if I thought my health insurance would get cut if I didn’t find the time, I’d definitely go more often.

66

I can’t tell if you’re being serious, but that sounds like a good way to make people hate both exercise and their HMO.

I hate gyms. I hate the concentrated funk. I hate the eyes that may or may not be watching me. I hate waiting in line to get on the treadmill, and I hate having to get off the treadmill because someone is waiting to use it. I’d rather ride my bike or go hiking. These things are fun. Jogging on a treadmill is not.

I mean, if we’re going to be that drastic, why don’t we create a HMO that has mandatory “weigh-ins” each year? You’re only allowed an extra 20 pounds over your ideal body weight. Go beyond that, and you’re out of the program. This isn’t a good idea either, but at least people have some freedom.

67

Actually I don’t have much problem with weight control, mainly due to good genes and habits learned when I was young. Sugary snacks, fast food, soft drinks, etc. were rare treats, far from the norm. I’m not particularly thrilled with the 15 or so pounds that crept on with middle age but they’re a warning sign for me change my eating and exercise habits to match my slowing metabolism. Doing both, and sure enough the pounds are coming right back off.
But perhaps my perspective is based from age. It was not always so difficult to eat healthily. For example, portions were about half what they are now. Eating out didn’t mean huge platters overflowing with food. Bagels were about 2/3 the size they are now. A person had to deliberately over-order to pig out, i.e. the default portions were sensible. That’s reversed now, and yes, it does present new hurdles for people. Of course they can just eat half–but that means throwing away a lot of food. That’s what I mean by societal changes instead of basic changes in human nature. Wastefulness doesn’t come naturally, even if the alternative is unhealthy.
I don’t think for one moment that people are fundamentally much different from what they were a few decades ago. A tsumani of human self-indulgence and sloth hasn’t suddenly swept across entire countries. (Neither have exotic physical bases for obesity, for that matter.)
I do think the defaults need to change, though how that would be done is the stumper. Trading in sedentary past-times like computers, TVs, etc. for even moderate physical amusements, for one. Drastic reductions in portion sizes, with reduced prices as well. More consistent, widespread availablity of good produce at reasonable prices, in proportion to the aisle-after-supermarket-aisle glut of highly processed empty-calorie stuff.
Of course individual responsibility applies. Eating reasonably and even inexpensively isn’t any harder than it used to be; the easy, unhealthy alternatives are just much more in-your-face. During a rather extended period of my life I was dead, flat broke–but slender and well fed. But it took quite a bit of conscious effort to do it: lots of veggies, beans, soups, yogurt, sometimes chicken, etc. not to mention the careful time needed for cooking, freezing lots for future use, etc. It can be done, and I still do it basically the same way, but I don’t blame people for settling for more convenient, widely-touted alternatives either.
FWIW I think market pressures are starting to change. I really like the fact that I can now quite convenienlty choose among an array of inexpensive, tasty salads from fast food places if needs be. That’s a promising start.

Veb

68

Yes, as I’ve tried to illustrate throughout this thread, it isn’t that hard to eat sensibly. It only takes some thought and discipline on your own part.

Learn to read the labels on the foods you buy because companies play a lot of games with serving sizes. For instance, most of the personal size pizzas (frozen or fresh) that you buy have a serving size of 1/3 of the pizza. This is unrealistic since most people (myself included) eat the whole thing. You have to take the calories listed and multiply them out. I’ve got one personal size pizza here from Trader Joes (chicken breast, artichoke and mushroom). It says it has 220 calories and 60 of those calories are from fat. The serving size is 1/2 pizza. So if you eat the whole thing, you are consuming 440 calories with 120 from fat The FDA is looking into setting standards to force companies to set the serving size equal to what a normal person would consume.

As to those fast food salads, the killer is the dressing that people put on. I personally never use dressing, instead favoring a squeeze of lemon and some salt & pepper.

69

Granted, but I think we’re interpreting the standards for “ease” very differently. I personally love the detailed nutritional information on foods, mainly because it’s become a demented “gotcha!” game for me. Check out the actual fat and sugar content of most (quote) healthy granola-type cereals, for instance. Same goes for just about any highly advertised food, including smoothies-for-busy-people, “healthy” fruit drinks, etc. If you’re a cook, check out the actual salt and sugar content of seemingly harmless items like canned tomatoes. It’s all listed…but it’s a complicated nightmare for ordinary people just trying to put a meal togehter.

Companies do play complicated, deceptive games with serving sizes.
You’re absolutely correct, those nutritional disclosures are aimed for maximum confusion while still complying with strict regulations. I know how to determine actual proportions by ingredient order, not to mention freshness by bottling codes on dried herbs, etc. It’s rather a sideways hobby of mine, but easy it ain’t. Most people, myself most definitely included, just want something something tasty and comforting to eat, before, during and after stressful days.
As you aptly noted, much of the information is designed to mislead, under the guise of informing. That’s part of the problem, IMO. There isn’t any easy, pre-fab answer for tired people who just want to be fed, preferably relatively healthily and tastily.
Much of the information glut is amazingly misleading. Of course personal responsiblity and common sense plays in. It’s just not all that easy to separate out the factors, IMO. Who hasn’t sometime said, “T’hell with it, I’m starved, rushed and will settle for what’s in front of me?”

It depends on the salad dressing, the salad ingredients and one’s daily nutritional intake. I’m fussy about this one too. I have no problem with modest amounts of good olive oil, parmesan shavings, etc. (Newman’s Own[sub]TM[/sub] isn’t bad for this.) OTOH, most cheese glopped on fast food salads deserves to be scraped off immediately. It’s horrid stuff, offering zero actual taste to compensate for the nutritional bomb. My preferred homemade salad dressing is low-fat buttermilk blended with a few dollops of plain yogurt, a snerk of vinegar, and lashings of fresh dill, freshly ground pepper and kosher salt.
Which brings me back to the central point…people shouldn’t have to expend huge amounts of time or mental energy just to eat. Foodies and health nuts might be the vanguard, but they’re lousy benchmarks.
Some people will always be irresponsible idiots. But when alarming numbers of ordinary folks fall prey to nutritional perils, then maybe a few systems deserve close scrutiny.

Veb

70

I’ve already said that food labels should be more straightforward and that the FDA is looking into this issue. But that does not mean that the FDA will really do anything about the problem. It still only requires simple high school arithmetic to figure out what is what on a food label. If the average person can’t do that level of arithmetic, then short of going back to school, I don’t know what else could be done for them.

Second, in our capitalist, money talks country, corporations are not your friend. They are in business to sell more product at the lowest possible manufacturing/production costs that they can so that shareholder value increases. They or their trade associations regularly “buy-off” politicians to pass favorable rules for them. They have teams of lawyers and consultants whose job it is to find every legal loophole and to determine just how close they can go without actually violating a law. Corporations are not going to do anything to help you as a consumer unless they see a way to make more money doing so. If they do produce a selection of more healthful foods, they are only doing so because it is profitable. But they are not going to stop making unhealthful foods either.

So that being said, I’m not sure what it is that you propose as a solution to this problem? IMO, it still comes down to self-education and taking personal responsibility.

71

Some pictures of dinners that you can easily put together yourself in just a few minutes. :wink:

Dinner photo’s

72

The problem with that is that there is some evidence that its not the excess adipose tissue that is deadly, it is inactivity and poor diet which are stereotypically linked to obesity (and which play a large role in obesities development). Sandy Szwarc over on tech central station has written some interesting articles on the subject of excess adipose tissue vs bad diet and no exercise and how people confuse the two.

The link i posted earlier shows that things like early screening, diet and exercise would prevent a huge number of cancer deaths, saving taxpayers and insurance companies endless billions a year. So if you did enforce this law you’d have to enforce it across the board. Good diet and exercise are good preventative treatments for most illnesses, not just obesity.

73

Nightline this evening devoted the whole show to the problem of obesity for the poor. It was quite interesting and some of the points made eariler here about lack of stores in poorer neighbors and lack of transporation were well covered in the show.

Here is a link to the show.

There are a whole slew of other related Nightline this evening devoted the whole show to the problem of obesity for the poor. It was quite interesting and some of the points made earlier here about lack of stores in poorer neighbors and lack of transportation were well covered in the show.

Here is a link to the show.

There are a whole slew of other related stories on the subject at this link.

This statement is not correct. Additional adipose tissue requires additional blood supply. This requires the heart to do more work and increases the strain on this muscle. Additional fatty tissue also increases heat retention in the body, again putting a heavier load on body cooling systems.
stories on the subject at this link.

This statement is not correct. Additional adipose tissue requires additional blood supply. This requires the heart to do more work and increases the strain on this muscle. Additional fatty tissue also increases heat retention in the body, againputting a heavier load on body cooling systems.

74

Another interesting story in the paper today.

75

Hm… That’s interesting.

Hm… That’s interesting.

76

A lot of people make light of obesity among the poor…I have even heard assholes boast that “America is the only country in the world where there poor are fat”. Obesity is as much a form of malnutrition as starvation. Plus many people from minority groups or people who come from a long line of poor folks are genetically conditioned to store body fat.

I grew up relatively poor, and my (single) mother generally could only afford 10 to 20 dollars worth of groceries at a time. It wasn’t like we sat around eating twinkies and Dr. Pepper all the time, but fresh vegetables or good lean cuts of meat were often pretty expensive. I have had to watch my diet for most of my adult life, if I don’t I’ll pack on 40 or 50 lbs in no time.

School lunches are just plain evil. They have always been awful, and predicated on the idea that kids can just eat any old surplus slop. If we really cared about children we’d offer them something better. Most young children actually enjoy fruits if they are fresh, but canned peach halves and mushy apple sauce ruin the love of fruit.

When I was in college, I worked as a substitute teacher in elementary schools. A typical breakfast would be either sausage biscuits, pancakes, or pizza, I’m not talking about “breakfast pizza” even…just regular frozen pizza. Then with that they’d serve a roll. And then some cold soggy canned green beans no one would eat, with chocolate or strawberry milk. Then more of the same for lunch, either pizza or a hot dog with a bun with macaroni and cheese, or french fries and corn. These kids eat nothing but starch and the teachers (who never even entered the cafeteria) wondered why the children are either out of their seats going bonkers or dead tired in class.

Plus every occassion was an excuse for a bake sale or candy sale. And when they stopped selling carbonated drinks they replaced them with those ersatz juices that have just as many calories, if not more.

77

Here’s an interesting excerpt from the Life Extension email newsletter. Fat and obese people may live shorter lives than their thinner compatriots and suffer more age related diseases.

And here’s a comprehensive article on the subject of eating less, the potential benefits and how to go about doing this:

78

I just wanted to chime in and let anyone know who was interested that there’s a great community over at Men’s Health (women can come too :slight_smile: ) where people can help you with the anxiety of lifting weights and teach you to make a lifestyle change and not just go on diets.

http://forums.menshealth.com/index.jspa

79

Even though that is probably true, i don’t think that that or things like the fact taht fat cells send out dangerous hormones are responsible for the 300,000 deaths attributed to obesity annually.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,1200549,00.html

“In almost all large-scale epidemiological studies, little or no correlation between weight and health can be found for a large majority of the population”

80

The problem with death is that it is a slow process. Many factors contribute that make it more likely that, for some people, it will occur sooner rather than later. In other words, while obesity doesn’t suddenly happen out of the blue, death (not caused by an accident) rarely does either.

As to your correlation quote, there are a variety of opinions on this. It depends on how you define “health”.