By the way, there is another problem with your apparent definition: Suppose a dieter reaches a reasonable goal weight and from then on eats enough food so that he stops losing weight but doesn’t gain weight.
Since he is consuming enough calories to maintain his weight, our dieter is not experiencing permanent “starvation” by your apparent definition.
It also follows that “starvation” per se is not the source of the misery you describe. Of course nobody denies that maintaining one’s weight is uncomfortable and perhaps even miserable on occasion. But we need to be clear about what’s going on, and it ain’t starvation by any definition.
Maybe. But babies aren’t born obese (barring illness during gestation) and obesity takes years to achieve. As does alcohol dependency. I expect the brain of the chronic over eater to have altered receptors in the brain which are rewarded by food, but just like alcohol dependence, the overindulging leads to the disease and dependence, not the other way around.
Unless babies born to chronic over eaters are born addicted just as babies born to drug and alcohol using mothers are. If that’s happening, it’s a health crisis of catastrophic proportion and the repercussions of gestating while morbidly obese could be at the very least irresponsible and at the worst, what…criminal? The implications seem pretty dire, especially in light of Stoid’s claims of starvation and abject misery.
They may not be born obese, but they are born with an internal system which regulates how much they desire to eat. The parameters of that system surely vary from person to person, just like pretty much anything else you care to measure varies from person to person.
I would guess it’s a combination. Some people can drink day after day for years and then stop at will expending minimal willpower.
But it isn’t a global problem, and not limited by ethnicity, age, environment, or sex. It isn’t communicable. This isn’t an epidemic, isn’t endemic. Entire countries and entire cultures are free from this “disease”. There isn’t a convenient scapegoat lurking in the bodies of the human species to hang this on.
I’d like to see the BSA teach these guys to prepare or cook (for older kids) nutritious meals and snacks. Have them practice, give them recipes and shopping lists. Suggest that older kids make dinner for their families once a week (or more often!). Create healthy alternatives that are still enticing to kids. Tacos and pizza can be made healthier, but they’re still tacos and pizza. I don’t expect kids to embrace broccoli. This would be good for ALL kids to learn.
Troppus, I don’t have any ideas regarding your in-laws. That’s a tough one. However, one thing I’d suggest is involving your kiddo in age-appropriate food preparation. She’s too young now, but as she grows, start teaching her about nutrition, foods she can put together herself (sandwiches, PB and celery etc.), and how to cook (when she’s old enough for you to feel comfortable with it). I think that’s one thing kids today have lost-fewer and fewer families prepare meals at home together. The kids don’t learn it, so they don’t do it. So they eat processed crap because that’s all they know.
Assuming that’s true, there isn’t anyone to blame except the individual, no scapegoat, no cause for obesity other than the willful, deliberate ingestion of too much food.
Well, of course they are. It isn’t news that the US is leading first world countries in obesity rates.
Looking for someone or something else to blame for any addiction is a cop out, and in my opinion a waste of money and energy. No one is providing food for free or force feeding the populace. And those people who share this food rich environment without getting fat disprove an environmental influence that artemis and others are blaming.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe we’re going to need a drug to curb the appetite. But like other treatment for addictions, personal accountability should be the primary component of a treatment plan.
Every first world country has lower obesity rates than we do in the States. See previous link.
I believe that certain people are hoping that we’ll find a culprit to blame for their inability to control themselves. HFCS, maybe. Something in the water, food additives, steroids in our meat… something, anything which removes the blame and responsibility from the chronic over eater.
Yes.
Sure, just as an alcoholic or meth addict has an internal system that is “out of whack”.
Nope. Taste is a matter of preference, and any food will do if the food of choice isn’t available. The alcoholic cannot satisfy his craving with meth, the meth addict cannot satisfy her craving with food. But a food addict can substitute any food without detoxing.
Not weasling, was a poor choice of words. I should have said there are numerous countries and cultures with easily accessible cheap food which do not suffer the same *epidemic *of obesity that the US has.
That makes no sense . . . you just defined your term using the same term.
What exactly do you mean by the word “blame”?
I have no idea what your point is.
Let’s do this: Please quote whatever statement I made which (1) you dispute; and (2) you feel is contradicted by the observation that obesity is a more pervasive problem in the United States than in other countries.
Maybe we aren’t disagreeing, but it sure seems as though you feel that chronic over eaters suffer from some sort of disease or mechanism that is out of their control. What do you feel is to blame for morbid obesity?
One poster here blames tasty food. Another blames cheap food. Still another seems to be claiming heredity. But other countries which have cheap,tasty food and a comparable collection of ethnicities and cultures are not suffering from the same rate of morbid obesity. What do you feel is the most likely cause?
Look, there are two ways that a person can decide what to eat and how much:
Eat intuitively. Just rely on your cravings to decide what to eat and eat until you don’t feel like eating any more.
Exercise conscious control over what you eat.
The first approach requires no mental exertion and works just fine for a lot of people. But for a lot of people, following their internal system will result in the overeating. Probably because the internal system evolved during a time when there was not an abundance of junk food.
The second approach requires a good deal of effort and it’s a big challenge. Lifelong attention to what you eat. A lot of people try it and fail, but I think more would succeed if they faced the reality of what’s involved.
It’s also possible to combine these two methods. Many people find that as long as they steer clear of certain problem foods, they can eat intuitively and do fine.
First please answer my question, since I asked first:
Please quote whatever statement I made which (1) you dispute; and (2) you feel is contradicted by the observation that obesity is a more pervasive problem in the United States than in other countries.
It is these types of sweeping (ignorant) generalizations that frequently get you into trouble, Troppus.
Obesity is very much considered a global pandemic. Unless you referring to some rare outlier or totally isolated culture/country, virtually every country is experiencing an alarming increase in prevalence. While the US is certainly the world leader in obesity, obesity is not at all a first world only problem. And non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are among the biggest health issues of our time.
In the field of global public health, obesity is considered the fifth leading risk for global mortality (keep in mind where the bulk of the world’s population resides). Once considered a high income country problem, obesity is now an emerging epidemic in low to middle income countries, where paradoxically, undernutrition and obesity exist side-by-side. Research “double burden of disease” for more information.
While I don’t think the obesity epidemic can be solely attributed to environmental or genetic factors, it is not a simple matter of choice either. Particularly, when it comes to pediatric obesity. It is a very complex multi-faceted issue, where one’s environment, genetics and personal agency intersect – with all ensuing baggage.
A 40+ BMI on a child would be indicative of an alarming health issue, however, since most of the general public is relatively ignorant on health measures and meanings (e.g. BMI is most useful as a population-based measurement of fatness, the same measure may not correspond the same way in individuals), I find the 40+ BMI exclusion an extremely poor choice of criterion for BSA to use. If BSA leaders are not equipped with the necessary plus-size EMS equipment needed during a potential medical emergency, that would serve as a better threshold, IMO.
And this is what I take issue with. Approach number one does not “work just fine for a lot of people.”
Most people, if they do not make a conscious effort to balance their intake and activity, will quickly gain weight. Most people feel strong cravings for high-fat and high-sugar foods, and can easily consume massive quantities of these foods if they let themselves. Indeed, with things like soda, we are all the same in that we can drink gallons of the stuff without it satisfying our hunger at all.
Most of those healthy-weight people out there are not just wandering around eating whatever and staying thin. Who do you think is going to all those gyms? Who do you think are buying all of those portion controlled snack foods and healthy cooking cookbooks? Do you think the entire “health” market is just for chubby people and those who inherently love kale?
Most healthy weight people are the weight that they are precisely because they practice eating pattern 2. Most people who practice eating pattern 1, in modern America, will not remain a healthy weight for long.
I worked in a group home for teens and raised a handful of foster kids a few years ago. All kids who were in state custody were required to complete a “Life Skills” program which included shopping for and preparing food, making healthy and budget wise choices, feeding kids, etc. Our house dietician kept two kids out of school each day and they helped her prepare all three meals for the entire house, she took them grocery shopping, clipped coupons, prepared menus. It was brilliant and I wish public schools required it for everyone.
I was forced to cook as a little kid because I was a picky little shit who flat refused to eat meat. Mom’s solution was to force me to come up with and prepare alternatives. I loved spending that time learning to cook and take charge of my own meals. I definitely intend to make the kitchen a positive experience for my girl. I would love a script for how to say something like “yep, Grandma eats a lot of cookies, but all that sugar doesn’t give us as much energy and makes us feel bad when we eat too much.” But I don’t want to incite a battle with the in-laws I’m sure to lose or say something that will get back to Grandma and insult her. And I sure don’t want to paint cookies as a forbidden food. Cookies are awesome treats. This whole conversation has me concerned that one false move can lead someone to a lifetime of disordered thinking about food. This is one problem I don’t want my kid to struggle with, because food shouldn’t be a source of anxiety and shame.
This would be good for ALL kids to learn.