the irony of this thread is that I was so engrossed in reading it I ended up working out a half an hour later than I had planned…
I nominate Snake for the “most misunderstood post” award. Several posters in this thread have pointed to this poor guy’s post as evidence of prejudice against fat people. Try not to be so defensive that you lose reading comprehension. From post #98, which can be found at the end of page #2: (emphasis added)
Be careful you don’t meander into “cry wolf” territory.
Point taken, Ellis Dee. Snake was talking about the parents—a significant distinction.
However, I thought I’d quote Snake’s complete post, just to get the feel for it in its entirety. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I think I detect a certain measure of disgust and contempt (“gellatinous humanity,” etc.) in his post. YMMV, etc.
And you know what? Even if Snake’s post dripped with compassion, it doesn’t negate the fact that there are plenty of pretty of examples of contemptuous comments (on this board—easy enough to seach for 'em) made about fat people. 'Cause, you know, people are mean. 
You do know that many people don’t read, don’t you? Not voluntarily at least, and possible not above an eighth grade level–or has that been lowered to seventh grade? In my city of 100,00 studies show that less than 35% use the library (based on info from a campaign to fund the library differently). When I taught, I regularly had children whose families did not own any books and who had never seen their parents read for pleasure (and this in a solidly middle class school district).
Most–no, I’ll change that to a more non-specific “a lot of” to avoid a hijack into how many most is and where I get my information-- A lot of people get their information from the television and what they hear is the latest diet/fitness plan de jour. Some of these may well be effective, but, since a lot of people don’t read, they try to go on the diet or do the fitness workout based on the 20 minute segment they saw on Dr. Phil. It doesn’t work, because they don’t understand the full plan, and then reinforces the idea that they can’t lose weight.
Which in turns feeds into the feeling that they have failed at something “everyone” else can do and so they must really be stupid or lazy or worthless, so why should they bother to try to keep to the plan? And the running shoes sit in the corner, and the nifty, fail-proof scale or food checkbook or assortment of tasty recipes get sold at the next garage sale. And that apple pie is mighty tasty and being sick to your stomach is sometimes better than being sick in your heart.
Would you (no directed just at Lord Ashtar, just a generic you) object to sensible, practical classes, starting in elementary school and going through high school, in nutrition, how the body reacts to and processes different types of food, diet’s role in maintaining health or lowering genetic risk factors, how preparation affects food’s nutritional value, etc.? Let’s add a good, balanced lunch program to the mix, on the odd theory that access to health food will generate a desire for such foods.
Would you object to classes, elementary through high school, that taught various physical fitness activities–not just the rules to touch football, but what different types of exercise does to our muscles, how diet and exercise interrelate, how to take into consideration the changes our bodies go through as we age, etc?
Would you object to finding ways to make the type of classes mentioned above available to people who have already left school?
If a obese person truly wanted to work through an effective weight loss program, (maybe Weight Watchers, Duke University, or an individualized program monitored by her doctor), and her/his doctor indicated that doing so would prevent or lower the risks of any number of diseases or conditions, but could not afford it, should there be a way to subsidize that cost?
Which is a better use of my tax dollar (assuming I will be taxed regardless): paying for an obese person the be taught and counseled through a weight loss process that involves her/him making serious changes in lifestyle, or paying for that same individual as she/he gradually becomes more and more incapacitated by the excess weight (developes diebetes and must take insulum every day, needs a knee relacement surgery, spends a few days in the hospital every few months for a cardiac incident, needing to be in a nursing home years earlier than average folks, etc)? And since this thread was originally started because Medicare was considering covering treatment for obesity, we’re talking old, fat people so gastric bypass and other surgeries aren’t really an option, so let’s leave that off the table shall we?
Which is more likely to bring down the cost of my insurance premiums (assuming that the insurance company sets rates based on average claims and not some arbitrary dollar amount): spending a whole bunch of money on a person to help them get and stay healthy, and so not need to make as many claims on the insurance carrier, or to to spread out that same expediture of money, and more, as he or she needs to go to the doctor more and more often for back pain and joint pain, acid reflux and shortness of breath, etc., and takes more and more drugs to control blood pressure, insulum production, cholesterol, water retention, etc., etc., etc.?
How about admitting that the mind and the body are not two separate, unrelated entities, and that for many obese people, the injury is to both, and a purely physical solution is only a partial solution, and will fail? No, I can’t see you (still a generic you) ever understanding that, but I can try to be compassionate instead of angry.
tdn, please accept my condolences as well.
Well, you’ll notice I put the word “ingrained” in quotes, meaning in a manner of speaking. Some people are geared toward learning on their own. You are one of them, and I am one. But not everyone can do it that way. Perhaps a reasonable analogy would be math (for me that is), though I’m somewhat above average intelligence (and you can’t deny that there are a BUNCH of way above intelligence, self admitted overweight and obese people here on the dope), I have a severe math phobia and am pretty bad at it.
All it does for me to try and “self teach” in that area is make me MORE paranoid, confused and upset on the subject. In order for me to advance, I need a compassionate, PATIENT tutor. And only THEN will the books and so on work for me.
Does this mean I’m saying 'it’s not my fault, it can’t be done?" No, it means, that in THAT instance, I have “special needs” to learn that particular subject. Much in the same way that many obese and overweight need HUMAN help (not just "oh go to the library and check out a book) with their obesity.
And if you read Muscle & Fitness, Muscle Media and other mags dedicated to fitness, then you can’t have missed the dozens of articles discussing obesity and the emotional and psychological obstacles (and all the hows and whys of those inlcluded), which describe exactly the sort of thing I do here. Bill and Shawn Phillips themselves even spend some time in their books discussing how to get over the emotional hump.
tdn gave you some excellent examples of how this effects obese people. Such as his discomfort (bordering on fear perhaps) of going to the gym and having “all the beautiful people” laugh at him behind his back.
Well, as I said, I was really meaning “in a manner of speaking” of COURSE no one is born just knowing. But again, some are better geared toward learning in that manner than others. And those who haven’t been severly obese or overweight all of their lives, are likely more liable to find that “simple” as they keep pounding home the mantra.
Again, I am NOT saying that for the obese and overweight that “it can’t be done”. I am saying it is not AS simple as “eat less, exercise more”. And especially for the morbidly obese it is so far from “simple” that it’s ridiculous.
AHA!!! I don’t know about the others complaining about this useless mantra. But for me, I’m not saying that the mantra ITSELF is useless. What I AM saying is useless, is for people to keep telling the obese this mantra as if just the saying itself will “fix” things makes it useless. Going around saying this “well, just eat less and exercise more” DOES. NOT. WORK. For the simple reason that “eat less” can be mistranslated to mean anything from “starve yourself on a 400 calorie a day diet” to " drop a twinkie or two and that’ll work".
And “exercise more” is so ambiguous too. What does that mean? A walk around the block in the morning? Instant immersion in a 3 hour a day workout? In Muscle and Fitness there are frequently articles on why cardio and only cardio DOES NOT WORK for most people. But cardio is exercise no?? So, really that right there proves the saying wrong.
My secondary problem with it is not that it, at its basic doesn’t work, but that it insultingly makes what is a very complicated and heartwrenching journey for many, into a saying which effectively invalidates their concerns, their past struggles and their hard, VERY hard work once they finally are successful.
[quote]
Another issue I want to address is the vitriol overweight people face. I am a skinny person; always have been, and likely I always will be. I do look at obese people with contempt. It is, interestingly, the exact same contempt I face for being a smoker. The contempt is directed at weakness. And it is, in my opinion, justifiable contempt.
Several mentions have been made that overeating for the obese is an addiction. Then come the hems and haws about how an alcoholic can avoid booze, but you have to eat. That’s bullshit. You aren’t addicted to eating, you are addicted to comfort food. In other words, you are addicted to the feeling you get from sugary and fatty foods. If you truly are addicted to eating, as opposed to comfort foods, then you would over-eat foods you don’t even like. You could go on Fear Factor and eat everybody’s portion in the gross-out segment and ask for more. Don’t think for a moment an alcoholic won’t get drunk on cough syrup or mouthwash in a pinch. If you found yourself “in a pinch” for a comfort food fix, would you eat two pounds of raw tofu?
[quote]
The source of addiction, that of the substance being the comfort foods rather than tofu hasn’t been denied, at least in this thread, nor in most articles and books on the subject. This in no way means that we still don’t need to address the underlying issues that cause the NEED for the comfort food, or substance. The drive to addictive behavious is at issue, not what the substance is.
For some of the obese, yes, that is exactly what they will have to face, that of completely avoiding their “trigger” foods. For many others, once again, it’s NOT the target substance, it’s what drives them to it. In other words, it’s not what they’re eating, it’s what eating them. Address the underlying emotional issues (childhood abuse, no self esteem, etc), and start on the road to recovery, and take the “power” out of the addictive substance.
Again, no it’s not the answer, for you, once again, like everyone else, have just given a longwinded version of “eat less, exercise more”. You’ve not said one thing that an obese person could use to actually help themselves take that first step, or find the REAL answer, one that would actually work and work for good.
Oh absolutely, I do. And I don’t have a problem AT ALL with helping people with the physical aspect first, or at least in conjunction with the psychological part. Again, MY gripe is that just telling them “eat less, exercise more” is NOT "helping’ them. My gripe is that to help them, the “eat less, exercise more” needs to be broken down. HOW should they “eat less”. Show them, lead them, show them how to make tasty healthful meals. Show them the way to boost their metabolism by eating several small meals a day. And so on.
Yes, I agree and I guess, once again, that’s why this simple declaration raises such aggravation in me. I’ve had too many students who’ve been victims of those “well, just eat less, exercise more, it’s all your fault you fat disgusting pig” lectures and treatment.
I’ve had girls who just cried in relief when I did their BMRs and taught them how many, and what type of calories to take in throughout the day (you mean I DON’T have to eat salad and tofu and keep it to 700 calories a day??? ). And were shocked to find out about weight training and how aerobicizing (the exercise more part) yourself to death can actually cause you to GAIN weight. In that it eats up precious muslce (which burns 50 calories per pound, per day) resulting in the person gaining weight on even FEWER calories per day.
This, the simple fact of less muscle mass can very WELL result in someone gaining fat, while someone of the same basic size and height can lose or maintain, all the while the person losing is taking in MORE calories than the person gaining.
I have broken plateaus by eating MORE food, not less. And even for me, a person who has, as I’ve said, been doing this since my teens, and who works in the fitness industry, it took a GREAT deal of tweaking and trial and error. But the key was that it was the right kinds of food, at the right time. A calorie is not just a calorie, so once again, it’s not just “eat less” it’s eat right and here’s how, where here’s how equals volumes of knowledge and help, NOT just saying words at someone expecting them to change instantly (not YOU **Coldfire[/] you have been the very voice of reason and patience in this thread IMHO)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanvasShoes
To the obese or overweight, who HAVE no such background and training … you’re an obese adult, who grew up in a home where no type of knowledge of fitness, health and appropriate nutrition was ever used… many of them lack the knowledge to make it work…
Good grief. You know, I’ve posted at least a dozen posts expressing this. You have apparently missed all of them. Once again, I am not saying ignorance is an excuse, I’m saying it’s the reason why simply lecturing them for being fat, and saying “it’s as simple as eat less, exercise more” does NOT work. The mantra is idiotically simplistic, for all the reasons I’ve outlined several times in previous posts.
But, in saying that, I am NOT then saying that that means that the obese then have carte blanche to say “well, it’s not as simple as the stupid mantra, therefore I can’t do it”. Despite the several posts I’ve written to you saying that, you seem to keep missing it.
What I AM saying is that, in order for it to work, REAL information and REAL help needs to be given to those who’ve struggled and failed so many times.
It is the tendency for so many to just SAY (and not put into effect, or break down in applicable ways for the obese) the stupid mantra that I disagree with. Just the way you’ve been doing here.
And again, the gist of the mantra is somewhat true, but SAYING it over and over and over doesn’t work. And again, the mantra completely ignores that the emotional and psychological issues behind the overeating MUST be addressed for success. This too is not saying that “it can’t be done”. This is saying “here is the REAL way to do it”.
[QUOTE=Kallessa]
Most–no, I’ll change that to a more non-specific “a lot of” to avoid a hijack into how many most is and where I get my information-- A lot of people get their information from the television and what they hear is the latest diet/fitness plan de jour. Some of these may well be effective, but, since a lot of people don’t read, they try to go on the diet or do the fitness workout based on the 20 minute segment they saw on Dr. Phil. It doesn’t work, because they don’t understand the full plan, and then reinforces the idea that they can’t lose weight.
Which in turns feeds into the feeling that they have failed at something “everyone” else can do and so they must really be stupid or lazy or worthless, so why should they bother to try to keep to the plan? And the running shoes sit in the corner, and the nifty, fail-proof scale or food checkbook or assortment of tasty recipes get sold at the next garage sale. And that apple pie is mighty tasty and being sick to your stomach is sometimes better than being sick in your heart.
[QUOTE]
Yes, and why didn’t I think to put it like this (grrr). When what “eat less, exercise more” actually means changes according to the “experts” every 5 minutes, and then the obese get blamed for not being “self taught”, it’s seriously insulting to expect them to “just do it” when it seems no one really knows what “it” is.
All those 'thousands of books on amazon.com" out there? They’re oftentimes just more of the same contradicting information.
(Warning to yosemite: I may begin to sound mean here)
I interpret the above as the information and resources are available to them, for free even, but they don’t want to use them.
:rolleyes:
Woah. Say again?
I’ve seen a dietician, and have read dozens of fitness books, and this is a new one on me. Can you explain more about this? You got a cite? Not that I doubt you, but if this is true then I’d better find out more about it.
On the subject of books, it’s hard to seperate the good ones from the crap. Remember that publishers print books not to help readers, but to help themselves. If they think it will sell, they will print it. And sensational sells far better than dry but factual.
Three years ago my girlfriend finished a book on sex. It was one of the most factually correct and helpful books on the subject that I have ever seen. It went up on store shelves next to The Sex Diet and the latest crap from Dr. Laura. Guess which sold more?
Well I think we’re finally in agreement on something, CanvasShoes!
My “mantra” may be simplistic, but it’s also 100% correct. Isn’t it nice when a solution can be stated so simplistically? I think so.
My mantra not withstanding, I do believe many fat people have emotional or mental problems that keep them from wanting to eat less, eat better, and/or exercise.
Its probably because too much exercise can lead to muscle loss. I think muscle’s role in diet is overrated though. I know huge bodybuilders, people who have 22" arms. True they eat 6000 calories a day but their appetite goes up to make them eat 6000 calories a day. I have a friend who feels like he’s starving on less than 4000 a day. I have trouble on 2500 a day and only feel comfortable dieting on 2900-3300 a day.
Sure no problem. I have a few websites, one from a doctor, an MD who specializes in fitness medicine, and a few cites from personal trainers and those in the “biz”.
http://www.hussman.org/fitness/
He’s changed his site some since I was last there, but if IIRC the section dealing with keeping muscle, and how losing it can cause you to either gain weight or maintain using FEWER calories (yeah a shocker huh?), is in his section called “Your Raging Metabolism”.
And here’s a one from a very cool and unorthodox trainer. Neat site, explore her homepage too.
I won’t be near as scientific as the doctor of course, but here’s how it works in a nutshell. In fact this is how many a person “yo-yo’s” themselves from a normal weight right UP the scale to obesity.
As an example (and since I know it from a woman’s standpoint best of course), let’s take a young mid teen girl. She’s a reasonable weight, (maybe a few pounds over, but otherwise healthy looking and active and so on). So, she sees Britneys Spears (or Farrah Fawcett in my day :D), and decides she’s hideously obese. So, she drops her calories to about half of what she really needs to keep her BMR up.
So, she loses 10 pounds. Well, that’s SCALE weight. What’s she’s basically lost (and I’m going from memory here, check out Doc Hussman’s site for closer math), is about 3 pounds from water weight, about 1 -2 pounds of fat, and about 2-4 pounds of muscle.
When we drop our calories into the 'starvation mode" our bodies don’t realize that we’re unhappy with our looks, our body and all the endocrine systems etc see it as muuuuAAAAAAh, MuuuuuaaaaAAAAH, RED ALERT, Starvation imminent Calories QUICK".
The most easily broken down substance in our bodies is NOT fat, but muscle. So, now our heroine is 10 pounds lighter, but 4 pounds of that was muscle, so once she starts eating normally (as her body WILL drive her to do eventually), she now has four fewer pounds of muscle with which to burn the fat. Which, at 50 calories per pound of muscle per day is 200 calories which her body now won’t burn, but will store as fat. So, she’ll gain those 10 pounds back, plus 200 per day will eventually end up on her frame, til she goes on another crash diet, or aerobicizes for 3 hours a day. As too much cardio without weight training and proper nutrition can destroy muscle tissue as well. And that was out of a recent issue of Muscle and Fitness.
[quoteOn the subject of books, it’s hard to seperate the good ones from the crap. Remember that publishers print books not to help readers, but to help themselves. If they think it will sell, they will print it. And sensational sells far better than dry but factual.
Three years ago my girlfriend finished a book on sex. It was one of the most factually correct and helpful books on the subject that I have ever seen. It went up on store shelves next to The Sex Diet and the latest crap from Dr. Laura. Guess which sold more?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I addressed this too, and he ignored it again. You can’t believe everything you read. After all, plenty of “Bush is a hero” books are just “out there for anyone to read” and very few people in this country seem to think that, so just the fact that books are there mean nothing. It’s having the assistance to separate the chaff from the wheat as well.
Where did I say that the mantra was 100% correct? Sorry, I said at it’s basic it’s true, but still doesnt’ work AS IS and in fact can cause harm.
As I outlined in several posts previously.
I know you guys have been slogging through this issue for several pages, and not for the first time, but I wanted to add one personal experience that I don’t think has been addressed before (if I missed reading a post, please excuse me).
I was recently pregnant with twins. And you know how pregnant women’s appetites are crazy? Well mine was too - but in an unexpected way. I was, and am, significantly overweight, yet was not supposed to lose any weight during pregnancy (because elevated ketone levels are toxic to fetuses) and in fact, needed to gain 50 lbs. or so in order to have healthy babies.
So you’d think that as a fat lady, gaining weight would be no sweat, right?
Wrong.
The food buzz was gone. Absolutely gone.
I had the green light to eat as much as I wanted, and no real desire to do so. It didn’t feel good to eat. I don’t know why. It could be because I was eating a little better (no Pepsi), or it could be because my hormones were so affected by my pregnancy. I wasn’t exercising at all, so that couldn’t have been it.
This month’s Oprah magazine (yeah, yeah, I know) has an interesting article about hormones and appetite. I’ll betcha that in another 20 years we’ll find that hormones are a huge factor in obesity. And perhaps that some people’s systems can’t handle junk food, period.
Naaah, that’s not weird. Something similar happened to me, the first 4 months I was too nauseated, then I had a few months where I was okay, then there was just too damn much baby pressing on my poor lungs and tummy and everything else to be able to eat well. I lost 14 pounds my first four months and never did gain the weight I was supposed to. Though I can see why your doctor was concerned if you were having twins. They were happy and healthy I hope??
You know, I am getting more than a little tired of having to define what is and is not “mean,” and you are obviously not paying attention when you keep on adding these lame little “yosemite will think this is mean” asides to every comment you make. Give it a rest, it is way off the mark and (in my estimation) shows how you just aren’t putting any effort into comprehending.
Whatever, dude.
I can kinda understand the explanation for why you shouldn’t lose weight, but why would a self-described “fat lady” need to gain weight for anything, even a pregnancy? Also, why 50 pounds?
Because of the weight of the pregnancy. If one doesn’t gain weight, then one’s fat reserves are being burned up in order to compensate for the additional mass & that’s the dangerous ketone issue. If a woman weighs X and the pregnancy weighs Y, then the woman needs to weigh X plus Y; otherwise if she doesn’t gain, then her weight is now X minus Y. The Y is a constant, you can’t choose it.
I’ve given away my pregnancy books, so this is just from memory, but you gain weight for the baby, the placenta, and your additional blood (a woman’s blood volume doubles), and some other stuff that’s essential. Boy, I wish I could recall all the factors, I know I read that list a dozen times.
Thanks for asking Canvasshoes I wound up gaining 40 lbs, the babies were almost 6 lbs ea, and at my 3-week checkup I’d lost 60 lbs. Quite a few postpartum issues there! The babies are great, at their 4-month checkup they were 16 and 17 lbs, 25 and 26 inches, which put them in the 95th percentile for height and around 90th for weight.
I still think my pregnancy appetite was strange. I mean, eating didn’t give me any satisfaction beyond a feeling of fullness. It was soooo different from how I typically respond to food. Unfortunately my old response came back, with a vengeance. For about 2 weeks I ate almost nothing but chocolate - I’ve never eaten so much chocolate in my life. Now, 5 months later, I’ve gained back 10 lbs. So I’m trying to eat better. I have a hunch that when they start crawling I won’t have any exercise issues!