Stop bending words. This is what I said: “You weren’t there when groups of 4 or more guys -yes, guys, not girls- would hold me down and kick the shit out of me.”
I never said this happened just once. I was kicked, punched, spit on, and shoved in school. This is just one example of something that happened a lot.
I said I was chased one time, by guys I didn’t even know. This was a seperate incident. They did not beat me up, but I got away before they got a chance to do anything. Do not attribute words to me that I did not say.
I thought at first you had a serious beef, but now I see you just have nothing better to do than misinterpret things to try to stir up shit. You’re not worth any more of my time. Have fun making false claims to yourself.
True enough. I don’t know how strictly accurate it is, but I’ve always heard the base caloric rate for a sedentary person is around 14 calories per pound of body weight. So, according to this, a 175-pound person consumes about 2450 calories per day just sitting around the house. I’ve also heard the figure of about 2000 calories per day for a sedentary lifestyle, which is somewhat lower, but still more than 1800.
Unless you can show me something more compelling, I tend to regard arguments like this as little more than alarmist whining. “$78.5 billion?!? Now I can’t by my dream yacht! Look what you cost me!”
For one thing, not all of that money comes directly out of your pocket. I’d bet that if we did the math, we’d find that the actual cost to you is not more than a couple of bucks per year.
For another, that statistic isolates one cause of expenses without comparing it to others. How much out-of-pocket suffering do you endure because of, say, pregnancy? Or smoking? Or for that matter, military? Without context, the obesity figure is meaningless.
Lastly, I doubt that there are two primary classifications of illness – obesity-related and everything else. If a fat person has a heart attack, can you say with certainty that the obesity was the sole cause? I doubt you can, and yet statistically it would probably be counted as obesity-related. For that matter, I’d like to learn more about their data collection methods.
Compared to what parapalegics face on a daily basis (and to what blacks and jews have faced both in the past and today), getting bullied about weight problems don’t count. At all.
The use of the words “groups of 4 or more guys” and “would hold me down” etc indicates multiple times, not just once. So which is it??
Jesus, make up your bloody mind! Can you not keep your stories straight? So on a weekly basis you were beat up until you left high school. Then it happened one other time by groups of four or more guys (would) hold you down and beat the shit out of you? You’re the one trying to drum up empathy for fat people with these anecdotes, don’t get your panties in a wad when people find it hard to believe when you don’t make it clear. Maybe your high emotions here are making you befuddled.
And while you’re at it, point out where these other posters related similar incidents?
And if you wouldn’t mind pointing out all the untrammeled hatred and hostility towards fat people in this thread…I don’t count my “get the fuck over it” in my intial response to the OP as full of hate. If you do, you really need to grow a thicker skin.
In response to your little tirade, I’m on the verge of calling everything you’re writing here “kneejerk ignorant bullshit”, Amazon. Tit for tat.
Probably because it’s so far out of the experiences of me and pretty much every other person who was fat as a child growing up. I was fat and while there was name-calling, I was never assaulted or even threatened for it. Nor were any of the other fat kids in high school - heck some of them were pretty popular -, nor were any of the kids who were fat in their youth who I know now. Basically, I’m suspicious of your story because, quite frankly, I don’t know anyone in real life who had that sort of experience. Not only that, but I suspect that your weight wasn’t the primary reason you were picked on in school.
Out of curiosity, I did do the math. Assuming a total US population of 270 million, that works out to $290.74 for every man, woman and child in the US per annum. I don’t know many children who pay into the health care system, so that figure is actually going to be somewhat higher. Some quick research seems to indicate that the population under the age of 16 was about 19 percent as of 2004 (we’ll assume that anyone 16 or over is working and paying into the system), which increases the cost to $358.94 annually.
Or alternatively "Now we can’t invest $78.5 billion into programs to reduce obesity, or cure cancer, or fight AIDS, and so on.
I’m not sure why you’ve needed to personalize this to me. I think that the significant costs attributable to obesity related health concerns are a burden for us as a society. Your need to attack me as petty and greedy suggests a lack of a strong rebuttal.
Hardly. It doesn’t matter what the costs of other issues are. The costs associated with obesity, which can be modified, may be 78.5 billion dollars. That will not change if the costs of pregnancy are $1 or 100 billion. Again, I’m not sure why you need to paint this as me simply being concerned about my bottom line. I will admit that I would like to see more research funding going towards diabetes or cancer or Parkinson’s disease (or child psychopathology) for selfish reasons, but I would like to be able to direct more money towards a large number of diseases that have not affected me personally too.
Well, if you want to attack the methodology, I’d like to see your method for doing so before you begin spouting off about it. I’m sure, like any other investigation, the methodology here can be attacked. Without some meaningful alternative that shows a dramatically different result, however, you appear to be simply lashing out mindlessly.
I’m a little suprised, but hey, I guess we all have our hot buttons that provoke less than well reasoned responses. You can, however, take your suggestions of pettiness and greed and shove them up your ass.
I think I’ve got it now. “Kicked, punched, spit on, and shoved” on a weekly basis in school by groups of guys (never girls) and just once chased by a group of unknown-to-her strangers into a convenience store once as an adult.
Damn. I thought Canada was such a friendly place, too.
Phew.
Still waiting to be shown all the other posters who related similar experiences she mentioned. I just scanned the whole thread…did I miss all of them?
I think there are a number of extremely overweight people who would have to dedicate every waking minute to the fight if they wanted to get to a normal weight.
I went to school with a girl whose mother was very obese and whose father was really skinny. They had 9 children, 5 extremely obese, and 4 skinny. The obese ones were obese as children. The skinny ones were skinny as children. They all stayed in their tracks, with one of the obese ones occasionally making it down into just “very overweight” territory, instead of extremely obese.
So this girl, who was a dear friend of mine, was very big. She was hungry. She was always hungry. We’d spend whole days together where she would eat what I was eating or less, and she was fighting her appetite the whole time. She was hungry. She was gorgeous, and smart, and incredibly funny, and her body was telling her that she was starving to death if she ate what I ate.
Yes, someone can say that it’s just willpower, but there are certain levels of willpower that I just don’t think are reasonable to expect from people, especially when it means that we expect an incredible amount of willpower, exercised all day, every day, for the rest of their lives. “You’re hungry and you will be hungry for the rest of your life.”
We have 8 cats. 4 of them are fat. 4 of them are skinny. Cats don’t have “willpower” or moral failings. They don’t have low self-esteem or psychological issues the way humans do. They don’t make choices about food the way humans do. But 4 are fat. 4 are skinny. Of course the skinny ones don’t eat as much, but why not? They have the opportunity. Nothing is stopping them. They aren’t worried about what they’ll look like. They aren’t worried about anything except who gets the prime spot curled up next to my husband.
4 of the cats eat more because they are driven to eat more. 4 of the cats eat less because they are driven to eat less. Humans who find the choice to eat less “easy” probably don’t have the same drive as humans who find the choice to eat less “hard,” and experiences don’t translate between the two groups, just as my cat Irving wouldn’t understand if I explained why my cat Orson is so fat. (He’s getting better, though, because we try to limit the poor fat thing’s food.)
You’re absolutely right. I never said it was necessarily easy, just possible, to lose weight if one put one’s mind to it. That’s the real rub. Hell, I don’t think I could put in a full-time effort into it, if I were in the same situation.
Your need interpret my use of the word “you” in the general sense as a personal attack suggests a strong persecution complex. Or paranoia. Tell me, doctor, what would you say of a patient who assumed all negative comments were personal attacks, hmm? Seriously, It wasn’t directed solely at you.
And I’m not attacking the methodology, I’m merely questioning it. Not taking it at face value. I’ve seen enough poorly conducted studies to know better. What’s wrong with that?
As to my suggestions of pettiness and greed, I’ve seen that all to often on these fora. Some people really do consider it an affront to their wallets.
First, you completely missed my original point: a fat person that weighs 175 lbs is NOT a person with a 1800 kcal BMR. You should be working with your ideal weight and not your current weight with these calculators, since the lean body mass is what burns off nearly all these calories. In this example, if the person weighing 175 lbs was an obese person, his/her maximum ideal weight would be 135 lbs, which puts the BMR at a bit below 1400 calories.
Second, you also overestimate the caloric effect of sleep versus being awake and doing nothing (physically). The calories burned sitting quietly (which is what your typical office worker does all day long with about 10 minutes walking spread out there) is minimal:
When someone’s going to call the fat people saying “I eat 1800 calories a day and ride a bike 4 miles a day and I’m not losing weight!” liars, it’s pretty important. Men may be able to get away with it, but your average woman is going to gain weight on such a regime (let alone lose) unless she’s either freakishly tall or works outside the office. A poster who asks the question of why he/she can’t lose weight needs education and support, not derision.
No doubt, it’s very difficult. I’ve quit both alcohol and nicotine, I imagine breaking a true addiction to food might be a bit harder.
Modifying behaviour is rarely easy, though. However, it’s certainly possible, and that is where the willpower part comes in.
I don’t let my pets get fat either, it’s very bad for them. Number one dog weighs about 100lbs. He’s got the type of metabolism that will carry him through a famine - he looks at food and can gain weight. Given the chance, he’ll eat until he explodes and will tell anyone who asks that I starve him. Number two dog can eat as much as she wants and often borders on skinny. She hovers around 70lbs.
Both animals similar age and activity levels, both utterly healthy.
Number one - despite being much bigger - eats a good third less than Number two. He’d like to eat more, but I don’t let him, poor guy.
What I’m getting at is, having a lower metabolism means, unfortunately, you have to eat much less to maintain a lean weight than those lucky ones with high metabolisms.
Nobody said life was ever fair…ask my dog!
Gee, how could I have misinterpreted the former quote as an attack directed at me? I must be paranoid and harbor delusions of persecution, because it is clearly everyone else but me who is an alarmist whiner! Thanks, tdn, for telling me of my psychopathology. You so s-m-r-t!
Only you can answer that. The wording of my post clearly indicates that I was going after the argument, not you. I don’t see how I could have made it plainer.
But just in case you still don’t get it – IT WAS NOT DIRECTED AT YOU.
