We know more...and we weigh more. Why?

In My Humble Opinion
1

Recently, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (who could pretty much save themselves a lot of needless work by just putting out every few months a message saying, “If you like what you’re eating SPIT IT OUT because IT’S BAD FOR YOU!”) issued another one of its red alerts warning of the obvious health hazards of “super-size” orders of fast food. This news of course should come as no surprise to anyone with an IQ higher than a dead crab but, nonetheless, it will probably do nothing to halt the swelling of the American waistline. This brings me to the following paradox: in the last 35 or so years there has been a growing body of information linking a high-fat and high calorie diet (coupled with a lack of exercise) with such harmful conditions as heart disease, cancer, and diabetes but Americans on whole have only gotten fatter and lazier. We’re now at a point where the national health risks caused by obesity are just as great as that caused by smoking. We willingly scarf down super-sized orders of fattening fast food despite our increased consciousness about the importance our diet has on our health. And–despite what the CSPI believes–it’s not as though McDonald’s, Burger King, KFC, Pizza Hut, and other fast food chains are forcing us to consume all this “dangerous” food. Whenever they try to introduce a light item to their menu (e.g, McDonald’s McLean Deluxe or KFC’s roasted chicken), it usually flops miserably.

So why has our increased knowledge about the need for a low fat diet and exercise produced the opposite result? Let’s chew the fat on this topic. (Sorry.)

2

Knowledge is heavy. :smiley:

3

I don’t think the new-ish knowledge is causal. Over the past thirty years there has been a huge boom in electronics, most of which are enjoyed by users as they sit on their butts. Increasingly sedentary lifestyles have probably had a far greater impact than learning that high fat diets are not particularly healthy for us.

4

Good diet information is really hard to come by, and there are a lot of quacks selling snake oil, and it’s really hard to practice a good diet, especially since fast/junk food is just so convenient. And for most people, eating well and exercising would require a major, long-term lifestyle change. Also, I think a lot of people believe it’s possible to get in shape quickly, and get discouraged when they don’t see results right away.

Do a google on “Pima Paradox” for an interesting article on this topic.

5

The price of disease is lower than it was. Heart attacks, cancer and diebetes are much more manageable than they used to be.

6

Easy.

Knowledge = power. Power = energy. Energy = mass. Mass = weight gain. Therefore, the more we know, the bigger we are.

7

I like photopat’s little progression!

Just because you know how to eat properly doesn’t mean you’ll actually do what’s proper.

I agree, it’s easy to eat too much of the wrong stuff. It’s convenient. And we’re sitting on our duffs too much. Put those together and you’ve got the problem.

Knowledge is power, but it takes more than knowledge to make changes and create a healthy lifestyle.

8

ultrafilter, that was a great article. It made me think, perhaps some of the cause of the “fat epidemic” in the US is similar to the “welfare cycle”; that is, fat people not only pass on their genes for a high weight set-point (as discussed in the referenced Pima Paradox article) but also pass on their poor eating and exercise habits, and a vicious cycle is begun.

Even when provided with an increased knowledge of healthy eating and lifestyle, those other factors discussed here (convenience of fast food, unrealistic expectations and discouragement, increase in sedentary lifestyle) practically doom any weight-loss attempt in someone caught in this “fat cycle.”

9

Yeah, I think the parallel you draw is pretty dead-on. The question is, how do we break the cycle?

I think the most important thing to do is to combat unrealistic expectations about weight loss and health. A lot of people go into a workout/diet expecting a miracle, and drop it when nothing’s changed in a week or so (this is an overgeneralization, of course). Fix that kind of behavior, and I believe a large part of the problem is solved.

The other factor that makes exercising tough is the “This is the only right workout!” mentality. People try the workout that’s supposed to be the only good one, don’t like it, and quit. I know I had this problem with running a while back. Now I like to run, but we can’t count on everyone having that same change of heart.

This was meant to be more substantive and less rambling, but it’s right before lunch. Now to go eat something healthy…

10

Is this the article ultrafilter? It addresses my question almost exactly.

11

I just had bean curd and rice for lunch, and enjoyed it. Will the CSPI issue a warning against that? :wink:

12

I’ve got a very simple reason for why people are fat, and show a lack of ability to maintain a healthy weight.

Ads. How many TV ads do you see during each show that talk about food? How many in your magazines? And each ad talks about the great new taste.

How many ads do you see for the great new workout at your local gym? Or how cool it is to go for a walk?-- Hell, I see more ads mocking people engaging in outdoor sports, and how cool it is to stay in your car and drive, then I do promoting exercise of any kind.

13

We may be more educated but that actually works against physical health. The Thinking Man is sitting on his butt for all eternity, not walking.

14

Also, for me to have a lunch of a fresh salad and low fat dressing it’s going to cost me about twice what I would pay for a #4 value meal, large sized.

It’s expensive to eat healthy.

15

Yep, that’s the one.

16

In this post, I shall cheerfully swing a brush in great big sweeping generalities. Tallyho.

The popular prejudice is fat==lazy.

In some instances, that’s true, but I don’t think it holds true as a general rule. Particularly about the american waistline, I think it’s generally dead wrong. The American waistline gets bigger and bigger because we keep working harder–and generally speaking, more and more of it is pretty physicaly-sedentary work.

If you’re putting in 50-60 hours at the office, every week, week-in, week-out, with barely any break in that schedule (Americans get absurdly little vacation time), and tack on a couple hours of commute-time per day on top of that, that doesn’t leave much time for activity. Busy busy busy, and junk food is always quicker, which lets them get more of that important work done, and furthermore, snacking keeps you more alert to work at a desk for nine, ten, eleven hours in a row, which people simply weren’t made to do.

Laziness? Not at all. Americans have a great work ethic–and a not-very-healthy life ethic. The American Waistline™ will shrink again if and when we figure out a more sane balance between the two. Until that time, expect it to keep ballooning.

17

Drastic, I think you have a great point there. One of the things I look forward to on vacation days or holidays is having more time to go for a run. In fact, I look at a holiday as a chance to get an extra run in.

I’m convinced that if I could work part-time, I’d be a wonderful physical specimen…

18

That’s an interesting point, Drastic, and I think you’re dead-on.

19

It doesn’t have to be. Eating healthy doesn’t mean eating just salad all the time. You can get just the regular, small hamburger, roast beef (without the horsie sauce!), or grilled chicken sandwich (no mayo) and bring some fruit or crackers or something to round out your meal.

You can bring your own healthily prepared sandwich or, if you have a microwave where you are at lunchtime or dinner, you can get one of the cheaper, lower-fat frozen dinners (I get Michelinas here, about $1.99 each). It’s much much cheaper to buy the makings for a healthy lunch at the grocery store than to buy lunch out every day.

It’s all about portion control. Yes, you get more food for your dollar with the value meal, but the idea is to eat less food. You can spend exactly the same amount and get just the grilled chicken sandwich and eat an apple. With a little preparation, you can actually save time at lunch by not going to the fast food joint. If you really must eat out, you can still make healthy choices that cost just the same as the “value meal.”

This site has some good tips for eating healthy inexpensively. Yes, it’s more trouble to make your lunch than to just buy it, but losing weight is a lifestyle change, and once you are used to it, you’ll wonder why you ever got fast food for lunch every day. I’m lucky to be able to go home at lunchtime and eat leftovers or a frozen dinner.

It’s also cheaper to buy some graham crackers, dried fruit, low-fat string cheese, etc., at the grocery store or bulk store and bring it to work to snack on rather than raiding the vending machine.

So, obviously, I disagree that it’s more expensive to eat healthy than not. In fact, I think I save gobs of money by not eating out at lunch and not getting snacks from the vending machine.

Now to contradict myself, it is true that calorie for calorie, it is cheaper to eat unhealthy, sugary, greasy food, because strictly speaking you get more calories from chocolate than a carrot, and calorie for calorie, it is cheaper to eat the candy bar. This is an argument often used as to why people in poverty can’t afford to eat healthy, and for people on the edge of survival, this is probably true. But for your average Doper, I think it can be less expensive to eat healthy if you just make the right choices.