"A Fat Rant"
I guess this isn't entirely new, but since it's made circulation on Dateline and a few other spots I think it's fair game for some rekindled discussion. First off, watch the video on YouTube, just search for "A Fat Rant" or wait until someone eventually embeds it here in a later post. It's not too bad, definitely one of the more articulated entries on the subject that I've encountered. However, I'd like to hear what people have to say about her bit on dieting. Even though she never says "so don't bother!", she digs into it pretty strongly without differentiating between fad diets, crash diets, or other alternatives to just relegating certain foods to the 'once in a blue moon' bin.
My personal take? Weight is sometimes a reflection of how well you treat yourself, other times it is not. There is no universal truth to be gained about someone by noticing that they are 30lbs heavier then average.
It should also be said that I find those who try to mark slim people as unhealthy (slim, not emaciated), as insulting as those who say that all overweight people are disgusting. I used to know someone who would insinuate that all skinny people have eating disorders. The last time I saw her was with a group of friends having dinner at Fridays, when she made an extremely insulting comment about how my choosing greek salad was an indication of low self esteem and other problems I 'had yet to come to grips with'. Just raising an example of the flip side to the problem.
That being said I agree with what I think is the main crux of her 'rant', that being overweight is not in and of itself as evil as certain people seem to think it is. I'll hand her the fact that she's pretty clear in who she attacks on this. The fashion industry and people who seem to have nothing better to do then to comment about other people's weight and their own anxiety. I feel this way myself, weight is not, was never, nor will ever be an interesting or engaging conversational topic unless it is being used only as part of a larger topic. For example, if you weighed 135lbs 6 months ago and are now breaking 200lb, then people are going to be interested in whatever it was that caused it. People with IQ's larger then 70 will not be interested in 5lbs gained over the holidays. </own rant>
I used to know someone who would insinuate that all skinny people have eating disorders. The last time I saw her was with a group of friends having dinner at Fridays, when she made an extremely insulting comment about how my choosing greek salad was an indication of low self esteem and other problems I 'had yet to come to grips with'.
What a bitch. I hope you punched her right in her stupid face.
OK, my IQ is over 70 and if I gain 5lbs over the holidays I think there's a lot to be interested in. lol
Usually I get over it though. ;)
I would assume you don't expect to make it the only topic of interest though.
Think I found a new rule of thumb for 'way too skinny', at least for women. If you can see ribs
between the boobs, that's just gross.
Keira Knightley's been in the news for this so I'll use her as an example:
Not gross ->
http://images.eonline.com/eol_images/Profiles/20060912/244.knightley.keira.091906.jpg
Gross ->
http://www.americansuperstarmag.com/celebrity/keiraknightley1.jpg
Actually, ribs showing when your arms aren't above your head is still within the 'eat a sandwich' range.
Before she decided that her body was capable of running entirely on oxygen without the need for all that messy food she was, in my book, far and away the most attractive woman in Hollywood. Now she's a case study. :thepain:
Really, if someone's happy then who gives a shit what size they are? What's it to anyone else?
If anyone has a problem with someone else's size, they should be looking inwardly not outwardly unless they have a vested interest and concerns about the persons health.
I've got friends at both ends of the scale. One in particular has been at both ends. Sometimes we talk about it, but I know it only makes things worse for her when other people try to suggest what she should do with her body.
The point is, by confronting people about their weight, you make yourself look like an arsehole, and you make them feel like one (in most cases).
You just don't do it. About anyone. Even celebrities. Who cares?
I consider anything to do with "celebrities" to be one of the least interesting subjects (professional sports are a close contender), but there is an even less interesting subset of this very uninteresting subject: how much celebrities weigh.
The only reason I know it is a "subject" is I see it on magazine covers at the grocery store, etc. ...highlighting how out of touch I must be with what other people are fretting over. Either that or it's a conspiracy to turn us off to the media as a provider of actual information.
Obesity is a huge problem in today's society, more so as we have become more affluent and the priorities among people have shifted towards the "me" generation as well as the belief that immediate gratification is a "Right" of all people. Childhood obesity is a very big problem and sets the stage for problems later in life. Morbid obesity is another extreme altogether. Morbid obesity is an extreme example of the larger problem (no pun intended). There are well documented studies which look at the severe physiological toll that obesity will extract from your health status. These effects are often glossed over by "heavyweights" in an effort to support self-esteem issues and ego protection. The problem is that even with as much confidence they extrude, deep down inside they are bothered by and prejudiced by society for their overweight status. My 2 cents.
I saw a show on PBS where this guy, a medical doctor, who was a triathlete and biked 10 miles every day as a part of his training regimen, was officially "overweight" ...he was shortish and weighed like 250 pounds, and it wasn't muscle mass either, it was chub.
He reasoned that his ancestors must have selected for extreme calorie retention as a result of surviving through famine.
I saw a show on PBS where this guy, a medical doctor, who was a triathlete and biked 10 miles every day as a part of his training regimen, was officially "overweight" ...he was shortish and weighed like 250 pounds, and it wasn't muscle mass either, it was chub.
He reasoned that his ancestors must have selected for extreme calorie retention as a result of surviving through famine.
Genes play a big part. As does extercise. Most "fat" tables do not accurately reflect either your level of obesity or your health status. I know some awsome athletes that smoke. I have known people throughout my career who were rock solid muscle that were off the scales on the Military Weight Charts. I was off the scale during most of my career and few would call me overweight. But there I was getting tapped with the rest of the folks who had serious weight problems. The difference is that I ran my 2 miles in 15 minutes at 40+years old, while they couldn't finish the test.
Genes play a big part. And eating/exercising habits do too. But don't forget the strains of
germs in your gut as discussed in this
thread.
They apparently play a part too.
I was slender all my life up until three years ago when I had some major life changes that contributed to my gaining 70 pounds - going from 130 pounds to almost 200 (ugh!). I am now cutting back on the alcohol, starting an exercise plan and trying to become more aware of calories.
I feel that there is an unfortunate tendency among some to make an over-weight person well aware of their extra pounds. When I weighed 130, no one ever commented on my weight. Now, people seem to feel quite free to comment on my 200. ( I'm 5'6" and female, BTW.)
I guess there always will be some folks who try to make themselves feel better at someone else's expense. I consider the source and let the comments go. I KNOW I'm gonna lose the weight, and its my own concern, thank you very much! :eyebrow:
Welcome SamIam. Very nice post! :)
The problem is that even with as much confidence they extrude, deep down inside they are bothered by and prejudiced by society for their overweight status. My 2 cents.
And they feel this way because society puts so much emphasis on how much people weigh. It's a self fulfilling prophesy. ie 'I want to look good and be fit because then I'll look better and feel better (but that's because I've been brought up in a society that tells me what those standards are)'
The point is, health issues are a concern, but there are plenty of people who are very far from either over or under weight and yet they feel bad about themselves because they don't fit the mold. It's a terrible situation for our kids to be growing into. (no pun intended)
snip~ Childhood obesity is a very big problem and sets the stage for problems later in life. Morbid obesity is another extreme altogether.
Well if they live long enough to pay into Social Security, but not long enough to collect, then it's a good thing, right?
I rarely care about other people's weight, but I've been the target of attention in situations like in my first post because of my own motivation for losing weight. I'm at a reasonable weight right now, 167 for a 6'1'' guy. No abs, but I can tuck in a shirt without sucking in my gut. However, as I move forward in my education and career I can see that I'd definitely reap benefits from losing the extra 10lbs or so. It would allow me to move to a leaner cut of suit and slim my facial profile (I have a slightly wider head then normal). Apparently this is not acceptable for some people who take it upon themselves to let me know that I am helping to perpetuate a stereotype, and that I should be ashamed of the harm I am supposedly causing.
The studies have been done, an increase in physical attractiveness has professional repercussions, and I'm not pretending that getting a leaner torso would make me a better person, just more competitive in the workplace. Why do some people find this offensive still? I have no clue.
That's really the only reason why I tend to keep an antenna out for people saying that weight loss is bad.
Because you're submitting to the stereotype you're perpetuating the cycle.
What about being recognized in your particular profession for your skill?
Isn't that what it's all about?
Edit: I just don't buy the line about getting further ahead because you look better. In the real world, that's not how it is.
Apparently this is not acceptable for some people who take it upon themselves to let me know that I am helping to perpetuate a stereotype, and that I should be ashamed of the harm I am supposedly causing.
That's really the only reason why I tend to keep an antenna out for people saying that weight loss is bad.
For goodness sake - if you feel losing a little weight and buffing up are minor adjustments for you and fall within your comfort zone then of course you shouldn't feel you are compromising your integrity doing so. Next time a woman (and I assume it is women who do so) brings this up, suggest she attends her next interview without make-up or hair products. And
then have a conversation about level playing fields and appearance-pressure.
It's trickier once you get into the realms of how people damage their own health. I know - I am morbidly obese and can't see any way out of my current cycle of self destruct apart from killing myself. No-one could engender any more disgust in my physical self than I already have. But then I'm depressed, so I'm not a fair comparison...
Believe me, I'm not worried about not being noticed for my skill. I'm entering my third year of college and I'm working in a functional neuroanatomy lab under a newly transfered Stanford prof who's one of the top in his field. I beat out 300 other students for this job and I'm damn proud of it.
I don't hold grandiose notions of what I'm trying to accomplish, just one part of continually refining myself. I'm also trying to get through a reading list that includes books that are simply good to have as part of an education. A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is my current project. Just part of improving myself. It's the idea that I'm a bigot for considering healthy weight loss an improvement that gets me riled.
snip~Apparently this is not acceptable for some people who take it upon themselves to let me know that I am helping to perpetuate a stereotype, and that I should be ashamed of the harm I am supposedly causing.
Fuck them... if they, and everyone else, minded their own business, there wouldn't be a stereotype problem.
My boss is very over- weight. She is very attractive still. (well I think so) When we go out to lunch together people get a disgusted look on their face when they see her. No one hides the looks or the staring. There's nothing worse than watching an ugly, old, bald, witless man give her crusty looks. Makes me want to to go kick some a_ _. What? Is society going to shame on her until she loses weight? People like that suck. And they're ugly.....
I've actually talked about that before in context. I once took the counter-stance in a debate that men would be lucky to have a men's cosmetics industry, because right now we still have to walk past Polo and Ralph Lauren ads but would need to almost be born perfect to attain anything close.
I rarely care about other people's weight, but I've been the target of attention in situations like in my first post because of my own motivation for losing weight. I'm at a reasonable weight right now, 167 for a 6'1'' guy. No abs, but I can tuck in a shirt without sucking in my gut. However, as I move forward in my education and career I can see that I'd definitely reap benefits from losing the extra 10lbs or so. It would allow me to move to a leaner cut of suit and slim my facial profile (I have a slightly wider head then normal). Apparently this is not acceptable for some people who take it upon themselves to let me know that I am helping to perpetuate a stereotype, and that I should be ashamed of the harm I am supposedly causing.
Like Bruce said, fuck those people who are overly concerned about physical stereotypes. You need to look out for yourself, so you can feel the best that you can while you're pursuing your career. Just remember to keep it rill.*
*Don't put everything on the looks and skills.
Well if they live long enough to pay into Social Security, but not long enough to collect, then it's a good thing, right?
Actually no, because they amount the extract from Medicare/Medcaid in no way compensates for what they contributed.
Its cliché but I bet a lot of the negative views on being overweight is caused with problems within theirself. I have found that the people that are the most critical of others are either obsessed with their body or very insecure about them. If you are content and relaxed with yourself then you are usually very less critical of others.
It also comes from trying to purposely fit in or break stereotypes. If you try to fit in with a stereotype then you are making a statement that you care too much about your given stereotype you want in on and if you are purposely (stress purposely again) trying to break a stereotype you are making a statement that you care too much about the stereotype given to you. Neither is good in my opinion.
When you start caring about how you look, then you will naturally start to care about how others look.
So 9th, because you care how you look, then you naturally care how others look?
Its cliché but I bet a lot of the negative views on being overweight is caused with problems within theirself. I have found that the people that are the most critical of others are either obsessed with their body or very insecure about them. If you are content and relaxed with yourself then you are usually very less critical of others.
It also comes from trying to purposely fit in or break stereotypes. If you try to fit in with a stereotype then you are making a statement that you care too much about your given stereotype you want in on and if you are purposely (stress purposely again) trying to break a stereotype you are making a statement that you care too much about the stereotype given to you. Neither is good in my opinion.
When you start caring about how you look, then you will naturally start to care about how others look.
I don't know if I completely agree. I have many overweight and morbidly obese people who are perfectly content, on the outside. Inside? well no really knows if they are truely happy. Some people just have the ability to extrude a happiness about them that you know is the real deal, other merely put on a good front.
I know quite a few people who do analyze other people's weight as an extension of their own obsession with themselves. But it's almost always the case that these types of people don't have much to focus on other then their's and other people's physical appearance. They obsess on their attractive physique to divert attention from their flaws, and they bully others about it to keep others looking at themselves and at them. If I don't feel the urge to make people pay undue attention to me, then I don't think I'm pressuring others to pay undue attention to themselves.
I won't deny that I pay attention to how people look, but I don't think it's in the way Ali is insinuating. I've been heavy myself, and I don't make snap judgments about others in terms of weight.
Anyway....
What do you think about her comments about boycotting stores that don't carry styles above sizes 12 or 13?
I'm not insinuating anything. I'm just asking a simple question.
If it's a simple question, then yes Ali I do care how people around me present themselves. I expect people to look the part in whatever situation their in, but being heavy doesn't stop anyone doing that.
but why do you care? Why does it matter?
Why do I care how I look or why do I care how others look?
Part of being a professional is presenting yourself in a manner that reflects your position. There are certain cut-off lines for acceptable appearance depending on the situation. And I feel like we're missing each other on some critical thing here, because I'm sure you're not saying that I should think nothing of someone from my department showing up to a progress meeting in a sweat suit. Or for that matter if they just decided they weren't going to wash their hair or clothes anymore.
Well I guess on some levels that's true 9th. I just don't subscribe to those standards that's all. I know people who are in very 'professional' positions who don't either. I commend them for being able to get past all that power dressing bullshit and just do their job.
Well...depending on the job, once you have it, you can probably dress anyway you like, if that particular environment allows it. But when you're trying to break in, you gotta put forth your best appearance.
I don't know if I completely agree. I have many overweight and morbidly obese people who are perfectly content, on the outside. Inside? well no really knows if they are truely happy. Some people just have the ability to extrude a happiness about them that you know is the real deal, other merely put on a good front.
I think we misunderstood each other. I was saying that people who care too much about their appearance will criticize others. If someone is comfortable with their appearance, they will become more accepting and happier with themselves..
There is a limit, when people expect to get two airline chairs or theatre chairs for the price of one, we now have an issue.
Even though she never says "so don't bother!", she digs into it pretty strongly without differentiating between fad diets, crash diets, or other alternatives to just relegating certain foods to the 'once in a blue moon' bin.
I feel she is not only saying "don't bother" I feel she is, at the very least, being highly disingenuous when she implies that being skinny requires "two thin parents and four thin grandparents" or that one's quality of life does not suffer from being overweight. Both of these ideas are absolutely false and are hardly good ideas to convey to people in today's culture of inactivity and fast food. While she is correct that the overweight should maintain high self esteem and not let the opinions of others prevent them from being happy, it is absolutely wrong to extend that to suggest that people should automatically consider their condition genetic and that there is nothing they can do or should do.
She also rants that being overweight does not mean one is ugly, selfish, or lazy, but I'll only agree with the first two ideas -- being overweight almost certainly, barring any exotic medical conditions, stems from inactivity coupled with poor diet.
"...does not reflect on your character..."
I'm sure Joy would hate to hear that being morbidly obese reflects just as much on one's character as smoking two packs a day or being an alcoholic. All are chemical addictions, all are preventable, and all can be treated.
We come in all sizes and no one should be discriminated against, but generating false excuses for an unhealthy lifestyle runs contrary to common sense.
She also rants that being overweight does not mean one is ugly, selfish, or lazy, but I'll only agree with the first two ideas -- being overweight almost certainly, barring any exotic medical conditions, stems from inactivity coupled with poor diet.
No. It stems from a lack of the right kind of activity, coupled with poor diet. To suggest that someone who is overweight is necessarily lazy or physically inactive is an oversimplification of an often quite complex situation. You can spend most of your day on the go, but if it isn't the kind of exercise that increases your heart rate it's unlikely to burn off many calories. A lot of people who are overweight are very, very busy people. And a lot of skinny people are idle bastards, who do all the wrong things, eat all the wrong foods, drink too much and smoke too many cigarettes.
This kind of nonsense really puts me in a bad mood. What the fuck gives us all the right to moralise, come to conclusions about the lifestyle choices and make judgement calls on the characters of people we meet based on their fucking weight?
If all the other human frailties and habits produced visible results so quickly, we would all be so harshly judged.
Greek salad is good and if I eat a whole one I am full... I'm a really big guy. That is a stupid statement on it's face. I would have said so, in those words, and laughed if I felt like it. "What a stupid thing to say, hahaha! Greek salad fills me up and it tastes good."
I am also uninterested in worrying about embarrassing people or not, I would have called them on it, very politely, continued to labor the point logically, unemotionally, until they conceded.
I am overweight because"
First, I eat the wrong things
Second, My genetics (perhaps interchangeable with the first, but this is a very LARGE part of it)
I, and this is the truth, eat very little... but when I do I tend to eat the wrong things. If I ate more often and the correct things I would lose weight. But, due to being in so much pain, I have very little appetite. Also due to that, I tend to eat what is convenient, the wrong things.
If I did not, I would be thinner. Not thin, due to my genetics, I will never be that.
I do think that people who are VERY thin are obsessive and freaky, because those I have met who are VERY thin are obsessive and freaky.
But, not people who are built to be that way, genetics again, you can tell, they don't look unhealthy and they EAT.
in the words of Foamy the Squirrel...well.. just watch it.. yeah I know all the 'hot topic' trendy kids are on the bandwagon now... but.. it's still funny
http://scarysquirrel.home.comcast.net/fatkins1.htmlPeople's weight varies for many reasons.
Some people eat the wrong things and therefore weigh more or less than the average.
Some people have metabolisms that work differently and therefore weigh more or less than the average.
Some people are unable to find the time to look after themselves properly and therefore weigh more or less than the average.
Some people conform to different cultural expectations and therefore weigh more or less than the average.
Some people reject the norms of society in preference to their own personal happiness and therefore weigh more or less than the average.
People who eat a healthy diet and get enough exercise may still be overweight because they have inherited an efficient, thrifty metabolism. For such people it is as wrong to vilify them as it is to vilify someone on the basis of race or gender: people cannot change the genes they inherit.
Other people may be overweight because their lifestyle may make it difficult for them to find the time to be more healthy. They may lack the time to eat healthy food or to take exercise. For such people, society as a whole has failed them. A society that finds it acceptable for people to work more than 12 hours a day andor work six or seven days a week should not be surprised if this causes some people to lack the time to look after themselves properly.
Some people may come from a different culture with different views on body weight. It is difficult to undo the effects of upbringing in the same way it is difficult for someone raised in a lipophobic culture to adjust to the norms of another culture with a more accepting view of overweight people.
Some people are overweight because they choose to be. Such people have a different view of the world or themselves to the norms dictated by society. They have made their own decision and are well aware of the risks. Many smokers smoke for the same reason.
We should remember that the current "thin is healthy" view of modern society is overly simplistic. Medical evidence shows that under some circumstances being moderately overweight is healthier than being too thin. Thin women are more prone to osteoporosis in later life. Chubby people have a better prognosis after some medical treatments than thin people. So being a bit overweight is not particularly harmful as long as the overall diet is healthy and some exercise is taken. However, regardless of one's weight, it is always wise to keep an eye on one's health by having the appropriate medical checks done regularly.
Some people eat to much.
Not all such people get fat. Many teenagers have hollow legs.
And there are people who eat like birds and still gain weight.
It is not just food intake that determines weight. It is food intake and metabolism.
A lot of it is also what you eat....unless that is what you meant by food intake.
For such people it is as wrong to vilify them as it is to vilify someone on the basis of race or gender: people cannot change the genes they inherit.
Insurance companies might soon have a
different view. Regardless, I'm fairly certain that most of the
nearly one quarter of Americans who suffer from obesity and the
full 50% of the population who are categorized as overweight didn't get to where they are due to a "genetics issue".
Other people may be overweight because their lifestyle may make it difficult for them to find the time to be more healthy. They may lack the time to eat healthy food or to take exercise. For such people, society as a whole has failed them.
I'm not certain that society has failed anyone that consciously chooses to drink
so much soda or
eat every last bite of the huge portions that are offered on most menus. At the least I'd say that people are ill informed about what they eat, but I'd say most of the blame isn't on anyone else other than the person making their diet selections. I weighed 180 at my heaviest, but I've been at 160 for years thanks to the basic understanding that sitting in an office chair for ten hours a day means I probably shouldn't be eating that huge "recommended breakfast" that ends every cereal commercial and it isn't really a good idea to follow my co-workers when they have lunch at Olive Garden twice a week. Anyone that lives a sedentary life thanks to their job should have the brain to know their diet should be low calorie until they can get out and do something.
I do note that the poor are more likely to be overweight/obese and that while most will joke that obesity is a disease of the wealthy it really is the cheap food that contains so many calories and causes so much weight gain. Eating healthy, these days, is actually very costly. I think that the majority of the people can afford it, however.
Greek salad is good and if I eat a whole one I am full... I'm a really big guy. That is a stupid statement on it's face. I would have said so, in those words, and laughed if I felt like it. "What a stupid thing to say, hahaha! Greek salad fills me up and it tastes good."
I am also uninterested in worrying about embarrassing people or not, I would have called them on it, very politely, continued to labor the point logically, unemotionally, until they conceded.
I am overweight because"
First, I eat the wrong things
Second, My genetics (perhaps interchangeable with the first, but this is a very LARGE part of it)
I, and this is the truth, eat very little... but when I do I tend to eat the wrong things. If I ate more often and the correct things I would lose weight. But, due to being in so much pain, I have very little appetite. Also due to that, I tend to eat what is convenient, the wrong things.
If I did not, I would be thinner. Not thin, due to my genetics, I will never be that.
I do think that people who are VERY thin are obsessive and freaky, because those I have met who are VERY thin are obsessive and freaky.
But, not people who are built to be that way, genetics again, you can tell, they don't look unhealthy and they EAT.
That is overall... lifetime. Now, my meds/hormone issues and inabilty to exercise have a LOT to do with my weight.
hey kingswood.. off topic a bit but... since you seem to be comfy with latin.. what's a rough translation of ' don't let the bastards get you down'? looked it up online, and all my books are back in kansas.. so help a brother out :)
Your butt is wide, well mine is too
Just watch your mouth or I'll sit on you
The word is out, better treat me right
'Cause I'm the king of cellulite
Ham on, ham on, ham on whole wheat, all right
My zippers bust, my buckles break
I'm too much man for you to take
The pavement cracks when I fall down
I've got more chins than chinatown
Well, I've never used a phone booth
And I've never seen my toes
When I'm goin' to the movies
I take up seven rows
Because I'm fat, I'm fat, come on <-- this is supposed to be "sha mone"
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, come on you know
(fat, fat, really really fat)
Don'tcha call me pudgy, portly or stout
Just now tell me once again who’s fat ahhhhhh!ahhhh!
When I walk out to get my mail
It measures on the Richter scale
Down at the beach I'm a lucky man
I'm the only one who gets a tan
If I have one more pie ala mode
I'm gonna need my own ZIP code
When you're only having seconds
I'm having twenty-thirds
When I go to get my shoes shined
I gotta take their word
Because I'm fat, I'm fat, sha mone
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it you know
(fat, fat, really really fat)
And my shadow weighs forty-two pounds
Lemme tell you once again who's fat
If you see me comin' your way
Better give me plenty space
If I tell you that I'm hungry
Then won't you feed my face
Because I'm fat, I'm fat, come on
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it, you know
(fat, fat, really really fat)
Woo woo woo
(when I sit around the house
I really sit around the house)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, come on
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it, you know it
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know, you know, you know, come on
(fat, fat, really really fat)
And you know all by myself I’m a crowd
Lemme tell you once again
You know I'm huge, I'm fat, you know it
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know I'm fat, you know, hoo
(fat, fat, really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it, you know
(fat, fat, really really fat)
And the whole world knows I'm fat and I'm proud
Just tell me once again who’s fat
hey kingswood.. off topic a bit but... since you seem to be comfy with latin.. what's a rough translation of ' don't let the bastards get you down'? looked it up online, and all my books are back in kansas.. so help a brother out :)
I heard a humorous pseudo-Latin phrase that is something like:
Illegitimi non carborundum.
(I'm not so good with Latin yet but I have a Latin dictionary with useful phrases and some good bookmarks in my web browser.)
Insurance companies might soon have a different view. Regardless, I'm fairly certain that most of the nearly one quarter of Americans who suffer from obesity and the full 50% of the population who are categorized as overweight didn't get to where they are due to a "genetics issue".
Imagine the outcry if insurance companies refused to cover light-skinned people for skin cancer.
You were also quoting me out of context. You deleted the first sentence of the paragraph:
People who eat a healthy diet and get enough exercise may still be overweight because they have inherited an efficient, thrifty metabolism. For such people it is as wrong to vilify them as it is to vilify someone on the basis of race or gender: people cannot change the genes they inherit.
If everyone ate a healthy diet in moderation and got enough exercise, there would
still be fat people. Some people have very efficient metabolisms, and others have inherited appetites that make it difficult to avoid gaining weight.
However, it seems you have completely missed the point that I was making. The difference between dark skin and light skin is about seven genes. A similar number of genes may be the difference between someone with a moderate appetite who can maintain a healthy weight easily, and someone who eats like a sparrow and still gains weight or someone whose appetite becomes ferocious if they lose five kilograms. Such people are only the unlucky recipients of a bad deal from the genetic deck, yet such people are often discriminated against to a degree that is not dissimilar to Apartheid-era South Africa or the Southern USA during the slavery era.
If everyone ate a healthy diet in moderation and got enough exercise, there would still be fat people.
I didn't buy this at first, but I browsed around and found some interesting articles that detail how complex the issues is, including
this one about stress.
That's because fat in the abdominal area functions differently than fat elsewhere in the body. It has a greater blood supply as well as more receptors for cortisol, a stress hormone. Cortisol levels rise and fall throughout the day, but when you're under constant stress, the amount of the hormone you produce remains elevated. With high stress and, consequently, high cortisol levels, more fat is deposited in the abdominal area since there are more cortisol receptors there.
That is some odd stuff. Point taken.
If everyone ate a healthy diet in moderation and got enough exercise, there would still be fat people.
Yes, but the difference is you would basically only be left with the reasonably healthy overweight people, who would not have the same risk for heart disease and other problems. It's the
diseases the insurance companies don't want to cover, not the larger sizes of their clothing.
I browsed around and found some interesting articles that detail how complex the issues is, including this one about stress.
Interesting. This was front page news today in the
Washington Post because of the results of a new study.
Scientists reported yesterday that they have uncovered a biological switch by which stress can promote obesity, a discovery that could help explain the world's growing weight problem and lead to new ways to melt flab and manipulate fat for cosmetic purposes.
In a series of experiments on mice, researchers showed that the neurochemical pathway they identified promotes fat growth in chronically stressed animals that eat the equivalent of a junk-food diet.
The international team also showed that blocking those signals can prevent fat accumulation and shrink fat deposits and that stimulating the pathway can strategically create new deposits -- possibly offering new ways to remove fat
The Abstract from Nature Medicine.If everyone ate a healthy diet in moderation and got enough exercise, there would still be fat people. Some people have very efficient metabolisms, and others have inherited appetites that make it difficult to avoid gaining weight.
We look at those people who have very efficient metabolisms - 40 years ago. What is now considered normal was, back then, considered clearly obese. By today’s standards, there were literally no fat people back then. My grandfather was considered fat. Today about one in three adults are that fat.
Did genetics suddenly change in 40 years? What Kingswood posts can only be credible if people were also that obese 45 years ago. Back then we also were hauled to school in cars, trains, and buses. Nobody walked great distances. Why was fat so rare back then? Or has mankind's genetics changes in only 45 years?
I routinely look in other's shopping carts. I could not eat anything in the carts of the obese. We did not drink soda when I was a kid. It was a rare treat. Today, it replaces milk.
Like Kitsume, my waist is one inch larger than what it was in college. Two inches larger than in high school. I still eat in many ways the same as I did in wrestling. In part because I can measure a drop in intelligence when my diet slips. Yes, even daily intelligence changes with diet. And again, I am appalled at what I see in so many shopping carts. I would be dumb - probably have migraines - if I ate that junk.
Do you have migraines? What do you eat?
When it comes to a thrifty metabolism, that is me. Often I may only eat one major meal every other day. But then one does not get hungry when one avoids diet foods and that junk so common in obese people shopping carts. One gets hungry because the body did not get nutrition. Once you eat a cookie, you must eat half the bag - the body keeps demanding some nutrition in the form of hunger.
For youngsters who would become wrestlers - that is how one loses weight, is not always hungry, and wins matches. By eating right, a wrestler with only two years training had to win by outputting more energy. That meant nutrition – and no dieting. Learn that what you eat today affects even your intelligence tomorrow.
Kitsume has accurately defined the only thing that changed. Look at the crap in so many shopping carts - and that includes diet soda that will also contribute to weight gain.
An example: eat one carrot. Is it nutritious? Yes. It provides today's necessary vitamin A. Eat a second carrot. Is it nutritious? Of course not. More vitamin A is not required. Carrot also is higher in sugar. We already have too much sugar. That second carrot is junk food.
People brainwashed by nutrition taught in TV commercials would never learn that. I learned it from wrestling. My wrestling was only as good as my diet. That meant eliminating junk foods so as to lose 20% of my body weight - and eating nutritious foods so as to not be hungry.
What was necessary to lose weight and maintain my wrestling ability? Breakfast.
When the season ended, I put back 20% in two weeks. How? I continued to eat mostly as I did in wrestling. But, for example, I ate two hot meals for lunch. No junk food. No pizza, etc. We never had potato chips or candy machines in school. That 20% came back mostly as muscle. Again, it is not genetics as TV myth promoters would claim. It is not miracle diet foods. Exercising the abs does not flatten the stomach. All that is myth. People are obese mostly because of what they eat today. Then they jump for myths such as genetics - as if genetics has changed. If an obese person drinks a soda - diet or regular - then he is only fooling himself when blaming genetics. Obesity is directly traceable to the person himself - his destructive attitude.
Apple juice 45 years ago contained juice from apples. Today it is total corn syrup - complete sugar with no nutritional value. Genetics had nothing to do with that either.
Why put corn syrup in apple juice? US government subsidizes sugars. About one half the cost of sugar is paid for my government 'corporate welfare'. Nobody could sell apple juice make with nutrition. It costs more.
Fundamental difference between products from Kellogg’s and General Mills. The former has a long history of pushing low nutrition foods and hyping them as healthy. Nutribars? Total junk food. If you did not know that, then how are you staying at a healthy weight?
Insightful post, tw.
At what point did our community become oversaturated with junk food made of HFCS and fat? I have been thinking about this, lately and trying to determine where, when and how that shift took place. Does anyone have some insight on this?
Like Kitsume, my waist is one inch larger than what it was in college.
I sure as hell wasn't skinny in college thanks to my diet. I'm still trying to get back in shape -- my food intake and weight may be somewhat normal, but I have a long way to go to make my bmi a healthy one.
Speaking of clothing sizes, I found it funny that the "fat rant" woman complained that she can never find her size at the major chain stores. It must be different for women, because I've experienced much the opposite: it is damn near impossible to find blue jeans with a waist smaller than 36 inches. 34? Good luck. 32? Ha! I have to go from store to store to find anything in my size because no one keeps the slimmer stuff in stock, anymore. You'll find piles of 38, 40, and higher rotating in stock on a daily basis, but there isn't as much demand for reasonable sizes, anymore, so they rarely get them in. And what is measured as a "32in waistline" isn't really 32 inches, either, since everything is "baggy", "comfort fit", and "loose fit". I've found I have to step down anywhere from 2" to 3" on the listed tag size to get it right.
My wife and I were just talking about that. I was complaining that I had to return a bunch of "large" polo shirts to Eddie Bauer because they were way too big. I've always worn a large. The medium fits me now. I haven't shrunk. I'm the same.
She says it's the fashions that are to blame. I used to wear my clothes baggier, and now the style is a tighter fit. So I always wore a large to get that baggier effect. Now I want a shirt that fits so I should get a medium. I don't know if she's right. Maybe I should dig through some old clothes in the attic and see if clothes have grown or if my perception has changed.
Nobody could sell apple juice make with nutrition. It costs more.
It's
there, you just have to look for it.
I think they use grape juice to sweeten it, but that is much better than HFCS.
Yeah, most of their flavors have a lot of pear juice too. But juice is juice.
If everyone ate a healthy diet in moderation and got enough exercise, there would still be fat people.
Yes, but the difference is you would basically only be left with the reasonably healthy overweight people, who would not have the same risk for heart disease and other problems.
That's not true, and it will be clear if I give you an example.
Suppose we have the following genes:
* gene C that predisposes someone to high cholesterol
* gene M that causes someone to be fat by way of an efficient metabolism
Someone who inherits neither will be thin and have good cholesterol levels.
Someone who inherits C will be predisposed to high cholesterol even if they are thin.
Someone who inherits M will tend to gain weight on moderate diets but will have healthy cholesterol.
Someone who inherits C and M will be fat and have high cholesterol.
Thus, your assertion is incorrect because you don't allow for other genetic factors that also affect health.
It's all a matter of the combination of genes that one inherits. In a world where everyone eats normally and gets exercise (and nobody smokes), there will still be fat people with normal cholesterol, thin people with high cholesterol, and fat people with high cholesterol.
Taken in isolation, being overweight is not a health risk. Other factors need to be present, such as a predisposition to various diseases. Nevertheless, everyone can maximise their chances of good health by eating a healthy diet, getting enough exercise and not smoking.
Taken in isolation, being overweight is not a health risk.
Actually, yes it is. The word "risk" is a statistical term here, and statistically, being overweight means a greater likelihood of being unhealthy. It is by no means a guarantee, as you point out. But it IS a decent predictor, and that's the business that insurance companies are in--predicting their future losses. Some people smoke for fifty years and never get lung cancer, but they have to pay the higher premiums too. Life isn't fair.
But juice is juice.
Not if it's from concentrate, and it almost always is. Then the juice is a "natural" sugar delivery device. Read the label. Wherever you see the word "concentrate," substitute "sugar added."
Under FDA rules, you can take any fruit juice, remove most of the water from it, creating a sugary fruit juice syrup, pour that into a blend of juices, and still call it 100% fruit juice. You just have to declare that it's from concentrate.
EDIT:
And this link from Sugar.org says it better than I did.
What are juice concentrates?
Juice concentrates may be used to directly replace sugar. These syrups are made by first heating fruit juices to remove water, and then treating with enzymes and filtering to strip all characteristic color and natural flavor from the original juice. Because of their bland initial color and flavor, grapes and pears are the primary sources of the juice concentrates used as sugar replacers. Juice concentrates that replace sugar contain traces of sucrose, and variable amounts of fructose and glucose.
If a pear juice concentrate is used, the phrase “pear juice concentrate,” or a variation, would appear in the ingredient list.
Juice concentrates are used in any foods where corn syrups have replaced sugar. They are particularly prominent in baked goods, jams and jellies, and frozen confections.
It's there, you just have to look for it.
Why should we have to go 'out of our way' to look for it? Once when people were not so fat, when it said Apple Juice, then it was made from apples. Now Apple Juice can be 100% corn syrup with artificial flavoring. Or it can be extract of apples modified for flavoring and then be called 100% apple juice.
Want to see what changed? Once a loaf of bread left out for four days would become moldy. Has grain now genetically changes so that bread does not get moldy for two weeks? What has changed?
Clearly this sudden explosion of people so fat that I have never seen so much ‘fat on one person' is due to genetics? Someone once said, "Give me a break". If it says Apple Juice, then why would I 'have to go looking for it'? And why do so many fat people at the Old Country Buffet go back twice or more for deserts? Why did the guy in "Supersize Me" – eating in this nation's most popular restaurant - suddenly have a weight problem? Clearly it’s all due to genetics.
The fact that so few realize the second carrot is junk food says so much about why some are so fat. If I had dieted like so many women now do, then I would have been a loser on the wrestling mat and would constantly have migraine headaches. No problem. Headon. Just apply it to the forehead. Says so much about why some people are also so fat. Blame it all on genetics. Clearly our diets are missing a miracle pill - phen phen. Real reason for this new and never before seen problem? Irrelevant.
Being overweight is not a health risk.
Actually, yes it is. The word "risk" is a statistical term here, and statistically, being overweight means a greater likelihood of being unhealthy. It is by no means a guarantee, as you point out. But it IS a decent predictor, and that's the business that insurance companies are in--predicting their future losses. Some people smoke for fifty years and never get lung cancer, but they have to pay the higher premiums too. Life isn't fair.
By your arguments, one can also say that being of normal weight or underweight is also a health risk.
* Underweight people get osteoporosis at greater rates than heavier people.
* For people undergoing certain medical procedures, having some extra weight leads to a better prognosis than someone who has little bodyfat. In this case, the extra bodyfat is used for its natural purpose of nourishing the body in times of low food intake - in this case a lack of appetite or inability to eat caused by medical intervention.
While it is true that obese people do have reduced life expectancy, it is also true that for a person carrying a few kilograms of extra bodyfat, the risk is statistically insignificant.
If anyone can provide a reference to a peer-reviewed scientific paper based on a study with sound methodology that demonstrates a decrease in life expectancy of more than six months for a group of people who are less than five kilograms overweight, I will happily stand corrected. But it is unlikely that anyone can produce such a paper, particularly one that isolates the life expectancy to being overweight, and
only being overweight. For example, some studies into this problem were technically flawed by not taking other factors into account, such as the tendency of thin people to get more exercise or to eat healthier diets. Furthermore, there are also studies that suggest that people who have BMI's of around 26 or so (slightly overweight) actually have better life expectancy than people with a BMI of below 19.
I am not suggesting that being overweight is healthy. What I am saying is that the attitude of "overweight is bad" is overly simplistic and other factors must be taken into account such as genetics, diet, exercise, smoking, the presence of environmental factors such as pollution, whether one can avoid stress and so forth. Whether one has too much bodyfat - or indeed too little - is just one factor in a whole suite of health risks that one must consider.
I think they use grape juice to sweeten it, but that is much better than HFCS.
Is it my imagination, or do American manufacturers find sugar so expensive that they must resort to various means to sweeten foods more cheaply?
I believe Americans pay far too much for sugar but without knowing the price of sugar in the USA i don't know for sure. I bought sugar this week here in Australia, and I paid A$1.44 for a 1 kilo pack. For the metrically challenged, that works out to be US$0.56 a pound. How much does sugar (sucrose) cost in the USA?
Is it my imagination, or do American manufacturers find sugar so expensive that they must resort to various means to sweeten foods more cheaply?
Something like 50% of the sugar is paid for by US Government "corporate welfare". Companies such as US Sugar thrive on these government handouts. Normally, the sugar industry would go to other nations where people need jobs and where sugar is easier to grow. That is the major and fundamental reason for a world wide walkout, three days early, in Cancun - the first major trade conference to ever fail - the Doha round.
Now here's an important question. How much did you know about this when it happened - when the world specifically blamed France and the US for that collapse?
Why replace everything with more sugar? First, it makes those foods sell better. Then when called 'Nutragrain', people believe the propaganda rather than reality. Then the industry does everything possible to have food labels distorted. For example, have sugar listed by five different names so that it does not appear high on the ingredient list and is not obviously sugar. And finally, replacing ingredients with more sugar means the government is paying for more of its cost - increase profits.
Sugar is being consumed by Americans in such excessive quantities that one in eight people in NYC is now a diabetic. One half of all residents in NYC will be diabetics. The consumption of sugar has increased that massively.
Why do people need more food? When you don't get sufficient nutrition from a meal, the body gets hungry again in hours. So we consume more sugary foods. Diabetes.
It doesn't even end at 100% juice, if you want to be paranoid. Apple juice is now made from a different apple than 50 years ago: bred and/or genetically engineered to be sweeter and juicier, as well as more uniform and disease-resistant.
I just found out about Naked Juice today. It is an all natural 100% juice smoothie that has no added sugar, and has a pound of fruit in 15.2 FL OZ (450mL) of drink.
It is expensive (up to $3 for 15.2 FL OZ (450mL)) but it is probably the healthiest and best tasting (very thick) juice I've had. It actually fills you up.
Here is the site:
http://www.nakedjuice.com/We don't have Naked Juice here, but we do have Nudies which are the same thing if I go by your description.
Kingswood, instead of using substitutions like "gene C" for the actual name of a gene, could you actually post the real name? If you use science as part of your argument then you're pretty well obligated to cite your sources and use correct terminology, otherwise most of us would have no idea if you're just blowing smoke up our asses unless we undertake a very time consuming search through the journals. Your info, your responsibility to cite. Nuff said.
I'd also like to pick a point on someone being predisposed to something vs having a guarenteed outcome. Yes, there is a difference in metabolisms between people, but it's not the be-all-end-all determinator you make it out to be. If you happen to not be blessed with the ability to eat as much as you'd like and still maintain a healthy weight, then you have to make a choice between indulging yourself and keeping your weight under control. If obesity is actually genetic, then it must be approached with the same attitude as any other condition that is dangerous if it gets out of control such as diabetes.
On a more personal note, I know many people on both sides of the average weight, and I can't think of a serious exception where the persons weight didn't match their eating and exersise habits. And in this case, people are most often haunted by poor decisions in the past. The body does not normally create new adipocytes (the primary cells for 'fat' storage) after the late 'teens. While they may not have been bloated at this stage, excess weight at this age probably means a gross over abundance of fat storage capacity to be filled later. When you try to lose weight later in life, they can lose most of their stored lipids, but you won't lose the cellular stucture you put down.
However, members of my family who have been extreemly overweight in the past have lost over 40lbs in a few cases, and have kept it off through very strict dieting and exercise. Unless you happen to be that one in several thousand with a serious disorder, your weight is the result of how you've lived your entire life.
As for me, I'm on my diet really for one main reason, to look more physically attractive. It also helps greatly in my day-to-day comfort and mental alertness, but my biggest motivator for keeping myself on 1450 calories of vegan food a day is so that I look better both with my shirt on and without it. I am absolutly not ashamed to say so. With others, it's your lifestyle that I care about. I watch what you eat to make my judgements more then watching to see if your belly jiggles. But around the pool, I'd be lying to you if I said that I'm as physically attracted to overweight girls as I am to those with slim physiques. I'm also very attracted to high cheek bones and narrow faces, it's just my taste.
Kingswood, instead of using substitutions like "gene C" for the actual name of a gene, could you actually post the real name?
The point of the example was primarily mathematical, not scientific. The point was to demonstrate that genes could be combined in various ways. The example was intentionally simplified to prove a point and I expect that most people would understand this. I could have posted the real names of the genes involved, but to make a realistic example would have taken a few hours to do research to get the names right. If people want to find out more they can do their own research.
I'd also like to pick a point on someone being predisposed to something vs having a guarenteed outcome. Yes, there is a difference in metabolisms between people, but it's not the be-all-end-all determinator you make it out to be. If you happen to not be blessed with the ability to eat as much as you'd like and still maintain a healthy weight, then you have to make a choice between indulging yourself and keeping your weight under control. If obesity is actually genetic, then it must be approached with the same attitude as any other condition that is dangerous if it gets out of control such as diabetes.
I would like to pick a point of my own here. You are implying that everyone who is overweight has indulged themselves excessively. That is not true for everyone. There are overweight people who can gain weight on eating plans that would promote weight loss in normal people. There are also recognised syndromes in which obesity is a symptom, or the result of excessive appetite caused by hormonal deficiencies such as the inability to make the hormone leptin. To suggest that all overweight is the same is an erroneous simplification and you would do well to remember this.
I restate an earlier point of mine: If everyone ate a healthy diet in moderation and got enough exercise, there would still be fat people. For more information, do some research on metabolic disorders.
As for me, I'm on my diet really for one main reason, to look more physically attractive. It also helps greatly in my day-to-day comfort and mental alertness, but my biggest motivator for keeping myself on 1450 calories of vegan food a day is so that I look better both with my shirt on and without it. I am absolutly not ashamed to say so. With others, it's your lifestyle that I care about. I watch what you eat to make my judgements more then watching to see if your belly jiggles. But around the pool, I'd be lying to you if I said that I'm as physically attracted to overweight girls as I am to those with slim physiques. I'm also very attracted to high cheek bones and narrow faces, it's just my taste.
Other people's tastes are different. Some people would not mind you as you are now. But don't let that sap your motivation. Keep up the good work and I hope you achieve your goals.
By the way, I may be rather accepting of fat people - for example I prefer the fuller figure in women - but that does not mean I promote unhealthy eating habits. I like to see people eating fruit and vegetables every day, and I consider
trans fats to be public enemy number one as far as a healthy diet is concerned.
The point of the example was primarily mathematical, not scientific. The point was to demonstrate that genes could be combined in various ways. The example was intentionally simplified to prove a point and I expect that most people would understand this.
However, you first need to back up the implicit argument that the genes in question can behave in the manner you have presented them. Most people here have no knowledge of genetics, and if the information is as simple and well known as you claim it would be an easy search. Your point is absolutely a scientific one, since the crux of what you're saying is that these genes can be rearranged and separated from one another. This is not true of all genes, and this isn't a board where everyone can be expected to know that offhand.
If you make the statement, you back it up with real data. Otherwise anyone could simply make half-cocked claims, safe in the knowledge that we don't have multiple hours to devote to each thread.
There are overweight people who can gain weight on eating plans that would promote weight loss in normal people. There are also recognised syndromes in which obesity is a symptom, or the result of excessive appetite caused by hormonal deficiencies such as the inability to make the hormone leptin.
Yes, these disorders are out there, but not in 50% or more of the population. Hyperphagic disorders are not what make people just 'heavy', very often they must be institutionalized due to their weight. Prader-Willie's Syndrome is an example of one of these, occuring in 1 out of every 12,000 to 15,000 births.
If someone has a genetic disorder that does not allow them to eat a diet that would be healthy for a normal person, then they should tailor their diet to the extent of their illness just like a diabetic needs to alter their diet.
I am not saying that all overweight people are the same. In fact, I'm saying the exact opposite, that each person needs to eat according to themselves.
Food is just fuel, thankfully our society is starting to recognize it as that.
9th, I think you're missing the point.
Of course not 50% of the population has a predisposition to be overweight because of genetic issues.
I could be wrong, but I think the point is that if you throw everyone in together, how are you going to know who's fat because they're lazy or eat too much, and who has a genuine problem that's not easy to manage.
The issue really is that some people are prejudiced against people because they're too fat or too thin. It's wrong that people feel the need to judge others, particularly those they don't even know.
I could be wrong, but I think the point is that if you throw everyone in together, how are you going to know who's fat because they're lazy or eat too much, and who has a genuine problem that's not easy to manage.
Again, put this 'genetic disposition' into perspective. TheMercenary posted a picture of two kids. The kid in the background was once called grossly obese. Never before have people been so obese as the kid in the foreground. Genetics, et al has nothing to do with his grossly unhealthy physique. Furthermore, a kids as obese as in the background was rare. Today it is routine in any group of kids.
How much fatter does genetics make one? This was well reported years ago. If someone eats an extra packet of sugar every day - just one extra - then he would be as fat as one with the genetic 'fat' defect.
There is absolutely no way anyone can attribute massively overweight kids with anything but diet. How does 20 pounds overweight due to genetics account for so many people that are hundreds of pounds overweight?
Attributing any of this to genetics means ignoring perspective. Genetics would make one as overweight as the person who eats one extra sugar packet every day. Genetic disposition is blames where people ignore 'by how much'.
None of this is about judging people. The obesity is simply and nothing more than hard reality. Making excuses for it is rediculous.
I quite enjoyed watching the fat rant. I thought she had some very good points, but the biggest point is being at a healthy weight is well, healthy, and if you are healthy (as in no heart problems or high cholesterol or high blood pressure, etc) but are still overweight, then it's not a big deal. The only person who it should be a big deal to is yourself, and that's only if you're not comfortable with the way you look. If you like the way you look and you are overweight, then that's awesome and damn everyone who tries to tell you that you need to lose weight. But if you are generally healthy but you do not like the way you look, then by all means, lose weight! If other overweight people are trying to make other overweight women feel better about themselves and give them higher self esteem, then that's great, but I don't think it's the smartest thing to do because it might send the wrong message to people that it's okay to be overweight. It's not okay to be overweight unless you're happy with it and you're healthy. If an overweight woman is not healthy and her bad health is being caused by her being overweight, that woman should not be told that it's okay to stay overweight. She shouldn't be bashed by any means, but if she has diabetes and her heart races walking up the steps to her apartment and once she gets into her apartment she takes her meds for her high blood pressure, and she's only 25, she should probably seriously consider losing weight and get it out of her head that it's is okay being overweight. I'm basically saying that if being overweight is causing health issues that could be cured by losing weight, then you should lose weight. Or if you're obviously sickened by your naked body in the mirror, then you should lose weight. Ultimately, it should be a choice that YOU make for YOURself, and should definitely under NO circumstances be dictated to you by society. It's okay to be overweight if it's okay with YOU. I kinda went all over the place on this one, and I hope it makes sense to people!!! Cheers!
:O) :3eye:
By the way, I am overweight myself and struggle with it quite a bit, and I lost 60 pounds last year, went from 225 to 165, and that's all on a 5'1" frame. I want to lose 50 more pounds, and I want to do it for me, because I want to be thin and in good health. My mother is overweight and she developed diabetes because of it and takes heart and high blood pressure medication. I don't want to do that. I want to be thin so I can avoid those types of health issues, and I want to look good in what is my opinion of looking good. It is in my genes to be overweight (EVERYONE on my mother's side is) so I will probably struggle with it my whole life, and not to mention that I have had three children and gained quite a bit with each!! Pregnancy is a bitch for that! :)
*filches at the wall of text*
By the first paragraph you said that you should tell someone of the health risks involved of being overweight, but the choice to be, or at least content with being, overweight is that person's personal choice, right?
That I agree with.
