# The Fat Epidemic



## See_Listen_Love

Ladies,

Yesterday I spent the day with my wife in a sauna (nude spa & wellness complex).

Because its holiday and it was good weather, it was crowded. A couple of hundred of people. 

What struck me like never before, almost all of the ladies were too fat. Not a little, virtually every woman had excess fat, over the whole line of ages. Some a lot, some a little. Most everybody was ugly because of lingering fat layers. It was an unsavory and distateful sight.

Now I have seen this phenomenon grow in the past decades, but here was the result of it. It is really bad.

The Lord has made women different than becoming like this. It is not about weight, it is about fat layers. Since I believe in creation of some sort this means mankind has succeeded in deforming the female body to horrific bubbling examples of overconsumption. 

I believe the food industry and consumers together to be responsible for this. 

But You All, my dear ladies, need to stop this. Stop the industry, stop the shops, stop the people, from working together in this disease, on the abolition of the beautiful female body.


----------



## TiggyBlue

I don't really see why this post is aimed at women, the fat epidemic is effecting both genders.


----------



## Lyris

Ladies! Stop being so fat! Stop it ladies!


----------



## richie33

All the fat guys were golfing.


----------



## Dollystanford

But if the ladies are slim and sylph-like they will get squished by all the men with huge bellies and b*tch tits I see everywhere


----------



## Theseus

TiggyBlue said:


> I don't really see why this post is aimed at women, the fat epidemic is effecting both genders.


It is, but it's affecting women much more. 

Among black women, it's really extreme. A staggering 80% of them are overweight or obese. Some studies say that one factor is simply their hair care. 

But mostly I blame parents today. It begins in childhood, and what I know from my own experience is that children (of both genders and all races) simply don't play outside like they used to. Parents are too worried about child molesters snatching their children, or being arrested for letting their kids go to the playground alone. So the kids sit home all day on the computer instead. When I was young, my friends and I would stay out all day in the Summer, riding our bikes, playing baseball in the yard, or playing in the woods. That is almost unheard of today.


----------



## I Notice The Details

Wow, what a timely thread...

My wife, son, and I were recently back in the midwest to attend a family reunion. My 14 year old son made the comment..."Dad, there are ALOT of overweight people here". Then we had 3 extra hours at the Chicago airport while waiting for our flight to return home....and again, my son mentions to us that he sees lots of overweight people. We started to watch everyone walking by us, and I would honestly estimate that at least 65 percent of the random people we saw were overweight....and, it was BOTH men and women. 

Watching all of these overweight people just reminded us that we need to keep exercising and to continue to watch the calories that we consume everyday. Eating healthy and exercising takes self discipline, but it does pay off.


----------



## Openminded

Yes, there is an obesity epidemic. Men and women both. When I was a child in the 1950's it was uncommon to see overweight adults and rare to see overweight children. Now it's unfortunately quite common. 

When I was pregnant in 1971, my doctor adhered to a strict policy of no more than a 20 pound weight gain. That was the norm and if you gained more than that you were told not nicely to watch your weight and were carefully monitored. Even though I was 15 pounds underweight when I got pregnant, my doctor still expected me to not gain more than 20 pounds. Now women often gain 50 pounds or more. It doesn't benefit the baby and it doesn't benefit the mother. 

Fat was at one time seen as an indication of prosperity because it indicated you had more than enough to eat. Now it's killing us.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

Yeah, this is definitely not a gender specific issue, at least in the States. Certain demographics may be more affected but I think across the board everyone is just heavier.

I think much of it can be traced back to lifestyle. On-the-go families seemingly necessitate lots of pre-made and highly processed food. The gradual shift from agrarian to factory and now to more service-based industries (ie desk jobs) means people are more sedentary. Acceptance of obesity as "normal" or "ok" has led to a lot of apathy about weight and health/nutrition knowledge, I think. That's further exacerbated by studies that have linked obesity to genetics, leading many to conclude that obesity is "not their fault".

The good news is that while it may seem daunting at first, re-thinking some of those lifestyle choices isn't as difficult as people often think, and even the little changes can lead to healthier lifestyles.


----------



## I Notice The Details

At the airport, we saw people eating salads and drinking water right next to people eating 3 slices of Chicago style pizza with an oversize soda, and then a candy bar for desert. We all make choices everyday as to what goes into our bodies. We can get our calories from good things or bad things.

Some of our neighbors go to the drive thru at McDonalds almost everyday...and they say it is because they have kids. They say they do it for "convenience", while others take the time to cook at home. Their 6 and 8 year old kids are already overweight. My parents raised 8 kids, and we ate at home almost every day. We ate healthy, with lots of fruits, vegetables, and we drank milk with our meals.

We have to make a conscious effort to make better food choices every day if we want to be healthy and fit.


----------



## JASON58

The kids today will be very overweight, except for there fingers..thanks to Apple iphone.


----------



## Miss Taken

Theseus said:


> It is, but it's affecting women much more.
> 
> Among black women, it's really extreme. A staggering 80% of them are overweight or obese. Some studies say that one factor is simply their hair care.


Man that is silly. I am biracial so I feel I can say that.  

One of the reasons I embrace my natural hair is because of my love for swimming and biking. Of course long and straight hair is the most popular but I would rather have my curly, clean hair that I can take anywhere and do anything in than fake hair and hide from the rain or a little sweat. 



Theseus said:


> But mostly I blame parents today. It begins in childhood, and what I know from my own experience is that children (of both genders and all races) simply don't play outside like they used to. Parents are too worried about child molesters snatching their children, or being arrested for letting their kids go to the playground alone. So the kids sit home all day on the computer instead. When I was young, my friends and I would stay out all day in the Summer, riding our bikes, playing baseball in the yard, or playing in the woods. That is almost unheard of today.


:iagree: I am home with my kids this summer and we are out every day. The ten year old does get sent outside to play though and luckily there are two kids on our street he's allowed to go over and play with. 

I think the number of desk jobs contributes to it too. The people that worked in factories or doing other laborious jobs didn't need gyms. Sitting all day behind a desk and pushing papers makes you quite sedentary. It's not natural to sit all day and there's a correlation between sitting longer and dying sooner in life than those that are more active.


----------



## samyeagar

Dollystanford said:


> But if the ladies are slim and sylph-like they will get squished by all the men with huge bellies and b*tch tits I see everywhere


I'm not going to complain about all the fat guys...they just make me look that much better


----------



## lifeistooshort

We all know that fat men are entitled to fit women. Ha ha...but really, I agree there are way too many fat people out there. Lifestyles just aren't compatible with the natural tendencies of the human body.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## stormydays

From The Onion (a satirical newspaper):

Women: Why Don't They Lose Some Weight? | The Onion - America's Finest News Source


(This is kind of weird post. Why just the ladies? Are we especially obligated to keep our figures?)


----------



## JustSomeGuyWho

I hear you. Unfortunately my wife is one of those. She is in the 300 plus range so she isn't just a little overweight. I am a naturally thin person with a very high metabolism. I eat ridiculous amounts of food. I am also extremely active despite (or maybe because of) my desk job. The only reason I am not too thin is because of all the time I've spent in the gym. So far my daughters both seem to take after me (thank god). Hopefully they've learned enough from me as far as fitness and diet that they can maintain a healthy weight for the rest of their lives.

_Posted via *Topify* on Android_


----------



## lifeistooshort

I Notice The Details said:


> At the airport, we saw people eating salads and drinking water right next to people eating 3 slices of Chicago style pizza with an oversize soda, and then a candy bar for desert. We all make choices everyday as to what goes into our bodies. We can get our calories from good things or bad things.
> 
> Some of our neighbors go to the drive thru at McDonalds almost everyday...and they say it is because they have kids. They say they do it for "convenience", while others take the time to cook at home. Their 6 and 8 year old kids are already overweight. My parents raised 8 kids, and we ate at home almost every day. We ate healthy, with lots of fruits, vegetables, and we drank milk with our meals.
> 
> We have to make a conscious effort to make better food choices every day if we want to be healthy and fit.



This reminds me of a friend from the military I have, whose son is a month younger than my older son. When they were about 5 she asked me if the doctor ever game me a hard time about my son's weight. I said yes, because he's thin and I was always getting the don't you feed him lecture. He ate plenty, but it was all decent food.....everyone in our family is in good shape. She told me that she was getting a hard time about her son being too heavy, but she didn't understand why because he ate normally.

Then she tells me that she's on a diet because she is over her military weight limit.....i told her that healthy eating is much easier when the whole family joins. She said that her son wouldn't like it and as long as he had his Burger King he was good. Then I realized that to her, Burger King was eating normally, thus her confusion regarding her son. I bet this is a common mentality.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Starstarfish

Just lose some weight ladies, you have a solemn obligation not to be unattractive to any random man who might want to stare at you naked in the spa pool so he can "appreciate the female form."

Have some decency, for God's sake ladies!


----------



## Married but Happy

Starstarfish said:


> Just lose some weight ladies, you have a solemn obligation not to be unattractive to any random man who might want to stare at you naked in the spa pool so he can "appreciate the female form."
> 
> Have some decency, for God's sake ladies!


If only!


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

Starstarfish said:


> Just lose some weight ladies, you have a solemn obligation not to be unattractive to any random man who might want to stare at you naked in the spa pool so he can "appreciate the female form."
> 
> Have some decency, for God's sake ladies!


The tone of the OP and putting this in the Ladie's Lounge are definitely off-putting, that's for sure.

However, as much as I enjoy appreciating the female form (and believe me, I do ), for me it's not about physical beauty at all, it's about people (regardless of gender) taking care of their bodies. I don't judge how people treat their bodies, but living in the Deep South and coming from a family of overweight people, I see every day the consequences of people leading these kinds of lifestyles.

That's not fat shaming, lifestyle shaming, or a commentary on physical beauty at all, that's me having to watch the myriad of health problems my family members and dear friends impose on themselves due to their obesity.

ETA: but the OP definitely could have been worded a bit less self-righteously


----------



## lifeistooshort

I think if you're fit you are well within reason to ask for a fit partner. Hold up a picture of what you want next to yourself while you look in the mirror; if the pairing is equitable then go for it. If not, well good luck to you.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Starstarfish

> ETA: but the OP definitely could have been worded a bit less self-righteously


I think all threads that start with commentary about how all you see is fat and ugly people the OP should be obligated to post a pic. I want to see what the measuring stick is. 

I want to see who is complaining - a ripped Alpha male who runs 5 miles a day and is in a position to indeed, request an equally fit partner, or a 95 lb super-Beta who just wants to whine about how women are just not attractive enough for him.


----------



## Married but Happy

Starstarfish said:


> I think all threads that start with commentary about how all you see is fat and ugly people the OP should be obligated to post a pic. I want to see what the measuring stick is.
> 
> I want to see who is complaining - a ripped Alpha male who runs 5 miles a day and is in a position to indeed, request an equally fit partner, or a 95 lb super-Beta who just wants to whine about how women are just not attractive enough for him.


I don't think it matters whether the OP is fit or fat - the observations are still true and coincide with published health statistics. I think the only issue is whether you agree with his opinion about the reality.


----------



## firebelly1

I was at a conference recently where a graphic was shown of the United States and the percentage of obese adults. Currently there are states where more than 40% of the population is obese. That is an epidemic. As someone who has been overweight and trying to lose it her entire adult life, I can say from experience that there doesn't seem to be an easy fix. And the weightloss industry is partly to blame.

It seems to be easier for guys to lose weight. My ex-husband could lose weight pretty easily, but he would always gain it back. I suspect that there is something about the way men approach weight loss that makes them more successful at it and (not trying to open up a can of worms here) but I would be curious to hear from the men who maintain a normal weight and have overweight female partners, what they see their partners doing that they think is not working. 

Now...at this conference it was pointed out, and I'm hearing this more and more, that weight maintenance is about 75% what you consume vs. 25% exercise. Personal experience speaks to this for me. There was a point where I was at the gym for at least an hour a day and didn't lose one pound.


----------



## ReformedHubby

It does run in families. I was at Universal Studios in Florida on the Harry Potter ride. A kid got on with his parents but they were both too heavy and big in the belly for the restraints to close on them, so they had to stop the ride before we left. His mother encouraged the kid to ride without them. You could tell he felt bad for them. She began to cry as she and her husband walked away. I felt so bad for that whole family. I hope that they used that moment as motivation but I know its wishful thinking on my part.


----------



## Starstarfish

> I don't think it matters whether the OP is fit or fat - the observations are still true and coincide with published health statistics. I think the only issue is whether you agree with his opinion about the reality.


Uh, I think a fat man posting and complaining about how all the women are too fat to his liking is totally relevant. I want to know if someone is a "horrific bubbling example of over consumption" before they spout off about other people. Because then the stance isn't about health (otherwise why don't they care about themselves) it's quite simply about appearance. And it's also hypocritical. 

And really, the whole OP implies that women being fat and unattractive is somehow a more grievous sin that men (and possibly the OP himself) being fat. It's a deeply patriarchal and misogynistic thought to assume that women as a collective are under some sort of obligation to be attractive - simply because they should be. 

Notice how the OP is only about women? Even making sure to bring up God in it, just to really drive the point home.


----------



## firebelly1

ReformedHubby said:


> It does run in families. I was at Universal Studios in Florida on the Harry Potter ride. A kid got on with his parents but they were both too heavy and big in the belly for the restraints to close on them, so they had to stop the ride before we left. His mother encouraged the kid to ride without them. You could tell he felt bad for them. She began to cry as she and her husband walked away. I felt so bad for that whole family. I hope that they used that moment as motivation but I know its wishful thinking on my part.


I would argue that that kind of obesity is more about lifestyle than genetics. 

Speaking as someone who was a single, working mother for most of my parenting life I think part of the problem, and again, not trying to open a can of worms here, is that when more and more mothers started going back to work, more and more convenience food was introduced into our family diets. With bigger and bigger portions. 

Not blaming women - chores around food should be shared by the man too - but I think in most cases the woman is still the one who plans menus, shops and cooks. And there's just less time to do that when you work full time too.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

firebelly1 said:


> I was at a conference recently where a graphic was shown of the United States and the percentage of obese adults. Currently there are states where more than 40% of the population is obese. That is an epidemic. As someone who has been overweight and trying to lose it her entire adult life, I can say from experience that there doesn't seem to be an easy fix. And the weightloss industry is partly to blame.
> 
> It seems to be easier for guys to lose weight. My ex-husband could lose weight pretty easily, but he would always gain it back. I suspect that there is something about the way men approach weight loss that makes them more successful at it and (not trying to open up a can of worms here) but I would be curious to hear from the men who maintain a normal weight and have overweight female partners, what they see their partners doing that they think is not working.
> 
> Now...at this conference it was pointed out, and I'm hearing this more and more, that weight maintenance is about 75% what you consume vs. 25% exercise. Personal experience speaks to this for me. There was a point where I was at the gym for at least an hour a day and didn't lose one pound.


This is an excellent response, or at least it lines up with my personal life experiences 

My wife has a harder time losing weight than I do. I can just cut back on my calories only slightly and will have lost 2-5 lbs within a week. For her, it's much more difficult.

I think part of the issue is that people (again, regardless of gender) have very complex relationships with food. In the South where food is a way of life, I can definitely say that was the case for us. Part of our success has been retraining our brains to realize that, taste aside, food is at the end of the day fuel to help our bodies become one way or another. Lifting weights was a good driver for me in accepting that POV, and I'm starting to get my wife into that, too.

But more than anything, IMO the biggest key is sustainability. Crash diets, exercise fads, etc, may all work in the short term but are not sustainable lifestyle changes. Make changes that you think you can stick with over the long term. Start with little changes, like less fast food, less sodas, etc, and as you see the positive effects, maybe that will drive you to make bigger changes.

And yes, diet has far more effect than exercise. You can run 20 miles/week but if you're breaking even with calories consumed vs calories burned, you'll never lose weight.


----------



## firebelly1

Nigel Pinchley said:


> This is an excellent response, or at least it lines up with my personal life experiences
> 
> My wife has a harder time losing weight than I do. I can just cut back on my calories only slightly and will have lost 2-5 lbs within a week. For her, it's much more difficult.
> 
> I think part of the issue is that people (again, regardless of gender) have very complex relationships with food. In the South where food is a way of life, I can definitely say that was the case for us. Part of our success has been retraining our brains to realize that, taste aside, food is at the end of the day fuel to help our bodies become one way or another. Lifting weights was a good driver for me in accepting that POV, and I'm starting to get my wife into that, too.
> 
> But more than anything, IMO the biggest key is sustainability. Crash diets, exercise fads, etc, may all work in the short term but are not sustainable lifestyle changes. Make changes that you think you can stick with over the long term. Start with little changes, like less fast food, less sodas, etc, and as you see the positive effects, maybe that will drive you to make bigger changes.
> 
> And yes, diet has far more effect than exercise. You can run 20 miles/week but if you're breaking even with calories consumed vs calories burned, you'll never lose weight.


Yes - sustainability is key. Which is why I think the weight loss industry is partly to blame. They (and you, buying into it) expect you to change the way you eat and exercise overnight. There are a lot of tiny habits that you have accumulated over the years that all add up to your weight gain and sustainability means changing all those habits. You can't do it all overnight. And you can't sustain certain types of diets forever (the no-carb and paleo come to mind) at least, not 100% of the time.


----------



## Dollystanford

The weight loss industry is not designed to help people lose weight and maintain it forever. Because there wouldn't be much of an industry. 

People need to get cynical about this - they are just businesses like any other and they don't care about you, they care about their profit margins. They need a never-ending stream of people to sustain their business model


----------



## Jetranger

Obese? I'm a fat girl in a thin girl's world - Telegraph

I see her making up all kinds of reasons why she's happy the way she is because she 'bloody love(s her) food'. 

I love food too. But my parents had a note stuck on their fridge that I always remember: "nothing tastes as good as thin feels" (the woman in the article quotes it too)

It's made me adopt a more healthy approach to food. Fast food is a treat, not an everyday thing. Cravings can be fought. Exercising is fun and addictive. Going shopping for jeans and realizing you need a smaller waist size is awesome. Looking in the mirror and thinking "hell yes" is wonderful.

The woman linked above says she knows she's overdoing it, and she doesn't want to stop. She's happy who she is. I'm not so sure, if she has to come out and point this out to people as opposed to being happy just knowing it. 

Anyway. Time for a bike ride.


----------



## firebelly1

Jetranger said:


> Obese? I'm a fat girl in a thin girl's world - Telegraph
> 
> I see her making up all kinds of reasons why she's happy the way she is because she 'bloody love(s her) food'.
> 
> I love food too. But my parents had a note stuck on their fridge that I always remember: "nothing tastes as good as thin feels" (the woman in the article quotes it too)
> 
> It's made me adopt a more healthy approach to food. Fast food is a treat, not an everyday thing. Cravings can be fought. Exercising is fun and addictive. Going shopping for jeans and realizing you need a smaller waist size is awesome. Looking in the mirror and thinking "hell yes" is wonderful.
> 
> The woman linked above says she knows she's overdoing it, and she doesn't want to stop. She's happy who she is. I'm not so sure, if she has to come out and point this out to people as opposed to being happy just knowing it.
> 
> Anyway. Time for a bike ride.


Well...I know why she proclaims it. She doesn't want to be judged for her weight. But the fallacy is that somehow you have to choose between enjoying food and being a normal weight. French people - including women - eat more cheese than anyone in the world. They are thin. But Americans eat giant portions and don't balance the high-calorie stuff with vegetables, which is what we should be eating the most of. 

Not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg, weight loss industry or our culture, but it's a myth that you can only lose weight if you SUFFER.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

TiggyBlue said:


> I don't really see why this post is aimed at women, the fat epidemic is effecting both genders.


The men were much less fat. I would say a normal distribution.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Nigel Pinchley said:


> The tone of the OP and putting this in the Ladie's Lounge are definitely off-putting, that's for sure.
> 
> However, as much as I enjoy appreciating the female form (and believe me, I do ), for me it's not about physical beauty at all, it's about people (regardless of gender) taking care of their bodies. I don't judge how people treat their bodies, but living in the Deep South and coming from a family of overweight people, I see every day the consequences of people leading these kinds of lifestyles.
> 
> That's not fat shaming, lifestyle shaming, or a commentary on physical beauty at all, that's me having to watch the myriad of health problems my family members and dear friends impose on themselves due to their obesity.
> 
> ETA: but the OP definitely could have been worded a bit less self-righteously


I was just shocked at how the epidemic has now taken 'American' proportions over here. The men are to follow if the trend continues. Nothing self-righteous about that imho.
The good Lord cannot have designed the body, female or male, to be have these layers of fat, enveloped by large hanging skin folds, to be our natural look.

Because it obviously is American culture that brings it about, and concerning the ladies most at this moment (here), I want to start a discussion about the food industry. And, of course, its customers. It is necessary to create consciousness about the mechanics of the matter.


----------



## Ikaika

See_Listen_Love said:


> The men were much less fat. I would say a normal distribution.



I am not sure the sampling size or situation represented is indicative of a completely accurate conclusion. But, whatever the case, I can't speak for Belgium, here in the US the stats across the nation of 300M don't lie:

68% are overweight (non-gender specific)
39.8% are obese (again non-gender specific)
Fastest growing (excuse the pun) obese population are 13 - 19 year olds across both genders (equally). 

And, in people my age group, most just resign themselves to assume "fat" is normal (among both men and women). I don't know that minds can be changed but I try among my close group of acquaintances.


----------



## Faithful Wife

See_Listen_Love said:


> The good Lord cannot have designed the body, female or male, to be have these layers of fat, enveloped by large hanging skin folds, to be our natural look.
> 
> Because it obviously is American culture that brings it about, and concerning the ladies most at this moment (here), *I want to start a discussion about the food industry.* And, of course, its customers. It is necessary to create consciousness about the mechanics of the matter.


Perhaps have your discussion with "the Lord" about it instead.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Starstarfish said:


> Uh, I think a fat man posting and complaining about how all the women are too fat to his liking is totally relevant. I want to know if someone is a "horrific bubbling example of over consumption" before they spout off about other people. Because then the stance isn't about health (otherwise why don't they care about themselves) it's quite simply about appearance. And it's also hypocritical.
> 
> And really, the whole OP implies that women being fat and unattractive is somehow a more grievous sin that men (and possibly the OP himself) being fat. It's a deeply patriarchal and misogynistic thought to assume that women as a collective are under some sort of obligation to be attractive - simply because they should be.
> 
> Notice how the OP is only about women? Even making sure to bring up God in it, just to really drive the point home.


I am all about facts, as far as I am concerned.

Fact is, in Europe we were looking in disgust at normal street pictures of US cities, how many very big overweight people you see.

Nowadays we start seeing these also regularly on our streets. But I have never been anywhere until yesterday where EVERY woman was having these fat layers bubbling out of some place. So I guess some threshold has been passed.

The men are probably following. But it is clearly not as bad with them yet.

I blame the food industry. The sugar, salt and fat are cheap replacements for the real foods that people eat decades ago.

I blame the consumer, buying the stuff, being lazy and going to get fast food. Calling McDonalds a 'restaurant' was the start of it all.

I heard in certain parts of the US, in big cities, people cannot even buy food anymore, there is only fast food available.

God, or the Evolutionary Principle, or whatever you want, have created/propelled a body that is fully functional without that fat. Without the need to fill it with garbage food. So there is the solution, stop that food, and stop eating it.

I really think this is not about weight. It is about the quality of the food.

And yes, you can throw all your man-hating stuff at me, it is OK. I can take that, because I have a large point to make, more important than the sexist remarks, thank you.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

Dollystanford said:


> The weight loss industry is not designed to help people lose weight and maintain it forever. Because there wouldn't be much of an industry.
> 
> People need to get cynical about this - they are just businesses like any other and they don't care about you, they care about their profit margins. They need a never-ending stream of people to sustain their business model


This is absolutely step #1: Realizing that the diet and weight loss industry does nothing more than spread a lot of profit-driven disinformation to keep their perpetual motion machine, ah, in motion. It really is stunning to see the amount of disinformation out there.

Step #2 is finding good sources of nutritional and health information. This is where the internet is really helpful. Find forums/message boards (not this one), follow Pinterest users, like FB pages that aren't trying to push a product on you but instead are just out there trying educate everyone on good eating and exercise habits.


----------



## firebelly1

It's not comfortable for us to have a man point out that women are fatter than men SLS so if you wanted to start a discussion you might have tried a different tact. 

Having said that...see my former post. Where do people learn their eating habits? In their families. What kind of food is available in your home? Who cooks? Who plans the meals? Who shops? Are the kids learning how to prepare food at home? I think all of that has changed in the last half-century. And American portion sizes are bigger than they used to be and bigger than the European version. 

Here's another thing that I think influences - our ideas about parenting. For some reason, in North America anyway, it seems that we have come to believe that being a good parent means you are completely focused on your kids and their happiness. For women I think that often translates to not taking care of themselves physically.


----------



## I Notice The Details

I also chuckle when people say that they are "big" because they are "big boned"....that is just an excuse in my book. They act like they have no control over their body at all. 

These are the same people who would love to put gravy on their morning cereal...


----------



## firebelly1

Nigel Pinchley said:


> This is absolutely step #1: Realizing that the diet and weight loss industry does nothing more than spread a lot of profit-driven disinformation to keep their perpetual motion machine, ah, in motion. It really is stunning to see the amount of disinformation out there.
> 
> Step #2 is finding good sources of nutritional and health information. This is where the internet is really helpful. Find forums/message boards (not this one), follow Pinterest users, like FB pages that aren't trying to push a product on you but instead are just out there trying educate everyone on good eating and exercise habits.


But OH MY GOD - who do you believe? Low fat? Low carb? Paleo? Atkins? Gluten-free? Is fat making me fat or carbs? I think part of the reason i haven't been successful is because I've never been able to wade through all the contradictory "nutritional" advice.


----------



## Dollystanford

In which big cities in the US can you no longer buy normal food, only fast food?

I mean by all means let's have a sensible debate about food and obesity but throwing statements like that with no justification doesn't exactly help your argument. Any more than bringing the good Lord or baby Jesus into it


----------



## Ikaika

Our species did not evolve with carbonated sweetened beverages as a low hanging fruit. Most studies will indicate that the original low hanging fruit (apples) had all the sweetness and calories of a carrot. This is not to suggest that only sodas are to blame, but they are a huge contributing factor. 

We have become too satiated, too sedentary and too sanitary for our own good.


----------



## OptimisticPessimist

There is definitely a correlation between our consumerism-focused society and obesity. I agree with others that men have just as much of an obesity problem as women. 

Its interesting to consider though that it isnt just strictly based on eating.

For instance, take my case. I could eat 3 pizzas a day for years and I would still be a toothpick (if my heart didnt explode in the process). When I was working out, I would eat upwards of 6000 calories a day (EDIT- I changed to 6000) and yet STILL my gains were very slow (different muscle groups every day, 2 rest days per week, changing excercises every few weeks, freeweights with spotter, working out with a guy who knew what he was doing, etc). If I were to stop working out for a few years, I would naturally lose all my muscle and go right back to being a toothpick. Most people could hit a gym for 5 months and be lifting more than I could with a solid year of effort. 

There are 3 body types: ectomorphic, mesomorphic, endomorphic. I am an ectomorph- hard to make muscle, hard to make fat, can eat whatever I want and I stay skinny. Mesomorphic is the best type to be- reasonably easy to make muscle, reasonably easy to make fat, can eat whatever so long as excercise is part of the lifestyle. Endomorphic is the worst or best depending on preference- extremely easy to make muscle, extremely easy to make fat, must watch what is eaten and must excercise, and will still likely have some fat. Look it up online for more info..

Notice that weightlifters all have fat (they dont look ripped), and most have endomorphic body types. Bodybuilders are typically mesomorphic with extreme diets and extreme workout regimens focused on balanced aesthetic muscle tone.

Notice that James Bond of the 60s wasnt as "ripped" as Daniel Craig's James Bond. If you think about it, being ripped is actually a liability; without sufficient fat stores, any disruption to one's food supply is a threat to his/her survival. And so we celebrate ripped mesomorphic people in terms of image because it is the most desirable body type and because the "ripped" indicates the person's confidence in their food supply- or implicitly in a more general way, it indicates one's provisional security within their society. 

Obviously, as our society becomes more and more focused on consumerism, the endomorphic and mesomorphic body types become fatter if excercise isn't equally vaunted by the dominant public narrative.


----------



## firebelly1

It's an exaggeration to say there are cities where there is no normal food but there are definitely neighborhoods where there are multiple fast food restaurants but no grocery store and in most cases those neighborhoods have higher rates of poverty. Fast food is cheaper than fresh food. 

I'm a city planner and the conference I referred to earlier was focused on the built environment and health. There's a term we have been using for a few years now called a "food desert" which is what I described - an area where people can't easily access fresh food. The computer mapping program most of us use (ESRI GIS) has a built-in analysis tool that maps food deserts.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

firebelly1 said:


> But OH MY GOD - who do you believe? Low fat? Low carb? Paleo? Atkins? Gluten-free? Is fat making me fat or carbs? I think part of the reason i haven't been successful is because I've never been able to wade through all the contradictory "nutritional" advice.


Well, that's exactly my point. Low carb, paleo, atkins, etc, are all fad diets that have exploded in popularity in recent years.

Here's the bottom line: The only way to lose weight is to consume less calories than you burn. The only way to gain weight is to consume more calories than you burn. Period. That's it. In recent decades we may have learned all kinds of new things about the human body, but that rule remains the same. All of those fad diets you mentioned, all of the newly discovered miracle workouts are just ways to get you to that calorie deficit.

The is the yardstick by which I judge any nutritional information. If its basis is not "calories in vs calories burned" then I immediately discard it. 

Also, note that a lot of this stuff is very person-specific. Low-carb works for some people bc they were over-consuming carbs, but if your carb intake was already on point, then not only will you probably not see much difference on that diet, it may not be sustainable for you to restrict carbs for yourself like that. Same with each those other diets. If you were already eating very little processed foods, then paleo probably won't do much for you. It's more finding the combination of little pieces from each diet that work for you, that become that sustainable lifestyle, ykwim?


----------



## Starstarfish

> And yes, you can throw all your man-hating stuff at me, it is OK. I can take that, because I have a large point to make, more important than the sexist remarks, thank you.


Sorry, trying to turn the thread now into a discussion about the "food industry" seems too little too late after making the first post clearly all about female bodies and only female bodies.


----------



## soccermom2three

Hasn't there been studies showing a link between the rise of obesity and the addition of high fructose corn syrup in our diets? I think they started adding this to the food in the late 70's, early '80's.


----------



## firebelly1

Nigel Pinchley said:


> Well, that's exactly my point. Low carb, paleo, atkins, etc, are all fad diets that have exploded in popularity in recent years.
> 
> Here's the bottom line: The only way to lose weight is to consume less calories than you burn. The only way to gain weight is to consume more calories than you burn. Period. That's it. In recent decades we may have learned all kinds of new things about the human body, but that rule remains the same. All of those fad diets you mentioned, all of the newly discovered miracle workouts are just ways to get you to that calorie deficit.
> 
> The is the yardstick by which I judge any nutritional information. If its basis is not "calories in vs calories burned" then I immediately discard it.
> 
> Also, note that a lot of this stuff is very person-specific. Low-carb works for some people bc they were over-consuming carbs, but if your carb intake was already on point, then not only will you probably not see much difference on that diet, it may not be sustainable for you to restrict carbs for yourself like that. Same with each those other diets. If you were already eating very little processed foods, then paleo probably won't do much for you. It's more finding the combination of little pieces from each diet that work for you, that become that sustainable lifestyle, ykwim?


I am getting this of late.

The aspect of the low-carb thing that works for me is that I know I can't sustain a change in the way I eat if I'm hungry all the time. If I eat a lot of refined carbs, I feel hungrier than if I stick mostly to protein and veggies. But being obsessive or perfectionistic about it is a recipe for failure.


----------



## Ikaika

soccermom2three said:


> Hasn't there been studies showing a link between the rise of obesity and the addition of high fructose corn syrup in our diets? I think they started adding this to the food in the late 70's, early '80's.



There are... So, your body can't use fructose but fructose can be converted to usable glucose by isomerase enzymes (primarily) in the liver. However, when those enzyme pathways are overwhelmed, another enzyme pathway takes up the slack to convert the fructose and even excess glucose to beta-2 carbon units. The only destination for those two carbon units, fat storage. All the while the insulin roller coaster overshoots come into play which has long term implication in facilitating fat storage and insensitivity to insulin which is supposed to promote glycogen formation (glucose storage molecule)... Leads to obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus and long term causes a plethora of chronic illnesses, mainly heart disease.


----------



## firebelly1

drerio said:


> There are... So, your body can't use fructose but fructose can be converted to usable glucose by isomerase enzymes (primarily) in the liver. However, when those enzyme pathways are overwhelmed, another enzyme pathway takes up the slack to convert the fructose and even excess glucose to beta-2 carbon units. The only destination for those two carbon units, fat storage. All the while the insulin roller coaster overshoots come into play which has long term implication in facilitating fat storage and insensitivity to insulin which is supposed to promote glycogen formation (glucose storage molecule)... Leads to obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus and long term causes a plethora of chronic illnesses, mainly heart disease.


Oh god - this is where you usually lose me. Cuz I'm like, isn't fructose in fruit? Are you saying we shouldn't eat fruit? Or any nutritional rationale - I hear it. Sounds logical, but weighed against my long-held cooking habits and the emotion I have connected to my mom's peach pie recipe, it's hard for me to be influenced by that alone.


----------



## firebelly1

The one thing that actually made me start eating more vegetables is this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLjgBLwH3Wc


----------



## soccermom2three

drerio said:


> There are... So, your body can't use fructose but fructose can be converted to usable glucose by isomerase enzymes (primarily) in the liver. However, when those enzyme pathways are overwhelmed, another enzyme pathway takes up the slack to convert the fructose and even excess glucose to beta-2 carbon units. The only destination for those two carbon units, fat storage. All the while the insulin roller coaster overshoots come into play which has long term implication in facilitating fat storage and insensitivity to insulin which is supposed to promote glycogen formation (glucose storage molecule)... Leads to obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus and long term causes a plethora of chronic illnesses, mainly heart disease.


Well, that's why I've eliminated from the house. That and Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil, (except for my husband's Skippy peanut butter).


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Dollystanford said:


> In which big cities in the US can you no longer buy normal food, only fast food?
> 
> I mean by all means let's have a sensible debate about food and obesity but throwing statements like that with no justification doesn't exactly help your argument. Any more than bringing the good Lord or baby Jesus into it


I am still looking for the documentary, but the 'Food Desert' idea explains it also:



> Here are 5 reasons good food is hard to find for poor people sometimes.
> 1. *FOOD DESERTS* – Imagine you live in a city. There isn’t much in your neighborhood besides a few fast food joints, a Dollar General & a little convenience store. They have things like milk & eggs but any food beyond that comes in a box or a can & everything they do have healthy is overpriced. The only time you can get to the nearest real grocery store is when your sister comes and visits because she has a car. There is a Farmer’s Market somewhere in the city but like the grocery store, it’s too hard to get to without a car. With me so far?
> There is a community garden you’ve been told you can get involved in to grow your own food but it’s not in your neighborhood and you have to take 2 buses to get there and anyway, you work Monday -Saturday and by the time you would get there, it’s dark and to get back home, you would have to walk partially with your 2 little kids in tow because buses don’t run in your neighborhood (not a safe neighborhood,by the way) past a certain time in the evening.Sunday is your only day off and the time you want to spend with your children.
> You tried growing some things indoors and on a windowsill but 2 windows in the whole apartment… nothing really grew.
> The food pantry run by the church has exactly the same selection as the stores you can shop at – boxed & canned food with lots of preservatives and crap. Nothing fresh.
> I should mention now that this is a common thing I hear in emails from people living in food deserts.
> A food desert is defined as an area that has no food & grocery sources with fresh foods or if they do have fresh foods, they are disproportionately expensive. People affected the most by food deserts are poor people who do not have access to transportation and the primary affected are single mother & their children, elderly, and disabled. In an area considered a food desert, the rate of obesity & diabetes is much higher and there have been some causal studies that suggest children that live in food deserts don’t do as well in school. 217 million people receiving food stamps live in urban areas compared to about 62 million in rural areas. Food deserts can happen for those in rural areas,too but it’s far more prevalent in urban areas and affects the largest portion of food stamp recipients overall.


5 Reasons Poor People Don’t Eat Healthy | crazy dumbsaint of the mind


----------



## Fenix

stormydays said:


> From The Onion:
> 
> Women: Why Don't They Lose Some Weight? | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
> 
> 
> (This is kind of weird post, by the way. Why just the ladies? Are we especially obligated to keep our figures?)


Why yes! Because that's our only value. Surely you knew that?


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Starstarfish said:


> Sorry, trying to turn the thread now into a discussion about the "food industry" seems too little too late after making the first post clearly all about female bodies and only female bodies.


My last reaction on the issue:

Thread tittle: 'The Fat Epidemic'



> I believe the food industry and consumers together to be responsible for this.
> 
> But You All, my dear ladies, need to stop this. Stop the industry, stop the shops, stop the people, from working together in this disease, on the abolition of the beautiful female body.


It is you who react to the female body item alone.
I mention it as the effect of a cause. And it is a shocking effect to me. And the cause is a shame.


----------



## Ikaika

firebelly1 said:


> Oh god - this is where you usually lose me. Cuz I'm like, isn't fructose in fruit? Are you saying we shouldn't eat fruit? Or any nutritional rationale - I hear it. Sounds logical, but weighed against my long-held cooking habits and the emotion I have connected to my mom's peach pie recipe, it's hard for me to be influenced by that alone.



Fructose in fruit is at lower concentrations and most of it chelated in cellular and molecular structures. It is in a way the natural time released mechanism that enzymatic pathways can accommodate.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

I would like to mention that this thread is NOT about how to loose weight, diets etc. Those deal with the consequences of the Food Crisis:
17 Must-See Food Documentaries | Organic Authority

It is about the food industry and its customers, those consuming the bad foods.

So the consument not as overeating person who grows to fat, but the consument as buyer who pulls the whole industrial chain from the front.


----------



## over20

I personally feel that to many families (American at least) don't eat at home anymore. Meals prepared at home tend to be lower in calories and healthier..Americans have turned to the drive thru for dinner as one races on to the next commitment. I am NOT saying all families do this, but a lot do. The book made into movie is very good. "Fast Food Nation"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc_z623Wsro


Also this movie is exceptional....couldn't eat chicken for a long time after watching this....which prompted me to raise my own.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/food-inc/


----------



## firebelly1

See_Listen_Love said:


> I would like to mention that this thread is NOT about how to loose weight, diets etc. Those deal with the consequences of the Food Crisis:
> 17 Must-See Food Documentaries | Organic Authority
> 
> It is about the food industry and its customers, those consuming the bad foods.
> 
> So the consument not as overeating person who grows to fat, but the consument as buyer who pulls the whole industrial chain from the front.


If that's what you wanted the thread to be about I'm not sure you conveyed that with your original post. What we hear is "the women at the spa yesterday were so fat. Something should be done."


----------



## Thunder7

The Fat Epidemic 

Hey, I resemble that remark.


----------



## Starstarfish

There are plenty of thin people who eat total crap. 

So the idea that fat people obviously eat bad foods, and thin people obviously eat a superior diet without "junk" is a false association. I've known plenty of fat vegans and thin people who live on nothing but Mt. Dew and Cheetos. 

The thin people might (and likely do) eat less calories, but that doesn't need neccessarily that those things are "better" for them. 
It's more complex than that, I think. Some people can tolerate more "crap" eating than others.


----------



## Sunburn

It's interesting to note while watching a pre-90's movies how thin everyone is. 

It's also interesting to hear how people rationalize their size. My X's daughter is fat, can't even see her hooha but my X always said she was fat cause of stress. No, your daughter is fat cause she eats too much and sits at home all day.


----------



## happy as a clam

OP,

So what you're saying is, everyone now looks like the people on the right side of this pic, instead of the people on the left side? (Then and now). Sorry, couldn't resist...

:rofl:


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

Starstarfish said:


> There are plenty of thin people who eat total crap.
> 
> So the idea that fat people obviously eat bad foods, and thin people obviously eat a superior diet without "junk" is a false association. I've known plenty of fat vegans and thin people who live on nothing but Mt. Dew and Cheetos.
> 
> The thin people might (and likely do) eat less calories, but that doesn't need neccessarily that those things are "better" for them.
> It's more complex than that, I think. Some people can tolerate more "crap" eating than others.


It all goes back to calories in vs calories out (which itself is tied to any number of factors influencing metabolism, like age, lean body weight vs body fat %, gender, level of activity, etc). If I know my daily metabolic rate is somewhere around 2000 cals/day, I could lose weight on 1500 cals/day of ice cream and McDonald's (though you'd have a hard time fitting those two into 1500 cals). Conversely, a vegan eating 5000 cals/day of vegan food will still gain weight.

There are some caveats to that, as Drerio is pointing out regarding how the body processes HFCS.


----------



## Starstarfish

Nigel Pinchley said:


> It all goes back to calories in vs calories out (which itself is tied to any number of factors influencing metabolism, like age, lean body weight vs body fat %, gender, level of activity, etc). If I know my daily metabolic rate is somewhere around 2000 cals/day, I could lose weight on 1500 cals/day of ice cream and McDonald's (though you'd have a hard time fitting those two into 1500 cals). Conversely, a vegan eating 5000 cals/day of vegan food will still gain weight.
> 
> There are some caveats to that, as Drerio is pointing out regarding how the body processes HFCS.


That's also not taking into account that you might be thin in appearance/weight but have other health problems from crap eating like dental issues or high cholesterol.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## See_Listen_Love

firebelly1 said:


> If that's what you wanted the thread to be about I'm not sure you conveyed that with your original post. What we hear is "the women at the spa yesterday were so fat. Something should be done."


Last time:

ALL the women of a couple of hundred nude people, were having fat layers hanging down from them. Some a little, most quite a lot, some in obese form.

This has NEVER been before. We follow the USA in the epidemic on maybe 10-20 years distance. So the men will be no doubt next. But this is not about men or women. It is about the shocking change.

If men are telling this to the women, you get the effects quite predictably like I get on this thread. Therefore I directly adress the ladies on this forum, because I expect you to be the possible driving force that could change the consumption and therefore the Ask side of the market.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

happy as a clam said:


> OP,
> 
> So what you're saying is, everyone now looks like the people on the right side of this pic, instead of the people on the left side? (Then and now). Sorry, couldn't resist...
> 
> :rofl:


Exactly. Thx.


----------



## firebelly1

SLL - My point is that if you wanted to have a discussion about the industry, that wasn't clear from the post. Nor was it clear that you wanted us to steer away from a discussion about how to lose weight.


----------



## Starstarfish

See_Listen_Love said:


> Last time:
> 
> ALL the women of a couple of hundred nude people, were having fat layers hanging down from them. Some a little, most quite a lot, some in obese form.
> 
> This has NEVER been before. We follow the USA in the epidemic on maybe 10-20 years distance. So the men will be no doubt next. But this is not about men or women. It is about the shocking change.
> 
> If men are telling this to the women, you get the effects quite predictably like I get on this thread. Therefore I directly adress the ladies on this forum, because I expect you to be the possible driving force that could change the consumption and therefore the Ask side of the market.


Not sure women as a driving force as consumers can change the mostly male political and business forces spearheaded by Monsanto and Big Pharma to keep is all ignorant of what's in our food and drugged to the gills.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bravenewworld

As you can see from the ticker below, I've recently lost a decent amount of weight and gone from a size 14 to 8 (woo-hoo!) plus my BMI is now in the "normal" range.

I switched my diet - now eat a lot of veggies, fruits, potatoes, and lean protein. Mostly seafood or egg whites. Try to buy organic when I can afford it and do meatless Monday as well. Beer and ice cream have sadly been relegated to a sometimes treat. I feel having them only 1x per week or so does make me appreciate it more.

That said, losing weight the right way is a hard and slow process. Also, your grocery bill is WAY more pricey once you stop eating all that super processed crap. Which isn't easy for me as a single person so I can only imagine have a family would feel. I use coupons and shop at Farmers Markets but it's still about 30% higher to buy the good stuff. Produce and high quality protein is NOT cheap!!!! But sadly, McDonald's is. We as a society need to change that.

A few things I resent about your post OP is not only the judgmental attitude about all women (exclusively) being overweight but also that somehow being overweight makes them "ugly." Um, excuse you? That is extremely rude, and The Lord has asked me to let you know that you don't presume to speak for him. 

Frankly I'm not losing weight so I don't offend the eyes of some creeper in a sauna, I'm doing it for me. So I can run faster, lift more, be more flexible, and lower my cholesterol. And I am getting there. Lots of women, and men, are getting there. 

Bottom line: There is not one overweight person who does not constantly feel guilt and shame over their excess weight. Your verbal diatribe laced with misogyny brings absolutely nothing new or helpful to the table.

Also, I travel all the time. Europe has always had plenty of obese natives - pretty much on par with the US outside of the Deep South.


----------



## inquizitivemind

I'm not understanding something. How fat are we talking? If like the ones in the picture, than that is obesity and yes, it needs to be stopped. If you are talking about normal amounts of fat for women, which the MODEL industry and actresses have basically called fat when it isn't being fat, then I have a problem with it.

Biologically, women are meant to hold more fat on their bodies than men in order to feed children. Women hold this fat in different areas of their body, which contributes to their natural curvy shapes (not everything is the same da** shape). 

All I am saying is this...Women having a little fat on them is a good thing, especially if they are eating healthy. I'm sorry you were so turned off by this. Let's blame it on your conditioning from media. If you were alive in some past period before Hollywood, you would think differently. 

Again...obesity is unhealthy...some fat on the body is good.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

See_Listen_Love said:


> Last time:
> 
> ALL the women of a couple of hundred nude people, were having fat layers hanging down from them. Some a little, most quite a lot, some in obese form.
> 
> This has NEVER been before. We follow the USA in the epidemic on maybe 10-20 years distance. So the men will be no doubt next. But this is not about men or women. It is about the shocking change.
> 
> If men are telling this to the women, you get the effects quite predictably like I get on this thread. Therefore I directly adress the ladies on this forum, because I expect you to be the possible driving force that could change the consumption and therefore the Ask side of the market.


So what you're saying essentially is that it's all American women's fault that Belgian women are getting fat (but not the men, though, they're still Olympian statues), and as such, it is the sole responsibility of American women to reverse these worldwide trends in food consumption?

While I (sort of) see your indirect point, would your time not be better spent stopping Belgian people from copying bad American habits?

Also, are there not more tactful ways of making your point without putting American women on the defensive, as you've clearly done here in this thread?

And wouldn't American men and women working together to make lifestyle habits more healthy reach your (still oddly indirect) goal even quicker? And in that regard, wouldn't people in this thread talking about how to lose weight by *consuming* better foods be advantageous to your overall objective?


----------



## staarz21

Maybe all those 'wemmens' got fat because of the unbelievable standards set by media and our stupid society.

They just said F-it I quit.   

It's both genders not taking responsibility for themselves (and in some cases their children). 

If you gain weight easily, it's going to be harder for you...but not impossible to maintain a healthy...not necessarily thin...weight.

Some people will have it easier than others. But that's just life. 

By the way, I see just as many...if not more...fat nasty men around without their shirts on thinking it's ok. Bleh...it's not. If you don't have a 6 pack and orgasm inducing chest and biceps...then don't say anything about women being fat.


----------



## TiggyBlue

Starstarfish said:


> There are plenty of thin people who eat total crap.
> 
> So the idea that fat people obviously eat bad foods, and thin people obviously eat a superior diet without "junk" is a false association. I've known plenty of fat vegans and thin people who live on nothing but Mt. Dew and Cheetos.
> 
> The thin people might (and likely do) eat less calories, but that doesn't need neccessarily that those things are "better" for them.
> It's more complex than that, I think. Some people can tolerate more "crap" eating than others.


:iagree:
It's more of a health epidemic IMO, because someone is a healthy weight doesn't automatically mean they're healthy.


----------



## firebelly1

So which industry SLL? The weight loss industry or the pre-packaged / fast food industry? Which industry do you think women should be fighting against? 

Problem is, again, women aren't the only ones affected or influenced by these industries. And...if what you are saying is that women, primarily, need to fight against the production of unhealthy food choices because they are the primary purchasers of food, what I would argue is that THAT paradigm needs to shift too. Part of what I was saying earlier. Women ARE still the primary food purchasers and preparers in their families but they shouldn't be. Men should step up and help or ideally, be equals when it comes to planning, buying, and preparing food in the home. Women choose fast food and prepackaged food in part because it is quicker and easier than preparing real food and after a long day at work, it's just too tempting to go for what's easy. That's a really strong influence on food choice. If we were all stay-at-home moms like in the 50's we'd have plenty of time to chop vegetables and broast chicken, but we aren't stay-at-home moms anymore.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

firebelly1 said:


> So which industry SLL? The weight loss industry or the pre-packaged / fast food industry? Which industry do you think women should be fighting against?
> 
> Problem is, again, women aren't the only ones affected or influenced by these industries. And...if what you are saying is that women, primarily, need to fight against the production of unhealthy food choices because they are the primary purchasers of food, what I would argue is that THAT paradigm needs to shift too. Part of what I was saying earlier. Women ARE still the primary food purchasers and preparers in their families but they shouldn't be. Men should step up and help or ideally, be equals when it comes to planning, buying, and preparing food in the home. Women choose fast food and prepackaged food in part because it is quicker and easier than preparing real food and after a long day at work, it's just too tempting to go for what's easy. That's a really strong influence on food choice. If we were all stay-at-home moms like in the 50's we'd have plenty of time to chop vegetables and broast chicken, but we aren't stay-at-home moms anymore.


I agree with this absolutely 100%.

My wife is in professional school, and typically I will be home before her. During the school year I do all of the cooking. This not only frees up more time for her to study, but also allows us to make healthier food choices because we're not looking for something quick and easy.

Of course, the ironic thing is that we both can prepare a healthy and tasty meal in 15-20 minutes - which isn't much longer than a stop at McDonald's, once you factor in wait time at the dive-through, traffic to and from, etc.

This helps us in particular because my wife is a great cook - in the Southern American style, ie butter, gravy, sauce, and oil in *everything*. I cook far more simply than that, and nixing those things alone removes tons of calories from the equation. My food isn't as good as hers, and she still very much enjoys cooking as that's one of her love languages, but she's commented many times how much more healthily we eat when I do the cooking.


----------



## bravenewworld

TiggyBlue said:


> :iagree:
> It's more of a health epidemic IMO, because someone is a healthy weight doesn't automatically mean they're healthy.


Yesterday at the gym a woman 10 years younger and at least 20lbs lighter sized me up on the treadmill and immediately set hers to the same speed mine was at. A half hour later she was gasping, sweating, and jumped off saying "I think I'm going to vomit."

Meanwhile, I was still running for at least another 15 min. In fact, I upped the incline. :smthumbup:


----------



## firebelly1

Well...and I never really learned to cook. My mother was a single mother who worked full time, but never made a living wage so we ate hamburger helper more times than I can tell you. I never even KNEW there was such a thing as a red bell pepper until I was an adult. And I lived in your average, american city of 200,000 people growing up. We couldn't afford fruits and vegetables or good cuts of meat so I never learned how to prepare them. And so the cycle gets perpetuated.


----------



## Red Sonja

The solution to the obesity epidemic is actually quite simple … consistently eat a varied diet of _fresh whole foods_, stay (at least) moderately active and stop drinking the energy/sports drinks and sodas.


----------



## bravenewworld

Another thing that bugs me - why are some men so entitled to think that women not only need to 

A) Be attractive to look at
b) Be attractive to that particular man's standards 

Honestly, it's a little crazy town. I've been a model skinny size 2 before with rock hard abs/butt/legs and it didn't look good - to me. So why should I look like that to please the general man population or some esoteric media image of what women "should" be? 

Now, some women have bodies that look phenomenal at a size 2. More power to them! I'm more pear-shaped and think I look best with toned arms/stomach but keeping my butt/thighs thick. I'd rather stay the weight I am now than lose the juiciness in my butt. 

I want to tone it up but keep a little jiggle. To me, it's sexy! Makes me feel like Jessica Rabbit. If men consider me overweight, oh well. No one is going to force you to look at me. I'm feeling good and that's what counts!


----------



## bravenewworld

Red Sonja said:


> The solution to the obesity epidemic is actually quite simple … consistently eat a varied diet of _fresh whole foods_, stay (at least) moderately active and stop drinking the energy/sports drinks and sodas.


This I agree with but a few other factors I have found definitely affect weight loss: 

1) Stress level. ( hormones)
2) Sleep quality/quantity (again, hormones) 
3) How often you eliminate waste (probiotics work wonders)
4) How your body processes certain foods. For example in the carb department my body processes potatoes amazingly well but rice with the exact same calorie count will cause weight gain. My best friend is exactly the opposite. Trial and error I suppose.


----------



## Feeling-Lonely

From all the places I have been U.K. is fallowing US footsteps. I am European myself and moving to US was a big shock for me to see all the big people. I know this sounds like fat-shaming but I think there is more shame in not doing anything about it. Every time I see a fat parent and a fat kid buying loads of white/bleached bread and other crap I want to scream. 

Not to sound like a stuck up European, last time I visited Europe and was in 6 countries visiting family and friends it shocked me how many people were smoking. Far less in US.


----------



## firebelly1

Nigel Pinchley said:


> Of course, the ironic thing is that we both can prepare a healthy and tasty meal in 15-20 minutes - which isn't much longer than a stop at McDonald's, once you factor in wait time at the dive-through, traffic to and from, etc.


You rock Nigel. However, , being the family cook takes more time than just the 15-20 minutes it takes to prepare that one meal. You have to plan the meal. Then you have to shop for it and make sure the cost of the food is within your family budget. Then you need to bring it home and store it in the appropriate manner until you're ready to prepare it. THEN you cook it. And presumably you don't plan or shop for one meal at a time - so...all of this takes time, thought, planning, financial savvy, etc. The family cook doesn't just cook - they typically take on all of the duties related to food in the house and that's a lot for just one of the marital team to take on. 

BTW...the time in my marriage when I was most successful at losing weight was when my husband was laid off for five months and doing all the food duties.


----------



## firebelly1

Feeling-Lonely said:


> From all the places I have been U.K. is fallowing US footsteps. I am European myself and moving to US was a big shock for me to see all the big people. I know this sounds like fat-shaming but I think there is more shame in not doing anything about it. Every time I see a fat parent and a fat kid buying loads of white/bleached bread and other crap I want to scream.
> 
> Not to sound like a stuck up European, last time I visited Europe and was in 6 countries visiting family and friends it shocked me how many people were smoking. Far less in US.


Moving to Canada I had the opposite - people here are thinner than in my native America. I am usually the fattest person in the room. 

I was about to point out that white bread is $.88 a loaf while whole wheat bread is $2.50 a loaf -which is why poor people are fatter, but then I remembered that here in Canada, food at the grocery store is about 25% more expensive across the board than in the States. Meat and dairy are double what they are in the States. People eat smaller portions of them. But they are also packaged in smaller packages. A single-serving yogurt here is about half the American size. My coworkers eat smaller portions at lunch when they bring a lunch.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

*Re: Re: The Fat Epidemic*



firebelly1 said:


> You rock Nigel. However, , being the family cook takes more time than just the 15-20 minutes it takes to prepare that one meal. You have to plan the meal. Then you have to shop for it and make sure the cost of the food is within your family budget. Then you need to bring it home and store it in the appropriate manner until you're ready to prepare it. THEN you cook it. And presumably you don't plan or shop for one meal at a time - so...all of this takes time, thought, planning, financial savvy, etc. The family cook doesn't just cook - they typically take on all of the duties related to food in the house and that's a lot for just one of the marital team to take on.
> 
> BTW...the time in my marriage when I was most successful at losing weight was when my husband was laid off for five months and doing all the food duties.


Again, we agree. I do the budget and all the grocery shopping during the school year (during the summer my wife does the grocery shopping but I still manage the budget). Anyway, it can definitely be a hassle and a huge time suck. 

Here's a few things I've found:
- over time the budget takes care of itself as you learn which foods at which prices and qualities are appropriate for your family, and so the budget becomes much easier to plan and/or work around
- meal planning is made a lot easier if instead of planning individual meals you buy a lot of foods that go well together, and then when meal time comes each evening you can mix and match what you want. Again, over time you'll get a feel of how much meat, veggies, etc your family consumes weekly
- storage can be an issue if you have to buy in bulk due to price or family size. I can't offer much help there, as it's just me and my wife (and three dogs and two cats, but we don't cook for them), but a deep freeze could be helpful


----------



## firebelly1

Nigel Pinchley said:


> Again, we agree. I do the budget and all the grocery shopping during the school year (during the summer my wife does the grocery shopping but I still manage the budget). Anyway, it can definitely be a hassle and a huge time suck.
> 
> Here's a few things I've found:
> - over time the budget takes care of itself as you learn which foods at which prices and qualities are appropriate for your family, and so the budget becomes much easier to plan and/or work around
> - meal planning is made a lot easier if instead of planning individual meals you buy a lot of foods that go well together, and then when meal time comes each evening you can mix and match what you want. Again, over time you'll get a feel of how much meat, veggies, etc your family consumes weekly
> - storage can be an issue if you have to buy in bulk due to price or family size. I can't offer much help there, as it's just me and my wife (and three dogs and two cats, but we don't cook for them), but a deep freeze could be helpful


Yes - over the years I have come up with systems that work for me in terms of cost and such, but now that I'm trying to incorporate more vegetables and unfamiliar cuts of meat into my diet for health reasons, there's still a learning curve. And it would be easier if I were just cooking for myself who is okay with just a chicken breast and some steamed spinach for dinner but NO ONE ELSE in my house is going to be happy with that and will expect something else. That's part of the challenge of trying to lose weight and be the family cook at the same time. 

It is harder with kids especially if they are ones that go through phases of only wanting to eat chicken nuggets. Fighting with kids over food plus the fact that dinner time is usually when kids have their biggest melt-downs makes being the family cook all the more stressful. 

Of course, sometimes we women add more stress to ourselves than we need to by accommodating picky eaters and trying to make everyone happy, but, yeah.


----------



## Feeling-Lonely

I just went to local farmers market, yup, expensive but not as expensive as Friday night dinner out with drinks last night. 

Tomatoes and beets taste like the real deal! Love it. I will cut going out a lot more and use that money for local veggies.

What about growing your own?

My h is building me a glass, heated green house. CAN'T wait. 

How many of you are growing your own garden or just greens on a window sill?


----------



## GettingIt_2

Nigel Pinchley said:


> Well, that's exactly my point. Low carb, paleo, atkins, etc, are all fad diets that have exploded in popularity in recent years.
> 
> Here's the bottom line: *The only way to lose weight is to consume less calories than you burn. * The only way to gain weight is to consume more calories than you burn. Period. That's it. In recent decades we may have learned all kinds of new things about the human body, *but that rule remains the same. All of those fad diets you mentioned, all of the newly discovered miracle workouts are just ways to get you to that calorie deficit.*
> 
> The is the yardstick by which I judge any nutritional information. If its basis is not "calories in vs calories burned" then I immediately discard it.
> 
> Also, note that a lot of this stuff is very person-specific. Low-carb works for some people bc they were over-consuming carbs, but if your carb intake was already on point, then not only will you probably not see much difference on that diet, it may not be sustainable for you to restrict carbs for yourself like that. Same with each those other diets. If you were already eating very little processed foods, then paleo probably won't do much for you. It's more finding the combination of little pieces from each diet that work for you, that become that sustainable lifestyle, ykwim?


You might want to do a little more reading on calories--they are not all created equal, and our bodies burn them differently depending on the type of calorie it is. 

The new research is fascinating, I think. For anyone who wants to how best to approach their nutrition (and I agree, what is best differs for individuals), understanding how our bodies work is a must. 

But then again, imma geek . . .


----------



## Dollystanford

I don't agree that eating healthily is more expensive and I live in London which is one of the most expensive cities in the world. It's about educating yourself better and finding sources of cheap and nutritious food. It can be done easily, just takes a little more effort


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

GettingIt said:


> You might want to do a little more reading on calories--they are not all created equal, and our bodies burn them differently depending on the type of calorie it is.
> 
> The new research is fascinating, I think. For anyone who wants to how best to approach their nutrition (and I agree, what is best differs for individuals), understanding how our bodies work is a must.
> 
> But then again, imma geek . . .


I've read much of the same research, and you'll note in one of my other posts in this thread that I did mention that there are caveats to the calories in vs calories out concept. 

Calorie quality is still a somewhat controversial thing, with two camps kind of duking it out whether or not a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. 

However, you hit the nail on the head: we're geeks who enjoy researching this stuff, but at the end of the day that is a ton of information to absorb. And I agree that it's important to know how your body metabolizes food, but on the same accord you can't expect every American, or even one per household, to be what would almost qualify as a nutritionist with a heavy concentration in the human biological processes. 

I figure if you can get most Americans to at least start thinking about calories in vs calories out, then you've got a win, and the discussion on calorie quality is lagniappe if they make it that far.


----------



## Feeling-Lonely

Dollystanford said:


> I don't agree that eating healthily is more expensive and I live in London which is one of the most expensive cities in the world. It's about educating yourself better and finding sources of cheap and nutritious food. It can be done easily, just takes a little more effort


Maybe in London everything is expensive but here in the state that I live in local veggies that taste like real veggies are far more expensive than those plastic looking and tasting veggies in the supermarket. 

I remember visiting my sister in U.K. year ago and I was pleasantly surprised that supermarket bought veggies also tasted good unlike here.


----------



## TiggyBlue

Dollystanford said:


> I don't agree that eating healthily is more expensive and I live in London which is one of the most expensive cities in the world. It's about educating yourself better and finding sources of cheap and nutritious food. It can be done easily, just takes a little more effort


:iagree:
Live in London too (pretty much everything is ridiculously expensive), it really comes down to sniffing out where to buy and good planning.


----------



## Jetranger

bravenewworld said:


> Another thing that bugs me - why are some men so entitled to think that women not only need to
> 
> *A) Be attractive to look at
> b) Be attractive to that particular man's standards*


The bolded bit: That's how physical attraction works, and always has. If you think it's 'entitled' of me to like certain attributes more than others, good luck to you. You'll need it.

You, as a woman, don't have standards?


----------



## NobodySpecial

Dollystanford said:


> I don't agree that eating healthily is more expensive and I live in London which is one of the most expensive cities in the world. It's about educating yourself better and finding sources of cheap and nutritious food. It can be done easily, just takes a little more effort


I am trying to figure out how something that is easy takes more effort? :scratchhead:


----------



## GettingIt_2

Nigel Pinchley said:


> I've read much of the same research, and you'll note in one of my other posts in this thread that I did mention that there are caveats to the calories in vs calories out concept.
> 
> Calorie quality is still a somewhat controversial thing, with two camps kind of duking it out whether or not a calorie is a calorie is a calorie.
> 
> However, you hit the nail on the head: we're geeks who enjoy researching this stuff, but at the end of the day that is a ton of information to absorb. And I agree that it's important to know how your body metabolizes food, but on the same accord you can't expect every American, or even one per household, to be what would almost qualify as a nutritionist with a heavy concentration in the human biological processes.
> 
> I figure if you can get most Americans to at least start thinking about calories in vs calories out, then you've got a win, and the discussion on calorie quality is lagniappe if they make it that far.


I think it's pretty settled science that not calories are created equal, but maybe there is a bias in my sources, which to tend to be fairly harsh judges when it comes to the standard American diet, big/conventional ag, and the food industry in general--including their lobby power. 

Calorie in/calorie out doesn't mean a thing unless you understand that a carb from a mango is not the same as a carb from a packaged "fat free" granola bar, or that the fat from an avocado is not the same as fat from canola oil. Good health doesn't mean that you are an acceptable weight, but prone to sickness due to the quality of calories that you do consume. 

I sort of do expect people to take more responsibility for their health, and that doesn't necessitate "geeking out" on the science. It's time to stop allowing business and government to force feed us crap. (And yes, until consumers can see accurate and full information the label about what's in the food and how it was raised, it's hard to say we have a choice.) It's not going to happen over night--we're used to cheap food and we're used to convenient food and we're addicted to sugar to boot. I'm not sure what it will take until the balance tips and people do start to pay more attention. Maybe we are already headed in that direction, I don't know.


----------



## FrenchFry

Jetranger said:


> The bolded bit: That's how physical attraction works, and always has. If you think it's 'entitled' of me to like certain attributes more than others, good luck to you. You'll need it.
> 
> You, as a woman, don't have standards?


I'm pretty sure what she is saying, which I relate to, is that if you don't find a person attractive move on to someone whom does fit your standards instead of demanding the world (of women) cave to you--because even us women want the agency to tell ourselves we are attractive us just as we are, even if it doesn't make you personally happy.

(I too like being tiny up top and round on the bottom...squats brah :rofl


----------



## heartsbeating

dollystanford said:


> but if the ladies are slim and sylph-like they will get squished by all the men with huge bellies and b*tch tits i see everywhere


lmao!


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Another point I'd like to make is parents who make separate meals for their kids because they let the kids dictate what the family eats.

I hate making a dinner and have my kid pick at it, complain and then look for something else to eat. I have made concessions for her that I shouldn't have. I know another mother who didn't and her daughter will eat (or at least try) anything. MY mother certainly didn't give us a choice!!! 

But when Mom and Dad eat reasonably healthy but then put those pre-made chicken nuggets and fries on the table, they aren't doing the kids any favors. Many of you commented that obese families are busy and get fast food because they need to feed the kids.

It takes about the same amount of time to make a peanut butter on wheat and grab an apple. But we don't. Because we don't plan ahead even tho we know little Johnny has baseball practice every Tuesday and Jane has ballet every Thursday. Everyone needs to find what works for them and come up with a plan for better eating.

I find I operate better when I shop two weeks at a time and make a few stops at the store for perishables in between big trips. I makes a list of well-balanced meals on the right side of a white board on my fridge. When I make a meal, I erase it from the right side and note whatever ingredients I have used up on the left. Before I go shopping I take a photo of the white board and reference that as I shop. I almost never buy prepared food. The exceptions are protein bars (which I could make but it would be more expensive), cereal (which is a whole grain or oatmeal) and bread/crackers/pasta (whole grains) and rice (brown). 

I do not buy twinkies, pop tarts, fruit loops, hamburger helper, instant cheesy rice packets (which are actually half pasta), bakery items, chips, white breads or soda except an occasional special treat (like my kiddo wanted crescent rolls). Nor do I buy any canned fruit with any added sugar or sweeteners and choose canned vegetables that are low sodium. I buy a lot frozen - fish, shrimp, chicken, lean beef and pork and veggies (preferred over canned but have canned as a back up).

Having been raised in the south, it IS carb heavy - I remember going to eat Sunday dinner with a boyfriend and was appalled. Fried chicken (bread coating + fat), biscuits (white flour + fat) mac & cheese (white pasta + fat), green bean casserole (something healthy made UNhealthy wtih a fatty creamy soup, topped with fried onions - FAT), corn (NOT a vegetable - a starchy GRAIN) and a desert (fat+flour+sugar). 

That meal should have been roasted chicken, biscuits (one starch is fine), green beans, a green salad or cucumbers, etc. and maybe a desert but fruit is fine by itself as a desert. His whole family was overweight. It wasn't that there was a fat gene. They LEARNED to prepare, eat, enjoy what wasn't good for them and passed that learned behavior onto the next generation and the next.

I pack a reuseable grocery bag every Monday with everything I need for breakfast and lunch for that week. I check my list of meals and take the meat out of the freezer to thaw or if it is a crock pot meal I toss it in frozen and let it cook all day. Dinner rarely takes more than 30 minutes to prepare unless it has to roast. At night before bed after I clean up the kitchen I make my daughter's lunch for school. 

I've been overweight MOSTLY because of portion control (OK so you CAN blame the food industry on this one) and a sedentary life. Only a small bit of blame can be placed on my food choices in general. But it seems people rarely think about dinner until either they stand clueless at the store wondering what to buy or right before they realize it's meal time.

Yes we can blame industrialization, electronics, genes, fast food, etc. but it all comes down to choices and planning no matter WHERE you live.


----------



## over20

Feeling-Lonely said:


> I just went to local farmers market, yup, expensive but not as expensive as Friday night dinner out with drinks last night.
> 
> Tomatoes and beets taste like the real deal! Love it. I will cut going out a lot more and use that money for local veggies.
> 
> What about growing your own?
> 
> My h is building me a glass, heated green house. CAN'T wait.
> 
> How many of you are growing your own garden or just greens on a window sill?


There is a great thread in Social started by Drerio called "Off the food grid"


----------



## Jetranger

FrenchFry said:


> I'm pretty sure what she is saying, which I relate to, is that if you don't find a person attractive move on to someone whom does fit your standards instead of demanding the world (of women) cave to you--because even us women want the agency to tell ourselves we are attractive us just as we are, even if it doesn't make you personally happy.


Where are all these guys demanding women change their look to suit them? I mean, I know Dr. Luke told Kesha to lose weight because she looked 'like a refrigerator' but I can't think of any other examples... certainly not without also thinking of women who want guys to have six packs and chesticles.

I'd love it if more women looked like what I like, because that would mean I'd have more to choose from, but I know people come in all shapes and sizes and variety is the spice of life!


----------



## FrenchFry

> Stop the industry, stop the shops, stop the people, from working together in this disease, on the abolition of the beautiful female body.


so like here, where OP tells women to stop being so fat because it's destroying the female body--

this is not telling women how they should look? What they should be doing?

Instead of moving on to looking at something else he finds pleasing?

Focusing on the non-fat women that he likes instead? Making a thread about all the pretty women he saw today?

It's right there.


----------



## Theseus

firebelly1 said:


> I'm a city planner and the conference I referred to earlier was focused on the built environment and health. There's a term we have been using for a few years now called a *"food desert"* which is what I described - an area where people can't easily access fresh food. The computer mapping program most of us use (ESRI GIS) has a built-in analysis tool that maps food deserts.


Then I'm afraid you are a few years behind in your information. The whole "food desert" theory was a fad and has widely been discredited since then:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/h...s-and-obesity-challenged-in-studies.html?_r=0

The food desert myth - NY Daily News

The Root: The Myth of the Food Desert : NPR

There are political overtones here too - many people find it distasteful to hold the poor accountable for their own choices. But that's exactly what's happening here. Has anyone here lived in a poor inner-city neighborhood? You won't find an organic market on every streetcorner, they would go out of business. What you will find on every streetcorner is a *liquor store*, which also contributes to obesity, and again is much more expensive than buying vegetables. People have choices; they just don't make good ones. If people started buying vegetables instead of beer and whiskey, the local businesses would cater to that demand instead.



bravenewworld said:


> Also, your grocery bill is WAY more pricey once you stop eating all that super processed crap. Which isn't easy for me as a single person so I can only imagine have a family would feel. I use coupons and shop at Farmers Markets but it's still about 30% higher to buy the good stuff. Produce and high quality protein is NOT cheap!!!! But sadly, McDonald's is. We as a society need to change that.


That's not exactly true. While it's true that veggies at your organic market can be expensive, _you don't need those to be healthy_!!

As a matter of fact, frozen and/or canned vegetables are inexpensive and only very slightly less healthy than fresh or organic. They are also much cheaper and healthier than McDonald's nuggets or bags of Cheetos.


----------



## MrsDraper

See_Listen_Love said:


> Ladies,
> 
> Yesterday I spent the day with my wife in a sauna (nude spa & wellness complex).
> 
> Because its holiday and it was good weather, it was crowded. A couple of hundred of people.
> 
> What struck me like never before, almost all of the ladies were too fat. Not a little, virtually every woman had excess fat, over the whole line of ages. Some a lot, some a little. Most everybody was ugly because of lingering fat layers. It was an unsavory and distateful sight.
> 
> Now I have seen this phenomenon grow in the past decades, but here was the result of it. It is really bad.
> 
> The Lord has made women different than becoming like this. It is not about weight, it is about fat layers. Since I believe in creation of some sort this means mankind has succeeded in deforming the female body to horrific bubbling examples of overconsumption.
> 
> I believe the food industry and consumers together to be responsible for this.
> 
> But You All, my dear ladies, need to stop this. Stop the industry, stop the shops, stop the people, from working together in this disease, on the abolition of the beautiful female body.


YOU are part of the problem. Not the industry, or the shops, the people. YOU are. 

Honestly, I am all about helping people meet healthy weight goals, and as a healthcare provider I do so. However, cellulite is a common thing - lady curves = lady hormones = cellulite. 

If you don't like seeing naked bodies - use common sense and don't go to a naked spa.


----------



## Starstarfish

> As a matter of fact, frozen and/or canned vegetables are inexpensive and only very slightly less healthy than fresh or organic. They are also much cheaper and healthier than McDonald's nuggets or bags of Cheetos.


I'm hungry and have $1 - am I going to get the bag of frozen broccoli for $1 or the McDouble. Hmm. :scratchhead:



> If people started buying vegetables instead of beer and whiskey, the local businesses would cater to that demand instead.


You still need a place to buy vegetables to start buying them.  

Also rich people are obese and drink a lot too. Otherwise - who is buying those $75 of wine locked up at my local grocery store? Just because you go to Whole Foods for your organic Riesling doesn't make your drinking habit somehow better than me and my $1 cans of Pabst Blue Ribbon. When we don't have misogynistic body shaming we need a little class warfare too. Nice. 

How about people start writing their congressmen to stop the corn subsidies that make fast food and soda so cheap compared to real foods which changes the market dynamic on food prices? How about people start protesting the FDA being filled with former Monsanto leadership?

Seriously, stop making this whole thing about the poor or anyone who looks a way you don't like making poor choices and needing to be taught better. Start looking at the people who like the system just the way it is, and ask why that's the case.


----------



## Thundarr

See_Listen_Love said:


> Ladies,
> 
> Yesterday I spent the day with my wife in a sauna (nude spa & wellness complex).
> 
> Because its holiday and it was good weather, it was crowded. A couple of hundred of people.
> 
> What struck me like never before, almost all of the ladies were too fat. Not a little, virtually every woman had excess fat, over the whole line of ages. Some a lot, some a little. Most everybody was ugly because of lingering fat layers. It was an unsavory and distateful sight.
> 
> Now I have seen this phenomenon grow in the past decades, but here was the result of it. It is really bad.
> 
> The Lord has made women different than becoming like this. It is not about weight, it is about fat layers. Since I believe in creation of some sort this means mankind has succeeded in deforming the female body to horrific bubbling examples of overconsumption.
> 
> I believe the food industry and consumers together to be responsible for this.
> 
> But You All, my dear ladies, need to stop this. Stop the industry, stop the shops, stop the people, from working together in this disease, on the abolition of the beautiful female body.


It's a human problem afflicting men and women alike.

Now that we're past gender retorts, I agree completely. Women have fat layers and knee problems and men have huge bellies and heart desease (statistically speaking). The sad part is seeing fat mom and dad walking around with fat son and daughter. I'd feel guilty making such a statement but these kids need someone to re-stock the pantry. Just because we became unhealthy doesn't mean it's okay to let our kids be that way.


----------



## Thundarr

I Notice The Details said:


> Wow, what a timely thread...
> 
> My wife, son, and I were recently back in the midwest to attend a family reunion. My 14 year old son made the comment..."Dad, there are ALOT of overweight people here". Then we had 3 extra hours at the Chicago airport while waiting for our flight to return home....and again, my son mentions to us that he sees lots of overweight people. We started to watch everyone walking by us, and I would honestly estimate that at least 65 percent of the random people we saw were overweight....and, it was BOTH men and women.
> 
> Watching all of these overweight people just reminded us that we need to keep exercising and to continue to watch the calories that we consume everyday. Eating healthy and exercising takes self discipline, but it does pay off.


Your son was questioning why you, him, and the family are not normal . I hope he understands that this is a bad normal.


----------



## Max.HeadRoom

Supercharging Brown Fat to Battle Obesity - Scientific American


----------



## Thundarr

Married but Happy said:


> I don't think it matters whether the OP is fit or fat - the observations are still true and coincide with published health statistics. I think the only issue is whether you agree with his opinion about the reality.





Starstarfish said:


> Uh, I think a fat man posting and complaining about how all the women are too fat to his liking is totally relevant. I want to know if someone is a "horrific bubbling example of over consumption" before they spout off about other people. Because then the stance isn't about health (otherwise why don't they care about themselves) it's quite simply about appearance. And it's also hypocritical.


No it's not relevant to truth or fiction. It's only relevant to strawman arguments where you would attempt to tear down the messenger to deflect from the message.


----------



## FormerSelf

The over abundance of grains, corn, and sugar is what is creating the weight gain. They also comprise the cheapest of meal choices.


----------



## Thundarr

Dollystanford said:


> The weight loss industry is not designed to help people lose weight and maintain it forever. Because there wouldn't be much of an industry.
> 
> People need to get cynical about this - they are just businesses like any other and they don't care about you, they care about their profit margins. They need a never-ending stream of people to sustain their business model


A diet that works over the long haul would be like a battery that lasts forever. No corp wants to eliminate return customers.


----------



## code20

The last supermarket closed in detroit back in 2007. A whole foods and a Meijers have opened (heavily subsidized) in 2014. I think the food desert is a real thing-and it's good that someone is aware, and trying to change it.
For myself, I am trying to cut meat down to 20% of my diet or less. It hard because I just don't get stoked at the idea of eating vegetables at every meal but I know it's the best for my Health! And, I don't much care if anyone is puking in the bushes at the sight of the cellulite on the back of my legs. If you don't like it don't look. I will be happy to walk on those legs all the way to my 100th birthday.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Pamvhv

Excuse me for giving birth to two children and then keeping the diabetes associated with the last one. I run ten miles a day and am still 'fat'.


----------



## Samayouchan

Hmmm, this post seems a bit mean towards women. I mean do you know that it is harder for women to lose weight some times after pregnancy? That weight gain during pregnancy and after birth can be harder for women to lose b/c of hormones, eating to have calories to produce breast milk, ect. (Yes in case you didnt know if breast feeding women dont eat they dont produce as much). This post is so one sided. As a mother of my first child who is 7 months old, its hard to find time to even work out with a baby lol. How do you know if those women had children in the past and just are so busy that they would rather be fat and spend time with their children than to leave them with a sitter and go get fit? Not that I'm defending obesity, just that...men can lose weight easier than women and WOMEN BIRTH CHILDREN LOL!!!!! ^-^


----------



## Starstarfish

Thundarr said:


> in repsonse to See Listen Love....
> 
> 
> I think 'See Listen Love' has a sincere argument. Our bodies are unhealthy when we carry too much fat as indicated by life expectancy, inability to reproduce, heart desease, joint replacement, diabetes, and the list goes on.


If this is medical fact, why is the Lord needed to add extra clout to the argument?


----------



## Dollystanford

NobodySpecial said:


> I am trying to figure out how something that is easy takes more effort? :scratchhead:


A little more mental effort than mindlessly driving up to the McDonalds drive thru window perhaps. But the information and ingredients are right there if anyone cares to look. 

Just because something takes a bit of effort doesn't mean it's hard


----------



## Theseus

Starstarfish said:


> I'm hungry and have $1 - am I going to get the bag of frozen broccoli for $1 or the McDouble. Hmm. :scratchhead:


And that choice is entirely on you. Neither society nor poverty is forcing you to choose the McDouble, you are doing that on your own. 



> _You still need a place to buy vegetables to start buying them. _


I guarantee you grocers simply react to supply and demand, and do a ton of market research on the issue. If people preferred to buy broccoli and carrots instead of beer and potato chips, then liquor stores would have a ton of fresh broccoli and carrots for sale. 

One big anecdote illustrates this perfectly - when healthy lunches were introduced in the Los Angeles Unified School district in 2011, the students rejected them and would walk blocks away to buy their junk food. In other words, the students were willing to pay more money and go out of their way to buy the junk food over the healthy food. 



> _Also rich people are obese and drink a lot too. Otherwise - who is buying those $75 of wine locked up at my local grocery store? Just because you go to Whole Foods for your organic Riesling doesn't make your drinking habit somehow better than me and my $1 cans of Pabst Blue Ribbon. When we don't have misogynistic body shaming we need a little class warfare too. Nice. _


Plenty of wealthy people are obese too, but studies show that poor people have a higher obesity rate. And that is totally messed up; historically it's normally been the other way around.



> _How about people start writing their congressmen to stop the corn subsidies that make fast food and soda so cheap compared to real foods which changes the market dynamic on food prices?_


Go ahead, but that's still not going to change people's eating habits. What people eat is driven by their personal taste as well as cultural influences. 



> _Seriously, stop making this whole thing about the poor or anyone who looks a way you don't like making poor choices and needing to be taught better. Start looking at the people who like the system just the way it is, and ask why that's the case._


Unfortunately, a great many obese people like the system just the way it is.

Seriously, stop trying to make excuses for people being overweight. It's not a government conspiracy; it's entirely on the individual.


----------



## Sunburn

Starstarfish said:


> If this is medical fact, why is the Lord needed to add extra clout to the argument?


I think the OP was saying that according to his religion people were not created fat so being fat is not in keeping with what his god intended.


----------



## over20

Starstarfish said:


> If this is medical fact, why is the Lord needed to add extra clout to the argument?



Are you attacking his faith?


----------



## Starstarfish

The OP is free to have faith in whatever and whomever he wishes, however, he isn't free to declare that other people (or specifically ladies) should do to inherently live up to his expectations stemming from that faith.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Starstarfish said:


> Not sure women as a driving force as consumers can change the mostly male political and business forces spearheaded by Monsanto and Big Pharma to keep is all ignorant of what's in our food and drugged to the gills.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Well, these companies are very sensitive to their cash flow, and anything threatening their sales.

Nowadays they all have 'media advisors', persons and programs monitoring Twitter, Facebook and whatever there is. It can be a real danger for them.

A couple of women on their blogs can start a revolution. A couple of youtube vids can go around the world in seconds.

What about the fact I learned that a journalist on research for his book was undercover in meat factories, where the slaughter of meat for Europe had tree times the time than the meat for the USA?

Such a fact documented on video, combined with some one eating diner direct from his toilet seat instead of a plate, having much less, much less germs on his food that a McDonalds customer had in his hamburger?

It would open up people's eyes. It can't be shocking enough to create a change. And words and video can do that.


----------



## Starstarfish

Also, Thesues, what happened to ...



> A lot of women don't understand that men like a little body fat and even a "muffin top" can be sexy.


http://talkaboutmarriage.com/sex-ma...weeks-excuses-refusing-sex-2.html#post9683682

I'm not seeing any love for a little body fat or "muffin top" on this thread.


----------



## TiggyBlue

See_Listen_Love said:


> Well, these companies are very sensitive to their cash flow, and anything threatening their sales.
> 
> Nowadays they all have 'media advisors', persons and programs monitoring Twitter, Facebook and whatever there is. It can be a real danger for them.
> 
> A couple of women on their blogs can start a revolution. A couple of youtube vids can go around the world in seconds.
> 
> What about the fact I learned that a journalist on research for his book was undercover in meat factories, where the slaughter of meat for Europe had tree times the time than the meat for the USA?
> 
> Such a fact documented on video, combined with some one eating diner direct from his toilet seat instead of a plate, having much less, much less germs on his food that a McDonalds customer had in his hamburger?
> 
> It would open up people's eyes. It can't be shocking enough to create a change. And words and video can do that.


You're talking like no one is doing this yet.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

bravenewworld said:


> Also, I travel all the time. Europe has always had plenty of obese natives - pretty much on par with the US outside of the Deep South.


Eating Habits of Americans vs. French People and Europeans

"
In America, obesity rates reach over 30% of the population. In France, it’s 11%. The 11% obesity rate in France is caused by the fact that French people are starting to eat more like Americans, because obesity rates used to be only 5.5% in 1995.
In America, 33.8% of the adult population is now considered obese. In 1997 it used to be 19.4%. Keep in mind that we’re talking about obesity here, which means a BMI over 30. For example, for me to become obese, at a height of 5 foot 10 inches, I would have to weigh about 210 pounds.
So even though the French, and other Europeans, are going in the wrong direction with their eating habits, they still have a long way to go to reach the horrendous proportions in America."


And more interesting observations.


From my own experience I can only adhere what is said in the article.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

inquizitivemind said:


> I'm not understanding something. How fat are we talking? If like the ones in the picture, than that is obesity and yes, it needs to be stopped. If you are talking about normal amounts of fat for women, which the MODEL industry and actresses have basically called fat when it isn't being fat, then I have a problem with it.


Hanging flaps of fat:









__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

Granting that, yes, Americans are fat, I still don't understand why you're concentrating so hard on American vs European obesity. I mean, I get the general thrust of what you're saying, that if European countries follow American habits, then if Americans start a nutrition revolution, Europeans would follow suit, but in the midst of all that, aren't you excusing all Europeans from any responsibility regarding what they eat? I mean, you're basically saying that Belgian women are becoming obese due indirectly to American women's eating habits, so American women need to fix this by starting a nutrition revolution.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Starstarfish said:


> I'm hungry and have $1 - am I going to get the bag of frozen broccoli for $1 or the McDouble. Hmm. :scratchhead:


Actually, here (realizing prices vary) you can buy a can of generic green beans (.33) and a can of vienna sausages (.63). And since most places charge tax on prepared food but not on groceries, you might be able to buy an individual serving of fruit with the difference. Even convenience stores have bananas and apples for .33 by the coffee here.

It's about education and choices but also *desire*. Kids learn about food choices in school but when they get to the cafeteria they don't choose the healthy options. 

Parents know they are fat (any fat person knows, trust me) and they also know that generally that's an unhealthy thing. But it's hard to change. People don't like change. Tastebuds become trained to certain tastes. Now the family has to ALL change mid-stream and it could be exhausting hearing the complaints from all of the kids and the parent(s) have developed preferences as well. Like smoking, it's hard to quit cold turkey.


----------



## Starstarfish

> Actually, here (realizing prices vary) you can buy a can of generic green beans (.33) and a can of vienna sausages (.63). And since most places charge tax on prepared food but not on groceries, you might be able to buy an individual serving of fruit with the difference. Even convenience stores have bananas and apples for .33 by the coffee here.


I'm not really sure vienna sausages are that much better in the grand scheme to the McDonalds, especially not a can of sausage you can get for 63 cents, I mean - what is probably in that?

Also the proposed difference in that scenario is 4 cents - where can one honestly get a serving of fruit these days for 4 cents?


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Although the OP stirred up some hot feelings about obesity, muffin tops, Americans and women, the point is fat IS unattractive AND unhealthy. There are thin unhealthy people, too, but their health issues are fewer. COPD, sleep apnea, diabetes and heart disease are on the increase. If we care about our children we need to teach them about healthier choices, keep them active on a regular basis and do it by setting the example. I don't want my daughter to suffer from any of those. It isn't about being sensitive about body image - it's about health. 

And I really don't know anyone who things love handles or muffin tops are sexy. But I hear a lot of people who affirm they are beautiful the way they are. And the people who support that are also fat. I don't know any FIT and THIN person who thinks fat people are attractive; only other fat people.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

EnjoliWoman, I partially agree with what you're saying, though for me it isn't an issue of physical beauty as it is an issue of health.

Granting that yes, there are some normally sized people out there who live unhealthy lifestyles, there are far more health risks and concerns linked to obesity versus being a more healthy weight.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Starstarfish said:


> I'm not really sure vienna sausages are that much better in the grand scheme to the McDonalds, especially not a can of sausage you can get for 63 cents, I mean - what is probably in that?
> 
> Also the proposed difference in that scenario is 4 cents - where can one honestly get a serving of fruit these days for 4 cents?


It's not the best but it's better than the white bread bun you're getting with a meat patty that won't decompose. Note that in your instance it does not include a sugary drink or fries - just the burger.

And in my scenario you ARE getting a vegetable, at least. $1 + tax is $1.08 and you don't pay tax on groceries so that leaves .12 and if you can scrouge up .20 in the couch cushions you can get an apple. I buy a 6-pack of unsweetened applesauce for $1.68 which is .28 a serving. A jar with the same volume is even cheaper. So with a little planning, buying more than 1 serving at a time saves money.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Nigel Pinchley said:


> EnjoliWoman, I partially agree with what you're saying, though for me it isn't an issue of physical beauty as it is an issue of health.
> 
> Granting that yes, there are some normally sized people out there who live unhealthy lifestyles, there are far more health risks and concerns linked to obesity versus being a more healthy weight.


Yes, I specifically said they had fewer health issues. Did you miss that? I was focused on the risks obese people face.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

*Re: Re: The Fat Epidemic*



EnjoliWoman said:


> Yes, I specifically said they had fewer health issues. Did you miss that? I was focused on the risks obese people face.


Lol, I'm agreeing with you and was simply adding another voice to the chorus, no need to feel challenged.


----------



## FrenchFry

EnjoliWoman said:


> I don't know any FIT and THIN person who thinks fat people are attractive; only other fat people.


Can I introduce you to the world of feeders?


I'm just never surprised by the world anymore. Thanks internet!


----------



## lifeistooshort

Theseus said:


> And that choice is entirely on you. Neither society nor poverty is forcing you to choose the McDouble, you are doing that on your own.
> 
> 
> 
> I guarantee you grocers simply react to supply and demand, and do a ton of market research on the issue. If people preferred to buy broccoli and carrots instead of beer and potato chips, then liquor stores would have a ton of fresh broccoli and carrots for sale.
> 
> One big anecdote illustrates this perfectly - when healthy lunches were introduced in the Los Angeles Unified School district in 2011, the students rejected them and would walk blocks away to buy their junk food. In other words, the students were willing to pay more money and go out of their way to buy the junk food over the healthy food.
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty of wealthy people are obese too, but studies show that poor people have a higher obesity rate. And that is totally messed up; historically it's normally been the other way around.
> 
> 
> 
> Go ahead, but that's still not going to change people's eating habits. What people eat is driven by their personal taste as well as cultural influences.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, a great many obese people like the system just the way it is.
> 
> Seriously, stop trying to make excuses for people being overweight. It's not a government conspiracy; it's entirely on the individual.


Remember back in the 90's when McDonalds experimented with a lot of salads? Nobody wanted them and they didn't sell. Even fast food isn't in business if ruining peoples health, they're in the business of making money. If people will pay for it they'll provide it. The fact is that most people like eating crap, and who can blame them? Crap is tasty, you just have to make the decision to train your taste buds to appreciate decent food.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife

I know fit and thin people who are attracted to overweight people, several of them actually. I know both big girls and big guys who have thin, fit partners. Some people like having more to grab onto. Also some small/thin/fit people wish they themselves were bigger...not all thin people are happy with their size.

I am a small size but I'm athletic, so I'm definitely thicker than many. But I recall one time this big and tall woman friend of mine telling me that I "had no ass" and that I needed a lot more meat on me, and she really meant it, too, as in, she felt I would be more attractive that way. She knew she was hot, she'd had a lot of great sex in her life, and she felt that the smaller you were, the less fun sex with you would be.


----------



## Jetranger

Faithful Wife said:


> I am a small size but I'm athletic, so I'm definitely thicker than many. But I recall one time this big and tall woman friend of mine telling me that I "had no ass" and that I needed a lot more meat on me, and she really meant it, too, as in, she felt I would be more attractive that way. She knew she was hot, she'd had a lot of great sex in her life, and she felt that the smaller you were, the less fun sex with you would be.


Pah, I say. If you're smaller, you're more... how to put it... 'maneuverable' 

I have a friend who is pretty much average sized, and all of his significant others have been bigger women. Some rather much so (we used to wonder if he was a feeder or something). We figured that was just his preference, and good for him. What's interesting is that the woman he finally settled down and married is also pretty average, a few extra pounds but not large like his previous ladies.


----------



## Thundarr

bravenewworld said:


> Yesterday at the gym a woman 10 years younger and at least 20lbs lighter sized me up on the treadmill and immediately set hers to the same speed mine was at. A half hour later she was gasping, sweating, and jumped off saying "I think I'm going to vomit."
> 
> Meanwhile, I was still running for at least another 15 min. In fact, I upped the incline. :smthumbup:


You're insane. Isn't running bad enough? Actually I used to run on an incline too. Now my knees ache if I run too much so it's a steep incline and fast walk.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Nigel Pinchley said:


> Granting that, yes, Americans are fat, I still don't understand why you're concentrating so hard on American vs European obesity. I mean, I get the general thrust of what you're saying, that if European countries follow American habits, then if Americans start a nutrition revolution, Europeans would follow suit, but in the midst of all that, aren't you excusing all Europeans from any responsibility regarding what they eat? I mean, you're basically saying that Belgian women are becoming obese due indirectly to American women's eating habits, so American women need to fix this by starting a nutrition revolution.


It's a question of power. As you could read in the link about the French eating habits, the big companies are operating international, but still the most influence comes from the US. 

Suppose a Belgian firm would discover a pill that makes you eat only healthy food because you would get sick of sugar, saturated fat, and industrial food in general.

How many minutes you would think would it take before the large American food companies would buy all the stock of the company and replace the board, change the policies, remove in short time the product of the market?

This has happened before with revolutions in car technology and software.

So the US is the key. Because there is the money that influences the world.


----------



## Anonymous07

Faithful Wife said:


> I am a small size but I'm athletic, so I'm definitely thicker than many. But I recall one time this big and tall woman friend of mine telling me that I "had no ass" and that I needed a lot more meat on me, and she really meant it, too, as in, she felt I would be more attractive that way. She knew she was hot, she'd had a lot of great sex in her life, and she felt that the smaller you were, the less fun sex with you would be.


I feel like a lot of larger women(or people in general) say those kinds of comments to try to feel better about their own bodies. 

I've always been very thin and get told to "eat more", "have a burger", etc. from others who are on the heavier side. I like being healthy, with eating well and exercising. I don't think I would feel great if I was carrying around extra pounds. My sex life has also been great, so I don't follow her thought process.


----------



## Theseus

Starstarfish said:


> Also, Thesues, what happened to ...
> http://talkaboutmarriage.com/sex-ma...weeks-excuses-refusing-sex-2.html#post9683682
> 
> I'm not seeing any love for a little body fat or "muffin top" on this thread.



Good point. I personally prefer a fair amount of body fat on women, and many other men do also. The point in that thread was a very different one; many women assume their husbands are no longer attracted to them when they gain some weight, which is often not the case. 

But I'm not attracted to obesity, and even if I was, the danger to health is a more important concern than looks or body image.


----------



## Thundarr

I reread the opening comment after seeing so many angry responses in this thread. I had missed some of the underlying tone the first time I read it. But now I get it. The wording was uncalled for and nasty. 'ugly, unsavory and distateful' to describe women with some or a lot of body fat? Additionally this being at a nude spa means even healthy body fat is exposed.

Now I assume the wording sounds more harse and judgemental than intended but the tact sucks.


----------



## GettingIt_2

I don't think you can reduce the "blame" for the epidemic solely to either people's poor choices or to the influence of the food industry. 

It's complicated, and there is no "quick fix." 

Part of the problem is the fact that nutrient-poor, energy-dense foods (grains and fats) are cheaper per calorie than nutrient-rich, low-energy foods. (You can think of energy as "calories.") Healthy as it is for you, two dollars worth of kale will not fill your child's tummy and make him stop saying, "I'm hungry, mom." A box of pasta and a jar of sauce (also two dollars) will provide him several hunger-satisfying meals. So, where is a mom going to spend her two bucks? On the food that leaves her child's tummy with a pinch at bedtime, or with the food that allows him to fall asleep without feeling hungry? I know what I would do. Calling that a "choice" is a little disingenuous. 

Of course I'm simplifying here--the choice doesn't come down between kale and pasta, but the fact remains that hungry people with limited dollars will first look for ways not to be hungry. 

And for those people in low income areas with poor shopping options who would be willing to spend more on nutrient-rich foods . . . well, they are often out of luck. If what Theseus says is true (that if enough people demand it, the groceries stores will stock it) you're at the mercy of your neighbor's choices. Most poor people can't just pick up and move to areas where people make better food choices.

But I do think its more complex than that. The grocery store mark up on produce and meat and dairy is huge because it's expensive to transport, stock, and maintain in the stores. You have to keep produce and meat at certain temperatures to reduce the spoilage time, and even so, the shelf life is short. Cooling/freezing units in stores (even those that stock frozen produce and meats) cost money to purchase and to run. Maintaining produce and meat departments often require extra employee hours. Grocery stores throw/give away a huge amount of produce every day due to spoilage. It just doesn't pay to carry it when your consumer base is looking for a high return of food energy (calories) for their dollars. 

Grocery stores reap a much more dependable profit and low overhead from foods with a longer shelf life, and those tend to be the cheaper, energy-dense foods which are grain and (unhealthy) fat based. 

Here is a short abstract that explains the "cost of nutrition." 
The cost of US foods as related to their nutritive value

Now, I'm not saying that choice doesn't come into the equation at all--it does. There is almost always a way to eat healthier for people who are determined to do it--including seeking out assistance in the community or from government programs. For single parent homes, or homes where both parents work, time and energy are considerations. I don't see anything wrong with government money being used to help people along these lines. I'd rather my tax dollars go towards making it easier for folks to include the nutrient-rich foods on a regular basis--whether that means subsidizing better grocery stores in so-called food deserts, or teaching people how to better use the community and government resources already at their disposal--than to continue putting corn and corn-fed products on their plates.


----------



## pidge70

Meghan Trainor - All About That Bass - YouTube


----------



## Starstarfish

> Good point. I personally prefer a fair amount of body fat on women, and many other men do also. The point in that thread was a very different one; many women assume their husbands are no longer attracted to them when they gain some weight, which is often not the case.
> 
> But I'm not attracted to obesity, and even if I was, the danger to health is a more important concern than looks or body image.


Except threads like this (and the discussion of such things "IRL" ) are where women get the feeling that after gaining some weight they are "an unsavory and distateful sight" and their husband is likely ashamed and disgusted of them. 

As sometimes even verbal assurance from their spouse doesn't remove lingering doubt that the opinions of others expressed so vehemently about how lazy and just downright nasty heavy women are perhaps secretly how he thinks.


----------



## Jetranger

Anonymous07 said:


> I've always been very thin and get told to "eat more", "have a burger", etc. from others who are on the heavier side. I like being healthy, with eating well and exercising. I don't think I would feel great if I was carrying around extra pounds. My sex life has also been great, so I don't follow her thought process.


As I've been exercising, reducing the amount I eat and losing weight, my co-worker (female) told me "don't lose any more or you'll look like a cadaver".

I was sufficiently surprised by her words that I almost took it as a challenge.

Meanwhile, she has decided her middle-aged frame has gained too much weight from doing whatever she likes, so she's gone all out in the worst way possible: overdoing the gym, starving herself with small amounts of food...


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

Starstarfish said:


> Except threads like this (and the discussion of such things "IRL" ) are where women get the feeling that after gaining some weight they are "an unsavory and distateful sight" and their husband is likely ashamed and disgusted of them.
> 
> As sometimes even verbal assurance from their spouse doesn't remove lingering doubt that the opinions of others expressed so vehemently about how lazy and just downright nasty heavy women are perhaps secretly how he thinks.


I completely get where you're coming from, and I agree that societal expectations about women and how they should look and maintain themselves are pretty F'ed up at times.

That's why I hate in these kinds of threads when people start down that path. It completely diverts all attention from the notion of being healthy _just for the sake of being healthy_ and instead inevitably goes down the mens vs women or fat vs skinny arguments. Unrealistic societal expectations are a terrible thing, but they don't nullify or invalidate the mountain of medical and scientific evidence linked to obesity, nor do they mean that anyone, regardless of gender, who puts on a little weight becomes worthless or somehow less human.

And of course, the fact that some people cannot express their opinions in less confrontational, judgmental, or self-righteous ways (with head-scratching references to God, no less) only hurts the entire discussion.


----------



## Butterfly1014

Nigel. I agree with you anything and anyone can be brought into the argument over obesity in America and the truth is everyone story is different on how they got there. Most people who are obese don't want to be that way, but the choice to become healthier seems so challenging it maybe hard to find help, a program, a healthy diet, a healthy relationship, a therapist, proper food, so mamy factors, even medications can effect your weight. 

I recently lost a family member to diabetes to young he was obese and unhealthy. It instilled in me more than ever the need to eat right, exercise and take care of myself so I can be there for my family. 

As for the first post on this thread it is a little one sided. I am sure there were some overweight men too. To target just women and say that they set the trend is rude. I mean are we trying to set a standard to our future girls to be healthy and fit, or do you want them to be stick figures because my daughter is fit and muscular, volleyball player and by no means will ever be a stick figure. Just saying!


----------



## Jetranger

I used to work on the railway. On my spare shifts, I'd often go and visit signalboxes (towers) to get tips and knowledge from the people on the ground. It was an unspoken tradition to bring some cookies, so before heading off on any visit, I'd stop in the store and buy some.

On one visit, I presented my package of cookies and the signaller told me he didn't want them. He explained, since switching from a lever frame (which required considerable and regular physical exertion) to a fully computerized system with powered switches, he'd put on 30lbs. 

As for me, I worked in the control room, which meant eight hour shifts sitting at a computer and not really being able to leave it for long lest I not be there when a major incident kicked off. Plus, the shifts meant I'd be there for either lunch or dinner... and with limited time away from the desk, limited space to store food and limited cooking facilities, meant I would go and buy a load of microwave meals for the shifts when I'd be working at dinner time.

I gained weight. A lot of my co-workers had already gained a lot. A high stress job with a bad diet meant no exercise and lots of disrupted sleep patterns (important to keeping weight off) and maybe some alcohol binges.

Just being able to sleep in on my days of was so nice, going out to exercise almost didn't enter my mind.

(this is just one possible explanation as to why people are getting bigger)


----------



## unbelievable

I always have a few overweight soldiers. Over the past 30 years I noticed something curious about them all. They tend to eat more than they should. They tend to eat too much of the wrong things. Also, they all were neglectful about their physical exercise. I don't think it's a mystery. Consume more calories than you burn you're going to put on weight. "Epidemic" makes it sound as if people catch obesity like they catch the flu. Seems to me it has more to do with choices. If I eat the wrong things I put on weight. If I don't exercise regularly, my run times get slower. I'm in charge of what goes into my mouth.


----------



## staarz21

My entire family is obese. Like...huge. The exceptions are my brother and myself. We both work out. We lift weights 4 days a week and cardio the other 3 days. He eats more than I do, but...he's a dude...and a cop...so...Yeah. We live in different states, but we keep up with our workouts together via email/text.

My cousin (5 years younger) was obese. She never understood why and went to doctors trying to find a reason. She really didn't understand. 

I stayed with them one week while visiting on vacation. She was eating fast food every single day. We went out to eat one night and she ate a peach cobbler out of a huge gauntlet. Her boyfriend had one as well. This peach cobbler was enough to feed probably 4 people. That was just the appetizer. That's right! They had dessert for the appetizer! And she really didn't understand why she was so big. She wanted a doctor to tell her why she was big. She wanted to know there was something wrong with her instead of taking personal responsibility. 

Last year, she had gastric bypass. She's lost a lot of weight. I am happy for her. However, she was still talking about eating hamburgers, hot dogs, fried chicken, etc. She can only eat very little, but that is what she chooses to eat. So, she basically wasted that money on bypass.

Point is, people aren't taking responsibility for what they eat. It is easier to call pizza hut or run over to taco bell. And they aren't educated properly. 

Media says everywhere that you can get fit and toned in just 12 weeks....6 weeks....whatever and they throw in a nice pic of a tight and fit 19 year old. That's soooooo not true unless you are already thin and you work your ever loving @ss off. 

Realistically, you can be looking at a year or more (depending on starting weight and body fat) IF you are consistent with diet and exercise. That means not skipping workouts (unless you are ill or have an emergency) and don't cheat on your food.

People say "cheat meals' or "cheat days". Those can be so bad if you don't know what you're doing. People should have cheat snacks once or twice a week in small, tiny portions so not to mess up all of the hard work. Once you're at your goal weight/how you want to look...cheat a little more...but not enough to let yourself fall back into the gutter. 

There's so much confusing information out there, it's no wonder people say screw it and give up.


----------



## tennisstar

I work out constantly, but I have a hard time losing weight (and I definitely need to lose some). I find that a high stress job and less time to cook etc has made me put on weight. It isn't anyone else's fault than mine, but some people assume that overweight people are lazy and never work out. I work out several hours a week - doesn't really make a difference, unfortunately. 

Oh, and I don't eat fast food. So that's not it either.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Dollystanford

That's because you can't out-exercise a bad diet. You're not eating at a calorie deficit and are likely eating the wrong things at the wrong times. Sometimes it is that simple. Doesn't have to be fast food at all. You can eat too many calories on a clean diet too


----------



## TiggyBlue

Dollystanford said:


> That's because you can't out-exercise a bad diet. You're not eating at a calorie deficit and are likely eating the wrong things at the wrong times. Sometimes it is that simple. Doesn't have to be fast food at all. You can eat too many calories on a clean diet too


Plus food sensitivities.


----------



## tennisstar

Dollystanford said:


> That's because you can't out-exercise a bad diet. You're not eating at a calorie deficit and are likely eating the wrong things at the wrong times. Sometimes it is that simple. Doesn't have to be fast food at all. You can eat too many calories on a clean diet too


I'm sure you are correct. I try to get on track and then I get stressed and busy, and it falls apart. Gotta keep my job 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bravenewworld

Dollystanford said:


> I don't agree that eating healthily is more expensive and I live in London which is one of the most expensive cities in the world. It's about educating yourself better and finding sources of cheap and nutritious food. It can be done easily, just takes a little more effort


Here in the US we don't have the same regulations the European Union imposes on GMO foods, which I believe are extremely stringent. You also ban most if not all of the hormones regularly given to the "cheap meat" here. I don't think we can even legally import our meat to you, although that might have changed.

You will pay A LOT more here for organic, non-gmo, etc. than the "regular" produce. I'm not arguing that there are plenty of cheap sources for nutrition, but stateside fresh produce and good quality lean protein are a lot more expensive than their counterparts. 

Just because I don't make a lot of money doesn't mean I should have to eat lentils, canned tuna, or hormone ridden chicken all the time. I think a lot of people stateside are becoming very frustrated with this! There was recently a HUGE protest against Monsanto which of course the media refused to cover.


----------



## bravenewworld

FrenchFry said:


> I'm pretty sure what she is saying, which I relate to, is that if you don't find a person attractive move on to someone whom does fit your standards instead of demanding the world (of women) cave to you--because even us women want the agency to tell ourselves we are attractive us just as we are, even if it doesn't make you personally happy.
> 
> (I too like being tiny up top and round on the bottom...squats brah :rofl


----------



## bravenewworld

See_Listen_Love said:


> Eating Habits of Americans vs. French People and Europeans
> 
> "
> In America, obesity rates reach over 30% of the population. In France, it’s 11%. The 11% obesity rate in France is caused by the fact that French people are starting to eat more like Americans, because obesity rates used to be only 5.5% in 1995.
> In America, 33.8% of the adult population is now considered obese. In 1997 it used to be 19.4%. Keep in mind that we’re talking about obesity here, which means a BMI over 30. For example, for me to become obese, at a height of 5 foot 10 inches, I would have to weigh about 210 pounds.
> So even though the French, and other Europeans, are going in the wrong direction with their eating habits, they still have a long way to go to reach the horrendous proportions in America."
> 
> 
> And more interesting observations.
> 
> 
> From my own experience I can only adhere what is said in the article.


You do realize though that some (if not many) of Europe's entire countries fit into one state here in the US? And that each state has it's own culture as well? 

In my experience, people in Belgium and/or France are not in better shape than people in Washington, California, New York, or Minnesota. I couldn't even find a proper gym outside of a hotel in Paris a few years ago. Last time I was in Belgium was about five years ago and I saw plenty of native chubbers. Come on, you guys are famous for beer and chocolate! 

However, I will concede that if we put many European countries against the Deep South and some Midwest states you would be more fit. I realize the cool marketing thing is to say "Europeans are in soooo much better shape than the US" but that's simply not true. Food and fitness culture really varies by state out here. 

That said, my friend from Louisiana (one of the fattest states) still kicks my ass when we go running. So overall just proves it's really an individual thing.


----------



## lifeistooshort

bravenewworld said:


> You do realize though that some (if not many) of Europe's entire countries fit into one state here in the US? And that each state has it's own culture as well?
> 
> In my experience, people in Belgium and/or France are not in better shape than people in Washington, California, New York, or Minnesota. I couldn't even find a proper gym outside of a hotel in Paris a few years ago. Last time I was in Belgium was about five years ago and I saw plenty of native chubbers. Come on, you guys are famous for beer and chocolate!
> 
> However, I will concede that if we put many European countries against the Deep South and some Midwest states you would be more fit. I realize the cool marketing thing is to say "Europeans are in soooo much better shape than the US" but that's simply not true. Food and fitness culture really varies by state out here.
> 
> That said, my friend from Louisiana (one of the fattest states) still kicks my ass when we go running. So overall just proves it's really an individual thing.



That's a really interesting point that I hadn't considered. The US is a huge country that varies so much by region, what's going on in Mississippi is radically different then what goes on in Colorado. And you're right about individuals, I live in Florida which is one of the fatter states. I'm also very active in the local running community, which is quite large in my city, and obesity is not common.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Thundarr said:


> I reread the opening comment after seeing so many angry responses in this thread. I had missed some of the underlying tone the first time I read it. But now I get it. The wording was uncalled for and nasty. 'ugly, unsavory and distateful' to describe women with some or a lot of body fat? Additionally this being at a nude spa means even healthy body fat is exposed.
> 
> Now I assume the wording sounds more harse and judgemental than intended but the tact sucks.


Maybe I am a little autistic. I reread it several times. For me it is an observation, a true verbalisation of an occurrence of facts.

It can be my truth, a relative judgement etc. etc. True. But my observation was that. And it is a threshold passed by reality. 

So sorry for the offense, but it is my honest truth.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Maybe you all forget how it went in the tobacco industry. They added ingredients just for the purpose of getting people addicted to smoking. So they do the same with the industrial food. Keep you addicted. That is what this is about, and the evidence is all around you.

I get from the comments this is already a lost fight.

:slap:


----------



## TiggyBlue

See_Listen_Love said:


> *Maybe you all forget how it went in the tobacco industry. They added ingredients just for the purpose of getting people addicted to smoking. So they do the same with the industrial food. Keep you addicted. That is what this is about, and the evidence is all around you.*
> 
> I get from the comments this is already a lost fight.
> 
> :slap:


I 100% agree with you about this, but with your opening post was never going to be responded with a general talk about health and food as you hardly addressed the food industry in your opening post.

To be honest even if you did make a post about what's exactly in food ect you would have been met with some hostility.


----------



## Dollystanford

Some people are a bit delusional about themselves too though. I mean I think I could easily lose a stone without really missing it but there are people a couple of inches shorter than my 5ft 4 inches and a good 40 or 50lb heavier who seem to think they are alright or 'need to lose a few pounds'. 

I think it often creeps up on people and they still think of themselves as that thin 20 year old they used to be and can't understand why they aren't zipping up that skirt any more (I know because I've been there)


----------



## EnjoliWoman

tennisstar said:


> I work out constantly, but I have a hard time losing weight (and I definitely need to lose some). I find that a high stress job and less time to cook etc has made me put on weight. It isn't anyone else's fault than mine, but some people assume that overweight people are lazy and never work out. I work out several hours a week - doesn't really make a difference, unfortunately.
> 
> Oh, and I don't eat fast food. So that's not it either.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Although I lost weight tracking my caloric intake via My Fitness Pal, it REALLY started dropping when I started wearing the Body Media armband. I always wondered how accurate the estimated calorie burn on the machines at the gym were or when you put 30 minutes of mowing or house work... probably is, those figures people often assume are on top of their basic caloric needs - it's not - that number includes the BMR. I was looking for a heart rate monitor when I found it - it's 95% accurate estimating the calories you burn and the more you wear it, the more accurate it is. I wear it 24/7 except when in the shower or once a week fork 3-4 hours when charging it.

Since wearing it and linking it to My Fitness Pal, my weight loss doubled that month. I have learned that I only use about 2000 calories in an average day without exercise. So to loose one pound a week I have to consume 1500. Of course exercise adds some additional calories one can expend but 30 of strength and 30 of cardio really only burns about 300 calories.

That cobbler (appetizer?!?!) was probably a whole day's worth of calories for your cousin and then she ate a meal that was likely nearly a whole day's worth. And ate 2 more meals that day. Yet wonders why she couldn't loose weight. SMH

And then there's the thought that after you work out your body burns more calories afterward. Well, I've been tracking that and it IS true - but not to the extent one thinks. My average calorie burn while at rest (sitting/sleeping/desk job) is 1.04/minute. Up from 1.02/minute. So yes, I burn more now that I'm working out but it's not enough to allow me to eat a burger for lunch every day.

Information is KEY. It's a lot easier to make good choices when using these tools.

ETA - and those 300 calories on the elliptical - I burn those in 30 minutes at an average speed of 5mph. At 6mph I only burn 320. (at 4mph 293) So one would think running burns a LOT more calories than a fast walk - not so much. I was amazed. (And a little disappointed! LOL)


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

My wife and I both use FitBits, which are similar devices. Even given that such devices are not 100% accurate, they can be truly eye opening.

That's why I preach the "calories in vs calories out", even though it is absolutely correct that it's not always so simple. I stick to "calories in vs calories out" bc most people's (or at least American's) perception of exactly how many calories they consume versus how many calories they burn are so outlandishly unrealistic that they don't even have a simple baseline of knowledge from which to work. And without that baseline, most people will *never* reach any kind of fitness goals.

Once you get Americans on board with truly understanding calories consumption and expenditure, then is when I think you start educating them on the various metabolic pathways that specific kinds of calories can take, and why in some calories one gram of carb or protein or fat is better than the other. 

Although, being honest, I think it's a commentary on our society that most Americans don't even have that basic understanding of nutrition (calorie input vs expenditure).


----------



## Faithful Wife

Anonymous07 said:


> I feel like a lot of larger women(or people in general) say those kinds of comments to try to feel better about their own bodies.
> 
> I've always been very thin and get told to "eat more", "have a burger", etc. from others who are on the heavier side. I like being healthy, with eating well and exercising. I don't think I would feel great if I was carrying around extra pounds. My sex life has also been great, so I don't follow her thought process.


I feel like smaller women just can't always understand how a big woman can feel sexy, like you wouldn't feel sexy big yourself, so you can't imagine that she does.

Trust me, this woman felt sexy as hell and wasn't just trying to make herself feel better for not being thin. I think it would be quite arrogant for anyone to try to take away another person's self-esteem by the type of projection you are talking about. 

And I have a great sex life too, but that doesn't mean I'm going to assume she hasn't.


----------



## samyeagar

In the most general sense, people try and find equilibrium in their relationships with other people. They try and get and keep things on the same level, and there are two ways of doing that...build yourself up, or tear the other down. Whether it is fat shaming, thin shaming, or any kind of shaming really, it is trying to make themselves feel better, to equalize things by tearing the other person down...not good.

Myself, I have experienced both fat and thin shaming to one degree or another. The funny thing is, the fat shaming came from my ex wife when at 5'7", the heaviest I have ever been in my life is 160 lbs...when I was a competitive swimmer and gymnast, so the weight was muscle. Looking back now, not sure where the fat was, but it's really easy to take to heart the criticisms of your spouse.

My current wife on the other hand, the very first thing she said when we hugged for the first time was she had no idea I was so skinny and we'd have to work on fattening me up. I am still 5'7" and right about 145lbs. I'm in decent shape, but she still jokes from time to time that we need to wrap everything I eat in bacon, but then she will tell me how perfect of a body I have, then be absolutely glued to guys on tv with more muscular bulk than I have, then tell me she doesn't want me to bulk up...talk about mixed messages...


----------



## Deejo

SLL, if you wanted to discuss the food industry and the foods primarily found in the S.A.D diet, (Standard American Diet), you picked a hell of a way to open the conversation.

I don't mince words on this subject. I am currently overweight. At 5'10", I weigh about 180 pounds. 

I don't know about Belgium, but I have always been utterly stunned at the visual difference between virtually any European city I have traveled in, and any standard U.S. city. Only exception that comes to mind in European terms was when I was in the U.K. 

The U.S. is fat, morbidly so. Don't feel remotely compelled to soft peddle that statement. Without any reasonable doubt, our lifestyles and primarily our diet is to blame. People do not think about what they put into their mouths.

As long as bad, cheap, food is ABUNDANTLY available, most people are going to take the path of least resistance.


----------



## Anonymous07

Dollystanford said:


> That's because you can't out-exercise a bad diet. You're not eating at a calorie deficit and are likely eating the wrong things at the wrong times. Sometimes it is that simple. Doesn't have to be fast food at all. You can eat too many calories on a clean diet too


:iagree:

I have a co-worker who is morbidly obese and he doesn't understand why he can't lose weight. He eats like crap. He'll go a few days eating well and then have a "cheat day", which undoes all of his good eating from before(pigs out on donuts, shakes, cookies, candy bars, fast food, etc.). He goes to the gym often, but it's not going to take away his horrible diet. Then he'll try all of these different 'fad' diets and wonders why they don't work. Well, diets in general don't work. Once the diet is stopped, you gain the weight right back. If someone wants to lose weight and keep it off, they have to change their lifestyle. It doesn't have to be huge changes, but everything has to be in moderation. 

Even my parents have been struggling to lose weight and I know exactly why they aren't losing the weight. My parents overeat. I see them do it all the time, eating because the food looks good/tastes good and not because they are actually hungry. It is a really bad habit.


----------



## Anonymous07

Faithful Wife said:


> I feel like smaller women just can't always understand how a big woman can feel sexy, like you wouldn't feel sexy big yourself, so you can't imagine that she does.
> 
> Trust me, this woman felt sexy as hell and wasn't just trying to make herself feel better for not being thin. I think it would be quite arrogant for anyone to try to take away another person's self-esteem by the type of projection you are talking about.
> 
> And I have a great sex life too, but that doesn't mean I'm going to assume she hasn't.


I'm not saying her sex life is bad. I'm saying her "confidence" of feeling really sexy as a larger women might be fake. I've seen that often, both with women I know and others. If you ever watched that show on TLC a while back called "Big Sexy"(I think?), you could see these overweight women who were supposedly very confident in their bodies, but as the show goes on you see how insecure they truly are with how they look. Their "confidence" is really just a show to hide how they really feel.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Anonymous07 said:


> :iagree:
> 
> I have a co-worker who is morbidly obese and he doesn't understand why he can't lose weight. He eats like crap.


Ditto. There is a lady here who always has an excuse. Too busy/too much going on so she can't think about that now... She eats poptarts for breakfast (BTW one pouch is TWO servings) and Wendy's for lunch like clockwork. No idea what she has for dinner. If I had to hazard a guess she's about 5'4" and around 275. She always says she just can never loose weight. I can see why. I'm thinking if she has to go to the grocery store anyway to feed her family, how about get things for breakfast and lunch that are healthier? 

Even low sugar instant oatmeal is better than a pop tart. Or a piece of fruit and an individual cottage cheese, etc. With a little planning, she would have two meals already much healthier. It does require some planning AND knowing what a serving is, how many calories are in things and how many calories we expend on average.


----------



## bravenewworld

This thread made me think back to when I was in college. I worked at a popular restaurant and there was a club across the street that had a BBW night called "Butterfly Club." 

Of course, all my guy friends made fun of this club mercilessly. The smallest woman in there was probably a size 14. Interestingly enough, a lot of hot and fit guys went there. At the time I was a size 2 and actually a bit jealous, LOL!

One night we ran out of change and the manager asked me to go across the street and see if the nightclub would break some large bills. When I get over there, of course it's BBW night and who do I see? My "too cool" guy friends bouncing between big girls like bumper cars! I waved and it was like the record screeched to a stop. Total deer in headlights look. 

Anyway, point of the story is big people can be and are attractive! I'm not saying it's attractive to everyone though. Personally I won't date a guy more than 40lb overweight. There is actually this awesome guy I would love to get to know better BUT he is 100lb overweight. I know he likes me - wish there was a tactful way to say I would date him if he lost some chub.


----------



## bravenewworld

Anonymous07 said:


> I'm not saying her sex life is bad. I'm saying her "confidence" of feeling really sexy as a larger women might be fake. I've seen that often, both with women I know and others. If you ever watched that show on TLC a while back called "Big Sexy"(I think?), you could see these overweight women who were supposedly very confident in their bodies, but as the show goes on you see how insecure they truly are with how they look. Their "confidence" is really just a show to hide how they really feel.


I dunno, I am more confident and feel sexier at size 8 than I ever did at a size 2. For me it's just a more flattering and womanly look for my body shape. Some people look great at a smaller size but I felt I looked emaciated and ill-proportioned. 

However, at size 14 I looked like a beach-ball. One of my friends who is a 14, meanwhile, looks like a bombshell. I guess it's all in how you are built.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Anonymous07 said:


> I'm not saying her sex life is bad. I'm saying her "confidence" of feeling really sexy as a larger women might be fake. I've seen that often, both with women I know and others. If you ever watched that show on TLC a while back called "Big Sexy"(I think?), you could see these overweight women who were supposedly very confident in their bodies, but as the show goes on you see how insecure they truly are with how they look. Their "confidence" is really just a show to hide how they really feel.


And I'm saying you must be projecting, because you didn't know the woman I'm referring to and what you're saying doesn't describe her at all...and again I'll say, perhaps you just can't imagine feeling sexy yourself if you were bigger, so in your mind, you can't imagine my big sexy friend having honest self-confidence and good self-esteem. But that's really just a way to try to say that YOU get to decide if someone else is sexy or not, they cannot decide for themselves. Which is nonsense...people get to feel sexy if they want to.


----------



## Anonymous07

Faithful Wife said:


> And I'm saying you must be projecting, because you didn't know the woman I'm referring to and what you're saying doesn't describe her at all...and again I'll say, perhaps you just can't imagine feeling sexy yourself if you were bigger, so in your mind, you can't imagine my big sexy friend having honest self-confidence and good self-esteem. But that's really just a way to try to say that YOU get to decide if someone else is sexy or not, they cannot decide for themselves. Which is nonsense...people get to feel sexy if they want to.


If she truly feels sexy, then good for her. 

For me, sexy is about being healthy. If someone is carrying around extra weight, they are putting more stress on their heart and joints, increasing their risks for high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, sleep apnea, gall stones, certain cancers, and so on. That isn't very sexy to me.


----------



## Deejo

Sexy or not, obese isn't HEALTHY. And it's expensive, for everyone. Everyone except the people peddling soda, chips, and fast food.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Anonymous07 said:


> If she truly feels sexy, then good for her.
> 
> For me, sexy is about being healthy. If someone is carrying around extra weight, they are putting more stress on their heart and joints, increasing their risks for high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, sleep apnea, gall stones, certain cancers, and so on. That isn't very sexy to me.


Thank you for just admitting it, yes it isn't sexy to you, so you feel you have the right to dictate to others what should be sexy to them.


----------



## Deejo

Your average medium 'grande' Starbucks frozen coffee drink has as much, if not more calories and fat than a McDonalds cheeseburger.

Or ... you could have 3 medium bananas, or 4 apples and a bottle of water clocking in at 315 calories and just over a gram of fat.

Industry spends billions of dollars to make sure we DON'T think that way or make that comparison before going through the drive through or going to stand in line at a counter.

Love to eat?

Eat healthy and you get to eat more, more often.


----------



## Ikaika

What is the problem?

Although, I am somewhat skeptical of this report altogether. I do think consumption over the last two decades has changed. If not the total caloric intake it is the type of caloric intake, simple sugars vs more complexity in our diet. But, this study did not appear to factor in that metric.


----------



## Thundarr

Deejo said:


> Sexy or not, obese isn't HEALTHY. And it's expensive, for everyone. Everyone except the people peddling soda, chips, and fast food.


A lot of women can put on weight and look sexy unless they put on too much weight. I read a study that says women who carry their additional weight in their butt and legs are able to carry more weight and still be healthy. That makes sense to me because a little weight on those places can look pretty good.

It's usually easy to tell when someone has more immediately dangerous weight though. I know when I was heavier, my face was round, my chin wasn't very square, and my feet looked like Fred Flintstone's . At least it's easy to notice when a person you've seen slimmer crosses a particular threshold for their body.


----------



## Thundarr

drerio said:


> What is the problem?
> 
> Although, I am somewhat skeptical of this report altogether. I do think consumption over the last two decades has changed. If not the total caloric intake it is the type of caloric intake, simple sugars vs more complexity in our diet. But, this study did not appear to factor in that metric.


I wouldn't be surprised if we don't eat more calories than we used to. But I eat more healthy stuff when I'm exercising and I eat terrible when I'm not. These studies always separate exercise and eating habits but IMO they're more closely connected. I especially go for water after workouts instead of diet pepsi (my poison of choice). Also when I reduce the salt, sugar, and grease, for a little while (they don't taste all that great when I'm getting cardio), a big cheese burger doesn't taste as good anymore. It only takes a week or two of slight modification to change how good and bad stuff tastes to us. That's great when we're eating healthy but it sucks when we get used to unhealthy stuff. Seems like that's all that tastes good when it's what we're used to eating.


----------



## heartsbeating

There's already many great points covered here that I agree with: affordability and access to foods within certain areas, that being thin doesn't necessarily equate to healthier / fitter, that obesity and the habits leading to it are a problem across both genders. Education of nutrition, town planning and culture of an area contribute. 

The central business districts of cities we've lived see majority of people in good shape. Cycling to and from work, jogging during lunch, and the gyms and yoga studios packed after work (granted as well as the cafes and bars). Healthy food options and portion sizes available. Whether the health is actually better may be another story. Looking 'good' is relative but it seems that most wearing suits are in fairly fit shape. Maybe there's a city competitiveness that's involved on some level? Looking 'good' sometimes plays a part in that. And / or perhaps inspire one another.

I'm like Thundarr. My healthier habits inspire other healthier habits. The friends around me are into more healthy living and exercise... as well as drinking wine lol. In balance everything is fine. I just know myself - and can be both a good and bad influence at times. So if stressed, I know I'll appreciate the gym and lifting weights more and the decisions that follow. We live in an area where fresh fish, quality meats and such from local farmers is available. Eating clean, in the way I've been adjusting to hasn't cost us more as the food seems to be used more efficiently and I pack my meals for work. I feel better within myself eating this way. My perception of what I aspire to and find attractive within my own gender has recently shifted to women who are strong, lean, and muscular.

However the shift to obesity overall, is still occurring here too.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## heartsbeating

From NY Times article, dated 2 June 2014: No Nation Has Lowered Obesity Rate in 33 Years

'Nearly 30 percent of the world’s population is overweight or obese, and not one country has reduced its obesity rate in 33 years, according to a new study combining three decades of data from 188 countries, published in The Lancet last month.

Although 13 percent of the world’s obese people live in the United States, the world’s richest country, 62 percent live in poor or middle-income countries. Countries with the highest rates included Tonga, Samoa and Kiribati in the South Pacific and Kuwait, Libya and Qatar in the Middle East.'
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

Just to touch on something I saw in this thread earlier, at my local supermarket, which sources all of its meat from as local sources as possible, organic meats (ie no hormones, chemical treatments, farm-raised, etc) are anywhere from 20-40% per pound more expensive than their non-organic counterparts.

Of course, that's just my local area (south Louisiana), and it's only true for meats. Locally produced vegetables and fresh fruit tend to be much cheaper.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

in terms of the fat epidemic two modern factors jump out at me:

1. all the time people, kids especially, spend on the internet - social media, "gaming" etc. I think these activities have displaced what used to be more active pastimes. especially for kids, who I think used to get out more, play pickup football/bball etc.

2. we've apparently been given, by the experts, precisely the wrong nutritional guidance for the past 20-30 years. this correlates fairly closely with collective weight gain (in USn at least) pasta and potatoes used to be very healthy because they were "fat free" - now apparently it is sugar and starch (carbs) that is THE culprit for weight gain and fat will apparently NOT make one fat, at all. cheese, butter, heavy cream, fatty meats - pretty much all OK. all healthy. many of the formerly bad foods now good, while many of the formerly good foods now bad.....


----------



## bobbieb65

Being overweight myself I can tell you it's not just about food. It's also about physical health, surgeries and medications. 

First there a physical aliments that can limit ones ability to get enough exercise...I suffer from scoliosis and I have days where it hurts just getting out of bed in the morning but I push through. I still manage to walk the dogs daily, weather depending. Many people suffer from things you can not see but it does hinder their ability to meet necessary exercise requirements. 

Second, multiple surgeries on my lower abdominal area has forever changed my ability to have a flat stomach. The same surgery has also given me a new lease on life, in a way. I feel better but it's been at a cost...early menopause. 

Lastly, and probably the most important, medication. I don't know about other countries, but here in the US they had out meds like candy, and we pay a high cost. Some RXs are necessary and when we take them the side effects are worse then the disorder we suffer from. I'll use myself for example, again. I have HBP, always have. Even in my late teens/early 20's and I was thin and exercised everyday...hereditary in my case. I had been given 3 medications to get it under control...one gave me insomnia, one constipation, and the third one zaps may energy making me feel like I got hit by a semi-truck. I couldn't live without sleep and constipation...well I'll take a shorter life span as long as it's regular! I ditched those two and kept the third and it works well enough...not great numbers but they are for me.

So what I'm getting at is don't judge a book by it's cover because you don't know the story it could tell. Judging people based on appearance is wrong. In fact, I'd rather be chubby and unappealing to people I don't know or care about in the slightest verses being fit and hot and having men stare or make unwanted remarks to me. Having been at both ends of this spectrum I prefer the more padded side of the rainbow thank you.


----------



## firebelly1

Theseus said:


> Then I'm afraid you are a few years behind in your information. The whole "food desert" theory was a fad and has widely been discredited since then:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/h...s-and-obesity-challenged-in-studies.html?_r=0
> 
> The food desert myth - NY Daily News
> 
> The Root: The Myth of the Food Desert : NPR
> 
> 
> There are political overtones here too - many people find it distasteful to hold the poor accountable for their own choices. But that's exactly what's happening here. Has anyone here lived in a poor inner-city neighborhood? You won't find an organic market on every streetcorner, they would go out of business. What you will find on every streetcorner is a *liquor store*, which also contributes to obesity, and again is much more expensive than buying vegetables. People have choices; they just don't make good ones. If people started buying vegetables instead of beer and whiskey, the local businesses would cater to that demand instead.


I'm going to disagree with you on this in terms of food deserts being a myth. You can create a map in almost any metropolitan area today (I see them all the time at work) that shows that generally, fast food restaurants and convenience stores are more accessible in poor neighborhoods than grocery stores. The effect this may have on obesity rates may be argued, but that doesn't make the existence of food deserts a myth. Since the poor rely more heavily on public transportation, proximity does make more of a difference in terms of accessibility than it does to wealthier people. 

Then there's the satiety factor. You've got $1. You can buy two cans of green beans or two McDonald's cheeseburgers. The cheeseburgers are going to make you feel satisfied for longer than the green beans will. So, yes, people have choices, but the less money you have, the more you have to make it stretch. The cheeseburgers will get you to the next meal. The green beans won't. 

Not sure what you mean by making the poor accountable in this scenario. Healthy food is more expensive and harder for them to get to. Doesn't mean they couldn't make a little more effort but understandable that they don't. Frankly, I think they have more of an excuse than us middle-class folks who can afford healthy food and can get to it easier but choose not to eat it for other reasons.


----------



## Faeleaf

I would feel so much better if this post said, _"Ladies, this is a health epidemic. You are so much more at risk for terrible diseases and a shortened lifespan when you are overweight. We, as your husbands, don't want to even contemplate a life without you because you died a premature death that could have been avoided!"_

Since, instead, it kind of sounded like, _"Ladies, you are not as beautiful as you could be, and that is a tragedy because I like looking at beautiful female bodies! You must stop being so fat because God created you to be eye candy for me!" _

...I find myself struggling to write something nice. That may not be at all what you intended to write, but I'm just letting you know that it can come across that way. I am sorry. This is more blunt than I usually am, but I have a sister that really struggles with weight and self-esteem, and this strikes a nerve for me.


----------



## firebelly1

heartsbeating said:


> There's already many great points covered here that I agree with: affordability and access to foods within certain areas, that being thin doesn't necessarily equate to healthier / fitter, that obesity and the habits leading to it are a problem across both genders. Education of nutrition, town planning and culture of an area contribute.
> 
> The central business districts of cities we've lived see majority of people in good shape. Cycling to and from work, jogging during lunch, and the gyms and yoga studios packed after work (granted as well as the cafes and bars). Healthy food options and portion sizes available. Whether the health is actually better may be another story. Looking 'good' is relative but it seems that most wearing suits are in fairly fit shape. Maybe there's a city competitiveness that's involved on some level? Looking 'good' sometimes plays a part in that. And / or perhaps inspire one another.
> 
> I'm like Thundarr. My healthier habits inspire other healthier habits. The friends around me are into more healthy living and exercise... as well as drinking wine lol. In balance everything is fine. I just know myself - and can be both a good and bad influence at times. So if stressed, I know I'll appreciate the gym and lifting weights more and the decisions that follow. We live in an area where fresh fish, quality meats and such from local farmers is available. Eating clean, in the way I've been adjusting to hasn't cost us more as the food seems to be used more efficiently and I pack my meals for work. I feel better within myself eating this way. My perception of what I aspire to and find attractive within my own gender has recently shifted to women who are strong, lean, and muscular.
> 
> However the shift to obesity overall, is still occurring here too.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


There are statistics to suggest that people who live in cities are fitter than those who live in the suburbs and rural areas. The theory, in part, is that you do more walking when you live in a city. 

I have noticed, living in Canada, that people are more health conscious here than in the U.S. There's also more public spending aimed at health - not only the public health system, but, for instance, you get an income tax deduction for fees that you pay to a child's sport club or dance class. I get up to $500 annually to spend on recreational fees and / or equipment from my employer. People expect there to be city-run recreation facilities. There are more adults in recreational sports clubs here than I've seen in the U.S. 

And one of the things that I think makes it different is that physical activity isn't seen as some torturous thing you do to lose weight or reserved for the narcissistic, but something everybody enjoys and incorporates into the fabric of their daily lives.


----------



## Nigel Pinchley

firebelly1 said:


> I have noticed, living in Canada, that people are more health conscious here than in the U.S. There's also more public spending aimed at health - not only the public health system, but, for instance, you get an income tax deduction for fees that you pay to a child's sport club or dance class. I get up to $500 annually to spend on recreational fees and / or equipment from my employer. People expect there to be city-run recreation facilities. There are more adults in recreational sports clubs here than I've seen in the U.S.


Being you're an American expat (I think?), you already know why this sort of thing won't fly in America. Using the words "public" and "health" together in America are enough to have you branded a traitor in some circles.


----------



## firebelly1

Nigel Pinchley said:


> Being you're an American expat (I think?), you already know why this sort of thing won't fly in America. Using the words "public" and "health" together in America are enough to have you branded a traitor in some circles.


Yes - an expat - and yes, unfortunately, I'm well aware of what you're saying. (Where's the "smack my forehead" emoticon?) Most Canadians that I've talked to have said the number one reason they wouldn't want to move to the U.S. is because they would miss free healthcare. They wouldn't want to run the risk of going bankrupt because of a health concern. But...ok, America, keep telling yourself it's all a communist plot.


----------



## Starstarfish

As for transportation and exercise being more integrated into people's lives. If you live in the burbs, take a look around you and see how many sidewalks there are. Frankly, unless they are "green" and interested, a lot of American suburbs have a severe lack of sidewalks to get to even vital services like grocery stores.

Case in point, I live in an apartment complex off what is arguably the intersection of the two most important roads on my side of town. There is no sidewalk at all on either side of the road - for miles. There is a grocery store 100 feet behind our apartment that they refuse to build a path or sidewalk too because it's not seen as "classy" for people to walk to the store. They literally built a fence to stop people from doing so. (I've been known to hop the fence anyways, but ... why is it that difficult, seriously?)

So if you want to walk to that grocery store, you need to get into a car or you need to walk all the way our complex, go around past the inlet to the interstate and walk with no sidewalk to get there.


----------



## Davelli0331

A lot of good points in this thread.

Just to dovetail off of what StarstarFish is saying...

I live in a large metropolitan area. We have almost no public transportation system to speak of, except for an anemic bus system that is too underfunded to be effective.

As such, unless I have a large chunk of time set aside for walking, it is not reasonable to expect that I could walk or even bike to my local supermarket, which is actually fairly close.

Also, I live in the #2 worst city in my state for traffic violations, including struck pedestrians.


----------



## firebelly1

Yeah - cars have been the priority for decades when cities and suburbs plan and design streets. The City Planning and Traffic Engineering professions are coming around to the idea that transportation isn't just cars - it's also public transit, pedestrians, and bicycles. So, fortunately many cities are adopting standards that reflect this. But, it will be slow going. Especially with reductions in federal transportation funding which means not as much money for public transportation projects or sidewalks.


----------



## Dollystanford

This is a really big issue too. I live about 15 miles out of central London, 2 mins away from a tube station, very close to lots of bus stops that have buses every few minutes. I gave up my car nearly a year ago and now get public transport everywhere. All supermarkets have home delivery for heavy stuff that you can't carry but I have three within easy walking distance anyway. My walk to work takes me 40 mins, a bus ride about 10 - 15 minutes

And yet I still see people driving from one end of my street to get to the school that is at the other end of my street. God forbid they or their kids have to walk a few hundred metres

So people still rely on cars despite an excellent public transport system - I used to do it too. Much easier to jump in the car and nip round to the shop in 30 seconds than walk round in 10 minutes. Now I've given it up I realise how reliant I was on it and how I would do ridiculously short journeys without a second's thought


----------



## homedepot

I realized that people hate fat. I lost 40lbs and now people listen to what I have to say. It is rather amazing


----------



## Davelli0331

My wife and I have visited cities with really robust public transportation systems, and no kidding, we are always incredibly sad to leave that public service behind. I love my car but I'd give up the payments and insurance in a heartbeat if I could get the places I needed to be in a reasonable amount of time using some kind of public transportation.


----------



## firebelly1

Davelli0331 said:


> My wife and I have visited cities with really robust public transportation systems, and no kidding, we are always incredibly sad to leave that public service behind. I love my car but I'd give up the payments and insurance in a heartbeat if I could get the places I needed to be in a reasonable amount of time using some kind of public transportation.


I lived in NYC for about 2 years and there is just nothing better than the convenience of the subway. Now a lot of cities have Car 2 Go. My 22 year-old daughter who lives in Seattle is contemplating never having to own a car because she's used to taking a bus and figures if she needs to, she can just hire a Car 2 Go. Love that.


----------



## Davelli0331

Portland had a great DART system and the subways in DC are great, too.

People complain about how smelly they are, the discomfort of being with strangers who may have urinated on themselves, etc, and for sure, they can be dangerous if you don't keep your head on a swivel.

But come live in a city where you *have* to drive everywhere, and *in asinine traffic*, then tell me which you'd rather have.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

I lived in DC 'burbs for years and I have to say, I loved the metro. Even when I visit these days I still enjoy seeing the architecture of it... recessed lighting, interesting textured tube walls, the platforms often seem to "hover" in the middle of the tube, and so many small nooks and spaces - try the elevators - when you reach street level on some of them you feel like you've come out of a secret entrance in a spy movie. haha

The only problem with the metro is far too few stations and they don't go nearly far enough out in the 'burbs.


----------



## VermisciousKnid

firebelly1 said:


> I lived in NYC for about 2 years and there is just nothing better than the convenience of the subway. Now a lot of cities have Car 2 Go. My 22 year-old daughter who lives in Seattle is contemplating never having to own a car because she's used to taking a bus and figures if she needs to, she can just hire a Car 2 Go. Love that.


I lived in Hoboken and commuted by foot and rail to Manhattan for a year and a half. That gave me about an hour plus of brisk walking per day. The grocery store was near the rail station so I would stop there every other day, as buying several days worth of food was too heavy to carry in addition to my work gear. 

I was definitely in better shape back then due to the extra walking and I tended to buy more fresh food overall because I knew I would be eating everything before it spoiled and returning to the store in two days anyway. 

Even though I live in the burbs now and drive to work I've gotten in the habit of buying food every other day and only getting what's needed for the meals I've decided to cook. I don't buy filler food or junk food any more.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Deejo said:


> SLL, if you wanted to discuss the food industry and the foods primarily found in the S.A.D diet, (Standard American Diet), you picked a hell of a way to open the conversation.
> 
> I don't mince words on this subject. I am currently overweight. At 5'10", I weigh about 180 pounds.
> 
> I don't know about Belgium, but I have always been utterly stunned at the visual difference between virtually any European city I have traveled in, and any standard U.S. city. Only exception that comes to mind in European terms was when I was in the U.K.
> 
> The U.S. is fat, morbidly so. Don't feel remotely compelled to soft peddle that statement. Without any reasonable doubt, our lifestyles and primarily our diet is to blame. People do not think about what they put into their mouths.
> 
> As long as bad, cheap, food is ABUNDANTLY available, most people are going to take the path of least resistance.


But now I have realized we are really going the same road...Its different when you see it on the tv than full frontal in real life....

So...it did not come out really well I am afraid. But maybe when you start a 'normal' discussion the people I wanted to motivate to come to action would not read it. Almost everybody is busy with his or her personal situation in dieting. I care about the loss of nutritional value in food and the replacement with unhealthy content. That is at least my perception, I am actually calm but mad at this establishment that keeps the people like in the Matrix. And the Sheeple selve are the guards of eachother.

Well, I guess that it's unavoidable. Back to normal.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Faeleaf said:


> I would feel so much better if this post said, _"Ladies, this is a health epidemic. You are so much more at risk for terrible diseases and a shortened lifespan when you are overweight. We, as your husbands, don't want to even contemplate a life without you because you died a premature death that could have been avoided!"_
> 
> Since, instead, it kind of sounded like, _"Ladies, you are not as beautiful as you could be, and that is a tragedy because I like looking at beautiful female bodies! You must stop being so fat because God created you to be eye candy for me!" _
> 
> ...I find myself struggling to write something nice. That may not be at all what you intended to write, but I'm just letting you know that it can come across that way. I am sorry. This is more blunt than I usually am, but I have a sister that really struggles with weight and self-esteem, and this strikes a nerve for me.


OK, I admit I used the wrong words. I wanted a discussion about the going down the drain of health and food quality, in my eyes because of economic reasons. 

The reason was exactly as I stated. But people feel personally attacked so I am sorry, that was not good. Mea Culpa.


----------



## heartsbeating

firebelly1 said:


> There are statistics to suggest that people who live in cities are fitter than those who live in the suburbs and rural areas. The theory, in part, is that you do more walking when you live in a city.
> 
> I have noticed, living in Canada, that people are more health conscious here than in the U.S. There's also more public spending aimed at health - not only the public health system, but, for instance, you get an income tax deduction for fees that you pay to a child's sport club or dance class. I get up to $500 annually to spend on recreational fees and / or equipment from my employer. People expect there to be city-run recreation facilities. There are more adults in recreational sports clubs here than I've seen in the U.S.
> 
> And one of the things that I think makes it different is that physical activity isn't seen as some torturous thing you do to lose weight or reserved for the narcissistic, but something everybody enjoys and incorporates into the fabric of their daily lives.


I was thinking further on this thread and how life can look in cities - and when working in it. Fruit is delivered a few times a week to the office. Yoga and Pilates classes offered. Sometimes groups get together for boot camp during lunch and discount rate offered to employees. There can be a certain team mentality with exercise. And social aspect too - curiosity around what people are eating and sharing recipes. We currently live inner city and I walk a fair bit by choice as it's easy. I can pass fruit stalls, sushi, salad bars etc. Head further from the city and these options seem to become less prevalent.

Then again, there's something to be said for those who have land, work in and grow their own food.


----------



## happy as a clam

Bottom line, people can make excuses for why they are overweight... but it all comes down to portion control.

Stop eating voluminous quantities of food. Start moving more. Make the healthiest choice you can make. Stop making excuses about the high cost of organic foods vs. "regular" food. Quit making excuses about the distance from grocery stores, parks, walking trails. Go right outside your FRONT DOOR and walk for 30 minutes or more, EVERY DAY, round and round the block or parking lot. Cut out junk food and processed cr*p. Grow your own tomateoes, peppers, herbs in pots. Cut out sugar and excess alcohol. Stop being a couch potato.

This isn't rocket science. The old adage, "Calories in, calories out" still holds true.


----------



## Thundarr

homedepot said:


> I realized that people hate fat. I lost 40lbs and now people listen to what I have to say. It is rather amazing


It's more than amazing. It's a fact. When I'm in shape, I'm apparently nice, outgoing, and likable. When I'm heavy, I'm creepy.

It's human nature and I think almost all of us are guilty of it on a subconscious level.
1. We have an innate avoidance to perceived danger. Historically poor health was often a sign of danger.
2. We have an innate dislike of things we perceive as lazy or mentally weak. Addictions fall in this category. It's the same reason cigarette smokers are hated. Not due to second hand smoke but instead because of the perceived weakness.

I catch myself being judgmental of obesity. That's my gut reaction anyway. I rationalize that I can't possible know that person's struggles but still the knee jerk reaction is there and it's not nice. I judged myself when I was heavy just as 'Brave New World' mentioned people do a few pages back. Specifically though, when I see an obese person get out of a vehicle in a handicap spot, I become annoyed if I think about it. The expense of knee replacements, and years of medications of the many ailments associated with obesity on our health care system and my portion of income that goes directly to having health care. When I see obese kids, I'm annoyed at their parents. If their parents are also obese then I'm more than annoyed.

The think is, I'm generally a nice and respectful person. I love people in general. Down deep, I don't think it's obese persons that I'm angry at. I'm angry at 'obesity' it's self. I want to help obese people kick obesity's arse. But we are helpless. So my anger at obesity trickles over.


----------



## heartsbeating

I've been saddened by obesity and disgusted by serving sizes in the US.

I have never been obese and can't relate to it. I was at my heaviest this year and refused to go up a size when the clothes became snug. A result of unhealthy habits creeping in and going unchecked. Those glasses of wine, pasta dishes, cups of tea with 2 sugars, and perhaps not eating regularly enough was taking it's toll. Although I actually thought I was living fairly healthily. I had much to learn Master Yoda. Time for healthier habits and lifestyle and to take responsibility. I don't go by what the scale says so much anymore and instead by fit of clothes and body fat %.

I'm aware how lifting weights helps my stress levels. Friend is going through similar life-stuff and commented how positive I am. She's having a tough time with it all. Asked how I handle it. I told her it's the gym. Next day she brought her bag with gym clothes and said she's following my lead. I know my old vices when stressed, including comfort food, and how that manifests as a mind-state for me in comparison to the adrenalin and achievement at the gym and eating healthier foods. But not many want to hear that. Boring! lol.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Runs like Dog

When women are fat they're scolded by other women to embrace their body type. Unless of course they're scolding other women to be 'healthy' at which time they'll scold the women who lost weight for buying into the bodyism of the patriarchy and Mad Ave. 

Basically you're all b^itches to each other.


----------



## NextTimeAround

Runs like Dog said:


> When women are fat they're scolded by other women to embrace their body type. Unless of course they're scolding other women to be 'healthy' at which time they'll scold the women who lost weight for buying into the bodyism of the patriarchy and Mad Ave.
> 
> Basically you're all b^itches to each other.


Yup, I've run into a lot of haters. I try to avoid the discussion of weight management with other women.


----------



## Satya

heartsbeating said:


> I'm like Thundarr. My healthier habits inspire other healthier habits. The friends around me are into more healthy living and exercise... as well as drinking wine lol. In balance everything is fine. I just know myself - and can be both a good and bad influence at times. So if stressed, I know I'll appreciate the gym and lifting weights more and the decisions that follow. We live in an area where fresh fish, quality meats and such from local farmers is available. Eating clean, in the way I've been adjusting to hasn't cost us more as the food seems to be used more efficiently and I pack my meals for work. I feel better within myself eating this way. My perception of what I aspire to and find attractive within my own gender has recently shifted to women who are strong, lean, and muscular.


This is similar to my situation as well. It's about balance and being in-tune with your own body. I changed to a pescetarian diet at a very early age. It was not an ethical decision but I simply disliked meat. I needed the protein/calcium, so I learned to like fish. Regardless of my diet and exercise (I was quite an active kid and teen) I still ate high calorie junk foods when younger and carried extra weight (probably 25-30lbs extra) until I graduated from college. moved to the UK where portions were smaller, and I had to walk all the time because a car was not affordable.

That lifestyle change left an impression on me and since moving back to the US, I've been extra meticulous about what I eat. I have a list of about 10-15 simple foods I regularly eat and I rarely go outside of this list unless I'm dining out or attending a BBQ. The list includes yogurt, almonds, salmon, leafy greens, cheese, beans, whole grains, chilies, high fiber and antioxidant fruits. One day of the week is my "treat" day and I have something a bit naughty. Diet absolutely affects my mood, so I know to keep a balance of the vitamins/nutrients I'm probably lacking.

The most important things I stay aware of are protein and B vitamins. My job has me on site at a client for sometimes 4-5 days at a time and I am "weird" because I always pack a lunch. This is in the city where most people go out for lunch every day. If I did this, I'd have frequent stomach upset. 

It sounds more complicated than it is. I've just worked out a routine that works for me and I can maintain a pretty predictive budget for food shopping. I have more of a struggle committing to regular exercise but I do what I can, when I can. 30 minute speed walk at lunchtime, 1 hour on the bike during the weekend, etc.

I am also living by the sea, so fresh fish and produce are pretty easy to obtain. Even so, I spent time this spring/summer planting a vegetable garden. My girlfriends also eat healthy - my best friend is a nutritionist. As Heartsbeating said, healthier habits inspire other healthier habits. 

My last boyfriend was not a healthy eater, nor did he lead a healthy lifestyle, and these were the biggest issues for me in our relationship. I didn't mind that he carried some extra weight, but he sincerely enjoyed eating what he wanted and never exercised. I knew that if I stayed with him, I would worry about his health so much that it would break my heart. I truly loved him. I don't think that he really registered my concern about his health, but only heard me calling him fat (even though I never used that word). So in that situation, my own habits had no effect on him, not even in the slightest. He never criticized me for my habits, so equally I had to respect him for his and let him go. I sincerely hope that he is now happy with a woman who can love him as well as enjoy food and a non-active lifestyle.


----------



## Davelli0331

Well, it's like anything else, this tends to break down into ideological groups, each one being in the business of shaming the other.

It's been an interesting thing to watch. First there was fat shaming, then in a response to fat shaming there was the "rail thin models are an unrealistic standard of beauty", out of which sprang the "you're ok just the way you are and should never conform to anyone's idea of beauty", from which came thin shaming. I see the whole spectrum on my FB feed all the time.

Again, all this jockeying takes away from the idea of just being healthy for the sake of being healthy, irrespective of standards of beauty. Unfortunately, all this shaming has soured many on the idea of making those healthy lifestyle changes. They think, why do something that's steeped in this much negativity, if no matter what I do I'm wrong?


----------



## See_Listen_Love

The thing that not gets dealt with is the food industry-consumer dynamic. The cause of it all in my opinion. I believe there is some revolution needed.

Sadly enough the industry might earn on both sides, providing the garbage food and providing the health repairing...


----------



## EnjoliWoman

My city is really finally figuring it out but we are certainly going through some growing pains. For the longest time there were very few sidewalks except near uptown before urban sprawl hit. Now it is required that every new street with more than 5 lots (basically more than a cul de sac) has to have a sidewalk on one side; busier roads must have two; all divided roads must have two but it will take a while to retrofit a lot of the sprawling areas that didn't get them at the time the roads were built. Bike lanes are being incorporated in many more areas now.

I am not too far from a grocery store - probably 2 miles, maybe a little more; however there are no sidewalks on the main 2-lane road my neighborhood is on, tho there are sidewalks IN the neighborhood. I think sidewalks were originally thought of, not as transportation, but rather for strolling with your neighbor or a safe way for kids to get to nearby friends' homes.

Now we are developing more and more communities within the city where there are small grocers, businesses and homes/condos, small parks and sidewalks so you can live/work/play all in a relatively close proximity. 

Our transportation system was only buses. We had a lot and decent schedules and stops but now with a rail system being built, planners are seeing just how much that first line is being used and going full force with additional lines being built and a long-range plan. Unfortunately, noone anticipated the growth since we aren't a capital city and no subways were built so it's a bit late for that. 

Most low income areas have sidewalks and parks but the crime is too high for traditional grocers to want to do business so most larger, well stocked and better priced stores are in strip malls (vs. stand-alone) and do require a longer walk or a bus ride. You see shopping carts left all around. 

Maybe food subsidy programs should include an allotment for vegetables, less for meats/cheese and a lot less for packaged, sugar heavy baked goods and limit soft drinks. After all, you can't buy beer or cigarettes with food stamps so there's a way to connect bar codes with what's allowable. I'd rather educate and subsidize NOW as a tax payer before I have to support lots of medical expenses later.



Runs like Dog said:


> When women are fat they're scolded by other women to embrace their body type. Unless of course they're scolding other women to be 'healthy' at which time they'll scold the women who lost weight for buying into the bodyism of the patriarchy and Mad Ave.
> 
> Basically you're all b^itches to each other.


Not all, but I do agree. When I embarked on my lifestyle change, I had a few joining me. I'm the only one left and now I don't feel I can share my successes with them. They just make excuses and say "Yeah, I need to get back on track...." and trail off without making any real plans as to how to do that.

My thinner friends are WAY more encouraging. One lady who has always been an attractive weight recently put on about 20 pounds and found out it was a thyroid issue and is on meds now, working to get it under control and every few days exclaims how "skinny" I look (not skinny but she's being encouraging!) 

So when people aren't successful they don't like it when another succeeds. I don't know if they feel resentful or just bad about their own failure or guilty for not sticking with it but I notice they avoid me. Oh well - I wouldn't rub it in their faces - I'd just encourage them to join me at the gym or share recipes or tips if they asked.


----------



## Davelli0331

The food industry is a tougher nut to crack, because while we can control our own lifestyles, we can't directly control what's stocked at our supermarkets. We can indirectly influence that with our wallets but that is dependent on other shoppers buying in similar patterns to make that critical mass for change.

With the food industry itself, you also have to ask what is a side-effect of American consumption vs what is leading the customer on. E.g. I mentioned earlier that farm raised, range fed, no hormones chicken is about 20-40% more expensive at my local supermarket than the other kind. Is that price differential due to some nefarious scheme by the food companies to get me hooked on hormone-fed chicken, or is it due to decades of raising chickens that way, and thus that process being far more efficient than organic chicken?


----------



## heartsbeating

Satya said:


> The most important things I stay aware of are protein and B vitamins. My job has me on site at a client for sometimes 4-5 days at a time and I am "weird" because I always pack a lunch. This is in the city where most people go out for lunch every day. If I did this, I'd have frequent stomach upset.


I could imagine that wouldn't be the norm at a client site. Your mention of protein and B vitamins caught my attention. I used to buy lunch (and often breakfast too) during the week. Now it feels strange if I don't have my packed meals with me through-out the day. 

My husband looks fairly trim. He walks a couple of times a day with the dogs and used to do push-ups at home. He's supportive of my new found journey with weights and although I'd love for us to go to the gym together, it just isn't his bag. That's okay. As for food, well to him food is very much about sharing and enjoyment rather than just fuel for the body. But he's the type that can eat with balance. That large chocolate chip cookie in the cupboard? He'll eat a quarter at a time over several days. I don't understand how he does that lol. I'd breathe it in. 

I think he's pretty aware of nutrition - just doesn't necessarily follow what he knows. We have decided to start jogging together, namely to help stress levels. I can't say I influence him though or would attempt to. I think he's encouraging and supportive of me because I don't put my views on him. Does that make sense? Although I'm wanting to build muscle and drop body fat, I don't have any kind of expectation of him. However I couldn't be with someone who by choice didn't consider their health and fitness. 

An article I was reading because of this thread: Bodybuilding.com - Losing The Gut Race: Obesity In America - Why Other Countries Are Slimmer Than Uncle Sam


Satya... you planted a vegetable garden? That's great! What are you growing?


----------



## See_Listen_Love

I think customers could form cooperations to do their own buying. Like shopping on the farm, wholesale prices for organic food and having volunteers work on it.

I think if people buy any chicken that is already way better than using the processed foods and especially processed meats.

It is really doable to avoid industrial food. Not yet to avoid mass production of whole foods, but that may be not even necessary.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

heartsbeating said:


> An article I was reading because of this thread: Bodybuilding.com - Losing The Gut Race: Obesity In America - Why Other Countries Are Slimmer Than Uncle Sam


In the percentage the Overweight% are taken, not the Obesity%. That may even give a better perspective. For instance: I can say the Germans may be overweight in general, but they are not obese.


"The European way of grocery shopping is far different than ours. *Most of us go once or twice a month and fill our carts with pretzels, chips, cereal* and all other manner of food whose shelf life can be measured in presidential administrations. 

The French and Italians generally shop for whatever ingredients they need to make a meal right before they make it."


We too shop for every meal, and incidentally for a couple of days.


----------



## Davelli0331

Americans shop that way 1) for convenience and 2) as Firebelly pointed out, because fresh produce supermarkets may not be as readily available as something that stocks packaged food full of sodium and artificial preservatives.

In many European countries, you can pop into a local market on your way home, buy some fresh food for the evening meal, and it's not too big an inconvenience. In America, that is not nearly so easy.

And there's also just the cultural difference of Americans not really wanting to stop on their way home from work due to having to fight with traffic, need to get somewhere to pick up the kids, etc.

ETA: As my wife and I switched to fresher food, we had to start increasing our grocery trips to once a week. We found this to be a pretty good balance for us.


----------



## Adelais

I haven't read all the comments yet, because all I could think about was,

"What the heck was Jesus doing being at a nude spa and not only looking at all the fat ladies, but criticizing their bodies?"

I'm sure there were fat men there, but obviously you were fixated on the women.

You really neeeeeed to change your avatar. It is incongruent with your walk.


----------



## Faithful Wife

I eat a healthy diet, have always been fit, and have had no problems finding healthy, organic foods that don't cost a fortune. I don't feel I am at the mercy of the food industry. I also don't feel that others should have to conform to a beauty OR a health standard, they don't have to be like me. If someone asks me how I stay fit, I tell them. I would never tell them they "should" do anything. I taught my children to eat right and they are both adults now and are fit and healthy. This is how you cause change in the most effective way: teach your own children, the effects spread.

Yet I will still always feel offended by blanket statements about fat OR thin OR any other type of shaming, because it is rude and it doesn't work to correct anything. It hurts more than helps and it engages the same arrogant attitudes that caused these problems in the first place. It is the other side of the same coin.

Runs like dog said: "Basically you're all *****es to each other".

This untrue, most women in my life have been wonderful to me and me to them...we are sisters, midwives, hospice nurses to each other...we help each other bury our husbands when the time comes. Contrary to what you may see on TV, most women are incredibly supportive to each other.


----------



## Adelais

My family has also noticed the rising number of obese people (not just women) living in our town. By obese, I mean people with rolls of fat or people with fat layers hanging down...not just with a little extra. There are natural variations of body type, and I don't expect everyone to be thin, like me.

No one is fat in my family of 6. We cook most of our meals at home, and from scratch. We have not forbidden sugar, fast food, etc. so as not to create resentment or a rebellious desire to have what is forbidden. We look at processed foods as something to be eaten once in a while, and in small amounts. We can't afford organic foods, yet we fill our refrigerator with healthy non organic alternatives.

Eating as close to the way the food comes from the earth is the key...less processing, less preservatives, and plenty of fresh (or home cooked) veggies with our meat, dairy and cookies works well for us. Anything we can make ourselves, including dressings, that don't contain artificial ingredients to increase shelf life, is better for the body.

Our children are aware of what is healthy, how much is a healthy portion, and they enjoy treating their bodies well, while they eat delicious foods. If they want some chips with their meal they know to put a few on their plate, not eat straight from the bag. That way they control the amount. In our home, chips are never to be eaten as a snack. If you want a snack, look for something with a bit of protein and combine it with a vegetable or fruit. A yogurt or an egg will also work well.

Food is to nourish our bodies, but when it tastes good, you can eat less of it and be satisfied, because you know you can have a little more tomorrow. If you don't feel deprived, and make eating a positive experience, you can eat less.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

One huge difference between European countries and America is the fact it's a large country! Originally settled into either tight clusters or spread out across wide open spaces, you either had room to grow your own perishables and stocked up on dry goods or if there wasn't a lot of land because you were in a city, there is a market close by.

Most of America is now suburbia - nothing quite close enough to walk to (and limited safe sidewalks); lots not really large enough to grow much. Grocery stores just far enough away that you don't want to make daily trips so therefore want to stock up.

It seems European countries have farms (space to grow) villages (tight knit, walkable, farmers markets/daily shopping) or cities (walkable/daily shopping).

As to poverty, yes, everyone can make better choices. It might mean carefully planning meals to eliminate waste and having to take a bus to a grocery store vs. walking to the corner to get a loaf of white bread and a jar of peanut butter but it can be done. 

Everyone keeps mentioning 'organic' foods - that may be a preference for a lot but really, a family can still get fresh produce and eat healthier without having to go organic.


----------



## Runs like Dog

Mexico is the fattest country in the world, and, apparently they have no trouble walking hundreds of miles north.


----------



## lifeistooshort

I stay fit because I run a lot, competitively, and make decent food choices. And I cook a lot. Having said that I know 40-50 miles a week isn't for everyone.....running at any level isn't for everyone. I've found other women to be wonderfully supportive, whether they run or not. Only b!tches are b!tches to each other, most women are great to each other. And the older you get the older you realize how valuable your girlfriends are to you as a woman.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## norajane

Davelli0331 said:


> Americans shop that way 1) for convenience and 2) as Firebelly pointed out, because fresh produce supermarkets may not be as readily available as something that stocks packaged food full of sodium and artificial preservatives.
> 
> In many European countries, you can pop into a local market on your way home, buy some fresh food for the evening meal, and it's not too big an inconvenience. In America, that is not nearly so easy.
> 
> And there's also just the cultural difference of Americans not really wanting to stop on their way home from work due to having to fight with traffic, need to get somewhere to pick up the kids, etc.
> 
> ETA: As my wife and I switched to fresher food, we had to start increasing our grocery trips to once a week. We found this to be a pretty good balance for us.


Some of us shop the way Europeans do! 

New Yorkers have delis and ethnic food shops all over the place, so it is actually relatively easy to pick up fresh items. (They assure me they have big grocery stores too, though I've never noticed them during my formerly frequent visits there). 

When I lived in San Francisco, I discovered they also have little delis, cheese shops, organic stores, and other fresh fruit and veggie shops in many places. That's where I got used to getting off the MUNI after work, stopping in at the deli and picking up items for dinner. 

I loved being able to do that, so when I moved back to Chicago, I made sure to find a place to live within walking distance from some grocery stores and shops. The problem here is winter, though. It may only be a few blocks to walk, but when it's frigid and snowy, I would rather order in and have meals delivered.

Eating out and ordering in are very difficult to do in a healthy way. Not impossible, but difficult.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Agree with your post Nora, but where I live, you can also eat out as much or healthier than you can prepare food at home, and sometimes for about the same price.

An example of a restaurant here which is packed every day with a line out the door:

Fresh Conscious Cuisine. Harlow is located in SE Portland, OR.


----------



## firebelly1

heartsbeating said:


> An article I was reading because of this thread: Bodybuilding.com - Losing The Gut Race: Obesity In America - Why Other Countries Are Slimmer Than Uncle Sam


Thanks for the link! I've been wanting to add strength training and not known how to start. Glad you shared this website.


----------



## NextTimeAround

Getting back to the "hating" aspect that arises among certain people.......

I find it interesting how vegans and vegetarians can rid their diets of entire food groups AND by choice and others will think about how healthy their diet is.

Yet, when someone says that they want to limit carbs -- mostly sugar which has no nutritional value and the "white foods" ie rice, potatoes, bread and pasta, low carbers are then accused of fooling themselves that they are practicing healthy habits. 

More will respect a vegan or a vegetarian and fix a special plate for them in their own than they will someone who intends to minimise carbs. I remember when I first started low carbing, just to avoid the bread at a restaurant would raise suspicions. 

Despite the fact that the obesity trends have accelerated during the prevailing "low cal, low fat, balanced diet; everything in moderation" regime, many people still want to continue believing in it. Isn't that the definition of insanity?


----------



## Davelli0331

NextTimeAround said:


> Getting back to the "hating" aspect that arises among certain people.......
> 
> I find it interesting how vegans and vegetarians can rid their diets of entire food groups AND by choice and others will think about how healthy their diet is.
> 
> Yet, when someone says that they want to limit carbs -- mostly sugar which has no nutritional value and the "white foods" ie rice, potatoes, bread and pasta, low carbers are then accused of fooling themselves that they are practicing healthy habits.


I don't think veganism/vegetarianism is any healthier than anything else, and actually the few I know IRL are just as overweight as many others. Too much vegan/vegetarian food will still make you obese.



NextTimeAround said:


> More will respect a vegan or a vegetarian and fix a special plate for them in their own than they will someone who intends to minimise carbs. I remember when I first started low carbing, just to avoid the bread at a restaurant would raise suspicions.


I think this is more because people view vegan/vegetarianism as a full life choice, not just a nutritional one, usually with some moral qualms regarding the treatment of animals.

Also, and I don't mean to come off as a d!ck, but vegans/vegetarians are a very, ah, loud and vocal group, so I don't think it's so much people respecting their choice as just trying to keep them from complaining even more about their life choice not being respected. 



NextTimeAround said:


> Despite the fact that the obesity trends have accelerated during the prevailing "low cal, low fat, balanced diet; everything in moderation" regime, many people still want to continue believing in it. Isn't that the definition of insanity?


This would be true if people were actually following the "low cal, low fat, balanced diet, everything in moderation" "regime".


----------



## TiggyBlue

NextTimeAround said:


> I find it interesting how vegans and vegetarians can rid their diets of entire food groups AND by choice and others will think about how healthy their diet is.


From my experience you can get a lot of grief. But no vegan/vegetarian isn't automatically healthy.


----------



## Starstarfish

> Yet, when someone says that they want to limit carbs -- mostly sugar which has no nutritional value and the "white foods" ie rice, potatoes, bread and pasta, low carbers are then accused of fooling themselves that they are practicing healthy habits.


Not just that, but the number of "serious studies" that need to keep floating around FB revealing the truth at "gluten sensitivity" is a sham, and the number of people who need to slam people eating gluten-free as a sham, and sheeple, and pointless, etc, etc, etc. They feel driven to like speak on the behalf of wheat. 

I mean, I don't want to sound like a "Lone Gunman" nut job, but - ask yourself, if one of the most subsidized crop is wheat how can it not be coincidental the amount of pushback to prove that gluten free diets are "fake" and "just a fad." I mean, just like the whole "HFCS" is just "corn sugar" advertising campaign, just they were more upfront about who they worked for and their point. 

I went gluten free, and the transformation has been amazing. Is it the solution for everyone, who knows. But - in the end, one can only speak to the experience that works for themselves. 

As an aside, now that I've lost 80 lbs, I do like how when I go to a restaurant and ask about GF options, the waitstaff no longer feels compelled to ask "Allergy or Weight Loss?" they'll now ask "Allergy or Preference?"


----------



## homedepot

Let me tell you that being a Gluten Free/Celliac(sp?) has done wonders for my wife. She cut over 60lbs in a yr. By not having any wheat or soy products in my house.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Just curious and not assuming gluten free people are just doing it as a fad... do you think it's the gluten specifically or just that you cut out a high calorie/now nutrient food category that helped the weight loss? 

Personally I have no sensitivity nor do I eat a lot of foods high in gluten - triscuits at lunch and pasta or a dinner roll maybe once a week, so I don't think it would help or hurt me to cut it out altogether.


----------



## norajane

If you are eating low-carb and you get sh*t for it, just tell people you're pre-diabetic. It's practically the same kind of diet - low sugar, low carb, fresh veggies and protein.

For some reason, if you stick a disease in front of your food preferences, people take you more seriously.

Obviously, you wouldn't want to lie, but if people give you sh*t about your food choices, who cares? At the same time, a lot of people probably are pre-diabetic and don't even realize it.


----------



## Satya

*Re: Re: The Fat Epidemic*



heartsbeating said:


> Satya... you planted a vegetable garden? That's great! What are you growing?


Thanks for asking. 
Lettuce, tomatoes, beans, zucchini squash, jalapeño peppers, dill, rosemary, and thyme. I had carrots too but they didn't do so well! 

I also planted some cat grass for my two furkids. 

I'm lucky that I do most of my work remotely so I can keep an eye on things. Having a garden, or even just things in pots, is great.


----------



## Thundarr

See_Listen_Love said:


> The thing that not gets dealt with is the food industry-consumer dynamic. The cause of it all in my opinion. I believe there is some revolution needed.
> 
> Sadly enough the industry might earn on both sides, providing the garbage food and providing the health repairing...


Each adult has to take personal responsibility for what they eat and not blame shift onto corporations. Every grocery store I've been to has produce and most of it's not very expensive. If I skip the produce Isle and go for frozen dinners and chips then it's my fault. Not the frozen dinners and chips for tasting good. It's also not my TV's fault or laptop's fault if I set around all day in virtual reality.

The caveat to this is children. They are victims. Not of bad food and technology but instead they are victims of their parents.


----------



## Miss Independent

Thundarr said:


> Each adult has to take personal responsibility for what they eat and not blame shift onto corporations. Every grocery store I've been to has produce and most of it's not very expensive. If I skip the produce Isle and go for frozen dinners and chips then it's my fault. Not the frozen dinners and chips for tasting good. It's also not my TV's fault or laptop's fault if I set around all day in virtual reality.
> 
> 
> 
> The caveat to this is children. They are victims. Not of bad food and technology but instead they are victims of their parents.



Seriously I had to repost this!!


----------



## Thundarr

Davelli0331 said:


> The food industry is a tougher nut to crack, because while we can control our own lifestyles, we can't directly control what's stocked at our supermarkets. We can indirectly influence that with our wallets but that is dependent on other shoppers buying in similar patterns to make that critical mass for change.
> 
> With the food industry itself, you also have to ask what is a side-effect of American consumption vs what is leading the customer on. E.g. I mentioned earlier that farm raised, range fed, no hormones chicken is about 20-40% more expensive at my local supermarket than the other kind. Is that price differential due to some nefarious scheme by the food companies to get me hooked on hormone-fed chicken, or is it due to decades of raising chickens that way, and thus that process being far more efficient than organic chicken?


:iagree:
Yes it's a truth most of us at TAM believe. We may influence others but we only have control of our own actions.

And yes corporations and businesses only exists when they make money. That's what drives them and especially when they have shareholders. The economics of it are simple and it's not driven by consumer health (unless that's the niche marketing of the company).


----------



## heartsbeating

Satya said:


> Thanks for asking.
> Lettuce, tomatoes, beans, zucchini squash, jalapeño peppers, dill, rosemary, and thyme. I had carrots too but they didn't do so well!
> 
> I also planted some cat grass for my two furkids.
> 
> I'm lucky that I do most of my work remotely so I can keep an eye on things. Having a garden, or even just things in pots, is great.


That sounds delightful. It would be great to have your input in the 'Off the Food Grid' thread over in Social Spot. 

I'm a little excited to be moving soon to a place with a garden. Love flowers. Can't wait. Would love to see photos of your veggie garden if you'd be willing to share?


----------



## Mostlycontent

I don't know if it's been stated or not as I didn't read the previous 16 pages of this thread, the real issue is carbs.

When the morons in congress some 30 or so years ago stated that we should eat lower fat and more carbs, it began a downhill cycle that is manifest in what we see today.

When I was a kid, people ate real butter and drank whole milk yet hardly anyone was overweight. couple that with the overall general lack of activity, starting with today's youth, and you can fully understand the problem.

By going to a lower fat societal diet, the only way you can feel full is to eat more starches or carbs, which is primarily sugar. Additionally, we have more people than ever before, by a wide margin, who are insulin resistant, which means that any kind of carbs they eat, which should give them some energy, just gets stored as fat and then they crave more carbs in short order. It's a horrible cycle and millions are now in it.

People need fat but they do not need carbs in the same way and that, ladies and gentlemen, is the core problem in a nutshell.


----------



## Thundarr

We need healthy fat, carbs, protein. In moderation though. Too many carbs is a bad thing for most people.

Carbs: Sucrose for example is showing up study after study as being bad for us. Yet fruits have sucrose. Well fruits also have fiber and antioxidants. Sucrose in a cola bombards us with the thing that makes us like an apple but doesn't give us any of the benefit of an apple.

Fat: Natural fats in nuts and fish are repeatedly found to be good for our good cholesterol, skin, and health (in moderation). But the fats added to a piece of chicken from the deep fryer is just clogging our arteries and raising our bad cholesterol.

Protien: ? Ehh I don't really know about this one.


----------



## NextTimeAround

Thundarr said:


> We need healthy fat, carbs, protein. In moderation though. Too many carbs is a bad thing for most people.
> 
> Carbs: Sucrose for example is showing up study after study as being bad for us. *Yet fruits have sucrose. Well fruits also have fiber and antioxidants.* Sucrose in a cola bombards us with the thing that makes us like an apple but doesn't give us any of the benefit of an apple.
> 
> Fat: Natural fats in nuts and fish are repeatedly found to be good for our good cholesterol, skin, and health (in moderation). But the fats added to a piece of chicken from the deep fryer is just clogging our arteries and raising our bad cholesterol.
> 
> Protien: ? Ehh I don't really know about this one.


Yabbut, a diet for diabetes type 2 requires you to keep fruit to minimum just because of the sugar.

So that old adage, "unlimited fruits and vegetables" does not always apply to adults.

If doctors / nutritionists are playing down the benefits of fruit, that must mean that sugar is really toxic.


----------



## Dollystanford

I eat very little fruit in my diet and when I do it's things like blueberries and raspberries (occasional banana for energy)

People in my office doing weightwatchers or slimmer's world or whatever have a points system in which a lot of fruits are 'free' meaning you can have as much of them as you want because they are low fat. So what do they do? Sit and eat fruit all day. Are they still fat? You bet your sweet ass they are

People have been conditioned to think that low fat is good when it's a hell of a lot more complex than that. On low carb days I can eat anywhere between 30 - 60% fat


----------



## Davelli0331

Thundarr said:


> We need healthy fat, carbs, protein. In moderation though. Too many carbs is a bad thing for most people.
> 
> Carbs: Sucrose for example is showing up study after study as being bad for us. Yet fruits have sucrose. Well fruits also have fiber and antioxidants. Sucrose in a cola bombards us with the thing that makes us like an apple but doesn't give us any of the benefit of an apple.
> 
> Fat: Natural fats in nuts and fish are repeatedly found to be good for our good cholesterol, skin, and health (in moderation). But the fats added to a piece of chicken from the deep fryer is just clogging our arteries and raising our bad cholesterol.
> 
> Protien: ? Ehh I don't really know about this one.


Protein is the major building block for muscle, and also helps in muscle retention when losing weight. I've personally found that keeping my diet high in protein helps in both situations: When I'm trying to add more muscle and when I'm trying to cut down on fat (the only difference being the total amount of calories I'm taking in, usually effected by changing my carb intake).

By "high in protein" I usually mean the old lifter's rule, 1.5-2g protein per pound lean body weight. 

Fats are really great for satiety. They make you feel full. One of my favorite snacks is a little bit of organic peanut butter and nutella (which I know is not organic and has a lot of sugar in it, but I've accounted for that). Anyway, it's a nice little snack that's relatively healthy(ish, assuming I've accounted for it in my diet) and satisfies my sweet tooth almost like a Reese's.

Carbs are good for fueling physical activity (though they're certainly not the only thing). I try to stick to whole grain carbs when and where I can, as they break down more slowly and have a lower glycemic index, so I don't feel as much of an energy crash from them.


----------



## lifeistooshort

NextTimeAround said:


> Getting back to the "hating" aspect that arises among certain people.......
> 
> I find it interesting how vegans and vegetarians can rid their diets of entire food groups AND by choice and others will think about how healthy their diet is.
> 
> Yet, when someone says that they want to limit carbs -- mostly sugar which has no nutritional value and the "white foods" ie rice, potatoes, bread and pasta, low carbers are then accused of fooling themselves that they are practicing healthy habits.
> 
> More will respect a vegan or a vegetarian and fix a special plate for them in their own than they will someone who intends to minimise carbs. I remember when I first started low carbing, just to avoid the bread at a restaurant would raise suspicions.
> 
> Despite the fact that the obesity trends have accelerated during the prevailing "low cal, low fat, balanced diet; everything in moderation" regime, many people still want to continue believing in it. Isn't that the definition of insanity?


I dispute the health benefits of veganism. Every vegan I've ever known has looked terrible, right down to the color of their skin. But there's probably a vegan here on TAM I've just p!ssed off. Now properly done vegetarianism can be very healthy.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## happy as a clam

Mostlycontent said:


> By going to a lower fat societal diet, the only way you can feel full is to eat more starches or carbs, *which is primarily sugar*.


Absolutely correct!

Whatever bozos decided that low-fat and fat-free carbs were "healthy" were off their rockers. Thus began the introduction of garbage foods like Snackwell cookies (no fat, nothing but sugar) and other similar fat-free products. Manufacturers discovered that they could remove the fat and just replace it with a whole bunch of extra sugar to increase shelf life. And Americans mowed them down by the boxfuls, thinking they were somehow "healthier."

Unrefined, unprocessed carbs in moderation are healthy, like sweet potatoes, steel cut oats, brown rice. And of course fruits and vegetables are natural carbs too.

We've all heard it a million times before -- shop the perimeter of the grocery store (produce section, meat, dairy) and avoid the center aisles, where all the processed junk is, like the plague.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Davelli0331 said:


> Protein is the major building block for muscle, and also helps in muscle retention when losing weight. I've personally found that keeping my diet high in protein helps in both situations: When I'm trying to add more muscle and when I'm trying to cut down on fat (the only difference being the total amount of calories I'm taking in, usually effected by changing my carb intake).
> 
> By "high in protein" I usually mean the old lifter's rule, 1.5-2g protein per pound lean body weight.
> 
> Fats are really great for satiety. They make you feel full. One of my favorite snacks is a little bit of organic peanut butter and nutella (which I know is not organic and has a lot of sugar in it, but I've accounted for that). Anyway, it's a nice little snack that's relatively healthy(ish, assuming I've accounted for it in my diet) and satisfies my sweet tooth almost like a Reese's.
> 
> Carbs are good for fueling physical activity (though they're certainly not the only thing). I try to stick to whole grain carbs when and where I can, as they break down more slowly and have a lower glycemic index, so I don't feel as much of an energy crash from them.


Yup - this is me. I very seldom don't have whole grains. My protein and fats go up and carbs go down. It's difficult to actually get enough protein in a day for me and still keep calories down. I do the PB/nutella when I have a sweet craving, too.

I think the low fat/high carb diets were a response to the thought that consuming fat adds fat to the body. Granted the body doesn't have to convert it like it does sugars and it is very calorie dense so to cut calories it made sense. 

Unfortunately people then took the cue from the food pyramid and loaded up on starches thinking they are low in fat so one can eat more of them, but the satiety issue was ignored and blood sugar crashes so it's not sustainable.

Then the no carbs concept came around and it's more doable but there's nothing wrong with having an apple with a slice of cheese. The key is to combine healthy fruits with a protein and/or fat so you can enjoy the fruits and the benefits of them while slowing digestion. Juices are a bad idea period. As a kid we had "juice glasses" that held 4oz that we would have at breakfast which is an appropriate serving and combined with eggs and wheat toast with butter is certainly absorbed more slowly and not a dietary problem. My friend's overweight kid will pour a 16 oz glass of it! 

Fruit by itself is OK because the digestion of fiber slows absorption of the sugars but juice by itself, not so much. Yet kids are give LOTS of juice! Juice boxes galore. Parents think it's good for them because they are getting some vitamins but instead kids are developing a taste for the sweet stuff instead of water.


----------



## Davelli0331

EnjoliWoman said:


> I think the low fat/high carb diets were a response to the thought that consuming fat adds fat to the body. Granted the body doesn't have to convert it like it does sugars and it is very calorie dense so to cut calories it made sense.
> 
> Unfortunately people then took the cue from the food pyramid and loaded up on starches thinking they are low in fat so one can eat more of them, but the satiety issue was ignored and blood sugar crashes so it's not sustainable.


I think there's a lot of truth to this. I remember back in the 80s and 90s when my folks were always dieting, it was always about cutting fat bc fat was evil and caused you to be fat, I mean it's right there in the name, amiright?

It's really only in recent years that I've begun to see people coming back from the nutritional fat condemnation and realizing that loading up on carbs was not the right idea.

Another example of one fad dietary concept leading directly into another fad dietary concept


----------



## Personal

EnjoliWoman said:


> Fruit by itself is OK because the digestion of fiber slows absorption of the sugars but juice by itself, not so much. Yet kids are give LOTS of juice! Juice boxes galore. Parents think it's good for them because they are getting some vitamins but instead kids are developing a taste for the sweet stuff instead of water.


Our kids mostly drink water, on limited occasion they have juice, cordial and or soft drinks.

Our 14yo son looks like a Calvin Klein commercial, while our 11yo daughter is competitive in running at a regional level and enjoys a variety of sports.

I don't think having a lot of juice drinks is great for their teeth either.


----------



## Davelli0331

Well, it's like Dolly said before, fruit was pushed so hard as the "better source of energy" that people think they can just eat as much of it as they want and they won't put on any weight. As if somehow those calories don't count, which of course is completely at odds with it being the "better source of energy".


----------



## happy as a clam

You are MUCH better off eating a plate full of broccoli, dark greens, cauliflower, spinach, etc. than you are eating a plate full of fruit.

Fruit has some important nutrients for sure, but its high sugar content and calorie density is certainly a factor. There are almost no nutrients, vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, you CAN'T get by eating loads of vegetables instead.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Dollystanford said:


> I eat very little fruit in my diet and when I do it's things like blueberries and raspberries (occasional banana for energy)
> 
> People in my office doing *weightwatchers *or slimmer's world or whatever have a points system in which a lot of fruits are 'free' meaning you can have as much of them as you want because they are low fat.


This is not actually true IIRC. When I was doing it, there were VERY few things that were free. The calculation is based on calories with fat increasing the points somewhat from there and fiber decreasing the points somewhat from there.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Davelli0331 said:


> Well, it's like Dolly said before, fruit was pushed so hard as the "better source of energy" that people think they can just eat as much of it as they want and they won't put on any weight. As if somehow those calories don't count, which of course is completely at odds with it being the "better source of energy".


Calories ARE energy. So if one needs energy (calories) then fruit IS a better source of energy than say a piece of cake with the same amount of calories. They have lots of fiber and good micro-nutrients. But as you say, they DO have energy.


----------



## bravenewworld

Fruit is full of fiber, water, vitamins, and antioxidants. It's good for you and helps eliminate waste. I eat fruit every single day. My best friend eats fruit with every meal and is skinny as a rail. 

Carbs are good for you - especially sweet potatoes, brown rice, quinoa, bulgur wheat, etc. They give you lots of energy. Assuming you don't have celiac disease there's no reason to be gluten free. I saw this great Jimmy Kimmel sketch where they interviewed people who are "gluten free" and none of them could even explain exactly what gluten is. 

Healthy fat is good for you - avocado, coconut oil, olive oil, etc. It prevents heart disease and keeps your hair nice and glossy plus keeps your nails looking good with none of those funky white spots. 

If eliminating the above from your diet works well for you, that's great. And I sincerely mean that. But to say people who eat the above are unhealthy or obese is ridiculous. I know former olympians and office workers who eat the above and are in amazing shape. 

Carbs, fruit, and healthy fat are not the enemy. Saturated fat, alcohol, and refined sugar in excessive quantities + a sedentary lifestyle is what generally causes obesity. 

I would hate for someone to read this thread and become discouraged thinking they can't eat bananas or potatoes because it's "unhealthy." That type of mentality to me is just as dangerous as the person pulling into a McDonald's drive thru 3x a week.


----------



## Dollystanford

I think my point is that people need to be conscious that you can still overeat when eating clean and healthily. Yes you will get more fibre and nutrients from eating 300 calories worth of fruit than from 300 calories worth of cake. But it's still 300 calories. People have a tendency to underestimate how many calories they are eating by a huge amount

So no of course I wouldn't eliminate fruit entirely from a diet (it tastes nice for a start). But I tend to go with vegetables more. 

Anyway don't listen to me, I just scarfed down a load of cheese doritos


----------



## Davelli0331

NobodySpecial said:


> This is not actually true IIRC. When I was doing it, there were VERY few things that were free. The calculation is based on calories with fat increasing the points somewhat from there and fiber decreasing the points somewhat from there.


From the Weight Watchers website:


> Fresh fruit is definitely having its moment in the spotlight, ever since Weight Watchers awarded it all a PointsPlus™ value of zero!


----------



## COGypsy

Davelli0331 said:


> From the Weight Watchers website:


Well yes, they did give fruit a PointsPlus of zero, but they also pretty significantly changed the point system to account for that projected consumption. With the new calculations the number of "points" was reduced to about 2/3 of what was allowable under their old system.

Pretty moot point in my book since most fruit tastes too gross to eat without drowning it in something to kill the taste. Not sure I'd ever miss it outside of throwing the odd orange or apple into the juicer with a bunch of greens and veggies.


----------



## lifeisbetterthanalternat

sorry i did not have time to read all of the posts and replies, so it is possible that this was addressed by others...

I am a little shocked that you would address only the women. There are alot of fat men too. They don't look good fat either. 

Having said that there is alot of missinformation in the media and by the "studies" that are done by the universities, funded many times by multinational food companies indirectly or directly. 

The fact is that every wants to believe in the fad diets but don't want to face the reality that it is all calories in vs calories burned with little variation. what you eat/drink and when is much less a factor that the magizine articles/tv will say. 

Is is also highly exaggerated the role that "lean muscle mass" plays into the equation. 50 cal per pound it a farce. As is the notion that skipping meals will lower your metabolism. This is missinformation with little or no substance. 

Having traveled extensively i can tell you Americans eat more calories than anybody. Cheese, carbs, and other processed crap is to blame. 

As for the "the media portrayal of the female body made me give up...." this is rubbish...so you can't look like a starlet so you will stuff your mouth with 3000+ calories day....


I knew a women who swore she had a metebolic problem. then she llved with me. She did't realize that she was consuming 2500 calories IN COFFEE creamer per week. This translates to 37 pounds of fat added to your middle in a year. I personally lost 20 bls saving 200 calories of creamer in my coffee in a couple of months. Read the labels and measure 2 teaspoons and realize at a 2000 calorie diet your coffee is 20% of your daily allowance. You don't have to eliminate is perhaps use less or put some sugar to make it easier to drink (believe it or not sugar is only 15 cal per teaspoon. 

If you don't believe me get your body fat tested, count your calories (skip meals...fast..just lower your calories) and see the results. 

The benefits of exercise on the body are enormous and should be part of everyone's regime for many reasons...It should bed noted that exercize without calorie reduction will not result in big weight loss. 

The other harsh reality that people don't want to accept is that it takes time. If it took you a few years to get that tire around your middle like i did..don't think you can remove it in 6 weeks.


----------



## NobodySpecial

bravenewworld said:


> Fruit is full of fiber, water, vitamins, and antioxidants. It's good for you and helps eliminate waste. I eat fruit every single day. My best friend eats fruit with every meal and is skinny as a rail.
> 
> Carbs are good for you - especially sweet potatoes, brown rice, quinoa, bulgur wheat, etc. They give you lots of energy. Assuming you don't have celiac disease there's no reason to be gluten free. I saw this great Jimmy Kimmel sketch where they interviewed people who are "gluten free" and none of them could even explain exactly what gluten is.
> 
> Healthy fat is good for you - avocado, coconut oil, olive oil, etc. It prevents heart disease and keeps your hair nice and glossy plus keeps your nails looking good with none of those funky white spots.
> 
> If eliminating the above from your diet works well for you, that's great. And I sincerely mean that. But to say people who eat the above are unhealthy or obese is ridiculous. I know former olympians and office workers who eat the above and are in amazing shape.
> 
> Carbs, fruit, and healthy fat are not the enemy. Saturated fat, alcohol, and refined sugar in excessive quantities + a sedentary lifestyle is what generally causes obesity.
> 
> I would hate for someone to read this thread and become discouraged thinking they can't eat bananas or potatoes because it's "unhealthy." That type of mentality to me is just as dangerous as the person pulling into a McDonald's drive thru 3x a week.


I agree with you 500%. People get confused what IS a carb and what does it do? You hear carbs are bad, but nothing about insulin response. For a diabetic, the lack of insulin response in fruit sugar might make it problematic, as problematic as a cupcake of the same sugar content perhaps. But for many of us, they are just calories, and calories with the lightening affect of fiber.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Davelli0331 said:


> From the Weight Watchers website:


This response is a little unclear. Points are based on volume and are not additive. So if I were to plug a quarter cup of grapes into the calculator, I am going to get a different number than if I plug in a cup. So while 1/4 cup of grapes might be 0 

1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 <> 0 + 0 + 0 + 0


----------



## Mostlycontent

happy as a clam said:


> Absolutely correct!
> 
> Whatever bozos decided that low-fat and fat-free carbs were "healthy" were off their rockers. Thus began the introduction of garbage foods like Snackwell cookies (no fat, nothing but sugar) and other similar fat-free products. Manufacturers discovered that they could remove the fat and just replace it with a whole bunch of extra sugar to increase shelf life. And Americans mowed them down by the boxfuls, thinking they were somehow "healthier."
> 
> Unrefined, unprocessed carbs in moderation are healthy, like sweet potatoes, steel cut oats, brown rice. And of course fruits and vegetables are natural carbs too.
> 
> We've all heard it a million times before -- shop the perimeter of the grocery store (produce section, meat, dairy) and avoid the center aisles, where all the processed junk is, like the plague.


You are exactly right. When our food providers try and remove fat, they usually replace it with some sort of unhealthy carb substitute. I'm convinced that is the reason for obesity in our society.

What really ticks me off is that they have made eating healthy way more expensive than eating just crap, which is what most people do and it's primarily because they don't know any better and it's less expensive.

My daughter only eats a high fat, low carb (less than 25 grams of carbs a day) and moderate protein diet.

The number of people out there, nutritionists included, who actually have a clue about crux of the problem is amazing to me. Our society is so grossly misinformed about proper diet it's not even funny.

I like your idea about avoiding the middle of the store. I hadn't thought about the layout of most grocery stores but I believe, on balance, that you're likely correct. Unfortunately, our grocery bill is higher than most because we stay away from a lot of the "crap" areas of the store. If not for two growing boys still in the house, I may not venture there at all.


----------



## Blossom Leigh

I definitely need to lose weight. My struggle is sticking to good eating or exercise when drama hits my life, which has been a lot in the past few years. Makes me gun shy to try again since every time I get started WHAM something major happens. Need to break that cycle for sure.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Dollystanford said:


> I think my point is that people need to be conscious that you can still overeat when eating clean and healthily. Yes you will get more fibre and nutrients from eating 300 calories worth of fruit than from 300 calories worth of cake. But it's still 300 calories. People have a tendency to underestimate how many calories they are eating by a huge amount
> 
> So no of course I wouldn't eliminate fruit entirely from a diet (it tastes nice for a start). But I tend to go with vegetables more.
> 
> Anyway don't listen to me, I just scarfed down a load of cheese doritos


I was agreeing with you. Especially in light of the poster who did not know that calories and energy are the same thing, thus fruit really IS a better form of energy. We do still need energy. And veggies have precious few most of the time.


----------



## Davelli0331

NobodySpecial said:


> I was agreeing with you. Especially in light of the poster who did not know that calories and energy are the same thing, thus fruit really IS a better form of energy. We do still need energy. And veggies have precious few most of the time.


Wait, do you think I was saying that calories and energy aren't the same thing? Of course they are, that's the scientific definition of a (small c) calorie (energy required to elevate the temp of 1 cc of water 1 degree C).

I was in fact pointing out the fallacy that some people take in thinking that they can eat all of the fruit that they want, bc even though fruit is "good energy" compared to other sources the excess calories (if eaten to excess) can still lead to excess weight.


----------



## bravenewworld

Dollystanford said:


> I think my point is that people need to be conscious that you can still overeat when eating clean and healthily. Yes you will get more fibre and nutrients from eating 300 calories worth of fruit than from 300 calories worth of cake. But it's still 300 calories. People have a tendency to underestimate how many calories they are eating by a huge amount
> 
> So no of course I wouldn't eliminate fruit entirely from a diet (it tastes nice for a start). But I tend to go with vegetables more.
> 
> Anyway don't listen to me, I just scarfed down a load of cheese doritos


I understand what you're saying, but the mentality in weight watcher's (which I belong to and really enjoy!) is that no one is at a weight watchers meeting because they ate too many apples.


----------



## bravenewworld

So last night I tried to bring a bag of fresh cherries into the movie theater and was told I couldn't, which really ticked me off! 

There was literally not one healthy option snack-wise there except a bottle of plain water. Which I don't consider a decent movie treat. 

I've been to sporting events where the same thing happens, they search your bag and make you feel like a criminal for bringing in fruit or trail mix. If they sold something healthful (truly healthful, not low fat ice cream or reduced fat candy) I wouldn't have to bring my own food in the first place! 

#1stworldchubbyproblems


----------



## firebelly1

Blossom Leigh said:


> I definitely need to lose weight. My struggle is sticking to good eating or exercise when drama hits my life, which has been a lot in the past few years. Makes me gun shy to try again since every time I get started WHAM something major happens. Need to break that cycle for sure.


See, this is why my goal is to lose weight and keep it off by changing the way I plan and shop for my food. I decided that my short-term goal is to come up with a two-week plan that includes three meals and one afternoon snack a day that is packed with protein and vegetables, is easy to prepare (i.e could do it in my sleep), and is doable with my budget. Something where I never have to really think about it and can fall back on it when I don't feel like being creative. 

I guess the challenge is that when you go to the store, you don't get anything that isn't on that list. But, that's why I also include things like sugar-free pudding and skinny-cow ice cream sandwiches on my list. No way am I going to give up chocolate.


----------



## bravenewworld

firebelly1 said:


> See, this is why my goal is to lose weight and keep it off by changing the way I plan and shop for my food. I decided that my short-term goal is to come up with a two-week plan that includes three meals and one afternoon snack a day that is packed with protein and vegetables, is easy to prepare (i.e could do it in my sleep), and is doable with my budget. Something where I never have to really think about it and can fall back on it when I don't feel like being creative.
> 
> I guess the challenge is that when you go to the store, you don't get anything that isn't on that list. But, that's why I also include things like sugar-free pudding and skinny-cow ice cream sandwiches on my list. No way am I going to give up chocolate.


Love me some chocolate! My fav is to get out my Yonanas frozen treat maker and shave a little dark chocolate on top of my soft serve. It's the bomb dot com! 

Yonanas Frozen Treat Maker


----------



## COGypsy

bravenewworld said:


> Love me some chocolate! My fav is to get out my Yonanas frozen treat maker and shave a little dark chocolate on top of my soft serve. It's the bomb dot com!
> 
> Yonanas Frozen Treat Maker


I've heard about those--does it only work with bananas though? I can only tolerate bananas if they're hidden in bread that's covered with butter. But I like the idea of a less-bad frozen treat....


----------



## bravenewworld

COGypsy said:


> I've heard about those--does it only work with bananas though? I can only tolerate bananas if they're hidden in bread that's covered with butter. But I like the idea of a less-bad frozen treat....


You can pretty much use any frozen fruit but in my opinion bananas have the best consistency/similarity to soft serve. I love the taste of bananas though so I am biased. 

I have made banana/strawberry before and it was delish! I add a splash of vanilla extract too when in the mood.


----------



## Davelli0331

Fat free Greek yogurt - unflavored. Two/three drops of vanilla extract, dab of peanut butter and/or Nutella. Eat as is or let sit in the freezer for a few.

High protein and satisfies the sweet tooth


----------



## COGypsy

bravenewworld said:


> You can pretty much use any frozen fruit but in my opinion bananas have the best consistency/similarity to soft serve. I love the taste of bananas though so I am biased.
> 
> I have made banana/strawberry before and it was delish! I add a splash of vanilla extract too when in the mood.


Haha--bananas are the WORST when it comes to fruit! It is IMPOSSIBLE to kill the taste! I had a couple of juice/smoothie recipes that had banana in them and had to toss them out because even half a banana in a blenderful of other stuff is way too much for me! 

I do WW too and our challenge last week was to try a new fruit. I got a couple of fresh peaches and cut them up, sprinkled them with cinnamon, nutmeg, cayenne and a tiny bit of almond extract. Let it sit in the fridge a while and ate it with a splash of almond milk over it. That was okay, though I doubt I'll try it again. But if it could have been colder and the texture changed, I bet I would have liked it better.

I saw a Rocco DiSpirito recipe for a soft serve with ricotta and vanilla bean and other stuff that looks like it could be interesting, but I'm still too afraid of the points/calories with things like cheese in them. Maybe someday..... Mostly now I'm in the mode of "dealing with the consequences of past poor choices" and figuring out what I can allow myself to eat versus what I'd really like to eat. Always a process!


----------



## TiggyBlue

COGypsy said:


> Haha--bananas are the WORST when it comes to fruit! It is IMPOSSIBLE to kill the taste! I had a couple of juice/smoothie recipes that had banana in them and had to toss them out because even half a banana in a blenderful of other stuff is way too much for me!


I find frozen banana with carob powder makes a lush chocolate soft serve, I find carob strong enough to overpower the taste of banana.


----------



## heartsbeating

My sweet-tooth has lessened with eating more protein and eating more often.

I'll have occasional dark chocolate or berries. I don't eat much fruit anymore but keep frozen raspberries or mixed berries on-hand to take off the sweet-edge when it hits. Yum.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## heartsbeating

Blossom Leigh said:


> I definitely need to lose weight. My struggle is sticking to good eating or exercise when drama hits my life, which has been a lot in the past few years. Makes me gun shy to try again since every time I get started WHAM something major happens. Need to break that cycle for sure.


In life, you have to do a lot of things you don’t want to do. Many times, that’s what life is, one vile task after another. But don’t get aggravated. Then the enemy has you by the short hair.
— Al Swearengen, Deadwood

Edited out the swearing despite the effect it gives. There's a certain humor I find in this. Hopefully it might be received in the same way.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## heartsbeating

bravenewworld said:


> Carbs are good for you - especially sweet potatoes, brown rice, quinoa, bulgur wheat, etc. They give you lots of energy. Assuming you don't have celiac disease there's no reason to be gluten free. I saw this great Jimmy Kimmel sketch where they interviewed people who are "gluten free" and none of them could even explain exactly what gluten is.


I agree with much of the sentiment of your post.

With those shows it'd be boring if they had ppl with the answers / info. No doubt they're edited out. Or at least, I hope that's the case!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## heartsbeating

bravenewworld said:


> #1stworldchubbyproblems


Lol!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Blossom Leigh

heartsbeating said:


> In life, you have to do a lot of things you don’t want to do. Many times, that’s what life is, one vile task after another. But don’t get aggravated. Then the enemy has you by the short hair.
> — Al Swearengen, Deadwood
> 
> Edited out the swearing despite the effect it gives. There's a certain humor I find in this. Hopefully it might be received in the same way.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Couldnt agree more, the enemy having me by the short tail just totally p!sses me off! Lol. Grrrrr


----------



## bravenewworld

Davelli0331 said:


> Fat free Greek yogurt - unflavored. Two/three drops of vanilla extract, dab of peanut butter and/or Nutella. Eat as is or let sit in the freezer for a few.
> 
> High protein and satisfies the sweet tooth


This sounds really good! I'm going to try it. 

Another thing I like is to buy the European style dark chocolate yogurt at Trader Joe's, put a tablespoon of chia seeds, and let it sit overnight. The seeds plump up and it becomes like a healthy tapioca pudding. I also throw in some pomegranate seeds as well for some extra tang. So yum.


----------



## Lyris

Oh Dave, I love you as you know, but that sounds just a tiny bit disgusting. 

Gluten-free is such an irritating fad. If it helps with weight-loss it's only because gluten-free stuff tastes like chalk


----------



## Dollystanford

I accidentally bought some gluten-free sandwich thins and got a very nasty surprise. Gluten free, taste free and a pound more expensive than ordinary sandwich thins - no ta


----------



## Mostlycontent

bravenewworld said:


> Fruit is full of fiber, water, vitamins, and antioxidants. It's good for you and helps eliminate waste. I eat fruit every single day. My best friend eats fruit with every meal and is skinny as a rail.
> 
> Carbs are good for you - especially sweet potatoes, brown rice, quinoa, bulgur wheat, etc. They give you lots of energy. Assuming you don't have celiac disease there's no reason to be gluten free. I saw this great Jimmy Kimmel sketch where they interviewed people who are "gluten free" and none of them could even explain exactly what gluten is.
> 
> Healthy fat is good for you - avocado, coconut oil, olive oil, etc. It prevents heart disease and keeps your hair nice and glossy plus keeps your nails looking good with none of those funky white spots.
> 
> If eliminating the above from your diet works well for you, that's great. And I sincerely mean that. But to say people who eat the above are unhealthy or obese is ridiculous. I know former olympians and office workers who eat the above and are in amazing shape.
> 
> Carbs, fruit, and healthy fat are not the enemy. Saturated fat, alcohol, and refined sugar in excessive quantities + a sedentary lifestyle is what generally causes obesity.
> 
> I would hate for someone to read this thread and become discouraged thinking they can't eat bananas or potatoes because it's "unhealthy." That type of mentality to me is just as dangerous as the person pulling into a McDonald's drive thru 3x a week.



I have a couple of comments. First off, nobody is saying that carbs are bad for you but unfortunately, a lot of them are given how today's food is processed. What's bad for you is too many carbs and most people get way, way, way too many of them in their diet, which is directly the source of obesity.

The average person who is reasonably active only needs about 60 to 80 grams of carbs a day. The average person though consumes usually twice to three times that much. If you don't believe me then track what some of your friends or what you yourself might eat in a day. It's astounding how high some foods are in carbs.

If you are just a moderately active person and eat 200 + grams of carbs a day, I can promise you that you will be overweight. The extra carbs will be processed and stored as fat and then your body will begin to crave more of them because they're not efficiently being used to burn energy. 

A higher fat diet is good for all the benefits you mentioned but also adds additional benefits for women especially as fat is used by your body to produce hormones, particularly estrogen. This is usually a good thing for women either in or approaching menopause when hormone production drops dramatically. Lower fat diets usually decrease female hormone production, which brings about all kinds of other problems. Lack of estrogen can mean an inability for a woman to orgasm, for example.

Everything must be done in moderation obviously but this isn't the turn of the last century when people worked all day in the fields. We simply don't need as many carbs as the normal person consumes in a day. Couple that with decreasing metabolism as you age and lack of any real physical activity for most people and you get what we are seeing today, which is a large percentage of our population looking like they've not only never missed a meal but eaten your share as well.


----------



## Blossom Leigh

Mostlycontent said:


> I have a couple of comments. First off, nobody is saying that carbs are bad for you but unfortunately, a lot of them are given how today's food is processed. What's bad for you is too many carbs and most people get way, way, way too many of them in their diet, which is directly the source of obesity.
> 
> The average person who is reasonably active only needs about 60 to 80 grams of carbs a day. The average person though consumes usually twice to three times that much. If you don't believe me then track what some of your friends or what you yourself might eat in a day. It's astounding how high some foods are in carbs.
> 
> If you are just a moderately active person and eat 200 + grams of carbs a day, I can promise you that you will be overweight. The extra carbs will be processed and stored as fat and then your body will begin to crave more of them because they're not efficiently being used to burn energy.
> 
> A higher fat diet is good for all the benefits you mentioned but also adds additional benefits for women especially as fat is used by your body to produce hormones, particularly estrogen. This is usually a good thing for women either in or approaching menopause when hormone production drops dramatically. Lower fat diets usually decrease female hormone production, which brings about all kinds of other problems. Lack of estrogen can mean an inability for a woman to orgasm, for example.
> 
> Everything must be done in moderation obviously but this isn't the turn of the last century when people worked all day in the fields. We simply don't need as many carbs as the normal person consumes in a day. Couple that with decreasing metabolism as you age and lack of any real physical activity for most people and you get what we are seeing today, which is a large percentage of our population looking like they've not only never missed a meal but eaten your share as well.


Thank you for posting this. Last Fall I was losing weight on low calorie, low carb, moderate fat, moderate to high protein and someone said I needed to cut my fat to "lower the better" and I ranged from 10 g to 25 g a day and my hair fell out. Wasnt sure if it was the super high stress six months before or if it was linked to low fat. I also noticed a sex shift. Wasnt sure if that was age or again the super low fat. Your post encourages me that what I was doing prior to dropping my fat so low was probably the better route. I ranged between 30g and 50g, though mostly hovered around 35. I was doing 1000 calories, 115 carbs or less, 80+ protein, 35 g fat and burning 400 to 800 in calories through various exercise. This time, I may bump up the calories a bit and tweak carbs but leave the rest. I was using Fitness Pal to track and love it. Part of what happened that affected my progress was a foot injury from a car wreck I had. One of my main exercises was dancing with Zumba and boxing with wii. Foot injury and wii breaking really affected everything. Plus fighting with my H hit its peak this past Winter, so it consumed my focus and energy. Now that things are MUCH calmer and my foot is better I need to just set my mind in motion to pick up this project and have a back up plan ready in the event another set of events hits.


----------



## happy as a clam

Lyris said:


> O
> *Gluten-free is such an irritating fad.* If it helps with weight-loss it's only because gluten-free stuff tastes like chalk


Well, gluten-free may be a fad, but for those of us with celiac and gluten intolerance, it's a life-changing experience to give it up. And it helps with weight loss (mostly bloat and water) because if you're truly allergic to gluten your body is always having an auto-immune response to the allergen.

I was so sick all through my 20s and 30s; could never understand why I would eat a regular portion of pasta or a reasonable sandwich like everyone else, and then blow up 5-7 lbs of water weight. Not to mention horrific digestive issues, and eczema. 

At age 40 my doctor put me on an "elimination" diet -- lamb and rice only for 2 weeks. The doc suspected wheat was the culprit; I added dairy back first, no problems. Added soy, no problems. Added wheat -- BINGO! I broke out in hives, rash, eczema, bowel issues, it was almost indescribable.

I agree that food manufacturers have jumped on the gluten-free bandwagon trying to make everyone believe they should ALL ditch gluten. Like anything else, they will push a scam on to the unsuspecting public all for their own bottom line.

All it does is "de-legitimize" gluten-free for those of us who really can't eat it.


----------



## staarz21

Blossom Leigh said:


> Thank you for posting this. Last Fall I was losing weight on low calorie, low carb, moderate fat, moderate to high protein and someone said I needed to cut my fat to "lower the better" and I ranged from 10 g to 25 g a day and my hair fell out. Wasnt sure if it was the super high stress six months before or if it was linked to low fat. I also noticed a sex shift. Wasnt sure if that was age or again the super low fat. Your post encourages me that what I was doing prior to dropping my fat so low was probably the better route. I ranged between 30g and 50g, though mostly hovered around 35. I was doing 1000 calories, 115 carbs or less, 80+ protein, 35 g fat and burning 400 to 800 in calories through various exercise. This time, I may bump up the calories a bit and tweak carbs but leave the rest. I was using Fitness Pal to track and love it. Part of what happened that affected my progress was a foot injury from a car wreck I had. One of my main exercises was dancing with Zumba and boxing with wii. Foot injury and wii breaking really affected everything. Plus fighting with my H hit its peak this past Winter, so it consumed my focus and energy. Now that things are MUCH calmer and my foot is better I need to just set my mind in motion to pick up this project and have a back up plan ready in the event another set of events hits.


Why so low on calories? 1000 calories a day is pretty low and not getting enough to eat can also contribute to weight gain as weird as that sounds. It's recommended not to go below 1200 for females, higher for males. I mean obviously, you have found something that works, but I would be really worried about only 1000 calories a day, especially if you are exercising on top of that low calorie count.


----------



## happy as a clam

staarz21 said:


> Why so low on calories? 1000 calories a day is pretty low and *not getting enough to eat can also contribute to weight gain as weird as that sounds.* It's recommended not to go below 1200 for females, higher for males.


I completely agree. 1000 calories is way too low. Do a Google search for information about *basal rate metabolism (BMR)* -- this is the minimum number of calories your body needs to perform basic functions like digestion, respiration, muscle repair, keeping your organs functioning, etc. In other words, BMR is the minimum number of calories needed JUST TO STAY ALIVE, as in sitting in a chair all day and NOT MOVING. When you add things in like normal daily movement, walking, climbing stairs, housework, exercise, the caloric demands go way up. staarz is correct, 1200 calories is the lowest women should go just to meet the BMR demands.

When you deprive your body of necessary calories, your metabolism slows down, your brain starts "cannibalizing" muscle and organs just to get its fuel demands met, and weight loss stalls. It's like shooting yourself in the foot.

You need to eat more calories, somewhere around 1,800 all from good, clean, unprocessed foods to start cranking up your metabolism. Try to spread those calories out over 3 meals and 2 snacks so you're eating 5 times per day (a woman can only metabolize about 300-400 calories at a time; the rest, what doesn't get burned up for immediate fuel needs, gets stored as fat). 

It sounds paradoxical (more clean calories = more weight loss?) but its true.


----------



## Satya

bravenewworld said:


> So last night I tried to bring a bag of fresh cherries into the movie theater and was told I couldn't, which really ticked me off!
> 
> There was literally not one healthy option snack-wise there except a bottle of plain water. Which I don't consider a decent movie treat.


Did they check your bag? What I do is bring a big bag/purse with me and I just bring it inside the theater. If it's got pockets I put protein bars/fruit in there. I've never had my bag checked.


----------



## Blossom Leigh

Thanks for the info guys... Yea.. I think tweaking the calories and not going so low on fat is definitely headed in the right direction. Will take the rest of what y'all said and look into building me a new menu 

I'm only 5'3" so will probably hit 1700 calories to start and see where that gets me


----------



## See_Listen_Love

IMFarAboveRubies said:


> I haven't read all the comments yet, because all I could think about was,
> 
> "What the heck was Jesus doing being at a nude spa and not only looking at all the fat ladies, but criticizing their bodies?"
> 
> I'm sure there were fat men there, but obviously you were fixated on the women.
> 
> You really neeeeeed to change your avatar. It is incongruent with your walk.


Maybe you should read before asking these question.

I believe God created men and woman, including those beautiful curves I like to look at. But not the fat flabs.

added: (Tired...) I am not criticizing their bodies. I am calling the passing of a threshold in society. I told also about the men, but they were in a 'normal' mix. From athletic to fat.

About the avatar: I believe I have to try to have compassion with other people, understanding and be helping. As such it is not a personal attack, but everybody seems to read it that way. I excused for that.


----------



## happy as a clam

Blossom Leigh said:


> I'm only 5'3" so will probably hit 1700 calories to start and see where that gets me


Perfect, Blossom!

You might gain a slight amount initially, 2-3 lbs (all water weight, NOT fat), but once your metabolism gets CRANKED you will be a fat-burning machine!! Don't skimp on healthy fats -- olive oil, salmon, tuna (fish oil), avocadoes, walnuts, and PLENTY of water to flush everything out. Give your body the tools it needs and *it will do the work FOR YOU, beautifully!!* Your body is a fine-tuned, lean, fat-burning machine if you will give it the correct fuel. IT knows EXACTLY what it needs...  Stop working harder, work SMARTER!


----------



## bravenewworld

happy as a clam said:


> Perfect, Blossom!
> 
> You might gain a slight amount initially, 2-3 lbs (all water weight, NOT fat), but once your metabolism gets CRANKED you will be a fat-burning machine!! Don't skimp on healthy fats -- olive oil, salmon, tuna (fish oil), avocadoes, walnuts, and PLENTY of water to flush everything out. Give your body the tools it needs and *it will do the work FOR YOU, beautifully!!* Your body is a fine-tuned, lean, fat-burning machine if you will give it the correct fuel. IT knows EXACTLY what it needs...  Stop working harder, work SMARTER!


Agree with the above - healthy fats also helps me feel satiated so I binge eat less. Lots of water, fiber rich food, and a probiotic can also help you eliminate regularly which is important for weight loss. 

Another thing - don't get down on yourself if you slip up and are not "perfect." The only difference between a successful person and a non-successful person is the successful person failed more. No matter what happens, be kind to yourself and get back on the horse. 

A quote I love regarding eating healthy/weight loss: "You can have anything you want, but you can't have EVERYTHING you want." 

I've managed to lose weight eating sundaes, Chinese buffets, t-bone steaks, etc. but they've gone from a "regular" to a "sometimes/treat" food. It's surprising how far baby steps will take you!


----------



## bravenewworld

Another thing (particularly for women) is that stress levels and poor sleep quantity/quality really mess with our hormones and can prevent weight loss. 

If you can, try to get at least 7 hours per night of quality sleep and exercise/meditate/watch a silly movie/whatever works for you for stress management. 

I can't tell you how many times I had a week where I ate extremely healthfully and didn't lose weight because I wasn't giving my body and mind the rest it needed.


----------



## Blossom Leigh

Yep, must be a priority . Thanks bunches 

Have loved the treat idea and self kindness....


----------



## bravenewworld

Mostlycontent said:


> I have a couple of comments. First off, nobody is saying that carbs are bad for you but unfortunately, a lot of them are given how today's food is processed. What's bad for you is too many carbs and most people get way, way, way too many of them in their diet, which is directly the source of obesity.
> 
> The average person who is reasonably active only needs about 60 to 80 grams of carbs a day. The average person though consumes usually twice to three times that much. If you don't believe me then track what some of your friends or what you yourself might eat in a day. It's astounding how high some foods are in carbs.
> 
> If you are just a moderately active person and eat 200 + grams of carbs a day, I can promise you that you will be overweight. The extra carbs will be processed and stored as fat and then your body will begin to crave more of them because they're not efficiently being used to burn energy.
> 
> A higher fat diet is good for all the benefits you mentioned but also adds additional benefits for women especially as fat is used by your body to produce hormones, particularly estrogen. This is usually a good thing for women either in or approaching menopause when hormone production drops dramatically. Lower fat diets usually decrease female hormone production, which brings about all kinds of other problems. Lack of estrogen can mean an inability for a woman to orgasm, for example.
> 
> Everything must be done in moderation obviously but this isn't the turn of the last century when people worked all day in the fields. We simply don't need as many carbs as the normal person consumes in a day. Couple that with decreasing metabolism as you age and lack of any real physical activity for most people and you get what we are seeing today, which is a large percentage of our population looking like they've not only never missed a meal but eaten your share as well.


There were some people earlier in the thread advocating a very low carb/high protein/high fat diet. Generally speaking, the human body is made to consume a decent amount of carbs. I am not a fan of a Atkins type eating plan, and for me personally, it's not a sustainable lifestyle. Let's not forget, Dr. Atkins died of a heart attack. 

I am not at all saying all carbs are created equal. While I love white rice and sourdough bread, I don't eat them often and instead opt for quinoa, bulgur wheat, or a baked potato. Actually, my body does amazingly well with potatoes and I drop weight like crazy when I eat them. I think it's a personal thing, you have to experiment and see which carbs work best for you. 

I actually do track exactly what I eat almost every day and know exactly how many carbs I am consuming. I also do workouts where I burn at least 1,000 calories. Believe me, you don't want to deal with me if I haven't eaten carbs after - I somehow manage to be both b!tchy and a zombie.


----------



## bravenewworld

Satya said:


> Did they check your bag? What I do is bring a big bag/purse with me and I just bring it inside the theater. If it's got pockets I put protein bars/fruit in there. I've never had my bag checked.


Confession: I was at the dollar theater. (Keepin' it classy! ) Since they are only charging you one dollar for a movie - they check your bag to make sure you aren't bringing in your own snacks. Including water. 

I understand where they are coming from, but at the same time, I wish they sold better food! Basically I had to sit through the entire movie with my tummy rumbling.


----------



## Coffee Amore

bravenewworld said:


> Let's not forget, Dr. Atkins died of a heart attack.


No, he didn't. He fell on some ice and died from the head injuries.


----------



## bravenewworld

Coffee Amore said:


> No, he didn't. He fell on some ice and died from the head injuries.


Yes, you are correct. I should have put a history of heart attacks, congestive heart failure, and hypertension. But he did actually die of of the above.

Edited to add: Didn't intend for the above to read as snarky - just admitting I was wrong and should have been more factual.


----------



## NextTimeAround

bravenewworld said:


> Yes, you are correct. I should have put a history of heart attacks, congestive heart failure, and hypertension. But he did actually die of of the above.


In any case, Atkins work redirected emphasis on diet and strategies to lose weight.

there are a lot diets now that advocate lowering carb intake due to sugar and starches....... very similar to the Atkins philosophy.

This is one of those examples of someone hating on some aspect of weight management.

Why hate on Atkins? No one else was looking at the carb component of the diet before he did it?


----------



## bravenewworld

NextTimeAround said:


> In any case, Atkins work redirected emphasis on diet and strategies to lose weight.
> 
> there are a lot diets now that advocate lowering carb intake due to sugar and starches....... very similar to the Atkins philosophy.
> 
> This is one of those examples of someone hating on some aspect of weight management.
> 
> Why hate on Atkins? No one else was looking at the carb component of the diet before he did it?


I don't hate on Atkins at all - not even a little bit. In my original post I said that for me, personally, it's not a sustainable lifestyle. For others it might work great. I used him as an example as he is one of the more prolific nutrition authors of the low/no carb lifestyle. 

If I ate like that I would not only be hungry and sleepy, but I would likely develop some type of heart disease. It runs in my family and I don't think using large portions of high fat foods/proteins as opposed to complex carbs should be preached as the most healthful diet. There were quite a few anti carb/pro high fat posts and I wanted to bring some balance to the discussion.

Also, when you are overweight people are always just telling you to "cut out your carbs." It can be quite tiresome, especially when cutting your carbs leaves you feeling horrible/lethargic. And there are other, better (for me) ways to lose weight and get in shape.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

bravenewworld said:


> I don't hate on Atkins at all - not even a little bit. In my original post I said that for me, personally, it's not a sustainable lifestyle. For others it might work great. I used him as an example as he is one of the more prolific nutrition authors of the low/no carb lifestyle.
> 
> If I ate like that I would not only be hungry and sleepy, but I would likely develop some type of heart disease. It runs in my family and I don't think using large portions of high fat foods/proteins as opposed to complex carbs should be preached as the most healthful diet. There were quite a few anti carb/pro high fat posts and I wanted to bring some balance to the discussion.
> 
> Also, when you are overweight people are always just telling you to "cut out your carbs." It can be quite tiresome, especially when cutting your carbs leaves you feeling horrible/lethargic. And there are other, better (for me) ways to lose weight and get in shape.


I liked your posts about what you eat etc, do you happen to have a more elaborate post summarizing your diet in maybe another forum already?


----------



## bravenewworld

See_Listen_Love said:


> I liked your posts about what you eat etc, do you happen to have a more elaborate post summarizing your diet in maybe another forum already?


Thanks See Listen, I appreciate! Was worried I was being overly wordy/informative. I've developed a passion for nutrition, because I never want to go back to where I was when I started this process. Not only was I fat, unhappy, and sick - but I was in bad marriage and stress eating all kinds. No bueno physically or psychologically. I don't just see it in the weight loss - literally my hair, skin, etc. look better and my last physical at the doctor was a huge improvement! It feels really, really, good. 

I kind of got my hands on everything I could read and just started experimenting and making notes on how my body reacted to eating different foods/portions/etc. It was really eye opening. I think nutrition is kind of a lifelong individual experiment. 

For me right now it's pretty basic - three solid meals. If I feel like a snack I'll usually just have fruit or a tea/coffee. Some examples below:

Breakfast: (*I also take a fish oil pill and probiotic in the AM) 
-Vegan yogurt (made from coconut milk) with chia seeds and a piece of fruit. 
-Toasted whole wheat english muffin topped with nonfat cottage cheese and sliced tomatoes. Sometimes I'll crumble one slice of bacon over the top also for extra flavor
-Egg white omelet with lots of veggies, fresh salsa, and 1 or 2 slices of whole wheat toast 

Lunch:
-Large baked potato topped with vegetarian chili 
-Ceviche on top of a huge salad with an entire avocado mixed in. Sometimes I'll throw in some blue corn tortilla chips for crunch. 
-Chickpea salad sandwich on whole wheat bread. It's basically like tuna salad except you sub chickpeas for the tuna and use nonfat plain yogurt or vegan mayo. Add lots of fresh dill, celery, and cornichon pickles. So delish!

Dinner:
-Shrimp/Spinach risotto using bulgar wheat instead of Arborio rice. I use low sodium broth instead of cream and add salt to taste.
-Grilled lean protein on 1/4 of the plate, complex carb on 1/4 of the plate, veggies on 1/2 the plate. I usually buy a 4-6 ounce steak or fish for the protein 
-Vegetable curry over a cup of quinoa or brown rice with a poached egg on top. I like to add some hot sauce on top too. 

Dessert (Only if I'm in the mood) 
-Fruit
-A small portion of dark chocolate
-Cup of yonanas fruit only soft serve 

Basically my diet is lean protein, low to nonfat dairy, heart-friendly fat, complex carbs, fresh fruit and vegetables. It's omega and fiber heavy as well. When cooking I pretty much only use olive oil or coconut oil spray. When I eat out I order what I want, cut it in half, and make two meals out of it. Except when I don't. 

Oh, and I still drink beer 2x a week. Even though my body doesn't process it well and it has little nutrition value...because beer is delicious. I didn't drink any this week and lost almost 3.5 lbs. I swear if I had given it up I would have reached my goal weight months ago. Baby steps. 

I still eat stuff I shouldn't but overall I am satisfied, healthy, and feeling good. Everything in moderation.


----------



## Starstarfish

> Gluten-free is such an irritating fad. If it helps with weight-loss it's only because gluten-free stuff tastes like chalk


I find labeling gluten free a fad annoying. I mean - no one labels "nut free" products or "dairy free" or "vegan" products a fad. As someone else says - it de-legitimizes these things for those of us that require them to feel at our optimal best. 

Also - if the only gluten free things you've had tasted like chalk, you've never had Amy's almond flour shortbread cookies. :smthumbup: 

I've posted my story on TAM in a few different places, but - someone asked about my weight loss (I've lost 80 lbs) and the relationship to gluten free. I had a classic case of "leaky gut" - my allergic reaction to gluten inflamed my guts to the point it made them unable to properly absorb calcium or vitamin D. Which led to chronic bone and teeth issues (when I was pregnant with my son and encouraged to "eat more whole grains" - despite regular cleanings and brushing - I cropped up 15 cavities -in one year-). When I was a child I broke bones with fair regularity. The Vitamin D deficiency following my pregnancy contributed to a spiral of depression that led to post-partum bordering on mania. 

When I eat gluten-containing foods it makes me a different person, I can - feel - it. I feel like my whole body and being is in a state of agitation. I'm either snappy and on edge or depressed and despondent. My mind feels like it's swimming. I either "go" too much or don't "go" at all. I can see discernible affects via the scale the degree to which I'll bloat up - pounds and pounds of water weight and a visible puffy stomach.

Fad or otherwise, I know as an individual how I feel and the effects it has on my body. Is all of that totally in my head? 

Do I feel eating gluten free inherently requires me to make choices against things that contributed to my weight loss. Yes - you can't eat fried foods or breaded foods when you are gluten free (and the price of GF alternatives for home consumption is prohibitive enough they become a rare treat.) You have to carefully consider where you go out to eat, it requires you to read ingredient lists, and more natural foods also don't generally contain HFCS or GMOs or the other stuff no one should likely be eating anyway. 

I also eat low carb, for me - when I eat too many carbs I have the opposite effect as Bravenewworld, I feel constantly hungry. I need a fairly high level of protein to feel satiated. If I don't control my carb (and more importantly sugar) intake, I get yeast infections. I'm thinking no doubt this is linked to my issues with gluten, really - I have an issue with digesting carbs, and an even worse issue digesting the gluten/gliadin protein. 

I think ultimately - everyone needs to figure out what works for them. Go see your doctor, go see a nutritionist, work with them. Test things out - work on being your best you. The same diet might not work for everyone, all ultimately others can do is say what worked/works for them.


----------



## bravenewworld

Starstarfish said:


> I think ultimately - everyone needs to figure out what works for them. Go see your doctor, go see a nutritionist, work with them. Test things out - work on being your best you. The same diet might not work for everyone, all ultimately others can do is say what worked/works for them.


This exactly. Sometimes even stuff that is super healthy for 99% of the population just doesn't work for me personally. For example I didn't realize orange juice and kale gave me horrible acid reflux until I started writing down what I ate and making notes - I was always blaming whatever else I ate that day.


----------



## cuchulain36

I don't think it's a mystery that with increased obesity we see increased divorce. I'm sorry but people generally don't find fatness attractive and if you married both thin and attractive and one party lets themselves go completely, you can't expect the other spouse to enthusiastically engage in sex with you when they're simply not sexually attracted to you anymore.

And it's not just women, simply look around at Little League games, nearly every Dad is obese, not overweight, but a good 40-50 lbs overweight and obese.

With fat sex dies, once sex dies the marriage dies.


----------



## Runs like Dog

An epidemic is something beyond your control.


----------



## bravenewworld

cuchulain36 said:


> I don't think it's a mystery that with increased obesity we see increased divorce. I'm sorry but people generally don't find fatness attractive and if you married both thin and attractive and one party lets themselves go completely, you can't expect the other spouse to enthusiastically engage in sex with you when they're simply not sexually attracted to you anymore.
> 
> And it's not just women, simply look around at Little League games, nearly every Dad is obese, not overweight, but a good 40-50 lbs overweight and obese.
> 
> With fat sex dies, once sex dies the marriage dies.


Not (completely) disagreeing but I have to say, I think when a spouse starts to really put on weight, it can be a sign there's something wrong in the marriage beyond overeating/sedentary lifestyle. 

When I gained my first fifteen pounds (long hours at a stressful desk job) I tried to start eating more healthfully, exercise, etc. and my ex really made fun of me. When I joined weight watchers he was embarrassed I was doing "something so corny." It made me really depressed to feel so unsupported and I gained even more weight. 

Not blaming him for that as it was my choice to eat poorly BUT I was using eating to cope with other issues in the marriage. Recently I saw a great episode of "Extreme Weight Loss" on Hulu where a preacher's wife lost hundreds of pounds and her husband was so super supportive. It was awesome! He actually lost weight as well and worked out with her every day. 

I guess what I am saying is if you have a strong marriage (which shouldn't all marriages be?) then I don't believe weight gain will destroy it. However, spouses should support each other being healthy. I wouldn't be attracted to someone obese and the next person I am with will need to have an active lifestyle. 

One thing I don't understand (not trying to be nasty) is parents who let their children get morbidly obese. On a run this AM I saw two parents with young children who were at least 50lbs overweight. On a small frame, it was an enormous amount of weight. It made me really sad.


----------



## Coffee Amore

bravenewworld said:


> One thing I don't understand (not trying to be nasty) is parents who let their children get morbidly obese. On a run this AM I saw two parents with young children who were at least 50lbs overweight. On a small frame, it was an enormous amount of weight. It made me really sad.


I see this at our elementary school. There are children in kindergarten who weigh 70-80 pounds. Some of them look like they're fourth graders. I know the weight because the parents have mentioned it. The parents are also overweight or obese themselves. We went to a birthday party recently. One of these boys brought a large pizza. He ate five slices all by himself on top of the other food that was available. He's one of the boys who weighs 74 pounds in kindergarten. 

When I look at the class photos from my own years in elementary school back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the children look skinny maybe by today's standards, but we were at a normal weight.


----------



## Lyris

Vitamin D is absorbed primarily from sunlight, not food. I had low vitamin D when it was tested, as do most people where I live due to sunlight access and increased use of sunblock. So I doubt a lack of vitamin D had anything to do with "leaky gut syndrome"

I am surrounded by people who jump on whatever the latest food fad is dragging their children along with them. Aided and abetted by naturopaths who profit hugely from the sake of supplements. They cause stress and anxiety around food in their children and in my opinion, lay the foundations for future eating disorders.

And I don't see how anyone can equate a nut/dairy/egg allergy, which can kill someone within minutes, with a vague 'intolerance' which is often not even diagnosed by an actual medical professional.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Coffee Amore said:


> I see this at our elementary school. There are children in kindergarten who weigh 70-80 pounds. Some of them look like they're fourth graders. I know the weight because the parents have mentioned it. The parents are also overweight or obese themselves. We went to a birthday party recently. One of these boys brought a large pizza. He ate five slices all by himself on top of the other food that was available. He's one of the boys who weighs 74 pounds in kindergarten.
> 
> When I look at the class photos from my own years in elementary school back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the children look skinny maybe by today's standards, but we were at a normal weight.




When I was a little kid (i'm 40) the biggest size they made for little girls was 14, and if you wore it before middle school you were considered big. And there were very few big kids. Now they make size 20 and little kids wear it.

As to your other point, my younger son is 71 pounds and he's headed to 6th grade and is 4'6". Granted he's a little small but still.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bravenewworld

Coffee Amore said:


> I see this at our elementary school. There are children in kindergarten who weigh 70-80 pounds. Some of them look like they're fourth graders. I know the weight because the parents have mentioned it. The parents are also overweight or obese themselves. We went to a birthday party recently. One of these boys brought a large pizza. He ate five slices all by himself on top of the other food that was available. He's one of the boys who weighs 74 pounds in kindergarten.
> 
> When I look at the class photos from my own years in elementary school back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the children look skinny maybe by today's standards, but we were at a normal weight.


See I can't even imagine letting a kindergartner eat two slices of pizza let alone half a large pie. When children are young shouldn't that be the period when you have the most control over their food choices? I'm not a parent though so maybe I don't get it.

My friend is a teacher and had a few morbidly obese children in his class. He actually talked to their parents and the parents became so angry (at HIM!) they tried to get him fired. Meanwhile, he was genuinely concerned. Not only were the kids getting picked on, but they couldn't keep up at all in P.E. and he felt like their self esteem was really being affected. Very upsetting.


----------



## cuchulain36

bravenewworld said:


> I guess what I am saying is if you have a strong marriage (which shouldn't all marriages be?) then I don't believe weight gain will destroy it. However, spouses should support each other being healthy. I wouldn't be attracted to someone obese and the next person I am with will need to have an active lifestyle.


I definitely think a spouse should be supportive in their partners weight loss attempts, and should not criticize them or make them feel badly, and I wouldn't simply head for the hills if my wife gained a lot of weight but I probably wouldn't be rushing into the sack either as it's a turn off, I'm sure it's a turn off to her too, she wouldn't comfortable in her own body. That will tear apart a marriage eventually.

Obesity is a real issue in marriages as it destroys intimacy, you can't expect a spouse to pretend the fat doesn't turn them off, it's not really fair for them, especially if both were normal sized when they married.


----------



## Forest

I'm constantly amazed by the percentage of overweight people in the US. Now, its a peer thing. One of those "everyone else already is" things.

When I was in HS, obesity was not an issue at all. You'd have never got a date. Now, that's just the way it is. I certainly notice that girls are overweight more than boys through the teen years, though both sexes are alarmingly heavy.

My daughter and son-in-law just returned from 10 months in South America. There, they were often mistaken for Australian or European, because they are slim. Americans have a strong reputation for being fat.

They also remarked that even after just 10 months they were still shocked at the weight problem here. They left Lima, Peru, and landed first in Atlanta. Could hardly believe it. Very glaring.


----------



## cuchulain36

I've been all around the world, obesity and fatness is not just an American problem at all.


----------



## Forest

Coffee Amore said:


> I see this at our elementary school. There are children in kindergarten who weigh 70-80 pounds. Some of them look like they're fourth graders. I know the weight because the parents have mentioned it. The parents are also overweight or obese themselves. We went to a birthday party recently. One of these boys brought a large pizza. He ate five slices all by himself on top of the other food that was available. He's one of the boys who weighs 74 pounds in kindergarten.


I'm almost sure I remember going to a track meet in the 5th grade where they had an "under 75 pound" category that I ran in. Made it by about 1 pound, I think, and I was a very normal sized kid. Maybe a little skinny in those days.

I could eat a ton, but somehow burned it off. Do they even let grade schoolers run track now?


----------



## Coffee Amore

Forest said:


> I'm almost sure I remember going to a track meet in the 5th grade where they had an "under 75 pound" category that I ran in. Made it by about 1 pound, I think, and I was a very normal sized kid. Maybe a little skinny in those days.
> 
> I could eat a ton, but somehow burned it off. Do they even let grade schoolers run track now?


No, they don't even do that. I haven't seen any running at the elementary schools around here. They focus more on ball passing games. The children seem to spend more time indoors in classrooms than we did. I remember doing flag football, dodgeball (painful!) and other active P.E. 

The school playgrounds don't have swings anymore. Perhaps they were removed for liability reasons. Whatever the reason, it's very hard now to find swings around here.


----------



## Ikaika

My son plays Pop Warner football and given that he is one of the older kids on the team, he is supposed to weigh in at 100lbs at 5'1" age 13. So on the opposite end of the scale, I'm trying to figure out where to trim off three pounds from his bony frame.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

cuchulain36 said:


> I've been all around the world, obesity and fatness is not just an American problem at all.


That is right, but the US is leading the world. In my opinion because of the food industry, and we all have to follow.










"The original data provided by the OECD for the United States were incorrect. In fact, 33.8% of Americans are considered obese, therefore they are ranked above Mexicans and top our chart. This was corrected on September 24th 2010."

A third obese, you have to understand that obese is a deadly road to all kinds of illnesses.

Investing in the medical sector is by the way the best you can do to profit from this development.


----------



## Lyris

My older daughter is on the chubby side. She's 7 1/2 and is right at the top of the healthy weight range. She eats well, sushi is her favourite food to buy if we're out, she doesn't eat a lot of sweet stuff. She doesn't like pasta or rice (except in sushi) and eats lots of fruit and vegetables, drinks primarily water. She does have a normal amounts of treats, a small ice cream or a home made muffin most days. 

And yet there's no doubt that she's heavier than average. It's her body type, she's a cuddly endomorph like my mum and sister. I worry, as my prime objective is that she grows up with a healthy relationship to food and a positive body image, but I've seen how fatter people are treated and talked about, especially here.

I'm not going to restrict her food intake, which is normal anyway. I'm not going to give her the slightest hint that she's anything less than perfect. Which she IS. She's strong and healthy. She can run a mile with me on my training runs. She does a weekly dance class which she loves. She's a good swimmer, she walks happily and we spend at least two days at the park each week running around with friends for two or three hours. 

But I worry for her. So far she's not very conscious of weight and we homeschool so I'm hoping she'll be a little more protected than if she were at school.


----------



## Blossom Leigh

In my opinion its only partly the food industry. The other part is the computer age...


----------



## NextTimeAround

What I find ironic is that women's magazines have that "you go, girl" mentality when it comes to being overweight yet still use skinnier than the mainstream sized models for fashion editorials.....

and then get mad at men not appreciating these women's extra curves..... at the same time that some women don't want to date certain men because they are too short (or their equipment is too tiny......)


----------



## Starstarfish

> And I don't see how anyone can equate a nut/dairy/egg allergy, which can kill someone within minutes, with a vague 'intolerance' which is often not even diagnosed by an actual medical professional.


Not everyone has the same level of allergic reaction. Not everyone who has a nut or dairy allergy goes into Anaphylaxis - otherwise why is there Lactaid for lactose intolerance? Or ... is that not a real thing either? Some people get a rash, some people throw up, some people get tingly lips, some people have sneezing fits, some people (like my sister) eat dairy and then ruin the lives of everyone around them by producing an unending stream of the most noxious gas produced by a living creature. The idea that there's only one degree of allergic reaction to something is off. 

And "actual medical professionals" seem to be doing wonders for the American people - as we discuss right here on this thread. As a collective we are getting heavier with more medical problems, and they keep charging us more and more to "fix" them. With new medications introduced all the time. I find the disturbing fad of "recommending people talk to their doctor" about a plethora of new medications on the TV more disturbing than any perceived "food trend." Our healthcare system is a for-profit business it sets up a serious conflict of interest - according to the doctor's oath, he's supposed to do everything to heal you, but - on the other hand, the simplest solution probably won't earn him the big bucks. So not sure "actual medical professionals" are actually magically less likely to try and be making money off you even if it's not by selling supplements.


----------



## Starstarfish

Why in any conversation discussing female body image and appearance does someone inevitably need to post about short guys or guys with uh "shortcomings" and how they are getting the wrong end of some cosmic stick?


----------



## happy as a clam

Lyris said:


> And I don't see how anyone can equate a nut/dairy/egg allergy, which can kill someone within minutes, with a vague 'intolerance' *which is often not even diagnosed by an actual medical professional.*


See, this kind of thinking just really gets my underwear in a bunch! 

First of all, you don't have to go into instant "anaphylaxis" in order to have a serious, bona-fide allergic reaction. I am allergic to penicillin... do I die immediately from it when accidentally given it in the past? No, but I get a serious allergic reaction, hives, swelling, itching, stomach upset, eyes tearing up, congestion, etc. Enough of a reaction that any medical provider worth his salt would NEVER consider giving it to me. Does this make my penicillin allergy any less "real" because I don't go into anaphylactic shock? Of course not.

My wheat and gluten allergy *is every bit as real* as any other allergy.

And don't even get me started on needing an "actual medical professional" to make a diagnosis. First of all, an "actual medical professional" (Western-trained M.D.) DID diagnose my celiac/gluten intolerance. But Western-trained docs are not any more "real" than Eastern-trained docs; just a whole different philosophy. I would much rather alter my nutrition, make lifestyle changes, learn stress and relaxation techniques, etc. than take a whole bunch of poisonous pharmaceuticals that only add a whole laundry list of new symptoms (not to mention adding to Big Pharma's bottom line).

I realize debating "real" medicine isn't the point of this thread, but I couldn't sit on my fingers any longer.


----------



## that_girl

PE is an elementary requirement. 100 minutes per week minimum. I do PE about 3 times a week...plus they have recess/lunch to play. We do run and we have a track painted on our campus. I teach nutrition and about calories in/calories out. 

I see overweight children all the time. Their parents are usually overweight as well. It's sad. I hate seeing babies with bags of Cheetos...bags that my family would use for the WHOLE FAMILY and have some left over.

But the OP was lame. Women aren't the only ones fat. I've seen more obese men around here than ladies (California). The beach is full of skinny mini women and men sucking in their guts...their moobs resting nicely on top.

I just had my 20 year reunion and I'd say 90% of the women were so skinny I could snap them in half. That's also unattractive to me. But...that's what they like, so whatever.

Just be what you want to be and don't judge people so much.


----------



## Married but Happy

In the past few weeks, we've both lost a lot of weight. My wife hurt her back at work, and we can't go out - and certainly not to restaurants. When we did go to restaurants, we probably ate too much, even when we had leftovers. So staying home and eating only when hungry has made a significant difference. We haven't given up snacks and ice cream occasionally, and eat more healthy protein and vegetables versus going out.

Her BMI has always ranged from 19.5 to 21.5 (she's very fit, and 94% of women are heavier than her for her height and age), and I'm borderline overweight. Hopefully I'll continue losing if we avoid restaurants for a while, and keep up our exercise program.


----------



## bravenewworld

Coffee Amore said:


> No, they don't even do that. I haven't seen any running at the elementary schools around here. They focus more on ball passing games. The children seem to spend more time indoors in classrooms than we did. I remember doing flag football, dodgeball (painful!) and other active P.E.
> 
> The school playgrounds don't have swings anymore. Perhaps they were removed for liability reasons. Whatever the reason, it's very hard now to find swings around here.


Wow very surprising. When I was a kid we ran a mile + did a fairly difficult obstacle course + at least a half hour playing a sport like basketball, flag football, soccer, etc. and this was every day. Now that I think back on it, there were very few overweight kids at my school. 

The P.E. Teacher at the time thought it wasn't rigorous enough and called our class "camp cupcake." It seemed to work pretty well though, I wonder why things have changed?


----------



## bravenewworld

that_girl said:


> PE is an elementary requirement. 100 minutes per week minimum. I do PE about 3 times a week...plus they have recess/lunch to play. We do run and we have a track painted on our campus. I teach nutrition and about calories in/calories out.
> 
> I see overweight children all the time. Their parents are usually overweight as well. It's sad. *I hate seeing babies with bags of Cheetos...bags that my family would use for the WHOLE FAMILY and have some left over.*
> 
> But the OP was lame. Women aren't the only ones fat. I've seen more obese men around here than ladies (California). The beach is full of skinny mini women and men sucking in their guts...their moobs resting nicely on top.
> 
> I just had my 20 year reunion and I'd say 90% of the women were so skinny I could snap them in half. That's also unattractive to me. But...that's what they like, so whatever.
> 
> Just be what you want to be and don't judge people so much.


Also terrible when you see soda in the baby bottle. I wish I was joking.


----------



## bravenewworld

cuchulain36 said:


> I've been all around the world, obesity and fatness is not just an American problem at all.


So true. Go to the Middle East. Their "average" is in the US "obese." 

The only country I have been to where I literally saw no overweight people was Japan. Not only does everyone work out a lot but the diet is very healthy. I ate like a pig at the restaurants and seafood markets and actually lost a few pounds.


----------



## Thundarr

bravenewworld said:


> So true. Go to the Middle East. Their "average" is in the US "obese."
> 
> The only country I have been to where I literally saw no overweight people was Japan. Not only does everyone work out a lot but the diet is very healthy. I ate like a pig at the restaurants and seafood markets and actually lost a few pounds.


Yea I went to France years back. I ate a lot but came home 20 lbs light. It was a combination of diet and walking to and from rather than driving. I was eating stuff that is preached to be bad for us. But not many processed carbs and not so much sugar. Even the desserts didn't taste all that sweet.


----------



## Lyris

I don't know why you would assume I meant exclusively western traditional doctor when I said "actual medical professional". I've been to alternative medical practitioners, and in my opinion the only ones that have much efficacy are those that practice Traditonal Chinese Medicine - herbs and acupuncture.

And I'm perfectly aware of the different levels of allergic reaction thanks, as I'm a teacher and am required to keep up to date on all possible reactions and how to manage them. 

Health care may be a for-profit industry, but what exactly do you think alternative/complimentary healthcare is? They're not giving away that sh*t for free are they. It's totally in their interests for people to need "supplements" and be diagnosed with intolerances and vitamin deficiencies. 

I'm far more concerned with people's distrust for Western medicine causing them to do things like refuse chemotherapy and go for coffee enemas to cure cancer. My very beloved father had two forms of cancer at the same time and thank God for expertly trained and experienced surgeons and oncologists, because he's still here and healthy seven years later. 

Back to being fat though, one thing I have noticed is whenever I make an American recipe I need to cut the sugar down by half, or it's much too sweet. Plus I have to flip over the ones that include processed ingredients like "a can of mushroom soup" or "instant pudding" which is a lot of them.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Lyris said:


> I don't know why you would assume I meant exclusively western traditional doctor when I said "actual medical professional". I've been to alternative medical practitioners, and in my opinion the only ones that have much efficacy are those that practice Traditonal Chinese Medicine - herbs and acupuncture.
> 
> And I'm perfectly aware of the different levels of allergic reaction thanks, as I'm a teacher and am required to keep up to date on all possible reactions and how to manage them.
> 
> Health care may be a for-profit industry, but what exactly do you think alternative/complimentary healthcare is? They're not giving away that sh*t for free are they. It's totally in their interests for people to need "supplements" and be diagnosed with intolerances and vitamin deficiencies.
> 
> I'm far more concerned with people's distrust for Western medicine causing them to do things like refuse chemotherapy and go for coffee enemas to cure cancer. My very beloved father had two forms of cancer at the same time and thank God for expertly trained and experienced surgeons and oncologists, because he's still here and healthy seven years later.
> 
> Back to being fat though, one thing I have noticed is whenever I make an American recipe I need to cut the sugar down by half, or it's much too sweet. Plus I have to flip over the ones that include processed ingredients like "a can of mushroom soup" or "instant pudding" which is a lot of them.



Whenever I make a recipe involving ground beef I use about a quarter of what it calls for. A pound is way too much for a pasta or rice dish, imo.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Openminded

Desserts in Europe aren't anywhere near as sweet as they are in the U. S. I didn't realize there was such a huge difference until my first trip there in 1990. And it's gotten much worse since then.


----------



## GettingIt_2

I don't have a medically diagnosed allergy or intolerance to:

grain (including gluten)
legumes
dairy
sugar

But I don't eat any of it, because I feel like crap when I do. It really wasn't a hard choice to make, and I feel so much better than I'm not tempted to go back. 

I don't bother with "gluten free" anything, either. I experiemented with almond flour and coconut flour, etc for awhile, but it was more trouble that it was worth. Happy with my meat and veggies and nuts and fruit and healthy fats. 

. . . and occasional dish of ice cream after which I suffer wheezing and intestinal distress . . . but it's ICE CREAM!

When I switched to this way of eating and my card intake dropped drastically, I did go through a period of feeling tired and shaky, but I had read that it's not unusual for someone transitioning their diet to low carb. I think it was referred to as "carb flu." Anyway, that lasted a week or two then I didn't have any further problems. 

One thing I have noticed about eating this way is that I don't feel hungry, even if I've not eaten for a long period of time. My first indication that I need to eat will be shakiness from low blood sugar--yet I don't feel hungry. It's weird.


----------



## NobodySpecial

GettingIt said:


> I don't have a medically diagnosed allergy or intolerance to:
> 
> grain (including gluten)
> legumes
> dairy
> sugar
> 
> But I don't eat any of it, because I feel like crap when I do.


Because, after all, sometimes it is just that simple.


----------



## NextTimeAround

I thought legumes and grain was good for you....... like whole grain bread. (at least I heard it advocated on Oprah).


----------



## Thundarr

People think they have to go from wherever they are to super healthy which seems overwhelming. Realistically just becoming less unhealthy is step #1. That doesn't mean giving up everything all at once or giving up stuff of the time. I'm heavy for my height but I'm lighter than I was last year. Now at 46, my last resting BP was 124/77 and heart rate 56/min. I started getting daily exercise to reduce stress and started eating less crap because it made my exercise really suck. It's a snowball effect in both directions so the bane of an obese person's reality (I think) can become their savior. Unfortunately it seems too overwhelming because obese persons (I project) feel that they've let themselves go too far and they can't possibly have the will power to lose 100 lbs if they have a problem losing 10 lbs. They don't believe the snowball effect


----------



## GettingIt_2

NextTimeAround said:


> I thought legumes and grain was good for you....... like whole grain bread. (at least I heard it advocated on Oprah).


You'll find varying information on this. I feel better when I don't eat grain and legumes, so I don't eat them. 

If you are happy and healthy and feel good eating grain and legumes, and if you believe they are good for you, then I certainly don't see why you should stop.


----------



## heartsbeating

^ well said 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Deejo

Well I see this turned out rather nicely.


----------



## Jetranger

Thundarr said:


> Yea I went to France years back. I ate a lot but came home 20 lbs light. It was a combination of diet and walking to and from rather than driving. I was eating stuff that is preached to be bad for us. But not many processed carbs and not so much sugar. Even the desserts didn't taste all that sweet.


Read up on the French Paradox for something puzzling science - a high fat diet but less heart disease and obesity.


----------



## Healer

Is this a recent thing though? Or has it always been this way? I'm fortunate in that I have the metabolism of a squirrel on meth.


----------



## cuchulain36

Healer said:


> Is this a recent thing though? Or has it always been this way? I'm fortunate in that I have the metabolism of a squirrel on meth.



I'm curious how old you are? In the Marines and a few years after I got out I ate and drank what I wanted and was a lean 175 with about 8% bf. I started slowing down around 28, by 32 I was overweight and had to battle back to looking good. It's hard, it took months of diet and exercise. I can't eat poorly and I cut my drinking by about 95%. I also have to lift weights, row, run regularly to stay lean, it's constant work.

Today people are more prone to instant gratification, they believe all body types are fine (they're not), and they are sedentary. It's why obesity is at record rates.


----------



## firebelly1

Thundarr said:


> People think they have to go from wherever they are to super healthy which seems overwhelming. Realistically just becoming less unhealthy is step #1. That doesn't mean giving up everything all at once or giving up stuff of the time. I'm heavy for my height but I'm lighter than I was last year. Now at 46, my last resting BP was 124/77 and heart rate 56/min. I started getting daily exercise to reduce stress and started eating less crap because it made my exercise really suck. It's a snowball effect in both directions so the bane of an obese person's reality (I think) can become their savior. Unfortunately it seems too overwhelming because obese persons (I project) feel that they've let themselves go too far and they can't possibly have the will power to lose 100 lbs if they have a problem losing 10 lbs. They don't believe the snowball effect


I think this is the reason so many weight loss efforts fail - or only succeed short-term - because people try to change too much too soon. Right now I'm focusing on adding more vegetables to my diet. At some point, maybe there will be a greater percentage of leafy greens. Maybe I'll get to where they are all organic and / or grown in my garden, but right now I'm just focusing on vegetables in general.


----------



## Runs like Dog

Eating is a more of social thing in other places. For whatever reason, Americans and others like to go out in groups to eat unto stupor instead of interacting with one another. 

Also, let's be honest. Alcoholism is the most under reported issue in America. And that by itself represents massive empty calories.


----------



## Jetranger

I know it's old news but I finally got MyFitnessPal going and just from the weekend (where I had dinner with my parents Friday and Saturday nights followed by a few at home) I can see how quickly booze pushes you over the calories limit. Even thinking have a beer or two only after work is bad for your waistline, never mind a potential dependency if you're doing it every day...


----------



## cuchulain36

It's not just the empty calories in booze, basically your body shuts down processes like making testosterone and burning fat while it works on getting the alcohol (poison) out of your body.

I like wine, beer, and bourbon but everything in moderation. There is nothing worse for weight loss than daily alcohol consumption.


----------



## bravenewworld

cuchulain36 said:


> It's not just the empty calories in booze, basically your body shuts down processes like making testosterone and burning fat while it works on getting the alcohol (poison) out of your body.
> 
> I like wine, beer, and bourbon but everything in moderation. There is nothing worse for weight loss than daily alcohol consumption.


On weight watchers I think a Manhattan mixed drink is 11 points with no nutritional value. By contrast, a Big Mac is 14 and at least you are getting some energy, protein, and fiber. 

It's crazy how my body reacts to alcohol. I can be working out hard and eating perfectly, but one tiny after dinner brandy or light beer a night and I gain weight. Doesn't even matter if my calories for the day overall were good. 

Personally I think alcohol and really sweet drinks (soda, sugary fruit juice, sweet tea, mochafrappawhatever, etc.) are the biggest causes of obesity. Tons of calories and not filling.


----------



## Starstarfish

I'm also on MFP - we should start a group and exchange names and such.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

firebelly1 said:


> I think this is the reason so many weight loss efforts fail - or only succeed short-term - because people try to change too much too soon. Right now I'm focusing on adding more vegetables to my diet. At some point, maybe there will be a greater percentage of leafy greens. Maybe I'll get to where they are all organic and / or grown in my garden, but right now I'm just focusing on vegetables in general.


Exactly. I have done that many times. This time I decided I wanted to get my appetite under control first, knowing that exercise makes me ravenous so to try to cut calories and start working out at the same time was a recipe for failure. I did that for a month before adding in 30 minutes of cardio 5x a week. A month later I added in weights. After a month I tried to learn some new exercises and added in abs/core strength training in addition to the alternating upper and lower body workouts. This time it has been easier to maintain. 

And some days I break even with calories in/calories out. I think it actually helps because I don't feel deprived by having those days and I think it keeps my body from going into a calorie conservation mode.

Bravenewworld - I wonder - WHAT are you doing that burns 1000 calories?!?!?! 30 minutes/3 miles on the elliptical only burns 320 or so... 1000 is some serious exercise!

And I do have alcohol but I count my drinks in with my calories and still loose weight. I could do it faster without it but I'd also feel deprived if I never had wine or some of the other things I indulge in.

That being said, it only takes one night of restaurant food and alcholic beverages (especially sweet ones like margaritas or daiquiris) to undo and entire week of healthy eating and daily caloric deficits.


----------



## SurpriseMyself

lifeistooshort said:


> I think if you're fit you are well within reason to ask for a fit partner. Hold up a picture of what you want next to yourself while you look in the mirror; if the pairing is equitable then go for it. If not, well good luck to you.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It all depends on what is important to you in marriage. If you are fit and want a fit partner, then ask for it. Same for religion. Same for political views. Same for free time. Same for friendships/time with others. Same with sex. Same with everything. 

If you hold up a picture of what you want next to you and don't see that person there, then ask for it. If you don't get it, you have to ask yourself if that's ok or if you should go. It all comes down to "is it important enough" to warrant leaving if you don't get what you are asking for.


----------



## bravenewworld

EnjoliWoman said:


> Bravenewworld - I wonder - WHAT are you doing that burns 1000 calories?!?!?! 30 minutes/3 miles on the elliptical only burns 320 or so... 1000 is some serious exercise!


2x a week I do a 5+ mile hike up one of the tallest's peaks in my city. It's got a long extremely uphill portion which is nice for toning my lady lump. My friend and I refer to it as "bum mountain." 

And I agree on doing things so you aren't deprived. I need my dark beer and sausage at least 1x a week. I blame the fact I'm German. Pass the sauerkraut!


----------



## See_Listen_Love

For who has no steep hill in his backyard:

10 years ago 75 minutes of fast cycling would give me (weight and age considered) also a burn of around 1.200 calories. I did then some deep searching to dig that up. Fast like a mean of 23 km/h in a populated are, means 30/35 speed when you pedal.


----------



## barbados

See_Listen_Love said:


> Ladies,
> 
> Yesterday I spent the day with my wife in a sauna (nude spa & wellness complex).
> 
> Because its holiday and it was good weather, it was crowded. A couple of hundred of people.
> 
> What struck me like never before, almost all of the ladies were too fat. Not a little, virtually every woman had excess fat, over the whole line of ages. Some a lot, some a little. Most everybody was ugly because of lingering fat layers. It was an unsavory and distateful sight.
> 
> Now I have seen this phenomenon grow in the past decades, but here was the result of it. It is really bad.
> 
> The Lord has made women different than becoming like this. It is not about weight, it is about fat layers. Since I believe in creation of some sort this means mankind has succeeded in deforming the female body to horrific bubbling examples of overconsumption.
> 
> I believe the food industry and consumers together to be responsible for this.
> 
> But You All, my dear ladies, need to stop this. Stop the industry, stop the shops, stop the people, from working together in this disease, on the abolition of the beautiful female body.


Sorry but this thread is already 24 pages so let me just say that in my experience its FAT GUYS, not fat women that I see more of in life.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

That is completely a valid statement, but for clarity, I got about run over for stating my observation, which was not an opinion.

(The standard I see is quite often a fat lady with a normal guy)

The subsequent idea about how to bring about a change was quickly done with, Alas...


----------



## Blossom Leigh

bravenewworld said:


> 2x a week I do a 5+ mile hike up one of the tallest's peaks in my city. It's got a long extremely uphill portion which is nice for toning my lady lump. My friend and I refer to it as "bum mountain."
> 
> And I agree on doing things so you aren't deprived. I need my dark beer and sausage at least 1x a week. I blame the fact I'm German. Pass the sauerkraut!


Rollerskating with my child for a few hours is a 1000 calorie burn too  and such sweet fun.


----------



## Davelli0331

what I preach over and over is that the key to a healthy lifestyle isn't discipline or going "hardcore" at something, it's sustainability. Small changes that you can maintain over a longer period of time will be much more impactful than extreme changes that you can only maintain for a short while. That's why fad diets and extreme forms of exercise almost always fail.

A good example for me is drinking. I love to have a couple drinks, esp with my W. But as has been said alcohol has a blunting effect on the building of muscle. However, I know myself. I know that we enjoy our wine and beer and liquor too much to give it up completely. That would not be a sustainable change for me. So I only drink on the weekends, and I try to limit myself even then to something sensible.

Another example for my wife is cardio. She hates cardio. She'll do it for a couple months, start to see good results, but she hates it so much that she just can't keep at it. It's not a sustainable change for her. So I got her lifting with me, which she finds much more palatable (and, for most women, lifting will actually get you the look you're wanting better than cardio by itself, anyway).

It's those small, sustainable changes that will lead to a healthier lifestyle.


----------



## sinnister

Jetranger said:


> I know it's old news but I finally got MyFitnessPal going and just from the weekend (where I had dinner with my parents Friday and Saturday nights followed by a few at home) I can see how quickly booze pushes you over the calories limit. Even thinking have a beer or two only after work is bad for your waistline, never mind a potential dependency if you're doing it every day...


Awesome to get on that. I lost 40lbs in 4 months last year just using myfitnesspal. Of course I gained a good bit of it back once I started drinking again.


----------



## Jetranger

sinnister said:


> Awesome to get on that. I lost 40lbs in 4 months last year just using myfitnesspal. Of course I gained a good bit of it back once I started drinking again.


I think my love of the stats will help me out here. I had enough left over because of my brisk walk yesterday to go for Menchies when my BFF turned up unexpectedly, and still come in under my target.

It also shows the booze thing more clearly than anything else I've encountered. Oh sure, they might print the empty calories on the can but once you're having a good time you quickly lose track of that.

I only wish I'd done it sooner, but was too chicken**** to put iOS7 on my iPhone 4 because of all the horror stories...


----------



## Dollystanford

I too use MFP and I love it but would exercise a word of caution...

Firstly the amount of calories in things varies wildly (for e.g. today I tried to establish the number of calories in 125g mackerel and it varied from 200 to 450 calories). A lot of the foods input into MFP have been entered by other people and not everyone is as diligent and perfect as I am

Homemade stuff is a killer - you have to make your own foods for that as again, ingredients vary wildly from one person to the next

You need to weigh everything if you're serious. Because eyeballing a portion and saying 'yes that looks about 50g' is pointless. You could be wildly under or wildly over on any given day

Don't ignore butter and condiments. 10g butter (not a lot)? A good 80 calories. Tbsp light mayo? About 90.

Exercise calories - again a huge a variance. I have various running/fitness apps and the calories burned are different for every single one. If you're running and doing less than 6mph then you need to adjust accordingly. I try and lowball it where I can 

Also I would say try not to look how much you are 'saving' by doing exercise and then eating up the difference. A calorific deficit is easy to destroy


----------



## Davelli0331

Counting calories is an outstanding first step in becoming more conscious of exactly what you're putting into your body. However, it is not an exact science and should not be treated as such.

Unless your food scale is laboratory-grade, you'll never know precisely how much of something you consumed. Consumer food scales come close enough. And unless you own the proper bio-sign reading equipment, you'll never know exactly how many calories you've burned throughout the day. Things like FitBits (which I own and love) come close enough.

However, at the end of the day, they're ballpark figures at best. And there's also a psychological factor to counting calories that many people won't cop to: How honest are you being? How aware are you of exactly what you put into your meals? Did you sneak a bit of olive oil into your chicken? Did you put some thousand island on your salad? And if so, did you measure and account for them properly? It's those small things like that that people leave out, but over the course of a day those small things can easily add up to 400-500 calories.

What works best for me is counting calories (and accepting that they're just ballpark figures) until I have a good handle on what my maintenance intake requirements are. Once I know that figure, then if I'm trying to add weight, I'll add a couple hundred calories/day. If I'm trying to lose weight, I'll subtract a couple hundred calories/day. I consult the scale every few days, take progress pictures for comparison, but I leave the calorie counting behind. Such small changes are for me sustainable over the long term.


----------



## Jetranger

Dollystanford said:


> Also I would say try not to look how much you are 'saving' by doing exercise and then eating up the difference. A calorific deficit is easy to destroy


I hadn't intended to go and get froyo, it just sort of happened. It isn't a regular thing. I'm trying to see the numbers as a reminder as to what I'm putting into my gaping maw.


----------



## changedbeliefs

This is a topic I really tend to get passionate about. It just astounds me that people make it so hard. While I realize CNN is not a great source for a lot of things, they do post a lot of stories about people losing weight. EVERY time, it follows this formula:

* Person admits they were a comfort eater, and by the crapton
* Person has health issues, sore knees, high blood pressure, sleep apnea, etc... Often there's other shortcomings like "can't play with my kids," "can't walk up a flight of stairs," etc...
* Person has very low self-esteem/image because of it
* Person hits some "breaking point"
* Person revises diet: healthy portions of healthy foods
* Person starts to exercise, usually very humble/modest at first, then begins to embrace it
* Person loses a lot of weight, and generally pretty quickly
* Person's health issues disappear
* Person's self-esteem goes through the roof

EVERY. TIME.

Gastric bypass is the downfall of this whole problem, oddly enough. All that procedure does is CLOSE YOUR MOUTH. It does not make you eat healthy, it doesn't make you exercise, it doesn't change your chemistry: it simply restricts your intake. You know what also does that? A desire not to be morbidly obese.

I despise the words "thin" and "skinny." Those are not the goals. "Fit" and "healthy" are. Those aren't things you determine on a scale. There is a Weight Watchers thing here at work sometimes, a friend of mine hears them obsess, "I lost 2.2 pounds this week!" That's called fluctuations, and they don't know that, they think they're doing something real. I don't get how adults can be so clueless. Those same people put it all back on after each "cycle." They're like deers in headlights, they can't figure it out, meanwhile every birthday, anniversary, holiday occasion, there are boxes of cakes and donuts to kingdom come in the office.

I made a comment once around my MIL, about something not being "part of my diet," and she almost had a heart attack. "You're on a diet?!?!!" No......my "diet," as in, the things that make up what I eat. We should all be "on a diet," a diet of healthy foods, in healthy amounts, that fuel our level of activity, not simply fill our desire to consume. I play baseball and Crossfit 3-5x/week - I eat A LOT. If I travel on business, and can't get any exercise in.....I eat less! I eat treats occasionally, just not whole bags of Doritos, or 30 cookies, or half the box of ice cream.

I think the term "fat-shaming" is overused. To me, that is, "hey, you pile of obesity, you're a worthless human being!" and I surely don't condone that. However, "you're morbidly obese, it's going to kill you, I think it's you're own doing, and I think it should be on you to turn it around," is not. I always point out: if someone was anorexic, do we think the same way? Should they be "allowed" to be that way? Do we consider it a choice? Do we ignore the health risks? Do we see it as a real conundrum as to how they got that way, or how to overcome it? No, it's cut and dry in that scenario, and I think it should be for obesity. IMHO, obese-to-morbidly obese people should seek out some sort of IC, to determine why their relationship with food is distorted, and then you simply fix it. You instate a healthy regimen of a sound diet with exercise that can become the new standard for them. I just have a hard time seeing why that can't work in 99% of cases (with the remainder being the TRUE, rare "metabolic" problems, that I think is in no way as prevalent as people want to believe it is).

Is every person going to be a lean, muscular weight? Of course not. But every person should be able to take a flight of stairs easily. Every person should be able to sit and stand without grabbing an assist handle. Every person should fit in an airplane seat (ok, unless you're 6'9"). Every person should fit in a restaurant booth.


----------



## firebelly1

changedbeliefs said:


> I think the term "fat-shaming" is overused. To me, that is, "hey, you pile of obesity, you're a worthless human being!" and I surely don't condone that. However, "you're morbidly obese, it's going to kill you, I think it's you're own doing, and I think it should be on you to turn it around," is not. I always point out: if someone was anorexic, do we think the same way? Should they be "allowed" to be that way? Do we consider it a choice? Do we ignore the health risks? Do we see it as a real conundrum as to how they got that way, or how to overcome it? No, it's cut and dry in that scenario, and I think it should be for obesity.


I hear you. Being obese is something people do to themselves. However, and I say this as someone who has been trying to lose weight my entire adult life, it really isn't this easy psychologically. Especially with the dieting culture. Because it tells us that in order to lose weight we have to SUFFER. We have to give up things that we love and / or are the staples of our diet and we have to do it now and forever. We have to drastically reduce our calorie intake overnight. We have to do cardio at LEAST an hour, 5 times a week or what's the point?

So we try these things, and inevitably fail, and then BEAT OURSELVES UP because obviously we failed because we are weak and don't have enough will power. And to recover from the psychological abuse I've just foisted on myself it takes me another 3 months before I will even think about attempting another weight loss scheme because I'm so afraid I will fail AGAIN. And that is the psychological cycle I have lived for 30 years. You know? 

SO....fortunately, I have learned from that. I've learned not to deprive myself of things I've loved. I've learned not to take on too much too soon. I've learned that certain types of food affect my appetite in different ways. I've learned that i can't eat the same things over and over or I get bored. In other words, I stopped listening to everyone else and started listening to myself about what will work for me. And when I "fall off the wagon" I am compassionate with myself and have strategies in place to pick up where I left off.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

I love MFP and realize what you put in is what you get out. I try to be brutally honest. I did measure things to start with, I read packages and scan bar codes and I know it's not an exact science. Produce is the most difficult as well as meats. I prefer to err on the higher side most of the time. I trim all visible fat from pork chops. I'm pretty sure that the calories per chop in MFP include the fat but I use that measurement assuming it will make up for the times I'm off in the other direction. I use 2T of light ranch to dip my raw veggies in at lunch. I usually throw some of that away but I don't credit those calories back. I also eyeball quantities but after years of baking (I love to and it's my downfall) using individual measuring cups I have a pretty good idea of what a half-cup looks like. Smaller than I'd like it to be. 

I don't exercise just so I can have the extra calories of a martini but as long as I have a deficit I'll have one because otherwise would spell failure if I never had any treats or extras. Some days I have to make myself go to the gym, other times I do it out of habit and still other times I get restless and actually miss it. I really enjoyed the long walk/jog I had with dog and daughter yesterday. I think I'd like to do that more often than the gym.


----------



## Davelli0331

A large part of getting to that healthier lifestyle I think is untangling these very complicated relationships that we create with foods. 

I'm from and live in the Deep South. Americans in general treat food as a social activity, and even more so in the South, a fact made even more detrimental when you consider the kinds of foods we're famous for. There are certain comfort foods that I clearly associate with family, friends, etc, and a big part of consuming those foods more moderately has been acknowledging that connection.

And then as a culture we continue to buy into the messages that the diet industry pushes on us with whatever the latest fad is. In the '90s it was dietary fat, in the '00s it was carbs, and now in the '10s it's meat and gluten. That's not me debunking those trends, certainly many people have sensitivies to any number of those things, but far too many people buy into the tagline of "This is THE ONE thing that's been keeping you from losing weight, and for $14.95 I'll explain to you why in my book!" when the honest truth for most people is that they just plain eat too much.

Then when that $14.95 solution doesn't produce X results in Y days people think they're a failure and that they might as well go back to their bad habits.

The unfortunate truth is that for most people it's taken years, maybe even a lifetime, to accumulate those bad habits that have led to today. It will take those same people months, maybe years to undo those habits and establish new ones. The expectation that these things should happen relatively overnight is one that will almost always lead to disappointment and failure.


----------



## bravenewworld

changedbeliefs said:


> I despise the words "thin" and "skinny." Those are not the goals. "Fit" and "healthy" are. Those aren't things you determine on a scale. There is a Weight Watchers thing here at work sometimes, a friend of mine hears them obsess, "I lost 2.2 pounds this week!" That's called fluctuations, and they don't know that, they think they're doing something real. I don't get how adults can be so clueless. Those same people put it all back on after each "cycle." They're like deers in headlights, they can't figure it out, meanwhile every birthday, anniversary, holiday occasion, there are boxes of cakes and donuts to kingdom come in the office.
> 
> I think the term "fat-shaming" is overused. To me, that is, "hey, you pile of obesity, you're a worthless human being!" and I surely don't condone that. However, "you're morbidly obese, it's going to kill you, I think it's you're own doing, and I think it should be on you to turn it around," is not. I always point out: if someone was anorexic, do we think the same way? Should they be "allowed" to be that way? Do we consider it a choice? Do we ignore the health risks? Do we see it as a real conundrum as to how they got that way, or how to overcome it? No, it's cut and dry in that scenario, and I think it should be for obesity. IMHO, obese-to-morbidly obese people should seek out some sort of IC, to determine why their relationship with food is distorted, and then you simply fix it. You instate a healthy regimen of a sound diet with exercise that can become the new standard for them. I just have a hard time seeing why that can't work in 99% of cases (with the remainder being the TRUE, rare "metabolic" problems, that I think is in no way as prevalent as people want to believe it is).


Agree with the fit and healthy completely. I hated the fact everyone was so into those lame "Skinny B!tches" books about 7-8 years back." Super judgy, unhelpful, and even my friends who are vegan said the nutritional info was way off. 

I do weight watchers and I found your writings on this a bit condescending and untrue. It has worked for millions of people and was actually recommended to me by my medical doctor. He said it's the most successful out of the weight loss programs in his opinion because of the nutritional info + support and accountability meetings provide. Several people I know have lost 20-80lb on it and have kept it off for years. I've lost almost 50lbs this year (need to update my ticker!) and feel like I have the tools/knowledge to keep it off. I love the mobile apps, makes tracking my food/calories/work out easy breezy plus their recipes are fairly delish! I mean, how are you going to say a program that helps people lose weight by working out, eating healthfully, and providing emotional support is bs? :scratch head:

Also agree that Fat-shaming has nothing to do with a concerned friend talking to you about weight loss or trying to help you make better choices. It's the salesgirl sizing you up at the rack and saying "We don't carry bigger people sizes" when in fact, yes, they do have your size. It's the waiter raising his eyebrow when you place your order in a restaurant, although he doesn't know you've eaten healthfully all week and this is a treat meal after a long workout. It's the significant other who gawks at other women in front of you and says, "you'd look better if you lost some weight." It's the construction worker who says "hey big girl, bet you're a ton of fun!" and it's the promotion you get passed over for because "Suzie" is more qualified although her main qualification is being size 2 office candy and everyone knows you do the majority of her work. 

Fat shaming sucks.


----------



## COGypsy

Davelli0331 said:


> The unfortunate truth is that for most people it's taken years, maybe even a lifetime, to accumulate those bad habits that have led to today. It will take those same people months, maybe years to undo those habits and establish new ones. The expectation that these things should happen relatively overnight is one that will almost always lead to disappointment and failure.


I think for me it is not only changing bad habits, but realizing that actions have consequences and the actions I must take now are the consequences of having enjoyed the last couple of years. It's really hard to get motivated to diet and restrict when you're life is going well, I've found. So mostly that means going back to reinforcing food as a locus of control in my life--no matter how my day goes or what comes up, my ability to resist the things I want is an achievement that will be reflected on weigh-in day. I made a meme for my phone to stay focused and on track: Control: Every Bite. Every Drop. Every Minute. Every Day. It's just the reality of dealing with food. Granted it means way, way more time alone than I would prefer to spend--diet dinners aren't fun for anybody, so why inflict my consequences on friends and family--but I got myself here so the piper must be paid. As of today, I'm 20% of the way to my goal, so with any luck I'll be able to relax a little by the time my birthday hits in April!


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Also advertising and our lifestyles in general are geared toward immediate results. 

For instance, 100 years ago, order to have jam, you had to go and pick the blackberries in the hot sun, cook them down with some cane sugar and pectin on the stove, puree it in a grinder or for jelly drain through a cheesecloth, pour into jars that had been boiled and sterilized, boil the sealing lids and rings, apply and seal and let them all cool. That was all of the jelly you had until next year. Peanut butter is the same way as far as the time to actually MAKE it. Now you just drive 2 miles to the grocery store and pick up a jar of each for $4 total.

Losing weight can really only be done the slow and steady way. But we have gotten used to quick fixes for everything else and want weight loss to be the same. Hence liposuction, lap band surgery, 'miracle' weight loss pills, etc.


----------



## changedbeliefs

bravenewworld said:


> I do weight watchers and I found your writings on this a bit condescending and untrue.


With all due respect, I said absolutely nothing about the WW program itself. My comments only related how the participants that my friend overhears consistently, obsess over OUNCES of weight lost, constantly look for "cheats" and "treats" and re-up on the cycle every time because they never make any progress. If they actually lose any weight, they put it all back on. My comments only spoke to those people's utter lack of understanding of the mechanics of healthy, weight loss and proper eating. Whether WW is responsible for not teaching them, or whether they are simply lacking the true desire to learn, is not my place to say.


----------



## cuchulain36

People tend to become zealots when it comes to their workout and diet routine. In my experience crossfitters are the worst offenders in that regard (sorry it's true).

Most people just need to clean up their diet and walk five miles a day to start. Any movement is good and exercise should be something they enjoy doing, if it's a drag or too difficult they will quit or get injured.

Weight watchers will work if you follow the program, so will P90x, or Wendler 531or starting strength. It's all about your own goals are and what works for you.

Losing weight and keeping it off is hard, I'm down 20 lbs and there were weeks where I saw no results even though I was running 3 miles, hitting the compound lifts, crossfit workouts and my diet was on point. You have to trudge through those times and it's not the easiest thing to do.

I give props to anyone trying to lose weight and focus on their physical health because it's really hard to do.


----------



## bravenewworld

cuchulain36 said:


> People tend to become zealots when it comes to their workout and diet routine. In my experience crossfitters are the worst offenders in that regard (sorry it's true).


Hah! There's some workouts I don't get, not because they aren't challenging but they are so freakin expensive! 

Take Soulcycle for example. It's almost $40 for an hour class is my area. For that amount of money I could hire a personal trainer and split it with a friend. I mean at the end of the day it's a crowded spin class. Most gyms include those with the membership.


----------



## Davelli0331

I've always viewed workouts like CrossFit, P90X, and the like with a very healthy skepticism. Not because they don't work, quite the opposite, they're some of the most effective workouts out there.

For one, many of those workouts are no different than the kind of PT I was doing in the Marines 6-12 years ago, so they're nothing new, just repackaged and resold at (IMO) pretty steep prices.

However, my real point of skepticism comes back to my main point of sustainability. CrossFit, P90X, etc, work wonders *so long as you keep on doing them into perpetuity*. They're so effective because of the massive amounts of calories that you're burning while getting some strength training in there, too (and in spite of what a lot of lifters say, I've seen some built and shredded CrossFitters). 

But as soon as you stop those styles of workout, you're going to start putting weight back on because even with your new muscle you're not maintaining that same caloric deficit. Now, if you *can* sustain those types of workouts for months or years, then I say stick with them! Do what works and is sustainable for you!

But, IMO, the vast majority of Americans could not hang with CrossFit or P90X for any significant amount of time.


----------



## happy as a clam

I *love* Weight Watchers, and I am not (nor never have been) overweight in the slightest. I've always been a healthy eater at basically my ideal weight. I first joined to support my very overweight friend. "Sure, I'll go with you."

I had no idea what to expect, but I learned SOOO much about healthy eating, portion control, living a healthy lifestyle. Sure, there are always going to be those folks who try to "game the system" by hoarding "points" and squandering them on junky snacks, but WW has a WEALTH of information about healthy choices, "clean" foods, exercise, etc. If you WANT to learn to eat healthy and have a healthy relationship with food, WW has an awesome plan to teach you just that.

If you're going to WW as a short-term diet, you're not going to be very successful. It's a lifestyle change, not a diet.

Just being aware of what you're putting in your mouth is half the battle, IMHO. The other half is "moving your body" as much as you can.


----------



## firebelly1

Not dissing your experience Happy, but I've been to WW three times and won't go back. They are one of the most successful weight loss companies in terms of people that lose weight, but what are the statistics about people who gain it back after they lose it on WW? 

The reason I won't go back is because you have to weigh in each week. If I didn't lose, it was one more reason to beat myself up. PLUS...when they start you off, they don't account for how many calories you're eating now. If you start at 25 points or whatever, it could be 500 calories a day less than what you're eating now and you are HUNGRY for at least the first week and feeling like a failure, blah, blah, blah. After being hungry all the time for a week and not losing one ounce at the end of that week, I just thought there must be a better way.


----------



## cuchulain36

My issues with crossfit:

Someone takes a weekend course and now thinks they're qualified to teach all the compound lifts and program workouts for all ages, genders, and fitness levels. That isn't possible, it could take years to be able to do that.

Risk vs reward, some exercises are too risky to be done with little payoff. Dead lifting 225 lbs 20 times for speed then performing 30 plyo jumps x 5 is dumb and setting yourself up for a major injury. 1000 KB swings is just dumb, 1000 of anything in one workout is probably dumb.

Crossfit can be great IF you are being coached by someone who isn't clueless and programming complete BS, and that's the big IF in the crossfit world. Plus it's absurdly expensive.


----------



## Davelli0331

cuchulain36 said:


> My issues with crossfit:
> 
> Someone takes a weekend course and now thinks they're qualified to teach all the compound lifts and program workouts for all ages, genders, and fitness levels. That isn't possible, it could take years to be able to do that.
> 
> Risk vs reward, some exercises are too risky to be done with little payoff. Dead lifting 225 lbs 20 times for speed then performing 30 plyo jumps x 5 is dumb and setting yourself up for a major injury. 1000 KB swings is just dumb, 1000 of anything in one workout is probably dumb.
> 
> Crossfit can be great IF you are being coached by someone who isn't clueless and programming complete BS, and that's the big IF in the crossfit world. Plus it's absurdly expensive.


There was an article on T Nation recently where one of the lifting coaches there did CrossFit for 6 months and had nothing but praise for it ASSUMING that your coach is an actual strength coach with years of experience under his belt. The author of the article gave huge warnings to stay away from the centers (I refuse to use the word "box") where the coaches did the little weekend course and that was it.

And yeah, CrossFit has a really bad rep for pushing you and/or not instructing you properly to the point of injury. That's one reason I say it may not be very sustainable


----------



## COGypsy

Davelli0331 said:


> There was an article on T Nation recently where one of the lifting coaches there did CrossFit for 6 months and had nothing but praise for it ASSUMING that your coach is an actual strength coach with years of experience under his belt. The author of the article gave huge warnings to stay away from the centers (I refuse to use the word "box") where the coaches did the little weekend course and that was it.
> 
> And yeah, CrossFit has a really bad rep for pushing you and/or not instructing you properly to the point of injury. That's one reason I say it may not be very sustainable


But that's just the risk you take with any organized fitness program. I remember how many people really messed up their knees and shoulders flailing around during the Tae Bo years, people passing out during hot yoga classes, people black and blue from tripping over steps trying to figure out choreography in the step aerobics classes....

Okay. That last one might have just been me :lol: But you get the point. Crossfit is just the latest in a long line of fitness trends that most likely do as much harm as good in the long run.


----------



## Dollystanford

The concerns about Crossfit are valid I think because it's about a culture of quantity over quality. Some of the stuff I've seen on youtube is just dangerous form-wise

You can injure yourself doing anything but some crossfit technique positively encourages it

Granted it burns off an insane amount of calories but I'm a lone workout wolf anyway, I don't want to be in sweaty box hell with a load of other loons


----------



## happy as a clam

firebelly1 said:


> Not dissing your experience Happy, but I've been to WW three times and won't go back...but *what are the statistics about people who gain it back* after they lose it on WW?


I guess we all have different opinions, so we'll have to agree to disagree. What are the stats about people who gain weight back on ANY diet (not just WW)? The relapse rate is pretty dismal for any weight loss program.

And I would argue that those who gained it back "went on a diet" and did NOT make permanent lifestyle changes. Again, true for ANY weight loss program. 



firebelly1 said:


> The reason I won't go back is because you have to weigh in each week. If I didn't lose, it was one more reason to beat myself up.


Again, a difference of opinion. I personally LOVED weighing in each week, I found it very motivational and an inspiration to eat clean. Even though I really didn't have much weight to lose, I still ended up losing 5 lbs and felt great about it (it was a very slow loss over months, not water weight). I am a Lifetime member and still go weigh in once a month. Keeps me honest.

My girlfriend ended up losing 32 lbs and has kept it off for more than 5 years! She still weighs in once a month too.



firebelly1 said:


> PLUS...when they start you off, they don't account for how many calories you're eating now. *If you start at 25 points or whatever*, it could be 500 calories a day less than what you're eating now...


You can skip the Points system altogether and follow their Simply Filling plan (used to be known as Core), which is basically anything on the "clean" list as often as you are hungry. Which is how we should all be eating anyway. I never really followed the Points plan; I concentrated on eating clean according to their plan. I was shocked at how much MORE food I was able to eat when eating "clean"... never hungry.


----------



## changedbeliefs

I'm going to paraphrase one of my BOX members when it comes to the Crossfit critics.

"The hate on Crossfit is getting tired. What's not tiring, is having people ask me how I stay in such great shape." She's 37 years old and has been Crossfitting for five years. I'd say it's pretty sustainable. Another woman at our box is 46, she also coaches: I'd venture to say most 26 year olds would love to look like her.

A guy I work with is considering starting Crossfit. He knows I do it. He said to me, "all I know about Crossfit is, whenever I talk to someone who does it, they say how much they love it, and they're all in phenomenal shape."

I'm a lifelong athlete, I started Crossfit about 10 months ago, at the age of 40. I've "lifted," I did P90x for about two years pretty consistently (that is sustainable, too, btw), and Crossfit opened my eyes. At 41, I can deadlift 400# and squat 300#. My max box jump is 44". I can do ring muscle-ups. I can row 500m in under 1:30. My fellow baseball coaches make jokes about initimidating the other teams with my calf muscles, lol.

I pay $120/month. For that, I will attend AT LEAST 15, usually more like 20-25, coached one-hour classes, so let's call it $6/class. My coach's programming (btw, he's a Games athlete) is awesome, and he will tell you, he purposely avoids what they call "the sexy metcon" (the ones people think are actually rampant, but aren't, like 100 deadlifts or 1000 kettlebell swings - VERY few CF places do that, and you'll never see CF HQ do it). Our conditioning workouts almost always stay in the 10-20 minute range. We occasionally do very short sprint types, or interval types (built in rest), and even more occasionally do something that may take 25-35 minutes.

In addition, my box has several open gym periods - included in my monthly cost - where I'll spend time doing stretching/mobility, working on a skill or Olympic lift, make up a workout I missed during the week, etc... While you can't necessarily expect coaches to be available for you during those times (they may be working out themselves), a coach IS always there, and all of ours are not only willing to help if they can, they are also always watching to keep people safe.

I have yet to "hurt" myself doing CF. Two occasions I strained my shoulders/biceps tendon, and simply had to rest it. There are also times I'm just sore and work around something. One class, I started the workout, turned to the coach and said, "nope.....I can't do those today...." On the spot, he came up with a different workout to do that avoided that movement. During the CF Open, there was a workout with a "deadlift ladder," unusual in that it increased the weight and reps each round. Our head coach informed the group that, if he saw people's form breaking down, he was going to stop your workout. He tediously paced the floor during those workouts, and followed through with that on several people if he thought they were risking injuring.

Despite what YouTube may make you think, boxes like mine are the NORM. Can someone, with no athletic background at all, simply pass the L1 cert and open a box? Potentially. The cert exam is harder than you think, and CF HQ's approval process to be an affiliate is not like getting your driver's permit. Do people think a "certified trainer" at a regular gym is some masters degree program? And what do you pay them? I guarantee it's more than the $6/class I pay....

I would urge anyone: go online, watch videos of the Crossfit Games and Regionals. Watch what those people are capable of. Try even the mini-est of versions yourself, and you'll realize the strength and metabolic capacity that Crossfit can instill. Is it a 100% brand-new, using never-before-seen movements? No, but it has created a culture of fitness and sport that invites, and is adaptable, for anybody of any level. It creates a community of support and motivation toward achieving new goals and capabilities. Sure, there are bad boxes, bad coaches, bad programming out there.......there are "bad" everythings, but to dismiss Crossfit on its face, is a complete mistake.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

It has to be what works for the individual.

Insanity, P90X, Crossfit, etc. will work and like any plan weightloss IS sustainable - but you have to lower your caloric intake once you slow down the workouts.

WW at least teaches a healthy balance. Some people need the weekly meeting to keep on track. I have an online support group and report my weight and post photos to keep me honest AND motivated.

Other diets might work better depending on your tastes. Maybe Atkins is the way to go if you are a big meat eater but don't care for sweets. Maybe WW works better if you have a sweet tooth and you get some sweet options with your points.

All of these can work and can be maintained, but it does require being constantly attentive - once the weight is off, you can't go back to old ways and expect it to STAY off. That's why "lifestyle change" has become such a key phrase.

That is why I LOVE LOVE LOVE my BodyMedia arm band. FitBit is OK but BodyMedia, if worn 24/7 (minus showers) is the most accurate in determining calories burned. It links to My Fitness Pal and imports the calories in.

I know I've posted about it before but it's because with ALL of the various arguments, the problem eventually comes down to slipping back into old ways and not adjusting calories in with calories out.

No matter HOW it's done, THIS keeps me on track. I will continue to wear it after I'm down to my target weight. I want to get a very good feel for what my BMR is. Currently, without exercise it seems 2100 calories a day is a maintenance level and with exercise 2350ish. Therefore I can perhaps pull back to 3x a week at the gym from 5, but adjust my daily calories to about 2250 and keep the weight off once it's off.

But until I started wearing it, it was just a best guess based on a guesstimate of calories from My Fitness Pal and the calculations of calories burned from weight loss @ 3500/pound. 

I think if all overweight people started wearing it and started tracking their food (no omissions!), they would start to see where their biggest issues are and be able to adjust accordingly.

Down another pound since this thread started.


----------



## Dollystanford

This is a really good and balanced article about Crossfit by someone who I think is pretty well-reknowned in fitness circles. 

Mark Rippetoe on Crossfit

I'm not 'hating' on Crossfit, I'm expressing a concern about some elements of it. The rabid responses of crossfitters going for the jugular if you dare to even question their religion is also quite tired. Whatever works for you is just fine, no need to be so defensive. Why should you care what anyone else thinks about it

ETA: someone who is a lifelong athlete and who has experience of various different forms of exercise is not the sort of person I would be as concerned about injuring themselves by doing something they aren't ready for


----------



## cuchulain36

I still do crossfit type workouts, but I need a dedicated strength program to follow. By just going in and doing metcons you will have decent cardio and become decent at BW stuff but you're not going to significantly increase your strength.

I did CF at a box for two months and I lost weight but also found myself unable to squat 200 lbs since the programming was garbage. I moved to more traditional strength programs and in 4 months the CF'ers were looking at me repping 315 like I was superman. I became the strongest person at this particular gym in 4 months, and for a 184 lb man I was still weak by any traditional standard.

As for the CF games, the top athletes are great athletes, and none of them follow the CF main site programming. They have dedicated strength days, and very clear programs, they aren't doing a bunch of metcons and expecting a 750lb DL, not to mention most were fantastic athletes before CF coming from weightlifting and gymnastics backgrounds. The games allows them to make money. Then there is the issue of steroids in the CF Games.

I had the huge squat and deadlift in the past now I'm looking for a more rounded mix of strength and cardio. Plus I can't just go for strength as my marriage is ****e and I need to up my bangability quotient and look good for the next future Mrs. Cuchulain36


----------



## Dollystanford

Hey maybe the next Mrs Cuchulain36 likes the muscles - some of us do (not stupid melon muscles)

I do a mixture of weight training and running with the occasional bike/cross trainer if my IT band injury is playing up (Lyris understands my pain). My body shape has totally changed yet people don't believe me when I tell them how much fat I eat. As soon as you start talking about carb cycling their eyes glaze over but it's been smashing for me


----------



## changedbeliefs

My coach programs a strength movement almost every day. Some places do no strength, some are strength-biased, and some do a separate strength program outside of regular classes. Attributing lack of strength gains to "doing Crossfit" is a misguided statement. I have a 305# squat PR (at 41 and CF'ing less than a year), and I'm very middle of the road among our guys (we don't really have any beasts, but being in the 300#'s isn't uncommon). We have quite a few women in the 200# club (some easily there) also.


----------



## cuchulain36

In one year of SS and Wendler I had a huge squat. I could squat 315 over 20 times.

My initial lack of strength gains were directly attributed to Crossfits focus on metabolic conditioning and lack of any real direction for strength. You can't just come in and do a light compound lift for sets then some 30 minute metcon and expect to lift a lot.

Again it's all about someone's goals, a 300 lb squat may be fine for you but I lifted with 130 lb women with bigger squats, for a year of lifting its on the low side. But if value conditioning over strength then that works for you. But please don't try to sell me CF as a strength program.


----------



## changedbeliefs

Jetranger said:


> Read up on the French Paradox for something puzzling science - a high fat diet but less heart disease and obesity.


It's only puzzling if you believe the snap reaction the FDA had years ago that declared fat "bad." It was capricious science at best, that is now being proven false. Healthy fats - animal fats, coconut oil, olive oil, nuts - are being shown more and more to be VERY healthy.

The real culprits are sugar and breads. I read an article in the NY Times Sunday magazine: in the top-selling spaghetti sauces, after tomatoes, the next most prevalent ingredient is sugar. And everything is a bread product. Buy a Domino's pizza, get the side of cheese bread, and eat cinnamon bread (slathered in icing) for dessert.


----------



## bravenewworld

I tried Crossfit but it just seemed way too much for me in terms of the weightlifting component. 

I only have 2-3 years weight lifting experience and I take a lot of time with my form so the idea of lifting so much as quickly as possible seemed like a recipe for injury. 

I could see it working for someone more advanced who could easily be in the correct form without needing to adjust as much or look in the mirror as often as I seem to. 

And I agree with Dolly, I prefer lone wolf workouts as well. It's my zen time.


----------



## Dollystanford

changedbeliefs said:


> I'm a lifelong athlete, I started Crossfit about 10 months ago, at the age of 40. I've "lifted," I did P90x for about two years pretty consistently (that is sustainable, too, btw), and Crossfit opened my eyes. At 41, I can deadlift 400# and squat 300#. My max box jump is 44". I can do ring muscle-ups. I can row 500m in under 1:30. My fellow baseball coaches make jokes about initimidating the other teams with my calf muscles, lol.


I suppose I don't understand why having said you've been an athlete all your life and done lifting, etc. you attribute what you can do now to a programme you've been doing for 10 months. Have you made all those strength gains just in that time? Or did you (as I assume) start from a much higher base than most?


----------



## changedbeliefs

cuchulain36 said:


> My initial lack of strength gains were directly attributed to *your box's programming's focus* on metabolic conditioning and lack of any real direction for strength.


I fixed that for you there....


----------



## cuchulain36

changedbeliefs said:


> I fixed that for you there....



Not one top Cf athlete actually uses CF mainsite as their main programming. Each one is on a very regimented strength program and working with seasoned traditional strength and conditioning coaches. In fact their programs are very uncrossfit like.

CF is fine for conditioning and losing some weight, but it's not a strength program at all.
Or we may just have a different definition of strength. I'm coming back from a long layoff due to injury and can max squat 345 and I feel feeble.

I still use CF type workouts and they can be a great supplement but I think most CF programming is limited for strength gains.


----------



## bravenewworld

Seems like a lot of people are into weight lifting here - just curious if you can recommend your fav exercises for overall strength training with free weights?


----------



## cuchulain36

bravenewworld said:


> Seems like a lot of people are into weight lifting here - just curious if you can recommend your fav exercises for overall strength training with free weights?



I've never seen anything benefit a woman more in terms of confidence than strength training. Women get lost in this ideal they think men have and ignore strength in lieu of cardio and becoming very skinny.

If I could only do one weightlifting exercise it would be a back squat.


----------



## Davelli0331

My favorites are the basic compound lifts, along with a few more targeted exercises.

Some of the basic compound lifts: bench press, squat, deadlift, military press, rows, pull ups

Each of my workouts is built around 1-2 of those, though for deadlift I do Romanian deadlifts and for rows I do standing bent over rows.

For targeted exercises, I like barbell curls, 21s, skull crushers, shrugs, upright rows, close grip bench


----------



## changedbeliefs

Dollystanford said:


> I suppose I don't understand why having said you've been an athlete all your life and done lifting, etc. you attribute what you can do now to a programme you've been doing for 10 months. Have you made all those strength gains just in that time? Or did you (as I assume) start from a much higher base than most?


I'm not giving CF credit for all of my abilities. Yes, I did start out with a good athletic baseline. However, I never did any olympic lifting before (snatch, clean & jerk, e.g.). I never got on a set of rings. I never did a handstand. When I back squatted in high school and college, it was the age of "don't go below parallel." My first day of CF, I (deep) squatted 205#, that was all I felt comfortable with, I hadn't squatted a barbell in 18 years. Six months later, it was 305#. The other day, I did "pause" squats, where you sit rock-bottom for 3 seconds, and then squat it up, with 225#. I can do 5 linked muscle-ups. I credit CF because, at 41, I am more capable - overall, as a functional, strong, flexible machine - than I have ever been in my life. I look forward to going to workout, to what I may accomplish, to being supported by - and being supportive of - people who quickly became great friends of mine. That does not exist in a regular gym, it just doesn't, I've been to my fair share. At CF, we open the huge garage doors and essentially workout in the fresh air. Take your shirt off....scream....grunt....fall on the ground at the end....whatever you want....you lay it all out there every day. Someone may want to roll their eyes at this, but until you've experienced it, you just don't know what it's like.

To the person who alluded to "risking injury" by moving too fast, or whatever: CF does NOT encourage injuries. It just doesn't. However, NO ONE ever improves, or gains strength, or accomplishes a new skill, or gets their best time, without pushing themselves. Every form of sport and exercise has a risk of injury because of this. Try to run that one step faster, pull a hamstring. Try to jump that one extra foot, sprain an ankle. Try to make that last ditch tackle, get a concussion. Every one of my CF classes where we do an olympic lift starts off with a review of technique and faults with that lift. We use PVC pipes and empty barbells to review form. No one has ever said to me, "I know you're tired and your form is breaking down, but keep lifting it!" It is a collaborative effort between coach and athlete to, a) push each athlete, and b) keep that athlete safe. Any time our conditioning involves a barbell, I will almost always check with my coach for his opinion on what weight I should use. The coach will usually tell us something like, "pick a weight so you can do these unbroken," (so lighter) or "this should be heavy, you should have to drop the bar and do these one at a time," etc... The athlete needs to check his/her ego at the door. It does me no good to try 200# on something that I can't do more than one or two of, and get completely stuck on a round of 10 of those, lose my intensity, and never get to the rest of the workout, when I could do 150#, keep moving, keep my heart rate up and get through the rest of the movements.


----------



## Davelli0331

cuchulain36 said:


> I've never seen anything benefit a woman more in terms of confidence than strength training. Women get lost in this ideal they think men have and ignore strength in lieu of cardio and becoming very skinny.
> 
> If I could only do one weightlifting exercise it would be a back squat.


this right here.

Women shy away from weights, or when they do them they lift such light weights that they don't really make much of a difference.

It's ironic, bc most women say they want to be "toned" but not muscular. While I understand what they're saying, it actually doesn't make sense bc the path to either one is the same: Build up some muscle, lose some fat.


----------



## changedbeliefs

cuchulain36 said:


> I've never seen anything benefit a woman more in terms of confidence than strength training. Women get lost in this ideal they think men have and ignore strength in lieu of cardio and becoming very skinny.
> 
> If I could only do one weightlifting exercise it would be a back squat.


Could. not. agree. more.

Some of the women at my box...you can see it in their walk. Their posture is strong, they just exude confidence when they walk. It is completely sexy. What's interesting is, getting to know some of them more socially, outside of CF, sometimes, they look a little more "normal" to me. Hard to explain, but when they walk into the box, in their workout gear - and CF encourages some attractive clothing choices! - you can almost see the change in attitude. It's like, "I'm here......I'm going to kick some ass," and it's very sexy.


----------



## bravenewworld

cuchulain36 said:


> I've never seen anything benefit a woman more in terms of confidence than strength training. Women get lost in this ideal they think men have and ignore strength in lieu of cardio and becoming very skinny.
> 
> If I could only do one weightlifting exercise it would be a back squat.


I'm getting more into lifting and really enjoying it! The feeling of the muscle constricting and relaxing is kind of addictive.


----------



## Dollystanford

BNW, I do the following:

Weighted squats and lunges 
Bent over rows, lat pulldowns, mid rows 
Deadlifts
Bicep curls (bb and db)
DB lat raises, upright rows, overhead press
Chest press, pec fly, skullcrushers, tricep pulldowns

I also had a go at good mornings today

There's lots of good clips on youtube if you want to look at technique.


----------



## bravenewworld

Dollystanford said:


> BNW, I do the following:
> 
> Weighted squats and lunges
> Bent over rows, lat pulldowns, mid rows
> Deadlifts
> Bicep curls (bb and db)
> DB lat raises, upright rows, overhead press
> Chest press, pec fly, skullcrushers, tricep pulldowns
> 
> I also had a go at good mornings today
> 
> There's lots of good clips on youtube if you want to look at technique.


Thanks Dolly! Going to incorporate some of these into my next workout. 

I actually took weight lifting for two years in high school - the coach was a nice guy but put the girls in a separate group because we shouldn't be doing "exercises for men." While I did learn a lot we never really got into the heavy weights nor got a chance to try what he considered the male exercises like deadlifts. 

Getting back into it this time with no restrictions! :smthumbup:


----------



## awake1

For me, i was around 380lbs a year and a half ago. I'm down to 260ishlbs now. If anyone is curious, i can post my diet and methodology. My goal is to get down to 220-230lbs. I think for my height that would be good. 

I'm currently working up to a 5k and now jog 3 days a week, i also weight lift 3 days a week. 

I've had the same weight lifting routine for over a rear and just recently changed it. I'm now on a push/pull split.


----------



## Mostlycontent

Davelli0331 said:


> this right here.
> 
> Women shy away from weights, or when they do them they lift such light weights that they don't really make much of a difference.
> 
> It's ironic, bc most women say they want to be "toned" but not muscular. While I understand what they're saying, it actually doesn't make sense bc the path to either one is the same: Build up some muscle, lose some fat.


And women have a much higher percentage of body fat than men, which is all the more reason to be doing strength training.

I owned a Gym for 6 years back in the middle 90s. It was more of a power lifting, muscle head gym with lots of free weights, barbells and the like but we also had a fair amount of Cardio equipment.

I'd say 90% of the women went right to the Cardio area and did nothing else. I got my W into strength training and she's never looked as good as she did since that time period.

I can't begin to tell you all the benefits to the woman's lower half with strength training, although you already know that.

As my W has gotten older, she's more into Cardio and 3 to 4 mile power walks on the beach, which still keeps her looking good, but nothing like she was back then. Of course, that was 17 or 18 years ago so there's also that.


----------



## Dollystanford

And this is what people need to realise - it takes time but if you go for a slow and steady weight loss then it's much more sustainable

For women, kicking the idea of the number on the scale is a really hard thing to do. I'm trying to go for a body fat percentage rather than a number but when you go down a pound it's pretty hard not to fist pump ha ha


----------



## COGypsy

Dollystanford said:


> And this is what people need to realise - it takes time but if you go for a slow and steady weight loss then it's much more sustainable
> 
> For women, kicking the idea of the number on the scale is a really hard thing to do. I'm trying to go for a body fat percentage rather than a number but when you go down a pound it's pretty hard not to fist pump ha ha


The hard part (for me) with body fat percentages is that short of a Bod Pod assessment, it's too easy to manipulate the numbers. The most common body fat monitors work on a principle of bioimpedence. You can easily gain or lose a few percentage points based on the water you've consumed in the half hour or so before the reading. Granted you can manipulate a scale as well, or at least encourage it to tell you what you want to hear by the time of day, what you're wearing, etc., but overall I think it's a better tracker of progress. What I tend to rely on most is actually an old fashioned seamstress tape.


----------



## Davelli0331

ha ha ha - but the problem with tape and calipers is that if you don't check almost the exact same site your data will have a variance, too 

Whichever method you choose, the best thing I've found kind of goes counter to the conventional wisdom: I weigh and measure body fat % every day. I record the data quickly and don't give it a second thought. By recording it every day, I can account for shifts in water weight in the bioimpedence method or not measuring at the proper site with the tape and calipers. Instead, I can focus on trends. How am I trending on the week, the fortnight, the month, or the entire length of my bulk/cut?

(note that I'm a nerd who looks at data all day long so...yeah)

But the one measurement that trumps all is progress pictures. Take a picture of yourself every week, same pose, same lighting, etc. *That* should be your ultimate guide.


----------



## COGypsy

Davelli0331 said:


> ha ha ha - but the problem with tape and calipers is that if you don't check almost the exact same site your data will have a variance, too
> 
> Whichever method you choose, the best thing I've found kind of goes counter to the conventional wisdom: I weigh and measure body fat % every day. I record the data quickly and don't give it a second thought. By recording it every day, I can account for shifts in water weight in the bioimpedence method or not measuring at the proper site with the tape and calipers. Instead, I can focus on trends. How am I trending on the week, the fortnight, the month, or the entire length of my bulk/cut?
> 
> (note that I'm a nerd who looks at data all day long so...yeah)
> 
> But the one measurement that trumps all is progress pictures. Take a picture of yourself every week, same pose, same lighting, etc. *That* should be your ultimate guide.


Ha ha! Yes, there is a lot of room for variance no matter what method you favor. One of the times I lost a lot of weight, I did nothing but measurements and pictures. Now, I won't even look in a full length mirror most days past making sure I'm dressed appropriately, so I can't even fathom taking a picture. Currently the method is tape once a week and scale twice a day plus an "official" weigh-in once a week. Totally low-tech for now.

I think it all just goes to show what a mind-game diet and weight loss is more than anything else. Whatever keeps the progress going is likely the "best" method, in the end.


----------



## bravenewworld

COGypsy said:


> Ha ha! Yes, there is a lot of room for variance no matter what method you favor. One of the times I lost a lot of weight, I did nothing but measurements and pictures. Now, I won't even look in a full length mirror most days past making sure I'm dressed appropriately, so I can't even fathom taking a picture. Currently the method is tape once a week and scale twice a day plus an "official" weigh-in once a week. Totally low-tech for now.
> 
> I think it all just goes to show what a mind-game diet and weight loss is more than anything else. Whatever keeps the progress going is likely the "best" method, in the end.


Before/after pics are awesome! When you're changing slowly it's hard to "see" the difference. 

I compared mine last week - omg! Felt like I went from a baby butterball to a svelte figure 8. Happy!


----------



## Ikaika

On the exercising issues, one thing that is bound to happen along your lifetime journey are sports related injuries. So, first it can be a source of discouragement for the untrained, but this is not the time to say, oh well I can't because I get injured and it is not for me. Two things I would suggest to first reduce injuries when starting any exercise program:

1. Stretch first and last (include it into a warmup and cool down routine). I know it just seems unnecessary and so many times we just want to start into the routine, but I can tell you from years of experience if you don't stretch, warm up and cool down each time you will get injured. 

2. Form over weights and reps. I would rather see someone push a lighter weight with good form over a heavier weight that will result in serious injury due to bad form. 

If you do get injured, I would recommend you see a sports physician with the hope that he/she will get you lined up with a physical therapist. Firstly the routines of the PT may seem uncomfortable at first, but again from personal experience these can go a long way in getting you back in your game. Also the PT routines will mean you are not just sitting back and resting during your recovery. 

I typically do a number of different routines, but all of them help me focus on my hope of shaving time off of my rough water swim times. So while I do weights, Tabata workouts, plyometrics and other metabolic routines, they are all purposed to help with my forte, open ocean competitive swimming (amateur).


----------



## Thundarr

changedbeliefs said:


> I'm not giving CF credit for all of my abilities. Yes, I did start out with a good athletic baseline. However, I never did any olympic lifting before (snatch, clean & jerk, e.g.). I never got on a set of rings. I never did a handstand. When I back squatted in high school and college, it was the age of "don't go below parallel." My first day of CF, I (deep) squatted 205#, that was all I felt comfortable with, I hadn't squatted a barbell in 18 years. Six months later, it was 305#. The other day, I did "pause" squats, where you sit rock-bottom for 3 seconds, and then squat it up, with 225#. I can do 5 linked muscle-ups. I credit CF because, at 41, I am more capable - overall, as a functional, strong, flexible machine - than I have ever been in my life. I look forward to going to workout, to what I may accomplish, to being supported by - and being supportive of - people who quickly became great friends of mine. That does not exist in a regular gym, it just doesn't, I've been to my fair share. At CF, we open the huge garage doors and essentially workout in the fresh air. Take your shirt off....scream....grunt....fall on the ground at the end....whatever you want....you lay it all out there every day. Someone may want to roll their eyes at this, but until you've experienced it, you just don't know what it's like.


Years back I could rep 455lbs 10 times on deep squats, 315lbs 7-8 times on the flat bench, which was on par with my overall strength. I was getting stronger but less athletic and less flexible. I got in better shape with P90X (which is mostly body weight stuff and cardio) than I ever was lifting. I'm a fan of CF, insanity, P90x, Rush fit, etc. Really any routines that push cardio, flexibility, body weight strength training, and balance.


----------



## heartsbeating

bravenewworld said:


> Seems like a lot of people are into weight lifting here - just curious if you can recommend your fav exercises for overall strength training with free weights?


I've been enjoying weighted walking lunges - can be with dumbbells or barbell across shoulders. I'm currently doing these with thick grip dumbbells. Barbell squats, goblet squats, raised squats... theme here is squats. All the way down, not the seated position version. Get the largest muscles working! Lying hamstring curls. Prowler sprints. Hyperextensions and glute-ham raises. 

Lat pull-downs (and vary the grips). The usual for arms and upper body - bicep curls, incline DB presses, push ups (mine are currently inclined), skull crushers, bench press etc. If available, I'll vary with using thick grip bars/DB. For example, with skull crushers and curls, the thick grip EZ bar.

Abs and core - floor work such as jack-knives and body holds.

I'll either do a consistent weight with consistent reps, or increase the weights while lowering reps. The weight is often to my failure. Usually that last set with just a couple left to go. I will pause for 10 seconds then reattempt to complete the set but if it just won't go, then I'm done. Keeping correct form is the priority. I won't compromise form simply to get the weight moving. I'll usually finish the set there or sometimes drop to a lower weight to complete so that form remains. 

This is all new to me. I'm loving it though. I'm ditching the mindset of the scale and not counting calories (gasp!). That's my approach - each to their own with calories. It's been strange to adjust to but now I'm more focused on body fat %, fit of my clothes, the health of my food, and strength of my body. I'm still viewing myself in the 'forming habits' stages and that takes time to become a true lifestyle.


----------



## heartsbeating

Thundarr said:


> Years back I could rep 455lbs 10 times on deep squats, 315lbs 7-8 times on the flat bench, which was on par with my overall strength. I was getting stronger but less athletic and less flexible. I got in better shape with P90X (which is mostly body weight stuff and cardio) than I ever was lifting. I'm a fan of CF, insanity, P90x, Rush fit, etc. Really any routines that push cardio, flexibility, body weight strength training, and balance.


I'm just starting to include exercises-stretches-yoga movements to help with flexibility, posture and core strength. It will help me get more out of my strength-training while helping to keep mobility and assist with prevention of injuries. That's the theory at least


----------



## Thundarr

heartsbeating said:


> I'm just starting to include exercises-stretches-yoga movements to help with flexibility, posture and core strength. It will help me get more out of my strength-training while helping to keep mobility and assist with prevention of injuries. That's the theory at least


Yoga, core work, and stretches are especially good for us but yoga is hard (for me). It looks easy but it's not. My oldest son laughed when I told him I was getting ready to do yoga. But then he did some and said there were a lot of moves he did in the Marines during and boot camp after.


----------



## heartsbeating

I've taken yoga classes in the past and remember how sore I was the next day!


Wanted to add that while I don't count calories and I don't use MFP (but aware of its effectiveness for many), I do log my foods. I've taken to logging my meals in a notebook and highlighting foods/drinks that aren't aligned to my goals. This isn't about feeling 'bad' about those things, it's simply an awareness. Some of my goals include ensuring I have protein as my first meal. If that starts to be neglected (rushing to work in the morning and unprepared, whatever it is) then writing in my notebook and highlighting this helps me to get back on track again - especially if this goes to a few days. Other goals may include increasing my vegetables and including more variety. Those chocolate protein balls that I get addicted to? Fine but if they start to crop up almost daily, then it's time to start looking to include a meal if needed at that time instead. That chocolate or glass of wine - highlighted - so I may still have these things but it's being aware of habits and keeping my goals in mind. The less things highlighted over the week, the better for what I want to achieve but I'm also looking to what I may need to include more of for health.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Davelli0331 said:


> I've always viewed workouts like CrossFit, P90X, and the like with a very healthy skepticism. Not because they don't work, quite the opposite, they're some of the most effective workouts out there.
> 
> For one, many of those workouts are no different than the kind of PT I was doing in the Marines 6-12 years ago, so they're nothing new, just repackaged and resold at (IMO) pretty steep prices.
> 
> However, my real point of skepticism comes back to my main point of sustainability. CrossFit, P90X, etc, work wonders *so long as you keep on doing them *into perpetuity**. They're so effective because of the massive amounts of calories that you're burning while getting some strength training in there, too (and in spite of what a lot of lifters say, I've seen some built and shredded CrossFitters).


Any lifestyle changes that you make need to be viewed as into perpetuity. That is the difference between a lifestyle change and a diet. If you think of your change as this awful thing you have to get through, instead of changing your MIND, then you will fail.



> But as soon as you stop those styles of workout, you're going to start putting weight back on because even with your new muscle you're not maintaining that same caloric deficit. Now, if you *can* sustain those types of workouts for months or years, then I say stick with them! Do what works and is sustainable for you!
> 
> But, IMO, the vast majority of Americans could not hang with CrossFit or P90X for any significant amount of time.


Yah. Because they are fat! Really, the idea that exercise is this awful thing is pretty new. People used to have to do copious amounts of it just to stay alive. Never heard a farmer say, Oh I could never sustain this farming thing if I had to do it for more than a few months!


----------



## EnjoliWoman

I admit (after all I mentioned the lost pound here) that I do watch the scale but at this point I just want to be sure it's headed in the right direction. I measure as well. And I know that body fat is the most important.

I like doing the weight training even tho I'm not fully into the free weights. I wish my upper body were stronger and I want to improve faster than my body is letting me. My lower body is OK for strength. Maybe the time is coming for me to switch gyms. Planet Fitness has been great for a good start but the training is basic and minimal and I feel intimidated by all of the equipment being taken up by the men who are big and buff. I'd really like a female training partner. I think I have a lot of potential there due to my natural build. I also know a woman who lost a lot of weight by just building muscle but like anything else if you stop... yeah, she's heavy again. 

I will never have such a low fat percentage that I look manly from weights. My body just won't do that. German heritage and all. Me strong... like ox! Probably why I like beefier men - smaller framed men don't make me feel feminine because I'm not a petite girl.


----------



## changedbeliefs

Just had this thought this morning, just one last way to envision Crossfit....or how NOT to envision it. Crossfit isn't McDonald's. You don't walk into any box and get the exact same thing, the same look, the same feel, the same programming, the same procedures, etc... Crossfit, at its heart, is merely a philosophy: high intensity, constantly varied, functional movements.

High Intensity: this is the most flexible, most scalable concept. This can vary, and the meet the needs for absolutely anyone, because it simply means, whatever is "intense" for you.

Constantly varied: this is probably the one that really does depend on the specific box and programming. Does it include more pure strength movements? If so, does it vary those as well (5x5's, 1RM days, mixing up lifts from the floor, hang, high hang...)? Does it achieve variation through "sexy metcons," grueling, high-rep schemes?

Functional movements: this is generally consistent, in that you don't see Nautilus/pulley machines. There are barbells to lift, medicine balls and kettlebells to throw and swing, ropes and rigs to climb and hang from, things to push/pull/flip (tires, sleds), and rowers/bikes. That's about it. 

There are a million ways to throw all of that together, but all of them constitute "Crossfit." Sure, some ways may have no rhyme or reason, a friend of mine goes to a box with some bizarre programming. Some may be biased completely toward something you don't like, or that won't quite hit your own goals. I'm going to do a couple cycles of a 5/3/1 after my baseball season is over to up my strength numbers some. Maybe I just got dumb lucky, the first box I found is 1 mile from my house, with a head coach who is a 2-time Games athlete, and now up to 5 other coaches that are all great Crossfitters themselves and knowledgeable, helpful coaches as well.


----------



## happy as a clam

Well, *THIS* is surely an eye-opener...


----------



## I Notice The Details

Wow Clam.....WOW!


----------



## happy as a clam

I Notice The Details said:


> Wow Clam.....WOW!


:lol: :rofl: :lol: :rofl:


----------



## luv2luv

I Notice The Details said:


> Wow Clam.....WOW!


Seriously Clam, that puts some serious fear in me about gaining weight. I am certainly not where I want to be but the idea of letting myself slip to that point is scary.


----------



## happy as a clam

luv2luv said:


> Seriously Clam, that puts some serious fear in me about gaining weight. I am certainly not where I want to be but the idea of letting myself slip to that point is scary.


I'm just looking out for my fellow friends! Nothing like a swift kick in the rear and a dose of reality...


----------



## I Notice The Details

happy as a clam said:


> I'm just looking out for my fellow friends! Nothing like a swift kick in the rear and a dose of reality...


They should post that picture on the door of McDonalds! 

Wow, I am still in shock... 

I can't "unsee" that picture Clam!!!!!!


----------



## Lyris

Several of those things aren't really about being fat though. They're about other people's attitudes to fat.

Depression, reduced employment opportunities and social discrimination for example.


----------



## I Notice The Details

You are too funny Clam!!!!!!!!!! :smthumbup:


----------



## happy as a clam

I Notice The Details said:


> You are too funny Clam!!!!!!!!!! :smthumbup:


:rofl: :rofl:


----------



## bravenewworld

Omg Clam wow! A powerful reminder for those of us on this journey.

Can't put up my before/after pics as I'm in bra and underwear (nope.nope.nope) but found someone online with almost exactly the same before/after shape: 

Size 14 to Size 8

Still going! Long hike tomorrow AM then making seafood salad for lunch. Tonight's dinner was a slice of pizza and beer.


----------



## bravenewworld

Lyris said:


> Several of those things aren't really about being fat though. They're about other people's attitudes to fat.
> 
> Depression, reduced employment opportunities and social discrimination for example.


I was curious about the depression one as well. Is it because depressed people tend to gain weight? Or is it that weight gain causes depression? Also wondering if hormone fluctuations due to obesity affect this?


----------



## NextTimeAround

Here's something to read:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/magazine/tara-parker-pope-fat-trap.html?pagewanted=all


----------



## awake1

NextTimeAround said:


> Here's something to read:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/magazine/tara-parker-pope-fat-trap.html?pagewanted=all




The problem I see in that article are that the participants were on a very low calorie diet, which, in the west inherently means low fat and low protein. Yea, losing 30lbs on a very low calorie diet that is especially low in protein is capital B Bad. It's also a good way to rebound.

Something no one ever talks about is taking a break from weight loss. Plateauing, on purpose, to reset hormone profiles. Not to mention, slowing down the weight loss. You want a controlled decent, not a crash.

Everyone wants the quick results, and look at it as "once I lose the weight, my journey is over." Like the old cliche goes, you need a lifestyle overhaul. 

I ate for emotional reasons. I was sedentary. I did not work out or do much aside from video games. I didn't do much at all. 

Anyways, metabolic damage is maybe a "thing" but many studies have shown it not to exist. Either way, even if it's real, it tends to show up more often in already very lean people. A 300lb guy or girl is not going to stop losing weight on 1200 calories a day. And their hit to the BMR is going to be negligible. The largest I've ever read about was around a 20% reduction in expended calories, and of that, most of it was due to spontaneous activity which are subconscious movements you make during the day. The easy way to make this up is of course exercise. However, a given person may not get the 20% hit, it might be 10%, or close to 0%. 

After losing ~120lbs, anecdotal at 260lbs I haven't really seen any of the supposed ills mentioned. I eat 2500-2700 calories a day and continue to lose weight. Though I do work out, i'm otherwise sedentary for 23 and 1/2 hours of the day. When I first started losing weight, i ate much less. I upped it due to me being less sedentary. As I lost weight, I began to lose more and faster. So I had to up them. Ironically, losing weight caused me to burn more calories indirectly.

I think what happens is people go too hard too fast, get hungry, and binge. Maybe stuffing ice cream down their throat at 2 am. Then they forget it and cry two days later "i eat 1200 calories a day and I don't lose weight!" 

Obviously, that's untrue. Otherwise it wouldn't be possible to starve to death. But the body is pretty efficient to begin with. 

For the big people like me, most of this stuff isn't much of an issue until we start to get closer to our goal weights, which incidentally also impacts the less obese population to varying degrees if they try to lose weight. 

Anyways i'm posting this incase anyone reads a headline and gets discouraged. Not only can you do it, but if you plan it out and stick to it, it WILL work.


----------



## I Notice The Details

awake1 said:


> Th
> 
> ...Anyways i'm posting this incase anyone reads a headline and gets discouraged. Not only can you do it, but if you plan it out and stick to it, it WILL work.


Congratulation Awake! Good job on sticking to it and doing it. :smthumbup:


----------



## Thundarr

I'm participating in the 'fat epidemic'. Today was a cheat day. No push mowing grass, no treadmill or weights, no activity really at all. For lunch I had one hotdog and one large double cheese burger. Plenty of snacks this evening including a grilled ham/cheese sandwich with buttered bread.

Tomorrow will be a better day though. I have lots to do.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Davelli0331 said:


> ha ha ha - but the problem with tape and calipers is that if you don't check almost the exact same site your data will have a variance, too
> 
> Whichever method you choose, the best thing I've found kind of goes counter to the conventional wisdom: I weigh and measure body fat % every day. I record the data quickly and don't give it a second thought. By recording it every day, I can account for shifts in water weight in the bioimpedence method or not measuring at the proper site with the tape and calipers. Instead, I can focus on trends. How am I trending on the week, the fortnight, the month, or the entire length of my bulk/cut?
> 
> (note that I'm a nerd who looks at data all day long so...yeah)
> 
> But the one measurement that trumps all is progress pictures. Take a picture of yourself every week, same pose, same lighting, etc. *That* should be your ultimate guide.


If the data are entered in Excel, you can make a graph of them and add a moving average in the graph. That moving average is your best indicator I think.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

Lyris said:


> Several of those things aren't really about being fat though. They're about other people's attitudes to fat.
> 
> Depression, reduced employment opportunities and social discrimination for example.


On the risk of being slaughtered....

These items are a consequence of the being fat, the fat is these days seen as an organ, with interfering functions to the normal body functioning. It grows like a cancer, and promotes itself via sending hormones into the blood. These hormones have a bad influence on all area's of life. My guess is that other people react to the behavior caused by the bad influence of fat.

A very likable fat person has none of these problems you mention. But most are brought down by sluggishness on all area's of life. And that is the real problem, not the outside as viewed by others.


----------



## Lyris

Well I'm probably not going to actually kill you for disagreeing with me. 

But I think you're wrong. I don't think being fat is objectively distressing. In past and present cultures where fat is admired and celebrated, I don't think people are depressed because of it. 

Rubens' models seem pretty cheerful, for example.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

Also, you two are using the term "fat" pretty loosely but I think you could both be very well referring to the same body style.

For instance, OP saw "rolls" of fat. When a person is seated in the spa, rolls are much more likely - when a person stands up they may not actually have "rolls" with an actual crease between each so much as undulations of flesh. 

This woman likely doesn't have slabs of fat hanging down but does have undulations when standing. But likely has tummy rolls when seated. She is overweight but not obese. Some would call her fat. But this is not an unhealthy level of fat if she is active and eats generally healthy/nutritious foods.

I'm guessing SLL would call this fat and consider it unhealthy. I'm guessing that Lyris would find this fat and think it's just fine. And she is more along the lines of a rubenesque model.









I think we can ALL agree that this is neither attractive nor healthy, but it doesn't diminish her value as a human being. She is still loveable, can be a great friend, mother, even wife, but perhaps only a few men into fetishes would find this "sexy". 











Perhaps if SLL found an image close to the weight of the women he is referring to, it would clear things up a bit.


----------



## awake1

I Notice The Details said:


> Congratulation Awake! Good job on sticking to it and doing it. :smthumbup:


Thanks. I'm thinking i'll lose around 40lbs more, give or take and then be done. That should be sometime early next year.


----------



## Forest

Why is it so unheard of to admit that your body size is a matter of personal choice?

With all the talk about control, and personal responsibility, this area seems to be treated as overly taboo.

My parents, grandparents, etc lived thru the Depression, Dust Bowl and poverty that is mostly unknown today. At family reunions in the 60s and 70s, there were NO obese persons to be seen. I can recall only 1 great aunt that I'd call overweight.

Why were they not overweight? Initially, lack of food; followed by lack of funds, followed by priorities being geared toward things other than food. As they matured, those priorities remained intact.

Unpopular as it is, the truth remains that a person chooses to direct their resources at some things over others. It is a choice.


----------



## Miss_Conduct

Forest said:


> My parents, grandparents, etc lived thru the Depression, Dust Bowl and poverty that is mostly unknown today. At family reunions in the 60s and 70s, there were NO obese persons to be seen. I can recall only 1 great aunt that I'd call overweight.


There's a factor you're overlooking. Morbidly obese people don't tend to live as long and people with normal BMI's. That's why it's classified as morbid, as in morbidity. Visit any nursing home. People who life into their 80's and 90's are very unlikely to be overweight.


----------



## Forest

Miss_Conduct said:


> There's a factor you're overlooking. Morbidly obese people don't tend to live as long and people with normal BMI's. That's why it's classified as morbid, as in morbidity. Visit any nursing home. People who life into their 80's and 90's are very unlikely to be overweight.


I don't believe I've overlooked this at all. There were simply no obese persons of any age in my family in those generations.

My mom recently died at age 90 in a nursing home. The reality was indeed that those in their 80s and 90s were mostly not obese, or much overweight, really.

Still, obesity was just not present in my family in those days, at any age. Now? Yes, and at much younger ages.


----------



## bravenewworld

Side note - lost 2.5lbs at my WW meeting today! Even despite the fact I had pizza, beer, hot wings, and did a wine tasting this week. My 85% healthy eating / 15% treat food seems to be working out. I'm sure the working out helps too (10 miles hiking + ran 8 miles this week + weight lifting) but I think fitness improves my mood more than anything. Hoping as I lose weight I'll see more muscle tone from my lifting. 

Now I just needed to remember my dang ticker password so I can update it!


----------



## bravenewworld

EnjoliWoman said:


> Also, you two are using the term "fat" pretty loosely but I think you could both be very well referring to the same body style.
> 
> For instance, OP saw "rolls" of fat. When a person is seated in the spa, rolls are much more likely - when a person stands up they may not actually have "rolls" with an actual crease between each so much as undulations of flesh.
> 
> This woman likely doesn't have slabs of fat hanging down but does have undulations when standing. But likely has tummy rolls when seated. She is overweight but not obese. Some would call her fat. But this is not an unhealthy level of fat if she is active and eats generally healthy/nutritious foods.
> 
> *I think we can ALL agree that this is neither attractive nor healthy, but it doesn't diminish her value as a human being. She is still loveable, can be a great friend, mother, even wife,* but perhaps only a few men into fetishes would find this "sexy."


Had to bold that because I loved it so much. Really important to remember in how we interact with and treat others.


----------



## pinotnoir

There's no doubt this is an issue. I live in Illinois and am embarrassed by the number of overweight people in the Midwest. We are in the process of moving to Colorado (in the next 12 months) and I have been taking trips to CO every 3-4 months (in fact I am in CO now). There is a VERY noticeable difference in the weight of people in CO versus IL. In fact, we have a game we play called "guess where they come from". Just today my son and I saw an overweight couple and I guessed Iowa. Saw them walk to their car and sure enough... It's usually IA, IL or WI where we see the very heavy set people. But we also see a very noticeable difference in the lifestyles in CO. Very active, very aware of nutrition. And it shows in their appearances.


----------



## Coffee Amore

pinotnoir said:


> There's no doubt this is an issue. I live in Illinois and am embarrassed by the number of overweight people in the Midwest. We are in the process of moving to Colorado (in the next 12 months) and I have been taking trips to CO every 3-4 months (in fact I am in CO now). There is a VERY noticeable difference in the weight of people in CO versus IL. In fact, we have a game we play called "guess where they come from". Just today my son and I saw an overweight couple and I guessed Iowa. Saw them walk to their car and sure enough... It's usually IA, IL or WI where we see the very heavy set people. But we also see a very noticeable difference in the lifestyles in CO. Very active, very aware of nutrition. And it shows in their appearances.


I'm not surprised. I've had to go to CO for work. I've noticed a more active lifestyle there for residents compared to other places. CO has the lowest obesity rate in the country. CO usually does well in other health/fitness related rankings. My state isn't too bad either, but I think CO does even better.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

EnjoliWoman said:


> Also, you two are using the term "fat" pretty loosely but I think you could both be very well referring to the same body style.
> 
> For instance, OP saw "rolls" of fat. When a person is seated in the spa, rolls are much more likely - when a person stands up they may not actually have "rolls" with an actual crease between each so much as undulations of flesh.
> 
> This woman likely doesn't have slabs of fat hanging down but does have undulations when standing. But likely has tummy rolls when seated. She is overweight but not obese. Some would call her fat. But this is not an unhealthy level of fat if she is active and eats generally healthy/nutritious foods.
> 
> I'm guessing SLL would call this fat and consider it unhealthy. I'm guessing that Lyris would find this fat and think it's just fine. And she is more along the lines of a rubenesque model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we can ALL agree that this is neither attractive nor healthy, but it doesn't diminish her value as a human being. She is still loveable, can be a great friend, mother, even wife, but perhaps only a few men into fetishes would find this "sexy".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps if SLL found an image close to the weight of the women he is referring to, it would clear things up a bit.



Coming up...

A roll of fat when sitting down I consider as normal. But extended rolls hanging down when standing, I call flaps of fat. 

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/ladies-lounge/211370-fat-epidemic-9.html#post9849602











The first photo has belly fat hanging down. It is gone to normal on the second.


----------



## See_Listen_Love

EnjoliWoman said:


> I'm guessing SLL would call this fat and consider it unhealthy. I'm guessing that Lyris would find this fat and think it's just fine. And she is more along the lines of a rubenesque model.


I think she is too fat (for health) but looking gorgeous, because her curves are not distorted.


> Perhaps if SLL found an image close to the weight of the women he is referring to, it would clear things up a bit.


A roll of fat when sitting down I consider as normal. But extended rolls hanging down when standing, I call flaps of fat.

especially what I mean is this:









The first photo has belly fat hanging down. It is gone to normal on the second.


----------



## Anonymous07

Miss_Conduct said:


> There's a factor you're overlooking. Morbidly obese people don't tend to live as long and people with normal BMI's. That's why it's classified as morbid, as in morbidity. *Visit any nursing home. People who life into their 80's and 90's are very unlikely to be overweight.*


The last part you wrote is true, but ask any elder person how many people were overweight/obese back when they were young and you will get an answer that basically says "very little". My great-grandma lived to 101 and she always said how surprising it was to see so many large, overweight people during her last years. 

The lifestyle we have today is very different than what it used to be. Instead of kids playing outside and exercising, most are inside watching tv, playing video games, and other non-moving activities. Instead of eating a home cooked meal, many individuals eat fast food and other convenience foods(donuts, pop tarts, burgers, etc.). That was unheard of back in the day. They didn't have a McDonalds on every street corner, as it just wasn't there. I'm not blaming the food industry though, as it is still a choice people have to make. No one is force fed bad food. It just takes some more planning/time management to make healthy meals instead of eating out. It's also important to have a good knowledge of what healthy eating is, too. I've tried to help my in-laws switch some of their traditional ethic foods, cooking it slightly different, to make it healthier since my FIL is now diabetic and they both have high cholesterol and high blood pressure.


----------



## Anonymous07

bravenewworld said:


> Had to bold that because I loved it so much. Really important to remember in how we interact with and treat others.


I think everyone agrees on that part.  Hopefully. 

I just worry about my friends who are overweight/obese. My husband's friend/co-worker passed away from heart failure at only 28 years old from being obese(it was too much pressure on his heart). It's really sad.


----------



## bravenewworld

Anonymous07 said:


> I think everyone agrees on that part.  Hopefully.
> 
> I just worry about my friends who are overweight/obese. My husband's friend/co-worker passed away from heart failure at only 28 years old from being obese(it was too much pressure on his heart). It's really sad.


I hear you Anon. My Father is also morbidly obese and it has been really challenging to watch as he continues to make poor food choices. Despite weekly visits by me to throw out his candies, frozen pot pies, and other treats he is at least 100lb overweight. 

The weird thing is he was extremely healthy when I was growing up - always taking long walks and eating lots of vegetables and fish/roasted chicken. As he's gotten older his social circle has diminished and I think food has become his new companion. 

Was at the store today and noticed the candy section by the checkout counter is at least 3x bigger than when I was a kid. Plus there were all these new (and to me) gross snacks like hershey's dipping stix, crunchy candy balls, etc. It was like they figured out 9 different ways to make the same candy bar.


----------



## Thundarr

I believe exercise and activity is the key because I think it directly affects what we want to eat. Healthy foods just taste better when I'm active than they do when I'm a sloth.

I took a break this weekend from exercise and I noticed that I wanted crap food again. So no exercise, TV dinners and corn dogs. Awesome . This morning after I push mowed the lawn though, I chugged a glass of water and ate a banana. I didn't even want a banana over the weekend. After I went to the gym, I hit the water (instead of diet pepsi again) and ate a potato. Just a potato with no salt or butter and it was great. There's no way I'd like a BP without salt, butter, cheese, etc, when I haven't exercised. Maybe it's just me?


----------



## firebelly1

Thundarr said:


> I believe exercise and activity is the key because I think it directly affects what we want to eat. Healthy foods just taste better when I'm active than they do when I'm a sloth.
> 
> I took a break this weekend from exercise and I noticed that I wanted crap food again. So no exercise, TV dinners and corn dogs. Awesome . This morning after I push mowed the lawn though, I chugged a glass of water and ate a banana. I didn't even want a banana over the weekend. After I went to the gym, I hit the water (instead of diet pepsi again) and ate a potato. Just a potato with no salt or butter and it was great. There's no way I'd like a BP without salt, butter, cheese, etc, when I haven't exercised. Maybe it's just me?


I think exercising motivates you to want to eat better because you don't want to have wasted all that effort. That's me. But I know my weight loss is about getting my eating under control. There was a period of time when I was getting up every morning to work out at the gym for an hour. Didn't lose any weight. Nada. I was probably replacing my calories or gaining muscle, but still.


----------



## BostonBruins32

it comes down to net calories. the more you work out, the more you can eat. I think there is something in the American culture around simplifying life. Little things, like avoiding stairs and taking elevators. Driving around 45 minutes to get the closest parking spot. etc..

these little things help you get some form of excercise, and I think they are missed.


----------



## over20

BostonBruins32 said:


> it comes down to net calories. the more you work out, the more you can eat. I think there is something in the American culture around simplifying life. Little things, like avoiding stairs and taking elevators. Driving around 45 minutes to get the closest parking spot. etc..
> 
> these little things help you get some form of excercise, and I think they are missed.


:iagree:

Great POV...also having a TV remote prevents us from getting up and changing the channels like in days past...


----------



## pinotnoir

The biggest thing that sticks in my head is watching people drive to the gym, and then circling for a parking spot as close to the gym door as possible. It's a gym people! You came to exercise!

I've learned to appreciate parking at the end of the parking lot wherever I go. You get exercise and don't have to worry about people waiting for your spot.

I just got back from CO and I swear you just feel like you want to be healthy. I ate very little, very healthy and just wanted to exercise. Something about the air, or the attitude of the people, It's very contagious.



BostonBruins32 said:


> it comes down to net calories. the more you work out, the more you can eat. I think there is something in the American culture around simplifying life. Little things, like avoiding stairs and taking elevators. Driving around 45 minutes to get the closest parking spot. etc..
> 
> these little things help you get some form of excercise, and I think they are missed.


----------



## Dollystanford

I run or walk to the gym - it's 2k there and 2k back, that's my cardio done!


----------



## Blossom Leigh

Starting my new body today... three phases, 40lbs at a time. 

I'm hungry... lol

but started with almonds, and an almond milk, whey protein with instant coffee and stevia... yummo.. maybe should have hit two scoops of the protein. Apples and peanut butter in a little while until a great salad with a hard boiled egg and grilled chicken and veggies for supper.


----------



## Jetranger

Had dinner with a young lady off a dating site last night. As per the cliché, she put down ‘a little extra’ as her body type when she was in fact obese (or whatever you’d call 5’6” and about 250lbs). This left me, who’d decided to have a bit of a night off (still came in just under my calorie target) and had fish and chips with a few beers, feeling very self conscious as she ate a single slider burger and fries. I really don’t go for heavier girls and now I feel like a jerk because that’s why I’m just not interested.


----------



## Blossom Leigh

Different people react differently to weight. I've had to accept myself no matter what my weight. Not the easiest thing to do. But I'm ready to enjoy my body again. I'm grateful to be a pretty girl who carries weight well and have always turned heads no matter what my size, was even getting compliments out in Vegas in the land of nothing but perfect T & A, but I am so tired of feeling sick.


----------



## COGypsy

Jetranger said:


> Had dinner with a young lady off a dating site last night. As per the cliché, she put down ‘a little extra’ as her body type when she was in fact obese (or whatever you’d call 5’6” and about 250lbs). This left me, who’d decided to have a bit of a night off (still came in just under my calorie target) and had fish and chips with a few beers, feeling very self conscious as she ate a single slider burger and fries. I really don’t go for heavier girls and now I feel like a jerk because that’s why I’m just not interested.


We like what we like. It's really just that simple. I like TWB's (tall white boys). As much fun and as nice as a Hispanic or Asian or African American guy might be--not going to ever trip my trigger to move past the friend zone. Short, tall, fat, thin, blonde or dark....we all have a type. It's more jerky to try to drag things out and try to "convince" yourself that you're attracted when you're just not.


----------



## Anonymous07

Jetranger said:


> Had dinner with a young lady off a dating site last night. As per the cliché, she put down ‘a little extra’ as her body type when she was in fact obese (or whatever you’d call 5’6” and about 250lbs). This left me, who’d decided to have a bit of a night off (still came in just under my calorie target) and had fish and chips with a few beers, feeling very self conscious as she ate a single slider burger and fries. I really don’t go for heavier girls and now I feel like a jerk because that’s why I’m just not interested.


You are going to be attracted to what ever you like and that's fine, but it also goes beyond that when you are talking about an overweight/obese individual in that there are health concerns. I could never be with a man who was really overweight or obese because I really value healthy living. I enjoy being active and couldn't be with a couch potato. It just wouldn't work out. The lifestyle is too different. It would be worse to lead her on, instead of just breaking it off soon.


----------



## bravenewworld

Thundarr said:


> I'm participating in the 'fat epidemic'. Today was a cheat day. No push mowing grass, no treadmill or weights, no activity really at all. For lunch I had one hotdog and one large double cheese burger. Plenty of snacks this evening including a grilled ham/cheese sandwich with buttered bread.
> 
> Tomorrow will be a better day though. I have lots to do.


Had a few of those days myself - started a new job so been celebrating which means nights out with cheeseburgers, French fries, and a few beers. Plus someone gave me a box of chocolates so I've been snacking on a few of those each day. 

Good thing is I've stayed active, 2 miles runs every day. Today I was supposed to go on a 5 mile run but it is WAY too hot so I'm walking to the Farmers market instead. 7 miles total, not bad.

Doubt I'll lose any weight this week since my eating has been very fat/salt/beer oriented but some weeks are like that - I don't let them mess with my head anymore. The next one will be better.


----------

