One-third of Americans are clinically 'obese.' Why?

[Barack2theFuture]

Do you think it is high fructose corn syrup?

Fast food?

Processed and modified foods created by Big Agriculture?

Stress?

Overwork?

[LostinVA]

1. All that, too much soda, and lack of exercise

Especially for kids.

[bdamomma]

4. kids are too sedentary these days they sit in front of the TV or the computer.

oh I agree with all the responses to my comment. It's just really sad, it is not good for a persons physical/emotional wellbeing.

[Barack2theFuture]

but it's not just kids who are obese

it's adults.

[LostinVA]

8. I agree, i just mean there are WAY more obese kids now

Way more than 20, 30, 40 years ago. Even 10 years ago. It is a death sentence for many of them, literally: a shortened life, and emotionally is sucks, or so the kids themselves say.

[zipplewrath]

10. Not just kids

I'm not nearly as active as I should be, and I beat the pants off of most of the folks in my peer group, especially in my age group.
My wife and I take "walking vacations", where we walk each day from one village to the next, having our luggage moved for us each day. Nice way to see a country, both the countryside and the villages and towns along the way. We meet folks in the countries and get a real feel for the places we visit.

Tell people about them all the time, and the general response is "I'd rather lay on a beach somewhere". Mind you, we aren't climbing Everest here, we're walking 10 -14 miles a day OVER 6 - 8 HOURS. Not exactly a triathlon or anything. Same thing when we are in major cities line NYC or London or something. We mostly walk. Why spend time in a subway on vacation when you can walk around and actually see the town you're visiting. So yeah, by the end of the day we've walked 8 - 12 miles while seeing the sights. To hear our friends talk, you'd think we had walked the Appalachian trail or something.

[Arkansas Granny]

2. All of the above plus lack of exercise.

[NoNothing]

3. Two main factors:

1. Cheap food.
2. Desk jobs.

[LostinVA]

14. I have a desk job and have for years

You have to eat decent and make yourself exercise on those evenings when all you want to do is go home and collapse on the couch. just 30 minutes of walking or running makes a huge difference.

[NoNothing]

34. Exactly

And laziness is programmed into the human character.

But even desk jobs have gotten less strenuous. At least 50 years ago, you had to move papers around, walk things to filing cabinets, visit your co-workers to have a conversation. Now it's all email on computers and files on servers, you can spend an entire workday with ass in seat.

[LostinVA]

149. I make myself get up and move around

And, take stairs instead of elevators, etc. It helps some.

[Newest Reality]

5. When you feed

your livestock the general ooze of processed crap that contains cheap garbage of many sorts, what do you expect?

However, there is money to be made in the effects from the emotional to the physical, so its not all bad for those who stand to prosper from the trend.

[Fearless]

6. Cheapest foods are the least healthy. Stavation is for the 20th century, obesity the 21st..

[LostinVA]

17. That isn't necessarily true

Rice and beans are cheap. So is oatmeal, and lots of other stuff.

[Fearless]

20. And you need to prepare them, which is difficult if you work 2-3 jobs.

Overall unhealthy, center of the supermarket, foods are much cheaper overall.

[LostinVA]

23. I've done it before -- you can do it

Even if you just make a huge pot of soup one night to last for sinner all week. PB sandwiches are nutritious and healthy. Oatmeal is, and if that takes too long, Cheerios are okay, or PB toast.

I don't agree with you that processed food is cheap -- much of it actually isn't.

[Fearless]

29. Then you also need to look at what is attainable in the inner city.

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2010/06/for_birminghams_inner-city_dwe.html

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IQDj8z9YdBgJ:www.dailybreeze.com/ci_15566705+food+quality+in+the+inner+city&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

http://www.takepart.com/news/2010/05/12/all-hail-the-baltimore-food-czar

Etc.


It's not a question of CAN healthy eating be done, but IS healthy eating being done. And the answer is no.

[Barack2theFuture]

47. this is totally not typo snark

you wrote "sinner" instead of "dinner" and I got the picture of someone with a pot of soup on the stove, furiously committing debauchery all week and taking breaks only long enough to slurp down a bowl of soup and then hurrying back to their sinning. It made me chuckle out loud.

[LostinVA]

53. hahahahaha

Or watching porn while I madly slurp the soup!

[Barack2theFuture]

slurp the soup...

We've coined a new euphemism.

[LostinVA]

58. hahahaha

[myrna minx]

74. LOL -

You slurping the soup? - if ya know whadda mean. :rofl:

[MedicalAdmin]

117. The Tea Bag Party's new motto.

Before you toss that salad, come slurp the soup. Do it for Jeeeeeeesus.




Bwahahahahahaha

[City of Mills]

56. LOL

That's pretty funny :)

[myrna minx]

76. ..and dramatically wiping her mouth with her whole forearm once she's done.

:rofl:

[LostinVA]

81. hahaha

[gkhouston]

145. Yeah, made me want the special recipe so I could be fortified for the fornicatin'. n/t

[a la izquierda]

107. We were poor growing up...

and my mom always found time to cook, and to force my sisters and I to learn, even with her jobs. We ate cheaply, but well.
I know it's anecdotal. Crock pots are wonderful to use when you're going to be short on time.

[Fearless]

125. The problem is that many people don't have time to look for good food

who live in the inner city... CC: Post 29.

[a la izquierda]

135. That much is true...and should be remedied.

We didn't live in the inner city.

[roody]

152. Just pour hot water over oatmeal and wait 3 minutes.

Or eat it as is. It is delicious not cooked.

[snooper2]

30. head of lettuce always under a dollar

Bannanas at 59 cents a pound

[LostinVA]

64. Cabbage is actually often pretty cheap, as are many frozen vegetables

And sometimes canned vegs.

If you have time, bread is easy an cheap to make.

[snooper2]

93. and noisy , at least our bread maker :)

:hi:

[LostinVA]

112. lol

[Warpy]

7. None of those things add up although they might contribute

Epidemiologists and many health care workers will tell you something else has to be at work because the world has simply not changed that fast to make us chip and beer snarfing couch potatoes with stratospheric weight numbers.

When I started nursing in the early 80s, the upper range for obese patients was about 250. A 300 pound patient was an extreme rarity. In fact, I only saw one in my first five years, and I worked agency so I rarely had the same patients two nights in a row. We had to take the poor old guy down to the basement and weigh him on the linen scale to get his weight.

Fast forward to the early 00s. A full third of my patients were in the 300 pound range. Our scales had been replaced with digital models that went up to 400.

People were sedentary junk food junkies 50 years ago, yet the rate of extreme obesity was low. Epidemiologists have pointed out that the wave of obesity started around the Gulf coast and has spread out across the country in the classic pattern of an infectious disease. Central America has experienced exactly the same pattern, even though their average caloric intake is lower and their activity level higher.

Add to this the fact that people who starve themselves down to an ideal weight, even through surgery, will regain that weight within 5 years to the tune of 90% of them. We have no cure for obesity.

The conclusion is that fat is not a moral issue. It is not a dietary issue and it's not a lifestyle issue. Something else is at work and I sincerely hope they find out what it is soon.

[Barack2theFuture]

11. is something altering us genetically, or at the cellular level?

how do we know it is not a recently ubiquitous substance like HFCS?

[Warpy]

32. We know because obesity is also striking people who don't eat HFCS

especially in Central America, where the diet is typically fresh foods with the occasional bottle of soda a major and infrequent treat.

Something else is at work.

[wildflower]

71. I heard an interesting theory recently

It regards snacking.

The theory is that even when people ate all sorts of unhealthy stuff 50 years ago, they weren't snacking. They only ate at breakfast, lunch and dinner, and if they did eat something in between, it was an apple or half a glass of milk.

This person said the French are the same way, and that where obesity *is* starting to increase in France, people are eating between meals, at MacDonald's and the like.

Now, I had to think a lot about this because my belief has always been that one should eat every couple of hours (without too much sugar or fat, and with some protein) to keep energy levels stable. I remember this idea was promoted by the Zone diet too.

But this theory about snacking really got me thinking.

I wish I could remember where I saw this. But it's food for thought, no pun intended. :)

[happy_liberal]

83. "eat every couple of hours" sounds like a good idea if it is good nutrition

nuts, cheese....dense nutrients...just enough so you are not hungry anymore...then skip the 3 big meals.

If I eat just enough so I am not hungry, my body is happy but not hung up in digestion, and I can keep on keeping on.

[wildflower]

100. I tend to be that way too

I just feel better physically if I eat small amounts frequently.

[Warpy]

92. That's baloney

they were scarfing candy bars along with their sweet coffee at work and those candy bars were one hell of a lot bigger than they are now.

They know there's one flavor of adenovirus that reprograms muscle cells to become fat cells. Research into other areas is ongoing.

Please get out of denial. While lifestyle is a contributory factor, it's not the whole story.

[wildflower]

97. I'm not sure what you're referring to

Regarding the candy bars.

I'm also not sure what you feel I am denying, but I was trying to say that in addition to all the other changes we have seen over the years (genetic, medical, and otherwise), that the kind of snacking seen in different cultures and time periods is an interesting point, one that I hadn't considered, and that I'm not quite sure what to make of it.

[bvar22]

109. I heard that yesterday on "Dual Survival".

It was in a different context, but the same information.
They said that in a Survival Situation with limited food, it is better to eat small amounts spread over the whole day because the body metabolizes MORE of the calories contained in that quantity of food than if it is eaten at one big meal.

[LostinVA]

138. I have to eat that way for health reasons anyway

And, most sports nutritionists will tell you to eat five to six times a day. Eat a complex carb and a protein each time (plus green stuff at the bigger meals). You also rarely feel hungry.

[SoCalDem]

118. Foods we eat EVERY day, used to be once-in-a-while treats

Grocery stores used to be small, with just the basics
They did not have in-house bakeries, snack shops


People used to cook what they ate, except for the occasional restaurant visit

Some chef on a talk show once said something that resonated with me..

"People used to make their own french fires when they wanted fries & if people still did that, the MESS & prep time would turn them off, and they would eat less fries".

Cake was for your birthday

Candy was at Easter, Halloween & Christmas

Pie was at Thanksgiving & Xmas

Chips & soda pop were for picnics

Cocoa was for when you were sick or just in from shoveling snow (not every day, disguised as mochocappalattefroufrou in a vente-grande-macho-whatever cup)

Soup was homemade from scraps, bones & leftovers & the fat was skimmed off..and it was chock-full of veggies to make it go further

School lunches were a sandwich from home, an apple & some milk

An after-school snack was a few cookies & some milk..not a bag of doritos & a gallon of Pepsi

[Obamanaut]

130. Eating 5 -6 times a day, with some being good meals using portion

control and the remainder being healthy stuff ( for example apple w/ cheese, other fruit, humus, low fat milk w/ a 'small' turkey sandwich) can not only control weight but blood sugar levels as well.

With portion control one helpful method is to use a salad plate rather than a filled up dinner plate. Dinner plates have grown over the years, and one filled up is too much for one meal.


Check with your health care provider prior to making drastic changes in what, when, and how much you eat. There may be medical issues to be discussed with him/her.

Mine was pleased when I saw him this past Monday. Blood sugar finger sticks had been acceptable since the last visit, blood pressure daily checks had been normal, cholesterol level was good - all with no meds for six months.

I am retired, so I have time to go to the gym at least 5 days a week, I ride a bicycle, work in the yard, and eat as mentioned in the earlier part of the message block. This may not be as doable for everyone.

[wildflower]

134. I've tended to agree with that method, as it works for me

But this theory got me wondering, since it seemed to explain how two different cultures or generations could eat the same kinds of foods but have different weight levels (because of constantly snacking or not constantly snacking between meals).

So I started thinking, if I ate a cheeseburger and fries and a coke, but only did it a couple of times a day without snacking (on starchy/fatty stuff), would that make a difference? In me, I think it wouldn't. All the sugar, trans fat, etc. wouldn't have a good effect. I'd be more hungry, more tired, less healthy.

Yet I keep hearing people who talk about previous generations eating all kinds of stuff and staying thin. There are many possible explanations, including stress, hormones, viruses, environmental causes, exercise, and corn and sugar subsidies, just to name a few. But I wondered if the snacking thing might have any relevance.

I think it will probably take some time and more studies to figure out exactly what's going on.

[happy_liberal]

36. or GM foods?

causes organ damage in rats

[Barack2theFuture]

59. cancer cells slurp fructose madly, which fuels their growth

the unholy combo of fructose and glucose in HFCS is really evil, probably in ways we don't even know yet.

[Kali]

25. I don't think the level of junk food consumption 50 years ago

was ANYTHING like it is now. Also people drank water, not sweetened beverages. I would bet there was more body movement than there is now - even office workers.

The amount of highly processed "food" product that we consume has gone up a LOT in that time, not just "junk" food type stuff. Who ate food out of boxes 50 years ago?

[Warpy]

27. Some people were junk food junkies and there was no diet soda

so they got the full blast of junk calories. Fatty, salty TV dinners had been out for some time. Yet the obesity rates were low.

I know it's comforting for the thin to think it can't happen to them, but seriously, folks, something else is going on here.

[Kali]

37. sure but the majority of people weren't eating/drinking that stuff

everyday - they were a novelty. Now for many people that is the norm, not some kind of once-in-a-while treat. Remember the sizes of those full sugar sodas? 8 - 10 ounces - 12 to 16 at the most, and then you shared! now a quart size cup is common, even a half gallon

[Hell Hath No Fury]

48. "...they were a novelty."

Exactly. We never ate any of that stuff -- we had homemade meals and "junk food" was a treat. And our portions were MUCH smaller than they are now.

[Warpy]

89. The point is that some people were

and they weighed far less than three hundred pounds.

I know it's really comforting to blame obese people for being that way, but something else is at work.

[Kali]

104. warpy

as someone who fits (ha) that category - I am not blaming obese people at all. just trying to be factual and the truth is the dietary content and amount has changed a great deal in those 50 years.

Other things play into it no doubt, but our intake is very much different than 50 years ago.

[Statistical]

106. Portion size.

There is bad food and then there is eating 300% as much bad food.

Everything has gotten bigger. Ice cream, burgers, restaurant dinners, candy bars, sodas (remember when sada machine gave 12 oz cans. Now it is 20 oz and people sometimes drink 2 or 3 a day. 8 oz is a serving. 3 20oz sodas is almost 8 servings.

An average entree (not counting apatizer, drinks, salad, and desert) at Olive Garden is 1200-1400 calories. That simply didn't exist 50 years ago.

It isn't just bad food. If Americans ate "bad food" but at normal caloric intake rate they might have poor health and maybe loss muscle to fat ratio but we wouldn't have 30%+ of country morbidly obese.

It is
a) bad processed food
b) explosion in portion sizes
c) multiple portions per day
d) routine consumption of bad food
e) lower caloric burn due to "modern" lifestyle and workplace.

[eShirl]

99. "Also people drank water, not sweetened beverages." This is incorrect.

Sugar-sweetened lemonade, iced tea and oh yes Kool Aid.

[Kali]

101. 1960

might agree to the iced tea regionally but the others most likely fit in the same category as sodas - once-in-a-while treats, not the totality of beverage intake on a daily basis.

[prolesunited]

102. Kool-Aid was always in the fridge

and we are white bread, butter and sugar sandwiches.

[LostinVA]

139. Not in our house -- I'm 45

Water, milk, hot or unsweetened ice tea, and a very small glass of OJ at breakfast. Two sodas a month, tops, except on vacation.

[happy_liberal]

31. whoa- interesting

"Epidemiologists have pointed out that the wave of obesity started around the Gulf coast and has spread out across the country in the classic pattern of an infectious disease"

Do you have a good link where I can read more about this?

[Warpy]

35. The Wiki article is fairly straightforward

and has a nifty map of the spread of obesity in the US on the right, about halfway down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_obesity

The articles I'm referencing are in journals and full of medicalese.

[happy_liberal]

49. Thanks

:hi:

[Barack2theFuture]

77. That CDC graphic defines obese as BMI>=30

FYI

[MedicalAdmin]

120. Medicalese please.

Links?

It does occur to me looking at the map that what we are seeing is the implementation of the SAD (standard american diet). I beleive similar patterns have been found where the SADiet had been imported into 3rd world countries and has replaced indigenous diets.

So it's not just the CIA and the military that are exporting our "lifestyle." It's also Mickee D's.

[Barack2theFuture]

63. It's the gumbo!

I knew it!

[Hell Hath No Fury]

39. "People were sedentary junk food junkies 50 years ago,"

Sorry, but that is just dead wrong. I am 50 years old and can tell you that "junk food" was not a part of everyday life growing up for me or anyone I went to school with, and most men were working blue collar jobs that required physical labor. The first McDonald's didn't even show up in my area until I was almost a teen and we rarely went there because it was considered true "junk". We had home cooked meals evry single day of the week except for very special occassions when we went out to a restaurant. We certainly did soda, chips, and cookies in moderation but we were outdoors year round playing every second we had a chance.

In looking at pictures of my classmates and friends of my family there were ZERO obese people and only a couple who could be considered fat. Heck, the "fat kid" in our class was only a bit chubby at best.

What has changed? Access to extremely cheap, shitty food.An abundance of pre-packages food full of crap. A complete lack of exercise/sedantary jobs. Out of control portion size -- look at any dinner set from the 50s -- we eat huge amounts compared to back then. HFCs in just everything.

That is what has happened.

[elleng]

43. Darn. Thanks for the info Warpy, as usual.

[Marr]

66. I've noticed a societal change in my own lifetime-- people eat more.

The size of soda is the classic example. I remember AM/PM making a huge deal about their "giant Thirsty-Two ouncer" back in the eighties. Everyone thought it was huge. Now, medium drinks are thirty-two ounces.

And it's that way with everything. Portions have gotten larger and larger and people have become more accustomed to eating more and more.

[tridim]

88. Since you're a nurse you probably know how many calories these 300 pound people consume.

Can you give an average daily caloric intake prior and post-admission?

[Statistical]

94. "People were sedentary junk food junkies 50 years ago, yet the rate of extreme obesity was low."

Not true at all.

In 1960 a McDonald hamburger (not the healthiest thing) had 180 calories. A meal with shake, fries, and cheeseburger was 520 calories. Today a BigMac meal is 1060 calories. "Super Size" it and you added another 340 calories. Double to triple what was consumed 50 years ago.

Food has gotten much worse, and potions have exploded. The sheer volume of food (ignore for a second how bad it was or how it was prepared) on a restaurant plate has almost tripled. Think a dinner at Olive Garden was 1800 calories worth of food 50 years ago? Try again.

At the same time caloric burn rates have gone way down.

"We have no cure for obesity."
Yes we do. It is both simple hard: Calories in < calories out.

Impossible to gain weight under such conditions. Literally impossible it would violate the laws of physics (law of conservation of mass & energy).

"It is not a dietary issue and it's not a lifestyle issue."
It most certainly is a dietary issue. Most people are clueless about the calories they eat or burn. Many people feel they burn way more calories then they actually do. Thinking they burn 2000, 2200, 2500 calories living a seditary lifestyle with 0 minutes of areobic activity. Also many people vastly underestimate their caloric intake.

Tracking down ones food intake for just a week. Just one week can be a HUGE eye opener. Measure everything, record everything and tall it all up.

[MedicalAdmin]

119. Hmmmmmm.

Interesting post. Do you have any links to the vector patterns you aluded to. I'd love to see them.

Some kind of mutant viral infection? I'm going to guess that it's related to BBQ. Or maybe Nascar.

I know at our clinic we are using a version of human growth hormone to get chronically obese patients moving on weight loss. It's a process but by jump starting the fat loss (HGH targets fat mobilization - done right you only lose fat - about 1 pound a day)

[Tailormyst]

9. I think it is all of the above

I think we have been raised on food filled with chemicals and crap. We live a high stress lifestyle, many are struggling with little time for activities or money for the better foods. Sugar is in everything. People no longer know how to really cook. We are plugged into our lives and live in areas where walking and biking are extras and not a practical way of life. We have no health insurance or bad health insurance. We also have genetics that are not meant for the above ways of life.

LOTS of reasons, none of them easy.

I've switched to no sugar, no flour, no processed foods diet for the last 6 months. I cook more, I eat more, I do my best to eat organic and spend alot of time looking on new ways to accomplish this new way of eating. I've lost 38 pounds. Slowly but surely I will lose the remaining 142 pounds. I can't ever stop analyzing everything I eat though, if I do the weight will pile right back on and then some.

I'm looking forward to moving in Sept where I will have gym room and a pool (during the summer). You couldn't pay me to step foot in a gym with the "beautiful people" who like to make fun of those of us who really need to be there because somehow it makes them feel better about themselves.

[LostinVA]

19. Not all gyms are like that

I've never belonged to one like that.

[Tailormyst]

33. Well the people that are like that ruin it for others.

I remember when I was just over half the size I am now I joined a gym to get in shape. The second time I went I was in the locker room only to overhear "If I EVER end up looking like that, just kill me". I never went back.

Fortunately my fiance has a gym on the house, a nice pool out back and his son trains athletes for a living. I'm hoping to lose the rest of the weight by a year from Christmas, but I also know I will never be able to eat like other people and will always need to watch not how much I eat, but rather my food choices.

My goal is to be able to do all the outdoor activities that I used to be able to do. I would like to ride a bike, climb a mountain, even jog without the fear of falling. I'd like to be able to go out for dinner and not having being invisible be the best case scenario.

[LostinVA]

50. Some places ARE like that

Y's usually aren't.

I would love to have a gym in my house!

[mikeytherat]

82. Check you local Craigslist - you'd be amazed at the equipment you can get dirt cheap.

A Soloflex, an elliptical and a set of free weights are in our basement gym. The elliptical was brand new, but only $150, and the Soloflex and free weights were free.

mikey_the_rat

[LostinVA]

140. We have the same Craigslist

[tridim]

12. Simple, we eat more calories than our bodies need.

I didn't know that until I started counting calories.

2000-2500 calories is not a lot of food. Certainly less than three big meals and three or four "snacks" per day which most Americans eat.

[ipfilter]

22. That's exactly the problem.

Portions are so out of balance with reality. Processed food is calorie dense and nutritionally deficient. Our bodies crave nutrition. The more empty calories we consume the more our bodies crave nutrition so we eat more crap. The cycle continues and we end up buying XL shirts and larger pants.

If Americans would eat good food they would find they need less of it compared to processed junk.

[Arugula Latte]

26. A lot of people don't realize that one fast-food item

(say a Big Mac or a milk shake or something) often contains a significant fraction (say, one third or more) of the calories they should be taking in for the entire day).

[tridim]

40. Back when I had a job (long time ago), I watched in awe as coworkers routinely consumed..

over 1000 calories just at lunch. Chipotle burritos for instance are about 1200 calories, not including the drink.

Considering they have probably already eaten a full breakfast and three cups of coffee (with sugar) before that, they've probably already reached over 2000 calories by 12:30pm.

Without exercise, any dinner and snacks after that are stored as fat. Rinse, lather, repeat, every day.

[Statistical]

96. Even worse for most people in seditary lifestyle they burn much less than 2000 calories.

The first step is to know how much energy you are eating and how much energy you are burning.

If energy eaten > energy burned you will gain weight. Maybe you will gain it slower than someone else but you will gain weight.

Our bodies are programmed to store energy. For 99.999999999999% of the time humans were on the planet starvation was a real concern. Thus when food was available humans ate it. They ate and ate and ate to ensure that later when food wasn't available they didn't die (litterally starve to death).

Due to this genetic legacy humans are very well adapted to the efficient storage of energy in the form of fat (long term storage), and blood sugar (short term storage).

Today we live in a society where food is both abundant and cheap (insanely cheap as % of income compared to 100, 200, 500, or 1000 years ago). This is at odds with our genetic legacy.

Americans eat far more than 2000 calories and they burn far less than 2000 calories. The difference gets stored as fat. Simple concept.

Interesting fact. 20 oz soda has 240 calories. If you have a balanced caloric intake & burn (calories burned roughly equals calories consumed) and add just 2 sodas per day you will gain roughly 3 pounds a month. Just 2 sodas = 3 pounds a month. 36 pounds a year. It doesn't take much to tip the scale when you have a slight caloric gain and you keep that over months, years, even decades.

Someone who is 50 years old and 100 pounds overweight gained on average 2lbs a year, 5000 calories. That is just 13 extra calories a day.

[laundry_queen]

110. Exactly. It doesn't take much .

An extra soda here, an extra piece of bread there....

as with everything, the reasons for rising obesity are complex, and I don't believe it's as simple as we are all eating more calories - although that is one contributor - there is more to it than that. And it wouldn't take much, as you say, some virus that slows metabolism by 13 calories a day, for instance, would do it. Endocrine disrupting chemicals that slowed metabolism by 13 calories would do it. Being insulin resistant and having excess insulin that makes you hungrier than normal so you eat that extra slice of bread, would do it.

On the bright side, it's not that hard to cut back on even 100cals/day. That could make the difference long term for most people.

[Statistical]

122. "On the bright side, it's not that hard to cut back on even 100cals/day. "

It can make an amazing difference however most people (myself included) are discouraged with no immediate short term gains.

A 100 calorie per day reduction would result in net weight loss of about 4 pounds per year. When you consider it has taken some people 20, 30, 40 years to become obese that is a pretty good accomplishment. People "got fat slow" and likely the easiest thing to do is "get skinny slow" however it isn't very rewarding.

The scarier thing is very young children who are morbidly overweight. That isn't an imbalance over decades but rather over a few years thus the caloric imbalance is a magnitude greater. Maybe an imbalance of couple HUNDRED calories per day. Much much harder problem to solve.

[SPedigrees]

13. HFCS coupled with lack of exercise. nt

[soleft]

15. I would say probably 80-90 % of Americans are not living healthy

People are not exercising enough or eating healthy. On some of these people in manifests in weight gain. On others it manifests in high cholesteral, mental illness and other disease.

If we continue to only focus on fat people, 1) we continue to stigmatize and demonize those who are unfortunate enough to manifest their life circumstances on their bodies 2) a lot of people who are not fat live under the delusion they're okay and continue to poison themselves and feel poorly.

[happy_liberal]

16. because people are eating and it is not food

I walk in a regular grocery store and cannot believe how few foods of nutritional value there are and how hard they are to find.

When your food has no nutrients, your body keeps telling you to eat because you need vitamins and minerals and fiber and all of the things that that it needs to keep it healthy. So people keep eating and eating...but their body never gets what it wants so they keep on feeding it more and more crap which makes them sicker and have less energy so they eat more to try to fix that.

For example, my mixer just busted so I had to buy bread.(I always make whole wheat) I bought these white bread rolls that my kids like, but then they each ate a giant sandwich but were still hungry so they ate another. It looked like a real big sandwich but it was mostly air and crap flour. And these rolls aren't cheap. If I did this all the time it would cost a fortune to feed my family and I am sure they would be fat and unhealthy.

[City of Mills]

18. Anxiety and depression

Diagnosed or not, it's what leads to a lot of that bad habits that lead to weight gain.

Anxiety -> Overeating, bad dietary choices
Depression -> Lack of motivation, adequate exercise

This is admittedly hugely oversimplified.

[Barack2theFuture]

65. true that

are we suffering an underlying epidemic of depression, anxiety and stress?

Issues like this are why I posted the question.

[FBaggins]

21. Why accept the premise of the question?

Which definition of "obese" are we using? Some of them are ridiculous.

For the (still too high) proportion that ARE obese, the "all the above and then some" answers are accurate. From a global and historical perspective, we are a very wealthy people (even many of us who we count as "poor") who consumer a great deal. This obviously includes food.

[uncommon]

28. I also think the ideal weights are often ridiculous --

if it is really that difficult for people to maintain, maybe it isn't correct in the first place.

I can maintain a weight of about 150 when I have enough time to exercise - that's still about 30 lbs over my "ideal" weight. And I'm a size 6-8 at that weight. Wtf.

[FBaggins]

38. I've seen one study that indicated a longer lifespan for "overweight" people

than for "normal" or "obese".

How can you have a standard for "overweight" that actually has no net negative health impact? Was the line drawn by some college kid looking at pictures and saying " 'ceases to look hot to me' starts here" ???

[Hello_Kitty]

73. Years ago I read an article that actually used the phrase "cosmetically overweight"

I was like, WTF? But it was nice to see someone admitting that a lot of this is driven by looks.

[Barack2theFuture]

68. I agree that some definitions of ideal weight are ridiculous,

but I think it is undeniable that more and more Americans are overweight. Why?

[Arugula Latte]

24. There is also an understudied urban/suburban/rural component

For the last 20+ years of my life I've lived within the city limits of a large or semi-large city (San Francisco, Washington DC, and Portland, Ore., respectively). Although, yes, there are some obese people in these cities, I've always been struck by the contrast when I travel to the suburbs, small towns and rural areas. The jump in obesity is striking -- in some towns it seems to be almost the norm. Also, my son's baseball team (based in Portland) plays teams from the surrounding areas. Although a few of the parents of kids on our team might be a little overweight, it is interesting that usually the group of parents cheering for the other team usually contains a handful of quite overweight to morbidly obese people.

I think only a fraction of the weight can be explained with the theory that city people walk more to get around. That holds true in very high density areas of Manhattan, say, but not so much in the other places I've lived. I think it is a cultural thing, and I would love to know more of what is behind the differences.

[LostinVA]

51. You know, that is an excellent point I didn't think of

And, you're 100% right.

[bullwinkle428]

87. Get out to the rural areas (I live in Iowa), and it gets even worse

as far as obesity percentages!

[Arugula Latte]

143. My grandparents lived in rural northeastern Ohio.

Wow, the obesity rate there, even as far back as the 70s, was strikingly high. It has only gotten worse.

[taterguy]

153. There are links between reliance on cars and obesity

Too lazy to look them up now.

And yes, I'm an exception that proves the rule.

[SoxFan]

41. It's Obama's fault

Not sure how, but let's just get this part over with, shall we?

[Kali]

70. 4 posts down

but what about the clenis? don't neglect the clenis!

[dkf]

42. We drink soda and juice instead of water.

Fast food joints should provide a cup of water at a minimal cost. It's ridiculous to pay 2 bucks for water.

[LostinVA]

57. In some states, they legally have to

BUT: you have to ask for a cup of water. In Florida, for example. Disney World sells bottles of water for an insane amount, but if you ask for a cup of ice water, they give you a huge cup for free. They have to.

[yawnmaster]

62. do you know what fish do in water?? it costs money to get that stuff out.

[UndertheOcean]

44. Calories in > Calories metabolized

And not getting the simple concept that feeling hungry (as long as you are not malnourished) is no excuse to eat.

[Xenotime]

45. Bush allowed access to HFCS more than any other pResident.

That and the new regulations put into place after 9/11 caused people to stay at home more.

President Obama needs to encourage people to eat less and exercise more. He can change the country if he tried.

[SoxFan]

113. OFFS

I was kidding!

But since you brought it up:

http://www.letsmove.gov/

[ThomWV]

46. How does overwork make you fat?

I work like a dog and don't eat a whole lot so I can easily go sweat off 3 pounds in a day. Its eating like a dog and doing no work that gets you fat.

[Barack2theFuture]

52. Overwork leaves less time to prepare healthy meals.

Overworked people tend to eat more fast food, eat only one or two large meals instead of several smaller ones, and are chronically stressed, which reduces metabolic rates.

[LostinVA]

60. Yup, and stress steroids are released and make you gain weight

[uncommon]

75. I work overtime every week at a very stressful desk job and then go home and take care of a 6 year

old -- I have no time for exercise and little money for great food.

Not all overworked people do physical labor.

[Greyhound]

54. Yes.

I see our frankenfood and corporate slop contingent are all over this thread.

I'd really like to see these folks IRL.
:kick: & R

[whistler162]

55. because the charts say it is so!

and you MUST believe the charts.

[Barack2theFuture]

69. screw the charts.

I see it at my school, at the grocery store, on the paths at the park by my house, in the cubicles next me, on the sidewalks, in the airplanes, at the ballpark . . . too many Americans are overweight.

We can quibble about the semantics of "obese" or question the motives of health organizations or dispute what is "normal," but there is undeniably a problem.

[yawnmaster]

61. Not enough information...

How is obesity defined.
If its defined by a deviation from the average then there will always be obesity as long as we are allowed to eat as we please.

Is it defined some other way?
Please supply the definition used by your OP.
thank you

[NeedleCast]

67. What/Who's definition of obese are we using?

I wonder how much influence the medical industry and diet industry have in decide what is overweight/obese? Is their motivation to make Americans healthier, or to market drugs/diets to people who don't really need them?

[Barack2theFuture]

72. good question.

"...the National Center for Health Statistics showed 34% of American adults age 20 and older were obese in 2007-08 while 68% were considered overweight or obese. In children ages 2 through 19, 17% were considered obese while 32% were considered overweight. Broadly, the figures are similar to rates seen in 1999-2000."


From an article in the Wall Street Journal, also covered by MSNBC this morning, which is what prompted my OP.


Regardless of motives of various groups in reporting statistics, I think it is undeniable that more and more people are overweight.

[ThomWV]

79. When they have to have riding carts in the grocery store, then they are fat.

[Barack2theFuture]

84. are we (or some of us) becoming like the people in Wall-E?

[GreenPartyVoter]

90. Yes, I think we are. (And I say this as a morbidly obese person.)

[NeedleCast]

86. So all people incapable of walking are fat?

Interesting theory...

I know that's probably not the point you were trying to make and I'll agree that yes, those people are pretty fat. Still, the definition of what is overweight has become ridiculous. I'm a very broad individual and while my BMI is pretty healthy, I'd be obese by many of the modern standards, I'm pretty healthy. So are most NFL linebackers, who in many cases would also fall into the obese category.

[Statistical]

105. "while my BMI is pretty healthy, I'd be obese by many of the modern standards,"

If your BMI is healthy then you aren't obese.

"So are most NFL linebackers, who in many cases would also fall into the obese category. "
Many NFL linebackers are obese. Many are not that healthy. Strength isn't the only characteristic of health. Using more detailed analysis (cardiac strenght, % of body fat) they aren't healthy.

BMI is simply a benchmark. Like any other benchmarks there will be exceptions to the rule (positive and negative) however that doesn't invalidate the benchmark. Still using linebackers isn't a particularly good example.

[Obamanaut]

131. Body fat content is often a better measurement than BMI, which is simply

a height/wgt ratio.

For example, a competitive body builder with practically no body fat (or a very small percentage) would likely fall into the overweight/obese category using strictly BMI charts.

It is much better to check with your health care provider to determine what your situation really is.

[Tracer]

78. Someone once told me that there are two kinds of people...

...those who eat to live and those who live to eat.

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. Multifactorial

all that, and a few other things.

But IMHO the cheap food policy in the US is part of the problem. In fact, a large part of the problem, as well as insecticides.

[LeftinOH]

85. Many modern communities are not designed for walking-

many housing developments don't even have sidewalks; even the ones that have them often lead *nowhere*. If you want a newspaper or a bottle of aspirin you have to drive to get it and negotiate your vehicle into/through a giant parking lot. It sucks, but in most of this country the old-fashioned notion of 'walking down the corner store to pick up a few things' are long gone -and there are millions of Americans whose concept of leaving the house = driving somewhere.

[Statistical]

91. Poor diet, lack of excercise, and simply copying their parents. n/t

[Swede]

95. We eat like our parents,who worked hard all day.

We sit at desks. That is part of the problem.

[Obamanaut]

98. Eat too much, don't move enough. nt

[flvegan]

103. Long ago we stopped looking at food as fuel.

Somewhere along that line, we forgot how to properly feed ourselves. Nutrition isn't taught, and most don't seek to learn it. Couple that with how crappy our food has gotten. Then of course, we don't exercise enough.

Other factors like stress and depression can add to it. For the final so many %, medical issues may be to blame.

[Statistical]

108. The other thing is life has gotten (physically) easier.

500 years ago nobody had to exercise; just working hard enough to avoid starvation was "exercise". Even 100 years ago most people walked miles every day. I know it seems crazy but it only takes 15 minutes to walk a mile. People routinely walked hundreds of miles a year. That adds up to lots of calories. Most household work was labor intensive, as were most occupations.

Compare that to today. Many people working service jobs (low physical output), we not only have cars but they have "automatic" everything. Rolling down a manual window takes about 1/2 calorie. Seems silly but imagine a commuter without A/C who rolled up and down his window 4 times per day thats couple hundred calories per year. Couple hundred calories just from rolling up and down car windows.

Our lifestyle has slowly erased calories (50 here, 20 there, 15 here, 100 there) from our lifestyle at the same time there has been a explosion in available food.

Also cost largely limited food consumption for most of human history. Food has traditionally been very expensive taking up 30%-70% of household income (100 to 1000 years ago). Today it takes up a tiny fraction of that. 100 years ago most Americans simply COULND'T AFFORD to eat 3000+ calories a day.

Our caloric burn has gotten so low that even eating HEALTHY food you can easily gain weight if you down increase that caloric burn rate via excercise. You combine:
a) bad processed foods
b) larger portions
c) less calories being burned

it isn't rocket science. Hell if people DIDN'T gain weight that would be unexpected.

[The2ndWheel]

114. Another example of the solution to one problem

creating the next problem to solve.

[Statistical]

121. Exactly and the bad thing is we are genetically ill suited for this environment.

For 99%+ of the time humans have been on the planet starvation, malnutrition, and periods of chronic hunger was commonplace. Thus our biology developed to thrive in that environment. The humans with superior genetics (efficient storage of energy, ability to consume more food than needed in short period of time, drive to gather resources) survived. Those with "inferior" genetics died off.

We are the product of thousands of generations of genetic selection. Only in the very very very recent past has abundant food been the norm and sadly we are a species that has evolved to be superior under the exact opposite conditions. Also our society is much more genetically 'just' thus evolution won't be occurs at such a 'rapid' pace anymore (non desirable genetics still routinely get passed to next generation, those with undesirable traits can still thrive).

Likely in couple hundred years artificial bio-engineering will solve the 'problem'. Making the human body less efficient at storing excess energy would resolve the short term problem however if we ever entered a period where food became scarce again that would be a genetic liability.

[Barack2theFuture]

141. good points.

after awhile, a little can mean a lot.

[Lucian]

111. All that plus a more sedentary lifestyle.

Get out and move. That helps people lose weight.

[maxsolomon]

115. Industrial food = cheap carb calories, portion size, lack of self control

poor nutritional education, no cooking skills, little time, will or opportunity for exercise.

Ate at a little burger joint in the middle of Idaho last week - an obese mother and daughter both REFILLED their jumbo cokes as they left. Do they know that that's probably 500 calories? would they care? I'd had unsweetened ice tea, the wife had water.

[bvar22]

116. Beer

Potato Chips
TV
Packaged Food-Like Substances

It does seem that kids don't get the exercise we used to get.
We used to spend the entire recess in TURBO MODE killing each other.
The schools had to cut that out because it encouraged "competition".
Then after school until the street lights came on, also OVERDRIVE.
I don't see the kids outside anymore.

Maybe adults don't get the exercise they used to get chasing down their kids?

I really don't know, but it seems we used to be much more active, AND hungrier.
I remember being !HUNGRY! before dinner when I was a kid...and that was OK.
Now I just grab a snack at the first pangs.

[Yo_Mama]

123. Government changed the definition of obesity

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/guideposts/fitness/optimal.htm

Add to that that we are an aging society, and bang! you get an obesity epidemic.

That's not to say that we don't have all too many lardbutts around, and of course we all want to take off a few pounds, but the current standards are classifying many individuals as obese that are not. Body fat percentages and where it is located mean more than BMI for many people. Here is a better type of calculation:
http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/bfb

Also, BMI is a poor measurement of obesity to begin with, because muscle weighs much more than fat. If you are naturally larger framed person and either athletic or in a job that requires muscle, you can wind up classified by BMI as obese or close to it while to anyone's eye you are pretty fit. Also your medical risk factors depend partly on where your extra weight is located. If it is all around your middle, some very large studies show that you may have much higher risks for metabolic diseases such as diabetes than would appear from your BMI. According to the current theories, it's much better to have a big butt than a big gut.

When the current "obesity" standard for BMI was introduced, the idea was that this would be one indicator to suggest a possible risk, which would be ruled in or out by stats such as waist/height or waist/hips ratios combined with clinical observations. Since then we've had mission creep and now we are running around discussing an "epidemic" that is partly statistical and partly demographic.

For what it's worth, I am almost 49 and since my childhood, I would say that most older adults now control their weight better than I remember from my childhood. As for fatter children, I would say it's because a lot of kids are very restricted in physical activity due to safety concerns.

For kids, neck circumference and observation is much better than BMI. For adults, weight-related diseases are more strongly correlated with waist/hips and waist/height ratios.

[Yo_Mama]

124. PS: BMI is not a very good predictor of mortality either

The current classifications do seem to be scientifically bogus. In this survey, patients classed as "overweight" by the current BMI standards had the lowest risk for both total mortality and cardiovascular mortality. This may well be because this group of people might have been the most fit overall with generally higher rates of muscle tissue which pushed them into the "overweight" category.

This is a rather big study from 2006:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16920472?dopt=AbstractPlus
FINDINGS: We found 40 studies with 250,152 patients that had a mean follow-up of 3.8 years. Patients with a low body-mass index (BMI) (ie, <20) had an increased relative risk (RR) for total mortality (RR=1.37 <95% CI 1.32-1.43), and cardiovascular mortality (1.45 [1.16-1.81>), overweight (BMI 25-29.9) had the lowest risk for total mortality (0.87 <0.81-0.94>) and cardiovascular mortality (0.88 <0.75-1.02>) compared with those for people with a normal BMI. Obese patients (BMI 30-35) had no increased risk for total mortality (0.93 <0.85-1.03>) or cardiovascular mortality (0.97 <0.82-1.15>). Patients with severe obesity (> or =35) did not have increased total mortality (1.10 <0.87-1.41>) but they had the highest risk for cardiovascular mortality (1.88 <1.05-3.34>). INTERPRETATION: The better outcomes for cardiovascular and total mortality seen in the overweight and mildly obese groups could not be explained by adjustment for confounding factors. These findings could be explained by the lack of discriminatory power of BMI to differentiate between body fat and lean mass.

[AnArmyVeteran]

126. Video games, lazy, eat too much fat & garbage, undisciplined

I haven't seen a teenager come by my house in over ten years looking for a job to cut lawns. It's rare when I see any kids or teenagers working outside doing anything. They are probably surrounded by gadgets and electronic toys that don't require any exercise at all. And they are losing their ability to be imaginative because they don't have to make their own toys or be creative in what they do. I fear we are losing a generation of slobs.

Even if they didn't eat the healthiest foods they could still be fit if they used any energy at all, like exercising or doing things that require physical exertion. I wonder where their parents are and why do they let their kids grow up to be slugs never moving much else besides their thumbs and fingers to text. Where in the hell are the parents?

[madville]

127. Too many calories, not enough exercise, etc, etc

Too many calories taken in, not enough exercise, lack of nutritional knowledge, lack of willpower, way too many carbs in diets, high carb foods are the cheapest, etc, etc. All those and then some play a role. It mainly boils down to the individual being responsible for their weight/fitness, it starts and ends there.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

128. Metabolic and glandular disorders.

Millions of people with thyroid problems, that don't get talked about, like Oprah.

Adrenal problems, pancreatic problems, junk food, big portions, who knows what chemicals in our air and water and food that mess up our metabolisms that nobody has studied.

It's not as simple as calories in > calories out, in spite of what your average physicist would say. It's far more complex than a simple thermogenic reaction.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

129. Lack of exercise. Lack of diet. Lack of self control. Coddling.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

132. Use of cars rather than walking is probably a factor.

Americans are much more likely to drive rather than walk or cycle compared to Europeans, I believe (I only have that as hearsay, but I think there's probably reputable evidence out there if you can be bothered to google it).

[Toucano]

133. Calories crammed in pie hole exceed calories burned.

It is a relatively simple equation.

[JNelson6563]

136. I would also humbly submit

Eating too much as a possible cause.

:hide:

[TNLib]

137. I'm obese

I think all of those apply. But mostly I think Americans are stressed, depressed and worried and comfort food is often the remedy.

[slackmaster]

142. We're being systematically fattened up by an advanced race of aliens

[Rabrrrrrr]

144. Bad diet and lack of exercise. The real question is, "Why do so many not give a shit about diet and

exercise?"

While processed foods are shitty, and fast foods are shitty, no one makes people eat the shit - that's a personal choice.

There is also the issue of stress, overwork, and lack of vacation time that feeds into people choosing shit over health (plus those things have their own health risks added in).

Then add to that a society that poopoos getting out and about in favor of flopping down in front of the TV shoving shit into your piehole, and a generation of parents who were always too fucking scared to let their kids just go outside and play and burn off energy (and thus never learned the fun of running around and being active) and made them stay inside where it's safe from the rapists, kidnappers, drug dealers, meteorites, and murderers that line every street and sidewalk of every city in the country, stacked up like cordwood because there isn't enough surface area for them all to stand...

and, well, there you go.

[northernlights]

146. crap diet, overeating/gluttony and no exercise.

not rocket science.

Last summer, I watched 3 obese women come into a Subway for lunch and order BLTs with double bacon, hold the lettuce and extra mayo. Double bacon meant 16 slices each. 16 slices. That would be 5 meals of bacon for me, and I need to lose 10 pounds.

I witnessed other atrocities in my short stint making sammiches to make ends meet.

I don't even want to hear about how "cheaper foods are more fattening." Much of it is gluttony, plain and simple.

[eridani]

147. Because most work in our society is sedentary and there is enough to eat for most n/t

[Hannah Bell]

148. link for your "1/3" figure?

Reasons for general rise in weight since 60s:

1. Increased consumption
2. Decreased exercise
3. Aging of population
4. Changes in standards defining "obesity" (true!)
5. Possible epigenetic effects

[Barack2theFuture]

150. It was widely reported today,

but here is one link.

article

[Hannah Bell]

151. as i figured. it says nearly 1/3 of american ADULTS, not 1/3 of americans.

on the changing definition of "normal": 1943 metropolitan ht/wt tables "healthy" wt range about 5 lbs. higher than current bmi range.

1998 change in definition of "overweight"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/guideposts/fitness/optimal.htm

there have been others.

us population has been getting heavier, but the shift isn't as dramatic as you'd gather from reading media accounts.

a 5'7" 191-pound woman = "obese": she looks something like this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1087117/Fat-chance-On-scales-injustice-overweight-women-lose-out.html

not quite the body shape the word "obese" summons up, which is more like this:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://www.abstractinfluence.com/forums/viewtopic.php%3Ff%3D7%26t%3D4863%26start%3D42&usg=__l7O9UgmY681dz0JdOj96tzACzbQ=&h=337&w=450&sz=35&hl=en&start=123&tbnid=bUGT91mlIQqHGM:&tbnh=112&tbnw=139&prev=/images%3Fq%3Doverweight%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D965%26bih%3D520%26tbs%3Disch:10%2C2993&um=1&itbs=1&ei=UmdaTKCUM4P2tgP1pvStDw&iact=hc&vpx=332&vpy=197&dur=1156&hovh=167&hovw=223&tx=89&ty=99&oei=bWZaTOiBEJSCsQPwytn7Dg&esq=8&page=8&ndsp=17&ved=1t:429,r:13,s:123&biw=965&bih=520