Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

IvanTih wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:[youtube]

You got ana popcorn?

O my,that's really sick,I heard that one girl consumed about 10k of calories a day and is that true.

That would mean she's probably gaining about three pounds of fat a day, so I would rather hope not.

Here's my two cents on all of this. I do feel the parents should be held in neglect, because A: you are not doing your child any favors, B: what the hell is wrong with you.

Now all that said let me explain my beliefs. I agree with the poster early on that if you go out to dinner have fun it is a treat and should be accoard as such. Dinning out or ordering a pizza for sleep overs are not ever night occurances so ya let the kids be kids, and enjoy that extra pop(soda for the rest of you all, but im origonally form the midwest so suck it), but if their at home eating a family diner then well eat it or don't eat. If you don't eat those veggies well then guess you don't have desert or that pizza later in the week huh.

Parents who let their children become fat/obese really in my opinon are unfit parents. I have seen it with a few of my friends, and I remember what it was like to be fat(teenage years) and how much pain it caused me. Thankfully I lost the weight, but still have fears of looking like that ever again. Sure I make tons of fat jokes, but when it comes down to it I don't spend hours in the gym for the fun of it. I do it to prolong my life. By allowing a child whose body is still developing to form heart problems, and what nots early on because you are to afraid to say no well to me that is just sad. If my friend had said no to his kids every now and then , then maybe they wouldn't have burnt his house down(literally to the ground).

one of the biggest problem is the 'i don't have enough time to cook' argument, its BS cooking a healthy meal takes less than half an hour in most cases (actual time spent working on it, not cooking time), my dad is a mental health nurse and my step mum is a teaching assistant, in a house of 5(six when i get back from uni) children they still get a cooked healthy meal on the table.
the second is the fact that people don't learn how to cook, women don't cos they think its sexist, men don't cos they think its a girls job (its suprising that most of the best chefs are men), the healthy foods don't have to taste bad or bland, you just need to know how to cook them.

if neglect/abuse = harm to health or mind, then giving your kids fast food every meal is neglect or abuse

Lordhat wrote: Why is causing long-term life threatening physical ailments a less deplorable act because it's done with food? If abuse and neglect are measured by their lasting effects on the child, why isn't obesity considered such? 'Conventional' abuse and neglect cause lasting psychological harm, and (usually) temporary physical harm. Is it such a stretch to believe that obesity is just as harmful to a person as depression/ psychological trauma?

Because it's a really serious accusation and the next step, taking the child away from the parent, is a thing you society should not do lightly. How fat does a kid have to be for the state to take the kid? How many Curly Wurlies is too many?

When does willful neglect (often labled laziness) become abuse?

Yes, exactly.

feth all this whinging about big brother laws, if you want a car, a boat, a fething fishing rod you need a licence, but any brainless mother fether can have a child?!

We should have IQ tests for people if they want kids, feth it, and to vote too.

Im tired of all the imbeciles. If you over feed your kid your a disgusting parent, and no he isnt cute, he is a disgusting fat butter ball and he will die early, great job ma!

A few thoughts:

First up, this has nothing to do with underfeeding your child. It seems like it would simply be the inverse of the problem, but it's really not. A starving kid wants to eat, but his parents don't provide him food. A fat kid wants to eat and is being provided with food; the problem is that he eats way more than he should be eating.

The closest parallel to this would be a parent that knowingly lets his children do something dangerous, when he should be putting a stop to it. But how dangerous is so dangerous that it becomes negligence?

I'm inclined to say the obesity needs to be causing serious, immediate harm. I'm not talking about diabetes or future heart disease or having a hard time losing the weight in the future; I'm talking about difficulty walking sort distances, not being able to sleep on your back, the kind of thing where the child is essentially disabled by the lack of supervision.

Most butterballs won't qualify for that; if they have lousy parents that's just a tough break.

The problem with IQ tests for having kids is that a high IQ does not equate to a lot of common sense. Common sense is lacking in all the cases where a 10yo is on the plus side of 200 pounds because his parents don't have enough common sense to not feed their kids McDonalds 4 times a day followed up by 1/2 gallon of ice cream right before bed.

You really can't measure common sense either. You can observe someone lacks common sense but at what point do you deem them unworthy of kids? Some teens have lots of common sense and then lose it when they become young adults (see also UC Berkeley students in Wikkipedia), some have no common sense as teens and then suddenly seem to realize that they are utter morons when it comes to things they shouldn't do and so appear to gain common sense as adults.

It can also be said that kids normally do have a choice. Most fast food places now offer salads and subs in addition to the usual fries and triple cheeseburgers and shakes. Granted most 8yo's aren't going to choose water and a salad when mom takes them to Burger King and perhaps BK is the wrong place to go when you want to promote healthy eating in your kids but I have never been into BK and hear the mom say "You HAVE to order the Triple Whopper and King size it", so obviously the kid COULD choose the water and salad (though Subway or Quiznos would be more sensible place to go if you really want your kid to not have a 1200 calorie meal). Child abuse and child neglect sicken me but I wouldn't really use either of those terms to describe it. Bad parenting is closer to what it really is.

mattyrm wrote:F
Im tired of all the imbeciles. If you over feed your kid your a disgusting parent, and no he isnt cute, he is a disgusting fat butter ball and he will die early, great job ma!

And in the vastness between stars, the Darwinians cackle evilly as the stupid became self regulating...

dogma wrote:

JEB_Stuart wrote:I don't think its ignorance. Everyone knows that fast food and twinkies are bad for you. The problem is people like food that tastes good, and unhealthy food tends to taste great. Healthy food tastes awful, relatively speaking of course, and so people don't tend to eat it. I mean have any of you ever eaten Kashi?

Every day, but I'm vain as hell.

I agree with you though, but I'd also add that food that's bad for you tends to be cheaper; forcing the hands of those who have to count every penny. There's also the bit about a psychological need for amusement, and how the absence of money forces people to look for cheap sources of stimuli, like tasty burgers and fries.

Fresh Veggies from the supermarket aren't that much, and sometimes come out cheaper than frozen or canned alternatives. They take time to prepare and people are lazy. Therefore they become fat, which also makes them more lazy. There are at least OK cheap healthy foods out there.

When I fix dinner at home it's on the grill, when I go out to eat (about 4 times a week) it's to Quiznos or one of the many fine mexican restaraunts in town.

Anyone wonder if cutting off farm subsidies would make overeating more difficult?

I hear it's a large part of why high fructose corn syrup is as cheap as it is.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

mattyrm wrote:F
Im tired of all the imbeciles. If you over feed your kid your a disgusting parent, and no he isnt cute, he is a disgusting fat butter ball and he will die early, great job ma!

And in the vastness between stars, the Darwinians cackle evilly as the stupid became self regulating...

If only it were that easy. If only one of the tenets of western society were not to have high calorie, low nutrition foods so readily accessible, if only people were better educated about understanding nutritional information on packaging and so realized exactly how much junk they might be putting away without realizing it. You can't lay all the blame on parents when it's an issue with very deep societal roots. There are plenty of people out there who would think that cutting sugar soda out of their diet, and instead drink a half gallon of juice each day have made a healthy choice (which it is, in the same way that having your foot run over by a car is better than having it run over by an SUV).

Japan is pretty fascist about making people thin.

Japanese women voluntarily starve themselves into near anorexia.

There needs to be a focus on a healthy weight, not a reaction against fatness.

I don't really care if people are fat, as long as they're not trying to get two airplane seats or something.

I am sorry but I have very little time or sympathy for fatties, 99% of those overweight are that way because they eat too many cakes and are lazy. Sure they can blame it on their Thyroids or emotional difficulties, but at the end of the day most of them are just plain greedy and are a drain on resources (especialy in the UK where the tax payer funded NHS pays for there treatment, when their lard encased joints can't take the strain on them any longer).

People who allow their kids to get fat are neglecting their welfare, once they knowingly continue to feed them a poor diet once they are fat then it turns into abuse. The bottom line is that they are directly damaging the health and welbeing of a child, in any other circumstance they would end up in court.

Exercise at school should be mandatory and daily as far as i am concerned, there should also be a higher tax band for unhealthy foods such as sausages and crisps, this money could be used to either subsadise cheaper helthy foods like fruit and vegitables or go directly to the health service.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
Fresh Veggies from the supermarket aren't that much, and sometimes come out cheaper than frozen or canned alternatives. They take time to prepare and people are lazy. Therefore they become fat, which also makes them more lazy. There are at least OK cheap healthy foods out there.

In terms of caloric density vegetables price out almost exactly in line with proteins. They also lack a critical amino acid (the one exception being soy beans).

Fateweaver wrote:The problem with IQ tests for having kids is that a high IQ does not equate to a lot of common sense. Common sense is lacking in all the cases where a 10yo is on the plus side of 200 pounds because his parents don't have enough common sense to not feed their kids McDonalds 4 times a day followed up by 1/2 gallon of ice cream right before bed.

It isn't really common sense. That's not a real thing. Its simply a divergent value set. Intelligence does not guarantee that any given person will possess a value set which the larger society endorses. In fact, it tilts the scales against it. Intelligent people are more likely to be indifferent to the physical condition of their children, because they're also more likely to be either indifferent to their children as a whole, or indifferent to fatness in specific (placing more emphasis on mental development).

Children who are already obese at a young(sometimes even pre-teen) age absolutely sickens me. I would consider it akin to neglect, IE failing to educate one's child... hence it is morally wrong and I would consider it bad parenting; if the child's health is at risk due to something the parents could and should have prevented, I think a bit of assessment is in order.

The kid eats the fething stuff. Sucks to be him.

I am going to put this here, rather than start a whole new thread.

http://www.grist.org/article/draft-new-research-links-high-fructose-corn-syrup-and-diabetes-heart-diseas/

Scientists have proved for the first time that a cheap form of sugar used in thousands of food products and soft drinks can damage human metabolism and is fuelling the obesity crisis.

Fructose, a sweetener derived from corn, can cause dangerous growths of fat cells around vital organs and is able to trigger the early stages of diabetes and heart disease.

...Over 10 weeks, 16 volunteers on a strictly controlled diet, including high levels of fructose, produced new fat cells around their heart, liver and other digestive organs. They also showed signs of food-processing abnormalities linked to diabetes and heart disease. Another group of volunteers on the same diet, but with glucose sugar replacing fructose, did not have these problems.

STOP. SUBSIDIZING. THIS. FETHING. CRAP... I am all for personal responsibility, but some of the anti-fat sentiment is just ridiculous.

A while back there was a story about how some candy companies needed government assistance to stay afloat. Can you imagine losing candy companies? That would be truly catastrophic indeed... .

People got fat before high fructose corn syrup was invented.

It probably doesn't help, but the whole thing can't be blamed on it.

Wrexasaur wrote:I am going to put this here, rather than start a whole new thread.

http://www.grist.org/article/draft-new-research-links-high-fructose-corn-syrup-and-diabetes-heart-diseas/

Scientists have proved for the first time that a cheap form of sugar used in thousands of food products and soft drinks can damage human metabolism and is fuelling the obesity crisis.

Fructose, a sweetener derived from corn, can cause dangerous growths of fat cells around vital organs and is able to trigger the early stages of diabetes and heart disease.

...Over 10 weeks, 16 volunteers on a strictly controlled diet, including high levels of fructose, produced new fat cells around their heart, liver and other digestive organs. They also showed signs of food-processing abnormalities linked to diabetes and heart disease. Another group of volunteers on the same diet, but with glucose sugar replacing fructose, did not have these problems.

STOP. SUBSIDIZING. THIS. FETHING. CRAP... I am all for personal responsibility, but some of the anti-fat sentiment is just ridiculous.

A while back there was a story about how some candy companies needed government assistance to stay afloat. Can you imagine losing candy companies? That would be truly catastrophic indeed... .

QFT. I am fat, my wife is fat. I am trying my best to prevent my girls from getting fat. I was going to post EXACTLY what Wrex just said, but I was abstaining from this thread. After my nerdrage yesterday, and the inflammatory statements that insinuated my wife and I are immoral and... well, I am going to stop there... No need in going down this road, especially after I just said I didn't want to post. Bust since I did anyway:

squilverine, you (edited to comply with Rule #1)...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:People got fat before high fructose corn syrup was invented.

It probably doesn't help, but the whole thing can't be blamed on it.

Very true, just like young kids were looking at porn long before the creation of the internet, and people had car accidents long before the advent of cell phones.

I am not saying you are wrong, but all I can say is that when I am on the go and want a quick snack, 7-Eleven has entire isles with hundreds of bags of chips, twinkies, hohos, sno-balls, tiger tails, and ding dongs. However, there are only three past ripe bananas in the whole fething place...

It is our choice to eat healthy and follow that path. There are not many options along that path in most convenience stores, which is where I make 80% of my junk food purchases.

This isn't directed to you KK:
BTW, being late for work and grabbing a quick bite at McDonald's is not being lazy. The problem is that all fast food places that cater to convenience don't have people health in mind. They do what is best for their bottom line.

Kilkrazy wrote:People got fat before high fructose corn syrup was invented.

It probably doesn't help, but the whole thing can't be blamed on it.

I will take some time to look through the information on this, but there are very clear connections between the way food is made, and how it effects peoples health. The main point here, is that people did not get anywhere near as fat (unhealthy/ truly obese) before HFCS was introduced, even though we have had Twinkies for an awfully long time... Take a look through the data on this, and I am sure you will see an extremely strong, if not partially circumstantial rise in obesity; parallel to that of the changes made in the agricultural, and restaurant/grocery industries. More than half of the goods in a supermarket are bad for my health, and to pick and choose, while balancing a tight budget is a rope that many simply cant cross.

It is fair to assume that HFCS plays a pretty large role in skyrocketing obesity (along with very sparse science to back up much of those statistical claims TBTH, BMI is really not enough to provide critical information; and I remember a study saying that many people that are considered 'lightly obese', are actually healthier than people who are of 'normal' size). This, along with the way that food is distributed/accessed (as with the corner store diets and such) adds up to a very large problem.

I can also safely assume that there are obviously people that take their health into their own hands by eating nothing but junk food, at all times. It is just all the talk about... well, this thread has definitely gone down the slippery slide of slipperiness already...

Obesity isn't connected to HFCS. You become obese by consuming more calories than you use. There are certain things which affect the rate at which it occurs, but the primary problem is behavioral. People become locked into a pattern which distorts their perception of 'fullness' and thereby causes them to eat too much. You could claim that the widespread use of HCFS has distorted the perception of sweetness, and thereby brought on a sort of 'taste' for overly sweet (and calorie dense) foods. But that's not a chemical cause so much as habitual ignorance. Unless we're going to discuss neurochemisty as a direct extension of biochemistry, which it might be).

That said, there is very little that's really understood about the connection between diabetes and obesity. Though we do know that obesity is a correlate, we do not know if it is the excess fat which can cause diabetes. or the food eaten by certain fat people which does. The research I've read seems to indicate that sugar, in general, is the problem; with HFCS being a target of convenience due to the obsession with 'natural' food.

I find obesity disgusting. You can't find anything that isn't made out of high-fructose corn syrup nowdays.

tblock1984 wrote:Very true, just like young kids were looking at porn long before the creation of the internet, and people had car accidents long before the advent of cell phones.

I am not saying you are wrong, but all I can say is that when I am on the go and want a quick snack, 7-Eleven has entire isles with hundreds of bags of chips, twinkies, hohos, sno-balls, tiger tails, and ding dongs. However, there are only three past ripe bananas in the whole fething place...

It is our choice to eat healthy and follow that path. There are not many options along that path in most convenience stores, which is where I make 80% of my junk food purchases.

Have you tried packing food with you before going off? That might help you with the snacking on junk food problem.

Orkeosaurus wrote:

tblock1984 wrote:Very true, just like young kids were looking at porn long before the creation of the internet, and people had car accidents long before the advent of cell phones.

I am not saying you are wrong, but all I can say is that when I am on the go and want a quick snack, 7-Eleven has entire isles with hundreds of bags of chips, twinkies, hohos, sno-balls, tiger tails, and ding dongs. However, there are only three past ripe bananas in the whole fething place...

It is our choice to eat healthy and follow that path. There are not many options along that path in most convenience stores, which is where I make 80% of my junk food purchases.

Have you tried packing food with you before going off? That might help you with the snacking on junk food problem.

Yes, in fact I have started making my own sandwiches for lunch, and I bring a protein bar with me on my commute for breakfast. I am also taking advantage of the free fruit in the break room at work instead of grabbing some chips. Dinners at my house are pretty evenly rounded, for the most part. Right now, soda is my biggest nemesis, but I have combated that by drinking more tea.

Back on topic:
Honestly, it was my choices that lead to my obesity, not my parents. I was the one sneaking salami behind my parents backs, even though they told me I would get fat if I ate whatever I wanted. When I grew up and was out of the house, I ate whatever I wanted, and I now know they were right. They weren't neglectful, I was rebellious...

So, can all of the people in the "Parent's Fault" camp please go STFU for a little bit? Blanket statements about people you have never meet are my most despised of all blanket statements...
There are parents that don't give a gak, and that makes me sad, but those types of parents can possibly mess there kids life up more than just obesity. And that is a rant for another time...

Wrexasaur wrote:I will take some time to look through the information on this, but there are very clear connections between the way food is made, and how it effects peoples health. The main point here, is that people did not get anywhere near as fat (unhealthy/ truly obese) before HFCS was introduced, even though we have had Twinkies for an awfully long time...

Australia uses cane sugar, not HFCS and I believe we've just overtaken you lot as the fattest country in the world. HFCS is certainly unhealthy, but weight is driven more by lifestyle and food choices than the use of one sweetener or another.

Meanwhile, I'm really loving the amount of hostility out there over weight... on a board for geek games. You guys must hate about 80% of your fellow gamers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:It isn't really common sense. That's not a real thing. Its simply a divergent value set. Intelligence does not guarantee that any given person will possess a value set which the larger society endorses. In fact, it tilts the scales against it. Intelligent people are more likely to be indifferent to the physical condition of their children, because they're also more likely to be either indifferent to their children as a whole, or indifferent to fatness in specific (placing more emphasis on mental development).

Very true, and there's also a problem with 'intelligence'. There are many different types of intelligence and only a few are measured in an IQ test*. The idea that one's right to have kids could be dependant on something as vague and subjective as intelligence is horrible.






*Basically an IQ test assesses your ability to solve abstract problems. There's been efforts to include a range of types of intelligence in an IQ test, and the end result is an odd mess of questions that ultimately ends up measuring your ability to do IQ tests.

Here is the full study.

sebster wrote:
Australia uses cane sugar, not HFCS and I believe we've just overtaken you lot as the fattest country in the world. HFCS is certainly unhealthy, but weight is driven more by lifestyle and food choices than the use of one sweetener or another.

I am not trying to blame HFCS, just pointing out that since it's development obesity rates have gone up world wide. There are basic differences between natural sugar, and HFCS, mainly it's fructose content. From what the article said, HFCS has 5% more fructose; and that supposedly could be the all that is needed over a lifetime to incur the worst of the health problems associated with obesity. When that extra bit of sugar is in everything you eat, I can see how much more damage it could do.

The article I linked talked about, how many health problems related to obesity, were seen developing in the HFCS test group. To be perfectly honest, most of this is way over my head. One thing that would be interesting though, is which country uses the most sugar per capita in it's overall food consumption. I have never been a big soda drinker, but looking through some of the food I eat is a bit perplexing when it comes to sugar content. Everything seems to have an awful lot of sugar.

Compare Iced teas sometime, I still can't get over how much sugar is in most of them. There are an awful lot of companies coming out with lower sugar content in many products though. If I could grow all of my own food, I simply would; not questions, but I can't, so I don't. Thus I do have to rely on what products are available to me through stores. I could go through my experiences at all of the local groceries, and why I can't find good, fairly priced produce which I can afford; but I think that would take too much time. My options now (and California actually has plenty of options foodwise) turn out to be limited by my 'monetary circumstances'. Produce is either wildly expensive at the farmers markets, or ridiculously low quality at the local grocery stores. Getting cheap lettuce, and having it go bad in a matter of a day, is not worth it at all. What is strange, is how long different foods can last. There is plenty of produce that lasts unnaturally long amounts of time; but most of the stuff I get must have been sitting around for a week before they delivered/ I bought it in the first place. I simply don't have the means to effectively eat the types of healthy food I want to, and there really is not an actual movement to get people to eat healthier. If I was able to live with a few people, where we could work together to get/consume food, most of this would not be a problem at all; alas, I don't, and roommates come with a million and a half problems that I really want no part of.

They say eat 5 veggies a day... and... I kind of shrug, because that is the length they are willing to go to, in order to help me be healthy.

Meanwhile, I'm really loving the amount of hostility out there over weight... on a board for geek games. You guys must hate about 80% of your fellow gamers.

While I think that 80% is actually a surprisingly generous number, I still agree wholeheartedly with you. The best thing I can think of in terms of helping as I can, is to suggest potlucks, instead of ordering Pizza or what have you. To hate someone for their food choices is just blockheaded, but worrying about an acquaintance or a friend because of their Mcdonalds habits is not.

My two cents...

First off fat parents do not equal fat kids. I myself am over weight, but my 2 kids (9 and 5, soon to be 10 & 6 this month), are both thin and healthy. My son eats like a horse, but he is also very active with sports and outdoor activities.

I agree this is extremely bad parenting to let your kids get to that point, but it is not abuse.

And no one wants the government to dictate what they should eat! No one! The little good that MIGHT come from this will in no way out weight the loss of freedom.

As for the sentiments of limiting who can and can not breed was a practice here in America with the eugenics programs of the 20's, but someone by the name of Hitler made that very unpopular later on.

This all comes back to the slippery slope argument. There are prices for living in a free society. Ideally society would take care of this themselves, but no one wants to talk with these parents about their fat kids.

Of coarse there are those that will not listen no matter how much you try. I happen to know people in this scenario presented at the start of the thread, and there is no helping them.

I still cried inside the day McDonalds and BK and Hardees started offering "healthy food". Damn liberals.

Who the hell goes to McD's for a salad and a bottle of water? I want to eat healthy I'll go to subway or quiznos or go to a deli and get a fresh, GOOD salad.

McD's, Wendy's, Hardees and BK should ONLY serve greasy, 600+ calorie burgers and fries and large fountain pops that make dentists happy and parents unhappy.

It's like sugar-free candy or pastries. WTF is that all about?