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.

I read on Wikipedia today that 71% of adults in the United States are "overweight or obese".

What on earth could cause that? Surely that has to be a catastrophe for figures to be that high? o.O

On another note, and people can feel free to stop reading at this point since this is a huge generalisation with no real supporting evidence, but when I walk around my neighbourhood and other areas here in merry old England I notice that it seems as though there are quite noticeably far more obese women than men... I wonder if it's because of childbirth? Anyone else agree/have explanations?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ah wait, the wiki article states that the WHO says there are higher rates of obesity amongst women than men... so there is concrete evidence I guess.

coming from somebody who has been slightly to moderately overweight back and forth most of my life, I can say a HUGE part of it is complacency and laziness. The "I'm comfortable with who I am" mentality is bs. I still need to lose weight, but I spent a lot of time researching, talking to different specialists, and my own trial an error, to find something that works for me. Every single body is different, but what it comes down to is portion control, when and where you eat, and what you eat. You can have fat and carbs, you can have starches and what not, but you need to know when to have them, and the best types of foods to obtain them from. Another big mistake is the lack of exercise...and not just Americans either, but a large percentage of the population are so incredibly lazy is ridiculous, even myself. The poor diet and lack of exercise also extends to the non obese, I know skinny people who are far less healthy than somebody twice their weight due to malnutrition and slight atrophy.

I think another contributing factor is what America and the UK (gak, AND other cultures) puts into their processed foods.... GBHT, other hormones, steroids, weird chemicals; all of these things cannot be good for our bodies, and I believe, account for a big percentage of a lot of mental problems as well.

to lump it all together in one lump cause, or at least try to, I would pin it on a lack of beneficial education and knowledge.

Henners91 wrote:I read on Wikipedia today that 71% of adults in the United States are "overweight or obese".

You also have to understand that the US's view of what is ove weight is often skewered toward Calvin Klien underwear models. We are religious, almost, about the outdated height-to-weight charts.

very true.

Food for thought. Obesity is an epedemic amongst most western countries. Hell, I think Oz actually passed the US up recently in obesity rates, havta find the report on that. From what I understand, its not so much what we eat, but the fact that we order a MCWhopper with triple cheese and God-Emperor size fries (but its ok cause we get a diet coke).
On the other hand, our countries kick so much ass our POOR PEOPLE are fat, not starving to death

Yea the UK's not far behind either according to this January article:

Uk Catches USA Up In Obesity

Obesity Statistics Uk said ''About 46% of men in England and 32% of women are overweight (a body mass index of 25-30 kg/m2), and an additional 17% of men and 21% of women are obese (a body mass index of more than 30 kg/m2 ). Overweight and obesity increase with age. About 28% of men and 27% of women aged 16-24 are overweight or obese but 76% of men and 68% of women aged 55-64 are overweight or obese. Overweight and obesity are increasing. The percentage of adults who are obese has roughly doubled since the mid-1980's''

More @ http://www.nowpublic.com/health/uk-catches-usa-obesity

Kind of ironic that us Westernized nations are struggling to stay healthy since we're eating too much crap while those in third world countries are struggling to make ends meet to just stay alive. Morbid humor.

In any case the only way I see this changing is maybe through taxes on bad foods/chemicals, another kind of sin tax. Or going the way of the Swiss and require mandatory military service so citizens are at least exposed to a healthier lifestyle for at least one timespan in their lives.

Cane wrote:In any case the only way I see this changing is maybe through taxes on bad foods/chemicals, another kind of sin tax.

Food isn't really the problem. The American lifestyle is one that is very sedimentary. Even if fast food was the problem, taxing it won't end why people go get fast food. Its fast. No one wants to cook anymore. You'd have to have one heck of a tax to hike those prices up enough to make people stop getting what is convenient. That said, fast food isn't the only factor at play.

Or going the way of the Swiss and require mandatory military service so citizens are at least exposed to a healthier lifestyle for at least one timespan in their lives.

As awesome as it would be to see some discipline put in place round these parts, it'll never happen. It's political suicide

Yeah, the primary issue is lifestyle, not eating habits. The majority of American workers don't exert themselves physically throughout the day, and in that sort of situation exercise becomes a luxury.

Ahtman wrote:

Henners91 wrote:I read on Wikipedia today that 71% of adults in the United States are "overweight or obese".

You also have to understand that the US's view of what is ove weight is often skewered toward Calvin Klien underwear models. We are religious, almost, about the outdated height-to-weight charts.

Here in the UK we use BMI, which I think is the same thing... if you use the NHS online calculator it asks for your age, weight, sex and height.

On another note, I guess it is lifestyle... I'm squat bang in the middle of the "healthy" section of the BMI, I'm eleven stone and five foot-eleven, but since I'm 19 I'd attribute that to my being in my "prime" (my waist shall only expand outward from this point on I'm sure)... I don't exercise, at all... I sit about on my computer or at my desk all day and though my family cook healthy meals I tend to snack on crap... I get winded from walking and I frequently get light-headed/get random aches, pains and indigestion... Too much info? Thought I might as well confess about why I believe I'll die aged 50 and get buried in an oval-shaped coffin

Henners91 wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

Henners91 wrote:I read on Wikipedia today that 71% of adults in the United States are "overweight or obese".

You also have to understand that the US's view of what is ove weight is often skewered toward Calvin Klien underwear models. We are religious, almost, about the outdated height-to-weight charts.

Here in the UK we use BMI, which I think is the same thing... if you use the NHS online calculator it asks for your age, weight, sex and height.

On another note, I guess it is lifestyle... I'm squat bang in the middle of the "healthy" section of the BMI, I'm eleven stone and five foot-eleven, but since I'm 19 I'd attribute that to my being in my "prime" (my waist shall only expand outward from this point on I'm sure)... I don't exercise, at all... I sit about on my computer or at my desk all day and though my family cook healthy meals I tend to snack on crap... I get winded from walking and I frequently get light-headed/get random aches, pains and indigestion... Too much info? Thought I might as well confess about why I believe I'll die aged 50 and get buried in an oval-shaped coffin

BMI is a much better indicator of true health. I am 6' 1" and I wiegh 270lbs. My Fat content is about 20%. According to that chart, I am morbidly obese and will die from heart disease. It's also compensates for body type. I am stocky, always have been. That chart sucks.

I read somewhere, or heard, or came across at some point, in the distant past that aspartame is an appetite inducer. I remember when Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi were introduced back in like 1980 or whatever along with like Tab and stuff. Back then, people didn't seem to be the fat slugs they are now. I think that perhaps the man-made chemical ingredients in food cause cravings. Look around the next time you're at a shopping mall at how many people are walking around with at least a quart of soda. I bet the fatties have diet something. It never was that way back in the early 80s.

I think diet pop/soda is probably one of the worst things you can drink. Pop is horrible for you in general, but I think diet is probably even worse, especially because people seem to think "Oh it's diet, I can drink as much as I want!"

Unless you're diabetic or something, I don't see any reason to use artificial sweetener in anything, it's horrible.

Stormrider wrote:
BMI is a much better indicator of true health.

BMI is based on height and weight, and is a poor indicator of health. Really, all standardized health metrics are useless outside of trained hands, not unlike most things.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hordini wrote:I think diet pop/soda is probably one of the worst things you can drink. Pop is horrible for you in general, but I think diet is probably even worse, especially because people seem to think "Oh it's diet, I can drink as much as I want!"

Unless you're diabetic or something, I don't see any reason to use artificial sweetener in anything, it's horrible.

I drink about 2 cases of Diet Pepsi a week, and I'm in better shape than just about everyone that isn't a professional athlete. Granted, I also exercise far more than most people, but the diet soda isn't holding me back.

DEUS VULT wrote:On the other hand, our countries kick so much ass our POOR PEOPLE are fat, not starving to death

There's a difference between overweight and well fed. You can in fact be obese and under-nourished, if your diet is based on cheap filling foods like burgers and noodle meals this is likely the case. There is an issue in the Western world that everyone can afford to, but eating a healthy meal can be too expensive for some. It doesn't explain all obesity, but it goes some way to explaining the greater levels of obesity among the poor.

But there's also the sedantry lifestyle of most office workers, and also the serving sizes of many meals.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hordini wrote:I think diet pop/soda is probably one of the worst things you can drink. Pop is horrible for you in general, but I think diet is probably even worse, especially because people seem to think "Oh it's diet, I can drink as much as I want!"

Unless you're diabetic or something, I don't see any reason to use artificial sweetener in anything, it's horrible.

Yeah, I've that about aspartane as well, and wonder if it might be a contributing factor.

It's important to understand what "overweight" means for the purpose of that statistic. It means a BMI of 25 or more.

I am 6'2" and about 200lbs. I'm overweight.

I've seen charts suggesting that at my height, an optimally healthy weight would be something like 175.

That's really pretty damn skinny. My assumption is that animals (such as humans), are designed to get by on a pretty slim diet, since that's the standard condition in nature. So, animals run pretty well when they're "just a step away from starving."

So, basically, while Americans are indeed quite fat, the standards for "overweight" are probably not what you'd call "overweight" just on looking at somebody.

For example, Wayne Rooney is "overweight," at 5'10" and 175lbs.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/players/stats?id=21046&cc=5901

I hope Wayne Rooney is a good choice for the British audience. I think we can also agree that somebody who plays 80 minutes of soccer at worlds highest levels is probably not unhealthy.

sebster wrote:

DEUS VULT wrote:On the other hand, our countries kick so much ass our POOR PEOPLE are fat, not starving to death

There's a difference between overweight and well fed. You can in fact be obese and under-nourished, if your diet is based on cheap filling foods like burgers and noodle meals this is likely the case. There is an issue in the Western world that everyone can afford to, but eating a healthy meal can be too expensive for some. It doesn't explain all obesity, but it goes some way to explaining the greater levels of obesity among the poor.

But there's also the sedantry lifestyle of most office workers, and also the serving sizes of many meals.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hordini wrote:I think diet pop/soda is probably one of the worst things you can drink. Pop is horrible for you in general, but I think diet is probably even worse, especially because people seem to think "Oh it's diet, I can drink as much as I want!"

Unless you're diabetic or something, I don't see any reason to use artificial sweetener in anything, it's horrible.

I know. Was a bad joke. Your right on track though, when a cheeseburger at McDonalds costing only $.99, thats gonna be the choice folks make.

Yeah, I've that about aspartane as well, and wonder if it might be a contributing factor.

Phryxis wrote:It's important to understand what "overweight" means for the purpose of that statistic. It means a BMI of 25 or more.

I am 6'2" and about 200lbs. I'm overweight.

I've seen charts suggesting that at my height, an optimally healthy weight would be something like 175.

That's really pretty damn skinny. My assumption is that animals (such as humans), are designed to get by on a pretty slim diet, since that's the standard condition in nature. So, animals run pretty well when they're "just a step away from starving."

There's two things, one is that obesity numbers are often exaggerated through silliness like the BMI, the other is that we really are a bunch of fatties. Probably not 71% fatties like the OP's report, but certainly a lot more fatties than there should be.

Phryxis wrote:
I hope Wayne Rooney is a good choice for the British audience. I think we can also agree that somebody who plays 80 minutes of soccer at worlds highest levels is probably not unhealthy.

Hard to say. NFL players tend to die quite young, and while that is American football and not soccer it is indicative of the fact that being athletic isn't tantamount to being healthy regarding longevity, or not being ill. Notably, when I was playing football I fluctuated between 230 and 250. I was insanely strong, and pretty fast; more so than most people in the world. But I also had to eat 6-7000 calories a day, and had constant knee and back pain due to stress on those areas. There is a lot of variance regarding what is healthy (again, in terms of something like longevity), and what is physically enabling.

dogma wrote:There is a lot of variance regarding what is healthy (again, in terms of something like longevity), and what is physically enabling.

NFL is pretty unique, though, as most sports place a greater emphasis on endurance and less on strength and sprinting. Reaching elite levels of endurance would likely be better for you than reaching elite levels of strength, yeah?

Theoretically yeah, as the idea is to achieve maximum energy economy. But you also have to remember the degree to which wear has a negative impact on all of the body's processes; notably the heart doesn't deal with lots of stress when the body isn't properly nourished (and even when it is, sometimes). Just like anything else, too much exercise is detrimental to your health.

NFL players tend to die quite young

Roids...

But also, as you point out, cardio is really the only form of fitness that contributes to longevity. Being strong is a form of "fitness" but it's not going to help you live longer.

It's also worth noting that the NFL is one of the most physically diverse sports. You've got cornerbacks who are 5'8" 170lbs, and you've got tackles who are 6'9", 350 lbs. Some of these guys can run all day, some can only run for a few plays.

Yeah, the linemen definitely pull the average age of death down.

dogma wrote:Theoretically yeah, as the idea is to achieve maximum energy economy. But you also have to remember the degree to which wear has a negative impact on all of the body's processes; notably the heart doesn't deal with lots of stress when the body isn't properly nourished (and even when it is, sometimes). Just like anything else, too much exercise is detrimental to your health.

True, but given the level of obesity in the general population I'm not sure elite athletes in general would live shorter lives than average working joes. In the cases where they are living shorter lives, like NFL linemen, the physical requirements of their profession is quite unusual.

Phryxis wrote:It's also worth noting that the NFL is one of the most physically diverse sports. You've got cornerbacks who are 5'8" 170lbs, and you've got tackles who are 6'9", 350 lbs. Some of these guys can run all day, some can only run for a few plays.

Heh, you should see aussie rules. There's a guy called Aaron Sandilands running around who's just a tick under 7 foot, who's looking to tap the ball down to a guy like Hayden Ballentine, who's all of 5 foot 6.

Nowhere near the strength focus of NFL though, there's a much greater focus is on endurance.

And weird, ovular fields.

dogma wrote:And weird, ovular fields.

Cricket in the summer, footie in the winter. As God intended.

There's a guy called Aaron Sandilands running around who's just a tick under 7 foot, who's looking to tap the ball down to a guy like Hayden Ballentine, who's all of 5 foot 6.

Well, for what it's worth, the NBA has had a 7'7" player, and a 5'3" player. Oddly, the 5'3" player had a better career.

But, generally, basketball players have pretty similar body types. The range of body type in the NFL is much greater.

Phryxis wrote:Well, for what it's worth, the NBA has had a 7'7" player, and a 5'3" player. Oddly, the 5'3" player had a better career.

But, generally, basketball players have pretty similar body types. The range of body type in the NFL is much greater.

Sure, because there's a greater degree of specialisation in NFL. Aussie Rules has that same specialisation, only there's 18 guys on the field and you don't stop playing when the ball hits the ground, so in addition to big strong guys to catch the ball, you need little guys to pick it up when it hits the ground. Then if the umpire stops play you need a really tall guy to knock the ball down to little guys, who pass it out to quick medium builds, who kick to big power forwards, only to see the little guys fight for the ball when it hits the ground.

I'm not trying to one up on the point, just your comment made me think of AFL, which is really unique in the diversity of body types in the game. To some extent AFL is losing that diversity, as the game gets faster and the kids are getting drafted younger and younger, there's a trend towards medium builds with equal measures of pace and endurance.

We have overweight people in the UK because we have steak and ale pies. It's not hard to figure this one out.

And you have obese people in the US because you have far too many fast food chains and you can find one of them on just about every street corner. Again, not hard.

On the upside I just researched the average brit consumes 150% more alcohol than the average american on a yearly basis, and yet were still behind them in the overweight figures. Perhaps the government should just restrict how late you can sell kebabs.

^^ I don't know, whatwhat. When I lived in the UK (Durham), there was no shortage of Viz inspired 'Fat Slag'esque women around. OK, there wasn't fastfood on every corner, but I've never seen women more addicted to chocolate than I did in the UK.