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 didn't know what oleo wass , but I know what I am having for a snack next time I want one olio e olio! Pasta in dressed in olive oil and salt and pepper. I'd forgotten about it, thanks daed! (and thank you beasty boys for introducing me to the concept)

I think you're thinking of Aglio e olio.

Go drink some coffee. You just woke up.

errrrr.. yes that is what i was referring to. Coffee won't help it's a distinct lack of alcohol , i cannot wait for this weekend to make up for a lack last weekend.

As a representative of the people responsible for Foster's, I'm not sure you know what alcohol is.

Maybe some marmite will clear your head

 daedalus wrote:
As a representative of the people responsible for Foster's, I'm not sure you know what alcohol is.

Maybe some marmite will clear your head

Fosters is 'export quality' beer.

It's actually a bit hard to find in Australia.

 cincydooley wrote:
We've gone down this rabbit hole before, but suffice it to say I think you're justification is nonsense. It's simple.

Know what you put in your body.

It is actually very simple, once you step away from your need to moralise the issue. Sure, people 'ought' to eat right and exercise, but when it comes to actually fixing the problem 'ought' is irrelevant. All that matters is how people do behave, and how we best respond to the problem given that.

I mean, people 'ought' not to smoke, but they do and so we respond, looking to discourage smoking where we can and look after people who did smoke and ended up suffering the consequences.

People ought not to drink too much, but they do so we respond, looking to discourage drinking where we can and looking after people who did drink too much and ended up suffering the consequences.

People ought not drive too fast, but they do and you probably get the point by now.

The basic reality, established by studies, will tell you that more than 90% of people will not escape obesity simply from being told to eat well and exercise. If we had a cancer treatment that only worked on less than 10% of patients, we'd stop using that treatment. Even if the reason it failed was because patients simply didn't use the treatment often enough. But for some reason with weight we not only continue using that treatment, lots of people will actually insist its the only treatment that should be considered.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:
As a representative of the people responsible for Foster's, I'm not sure you know what alcohol is.

When I was in Berlin it was pretty trippy to walk in to an upmarket bar and see Fosters on tap... meanwhile Becks was the cheap drink you'd buy by the case to get drunk. It was the exact opposite here, except while Fosters was priced among the cheapest beers, people still didn't buy it because we have other cheap beers that less awful and higher in alcohol.

Incidentally, the US beers that come over here are Budweiser and Coors. I think it's fair to say it wouldn't be right to judge US beers by that stuff.

 sebster wrote:
The basic reality, established by studies, will tell you that more than 90% of people will not escape obesity simply from being told to eat well and exercise. If we had a cancer treatment that only worked on less than 10% of patients, we'd stop using that treatment. Even if the reason it failed was because patients simply didn't use the treatment often enough.

What if it was more important to focus on the moral failings and laziness of the patient than it was to cure them?

 Ouze wrote:

What if it was more important to focus on the moral failings and laziness of the patient than it was to cure them?

Why does it have to be one or the other?

For the people who are already obese, it's a bit late to teach them how to not become obese. Education is primarily for the next generation.

 Ouze wrote:
What if it was more important to focus on the moral failings and laziness of the patient than it was to cure them?

That seems to be how a lot of people look at the issue, yeah.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:
Why does it have to be one or the other?

For the people who are already obese, it's a bit late to teach them how to not become obese. Education is primarily for the next generation.

Sure, education about healthy eating is essential. Even for people who are obese and need other approaches, healthy eating is essential. Lap band surgery, for instance, actually comes with really strict diet controls way beyond what people would think of as healthy eating.

The point is that simply talking about healthy eating alone isn't enough. It clearly isn't working, because we've talking about healthy eating for decades now, and the obesity issue is only getting worse.

excluding people that are fat because of medical conditions, the rest is just eating too much unhealthy stuff and not doing enough exercise (getting up from you couch and getting a drink from the refrigerator is not exercise!).

The whole blame someone else gets a little old.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The whole blame someone else gets a little old.

No, what's tiresome is that blame gets raised over and over again. Whether you blame society or the individual just doesn't matter, all that matters is fixing the fething problem.

And we know for a fact that saying obese people are to blame for their weight and that they should eat better and exercise doesn't fix the problem.

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
As a representative of the people responsible for Foster's, I'm not sure you know what alcohol is.

Maybe some marmite will clear your head

Fosters is 'export quality' beer.

It's actually a bit hard to find in Australia.

Probably because you keep dumping it on us!!!

 sebster wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The whole blame someone else gets a little old.

No, what's tiresome is that blame gets raised over and over again. Whether you blame society or the individual just doesn't matter, all that matters is fixing the fething problem.

And we know for a fact that saying obese people are to blame for their weight and that they should eat better and exercise doesn't fix the problem.

sorry sebster, addictions are solely on the individual. Over eating is as much an addiction as heroin or smoking, people over eat to get the overfull chemicals in the noggin or as a result of some other psychological issue. Blaming anyone but the individual whilst being kind, does not and will never help the problem. And yes I have addictions myself.

 Bullockist wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The whole blame someone else gets a little old.

No, what's tiresome is that blame gets raised over and over again. Whether you blame society or the individual just doesn't matter, all that matters is fixing the fething problem.

And we know for a fact that saying obese people are to blame for their weight and that they should eat better and exercise doesn't fix the problem.

sorry sebster, addictions are solely on the individual. Over eating is as much an addiction as heroin or smoking, people over eat to get the overfull chemicals in the noggin or as a result of some other psychological issue. Blaming anyone but the individual whilst being kind, does not and will never help the problem. And yes I have addictions myself.

But the blame won't fix anything is what he is saying. Whether you blame the individual or the society, you are just wasting breath and trees. You need to fix the problem, which can be started by something as simple as better access to counselling for people who overeat, so conditions like depression which can result in that outcome can be dealt with, and the outcome behaviour of overeating can be dealt with much easier.

So really, stop blaming one or the other is what sebster is saying. Just fix the problem.

 sebster wrote:
that they should eat better and exercise doesn't fix the problem.

I have filtered this thread with your posts and haven't seen your proposal to fix the problem. Perhaps you posted it in another thread that I missed.

I am against "Fat shaming". Calling people out on it isn't doing anyone any good, unless you can only get an erection when you're mean to people. However, how do we fix it? What is your proposal?

 motyak wrote:

 Bullockist wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
The whole blame someone else gets a little old.

No, what's tiresome is that blame gets raised over and over again. Whether you blame society or the individual just doesn't matter, all that matters is fixing the fething problem.

And we know for a fact that saying obese people are to blame for their weight and that they should eat better and exercise doesn't fix the problem.

sorry sebster, addictions are solely on the individual. Over eating is as much an addiction as heroin or smoking, people over eat to get the overfull chemicals in the noggin or as a result of some other psychological issue. Blaming anyone but the individual whilst being kind, does not and will never help the problem. And yes I have addictions myself.

But the blame won't fix anything is what he is saying. Whether you blame the individual or the society, you are just wasting breath and trees. You need to fix the problem, which can be started by something as simple as better access to counselling for people who overeat, so conditions like depression which can result in that outcome can be dealt with, and the outcome behaviour of overeating can be dealt with much easier.

So really, stop blaming one or the other is what sebster is saying. Just fix the problem.

But all of that already exists. Insurance companies are increasingly covering access to nutritionists and gym memberships nexus that kind of preventative care is cheaper for them in the in the long run. Access to a mental health professional in the United States is also quite available.

There is more availability and education opportunities today than there has ever been. But none of that is going to stop someone from kilimg a bag of Doritos in one sitting while playing diablo 3 on an 80 degree day.

At some point you have to make that decision to put the cookie down and trade it for a dumbbell.

Yes, but just saying that, and telling people who have an eating problem that, won't have the desired positive effect, at least as general interventions go. Sure, you might know a bloke or two who you've said 'mate, it's gone to far, you need to lose a few' and they go 'yep, ok' and make progress. But it isn't an effective clinical tool to just say 'they need to make the decision to put the cookie down and trade it for a dumbbell'. I mean sure, it sounds witty and cool, but it doesn't actually have any impact on limiting the spread of and eventually beating back the problems with obesity and overeating that we have as a society.

Yeah, they should exercise instead of eating sometimes. Will they, without the counselling and access to help? No. So don't bother getting into it until you cross those first bridges, because otherwise you've landed at Arnhem and you won't be able to make the change you want to make.

We are arguing for much the same thing, an improvement of the general health of society when it comes to weight, which will improve health in so very many other areas as a result of that. But it isn't something that will be achieved by telling them to do it, because 'the other stuff is already in place'. If it isn't having the desired effect, it isn't in place in the right way.

I feel like, "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink is appropriate here."

I don't think further regulating the food companies, as some people have alluded to, is the solution. I, on occasion, want some horrible for me Doritos or a big, greasy basket of chicken wings. Just Because someone else can't manage their intake shouldn't mean the options should be removed from everyone

 motyak wrote:
Yes, but just saying that, and telling people who have an eating problem that, won't have the desired positive effect, at least as general interventions go. Sure, you might know a bloke or two who you've said 'mate, it's gone to far, you need to lose a few' and they go 'yep, ok' and make progress. But it isn't an effective clinical tool to just say 'they need to make the decision to put the cookie down and trade it for a dumbbell'. I mean sure, it sounds witty and cool, but it doesn't actually have any impact on limiting the spread of and eventually beating back the problems with obesity and overeating that we have as a society.

Yeah, they should exercise instead of eating sometimes. Will they, without the counselling and access to help? No. So don't bother getting into it until you cross those first bridges, because otherwise you've landed at Arnhem and you won't be able to make the change you want to make.

We are arguing for much the same thing, an improvement of the general health of society when it comes to weight, which will improve health in so very many other areas as a result of that. But it isn't something that will be achieved by telling them to do it, because 'the other stuff is already in place'. If it isn't having the desired effect, it isn't in place in the right way.

As I asked a post up: What should we do? Agreed on "Stop the Fat Shaming". But how do we fix the issue?

A simple solution might well be to ban advertising of all processed foods, as those are where the major problems lie
(fats/sugars etc that people don't know, and don't want to know is there)

advertising reminds people stuff it there and available, above and beyond hunger

less advertising/brand display and people would eat less (and the less you weigh the easier exercise is)

not sure why having a dr or councillor tell you to eat better and excercise more when hearing it from multiple other sources wont...

Especially since DR/ect have been saying it for years.


simple fact,

Its easier to be obese right now then at any point in history, life is extremely easy, food is cheap and plentiful and avaiable in dorito form.
Not to mention you litearlly never need to walk anywhere if you dont want too, so even though it only takes a minimal amount of effort to eat reasonably well, and excercise enough to not be obese, since NO EFFORT is an option, it is often taken over "minimal effort".

So people generally take the easier (short term anyways) choice, and end up with the consequences of that choice.

Blame matters not a bit,

but the solution 100% cannot come from anyone outside of the person wanting to lose weight...

no one can excercise for you, no one is eating those doritos but you.





also... dear god.. I feel for the poor nurses in that new hospital wing.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
As a representative of the people responsible for Foster's, I'm not sure you know what alcohol is.

Maybe some marmite will clear your head

Fosters is 'export quality' beer.

It's actually a bit hard to find in Australia.

Probably because you keep dumping it on us!!!

Fosters, Australian for "get that stuff off the continent!"

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
A simple solution might well be to ban advertising of all processed foods, as those are where the major problems lie
(fats/sugars etc that people don't know, and don't want to know is there)

advertising reminds people stuff it there and available, above and beyond hunger

less advertising/brand display and people would eat less (and the less you weigh the easier exercise is)

I don't even know what to say about this..... My goodness.

 Madcat87 wrote:
Oddly enough people in rural areas who are more likely to be in contact with the killer animals are more overweight. Is that the same in other countries where the further away from the city and more remote you are the more likely you are to be overweight?

In Russia, the further away from the city you live, the more likely you are to be a skinny, smelly peasant too poor to go the supermarket. That is why the vast majority of Russians lives in cities
Dachas dont count of course.

But dear Lord, those poor Australians...
All hope is now lost for them. How will they now run away from the drop bears, crocodiles and all those nasty poisonous creeps? They may now have a trucks weight, but they won't have a trucks speed....
(unless rolling downhill)

 cincydooley wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
A simple solution might well be to ban advertising of all processed foods, as those are where the major problems lie
(fats/sugars etc that people don't know, and don't want to know is there)

advertising reminds people stuff it there and available, above and beyond hunger

less advertising/brand display and people would eat less (and the less you weigh the easier exercise is)

I don't even know what to say about this..... My goodness.

It is something that is done in many places for things that are bad for you. Alcohol, tobacco, drugs. I would imagine that it might not be the first thing banned to advertise in Australia.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
A simple solution might well be to ban advertising of all processed foods, as those are where the major problems lie
(fats/sugars etc that people don't know, and don't want to know is there)

advertising reminds people stuff it there and available, above and beyond hunger

less advertising/brand display and people would eat less (and the less you weigh the easier exercise is)

I'm not against it, actually. In theory. I don't know about ALL processed foods. Milk is "processed". You'll need to tighten that up a bit, but I'm willing to listen.

 kronk wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
A simple solution might well be to ban advertising of all processed foods, as those are where the major problems lie
(fats/sugars etc that people don't know, and don't want to know is there)

advertising reminds people stuff it there and available, above and beyond hunger

less advertising/brand display and people would eat less (and the less you weigh the easier exercise is)

I'm not against it, actually. In theory. I don't know about ALL processed foods. Milk is "processed". You'll need to tighten that up a bit, but I'm willing to listen.

Just look at TV adds for medications when describing side-effects.

Is that what we want?

The solution to this problem is very simple, but the issue arises when we conflate "simple" with "easy".

I mean, we all understand what is required for someone to lose weight- they must consume fewer calories than they use, over a long period.

Exercise is also helpful, but mostly for the side benefits and increasing metabolic action overall- the most important point is to reduce calorie intake to less than what your body needs to fuel itself.

What you eat, whether it's all natural or processed, does not have THAT much to do with weight gain or loss. It may be related to other health issues (diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, etc) but weight loss is almost entirely predicated on calorie control.

The thing about that is, being hungry really sucks, it's quite hard to get through daily life while being hungry, and our brains aren't wired to tolerate it in an atmosphere of plenty where the issue can be easily solved.

If this were an easy issue to resolve, obesity wouldn't be such an issue, because let's face it- few people actually want to be overweight.

So it is disrespectful to imply that people are somehow weak for having trouble shifting weight. It is doable, but it takes discipline, and it is not easy at all. Simple, but not easy.

People are very slow to change their behaviour. The easiest way to impact on obesity levels is to go after the food manufacturers - limit additives, put into place limits on salts, fats, etc that can be in certain foods, etc...

You then impact significantly on the population with almost no effort, simply by enforcing certain food and health standards on manufacturers.

EDIT: Ignore, page 2 didn't show up for some reason.