Obesity rate may be worse than we think

AmeliaPond

hindsight's_a_biotch:

AmeliaPond:

Yes, I do sew. I didn't say what you were asking for was hard, I just said it was more work than the companies are doing now and therefore something they're unlikely to start doing unless they start losing money because of it.

It's different work.

I just don't see why we keep letting them get away with these flimsy ass excuses. They could very well do these things. But they'd rather keep basing fashion off the one body time so few women have. Most designers are completely out of touch with the realities of the human body even if we were dealing with a more normalized population.

But most women are going to blame their bodies for not fitting into the clothes instead of the designers for not making clothes that fit non-models. Designers want clothes hangers, not real women. And until they see a financial disadvantage to they way they do business, things aren't going to change.

Another way our society is fucked.

sprky79

hawkeye+:

sprky79:

"For the eleventy billionth time, where did I say "no access to clothes for obese people"? Sigh. I just think that the trend I see is more and more and more plus-size stores everywhere. I don't think that is a good thing- I think it just shows how complacent we are.

Fvvck it. Donuts for everyone.

Well I think I've solidified my reputation as resident fat shamer here at P&CE. lol. Ah well, I stand by my feelings that fat/obesity acceptance is a horrible thing, and very dangerous.

And just an FYI- I've been plenty overweight. It was the discomfort of not finding clothes that looked good on me that was the catalyst for change. It motivated me to want to feel good about myself. I can't imagine that feeling good and content with being obese would command much desire to change things. "

Let me understand:  When you were heavy, you could not find clothes to fit.  Your solution to that is to make less clothing that fits heavy people because that is what will make them get skinny!

Do I have it right?

No, you do not have it right.

 

Then clue me in.  What does the availability of plus sized clothing have to do with influencing weight loss?  And WHY do you think if there was less availability of plus sized clothing, that this would result in less fatties?  Make me understand, I'm not the smartest.

laptopprancer

https://homeport.uscg.mil/mycg/portal/ep/contentView.do?channelId=-18346&contentId=298613&programId=13046&programPage=%2Fep%2Fprogram%2Feditorial.jsp&pageTypeId=13489&contentType=EDITORIAL&BV

Please note that as of December 1st 2011, the Average Weight Per Person aboard ship was increased to allow for the expanding public.  Thereby reducing the number of safe occupancy limits on waterborne public transit, such as ferries. 

Obesity does have an effect on public spending, even if it is not a public nuisance like smoking.

And I have to say... everyone needs to do more to discourage unhealthy lifestyles, of all forms.  "Shaming" is too far.  However, total acceptance is also too far (i.e. let's just keep making everything bigger, bigger, bigger to accommodate everyone's increasing ass).

Personal freedoms are important.  But why ANYONE should be able to buy a 16 oz. hamburger is sort of beyond me.

 

LaPiscine

hindsight's_a_biotch:

Stores like Torrid, Lane Bryant and the one that I always think says Ashley Madison but doesn't are doing just fine. And my favorite store recently fully expanded its plus sizes section and is doing very well too.

I don't think it's an apt comparison to maternity competitive swimwear as that is a very small market share.

Well, I think it is a good comparison.  It was the only time I'd ever talked to anyone who explained to me that each patter and each size and each fabric is going to have its own individual cost, so it's not as simple as taking a fabric that is fun in regular sizes and using that same fabric in a maternity size.  You need a different pattern because the body type is different and then you need to make many of those different body-type patterns in a range of sizes.  Regardless of "market share" the analysis of any company considering making a size 26W of their size 0-14 line is going to be thinking the exact same thing.  Can I sell X number of these to make it work designing a whole new pattern?  For a company like Gap, that would probably work.  For a company like Tahari?  Not so much.  The higher the price point, the less the profit margin because the fewer buyers you have to begin with.  

Also, dude, I can go get a sewing pattern right now. There's one in fingertip length and the amount of additional fabric needed from the smallest to the largest size is not nearly as much as it seems. Nor is it that difficult to alter the patterns. Have any of you commenting actually seen or worked with a clothing pattern before?

Yes.  Have you ever attempted to make clothes in bulk?  Your cutter isn't going to be looking at one pattern, cutting, then taking that same pattern and extending the finger length to cut from the same pattern.  They cut in bulk.  They lay 250 pieces of cloth on top of each other and cut them with a machine, or if you're on a smaller scale, they lay 10 pieces on top of each other and cut with scissors, then they cut IN from those pieces again to make the smaller sizes.  This is why you have to look at the cost of creating multiple patterns and whether that is cost efficient.  The most cost efficient clothing model is one pattern that can be cut down into multiple sizes and sold to many, many people.  Like gap jeans.  The more specialized the item the less cost efficient it is to make different patterns because you have fewer buyers at all "levels."  So again, think of the plus line for a Theory pin striped suit.  That's going to be what, a $600 suit at least.  Their pants are $250, I don't know what their blazers are.  At any rate, there aren't many people looking to spend $600 on anything, much less a business suit.  So having multiple patterns, which you have to have if you're going to cut in bulk, is expensive.

Yes, full bust adjustments can be necessary for a better fit but people aren't getting a good fit in commercialized clothing anyway. And most full figured women aren't disproportionately larger in the chest either. So it's misleading to say that making bigger clothing would require loads more fabric or such hard work in pattern manipulation.

At any rate, none of this is to say that we as a society should somehow legislate against plus sized clothing.  And even if we did, what a shitty way to address a problem that doesn't have anything to do with the way clothes are made. All I'm saying is that the limited availability of plus sized clothing that sort of "corresponds" to regular sized clothing is related to two things: a significantly increased cost in manufacturing it and the "image" of the company making it.

hawkeye+

hindsight's_a_biotch:

Oh ffs! Do you know how many people actually feel good and content with being obese? uhm yeah, it's not a large number.

If it was, you wouldn't see Weight Watchers paying a washed up hasbeen like Jessica Simpson cold hard cash millions for an endorsement deal. There is no way the diet and exercise industry would be raking in the dough if people were perfectly content to be overweight.

You are absolutely right. But this is a whole seperate thread about why we are a society largely comprised of unhappy, overweight or obese people.

Losing weight is hard work. That is why most people don't do it.

So I'm seriously asking all of you guys, do think being overweight and/or obese is a disability? a disease? out of someone's control?

Do you think it should be a protected class?

I'm honestly curious.

samfish2bcrab

AT 5'3" i was 131.6 lbs and had a BMI of 23.3 and was a size 6.   You're telling me that at .7 point higher i should be considered obese?

cookiemdough

I think the obesity issue is like every other one in our country.  We want easy solutions that somehow won't negatively impact businesses in our country.  It is not going to happen.  It hasn't worked in education, poverty, taxes, discrimination policies, etc.  Why do we think there is an easy solution that won't require a huge overhaul of varying aspects of society?   

tartaruga

Here's the thing. It's very simple why we have a problem with obesity in our country: everything about our society is set up to make us fat. Everything. As children, we sit at desks for 8 hours a day, then ride a bus or car home where we sit inside because there are scary predators lurking around every corner and watch TV with tons of advertisements of delicious, sugary food. As adults, we sit in cars for an hour to get to work, where we sit at desks all day long, wolf down some lunch on our breaks, sit some more, then sit in cars to go home, drive to run our errands, go to the grocery story where we buy food that has been carefully manipulated to hit every single hot spot in out brain for addiction - the fat, the salt, the sugar. It's advertised in packages that are carefully designed by experts in psychology to manipulate our brains and make us want to buy and eat it. And it's cheap because it's been subsidized by the government. The grocery store has been designed to make us go down the aisles with the unhealthiest food and puts the healthy food in the farthest places. Then we go home and get less sleep than our bodies actually need, which causes us to secrete hormones that make us hungrier and fatter, because we've been told that sleep is for lazy people and you don't *really* need to sleep. If we have the time and energy, we go to the gym, where we engage in exercise that is not particularly enjoyable and for some people just plain sucks.

if we want to lose weight, we are going against every biological impulse that has been programmed into our body by millennia of evolution. And we're surrounded by constant temptations and ways to fail. if we succeed at losing weight, we will spend the rest of our lives fighting off our bodies' constant need to pit that weight back on.

It's really not that hard to understand why we have an obese society if you just look around and think about it for five seconds. The human body is designed to eat as much fat and sugar as it can because for virtually all of human history, this was *good* for human survival and the ones who had these desires lived and prospered. It's only in a very short span of history that it's suddenly become the opposite and our biology simply hasn't caught up yet.

EmiIyJ

hawkeye+:

I think it's time we treated obesity the same way we treat smoking. Make it harder to be obese, just like we made it harder to be a smoker. Stop expanding junior clothing stores to include a huge amount of plus sizes, stop making seats bigger etc etc.

But if you read this thread closely, you'll see that you can't pinpoint one definition of obesity, or one measurement of obesity. LaPiscine is my height and can't imagine carrying 150lbs and thinks it shouldn't be someone's comfort weight. Other girls have posted their heights and weights (which I'm not going to re-call out).  The point is everyone is different.  

I personally say fuucks the BMI.  I currently weigh 175, and my BMI comes in at 29.1, which puts me at the line of overweight and obese.  But my body fat is 26%, which is in the healthy range.  I have a ton of muscle.  People say I look like I weigh 140 - 145.  So for me, BMI says I'm obese.  If I am, then I'll just take my fatass and do this at age 34:

 

 

tartaruga

I also want to say I'm fascinated with all the different height/weight/sizes here, that people can be such varied heights and weights yet wear the same clothing size.

hindsight's_a_biotch

But we aren't talking about $600 Theory suits. We're discussing average clothing stores in middle america with the average population. Sure, what you cited is a good reason why Theory doesn't make plus sized clothes.

It still does not explain why stores that already make, carry, and sell plus sized clothing in their stores and online TODAY choose to make their clothing in markedly different styles from their regular sized clothing.

And when I say styles, I do not mean they make jeans and blouses for misses and muumuus for plus sizes. I mean that they make two similar dresses out of two different fabrics and materials and then stick them on one side of the store or the other.

There is no good reason why this is a plus sized dress

and this is not.

They are both from the same store. So if I fall in love with dress number two but it's slightly too big, I can't have it.

tartaruga

cookiemdough:

I think the obesity issue is like every other one in our country.  We want easy solutions that somehow won't negatively impact businesses in our country.  It is not going to happen.  It hasn't worked in education, poverty, taxes, discrimination policies, etc.  Why do we think there is an easy solution that won't require a huge overhaul of varying aspects of society?   

Bingo. We want solutions but only ones that don't cost any money and wont require businesses to change anything. It doesn't work that way.

samfish2bcrab

tartaruga:

Here's the thing. It's very simple why we have a problem with obesity in our country: everything about our society is set up to make us fat. Everything. As children, we sit at desks for 8 hours a day, then ride a bus or car home where we sit inside because there are scary predators lurking around every corner and watch TV with tons of advertisements of delicious, sugary food. As adults, we sit in cars for an hour to get to work, where we sit at desks all day long, wolf down some lunch on our breaks, sit some more, then sit in cars to go home, drive to run our errands, go to the grocery story where we buy food that has been carefully manipulated to hit every single hot spot in out brain for addiction - the fat, the salt, the sugar. It's advertised in packages that are carefully designed by experts in psychology to manipulate our brains and make us want to buy and eat it. And it's cheap because it's been subsidized by the government. The grocery store has been designed to make us go down the aisles with the unhealthiest food and puts the healthy food in the farthest places. Then we go home and get less sleep than our bodies actually need, which causes us to secrete hormones that make us hungrier and fatter, because we've been told that sleep is for lazy people and you don't *really* need to sleep. If we have the time and energy, we go to the gym, where we engage in exercise that is not particularly enjoyable and for some people just plain sucks.

if we want to lose weight, we are going against every biological impulse that has been programmed into our body by millennia of evolution. And we're surrounded by constant temptations and ways to fail. if we succeed at losing weight, we will spend the rest of our lives fighting off our bodies' constant need to pit that weight back on.

It's really not that hard to understand why we have an obese society if you just look around and think about it for five seconds. The human body is designed to eat as much fat and sugar as it can because for virtually all of human history, this was *good* for human survival and the ones who had these desires lived and prospered. It's only in a very short span of history that it's suddenly become the opposite and our biology simply hasn't caught up yet.

I think this belongs in a different thread.  Entirely too logical and not directly quoted from a magazine article.

laptopprancer

EmiIyJ:

hawkeye+:

I think it's time we treated obesity the same way we treat smoking. Make it harder to be obese, just like we made it harder to be a smoker. Stop expanding junior clothing stores to include a huge amount of plus sizes, stop making seats bigger etc etc.

But if you read this thread closely, you'll see that you can't pinpoint one definition of obesity, or one measurement of obesity. LaPiscine is my height and can't imagine carrying 150lbs and thinks it shouldn't be someone's comfort weight. Other girls have posted their heights and weights (which I'm not going to re-call out).  The point is everyone is different.  

I personally say fuucks the BMI.  I currently weigh 175, and my BMI comes in at 29.1, which puts me at the line of overweight and obese.  But my body fat is 26%, which is in the healthy range.  I have a ton of muscle.  People say I look like I weigh 140 - 145.  So for me, BMI says I'm obese.  If I am, then I'll just take my fatass and do this at age 34:

 

 

EmilyJ I've been on the nest forever and your siggy wins the alltime best siggie ever. I LOVE IT.

 

copzgirl

I wish it was as easy as shaming everyone into uncomfortable clothes.  I am by no means lazy but let me tell you that at 47 its a little more difficult to stay where I am right now, and that is WITH everything going for me.

I am healthy, active woman with access to all that makes it easy for me.  I can't imagine being someone who isn't all of these things and trying to fit and conform into some peoples idea of what I shoudl be 

CinemaGoddess

Right now I'm considered morbidly obese.

My goal is to get down to 165lbs.  By the BMI calculator, I would still be considered overweight and close to obese if I lost the weight that I want to.  I will be healthier and most probably happier. 

This is exactly why the BMI calculator is fuuucked up.  I will work hard, lose a shitton of weight, and will still be considered not skinny enough by the BMI calculator's standards. 

Also:  I'm reading this post while eating lunch.

That is all. 

EmiIyJ

laptopprancer:

EmilyJ I've been on the nest forever and your siggy wins the alltime best siggie ever. I LOVE IT.

 

Haha - thanks!  I stole it from my friend on FB.  It was too perfect.  I usually want to say it to someone daily.   

LaPiscine

hindsight's_a_biotch:

But we aren't talking about $600 Theory suits. We're discussing average clothing stores in middle america with the average population. Sure, what you cited is a good reason why Theory doesn't make plus sized clothes.

It still does not explain why stores that already make, carry, and sell plus sized clothing in their stores and online TODAY choose to make their clothing in markedly different styles from their regular sized clothing.

And when I say styles, I do not mean they make jeans and blouses for misses and muumuus for plus sizes. I mean that they make two similar dresses out of two different fabrics and materials and then stick them on one side of the store or the other.

There is no good reason why this is a plus sized dress

and this is not.

They are both from the same store. So if I fall in love with dress number two but it's slightly too big, I can't have it.

I don't know what to tell you about those dresses.  I don't know the brands and I don't know the store.  I do know that the second dress is going to require two patterns to start with because it's got a crinoline so the profit margin on it is already less than the plus sized dress.  I am no more of a dress oracle than you are, but I do know that commercial clothing making looks nothing like the home sewing you are doing.  Other than that they both involve fabric.

tartaruga

I'll also say that I don't have a problem with the BMI standards changing if theres evidence to support it. Medical guidelines aren't designed to make you feel good about yourself, they are (supposed to be) based on scientific and medical evidence about what is healthiest. If the evidence shows that I ought to be 60 pounds lighter than what I am, well that sucks for me and I may never achieve my healthiest weight, but it's not science's fault. I should still try to get as close as I can. And yes, BMI is supposed to be a guideline, not an end all be all. My H for example, is considered obese by the BMi calculator but he's clearly not - he's very athletic and muscular so it doesn't really apply. No biggie - his doctor can see this and just uses his judgement to say "well your BMI is high but your body type is different so I'm not concerned as long as you're eating healthy." it's no big deal. Doctors should be advising their patients using BMI as a *tool* not as the one and only piece of information. Just like exercise and food guidelines - yes we should all strive for eating tons of fruits and veggies and exercising daily, but if you can't, you should still try to do it as much as you can.

the science is not the problem. Our society and our lifestyle is the problem.

Jermysgirl

pedantic_wench:

I don't think "fat acceptance" means "bad health acceptance."

Fat does not automatically equate with bad health.

Yes, it could be indicative of bad eating habits or not enough exercise. But, being fat doesn't mean you're going to fall down dead at any minute.

Fer shure.  When I was almost 300 lbs and went for the consult for my weight loss surgery, my surgeon said "You'll be the healthiest person I've ever operated on!" all excitedly.  Granted, being almost 300 lbs wasn't healthy, but I had no issues with cholesterol, heart problems, blood pressure, diabeeeeetus, etc.  I was just a lardass who worked out 3-5 times a week and ate mostly decently, and still couldn't lose weight.  It's not like I was putting down whole pizzas or eating McDonald's 24/7 or anything.  I was just a poor sap with a jacked up thyroid and PCOS.

mysticporter

Of course BMI doesn't give a complete picture of health, any more than the Dow gives a complete picture of the stock market.  People as a rule aren't built to handle nuance:  they want a simple number answer (a few categories dumbed down categories, even better!), and that's what BMI is.  For that reason and that reason alone, I think BMI is a useful starting point.

Of course, there will be people who can have an "overweight" BMI and still be quite healthy, either because they are healthy despite having some extra fat or because their frame and/or muscular build pushes them over.  I don't think that's a reason to chuck out BMI altogether, and I completely don't get the "But that would make me overweight/obese!" reaction.  If you understand the limitations of BMI, what do you care where you get classified?

larrysdarling

tartaruga:

Here's the thing. It's very simple why we have a problem with obesity in our country: everything about our society is set up to make us fat. Everything. As children, we sit at desks for 8 hours a day, then ride a bus or car home where we sit inside because there are scary predators lurking around every corner and watch TV with tons of advertisements of delicious, sugary food. As adults, we sit in cars for an hour to get to work, where we sit at desks all day long, wolf down some lunch on our breaks, sit some more, then sit in cars to go home, drive to run our errands, go to the grocery story where we buy food that has been carefully manipulated to hit every single hot spot in out brain for addiction - the fat, the salt, the sugar. It's advertised in packages that are carefully designed by experts in psychology to manipulate our brains and make us want to buy and eat it. And it's cheap because it's been subsidized by the government. The grocery store has been designed to make us go down the aisles with the unhealthiest food and puts the healthy food in the farthest places. Then we go home and get less sleep than our bodies actually need, which causes us to secrete hormones that make us hungrier and fatter, because we've been told that sleep is for lazy people and you don't *really* need to sleep. If we have the time and energy, we go to the gym, where we engage in exercise that is not particularly enjoyable and for some people just plain sucks.

if we want to lose weight, we are going against every biological impulse that has been programmed into our body by millennia of evolution. And we're surrounded by constant temptations and ways to fail. if we succeed at losing weight, we will spend the rest of our lives fighting off our bodies' constant need to pit that weight back on.

It's really not that hard to understand why we have an obese society if you just look around and think about it for five seconds. The human body is designed to eat as much fat and sugar as it can because for virtually all of human history, this was *good* for human survival and the ones who had these desires lived and prospered. It's only in a very short span of history that it's suddenly become the opposite and our biology simply hasn't caught up yet.

This is a little too victim-y for me b/c there is a lot of this that is attributable back to choice. 

Parents choose to park their kids in front of the TV and buy them video games and ipods and iphones and ipad and computers and OMG I need a TV in my bedroom when I'm 4!   A parent can 100% say, "Um, no tv. Let's go outside and play together. Let's go to a park. Let's go ride bikes." That's a choice. 

When we go to the grocery store, food doesn't just FLLYYYYYYYY off the shelves into our carts. The fruits and vegetables aren't on lockdown.  Yes, it can be difficult to buy less processed foods when you're on a lower income. But it doesn't mean we're all zombie shopping.  When you buy soda, you're choosing to do so.

If you come home and cook crappy food and sit on your duff and go to bed late, and do the exact same thing the next day and the next that's a choice.  

I believe there is a genetic component to overweight and obesity. I believe it is going from being obese to not obese is extremely difficult but to relegate this to something we have no control over is just not true. There is a personal choice in this matter.  I don't understand why acknowledging this is so problematic.

LaPiscine

tartaruga:

I'll also say that I don't have a problem with the BMI standards changing if theres evidence to support it. Medical guidelines aren't designed to make you feel good about yourself, they are (supposed to be) based on scientific and medical evidence about what is healthiest. If the evidence shows that I ought to be 60 pounds lighter than what I am, well that sucks for me and I may never achieve my healthiest weight, but it's not science's fault. I should still try to get as close as I can. And yes, BMI is supposed to be a guideline, not an end all be all. My H for example, is considered obese by the BMi calculator but he's clearly not - he's very athletic and muscular so it doesn't really apply. No biggie - his doctor can see this and just uses his judgement to say "well your BMI is high but your body type is different so I'm not concerned as long as you're eating healthy." it's no big deal. Doctors should be advising their patients using BMI as a *tool* not as the one and only piece of information. Just like exercise and food guidelines - yes we should all strive for eating tons of fruits and veggies and exercising daily, but if you can't, you should still try to do it as much as you can.

the science is not the problem. Our society and our lifestyle is the problem.

And let me just keep digging myself into this hole because I think this is what most doctors are doing.  I think they are looking at a patient and they can see that the patient needs to lose weight.  If a doctor says, "You look overweight.  I can see that you are fat," they will be accused of focusing on the aesthetics of obesity.  Especially if it's a female patient, that patient will tell her friends that the doctor told her she was fat and ugly.  So doctors explain the patient's weight to them in terms of a BMI.  "Look, your BMI is too high."  This is supposed to make it less personal, less offensive.  But instead, you get the kind of hyper-rationalizing that takes place in this thread where people with a BMI of 32 are saying, "I'm just big boned.  My doctor shouldn't be relying on BMI anyway because it's notoriously unreliable and it should be just one of many tools."  Yeah, the other tool is his eyes.  But patients wouldn't like that discussion any better.  

+adamwife+

Can I get a recap of this post?  Is this six pages of "you're fat" and "no, I'm not" or should I actually take the time to read it?

tartaruga

LaPiscine:

tartaruga:

I'll also say that I don't have a problem with the BMI standards changing if theres evidence to support it. Medical guidelines aren't designed to make you feel good about yourself, they are (supposed to be) based on scientific and medical evidence about what is healthiest. If the evidence shows that I ought to be 60 pounds lighter than what I am, well that sucks for me and I may never achieve my healthiest weight, but it's not science's fault. I should still try to get as close as I can. And yes, BMI is supposed to be a guideline, not an end all be all. My H for example, is considered obese by the BMi calculator but he's clearly not - he's very athletic and muscular so it doesn't really apply. No biggie - his doctor can see this and just uses his judgement to say "well your BMI is high but your body type is different so I'm not concerned as long as you're eating healthy." it's no big deal. Doctors should be advising their patients using BMI as a *tool* not as the one and only piece of information. Just like exercise and food guidelines - yes we should all strive for eating tons of fruits and veggies and exercising daily, but if you can't, you should still try to do it as much as you can.

the science is not the problem. Our society and our lifestyle is the problem.

And let me just keep digging myself into this hole because I think this is what most doctors are doing.  I think they are looking at a patient and they can see that the patient needs to lose weight.  If a doctor says, "You look overweight.  I can see that you are fat," they will be accused of focusing on the aesthetics of obesity.  Especially if it's a female patient, that patient will tell her friends that the doctor told her she was fat and ugly.  So doctors explain the patient's weight to them in terms of a BMI.  "Look, your BMI is too high."  This is supposed to make it less personal, less offensive.  But instead, you get the kind of hyper-rationalizing that takes place in this thread where people with a BMI of 32 are saying, "I'm just big boned.  My doctor shouldn't be relying on BMI anyway because it's notoriously unreliable and it should be just one of many tools."  Yeah, the other tool is his eyes.  But patients wouldn't like that discussion any better.  

I actually agree with you. I don't think there's any evidence that doctors *aren't* making these judgment calls (like my H's doctor did, for example). I think that it's rare that someone who truly doesn't need to lose weight is being told by their doctor "your BMI is too high, you need to lose weight". I think it's a lot more frequent that people are taking it upon themselves to say "well BMI doesn't apply to me because of my frame".

ETA actually my H's doctor said he should probably lose 10ish pounds anyway, even though he's in great shape, because he said that kind of weight isn't good for your joints, even if it's muscle instead of fat.

copzgirl

This whole post just reminded me, that I got crazy news at my NP at my last check up.

I always defer having my weight taken (head/sand) and she is fine with that, now apparently they are going to a computer system that won't let them proceed with anything if vitals including weight aren't filled in.

I swear her assistant said something about federal guidelines...is this right? 

dontcallmeshirley

+adamwife+:

Can I get a recap of this post?  Is this six pages of "you're fat" and "no, I'm not" or should I actually take the time to read it?

no cute clothes for fatties, especially fat kids

that's shaming and won't cause people to lose weight, anyway

I'm __ tall and __ pounds and can deadlift a whale and am "obese"

Ins and outs about clothing manufacturing and why it's more expensive to make fatty clothes

Society

Self-responsibility !

Your doctor thinks you're fat, he's just afraid to tell you

/fin 

+adamwife+

dontcallmeshirley:

+adamwife+:

Can I get a recap of this post?  Is this six pages of "you're fat" and "no, I'm not" or should I actually take the time to read it?

no cute clothes for fatties, especially fat kids

that's shaming and won't cause people to lose weight, anyway

I'm __ tall and __ pounds and can deadlift a whale and am "obese"

Ins and outs about clothing manufacturing and why it's more expensive to make fatty clothes

Society

Self-responsibility !

Your doctor thinks you're fat, he's just afraid to tell you

/fin 

Awesome.  Thanks.

cookiemdough

LaPiscine:

tartaruga:

I'll also say that I don't have a problem with the BMI standards changing if theres evidence to support it. Medical guidelines aren't designed to make you feel good about yourself, they are (supposed to be) based on scientific and medical evidence about what is healthiest. If the evidence shows that I ought to be 60 pounds lighter than what I am, well that sucks for me and I may never achieve my healthiest weight, but it's not science's fault. I should still try to get as close as I can. And yes, BMI is supposed to be a guideline, not an end all be all. My H for example, is considered obese by the BMi calculator but he's clearly not - he's very athletic and muscular so it doesn't really apply. No biggie - his doctor can see this and just uses his judgement to say "well your BMI is high but your body type is different so I'm not concerned as long as you're eating healthy." it's no big deal. Doctors should be advising their patients using BMI as a *tool* not as the one and only piece of information. Just like exercise and food guidelines - yes we should all strive for eating tons of fruits and veggies and exercising daily, but if you can't, you should still try to do it as much as you can.

the science is not the problem. Our society and our lifestyle is the problem.

And let me just keep digging myself into this hole because I think this is what most doctors are doing.  I think they are looking at a patient and they can see that the patient needs to lose weight.  If a doctor says, "You look overweight.  I can see that you are fat," they will be accused of focusing on the aesthetics of obesity.  Especially if it's a female patient, that patient will tell her friends that the doctor told her she was fat and ugly.  So doctors explain the patient's weight to them in terms of a BMI.  "Look, your BMI is too high."  This is supposed to make it less personal, less offensive.  But instead, you get the kind of hyper-rationalizing that takes place in this thread where people with a BMI of 32 are saying, "I'm just big boned.  My doctor shouldn't be relying on BMI anyway because it's notoriously unreliable and it should be just one of many tools."  Yeah, the other tool is his eyes.  But patients wouldn't like that discussion any better.  

If you are visibly overweight, I don't really think people would balk at a doctor telling them about their weight.  As I mentioned earlier, I think there would be much more push back from someone who was not visibly overweight who was then called obese based on bmi and everything else seemed healthy, I think they would likely get the side-eye. That being said, I am sure there are people who are not aware of their weight and that may think they are thin when they aren't but for most I would think they are aware of their weight, society imo doesn't really coddle fat people. 

LaPiscine

larrysdarling:

tartaruga:

Here's the thing. It's very simple why we have a problem with obesity in our country: everything about our society is set up to make us fat. Everything. As children, we sit at desks for 8 hours a day, then ride a bus or car home where we sit inside because there are scary predators lurking around every corner and watch TV with tons of advertisements of delicious, sugary food. As adults, we sit in cars for an hour to get to work, where we sit at desks all day long, wolf down some lunch on our breaks, sit some more, then sit in cars to go home, drive to run our errands, go to the grocery story where we buy food that has been carefully manipulated to hit every single hot spot in out brain for addiction - the fat, the salt, the sugar. It's advertised in packages that are carefully designed by experts in psychology to manipulate our brains and make us want to buy and eat it. And it's cheap because it's been subsidized by the government. The grocery store has been designed to make us go down the aisles with the unhealthiest food and puts the healthy food in the farthest places. Then we go home and get less sleep than our bodies actually need, which causes us to secrete hormones that make us hungrier and fatter, because we've been told that sleep is for lazy people and you don't *really* need to sleep. If we have the time and energy, we go to the gym, where we engage in exercise that is not particularly enjoyable and for some people just plain sucks.

if we want to lose weight, we are going against every biological impulse that has been programmed into our body by millennia of evolution. And we're surrounded by constant temptations and ways to fail. if we succeed at losing weight, we will spend the rest of our lives fighting off our bodies' constant need to pit that weight back on.

It's really not that hard to understand why we have an obese society if you just look around and think about it for five seconds. The human body is designed to eat as much fat and sugar as it can because for virtually all of human history, this was *good* for human survival and the ones who had these desires lived and prospered. It's only in a very short span of history that it's suddenly become the opposite and our biology simply hasn't caught up yet.

This is a little too victim-y for me b/c there is a lot of this that is attributable back to choice. 

Parents choose to park their kids in front of the TV and buy them video games and ipods and iphones and ipad and computers and OMG I need a TV in my bedroom when I'm 4!   A parent can 100% say, "Um, no tv. Let's go outside and play together. Let's go to a park. Let's go ride bikes." That's a choice. 

When we go to the grocery store, food doesn't just FLLYYYYYYYY off the shelves into our carts. The fruits and vegetables aren't on lockdown.  Yes, it can be difficult to buy less processed foods when you're on a lower income. But it doesn't mean we're all zombie shopping.  When you buy soda, you're choosing to do so.

If you come home and cook crappy food and sit on your duff and go to bed late, and do the exact same thing the next day and the next that's a choice.  

I believe there is a genetic component to overweight and obesity. I believe it is going from being obese to not obese is extremely difficult but to relegate this to something we have no control over is just not true. There is a personal choice in this matter.  I don't understand why acknowledging this is so problematic.

I think I'm probably in between Larry and TTTs then because I think there is a lot of choice to what size you are, but these kinds of "it's just this simple" statements irk me.  It is not just this simple.  I know TTTs is a Nurture Shock disciple too so she's pick up what I'm putting down on this front, but I can't control what time my kids go to school.  The norm thorughout the country is for school to start ridiculously early and for kids to come home with a truck load of homework that keeps them up late at night.  This is a bad model that correlates directly with the obesity epidemic.  Other things that correlate?  REAGAN'S 1984 deregulation of commercials AND deregulation of what qualifies as "children's programming."   Other things?  A change in the "norm" that is the work day.  A change in the way productivity is measured such that there is very little "down" time during the work day (notwithstanding all of our abilities to participate in this thread).

Additionally, the less money you have the more likely you are to be overweight, which says a lot about how "easy" it is to afford to buy those healthy vegetables and fruits AND about how easy it is for women to find time to prepare them.  

Another thing that correlates with the obesity epidemic is the increase in the use of psychotropic medications for depression and anxiety.  

So I agree with TTTs that we are culturally fwcked.  But yeah, there are also some "choice" elements to it.  Even Burger King sells water. Actually, they don't sell it.  It's free.