2/3 of Adults overweight, 1/3 of Children

[mcmilljb]

300g DV of carbs is the recommended... WTF?! That is SO MANY FUCKING CARBOHYDRATES. Seriously, we have been lied to for years and years by assholes. Fucking vegetarian/vegan pricks who want us to not eat meat are behind the majority of it too. I know that sounds like a whack conspiracy theory bs, but it isn't.

You're not on a 2000 calorie diet?

Honestly, there is some complexity with the amount someone should eat. You can eat with certain goals like losing weight, maintaining weight, gaining muscle, etc. So you need a goal from the start. Then you need to base the percentages of each type of nutrient that meets those goals. However, I think if children can learn earlier how to do that, then they can make choices so they can avoid becoming obese. However it involves math, and people are afraid of numbers. It's the boogeyman. Hell someone may a hormone problem, but it's masked because they eat so much crap.

The best part is that obesity is something that can be overcome. There is a great story from my state. This girl lost 100+ pounds and won Miss South Carolina. Even won the swimsuit contest! It just takes some work and commitment.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/06/bree-boyce-miss-south-carolina_n_891163.html

 

[1prophet]

For all you that are blaming food, the same or similar foods were available in the early 1980's as today, Big Macs, KFC, Burger King, Wendy's, Jack in the Box, White CastleD:, etc, etc., as well as the pizza and other foods served in school.

The straw that broke the camels back was the selfish greedy school administrators bringing vending machines into schools (outside the teachers lounge) under the guise of increasing school funding at the expense of the children's health.


Schools are a captive audience and most schoolchildren lack the discipline and resolve to say no to easily accessed vended food and drinks.
http://www.foodtimeline.org/foodschools.html#schoolvending

PUBLIC SCHOOL VENDING MACHINES
America's first coin-operated food vending machines were introduced in 1888. Early advertisements promoting the vending machine industry listed schools along with hospitals, factories, office buildings, and transportation terminals as prime locations. None of these ads specify the type of school (college, trade, local public elementary) nor do they specify where the machine was intended for placement. Then, as today, teachers lounges and employee staff areas are generally "off limits" to students.
Where and when were the first vending machines placed in public schools cafeterias for student use? We have no clue. The earliest print references we find for vending machines in public schools targeting student consumption were published in the mid-1950s. These indicate the practice was not uncommon, but do not provide exact statistics. Interestingly enough? Both references reported the fact that dentists opposed vending machines because they promoted tooth decay. They confirm the machines dispensed candy and sweetened drinks.
As time progressed, the controversy surrounding vending machines in public schools grew more complicated. Government regulators, enterprising businessmen, health advocates, labor unions and school boards approached this thorny issue with different agendas.
[1950s]
"Schools at all levels would be a lucrative and controversial location for the [vending] machines. At this point, though, such placements were in their infancy."
---Vending Machines: An American Social History, Kerry Seagrave [McFarland & Company:Jefferson NC] (p. 154)
"On Recommendation of Dr. H. C. Steinberger, a dentist and a member of the Cannelton School Board, the board has ordered candy vending machines removed from the Cannelton High School. He said the sugar in the candy was bad for the teeth."
---"Candy Loses to a Dentist," New York Times, May 8, 1953 (p. 31)
"The Journal of the American Dental Association said today that public schools should remove vending machines that dispense candy and sweetened beverages. 'Schools should practice as well as teach good nutrition,' Dr. William P. Humphrey of Denver, said in an article."
---Dentist Takes Schools to Task," New York Times, June 2, 1956 (p. 10)
[NOTE: This issue of the The Journal of the American Dental Association is not available online. Your librarian can help you obtain a copy of this article.]
[1960s]
"Schools became increasingly important locations for VMs [vending machines] in this period--and increasingly controversial...The vending industry was making strides in 1964 in the $20-billion-a-year school-lunch area, where banks of VMs had replaced hot meals in many high schools and colleges. That year, 107 Southern California schools converted from cafeterias to vending machines. By 1968, Vendo company...estimated there were 750 schools in the vending came around the country, more than 200 of them in California. Still, as one account said, the vending industry did not then 'have a prayer of getting into more than a fraction of the country's 25,000 high schools, which represented the primary market. That was because, explained Business Week, the US government, state governments, most boards of education, and organized food service employees and administrators had put up a 'solid front' to keep vending out. The National School Lunch Act, which offered cash and foodstuff subsidies to schools in return for a non-profit hot lunch program for children, was described as the legal underpinning to the machine opposition. Vendo's approach was to use low-key persuasion--schools could use VMs and still keep the federal government subsidy. Also stressed was the idea that vending was a good supplement, and that partial-use vending without infringing on subsidy programs could be profitable for schools...Under the terms of the program [National School Lunch Act, 1945], schools could have VMs in the building--for snacks and drinks--but most of those dispensers were hidden away in teachers lounges."
---Vending Machines (p. 182-183)
[1970s]
"In 1970, the US Department of Agriculture agreed to amend the national School Lunch Program to allow vending and food-service companies to participate. During 1973 hearing of the US Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, school lunch officials warned that VMs that dispensed 'junk food' threatened to undermine the school lunch program. Criticized was an amendment to the School Lunch Act passed in 1972 that allowed the sale of 'competitive foods' at the same time and place in which federally subsidized school lunches were served. Regulations that would 'result in exploitation of children's nutritional needs by people whose interest is profits' were then being drawn up by the Department of Agriculture to permit normal use of the machines...Agriculture Department officials declared it was 'against our regulations' to have operating VMs in lunch rooms during school hours, but critics claimed VMs in lunch rooms were already in use in some states...In the early 1970s, Jean Farmer went to a PTA meeting one night in Bloomington, Indiana where someone complained about junk food in VMs. Farmer thought about it and went home...she found her child's lunch--untouched. Farmer then began a campaign lasting years."
---Vending Machines (p. 183)
[1990s]
"Schools remained the most controversial locations for VMs...Senator Patrick J, Leahy...urged the federal government in 1994 to do more to discourage the consumption of soft drinks from VMs on school property. Leahy wanted to include language in the Better Nutrition & Heath For Children Act of 1994 that 'clarified' regulations that gave school officials the authority to ban VM sales of soft drinks and snack items, such as candy bars and chips, during school hours... More common than schools turning to self-operation...were schools signing exclusive deals with one of the major soft drink bottlers...Since schools were in need of money for programs...they were better off signing exclusive deals...The Center for Science in the Public Interest...wanted to ban the sale of soft drinks from VMs in school, arguing that teens already drank too much pop and that schools should try to undermine that, not promote it."
---Vending Machines (p. 216-219)

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2010/09/vending_machines_obesity.html

fast forward to today
09/08/2010

Loaded with vending machines

Among those surveyed, 22 percent of school children consumed competitive or vended food items in a school day. Usage was highest in high school, where 88 percent of schools had vending machines, versus 52 percent of middle schools and 16 percent of elementary schools. Competitive food and beverage consumers had significantly higher sugar intakes and lower dietary fiber, vitamin B levels and iron intakes than non-consumers.
Soft drinks accounted for more than two-thirds of beverages offered in school vending machines and stores. Desserts and fried snacks were the most commonly consumed vended items among elementary school children and beverages other than milk and fruit juice were the most commonly consumed items among middle and high school students. Other frequently consumed vended foods included candy, snack chips, crackers, cookies, cakes and ice cream.
The results did not show a significant difference in students' consumption of these items based on family income or race and ethnicity.
Findings of this study appear in the September issue of the Journal of School Health.
Detrimental to children's diet

"Consumption of vended foods and beverages currently offered in U.S. schools is detrimental to children's diet quality," Kakarala said. "Childhood obesity, resulting from poor dietary choices, such as those found in this study, greatly increases the risk for many chronic diseases. A healthy school food environment can reduce these dietary risks."
Based on their findings, the study authors recommend school administrators design guidelines restricting vended and competitive foods and beverages to those that are rich with nutrients and not energy-dense. Additionally, school food service personnel can prepare point-of-service materials and displays to promote more healthful foods such as fresh fruit, yogurt, low-fat milk, juice and sandwiches.
"Targeted nutrition education to promote the importance of healthful snacks is further stressed by the Child Nutrition Act -- the major federal legislation that determines school food policy and resources," Kakarala said. "These and other types of school-enforced policies can be very helpful for children in making smarter eating choices throughout the school day."

 

[dali71]

I think this is a confluence of personal failure and government/leadership failure. Yes, there are those who excel above this and avoid the habits that so many millions go into. But it's an uphill battle, our culture throws food into our faces constantly and it's crap. The government subsidizes corn so much that high fructose corn syrup, a basically new invention, has gone from not existing to being in f**king everything.

This. HFCS is horrible, and it's use has increased since the sugar tariffs and quotas of 1977.

A sweet problem: Princeton researchers find that high-fructose corn syrup prompts considerably more weight gain

A Princeton University research team has demonstrated that all sweeteners are not equal when it comes to weight gain: Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same.

In addition to causing significant weight gain in lab animals, long-term consumption of high-fructose corn syrup also led to abnormal increases in body fat, especially in the abdomen, and a rise in circulating blood fats called triglycerides. The researchers say the work sheds light on the factors contributing to obesity trends in the United States.

"Some people have claimed that high-fructose corn syrup is no different than other sweeteners when it comes to weight gain and obesity, but our results make it clear that this just isn't true, at least under the conditions of our tests," said psychology professor Bart Hoebel, who specializes in the neuroscience of appetite, weight and sugar addiction. "When rats are drinking high-fructose corn syrup at levels well below those in soda pop, they're becoming obese -- every single one, across the board. Even when rats are fed a high-fat diet, you don't see this; they don't all gain extra weight."

I'd like to see a graph of the obesity rate since 1977, and another with the usage of HFCS in food products in the same period. I've got a hunch that they would be close to mirroring each other.

 

[halik]

The BMI is funny. When playing football in college I was considered borderline obese by the BMI. I was 190 pounds at 5% body fat lol

This,
BMI is stupid for anyone remotely muscular. I've got a 6 pack and I'm considered borderline obese on that stupid scale.

HFCS could be a culprit, given that stanford study. I stay away from that stuff.

 

[Baasha]

A simple rule for fatties: eat to live, don't live to eat!

 

[Cerb]

All based on BMI bullshit number. Not caring as it's not an accurate number.

Yes, actually it is. It removes variables that are necessary for an individual, but that works fine over a large and diverse population. IE, your BMI is a useless number, but your city's average BMI is not.

And really, it's the kids not exercising/getting out and playing all day till dark like we used to that is a much bigger problem than how and what they eat.

It's both. Much of what we eat gets in the way of the body functioning properly, and schools tend to serve abysmal junk food, so the kids would have little useful energy, anyway. That is not to say activity isn't needed, but how kids eat is very important, too. Our schools are categorically failing in both areas, despite overwhelming evidence that better food, and copious amounts of recess for all ages, are good things. Parents caring enough are in the minority, too--it's not just bureaucracies at fault--OTOH, what is a parent to do, when the school doesn't even allow for much physical activity, and private schools aren't really an option?

This really surprised me. NYU did a study on this and they found that calorie listings had no impact on what people ate. (might be the same thing the article cites) I find that strange, because it sure as hell has had an effect on what I eat. Now I'm 5'8" and way about 145, so obviously I'm not the target of these calorie listings, but still I have definitely opted to eat something different on a number of occasions due to the 'holy shit, I'm a lardass if I eat that' factor.

...is most food like that not obvious? Seriously, calories are probably one of the most useless nutrition numbers out there (sodium and sugars are much more telling, from the typical nutrition label, as many flavors work well with them, in ways that don't make them feel as high as they are). Food with lots of bread, gravy, fat, etc. will be high in calories. I generally assume that if I am eating out, spend >$5, and English is the first language of all the employees I might be able to talk to, that I'm getting 1+kCal, 2kCal with a big batch of fries. Immigrant joints seem to have more on their menus with less fast carbs, IME.

I think really the problem is many fold, it's not the "evil food companies" or anything of that nature. Now hear me out and then call me a conservative racist.

The evil food companies make making good choices, including getting good labeling, a royal PITA. They also lobby the government for what is taught to everyone as good diets. The new guidelines are better than they have been, but that's not saying much.

1) Breakdown of the family. No more mom making good home cooked meals keeping her family's nutrition and nourishment in mind providing a well balanced diet of things on the table because she had time to do so. No mom and dad in the home = no nice home cooked meals as one parent shoulders everything. Hell, Mom/Dad can't even pack a lunch for the kids as school won't allow it in the compound.

Not merely that, but the long borrowed economic growth of the 80s and 90s. Even with a nuclear family, with both parents working, things were good for awhile, but then everyone had to work more and harder, around the same time as cheap gas and the higher productivity allowed for exceptionally cheap mass produced COTS food items, so less and less time needed to be spent preparing food, with a given monetary budget, even with the mother making meals all of the time, and time budgets were getting ever-tighter. As a result, we've gotten multiple generations to which cooking a few eggs is an alien experience.

2) Kids not outside playing - already mentioned, sedentary lifestyle, all part of the bigger picture, that lifestyle carries over into adulthood

3) Basic nutrition not being taught in school (screw what they serve, teach them about what is good food and balance, which was the parents job in the first place and now you have removed that from the household, good job).

No, they have to feed it to them, as well. People don't truly learn by books. If they ate what they should every day, they'd be more likely to eat that way later on. However, even the new food guidelines aren't exactly the best for peak nutrition, and food pyramid was plain silly for it. The very first thing to do would be to stop with the x% of this broad category, and y% of this one BS.

4) A basic lack of know how in taking care of oneself is rooted for a generation or two now because of #1.

Add it all up, and no wonder people are eating crap and not exercising. They know no other way because of #1 - nobody to teach them how to live well, only rely on others for basic calories because tummy grumbles.

Like fucking cattle.

A simple rule for fatties: eat to live, don't live to eat!

Bah. If people live to eat, they won't be eating such crap that they get humongous.

 

[RocksteadyDotNet]

I hear what you guys are saying about HFCS, and I kinda agree, but we dont have that shit here and we're getting fatter too.

All western countrys are getting fatter. And you can't place it squarly at kilojoule intake or lack of exersise.

There are many studies that show 'kilojoules in and kilojoules out' hasn't changed that drastically over the last 20 years.

There is more to this issue than overeating.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

I hear what you guys are saying about HFCS, and I kinda agree, but we dont have that shit here and we're getting fatter too.

All western countrys are getting fatter. And you can't place it squarly at kilojoule intake or lack of exersise.

There are many studies that show 'kilojoules in and kilojoules out' hasn't changed that drastically over the last 20 years.

There is more to this issue than overeating.

There is only one hormone that signals the body to store fat. Insulin.

What causes insulin spikes: Carbs!

What type of diet does the Government push: High Carb!

Result: Obese population with rampant type 2 diabetes

I would say their plan is working quite well.

 

[ichy]

Also, BMI is a good overall scale. It's not perfect, but most people with a high BMI aren't benching 400 lbs and shredded up. They are, simply, fat.

This. Sure there are NFL players who're obese according to BMI but could outlift and outrun 95% of the population, however they are an exception to the rule. Most people whose BMI says they are obese are actually obese.

 

[ichy]

This is totally correct. Exercise in general is actually not a particularly good way to lose weight. It's diet, diet, diet.

Even if it doesn't cause you to lose weight it has huge health benefits.

 

[ichy]

I'm no Mike Huckabee fan, but his amazing weight loss ought to be an inspiration for all those fat Southerners.

 

[Cerb]

I hear what you guys are saying about HFCS, and I kinda agree, but we dont have that shit here and we're getting fatter too.

All western countrys are getting fatter. And you can't place it squarly at kilojoule intake or lack of exersise.

There are many studies that show 'kilojoules in and kilojoules out' hasn't changed that drastically over the last 20 years.

There is more to this issue than overeating.

Energy in v. energy out only works in the realm of academia. It's good to keep people hooked on the latest trends on weight loss, though. You can't easily predict calories stored, calories used, the efficiency of their use, nor how much you are burning, and how much of your fat you are going to be burning, unless you are already an active person, with a fairly steady metabolism. Calories in < calories out is what happened if you lost weight, but predicting weight loss, and controlling behavior for weight loss, is a many-variable problem.

If you eat a poor diet, your body will be storing more of it as fat. If you under long-term stress, your body will store more of it as fat. If you eat foods that digest slowly, you will have more energy, and less hunger, through your day. If you can eat, and begin digestion, calmly, you are more likely to be able to use more of what you take in, and not store it for the long term.

The bright side of it is that it's simple. Fresh foods, meals made from fresh foods, and not too much of any one kind. Then, don't eat lard, but don't skimp on the fat, either. Don't use too much salt. Don't use too much sugar. Walk or run some. Voila. The problem is that isn't easy to do, especially when working many hours at a desk, possibly chastised for taking breaks, with a sedentary commute, bombarded with bad foods that require little to no work for you to prepare, and which satisfy cravings, but not your body's real needs.

 

[Monster_Munch]

You can't just blame the schools when parents are still providing the majority of a child's meals.

Fat parents usually have fat kids and I don't believe it's entirely genetic.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

"In 1965, hormonal regulation looked like this: at least 8 hormones that worked to release
fat from the adipose(fat) tissue and one, insulin, that worked to put (store) it there."

Hormones that promote fat motabilization: Epinephrine, Norepinephrine, ATCH, Glucagon, Thyroid-stimulating hormone, Melanocyte-stimulating hormone, Vasopressin, and Growth hormone

Hormones that promote fat accumulation: Insulin

Science has known almost 50 years what causes fat accumulation, yet Insulin spiking ingredients are laced in 95&#37; of all items in the grocery store. The 5% of items that do not have insulin spiking ingredients (unprocessed fresh fruit, veggies, meat, nuts) are the most expensive. The average family would probably have to double their food budget in order to avoid insulin spiking foods. Lower income folks are at an AUTOMATIC disadvantage with regards to obesity. If you are food stamps you are looking to maximize VOLUME of food for your dollar vs. nutritional value. However since most people are willfully ignorant about nutrition, calories, micro/macro nutrients, insulin response etc....result: fatty fat sheeple everywhere regardless of income status.

 

[piasabird]

All cell phones must be destroyed. Texting must be abolished. How about a tax credit for purchasing bicycles? Build public schools in multiple buildings so children have to walk farther. Instead of reading programs we need more bike paths and walking programs. Walk 100 miles and you get a free box of oatmeal cookies.

 

[piasabird]

You need enough Insulin to keep you alive. It is not necessarily a bad thing. One thing that is going on is that we dont really know that much about nutrition. One reason for this is there are so many things like medicine, water, alcohol, and other things like Air and pollution that our bodies take in every day. It could be that taking too many ati-biotics causes diabetes or an inability to process certain nutrients. We have to learn to treat the whole body and not just the symptoms.

 

[Atreus21]

Is anyone here a registered dietitian? An expert opinion would be valuable.

My knowledge is what I'm gaining second hand from my wife's nutrition class.

Seems to me that alot of this problem would be solved by better parenting: cooking and eating meals at home. Would benefit the parents and the children.

While I resist tax-increases in general, I'm not opposed to the government using taxes as a tool of incentives in some circumstances. Taxing fast-food joints in some way for having extremely high calorie content in certain meals seems reasonable. You could hand that job to the FDA. Don't they already inspect places that serve food?

 

[IceBergSLiM]

You need enough Insulin to keep you alive. It is not necessarily a bad thing. One thing that is going on is that we dont really know that much about nutrition. One reason for this is there are so many things like medicine, water, alcohol, and other things like Air and pollution that our bodies take in every day. It could be that taking too many ati-biotics causes diabetes or an inability to process certain nutrients. We have to learn to treat the whole body and not just the symptoms.

Not much. Eskimos lived off diets of almost exclusively fish.

 

[Anarchist420]

A Federal anti-obesity campaign will make it even worse. For one thing, corn is subsidized by the Federal government, so that's why there is so much corn syrup in everything.

Also, the calorie listings are a form of corporate welfare, not to prevent people from getting fat.

 

[DirthNader]

In the case of this study, BMI is being used for its intended purpose - modelling large samples of the population and drawing general conclusions.

People get sensitive about BMI because it's often used in the wrong way, as an evalution of an indivudual's health. If my health premiums start going up because of my personal BMI, then yeah, I'm gonna protest. I'm 6'1", 195, bench over 300, ran my last half marathon under two hours, have visible abs and serratus, etc. Overweight by BMI, but not common sense.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

A Federal anti-obesity campaign will make it even worse. For one thing, corn is subsidized by the Federal government, so that's why there is so much corn syrup in everything.

Also, the calorie listings are a form of corporate welfare, not to prevent people from getting fat.

Its scary looking at labels in the grocery store, I was looking for just plain frozen veggies and half the name brands had corn syrup or sugar as an ingredient for frozen veggies....really? Why? Salad dressings do not need corn syrup yet its there. Tomato sauce does not need corn syrup yet its there. The list goes on and on.

 

[Thump553]

According to a news story I saw last night, here in CT we are #3, but if you took our current numbers and went back a decade we would be high among the fatties.

That graphic that 1prophet posted above at #52 is pretty eye opening. Much as it is easy to blame the internet, extra large sodas (when I was a kid a normal Coke was a 7 oz bottle), the internet, the simple fact is to quote the esteemed philospher Pogo "We have met the enemy and he is us."

 

[IceBergSLiM]

There are so many ways for a human to have a balanced diet it's astonishing. The idea that there is an 'ideal' diet is absurd. From my research on human evolution, one of the most salient trends for millions of years is a steady increase in the array of stuff we can eat. Tool use opened up legion previously inaccessible foods like nuts and bone marrow. Hunting/trapping added meat to an already diverse primate diet. Cooking added even more vegetables and made meat safer. Domestication made loads of foods more nutritious. Humans have a greater dietary breadth than any other mammal alive on this planet. "Eat like a pig" should really be "eat like a human" - because with the right processing, we can eat nearly anything that's organic and not spoiled. Hell, even some spoiled foods can be made safe by cooking and palatable with a condiment, haha.

so as long as we don't get immediately ill from eating its ok? I'm pretty sure the premise of this whole thread negates that.

 

[TheSlamma]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jul/7/colorado-tops-us-as-least-obese-state-district-fin/

Colorado least obese again. Mass pork eating Mississippi most obese again

 

[spidey07]

You can't just blame the schools when parents are still providing the majority of a child's meals.

Fat parents usually have fat kids and I don't believe it's entirely genetic.

But the parents aren't providing the majority of the kids meals. Free school food covers breakfast, lunch and many times dinner or take home food. Same goes for summer when they aren't in session.