If it was so easy there wouldn't be an obesity problem. I'm leery of government regulation but we're not going to wish this problem away.
I agree. However, obesity IS easily controlled by self-control. The self-control part is the hard part.
just to clarify, i don't think the CDC is doing this to dictate what we should eat. i gathered from some of the posts in here that people think the CDC is alienating one's right to pig out. what they're doing is a behavioral study whose results will be used to help prevention efforts, like making sure school kids are educated on the importance of a balanced diet and exercise program or having the proper choices at vending machines and such. IMO, the epidemic of obesity is a combination of behavioral characterists and genetics, so this should be a good start on the CDC's part, in the very least.
You can eat the same amount of non-fattening food as you can fattening food and not get fat. If they really don't know how bad the food is that they are eating, then self-control is pointless. It was a real eye-opener when I found out exactly what it takes for me not to gain weight. Basically I can not eat anything.
Firstly, I want to start by letting everybody know that I am NOT obese, so this is an unbiased opinion. Obesity can be caused by a number of factors. Some things to note: 1. Sedintary, stressful lifestyle, particularly for executives. 2. Most of the food in this country is crap. Even a lot of the "healthy" foods have a lot of filler instead of nutrition. A lot of people will then eat more in order to attempt to satisfy their body. 3. A shocking frequency of thyroid dysfunction. I learned of this because my wife is a class away from a masters in public health. Nobody seems to know why the frequency is what it is. All that is known is that when the thyroid levels are brought to within normal levels through medication, these people drift towards a normal weight. Carry on with the reading of books by their cover.
There's this new study that confirms a correlation between obesity and the lack of sleep. Not much is known why, but sleep deals with seratonin and seratonin and other neurotransmitters are responsible for appetite. Americans are known for incurring huge sleep debts. If Americans had more free time, less would resort to cheap and convenient fast food and more could walk instead of driving 5 minutes to the grocer. Then again, with adequate time and preparation, there wouldn't be a billion dollar industry built upon magic pills and secret diet plans hinged upon temporary short term results.
So basically it's: 1. By choice. 2. By choice. I'm assuming you are talking about food you buy at restaurants and fast food joints. Not food that you make yourself. 3. By choice. Thyroid dysfunction is probably the effect of over-eating. Humans aren't used to eating so much food, and some people's body can't deal with it properly. Maybe we judge this problem as a simple problem because it is a simple problem. The answer is the hard part...for some.
Corn. When we look back at that first Thanksgiving, so many years ago, it's tempting to feel bad for the Native Americans, who foolishly welcomed the Pilgrims and were subsequently violently massacred and given smallpox by the White Invaders from Europe. There's some merit to this point of view, but there is at least some small ironic satisfaction in knowing that the natives introduced the Europeans to the substance which may yet be their downfall -- corn. Corn is not inherently bad. There's a lot to be said for it. It's a hardy plant that grows with relative ease in a wide variety of climates. It can be served in a wide variety of ways. It can be mass produced affordably and it can be used to make a number of useful derivative products. The question is: Did God in his infinite wisdom mean for every living thing on the planet to eat corn as part of every meal, every day, in mass quantities, from children to senior citizens to cows? You see, it's not just gnawing on an ear of corn from the garden. Corn starch is used in virtually every bread or pastry you can buy in a major chain grocery store. And with a few scattered exception, every bread you can buy anywhere else too. Corn starch, syrup and cellulose are used in every medicine you can put in your mouth. Then there's the sugar. Any time you see the simple word sugar on an ingredient list you can substitute "corn syrup." That means in soda, in cookies, in candy bars, even in BAGS OF SUGAR. And not just sugar. Almost every sugar-free sweetener on the market today is made from a corn product. But just because it doesn't taste sugary doesn't mean you're clear. Corn syrup, starch and/or oil is added to french fries, peanut butter, saltines, steak sauce, table salt, margarine, iced tea, fruit juice (even ones that claim to be 100% juice), "raw" honey, fish sticks, soy milk, wine, beer, liquor, chicken nuggets, flour, barley, caramel, Vitamin C, vanilla extract, vinegar and/or yeast. Corn-derived glycerin is found in almost every soap, lotion, toothpaste and shampoo. Anything on the label you can't pronounce is better than even odds to be corn. Considering all this, you would think the corn industry would be a fiercely independent group of farmers who are sitting pretty on the fruits of their labor. Not so! The U.S. corn industry (easily the world leader) gets $5.5 BILLION in federal subsidies, an ample amount of which is kicked back to politicians in the form of campaign contributions, thus perpetuating a system in which the national interest is heavily invested in creating more and more and MORE avenues through which to feed corn to an unsuspecting public. But, amazingly enough, it gets worse. Not satisfied with being the largest single component of the average American's diet, the corn industry genetically modifies its product, sometimes without government supervision, and then distributes the end results to consumers without labeling it. And genetically modified "supercorn" is now sweeping through North America much like Hitler wanted the Aryan strain to sweep over Europe. GM corn has already profoundly damaged Mexico's native "wild" strains of corn. Pretty soon, there won't be any unaltered corn left, even for comparison purposes. All this would be bad enough on the face of it. The human metabolism and digestive system craves variety. Too much of the same thing is bad, especially when that thing — corn — is so undigestible that the unprocessed kernels will pass untouched through your entire digestive system to emerge whole and unscathed in your feces. In this paradigm, people are only a little better off than cattle. Almost every chicken, pig and cow in the United States is force-fed corn. Even salmon! Alas, these animals can't properly digest a diet of all corn (not to mention the massive amounts of pesticides used to keep the corn bug free). So the livestock gets sick. That sickness is treated by antibiotics and hormones which then bleed into virtually every piece of meat or cup of milk served in America, making the people who consume them sick. Now, if it's really bad for cows -- who have THREE stomachs -- to eat nothing but corn, what is it doing to those of us with only ONE stomach? The corn lobby, one of the most powerful in American politics, does not want to see that question answered. Not surprisingly, there has been little research done on the topic at our fine government supported universities and research labs. Scratch "little." There are NO studies covering the broad societal issue. What little information HAS trickled out is pretty alarming. The most obvious health effect of the corn glut is obesity. Granted, with a few exceptions, most people who are overweight have only themselves to blame. But we live in a world where the food industry spends millions of dollars marketing sugar (aka corn syrup) to PRE-SCHOOLERS. Food manufacturers hire people with doctorates in child psychology to help them outsmart four-year-olds (and their parents). You can even buy corn puffs coated with corn syrup, made expressly for kindergarten kids. The processed sugar game leads to its own complications, including hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia. The symptoms for each of these disorders, interestingly enough, can be alleviated by eating more sugar, much like the symptoms for heroin withdrawal can be treated by taking heroin. Drug guru Terence McKenna long argued that refined sugar easily fits the technical definition of an addictive drug — after all, it's harmful to your health and you suffer withdrawal symptoms if you try to quit using it. Nevertheless, heroin is considered "bad" but extraneous sugar (aka corn) is included in food and medicine products aimed at ONE-YEAR-OLDS. Other possible effects of excessive corn consumption include diabetes (related to the aforementioned hypoglycemia), heart disease and tooth decay. An unknown number of people additionally suffer from corn allergies. The reason the number is unknown is that it's difficult to remove all the corn from your diet to test the premise (especially if you eliminate corn-fed meat and corn-treated meat products). And if you somehow succeed in doing so, you will find that you have incidentally have removed virtually everything else from your diet as well. So what does the future hold? More corn, in all likelihood. The U.S. government is putting out something on the order of $20 billion in farm subsidies a year, the most concentrated portion of which goes for corn. Bush administration Health and Human Services director Tommy Thompson, the overweight man purportedly in charge of keeping the nation healthy, told ABC News in 2003 that the gigantic corn subsidies don't affect nutrition for Americans. You see, he explained, "the subsidy programs are things that are done through Congress." He didn't complete the thought, but we'll do it for him: "Naturally, anything done by Congress can't possibly have an effect on real people." http://www.rotten.com/library/medicine/corn/ Not the best source, but I'm in a hurry and it gets the point across. People do not know what they are eating.
Do you live in a cave? There is a truckload of evidence that certain folks are genetically predisposed to retain fat more than others. This is like saying dyslexic people choose not to be able to read -- they just have to study harder....
That argument doesn't have much substance. Obesity is an effect of a cause: over-eating. Dyslexia is a disability which causes people to have difficulty to read and process words. If the genetic factors that lead to obesity are so powerful, please point out the people in Africa and Asia that are obese. There aren't any because you need food to become obese. You don't magically become obese because of 'genetic factors'. Of course, people's metabolisms are different, but it's up to them to control their weight: self-control. Also, if the 'genetic factors' are so powerful, why aren't the people in Europe as fat as Americans? Genetically, people in Europe have the same genes as white Americans, yet they aren't fat. Again, your argument doesn't hold.
I don't know about Euros, but Asian youths are becoming fatter with the inception of McDonalds and global fast food. Check out the remaining Native American tribes. They used to be one of the fittest cultures on the planet. Now their populations are racked with chronic diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, and high cholesterol because their diet now includes cheap and easily accessible highly fatty and processed foods.
I agree. However, SamFisher was arguing that genetics was the cause, as if self-control had nothing to do with it. Becoming obese is a choice, harder for some than for others. Everyone here has an option of buying their own groceries and making their own food. They all have the option of walking 20 minutes a day. Is it hard to do if you have work and children? Sure it is. But you can just eat less. It's all a choice.
But you have to be very well educated about your choices and exactly what you should eat. I doubt if most people even know.
Not if your metabolic rate is screwed up due to genetics. Metabolism is the process which the body (cells) uses to break down substances and produce energy. The energy produced is used for bodily functions such as breathing, heartbeat, temperature control, and yes even in the metabolic process too. It also yields energy one would uses for activities such as running, walking, etc. So if one person yields more energy than another than voila they'll proabably burn more calories and fat easier than another too. As Sam also said some people are just more prone to store or retain more fat than others, which may or may be related to their metabolism and it may not. Bottom line, I don't think Sam was ruling out your "choice" theory he was just stating it isn't everybody's "choice" and I think it is foolish for you to say it is completely one's "choice" as well and other factors that are beyond one's control have nothing to do with it.
Is US the only country on earth (or one of the very few) that has drive-through window service in every fast food restaurant? I always wonder why these folks can't get their lazy (fat) asses out of their cars to order junk food. They are doing a double-whammy to their well-beings - voluntarily shunning a moderate exercise routine while consuming unhealthy food. On top of that, these folks are doing a double-whammy disservice to our nation - consider how much fuel is wasted everyday and the amount of harmful gases emitted from those vehicles waiting in line and/or slowly passing through the drive-through lanes. I say Congress should enact a law either eliminating all drive-through services, or imposing hefty taxes on drive-through merchant activities.
I don't doubt that certain people may be more predisposed to obesity on some genetic level. But how does that explain the rise in obesity rates? Are those with the unfortunate "obese gene" reproducing at higher rates than others? As someone mentioned, the problem seems more endemic to the US. Is the genetic pool of the US more predisposed to obesity than that of Europe or Canada? There may be a few isolated cases of screwed up metabolism, but I do not think the vast majority of obesity cases can be attributed to this.
Why do you all keep bringing up Europe? Scotland just reported a rapid rise in obesity rates, 1 out of every 5 children is now the number there. 1 out of every 5 15 year old is obese in Britain and the rate is twice as high for 6 year olds. The WHO announced in March that more than half the populations of Spain, Denmark, Italy, and Russia are over-weight as well as Australia, Mexico, and Brazil. They also reported rising obesity rates in Egypt, South Africa, Papua New Guinea and Guatemala, China, and South Korea. The U.S. may lead the world in obesity rates but we certainly are not alone.
