|
On September 08 2009 13:39 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2009 12:43 29 fps wrote:
phelps eats 10k+, but that's because he's a super athlete. maybe windcalibur is a super athlete also.
and japan's not all healthy stuff, although healthy options are always available, even as side dishes in restaurants. the salads that go with the meals are often drowned in sauce, so it seems healthy, but it really isn't. you could probably ask for it without the sauce if you want Phelps doesn't eat 10,000 calories a day. Most body builders only eat 5,000 to 6,000 a day and that's mostly protein. There's no way anyone eats 10,000 a day and isn't in severe metabolic trouble.
self-owned? this shit was so last year, everyone's mom knows it by rumor.
http://www.yumsugar.com/1862903
|
All of a sudden my beer belly doesn't seem like such a big problem after all!
Man, These people amaze me. They really ought to have seen trouble brewing at least a year or so earlier than they did, sigh ><
|
|
|
On September 08 2009 13:41 anch wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2009 13:39 Aegraen wrote:On September 08 2009 12:43 29 fps wrote:
phelps eats 10k+, but that's because he's a super athlete. maybe windcalibur is a super athlete also.
and japan's not all healthy stuff, although healthy options are always available, even as side dishes in restaurants. the salads that go with the meals are often drowned in sauce, so it seems healthy, but it really isn't. you could probably ask for it without the sauce if you want Phelps doesn't eat 10,000 calories a day. Most body builders only eat 5,000 to 6,000 a day and that's mostly protein. There's no way anyone eats 10,000 a day and isn't in severe metabolic trouble. self-owned? this shit was so last year, everyone's mom knows it by rumor. http://www.yumsugar.com/1862903
If you listen he doesn't say he eats 8-10k a day, he said he was told to eat that much. He's more than likely eating between 4,000 to 7,000 a day. I could also be wrong, but I very much doubt it. I'm being dead serious on this, because bodybuilders only eat between 4,000 to 6,000 a day and we eat between 5 to 6 meals a day (includes shakes in between meals and substituting shakes (1,000++) for meals).
Look at 47 seconds if you don't believe me.
|
Once again aegraen proves he has no idea what he's talking about and can't tell the difference between aerobic and anaerobic exercises.
|
|
|
What would happen if you cut the amount of food he eats in half? Would his body go through some sort of shock?
|
On September 08 2009 03:05 Snet wrote:
Certainly it's absurd to let yourself go like that, but it doesn't make him some kind of freak. Just hearing the way he interacts with his parents and the doctors, he's extremely sweet and polite.
People don't understand that you don't just suddenly become that fat. It happens over a long process and it can happen so slow that you don't realize how big you've gotten until someone points it out to you. It's like meeting up with someone you haven't seen in a few years, they will be like "oh you look soooo different", wtf I thought I looked the same?
After a certain amount of time it is so easy to get the idea that, "it's too late, I'm already 400lbs +, I will never be skinny again... why even try?" And that's how they build up to 600-800 and when they realize they will soon no longer be able to walk or move is when they do drastic things like these surgeries.
I believe it is the parents fault. It is your job to raise your child so that he/she has an understanding of the world and will be able to take care of themselves. This man was most likely exposed to unhealthy eating the second he came into this world - he never knew any better. Now he is old enough to think for himself and he's thinking, "My god... what have I done to my body?"
Even the healthy food he eats is destroyed by toppings. "My son likes healthy food too, like brocoli, but only if it has cheese on top... everyone loves cheese!" I bet his salads are covered in bacon bits, eggs, turkey and ham diced up, drenched in dressing, and with enough croutons to be its own meal.
The real travesty here is parents bringing children in to this world when they can't even take care of themselves. Then they refuse to listen to the advice of others. The mother even said "People ask me why I spoil him with food like I do, I just tell them its love. I love him" Just absolutely disgusting.
I agree with the bolded very much so. Not that I ever got that fat, or anywhere near it. But you don't realize it until someone says something, or you see a picture of yourself from when you weighed less, you don't realize that you're gaining all that weight.
I'm amazed the kid has the ability to walk, though.
|
On September 08 2009 14:38 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2009 03:05 Snet wrote:
Certainly it's absurd to let yourself go like that, but it doesn't make him some kind of freak. Just hearing the way he interacts with his parents and the doctors, he's extremely sweet and polite.
People don't understand that you don't just suddenly become that fat. It happens over a long process and it can happen so slow that you don't realize how big you've gotten until someone points it out to you. It's like meeting up with someone you haven't seen in a few years, they will be like "oh you look soooo different", wtf I thought I looked the same?
After a certain amount of time it is so easy to get the idea that, "it's too late, I'm already 400lbs +, I will never be skinny again... why even try?" And that's how they build up to 600-800 and when they realize they will soon no longer be able to walk or move is when they do drastic things like these surgeries.
I believe it is the parents fault. It is your job to raise your child so that he/she has an understanding of the world and will be able to take care of themselves. This man was most likely exposed to unhealthy eating the second he came into this world - he never knew any better. Now he is old enough to think for himself and he's thinking, "My god... what have I done to my body?"
Even the healthy food he eats is destroyed by toppings. "My son likes healthy food too, like brocoli, but only if it has cheese on top... everyone loves cheese!" I bet his salads are covered in bacon bits, eggs, turkey and ham diced up, drenched in dressing, and with enough croutons to be its own meal.
The real travesty here is parents bringing children in to this world when they can't even take care of themselves. Then they refuse to listen to the advice of others. The mother even said "People ask me why I spoil him with food like I do, I just tell them its love. I love him" Just absolutely disgusting. I agree with the bolded very much so. Not that I ever got that fat, or anywhere near it. But you don't realize it until someone says something, or you see a picture of yourself from when you weighed less, you don't realize that you're gaining all that weight. I'm amazed the kid has the ability to walk, though.
I also agree with this. I gained about 70 pounds over 4 years in university, and have only just now lost it all. (Took a year and a bit). I look at pictures of myself even 5-6 months ago and I go WHOA wtf... I found my student card picture for my final year and I remember thinking back that I didn't look that fat... but wow, do I ever look fat. 
Feels so good to finally be in good shape again. This kid can do it if he puts some effort into it. It may take him 4-5 years or so though.
|
On September 08 2009 14:24 SingletonWilliam wrote:
What would happen if you cut the amount of food he eats in half? Would his body go through some sort of shock?
They cut him down to 1/8th, so my guess is no.
Really fat people normally just disgust me, but this kid makes me sad. Sad that parents can do that to their kids and not even realize it.
|
On September 08 2009 14:38 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2009 03:05 Snet wrote:
Certainly it's absurd to let yourself go like that, but it doesn't make him some kind of freak. Just hearing the way he interacts with his parents and the doctors, he's extremely sweet and polite.
People don't understand that you don't just suddenly become that fat. It happens over a long process and it can happen so slow that you don't realize how big you've gotten until someone points it out to you. It's like meeting up with someone you haven't seen in a few years, they will be like "oh you look soooo different", wtf I thought I looked the same?
After a certain amount of time it is so easy to get the idea that, "it's too late, I'm already 400lbs +, I will never be skinny again... why even try?" And that's how they build up to 600-800 and when they realize they will soon no longer be able to walk or move is when they do drastic things like these surgeries.
I believe it is the parents fault. It is your job to raise your child so that he/she has an understanding of the world and will be able to take care of themselves. This man was most likely exposed to unhealthy eating the second he came into this world - he never knew any better. Now he is old enough to think for himself and he's thinking, "My god... what have I done to my body?"
Even the healthy food he eats is destroyed by toppings. "My son likes healthy food too, like brocoli, but only if it has cheese on top... everyone loves cheese!" I bet his salads are covered in bacon bits, eggs, turkey and ham diced up, drenched in dressing, and with enough croutons to be its own meal.
The real travesty here is parents bringing children in to this world when they can't even take care of themselves. Then they refuse to listen to the advice of others. The mother even said "People ask me why I spoil him with food like I do, I just tell them its love. I love him" Just absolutely disgusting. I agree with the bolded very much so. Not that I ever got that fat, or anywhere near it. But you don't realize it until someone says something, or you see a picture of yourself from when you weighed less, you don't realize that you're gaining all that weight. I'm amazed the kid has the ability to walk, though.
I can't imagine how fucked up his knees are right now. That kind of weight must be devastating on your joints.
|
and now with public health care coming the taxpayers get to help pay for all his medical bills, awesome.
|
On September 08 2009 10:17 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2009 09:18 nomsayin wrote:On September 08 2009 09:11 micronesia wrote:On September 08 2009 09:08 Aegraen wrote:On September 08 2009 09:04 micronesia wrote:On September 08 2009 08:59 Aegraen wrote:On September 08 2009 07:52 micronesia wrote:On September 08 2009 07:23 nomsayin wrote:On September 08 2009 07:19 FabledIntegral wrote:
Why do people want to tax fatty foods?
Since when should they decide what's best for my own body. I'm responsible for my own damn body, it's not my fault other people are idiots and can't control themselves. Now I have to pay extra because the government deems I "shouldn't be consuming that type of food"? Fuck that, fuck the government in that case. They don't believe in reason, and they don't believe that anyone can decide what's best for themselves. They believe that people must be forced to do what is in the best interest of the group. The government already does this with alcohol and cigarettes and it's absolutely disgusting. I realize that there is a case for taxing cigarettes because of the harm done from second hand smoke, but that doesn't apply to alcohol. What about the numerous innocent people who are killed by drunk drivers on a regular basis? Since when is the State, the person who got killed? Do these taxes go to recompense the innocent people killed by Drunk Drivers? No, it goes to the State and funnelled into whatever government program, entitlement, or finds its way into the bloated innocuous Federal Government. The taxes never actually go to the families of the loved ones that were killed, albeit, not directly, and in many cases not even indirectly. Wouldn't the logical arguement for this, would be to take the drunk driver to court for externality damages in a reasonable amount for lost wages? If the drunk driver end up dying also, then you can transfer the remaining estate in balance. There needs to be no tax whatsoever and in fact, none of this tax money is used to pay the victims. You have made the perfect case for the abolishment of many Government operations, and the abolishment of taxation. Take a second and logically think about what you just said. If you are truely for the payment to the innocent for the actions of the drunk driver then you cannot be for taxation on alcohol, rather you should be for civil courts, and other associated entities that actually provide remuneration for damages. I guess you skipped the post where I pointed out that I just said that in response to the claim that smoking is different than alcohol in this regard. I have not actually taken a stance on taxation. Smoking is different. You are causing damage to persons around you by smoking. Where as with alcohol, there are no externalities associated (Pollution, etc.). Smoking is the same as smoot being produced from a factory causing damages to a third party three miles away. The factory is still liabel for the damages caused, just as the person should be liabel for damages caused to third parties in the process of smoking. I might add, what are the damages to third parties (For clarification the two parties are the buyer and seller), who are unassociated with either the consumption or the producer (The seller in this case)? I'm merely providing a more articulate response which is echoing nomsayin's original thought. I'm actually curious to hear your response how a product that produces an externality is the same as one that doesn't. 99% of second hand smoke is preventable the same way 99% of alcohol-related atrocities are preventable. You are making it seem like second-hand smoke is inherent to people choosing to smoke which is as ridiculous to me as if I were to claim that drunk driving accidents are inherent to alcohol consumption. It is inherent to people choosing to smoke as long as it is done in public. Consuming alcohol does not directly hurt anyone, except maybe the consumer. Smoking a cigarette can directly hurt other people, the victims of the pollution of the air. If I were to sit next to you at a park and smoke a cigarette, I would be hurting you with my pollution. If I sat next to at a park and I drank a beer, there is no harm done to you. Then don't smoke in public? Instead of standing in the doorway to the bowling alley, go around to the back where there is nobody except for smokers? Instead of smoking in the kitchen, do it in another room near an open window? Don't sit down next to me on a park bench? If you want to avoid giving other people second-hand smoke you can.... same way most people can avoid allowing alcohol to hurt other people if they so choose (not getting into impaired judgment). Show nested quote +On September 08 2009 09:18 Aegraen wrote:On September 08 2009 09:11 micronesia wrote:On September 08 2009 09:08 Aegraen wrote:On September 08 2009 09:04 micronesia wrote:On September 08 2009 08:59 Aegraen wrote:On September 08 2009 07:52 micronesia wrote:On September 08 2009 07:23 nomsayin wrote:On September 08 2009 07:19 FabledIntegral wrote:
Why do people want to tax fatty foods?
Since when should they decide what's best for my own body. I'm responsible for my own damn body, it's not my fault other people are idiots and can't control themselves. Now I have to pay extra because the government deems I "shouldn't be consuming that type of food"? Fuck that, fuck the government in that case. They don't believe in reason, and they don't believe that anyone can decide what's best for themselves. They believe that people must be forced to do what is in the best interest of the group. The government already does this with alcohol and cigarettes and it's absolutely disgusting. I realize that there is a case for taxing cigarettes because of the harm done from second hand smoke, but that doesn't apply to alcohol. What about the numerous innocent people who are killed by drunk drivers on a regular basis? Since when is the State, the person who got killed? Do these taxes go to recompense the innocent people killed by Drunk Drivers? No, it goes to the State and funnelled into whatever government program, entitlement, or finds its way into the bloated innocuous Federal Government. The taxes never actually go to the families of the loved ones that were killed, albeit, not directly, and in many cases not even indirectly. Wouldn't the logical arguement for this, would be to take the drunk driver to court for externality damages in a reasonable amount for lost wages? If the drunk driver end up dying also, then you can transfer the remaining estate in balance. There needs to be no tax whatsoever and in fact, none of this tax money is used to pay the victims. You have made the perfect case for the abolishment of many Government operations, and the abolishment of taxation. Take a second and logically think about what you just said. If you are truely for the payment to the innocent for the actions of the drunk driver then you cannot be for taxation on alcohol, rather you should be for civil courts, and other associated entities that actually provide remuneration for damages. I guess you skipped the post where I pointed out that I just said that in response to the claim that smoking is different than alcohol in this regard. I have not actually taken a stance on taxation. Smoking is different. You are causing damage to persons around you by smoking. Where as with alcohol, there are no externalities associated (Pollution, etc.). Smoking is the same as smoot being produced from a factory causing damages to a third party three miles away. The factory is still liabel for the damages caused, just as the person should be liabel for damages caused to third parties in the process of smoking. I might add, what are the damages to third parties (For clarification the two parties are the buyer and seller), who are unassociated with either the consumption or the producer (The seller in this case)? I'm merely providing a more articulate response which is echoing nomsayin's original thought. I'm actually curious to hear your response how a product that produces an externality is the same as one that doesn't. 99% of second hand smoke is preventable the same way 99% of alcohol-related atrocities are preventable. You are making it seem like second-hand smoke is inherent to people choosing to smoke which is as ridiculous to me as if I were to claim that drunk driving accidents are inherent to alcohol consumption. You are causing damage to persons around you by smoking.I am truely in awe of how you prevent people around you from breathing in the smoke that you exhale. I'm truely curious, how may I prevent second-hand smoke from those who are smoking around me? (Don't even say Gas Mask!) Read above. Individual smokers don't make a big dent in overall air quality if you stay away from other people. Smoke in your house by yourself or in your room near an open window. Smoke in a place outside that is away from other people. Then, when you drink, do so responsibly and avoid things like driving while drunk or getting into bar fights. How are these issues so fundamentally different?
They may not make a big dent overall, but they do. I would prefer it were illegal to smoke in public, but if it isn't then the next best thing is taxing cigarettes. They are fundamentally different in that the act of smoking hurts those around you, while the act of drinking does not.
|
whats sad is how many thousands of people die from hunger everyday yet theres people this size :\
|
On September 08 2009 15:25 lazz wrote:
and now with public health care coming the taxpayers get to help pay for all his medical bills, awesome.
but the chosen one says it's the best thing for the us! how could he possibly do us wrong!?!?
|
On September 08 2009 09:22 nomsayin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2009 09:20 PanN wrote:On September 08 2009 08:27 number1gog wrote:
I'm surprised the public healthcare debate hasn't filtered into this thread yet. Well I'll take care of that!
When this kid's body starts breaking down (probably his heart from pushing his blood around the world and back lol), why should my tax dollars pay for his medical bills? Should we integrate a program where mandatory amounts of exercise and proper nutrition are required to be eligible for public health care so that cases like this don't drain the system? Mandatory exercise or proper nutrition? Ridiculous. Exactly. I believe those were rhetorical questions.
They were, but it I wish the opposite were true. I really do wish some politician had the balls to stand up and say "It would cost us less money in the long run to pay for physical education programs now than it would bypasses later."
Heck, if Nada can get ripped and Leta can be a Hapkido badass while being starcraft professionals, then why can't the average American do the same?
|
10387 Posts
On September 08 2009 15:36 number1gog wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2009 09:22 nomsayin wrote:On September 08 2009 09:20 PanN wrote:On September 08 2009 08:27 number1gog wrote:
I'm surprised the public healthcare debate hasn't filtered into this thread yet. Well I'll take care of that!
When this kid's body starts breaking down (probably his heart from pushing his blood around the world and back lol), why should my tax dollars pay for his medical bills? Should we integrate a program where mandatory amounts of exercise and proper nutrition are required to be eligible for public health care so that cases like this don't drain the system? Mandatory exercise or proper nutrition? Ridiculous. Exactly. I believe those were rhetorical questions. They were, but it I wish the opposite were true. I really do wish some politician had the balls to stand up and say "It would cost us less money in the long run to pay for physical education programs now than it would bypasses later." Heck, if Nada can get ripped and Leta can be a Hapkido badass while being starcraft professionals, then why can't the average American do the same?
4 year required PE would be so lol.. If they designed the class properly without making me do stupid shit it would be great, but it would still be a pain in the ass.. Plus there's the problem of people not trying anyways -_- America is so full of lazy people..
|
On September 08 2009 12:02 Manifesto7 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2009 11:57 MK wrote:
Japanese food is the best : eat all you can but never get fat. ... I dunno man, I mean if you are eating your grandmothers cooking maybe, but Japan has a lot of unhealthy shit. Kushikatsu anyone?
Right.
Actually, come to think again, it's really a problem of portion.
Now I'm used to it but I remember when I was just coming back from NYC, I had to order like twice omori every sets in every restaurants.
(BUT, JP also eat more vegetable, right ? )
Damn, makes me hungry, gonna have a gyudon.
|
30000 Calories?
That's enough food to feed a small village in Africa.
I don't see this guy living very long.
|
After reading basically the entire thread, and watching the entire documentary, I really want to know what happened to this guy. 'He' (more liek they) pretty much 'lost' (more liek removed) half of his weight. I searched on YouTube but it's all videos making fun of him.
Also towards the end of the documentary it was very refreshing to see the mother finally taking a stand and telling him what's what. I have a feeling that didn't last very long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
