|
On March 07 2012 03:40 CyDe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 03:30 Stratos_speAr wrote:On March 07 2012 03:08 antelope591 wrote:
Kids being obese is 100% the parents fault.....and these are the same parents who will protest against these campaigns to help spare their kids precious feelings then go out and buy them McDonalds for lunch every day. Maybe if you fed your child healthy food and made them go out and exercise instead of sitting around watching TV all day they wouldn't be fucking obese. To me obesity will NEVER be socially acceptable beacuse its pretty much 100% the person's choice. All the bullshit about genetics....maybe 1% are truly obese because of genes. If you have the dedication you can lose the weight. I'm not talking about obese as in a few pounds overweight or people that put on some weight when they're older. I'm talking about the people who are walking around at 300 pounds at 30 years old blaming the world for their obesity then passing their shitty habits on to their kids. These people deserve whatever's coming to them. Stop and think about the bolded part for a second. Something that is 100% a personal choice that doesn't affect you. And because of this you think it isn't socially acceptable. I hope you're beginning to feel as disturbed as I am with what you just wrote. Personally, by the way, the main issue for me here is the fact that it is getting put out there that being fat is okay. It really isn't, and people riding easy because society deems it insensitive to point out something to them is just counter productive. You people disturb me. Yea, being fat is unhealthy, and we should educate everyone on this fact, but where the fuck did you get the power to tell someone that it isn't ok for them to make the conscious decision to be happy being fat, knowing the health risks? Okay. I guess I mispoke, and you misinterpreted. I do not mean that anyone who is fat is evil and should be abolished. What I despise is that no one is being frank. There is all this political correctness to get around, and by the time you can actually get a decent message across it is hardly understandable by the average person. Another thing is that many people who are obese may claim they are completely happy with their weight, but it is like asking a drunk man if he is happy. They may be eating to cope, and the happiness may just be a passing thing which is a product of this food they are over-consuming.
Being drunk is a state of being mentally impaired. Being fat is not, and to make that comparison is insulting to fat people who are actually happy being fat. Sure, overeating can be a coping mechanism for emotional problems, but just being overweight isn't indicative of that at all.
|
On March 07 2012 03:40 CyDe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 03:30 Stratos_speAr wrote:On March 07 2012 03:08 antelope591 wrote:
Kids being obese is 100% the parents fault.....and these are the same parents who will protest against these campaigns to help spare their kids precious feelings then go out and buy them McDonalds for lunch every day. Maybe if you fed your child healthy food and made them go out and exercise instead of sitting around watching TV all day they wouldn't be fucking obese. To me obesity will NEVER be socially acceptable beacuse its pretty much 100% the person's choice. All the bullshit about genetics....maybe 1% are truly obese because of genes. If you have the dedication you can lose the weight. I'm not talking about obese as in a few pounds overweight or people that put on some weight when they're older. I'm talking about the people who are walking around at 300 pounds at 30 years old blaming the world for their obesity then passing their shitty habits on to their kids. These people deserve whatever's coming to them. Stop and think about the bolded part for a second. Something that is 100% a personal choice that doesn't affect you. And because of this you think it isn't socially acceptable. I hope you're beginning to feel as disturbed as I am with what you just wrote. Personally, by the way, the main issue for me here is the fact that it is getting put out there that being fat is okay. It really isn't, and people riding easy because society deems it insensitive to point out something to them is just counter productive. You people disturb me. Yea, being fat is unhealthy, and we should educate everyone on this fact, but where the fuck did you get the power to tell someone that it isn't ok for them to make the conscious decision to be happy being fat, knowing the health risks? Okay. I guess I mispoke, and you misinterpreted. I do not mean that anyone who is fat is evil and should be abolished. What I despise is that no one is being frank. There is all this political correctness to get around, and by the time you can actually get a decent message across it is hardly understandable by the average person. Another thing is that many people who are obese may claim they are completely happy with their weight, but it is like asking a drunk man if he is happy. They may be eating to cope, and the happiness may just be a passing thing which is a product of this food they are over-consuming.
You seem to confuse happiness with being happy about ones weight. I have family members that have struggled with their weight their entire lifes and you'd be hardpressed to find happier people. That doesn't mean they wouldn't like to lose some weight.
|
On March 07 2012 03:44 seppolevne wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 03:34 sc2superfan101 wrote:On March 07 2012 03:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 07 2012 03:25 sc2superfan101 wrote:On March 07 2012 03:19 KainiT wrote:
What I think is funny is that fat people often tned to get sympathies in society but if someone is too thin he just gets shit everywhere ->"he/she is probably mentally ill/cannot deal with his/her own body"
In the mass media you often even read words like "frightening" when some society reporter describes someone that he thinks to be anorexic
some people are just hardgainers and/or feel comfortable with little weight, if you have to tolerate fat people(which is much worse since it's unhealthier, uglier(note that we compare very fat with very thin) and hurts society more(takes two seats in public transports, often smells bad cause of sweat that obviously correlates with fatness etc.)) people should also have to tolerate thin people it's more unhealthy to be 5 lbs. underweight than it is to be 50 lbs overweight. neither group should be made fun of or stigmatized as that's rude and bad and not acceptable. anorexia is horribly unhealthy, in fact it's probably the single most unhealthy thing you can do to yourself. the strain on your heart caused by anorexia is far greater than the strain caused by love handles. Seriously? What's the relationship there? Surely that's not a constant rate (being 200 pounds overweight couldn't possibly be better for you than being 20 pounds underweight, right?), is it? Could you post a source please? I'm rather incredulous, but I've never thought about it before, so I'd like to read up on some stats  i don't know, but i'm positive that being 20 lbs underweight is horrendously bad for your body and your heart. in fact, you will probably live a lot longer being 200 lbs overweight than you will being 20 lbs underweight. go look up the health risks associated with being underweight. i remember reading it somewhere in a health book and i asked my doctor and he agreed that in most cases it is much better for you to be overweight than underweight. obviously neither is ideal, but being underweight means that no matter what you cannot be getting enough nutrients to run your body. being overweight, you probably are getting enough nutrients, but are just getting too much. Do you even read your own posts? How did "i don't know, but i'm positive... i remember reading somewhere... i asked my doctor..." sound like good sources to you? Have you ever been to high school? Cite something, quote something, don't FEED US YOUR BULLSHIT. If you don't actually know what you are talking about READ UP and SHUT UP.
I don't see you people arguing against him provide any evidence either. One quick google tells me it's not out of the realm of possibility.
http://www.rttnews.com/Story.aspx?type=cs&ID=1678441&Category=ScienceTechnology&Node=B15
But it is possible that we've lost sight of a more dangerous problem. A new study shows that anorexia may actually be a more lethal psychiatric disorder. While certainly less widespread than obesity, this problem affects thousands of people and could put their lives more immediately at risk than over-eating.
The study published in the Archives of General Psychiatry in July 2011 found that anorexia, and its ability to lead to other mental disorders, has a six-times greater risk of death if not treated early. For an anorexic in his or her 20s, there is an 18-times higher risk of death compared to his or her peers. Dr. Jon Arcelus of the University of Leicester, England, analyzed 36 different studies between 1966-2010 and concluded that there is a rate of 5.1 deaths per one thousand people with anorexia per year.
I found plenty of people arguing this point as well from other sources. Maybe you should read up and shut up?
|
Ok, so to sum up: Anorexia and obesity are bad.
|
United States261 Posts
On March 07 2012 03:04 TanTzoR wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 03:03 Monsen wrote:On March 07 2012 03:01 Akasha wrote:
You know, maybe if Disney gave a shit about their obese customers, they could provide healthier food options. That is actually a very good point. I've never been to Disneyland (neither in RL nor on TL haha)- what do they offer as food/snacks there? In Paris mostly junk food but if you're ready to pay there is some pretty good meals. You can bring your own meal as well.
I searched through both disney sites and they have Americanized ethnic restaurants. I did not see where you could bring your own food. So, I guess if you planned ahead on what you wanted to eat you could have relatively healthy meals. But if you have kids, kids are gonna eat what they get at home so...meh
Americanized = probably huge ass portions.
|
This may be slightly off topic but while we're discussing obesity in America, is it just me or am I the only one who hasn't seen an obese Asian?
Just to clarify, when I mean obese I'm talking in the region of 300 lbs and above. And I'm not here to spark a racism discussion, it's just this quote captured my attention:
Doctors further claimed that obesity can, at most of the times, go all the way down to genetics as well as a variety of other aspects like food and medications can be employed in the form of a mechanism.
In the big city, down to the suburbs, New York or LA, the midwest down to the south. I've been to a lot of cities but I've never actually seen an obese Asian. Fat ones, sure, but never the Michelin-man type.
|
On March 07 2012 03:44 seppolevne wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 03:34 sc2superfan101 wrote:On March 07 2012 03:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 07 2012 03:25 sc2superfan101 wrote:On March 07 2012 03:19 KainiT wrote:
What I think is funny is that fat people often tned to get sympathies in society but if someone is too thin he just gets shit everywhere ->"he/she is probably mentally ill/cannot deal with his/her own body"
In the mass media you often even read words like "frightening" when some society reporter describes someone that he thinks to be anorexic
some people are just hardgainers and/or feel comfortable with little weight, if you have to tolerate fat people(which is much worse since it's unhealthier, uglier(note that we compare very fat with very thin) and hurts society more(takes two seats in public transports, often smells bad cause of sweat that obviously correlates with fatness etc.)) people should also have to tolerate thin people it's more unhealthy to be 5 lbs. underweight than it is to be 50 lbs overweight. neither group should be made fun of or stigmatized as that's rude and bad and not acceptable. anorexia is horribly unhealthy, in fact it's probably the single most unhealthy thing you can do to yourself. the strain on your heart caused by anorexia is far greater than the strain caused by love handles. Seriously? What's the relationship there? Surely that's not a constant rate (being 200 pounds overweight couldn't possibly be better for you than being 20 pounds underweight, right?), is it? Could you post a source please? I'm rather incredulous, but I've never thought about it before, so I'd like to read up on some stats i don't know, but i'm positive that being 20 lbs underweight is horrendously bad for your body and your heart. in fact, you will probably live a lot longer being 200 lbs overweight than you will being 20 lbs underweight. go look up the health risks associated with being underweight. i remember reading it somewhere in a health book and i asked my doctor and he agreed that in most cases it is much better for you to be overweight than underweight. obviously neither is ideal, but being underweight means that no matter what you cannot be getting enough nutrients to run your body. being overweight, you probably are getting enough nutrients, but are just getting too much. Do you even read your own posts? How did "i don't know, but i'm positive... i remember reading somewhere... i asked my doctor..." sound like good sources to you? Have you ever been to high school? Cite something, quote something, don't FEED US YOUR BULLSHIT. If you don't actually know what you are talking about READ UP and SHUT UP.
"i don't know" was in reference to the question: "what is the relationship here?"
"i am positive" was a statement about how being 20 lbs underweight is terribly bad for your body and your heart. i don't know what the relationship is, but am positive that being 20 lbs is terrible for your body and heart. hence the use of the comma after "i don't know".
i believe my doctor is a relatively good source for information on health issues... (note that my doctor just said that, in general, being a little bit underweight is worse for you than being a little bit overweight. as in, being a little bit underweight is more comparable to being a lot overweight. i didn't ask him about the 5 vs 50 thing)
i graduated high school and am currently in college.
i have seen a resounding lack of sources or citations everywhere in this thread. i didn't ask anyone to believe me and this isn't an official argument and i'm not writing in a scientific journal. a simple google search will tell you all you need to know about the risks of being underweight vs. those of being overweight.
what is "BULLSHIT"? i would be glad to hear some sources from you that prove me wrong.
|
On March 07 2012 03:56 Xpace wrote:This may be slightly off topic but while we're discussing obesity in America, is it just me or am I the only one who hasn't seen an obese Asian? Just to clarify, when I mean obese I'm talking in the region of 300 lbs and above. And I'm not here to spark a racism discussion, it's just this quote captured my attention: Show nested quote +Doctors further claimed that obesity can, at most of the times, go all the way down to genetics as well as a variety of other aspects like food and medications can be employed in the form of a mechanism. In the big city, down to the suburbs, New York or LA, the midwest down to the south. I've been to a lot of cities but I've never actually seen an obese Asian. Fat ones, sure, but never the Michelin-man type.
does sumo count?
|
'Underweight' and 'overweight' are not precise terms, so "5lb underweight is worse than 50lb overweight" isn't really a meaningful statement. However, starvation is generally more harmful than obesity.
|
On March 07 2012 03:34 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 03:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 07 2012 03:25 sc2superfan101 wrote:On March 07 2012 03:19 KainiT wrote:
What I think is funny is that fat people often tned to get sympathies in society but if someone is too thin he just gets shit everywhere ->"he/she is probably mentally ill/cannot deal with his/her own body"
In the mass media you often even read words like "frightening" when some society reporter describes someone that he thinks to be anorexic
some people are just hardgainers and/or feel comfortable with little weight, if you have to tolerate fat people(which is much worse since it's unhealthier, uglier(note that we compare very fat with very thin) and hurts society more(takes two seats in public transports, often smells bad cause of sweat that obviously correlates with fatness etc.)) people should also have to tolerate thin people it's more unhealthy to be 5 lbs. underweight than it is to be 50 lbs overweight. neither group should be made fun of or stigmatized as that's rude and bad and not acceptable. anorexia is horribly unhealthy, in fact it's probably the single most unhealthy thing you can do to yourself. the strain on your heart caused by anorexia is far greater than the strain caused by love handles. Seriously? What's the relationship there? Surely that's not a constant rate (being 200 pounds overweight couldn't possibly be better for you than being 20 pounds underweight, right?), is it? Could you post a source please? I'm rather incredulous, but I've never thought about it before, so I'd like to read up on some stats i don't know, but i'm positive that being 20 lbs underweight is horrendously bad for your body and your heart. in fact, you will probably live a lot longer being 200 lbs overweight than you will being 20 lbs underweight. go look up the health risks associated with being underweight. i remember reading it somewhere in a health book and i asked my doctor and he agreed that in most cases it is much better for you to be overweight than underweight. obviously neither is ideal, but being underweight means that no matter what you cannot be getting enough nutrients to run your body. being overweight, you probably are getting enough nutrients, but are just getting too much.
...What?
Why are you making random weight claims if you have no evidence to back them up?
Please cite sources. Why should I have to do the research for you?
Obviously, being underweight or overweight are both not ideal. That's why they're given those names -.-'
This article says "Being too thin is worse for your health than being slightly overweight", but doesn't give numbers: http://www.diet-blog.com/08/underweight_or_slightly_overweight_which_is_worse.php
Where are you getting your numbers from? I would seriously like to know. Are you just making up shit or do you have actual medical reasons to believe this?
|
On March 07 2012 04:06 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 03:56 Xpace wrote:This may be slightly off topic but while we're discussing obesity in America, is it just me or am I the only one who hasn't seen an obese Asian? Just to clarify, when I mean obese I'm talking in the region of 300 lbs and above. And I'm not here to spark a racism discussion, it's just this quote captured my attention: Doctors further claimed that obesity can, at most of the times, go all the way down to genetics as well as a variety of other aspects like food and medications can be employed in the form of a mechanism. In the big city, down to the suburbs, New York or LA, the midwest down to the south. I've been to a lot of cities but I've never actually seen an obese Asian. Fat ones, sure, but never the Michelin-man type. does sumo count?
Sumo wrestlers have a harder daily regiment than an overwhelming majority of people in America's gyms. So no, they don't count. But yes, I've seen one IRL. Haven't seen one that size that wasn't a sumo wrestler.
|
As I was reading the last few pages of the thread I noticed a lot of talk about "x number of pounds too much / too few", but these numbers alone don't really tell the whole story.
If you are trying to find out how much of an impact a gain in weight has on you, you should calculate your own BMI (body mass index) which takes into account both your weight AND your hight. After all 10 extra pounds has a bigger impact on somebody who is 5,3 feet tall than some guy who's 6 feet tall.
|
I have no problem with fat people. I have problems with fat people who want to lose weight and complain all the time about it, without putting in any effort. I believe obesity is a terrible thing and the rate in which it consumes the United States(and a sum of western countries) is startling. However, "the happiest place on earth" shouldn't be preaching the negativity of childhood obesity.
|
On March 07 2012 04:22 Warba wrote:
As I was reading the last few pages of the thread I noticed a lot of talk about "x number of pounds too much / too few", but these numbers alone don't really tell the whole story.
If you are trying to find out how much of an impact a gain in weight has on you, you should calculate your own BMI (body mass index) which takes into account both your weight AND your hight. After all 10 extra pounds has a bigger impact on somebody who is 5,3 feet tall than some guy who's 6 feet tall.
i heard BMI isn't a good standard either, as an "overweight" linebacker is more athletic and healthier than a "fit" basement dweller that has never lifted weights before.
|
The problem is that you are focusing on a possible symptom. Equating weight to health is a very bad idea to put into the minds of children. Many people already have this simplified view on health as you can see from this thread, and it is very unhelpful in dealing with the people's health.
What you want is to encourage a healthy consumption of foods that with the nutrients that you need, encourage exercise , and discourage consumption of foods with negative health consequences. A "healthy" weight is going to naturally correlate with this.
When you just make the goal simply about weight, you can lead people down dangerous paths, especially young girls. Eating disorders are very common , and they exist because of viewpoints like the one expressed in the OP. When lower weight becomes the sole goal, there are many methods to attain it which are not at all healthy, such as anorexia, or bolumia. These exist because of our focus on image as a measure of health. These are dangerous disorders and are very damaging to young girls (and boys).
It's not just eating disorders, though. You can have all kinds of diets with stuff that is terrible for your system but will not cause you to be overweight. We need to stop simplifying everything. Health is a very complex thing, and it needs to be treated as such. If you're going to make a theme park ride, it should be about what kind of food would be healthy to eat, or what kind of activities kids could do to keep their body healthy.
There are so many people who are hurt every day by this ignorant, simplified viewpoint. And it disgusts me that such stupidity gets perpetuated in discussions like this. We definitely have a health problem in our world today, and we should for sure try to fix it, but you have to go about it in a smart way, and it is going to take more than this common, casual, unthought-out, ignorant of biology approach.
I want people to be healthy, happy, and live long , but I don't want young teens destroying their bodies in a faulty attempt to achieve a "healthy image."
(The OP opinion is kind of short so it was hard to fully understand his viewpoint. If his viewpoint isn't as I am implying, just imagine I am arguing against one of the others in this thread who do have the view I am attacking).
|
The same problem (but not for the same reasons) would have cropped up if they made an anti-drug attraction.
|
On March 07 2012 03:40 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 03:36 KainiT wrote:On March 07 2012 03:25 sc2superfan101 wrote:On March 07 2012 03:19 KainiT wrote:
What I think is funny is that fat people often tned to get sympathies in society but if someone is too thin he just gets shit everywhere ->"he/she is probably mentally ill/cannot deal with his/her own body"
In the mass media you often even read words like "frightening" when some society reporter describes someone that he thinks to be anorexic
some people are just hardgainers and/or feel comfortable with little weight, if you have to tolerate fat people(which is much worse since it's unhealthier, uglier(note that we compare very fat with very thin) and hurts society more(takes two seats in public transports, often smells bad cause of sweat that obviously correlates with fatness etc.)) people should also have to tolerate thin people it's more unhealthy to be 5 lbs. underweight than it is to be 50 lbs overweight. neither group should be made fun of or stigmatized as that's rude and bad and not acceptable. anorexia is horribly unhealthy, in fact it's probably the single most unhealthy thing you can do to yourself. the strain on your heart caused by anorexia is far greater than the strain caused by love handles. most of the things you said here are either just wrong or not based on facts at all 1. it's more unhealthy to be 5bs underweight than 50 lbs overweight. (based on facts, but could be wrong) 2. neither group should be made fun of (i hope you aren't trying to say this is wrong. but you're right, it's not "based on facts") 3. anorexia is horribly unhealthy (based on facts and absolutely true) 4. it's probably the single most unhealthy thing you could do to yourself (ok, well i guess shooting yourself in the head might be more unhealthy... still, this is based on facts and is mostly true) 5. the strain on your heart caused by anorexia is far greater than the strain caused by love handles (based on facts and is mostly true) ....i guess pick the ones you don't like and argue em
First of all, we are not talking about aneroxia, just about being (very) thin, that does not always require someone to have a psychlogical eating dissorder. Now let's start with your points:
1. On whicht facts is this based in your opinion? I mean seriously, wtf, one problem for me is that i do not know what "lbs" means since i am meausuring in kg but no matter what kind of scale lbs is this is not true, in fact it is widely proven that pretty much any bodyfat(provides space for many liposoluble toxic substances) can be considered unhealthy since people nowadays(at least tlers) do not need to overeat in good times to prepare for starvation times, underweight on the other hand is only unhealthy if you are a child/teenager(because you need to grow and develop obviously) or if it is the result of malnourishment ie not having enough vitamins/mitcronutrients for specific organs to run ->being 5lbs underweight doesn't indicate that at all
2. yeah, i guess you are right here  therefore i have written "most" in my initial posting
3,4,5. like i said above we are not talking about anorexia, which is mainly a psychological problem
but even with anorexia your arguments are not that solid, your point 4 is only true if someone's anorexia is not healed, most concerned actually recover pretty well once their disease is healed
and your argument 5 is just based on asumptions, do you say that because you know one single person that has had anorexia and know still has psychological problems?
|
On March 07 2012 05:08 divito wrote:
The same problem (but not for the same reasons) would have cropped up if they made an anti-drug attraction.
Anti-anything, really.
Disneyland is where people go to escape the fact that there are bad things in the world. I can understand people being put aback by a Disney attraction that says there are negative consequences to their lifestyle. It just doesn't fit into the mold.
|
People should be called what they are. Obesity is not healthy, why would anyone try and tell people that it's okay? Wtf.
|
next we'll have a policy against calling people who kill other people "murderers" because it might offend them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
