Neapolitan

They're not bad, they're fluffy and cripsy, I think they are very low in carbs. But you can't win when it comes to snack food, basically the down fall of snacks is that it's loaded with salt, even normal(?) foods like frozen dinners and can soup have high salt content. Even things are suppose to be good for you really aren't, like yogurt w/ fruit on the bottom is loaded with sugar; rice, bleached flour, potatoes are refined carbohydrates. It's like the whole food industry is against us - health-wise.

__________________

Freebase Dali

You guys are thinking about this in the wrong perspective. Disregarding the social acceptability of what is "attractive" in terms of body weight, you have to think of the following:

Obesity means morbidly overweight. Overweight means you're overweight in a fat to muscle/makeup sense. Like you guys are saying, the numbers themselves mean absolutely nothing out of context with the physical makeup of the person. You wouldn't call a 200 pound guy who's 5' 6" in height but with a 2 percent body fat composition and the rest muscle "overweight" in the same sense you call a 200 pound guy who's 5' 6" in height but with a 65 percent body fat composition "overweight".

The important thing to look at is what your natural physical build is, and whether you are in that general area considering body mass index, Basal metabolic rate (as far as diet is concerned) and any other factors that contribute to you personally.
It's fairly obvious as to what a natural body composition is for certain people of certain size and conditioning, but morbid obesity is not a naturally funded condition and that's evident in the health toll it takes, especially blood pressure issues.
That's even compounded by the sodium consumption of most folks now days with the way our food is processed.

While no one is arguing that a person "this" tall should weigh "this" much, which would be an assumption ridiculously ignorant of body composition variations and totally reflective of societal standards, it's pretty safe to assume that an obese or overweight person is not operating at optimum health by standards of even nature itself, much less some arbitrary idea of an ideal society.

As far as junk food is concerned, yea it's horrid because it A) Provides very little nutritional value, and B) Packs so many calories, carbs, fat, and sodium.. not to mention other crap, that by the end of the day you're overlimiting your maintenance caloric intake level without even getting a day's worth of nutrient. So you gain weight without even the benefit of eating a decent meal that's going to benefit you and meet the requirements of your physical needs.

Having lived in America my entire life, minus 6 years, I can tell you that our culture here is mainly based on food that fulfills 2 categories only... Fast, and Tasty. Unfortunately most of these meals contribute the most unhealthy combination of factors that almost always leads to never getting what you really need nutritionally, but in a caloric aspect, far too much than you should ever be consuming if you're trying to maintain your natural composition (if you're not actively weight lifting, which requires a lot more calories than sedentary or lightly active people).

I think the trend is mostly based on "looking good" because of the way media portrays iconic symbols of cultural fascination. People who use that as a goal when trying to be fit are often met with disaster because it's unrealistic.
Simply being educated enough to know what you're putting in your body and either maintaining, or getting down to, your optimal weight/body makeup is a matter of health benefits and "looking good" serves merely as a visual byproduct of that regardless of how it's compared to a media-driven image.

But it's definitely foolish to assume that just because there's a media-driven image of what people "should" look like that you don't agree with, that you shouldn't be cognizant of how your lifestyle affects you physically.

mr dave

i think this attitude is changing, especially with the all the information freely available on the net. anytime i've seen height / weight charts it's always a range. like my height, 6'3" the target is apparently 180lbs, but the acceptable range is from 150 to 210 to account for varying factors of one's genetic makeup.

but i clearly remember being really young and hearing about how women were all supposed to be 98lbs.

__________________
i am the universe

Astronomer

There's a lot of moral panic in the media about obesity. Messages that tell us that if we're over a certain weight, then we must be obese, or if our BMI is calculated to a certain figure, then we are obese. And that if we are fat we will suffer from a range of different and often fatal health issues, blah blah blah. When the point is, that if you eat well and exercise and look after your body, then you are healthy. And you do not need to worry about all these measurements and figures and panics about health issues that are thrown at us. A few of you said this previously.

Research has shown that a 'fatter' person who exercises will live longer than a skinny person who does not exercise. Healthiness has absolutely nothing to do with size, it's about how you look after your body, and I think people are losing sight of that.

I recently did a study on obese children at the school I work at and statistics have shown that in Australia and New Zealand childhood obesity has not increased in the past decade, but stayed relatively the same. While I can't speak for other countries, here it is the case that when you hear all these stories about 'obesity on the rise' it's pretty much wrong.

That being said, in some instances obesity can be a life-threatening problem and it needs to be addressed. I just think the way in which it needs to be addressed should be rethought. It's not about body size - we are naturally all different shapes and sizes - it's about being healthy.

__________________

CAPTAIN CAVEMAN

not if you have cancer

Astronomer

Obviously not if you have cancer or any other life-threatening illness. Which, by the way, most of the time are also not related to your weight but more strongly correlated to genetics.

The point I was trying to make is that healthiness is not how much you weigh or what your BMI is, like those ridiculous shows like The Biggest Loser and every other media outlet trying to tackle the issue tell us.

__________________

Freebase Dali

When you eat healthy food and exercise, the byproduct tends to be that your weight/size/makeup heads towards and stays at its natural range. Obviously that natural range can be variable, but obesity is not a part of a natural human composition. If you're overweight, you're simply consuming more calories than you're burning. It's not debatable, nor is it nullified via some "big & proud" theory that has absolutely no bearing on the human body and how it functions.
While I agree the focus should be on healthy living, body composition is more than an ideological goal. It's an indicator in most cases.

A lot of us here live in the most obese country in the world and should know the social tendencies connected to it. It's not some debatable value system that goes into health and its benefits. It's science, observation & awareness. Eat right and exercise, and you'll be your HEALTHIEST, barring any diseases. If that's your lifestyle, you won't be morbidly obese.
You might naturally be a little thicker than the next person, but using that as an excuse for obesity is ignorant and downright dangerous.

Astronomer

Obviously obesity is a huge health issue and humans are not meant to be morbidly overweight. But I know people who are way healthier than me - they eat all the right foods and exercise 5 days a week and are just really healthy BUT are a little on the heavier side and if they calculated their BMI would probably be in the 'obese' range which is not right. Everybody has different body shapes/types and a lot of it has to do with genetics rather than dietary or lifestyle problems. I agree in that the "I'm big and proud" movement is dangerous in terms of dismissing health issues like obesity, but there is a lot of moral panic and incorrect data surrounding the issue.

And don't even get me started on 'childhood obesity' and the messages we send kids about body image and health.

__________________

Freebase Dali

If your friend's caloric intake is higher than he/she burns based on his/her basal metabolic rate, he/she is going to gain weight whether the food is healthy or not. Being significantly overweight is linked to health issues backed by overwhelming statistical evidence. In one hand, the issue of eating and living right is impacting. In the other, the issue of excessively overweight individuals is linked to the first issue but also an impacting factor on health on its own. All I'm saying is just because someone eats healthily and exercises doesn't mean their excessively extra weight is not a health concern. To say that is to completely ignore the known health issues that are caused by large amounts of excess body fat.

Regarding childhood obesity, what kind of message do you think we're sending?
If you look at the numbers, it's pretty obvious that there's a cause for concern about the exponential growth of childhood obesity that's directly linked to lifestyle and food choices. It's such a concern, in fact, that there are laws being put into place that change the kind of foods available to children in school to curtail this rising problem.
It's not about telling kids to look like movie stars. It's about trying to limit this garbage-food lifestyle that's contributing to the problem, and also raising awareness about how sedentary lifestyles contribute as well.

Unfortunately, most kids don't consider the impact their health will have on their lives and it takes responsible parents and mentors to ensure their children aren't headed down a short and costly road of life.

CanwllCorfe

I was thinking about this actually. On one hand, people say our magazines and such promote being "thin" and "thin=good, fat=bad" and that it's detrimental to the self esteem of those who are big.. BUT if we start having magazines saying it's alright to be big and you can be whatever size you want, there's no way that could end up doing anything positive. Sure it may feel some people feel better, but I'd rather have my feelings hurt and then have an initiative to lose weight and get healthy. Actually, that already happened. I didn't get "hurt" by magazine covers it's just that I knew I was overweight and hated it so I lost 30 pounds and now I'm here.

__________________
Your eyes were never yet let in to see the majesty and riches of the mind, but dwell in darkness; for your God is blind.