- This topic has 1,015 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 9 months ago by
KSMountain.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 30, 2009 at 9:26 AM #498745December 30, 2009 at 9:30 AM #497865
Anonymous
Guest[quote=CONCHO][…] why are the US Pima Indians suffering an obesity and diabetes epidemic while the Mexican Pima aren’t? Genetically they are about as close as two groups of people can be. Looks like it’s the food and activity levels, at least according to the study I linked to…[/quote]
If one has no choice but to do manual labor all day, it’s hard to gain weight no matter what metabolism they have. That’s why the Mexican Pima don’t gain weight — they (literally) work their asses off. If one lives a typical “American” lifestyle where they are not compelled to burn thousands of calories a day, then genetics is the primary influence of weight. That’s why the American Pima have more issues than other Americans in general — all of the Pima are genetically disposed toward obesity.
My point is that, in America, or other places where long hours of manual labor is not the norm, self control or discipline is not the primary issue in determining one’s weight. Yes, one can overcome a genetic predisposition toward obesity with self control, but it is much harder for them to stay thin than an ordinary person. It’s easy to be thin when you just don’t feel hunger.
December 30, 2009 at 9:30 AM #498018Guest[quote=CONCHO][…] why are the US Pima Indians suffering an obesity and diabetes epidemic while the Mexican Pima aren’t? Genetically they are about as close as two groups of people can be. Looks like it’s the food and activity levels, at least according to the study I linked to…[/quote]
If one has no choice but to do manual labor all day, it’s hard to gain weight no matter what metabolism they have. That’s why the Mexican Pima don’t gain weight — they (literally) work their asses off. If one lives a typical “American” lifestyle where they are not compelled to burn thousands of calories a day, then genetics is the primary influence of weight. That’s why the American Pima have more issues than other Americans in general — all of the Pima are genetically disposed toward obesity.
My point is that, in America, or other places where long hours of manual labor is not the norm, self control or discipline is not the primary issue in determining one’s weight. Yes, one can overcome a genetic predisposition toward obesity with self control, but it is much harder for them to stay thin than an ordinary person. It’s easy to be thin when you just don’t feel hunger.
December 30, 2009 at 9:30 AM #498411Guest[quote=CONCHO][…] why are the US Pima Indians suffering an obesity and diabetes epidemic while the Mexican Pima aren’t? Genetically they are about as close as two groups of people can be. Looks like it’s the food and activity levels, at least according to the study I linked to…[/quote]
If one has no choice but to do manual labor all day, it’s hard to gain weight no matter what metabolism they have. That’s why the Mexican Pima don’t gain weight — they (literally) work their asses off. If one lives a typical “American” lifestyle where they are not compelled to burn thousands of calories a day, then genetics is the primary influence of weight. That’s why the American Pima have more issues than other Americans in general — all of the Pima are genetically disposed toward obesity.
My point is that, in America, or other places where long hours of manual labor is not the norm, self control or discipline is not the primary issue in determining one’s weight. Yes, one can overcome a genetic predisposition toward obesity with self control, but it is much harder for them to stay thin than an ordinary person. It’s easy to be thin when you just don’t feel hunger.
December 30, 2009 at 9:30 AM #498502Guest[quote=CONCHO][…] why are the US Pima Indians suffering an obesity and diabetes epidemic while the Mexican Pima aren’t? Genetically they are about as close as two groups of people can be. Looks like it’s the food and activity levels, at least according to the study I linked to…[/quote]
If one has no choice but to do manual labor all day, it’s hard to gain weight no matter what metabolism they have. That’s why the Mexican Pima don’t gain weight — they (literally) work their asses off. If one lives a typical “American” lifestyle where they are not compelled to burn thousands of calories a day, then genetics is the primary influence of weight. That’s why the American Pima have more issues than other Americans in general — all of the Pima are genetically disposed toward obesity.
My point is that, in America, or other places where long hours of manual labor is not the norm, self control or discipline is not the primary issue in determining one’s weight. Yes, one can overcome a genetic predisposition toward obesity with self control, but it is much harder for them to stay thin than an ordinary person. It’s easy to be thin when you just don’t feel hunger.
December 30, 2009 at 9:30 AM #498750Guest[quote=CONCHO][…] why are the US Pima Indians suffering an obesity and diabetes epidemic while the Mexican Pima aren’t? Genetically they are about as close as two groups of people can be. Looks like it’s the food and activity levels, at least according to the study I linked to…[/quote]
If one has no choice but to do manual labor all day, it’s hard to gain weight no matter what metabolism they have. That’s why the Mexican Pima don’t gain weight — they (literally) work their asses off. If one lives a typical “American” lifestyle where they are not compelled to burn thousands of calories a day, then genetics is the primary influence of weight. That’s why the American Pima have more issues than other Americans in general — all of the Pima are genetically disposed toward obesity.
My point is that, in America, or other places where long hours of manual labor is not the norm, self control or discipline is not the primary issue in determining one’s weight. Yes, one can overcome a genetic predisposition toward obesity with self control, but it is much harder for them to stay thin than an ordinary person. It’s easy to be thin when you just don’t feel hunger.
December 30, 2009 at 9:33 AM #497870treehugger
Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=treehugger]My sister is 40 years old. 5’8″ 350 pounds.
Me 38 years old. 5’7″ 120 pounds[/quote]
A 300+ pound difference in weight between two siblings? That’s pretty unusual. Should we be basing national policy on such a single, extreme, example?
I’m no fan of sloth and gluttony, but most people couldn’t bring their weight up to 350 pounds even if they wanted to (I know I couldn’t).
And you really think the difference is simply that “she’s lazy and I’m not.”
Did ever occur to you, in the past three decades that you’ve known her, that she might actually have a medical condition?[/quote]
Really? Are you that ignorant or do you just assume I am? One of the top shows in this country is the Biggest Loser. Have you been to Disneyland, wow that is one hell of a cross section of middle America, lots of overweight people there. Lots of people have no problem getting their weight up to an obese level. And yes, IN THIS CASE, it is simple. It is about choices. My personal example was 2 sisters with the same genetic potential. My parents are not stunning examples of fitness, my dad is a runner (just finished the New York Marathon in November at 66) and my mother has done weight watchers for years. They both struggle with their weight.
I choose to be healthy. I OCCASIONALLY indulge in Nachos, pizza, whatever, but it is countered with a much more frequant healthy style of eating and I exercise a lot. My sister makes different choices.
As for the thyroid, she has been tested, as have I. There was nothing metabolically/physically wrong with her to account for the obesity. Before they are allowed to have the surgery they ensure there are no underlying health effects and put them through 6 months of “counseling”. Did it ever occur to you that I have known her for 38 years and have seen her choices firsthand as well as the steady weight gain year over year?
The question was is healthcare a right. I say no it is not. That being said, my sister had the surgery in September and has already lost 60 pounds. I am very happy for her and hope for the best. She has joined a gym and has been walking. My sincere hope is that she has reevaluated her past choices and chooses a healthier path.
December 30, 2009 at 9:33 AM #498023Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=treehugger]My sister is 40 years old. 5’8″ 350 pounds.
Me 38 years old. 5’7″ 120 pounds[/quote]
A 300+ pound difference in weight between two siblings? That’s pretty unusual. Should we be basing national policy on such a single, extreme, example?
I’m no fan of sloth and gluttony, but most people couldn’t bring their weight up to 350 pounds even if they wanted to (I know I couldn’t).
And you really think the difference is simply that “she’s lazy and I’m not.”
Did ever occur to you, in the past three decades that you’ve known her, that she might actually have a medical condition?[/quote]
Really? Are you that ignorant or do you just assume I am? One of the top shows in this country is the Biggest Loser. Have you been to Disneyland, wow that is one hell of a cross section of middle America, lots of overweight people there. Lots of people have no problem getting their weight up to an obese level. And yes, IN THIS CASE, it is simple. It is about choices. My personal example was 2 sisters with the same genetic potential. My parents are not stunning examples of fitness, my dad is a runner (just finished the New York Marathon in November at 66) and my mother has done weight watchers for years. They both struggle with their weight.
I choose to be healthy. I OCCASIONALLY indulge in Nachos, pizza, whatever, but it is countered with a much more frequant healthy style of eating and I exercise a lot. My sister makes different choices.
As for the thyroid, she has been tested, as have I. There was nothing metabolically/physically wrong with her to account for the obesity. Before they are allowed to have the surgery they ensure there are no underlying health effects and put them through 6 months of “counseling”. Did it ever occur to you that I have known her for 38 years and have seen her choices firsthand as well as the steady weight gain year over year?
The question was is healthcare a right. I say no it is not. That being said, my sister had the surgery in September and has already lost 60 pounds. I am very happy for her and hope for the best. She has joined a gym and has been walking. My sincere hope is that she has reevaluated her past choices and chooses a healthier path.
December 30, 2009 at 9:33 AM #498415Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=treehugger]My sister is 40 years old. 5’8″ 350 pounds.
Me 38 years old. 5’7″ 120 pounds[/quote]
A 300+ pound difference in weight between two siblings? That’s pretty unusual. Should we be basing national policy on such a single, extreme, example?
I’m no fan of sloth and gluttony, but most people couldn’t bring their weight up to 350 pounds even if they wanted to (I know I couldn’t).
And you really think the difference is simply that “she’s lazy and I’m not.”
Did ever occur to you, in the past three decades that you’ve known her, that she might actually have a medical condition?[/quote]
Really? Are you that ignorant or do you just assume I am? One of the top shows in this country is the Biggest Loser. Have you been to Disneyland, wow that is one hell of a cross section of middle America, lots of overweight people there. Lots of people have no problem getting their weight up to an obese level. And yes, IN THIS CASE, it is simple. It is about choices. My personal example was 2 sisters with the same genetic potential. My parents are not stunning examples of fitness, my dad is a runner (just finished the New York Marathon in November at 66) and my mother has done weight watchers for years. They both struggle with their weight.
I choose to be healthy. I OCCASIONALLY indulge in Nachos, pizza, whatever, but it is countered with a much more frequant healthy style of eating and I exercise a lot. My sister makes different choices.
As for the thyroid, she has been tested, as have I. There was nothing metabolically/physically wrong with her to account for the obesity. Before they are allowed to have the surgery they ensure there are no underlying health effects and put them through 6 months of “counseling”. Did it ever occur to you that I have known her for 38 years and have seen her choices firsthand as well as the steady weight gain year over year?
The question was is healthcare a right. I say no it is not. That being said, my sister had the surgery in September and has already lost 60 pounds. I am very happy for her and hope for the best. She has joined a gym and has been walking. My sincere hope is that she has reevaluated her past choices and chooses a healthier path.
December 30, 2009 at 9:33 AM #498507Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=treehugger]My sister is 40 years old. 5’8″ 350 pounds.
Me 38 years old. 5’7″ 120 pounds[/quote]
A 300+ pound difference in weight between two siblings? That’s pretty unusual. Should we be basing national policy on such a single, extreme, example?
I’m no fan of sloth and gluttony, but most people couldn’t bring their weight up to 350 pounds even if they wanted to (I know I couldn’t).
And you really think the difference is simply that “she’s lazy and I’m not.”
Did ever occur to you, in the past three decades that you’ve known her, that she might actually have a medical condition?[/quote]
Really? Are you that ignorant or do you just assume I am? One of the top shows in this country is the Biggest Loser. Have you been to Disneyland, wow that is one hell of a cross section of middle America, lots of overweight people there. Lots of people have no problem getting their weight up to an obese level. And yes, IN THIS CASE, it is simple. It is about choices. My personal example was 2 sisters with the same genetic potential. My parents are not stunning examples of fitness, my dad is a runner (just finished the New York Marathon in November at 66) and my mother has done weight watchers for years. They both struggle with their weight.
I choose to be healthy. I OCCASIONALLY indulge in Nachos, pizza, whatever, but it is countered with a much more frequant healthy style of eating and I exercise a lot. My sister makes different choices.
As for the thyroid, she has been tested, as have I. There was nothing metabolically/physically wrong with her to account for the obesity. Before they are allowed to have the surgery they ensure there are no underlying health effects and put them through 6 months of “counseling”. Did it ever occur to you that I have known her for 38 years and have seen her choices firsthand as well as the steady weight gain year over year?
The question was is healthcare a right. I say no it is not. That being said, my sister had the surgery in September and has already lost 60 pounds. I am very happy for her and hope for the best. She has joined a gym and has been walking. My sincere hope is that she has reevaluated her past choices and chooses a healthier path.
December 30, 2009 at 9:33 AM #498755Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=treehugger]My sister is 40 years old. 5’8″ 350 pounds.
Me 38 years old. 5’7″ 120 pounds[/quote]
A 300+ pound difference in weight between two siblings? That’s pretty unusual. Should we be basing national policy on such a single, extreme, example?
I’m no fan of sloth and gluttony, but most people couldn’t bring their weight up to 350 pounds even if they wanted to (I know I couldn’t).
And you really think the difference is simply that “she’s lazy and I’m not.”
Did ever occur to you, in the past three decades that you’ve known her, that she might actually have a medical condition?[/quote]
Really? Are you that ignorant or do you just assume I am? One of the top shows in this country is the Biggest Loser. Have you been to Disneyland, wow that is one hell of a cross section of middle America, lots of overweight people there. Lots of people have no problem getting their weight up to an obese level. And yes, IN THIS CASE, it is simple. It is about choices. My personal example was 2 sisters with the same genetic potential. My parents are not stunning examples of fitness, my dad is a runner (just finished the New York Marathon in November at 66) and my mother has done weight watchers for years. They both struggle with their weight.
I choose to be healthy. I OCCASIONALLY indulge in Nachos, pizza, whatever, but it is countered with a much more frequant healthy style of eating and I exercise a lot. My sister makes different choices.
As for the thyroid, she has been tested, as have I. There was nothing metabolically/physically wrong with her to account for the obesity. Before they are allowed to have the surgery they ensure there are no underlying health effects and put them through 6 months of “counseling”. Did it ever occur to you that I have known her for 38 years and have seen her choices firsthand as well as the steady weight gain year over year?
The question was is healthcare a right. I say no it is not. That being said, my sister had the surgery in September and has already lost 60 pounds. I am very happy for her and hope for the best. She has joined a gym and has been walking. My sincere hope is that she has reevaluated her past choices and chooses a healthier path.
December 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM #497874Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=treehugger]My sister is 40 years old. 5’8″ 350 pounds.
Me 38 years old. 5’7″ 120 pounds[/quote]
A 300+ pound difference in weight between two siblings? That’s pretty unusual. Should we be basing national policy on such a single, extreme, example?
I’m no fan of sloth and gluttony, but most people couldn’t bring their weight up to 350 pounds even if they wanted to (I know I couldn’t).
And you really think the difference is simply that “she’s lazy and I’m not.”
Did ever occur to you, in the past three decades that you’ve known her, that she might actually have a medical condition?[/quote]
December 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM #498028Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=treehugger]My sister is 40 years old. 5’8″ 350 pounds.
Me 38 years old. 5’7″ 120 pounds[/quote]
A 300+ pound difference in weight between two siblings? That’s pretty unusual. Should we be basing national policy on such a single, extreme, example?
I’m no fan of sloth and gluttony, but most people couldn’t bring their weight up to 350 pounds even if they wanted to (I know I couldn’t).
And you really think the difference is simply that “she’s lazy and I’m not.”
Did ever occur to you, in the past three decades that you’ve known her, that she might actually have a medical condition?[/quote]
December 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM #498421Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=treehugger]My sister is 40 years old. 5’8″ 350 pounds.
Me 38 years old. 5’7″ 120 pounds[/quote]
A 300+ pound difference in weight between two siblings? That’s pretty unusual. Should we be basing national policy on such a single, extreme, example?
I’m no fan of sloth and gluttony, but most people couldn’t bring their weight up to 350 pounds even if they wanted to (I know I couldn’t).
And you really think the difference is simply that “she’s lazy and I’m not.”
Did ever occur to you, in the past three decades that you’ve known her, that she might actually have a medical condition?[/quote]
December 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM #498512Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=treehugger]My sister is 40 years old. 5’8″ 350 pounds.
Me 38 years old. 5’7″ 120 pounds[/quote]
A 300+ pound difference in weight between two siblings? That’s pretty unusual. Should we be basing national policy on such a single, extreme, example?
I’m no fan of sloth and gluttony, but most people couldn’t bring their weight up to 350 pounds even if they wanted to (I know I couldn’t).
And you really think the difference is simply that “she’s lazy and I’m not.”
Did ever occur to you, in the past three decades that you’ve known her, that she might actually have a medical condition?[/quote]
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.