OT – F as in Fat

[Arraya]

[quote=CONCHO]

If the numbers don’t start coming down quickly enough to curb population growth, some “unexpected” highly contagious diseases will appear soon.[/quote]

Population growth is curbing itself. It started in the late 60s when the growth rate started to reverse. It topped off at 2.2% per year and now has dipped to under 1% globally. This trend is accelerating with some regions going negative. The world will top off at about 9 billion or just below then go into slow decline.

The population explosion of the 19th and 20th century was mainly due to public health measures and better nutritional understanding. People also used to have a lot of children because there was a very high infant mortality rate. This actually plummeted when doctors started washing their hands before delivering children. The first guy to suggest this, Ignaz Semmelweis, was met with scorn and ridicule for being unscientific. He ended up dying in a mental institute.

The US’s mental and physical health started to decline about 50 years ago. Besides the obesity epidemic there is also depression and addiction epidemics. Which the UK is experiencing as well. I assume these are all interrelated and have the similar causal mechanisms. They all have to do with dopamine stimulation.

[Ren]

I’m a fitness fanatic, so the subject comes up a lot around me, and 100% of the obese people I’ve talked to blame their genes and/or age. This gives them the excuse they need to not make the lifestyle changes that would enable them to achieve and maintain a healthy weight. Of course they always say I’m lucky to have gotten the “good” genes. When I point out that I control my caloric intake and exercise, they dismiss it with a wave of their hand and quickly move away, so they won’t have to face the idea that they might have to do some actual work.

If someone doesn’t correlate taking in 4,000 calories of fast food and beer every day (while getting no exercise whatsoever) with their ever-increasing waistline, that’s sheer laziness and stupidity – not the evil food industry. God forbid they get their heart rate up and pay attention to what they’re shoveling in their mouth. When they finally do, what do you know – the fat falls off. There’s no way around the math.

Case in point – my wife’s dad weighs 550 (not a typo), while she looks great in a swimsuit after two kids. Same “fat” genes, same love of food. The difference? She exercises and has a little self-control. It doesn’t take much.

Obviously we need some regulation – the kind where they make manufacturers and restaurants publish the content of food. What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.

[Ren]

I’m a fitness fanatic, so the subject comes up a lot around me, and 100% of the obese people I’ve talked to blame their genes and/or age. This gives them the excuse they need to not make the lifestyle changes that would enable them to achieve and maintain a healthy weight. Of course they always say I’m lucky to have gotten the “good” genes. When I point out that I control my caloric intake and exercise, they dismiss it with a wave of their hand and quickly move away, so they won’t have to face the idea that they might have to do some actual work.

If someone doesn’t correlate taking in 4,000 calories of fast food and beer every day (while getting no exercise whatsoever) with their ever-increasing waistline, that’s sheer laziness and stupidity – not the evil food industry. God forbid they get their heart rate up and pay attention to what they’re shoveling in their mouth. When they finally do, what do you know – the fat falls off. There’s no way around the math.

Case in point – my wife’s dad weighs 550 (not a typo), while she looks great in a swimsuit after two kids. Same “fat” genes, same love of food. The difference? She exercises and has a little self-control. It doesn’t take much.

Obviously we need some regulation – the kind where they make manufacturers and restaurants publish the content of food. What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.

[Ren]

I’m a fitness fanatic, so the subject comes up a lot around me, and 100% of the obese people I’ve talked to blame their genes and/or age. This gives them the excuse they need to not make the lifestyle changes that would enable them to achieve and maintain a healthy weight. Of course they always say I’m lucky to have gotten the “good” genes. When I point out that I control my caloric intake and exercise, they dismiss it with a wave of their hand and quickly move away, so they won’t have to face the idea that they might have to do some actual work.

If someone doesn’t correlate taking in 4,000 calories of fast food and beer every day (while getting no exercise whatsoever) with their ever-increasing waistline, that’s sheer laziness and stupidity – not the evil food industry. God forbid they get their heart rate up and pay attention to what they’re shoveling in their mouth. When they finally do, what do you know – the fat falls off. There’s no way around the math.

Case in point – my wife’s dad weighs 550 (not a typo), while she looks great in a swimsuit after two kids. Same “fat” genes, same love of food. The difference? She exercises and has a little self-control. It doesn’t take much.

Obviously we need some regulation – the kind where they make manufacturers and restaurants publish the content of food. What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.

[Ren]

I’m a fitness fanatic, so the subject comes up a lot around me, and 100% of the obese people I’ve talked to blame their genes and/or age. This gives them the excuse they need to not make the lifestyle changes that would enable them to achieve and maintain a healthy weight. Of course they always say I’m lucky to have gotten the “good” genes. When I point out that I control my caloric intake and exercise, they dismiss it with a wave of their hand and quickly move away, so they won’t have to face the idea that they might have to do some actual work.

If someone doesn’t correlate taking in 4,000 calories of fast food and beer every day (while getting no exercise whatsoever) with their ever-increasing waistline, that’s sheer laziness and stupidity – not the evil food industry. God forbid they get their heart rate up and pay attention to what they’re shoveling in their mouth. When they finally do, what do you know – the fat falls off. There’s no way around the math.

Case in point – my wife’s dad weighs 550 (not a typo), while she looks great in a swimsuit after two kids. Same “fat” genes, same love of food. The difference? She exercises and has a little self-control. It doesn’t take much.

Obviously we need some regulation – the kind where they make manufacturers and restaurants publish the content of food. What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.

[Ren]

I’m a fitness fanatic, so the subject comes up a lot around me, and 100% of the obese people I’ve talked to blame their genes and/or age. This gives them the excuse they need to not make the lifestyle changes that would enable them to achieve and maintain a healthy weight. Of course they always say I’m lucky to have gotten the “good” genes. When I point out that I control my caloric intake and exercise, they dismiss it with a wave of their hand and quickly move away, so they won’t have to face the idea that they might have to do some actual work.

If someone doesn’t correlate taking in 4,000 calories of fast food and beer every day (while getting no exercise whatsoever) with their ever-increasing waistline, that’s sheer laziness and stupidity – not the evil food industry. God forbid they get their heart rate up and pay attention to what they’re shoveling in their mouth. When they finally do, what do you know – the fat falls off. There’s no way around the math.

Case in point – my wife’s dad weighs 550 (not a typo), while she looks great in a swimsuit after two kids. Same “fat” genes, same love of food. The difference? She exercises and has a little self-control. It doesn’t take much.

Obviously we need some regulation – the kind where they make manufacturers and restaurants publish the content of food. What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.

[briansd1]

I’m with Ren.

Yes, there’s addiction and availability of food makes it easy for people to get addicted.

Yes, there problems with hormones, antibiotic, pesticides…

But the food is essentially the same as before — in many cases even healthier as before because of better inspections, rules and regulations.

It’s up to individuals to exercise personal responsibility.

Obesity is very much like the mortgage crisis were people become addicted to toxic products. Who’s the blame? The sellers or the buyers?

The difference is that with obesity, the crash will play out slowly. We’ll become a country of sick people.

[quote=Ren] What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.[/quote]

I agree.

But government can do a better job educating the public.

Government can also ban many chemical substances used in food.

And Government can also tax junk food or the ingredients used in making junk food.

[briansd1]

I’m with Ren.

Yes, there’s addiction and availability of food makes it easy for people to get addicted.

Yes, there problems with hormones, antibiotic, pesticides…

But the food is essentially the same as before — in many cases even healthier as before because of better inspections, rules and regulations.

It’s up to individuals to exercise personal responsibility.

Obesity is very much like the mortgage crisis were people become addicted to toxic products. Who’s the blame? The sellers or the buyers?

The difference is that with obesity, the crash will play out slowly. We’ll become a country of sick people.

[quote=Ren] What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.[/quote]

I agree.

But government can do a better job educating the public.

Government can also ban many chemical substances used in food.

And Government can also tax junk food or the ingredients used in making junk food.

[briansd1]

I’m with Ren.

Yes, there’s addiction and availability of food makes it easy for people to get addicted.

Yes, there problems with hormones, antibiotic, pesticides…

But the food is essentially the same as before — in many cases even healthier as before because of better inspections, rules and regulations.

It’s up to individuals to exercise personal responsibility.

Obesity is very much like the mortgage crisis were people become addicted to toxic products. Who’s the blame? The sellers or the buyers?

The difference is that with obesity, the crash will play out slowly. We’ll become a country of sick people.

[quote=Ren] What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.[/quote]

I agree.

But government can do a better job educating the public.

Government can also ban many chemical substances used in food.

And Government can also tax junk food or the ingredients used in making junk food.

[briansd1]

I’m with Ren.

Yes, there’s addiction and availability of food makes it easy for people to get addicted.

Yes, there problems with hormones, antibiotic, pesticides…

But the food is essentially the same as before — in many cases even healthier as before because of better inspections, rules and regulations.

It’s up to individuals to exercise personal responsibility.

Obesity is very much like the mortgage crisis were people become addicted to toxic products. Who’s the blame? The sellers or the buyers?

The difference is that with obesity, the crash will play out slowly. We’ll become a country of sick people.

[quote=Ren] What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.[/quote]

I agree.

But government can do a better job educating the public.

Government can also ban many chemical substances used in food.

And Government can also tax junk food or the ingredients used in making junk food.

[briansd1]

I’m with Ren.

Yes, there’s addiction and availability of food makes it easy for people to get addicted.

Yes, there problems with hormones, antibiotic, pesticides…

But the food is essentially the same as before — in many cases even healthier as before because of better inspections, rules and regulations.

It’s up to individuals to exercise personal responsibility.

Obesity is very much like the mortgage crisis were people become addicted to toxic products. Who’s the blame? The sellers or the buyers?

The difference is that with obesity, the crash will play out slowly. We’ll become a country of sick people.

[quote=Ren] What we don’t need is someone telling Ben and Jerry’s they’re not allowed to cram 1,200 calories into a pint.[/quote]

I agree.

But government can do a better job educating the public.

Government can also ban many chemical substances used in food.

And Government can also tax junk food or the ingredients used in making junk food.

[Arraya]

This is actually becoming well understood through many studies over the years in mature economies.

Happiness and life satisfaction rise steeply as one moves from subsistence-level poverty to a modest level of economic security and then levels off.

After that it’s starts to manifest in social pathologies.

During the last 50 years the US has doubled it’s per capita consumption. During the same time, obesity and a host of other mental disorders have skyrocketed.

So you start to get a correlation with economic growth, beyond a certain point, and epidemics of different illnesses in a society.

Now, a culture is an outgrowth of a political/economic system and patterns of behavior are encouraged to support that system.

Yes, the housing bubble was a similar dynamic – which if you pay attention, was in multiple countries.

We seem to confuse powerful cultural stressors for personal and social benefits. Among those stressors is a constant culturally-induced striving for perennially unsatisfiable desires that often conflict with basic bio-social needs – which manifests in all these increasing epidemics.

But, it is good for the economy in the short term.

[Arraya]

This is actually becoming well understood through many studies over the years in mature economies.

Happiness and life satisfaction rise steeply as one moves from subsistence-level poverty to a modest level of economic security and then levels off.

After that it’s starts to manifest in social pathologies.

During the last 50 years the US has doubled it’s per capita consumption. During the same time, obesity and a host of other mental disorders have skyrocketed.

So you start to get a correlation with economic growth, beyond a certain point, and epidemics of different illnesses in a society.

Now, a culture is an outgrowth of a political/economic system and patterns of behavior are encouraged to support that system.

Yes, the housing bubble was a similar dynamic – which if you pay attention, was in multiple countries.

We seem to confuse powerful cultural stressors for personal and social benefits. Among those stressors is a constant culturally-induced striving for perennially unsatisfiable desires that often conflict with basic bio-social needs – which manifests in all these increasing epidemics.

But, it is good for the economy in the short term.

[Arraya]

This is actually becoming well understood through many studies over the years in mature economies.

Happiness and life satisfaction rise steeply as one moves from subsistence-level poverty to a modest level of economic security and then levels off.

After that it’s starts to manifest in social pathologies.

During the last 50 years the US has doubled it’s per capita consumption. During the same time, obesity and a host of other mental disorders have skyrocketed.

So you start to get a correlation with economic growth, beyond a certain point, and epidemics of different illnesses in a society.

Now, a culture is an outgrowth of a political/economic system and patterns of behavior are encouraged to support that system.

Yes, the housing bubble was a similar dynamic – which if you pay attention, was in multiple countries.

We seem to confuse powerful cultural stressors for personal and social benefits. Among those stressors is a constant culturally-induced striving for perennially unsatisfiable desires that often conflict with basic bio-social needs – which manifests in all these increasing epidemics.

But, it is good for the economy in the short term.

[Arraya]

This is actually becoming well understood through many studies over the years in mature economies.

Happiness and life satisfaction rise steeply as one moves from subsistence-level poverty to a modest level of economic security and then levels off.

After that it’s starts to manifest in social pathologies.

During the last 50 years the US has doubled it’s per capita consumption. During the same time, obesity and a host of other mental disorders have skyrocketed.

So you start to get a correlation with economic growth, beyond a certain point, and epidemics of different illnesses in a society.

Now, a culture is an outgrowth of a political/economic system and patterns of behavior are encouraged to support that system.

Yes, the housing bubble was a similar dynamic – which if you pay attention, was in multiple countries.

We seem to confuse powerful cultural stressors for personal and social benefits. Among those stressors is a constant culturally-induced striving for perennially unsatisfiable desires that often conflict with basic bio-social needs – which manifests in all these increasing epidemics.

But, it is good for the economy in the short term.

[Author]

Posts