- This topic has 305 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 1 month ago by
briansd1.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 9, 2010 at 9:08 AM #549337May 9, 2010 at 9:24 AM #548373
poorgradstudent
Participant[quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-moreMinimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.
Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.
May 9, 2010 at 9:24 AM #548484Participant[quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-moreMinimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.
Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.
May 9, 2010 at 9:24 AM #548966Participant[quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-moreMinimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.
Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.
May 9, 2010 at 9:24 AM #549065Participant[quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-moreMinimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.
Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.
May 9, 2010 at 9:24 AM #549342Participant[quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-moreMinimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.
Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.
May 9, 2010 at 12:07 PM #548418briansd1
Guest[quote=AN]Brian, is it safe to say you’re in great shape with no health issue? What’s your BMI? Mine is 20.5.[/quote]
My BMI it 21.63 I’ve pretty much maintained the same weight since college.
I hardly ever use medical services.
May 9, 2010 at 12:07 PM #548529Guest[quote=AN]Brian, is it safe to say you’re in great shape with no health issue? What’s your BMI? Mine is 20.5.[/quote]
My BMI it 21.63 I’ve pretty much maintained the same weight since college.
I hardly ever use medical services.
May 9, 2010 at 12:07 PM #549011Guest[quote=AN]Brian, is it safe to say you’re in great shape with no health issue? What’s your BMI? Mine is 20.5.[/quote]
My BMI it 21.63 I’ve pretty much maintained the same weight since college.
I hardly ever use medical services.
May 9, 2010 at 12:07 PM #549110Guest[quote=AN]Brian, is it safe to say you’re in great shape with no health issue? What’s your BMI? Mine is 20.5.[/quote]
My BMI it 21.63 I’ve pretty much maintained the same weight since college.
I hardly ever use medical services.
May 9, 2010 at 12:07 PM #549387Guest[quote=AN]Brian, is it safe to say you’re in great shape with no health issue? What’s your BMI? Mine is 20.5.[/quote]
My BMI it 21.63 I’ve pretty much maintained the same weight since college.
I hardly ever use medical services.
May 9, 2010 at 12:14 PM #548423Guest[quote=poorgradstudent][quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-moreMinimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.
Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.[/quote]
poorgradstudent, your posts are always most reasonable and make the most sense.
I think it’s fun to observe the conservatives hang on to little things to get riled up over. It’s like they are constantly on the lookout for small things to prove that their rights are being trampled over so that they can feel outraged.
Listen to the conservatives talking-heads. It’s all about hate and outrage. Nothing positive ever drives them.
May 9, 2010 at 12:14 PM #548534Guest[quote=poorgradstudent][quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-moreMinimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.
Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.[/quote]
poorgradstudent, your posts are always most reasonable and make the most sense.
I think it’s fun to observe the conservatives hang on to little things to get riled up over. It’s like they are constantly on the lookout for small things to prove that their rights are being trampled over so that they can feel outraged.
Listen to the conservatives talking-heads. It’s all about hate and outrage. Nothing positive ever drives them.
May 9, 2010 at 12:14 PM #549016Guest[quote=poorgradstudent][quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-moreMinimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.
Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.[/quote]
poorgradstudent, your posts are always most reasonable and make the most sense.
I think it’s fun to observe the conservatives hang on to little things to get riled up over. It’s like they are constantly on the lookout for small things to prove that their rights are being trampled over so that they can feel outraged.
Listen to the conservatives talking-heads. It’s all about hate and outrage. Nothing positive ever drives them.
May 9, 2010 at 12:14 PM #549115Guest[quote=poorgradstudent][quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-moreMinimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.
Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.[/quote]
poorgradstudent, your posts are always most reasonable and make the most sense.
I think it’s fun to observe the conservatives hang on to little things to get riled up over. It’s like they are constantly on the lookout for small things to prove that their rights are being trampled over so that they can feel outraged.
Listen to the conservatives talking-heads. It’s all about hate and outrage. Nothing positive ever drives them.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.