Why is Belgium so Skinny?

Options
123468

Replies

  • doktorglass
    doktorglass Posts: 91 Member
    edited May 2015
    Options
    Acg67 wrote: »
    doktorglass wrote: »
    Acg67 wrote: »
    The rise in obesity on the US is negatively correlated with sugar consumption over the last decade. Hmmmm

    Is that because of increased use of High Fructose Corn Syrup?

    Hfcs is also sugar...

    Yes, I know. But when they say "measured sugar consumption" I kind of assumed sucrose. Otherwise they would have to know all products bought that contained all sugars (fructose, glucose, sucrose, lactose and so on.). Which sounds like a monumental task considering that HFCS is in everything.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Options
    I haven't found good data on activity level @rainbowbow . I hadn't known about chartsbin. That might be a new hangout for a data fiend like me.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Options
    jgnatca wrote: »
    I haven't found good data on activity level @rainbowbow . I hadn't known about chartsbin. That might be a new hangout for a data fiend like me.

    Wouldn't a data fiend actually care about data integrity? As someone who actually works with data analytics as their job, actual integrity of the data is super important. Odd that a so called fiend would dig into crappy data like the WHO uses
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Options
    I'll trust the WHO analysis over you, @Acg67 . I may be an amateur data fiend, but I did stick with the same data set and I knew the data was in grams.
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    Options
    Which, as has been pointed out to you twice, is close to worthless. Without knowing how many Calories are input, it's just numbers.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Options
    jgnatca wrote: »
    I'll trust the WHO analysis over you, @Acg67 . I may be an amateur data fiend, but I did stick with the same data set and I knew the data was in grams.

    There is no analysis, it's an aggregation of food availability data from various countries. So how strong of a proxy is that for actual per capita consumption? Does it vary by region/state/etc? That would matter in a country like the US with a huge geography.

    For WHO recommendations that base it off of observational studies that used FFQ, how are those in terms of accuracy?

    You can use the same data sets, but if the underlying data is crap, it doesn't matter. Even an amateur would understand that
  • usmcmp
    usmcmp Posts: 21,220 Member
    Options
    3000 grams of potatoes is 2580 Calories.
    3000 grams of zucchini is 540 Calories.
    3000 grams of broccoli is 1040 Calories.

    See how grams of food just doesn't mean much? Those are just vegetables. We aren't even comparing vegetables to fat, which would change that dramatically.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Options
    usmcmp wrote: »
    3000 grams of potatoes is 2580 Calories.
    3000 grams of zucchini is 540 Calories.
    3000 grams of broccoli is 1040 Calories.

    See how grams of food just doesn't mean much? Those are just vegetables. We aren't even comparing vegetables to fat, which would change that dramatically.

    Semantics and logic, pls go
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Options
    @usmcmp however, if I compare apples to apples, comparisons can still be made.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Options
    Global_Overweight_BothSexes_2008.png
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Options
    jgnatca wrote: »
    Global_Overweight_BothSexes_2008.png

    That's not apples to apples data though LOL

    Not very good at this, eh?

  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    Options
    Just a handful of the categories used to determine how many grams consumed:

    "Berries and other small fruits, fresh"
    "Citrus fruits, fresh"
    "Tree nuts (excl. groundnut)"
    "Roots and tubers processeded"
    "Fruiting vegetables (other than cucurbits) and mushrooms"
    "Other and mixed vegetables"
    "Sauces & Vinegars"
    "Fruit & vegetable juices"
    "Out of classifying"


    Not apples to apples. Not by a long shot. Again, for the fourth(?) time - this data is pretty close to utterly worthless.
  • usmcmp
    usmcmp Posts: 21,220 Member
    Options
    jgnatca wrote: »
    @usmcmp however, if I compare apples to apples, comparisons can still be made.

    The whole point is that you came in wondering how one country can do better than another based on grams ingested. The original numbers you gave included a dramatic difference in water consumption as well, which skewed the numbers. Your data had nothing to do with calories, just grams and macro breakdown (which I showed you both countries are nearly identical). Once you get down to actual relevant data (like calories in and calories out) is where you can make actual comparisons.
  • jaga13
    jaga13 Posts: 1,149 Member
    Options
    Based on the high carb intake on your original pie chart, I'd bet they eat a ton of veggies (which are carbs, but low calories). They may eat a lot of grams, but that doesn't mean a lot of calories.

    Also, and maybe this is total fiction from the movies, but don't they tend to be tall?? That would mean they can eat more in general.

    And of course there are numerous comments about how they tend to be very active.
  • usmcmp
    usmcmp Posts: 21,220 Member
    Options
    TR0berts wrote: »
    Just a handful of the categories used to determine how many grams consumed:

    "Berries and other small fruits, fresh"
    "Citrus fruits, fresh"
    "Tree nuts (excl. groundnut)"
    "Roots and tubers processeded"
    "Fruiting vegetables (other than cucurbits) and mushrooms"
    "Other and mixed vegetables"
    "Sauces & Vinegars"
    "Fruit & vegetable juices"
    "Out of classifying"


    Not apples to apples. Not by a long shot. Again, for the fourth(?) time - this data is pretty close to utterly worthless.

    I think I'm going to start telling my trainer how many grams of food I am eating, not how many calories or what my macros are. "Oh don't worry I only had 900 grams of food yesterday, the fact that it was an entire pizza doesn't matter."
  • greco16
    greco16 Posts: 465 Member
    Options
    Could be an average for all the food types in grams.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Options
    DietaryClusterGrams.jpg
    I've removed water and "out of classifying". Now Belgium is pretty on par with the US. They still have less of an overweight problem than the US, as does most of Europe.
  • andrikosDE
    andrikosDE Posts: 383 Member
    Options
    TR0berts wrote: »
    Just a handful of the categories used to determine how many grams consumed:

    "Berries and other small fruits, fresh"
    "Citrus fruits, fresh"
    "Tree nuts (excl. groundnut)"
    "Roots and tubers processeded"
    "Fruiting vegetables (other than cucurbits) and mushrooms"
    "Other and mixed vegetables"
    "Sauces & Vinegars"
    "Fruit & vegetable juices"
    "Out of classifying"


    Not apples to apples. Not by a long shot. Again, for the fourth(?) time - this data is pretty close to utterly worthless.

    You forgot a category:
    Gravy
  • greco16
    greco16 Posts: 465 Member
    Options
    Well, here's my 1000 gram menu, coming in at 1743 kcal. Better cut out some high fat foods to make it to 3000 grams!

    100 g dark chocolate 546 kcal
    100 g gruyere cheese 413 kcal
    100 g green lettuce 15 kcal
    100 g brocolli 34 kcal
    100 g tomatoes 18 kcal
    100 g boiled eggs 155c
    100 g French bread 289 kcal (but I think they eat some type of rye, whole wheat)
    100 g ham, lean 145 kcal
    100 ml orange juice 45 kcal
    100 ml wine 83 kcal


    1000 g/ml =1743 kcal

Categories