Easier to lose in the 80s?
Options
Replies
-
Have you all seen charts juxtaposing HFCS production and US obesity rates by year? That data seems pretty compelling to me. Maybe food packaging and pesticides disrupt endocrine processes, but Ockham's razor suggests we've been supersized, and we undercount calories by a supersized amount. That's really the simplest explanation.
0 -
Did the study take into account the change in BMI charts? People who were a "normal" weight 5 years ago are now "overweight" according to the current chart.
And how can you blame portion sizing if the people in the study are eating the same amount of calories now as they did then?0 -
I still have to read the study, but it doesn't surprise me that human bodies evolve over time and some factors may contribute to how we utilize the nutrients that go in our body, but it's still how many calories you eat that determines if you gain or lose weight.
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »Have you all seen charts juxtaposing HFCS production and US obesity rates by year? That data seems pretty compelling to me. Maybe food packaging and pesticides disrupt endocrine processes, but Ockham's razor suggests we've been supersized, and we undercount calories by a supersized amount. That's really the simplest explanation.
.svg/2000px-PiratesVsTemp(en).svg.png)
0 -
And how can you blame portion sizing if the people in the study are eating the same amount of calories now as they did then?
The study is depending on self-reported dietary intake. Like "a glass of orange juice". Does "a glass of orange juice" look the same today as it did in 1980? That's where I think self-perception of portion sizes may have gradually up-sized over the years.
Even better, let's take "one muffin"
Or "one muffin"
0 -
soulofgrace wrote: »The numbers here are all taken from self reported data. How reliable can that possibly be? I'd say they can be confident that their findings show present day activity estimates are more inflated than the self reported estimates from the 80's.
If they are taking from self-reported data then I agree that the numbers are not accurate. I didn't read the link, but really how many people are honestly going to say they're eating more now than they did in the 80s? Many people are in denial and are going to say they're eating the same and exercising the same so something else has to be the reason they can't lose weight.
Also - as many have mentioned, the portion sizes have really increased in that amount of time. So sure, someone may say I'm only eating one hamburger but the size of the hamburger (weight) may have changed, the other ingredients in it might have changed, the hamburger bun has changed . . . . we may think we're only eating the one hamburger but the amount of calories in that one hamburger has more than likely gone up and I'm pretty sure lots of people are still in denial about that.0 -
CasperNaegle wrote: »I still have to read the study, but it doesn't surprise me that human bodies evolve over time and some factors may contribute to how we utilize the nutrients that go in our body, but it's still how many calories you eat that determines if you gain or lose weight.
Not sure you mean the term evolve.0 -
Another thing to keep in mind is that correlation does not equal causation. It would be just as simple to state that there are far more hybrid cars now than in the '80s, so hybrid cars cause obesity. Or that people drink more energy drinks now than then, so energy drinks are the cause of obesity. While both may be valid correlations, there's no evidence actually linking them to causation.
Obtuse correlations aside, there are some things that we do know:
1) Caloric intake in excess of expenditure causes weight gain.
2) Being more sedentary reduces caloric expenditure.
3) We, as a society, are far more sedentary now than ever before.
4) We, as a society, are far more obese now than ever before.
It's said that "you can't out-exercise a bad diet". While that may be true, when both exercise and NEAT plummet, it makes a significant difference in our overall caloric balances. Combine that reduction of expenditure with an increase in portion sizes/intake and voila.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »People were talking about being healthy in the 80s. Then, it wasn't step-counting, it was Aerobicizing. And Jazzercising. Instead of fitbits, they wore leg warmers and headbands. Same motives, different era.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing (although I recall leg warmers as a weird fashion trend unconnected with fitness, from my jr high years, if memory serves).
Can confirm, I wasn't in school yet but I wanted *all of* the legwarmers (which were readily available) and had at least one pair (with glitter) and it was completely normal to wear them around. Or I thought so.0 -
acorsaut89 wrote: »If they are taking from self-reported data then I agree that the numbers are not accurate. I didn't read the link, but really how many people are honestly going to say they're eating more now than they did in the 80s? Many people are in denial and are going to say they're eating the same and exercising the same so something else has to be the reason they can't lose weight.
I haven't looked at the study, just the conclusions, but at the very least I believe they are taking the self-reported data from the 1980's from contemporary studies. That is, people were interviewed in the 1980's about how many calories they are consuming. Not making old ladies like me remember what we had for breakfast back then.
Even so, our perceptions, as you point out so well, may have changed quite a bit. What does "a burger" look like now compared to then? Or a "cup of coffee"? How much cream do we put in these days?0 -
They analysed the results from the " National Health and Nutrition Survey (NHANES)"
Here's contemporary questions, starting on page 15. All self-reported.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/nhanes_13_14/DBQ_H.pdf
More questions, listed down the side:
http://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/2009-2010/DTQ_F.htm
0 -
I counted calories in the 70's and 80's. I had Jane Fonda's audio cassette tapes, I couldn't afford the VCR tapes, back in those days a tape could cost more than I made in a month. I lost weight when I was at a deficit, just like I do today. I just don't have to eat tuna and green beans for dinner every night. I remember eating a hamburger and fries for lunch, because it looked so good, knowing that I wouldn't be able to eat the rest of the day, if I didn't want to exceed my calorie limit. It was in the 90's and 2000's when I said,"Oh, screw it, I am going to eat all the food." And I did and now here I am losing decades worth of weight in 2015.0
-
acorsaut89 wrote: »If they are taking from self-reported data then I agree that the numbers are not accurate. I didn't read the link, but really how many people are honestly going to say they're eating more now than they did in the 80s? Many people are in denial and are going to say they're eating the same and exercising the same so something else has to be the reason they can't lose weight.
I haven't looked at the study, just the conclusions, but at the very least I believe they are taking the self-reported data from the 1980's from contemporary studies. That is, people were interviewed in the 1980's about how many calories they are consuming. Not making old ladies like me remember what we had for breakfast back then.
Even so, our perceptions, as you point out so well, may have changed quite a bit. What does "a burger" look like now compared to then? Or a "cup of coffee"? How much cream do we put in these days?
Ha ha that makes sense . . . it wouldn't be super beneficial - I don't think - to ask people what they ate 30+ years ago - I couldn't even tell you what I ate 3 months ago. I mean I could guess and then go check my log but without a log, I couldn't tell you. I just know that even now if someone I know eats something they claim is "healthy" (and I hate it when people do the healthy vs. bad . . . but that's another story for another thread lol) and I sit down with them and figure out how many calories they actually just ate and then I show them how much food I can get in for the same worth of calories and they flip out. But it just goes to show there's a lot of people out there who truly, honestly (and maybe just by not being educated on it) really don't know what they're eating. And when you don't know what you're eating but trying to guess calories . . . you could be really off. And even if you're just off by like 200 or 300, they definitely add up. There are a lot of contributing factors to why obesity is so high for sure, but over eating (and not understanding what we eat) has to be among the top.0 -
And how can you blame portion sizing if the people in the study are eating the same amount of calories now as they did then?
Because the only way we know how much people are eating is self reporting.
If portion sizing changes and larger sizes seem normal, people may be underestimating what they eat even more than before.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »People were talking about being healthy in the 80s. Then, it wasn't step-counting, it was Aerobicizing. And Jazzercising. Instead of fitbits, they wore leg warmers and headbands. Same motives, different era.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing (although I recall leg warmers as a weird fashion trend unconnected with fitness, from my jr high years, if memory serves).
Can confirm, I wasn't in school yet but I wanted *all of* the legwarmers (which were readily available) and had at least one pair (with glitter) and it was completely normal to wear them around. Or I thought so.
With a mini skirt.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
We also know what is made and sold, so we have a maximum figure from that.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
We also know what is made and sold, so we have a maximum figure from that.
But that evidence shows a tremendous increase in calories consumed.0 -
Is this a serious thread? Just seems like an excuse to me.
If anything.... It's easier? Would you like to count calories by scrolling through a book? No thanks Jeff.....0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »People were talking about being healthy in the 80s. Then, it wasn't step-counting, it was Aerobicizing. And Jazzercising. Instead of fitbits, they wore leg warmers and headbands. Same motives, different era.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing (although I recall leg warmers as a weird fashion trend unconnected with fitness, from my jr high years, if memory serves).
Can confirm, I wasn't in school yet but I wanted *all of* the legwarmers (which were readily available) and had at least one pair (with glitter) and it was completely normal to wear them around. Or I thought so.
With a mini skirt.
LOL I don't think my mom would have let me, probably with a "princess" outfit, who the hell knows lol
I did however have a ton of plastic bangles and jelly shoes0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 931 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions