There's something very wrong here...

Options
myofibril
myofibril Posts: 4,500 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
So, after a wonderful couple of weeks watching the Olympics I was inspired to research the training schedules of the athletes and see how they compared with my own. This lead me to seeing what an average person would do in general as well.

I couldn't find a lot of readily accessible data about the UK where I live but there was a fair amount of data from the US floating around which honestly shocked me. Given the UK is similar to the US I believe we are probably much the same.

In 1971, the average US woman consumed about 1,542 calories per day. In 2000, this had risen to 1,877 a difference of 335 calories per day. This is equivalent to 122, 275 calories a year or an extra 35lbs of fat...

For men the numbers rose from 2,450 to 2,618 an increase of 168 calories per day. This is equivalent to an extra 17.5lbs of fat.

80% watch TV every day, with the average person watching a whopping 5 hours per day or 35 hours per week. Only 5% were engaged in vigorous exercising daily, with 16% engaging is sports or exercise per day.

This doesn't even factor in increasing automation meaning we are more sedentary and engage in less physical activity.

Our perception of what is normal has become hugely distorted with time. Is it any wonder our respective nations are getting fatter and fatter? I wager if people reverted to a 1970 calorie intake and devoted a meagre 1/5th of the time they spent watching TV on average to exercise then our obesity problem would rapidly diminish.

We have become pampered, complacent and self delusional. No wonder our waistlines are expanding...
«1345

Replies

  • Sidesteal
    Sidesteal Posts: 5,510 Member
    Options
    So, after a wonderful couple of weeks watching the Olympics I was inspired to research the training schedules of the athletes and see how they compared with my own. This lead me to seeing what an average person would do in general as well.

    I couldn't find a lot of readily accessible data about the UK where I live but there was a fair amount of data from the US floating around which honestly shocked me. Given the UK is similar to the US I believe we are probably much the same.

    In 1971, the average US woman consumed about 1,542 calories per day. In 2000, this had risen to 1,877 a difference of 335 calories per day. This is equivalent to 122, 275 calories a year or an extra 35lbs of fat...

    For men the numbers rose from 2,450 to 2,618 an increase of 168 calories per day. This is equivalent to an extra 17.5lbs of fat.

    80% watch TV every day, with the average person watching a whopping 5 hours per day or 35 hours per week. Only 5% were engaged in vigorous exercising daily, with 16% engaging is sports or exercise per day.

    This doesn't even factor in increasing automation meaning we are more sedentary and engage in less physical activity.

    Our perception of what is normal has become hugely distorted with time. Is it any wonder our respective nations are getting fatter and fatter? I wager if people reverted to a 1970 calorie intake and devoted a meagre 1/5th of the time they spent watching TV on average to exercise then our obesity problem would rapidly diminish.

    We have become pampered, complacent and self delusional. No wonder our waistlines are expanding...

    Glad you posted this. There seems to be a chunk of people who like to pin obesity on singular things outside of thermodynamics and this post is a pretty good example of the problem. We're eating more and moving less. Period.
  • k2quiere
    k2quiere Posts: 4,151 Member
    Options
    We have become pampered, complacent and self delusional. No wonder our waistlines are expanding...

    This pretty much sums it all up right here. Brilliant as always, my dear!
  • ElizabethRoad
    ElizabethRoad Posts: 5,138 Member
    Options
    Yes, people eat more now. What did you think was causing the obesity problem?
  • Jacwhite22
    Jacwhite22 Posts: 7,012 Member
    Options
    I gained weight because I didn't eat enough and ate too much sugar.
  • myofibril
    myofibril Posts: 4,500 Member
    Options

    Glad you posted this. There seems to be a chunk of people who like to pin obesity on singular things outside of thermodynamics and this post is a pretty good example of the problem. We're eating more and moving less. Period.

    I'm just waiting for someone to say "yeah, but the increase in calories was mainly due to increased carbs" and then it will become about insulin and metabolic advantage and the tooth fairy....
  • myofibril
    myofibril Posts: 4,500 Member
    Options
    Yes, people eat more now. What did you think was causing the obesity problem?

    Carbs.
  • sullrico18
    sullrico18 Posts: 261 Member
    Options
    Well said!
  • deadbeatsummer
    deadbeatsummer Posts: 537 Member
    Options
    UK is not quite as up there with obesity as USA:

    http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_obe-health-obesity
  • flsl
    flsl Posts: 75 Member
    Options
    Thats v interesting. No wonder I ve been so curvy and my mum was so slim!
  • Cliffslosinit
    Cliffslosinit Posts: 5,044 Member
    Options
    Spot on....nice post.
    Ignore the smartas ses
  • castadiva
    castadiva Posts: 2,016 Member
    Options


    In 1971, the average US woman consumed about 1,542 calories per day. In 2000, this had risen to 1,877 a difference of 335 calories per day. This is equivalent to 122, 275 calories a year or an extra 35lbs of fat...

    For men the numbers rose from 2,450 to 2,618 an increase of 168 calories per day. This is equivalent to an extra 17.5lbs of fat.

    80% watch TV every day, with the average person watching a whopping 5 hours per day or 35 hours per week. Only 5% were engaged in vigorous exercising daily, with 16% engaging is sports or exercise per day.

    Interesting, but I'd find it even more so if you'd found information about physical activity levels in 1971 as well. The TV was fairly well-established by then, and the cult of 'exercise' was not yet as dominant as it is today.
  • bassmanlarry
    bassmanlarry Posts: 117 Member
    Options
    It is amazing if you look at how much our portion sizes have increased and what is considered a normal meal.
  • DoomCakes
    DoomCakes Posts: 806 Member
    Options
    I could not agree with this more... also, the "normal" weight has shifted too over the years making it so obesity is basically stated as "that's normal" now where as back in the day, it was important to be fit.
  • Jacwhite22
    Jacwhite22 Posts: 7,012 Member
    Options
    This post doesn't take into account the special snowflakes.
  • beckajw
    beckajw Posts: 1,738 Member
    Options
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-465769/Can-modern-family-survive-wartime-rations.html

    Here is an interesting article about war time rationing in the UK. Calorie intake (3,000 per day for men) remains almost the same. However, fat, sugar and protein consumption have increased.
  • beckajw
    beckajw Posts: 1,738 Member
    Options
    I could not agree with this more... also, the "normal" weight has shifted too over the years making it so obesity is basically stated as "that's normal" now where as back in the day, it was important to be fit.

    Are you sure about this?
  • Sidesteal
    Sidesteal Posts: 5,510 Member
    Options

    Glad you posted this. There seems to be a chunk of people who like to pin obesity on singular things outside of thermodynamics and this post is a pretty good example of the problem. We're eating more and moving less. Period.

    I'm just waiting for someone to say "yeah, but the increase in calories was mainly due to increased carbs" and then it will become about insulin and metabolic advantage and the tooth fairy....

    ^LOL

    And yes, that is exactly what will happen. Or someone will choose a singular food item.
  • _magnolias
    _magnolias Posts: 13
    Options
    It is also the quality of the food. Our food is so processed these days that a meal that we had back in the 70's has more calories in it now then it did then. I'm not talking about homemade stuff, but instead the tendency to, instead of making say homemade dinner, going and buying a TV dinner, or instead of a grilled hamburger you did yourself, going to McDonalds. We are packing in food that is so bastardized most people can't even decipher the ingredient contents.

    And this may actually be different in the UK then here in the US. I spent two months there for school last year and noticed a lot of the ingredients were actually Real rather then chemical compositions; but that may have also been where I shopped? I was really quite surprised at not only the actually food in food (so sad I even have to say that) but it's improved taste.

    Like Coca-cola? I can't stomach it here, there, with real sugar? Best soda in the world.
  • mogletdeluxe
    mogletdeluxe Posts: 623 Member
    Options
    I think that the perception of what is 'fat' has changed hugely (no pun intended over the years). I was considered 'the fat kid' in school; I was not THAT much larger than your average schoolkid in the playground now.

    Vanity sizing also has a LOT to answer for.
  • myofibril
    myofibril Posts: 4,500 Member
    Options
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-465769/Can-modern-family-survive-wartime-rations.html

    Here is an interesting article about war time rationing in the UK. Calorie intake (3,000 per day for men) remains almost the same. However, fat, sugar and protein consumption have increased.

    3000 calories per day. Good lord, what kind of rationing is that exactly? Having said that the article does sensibly state:
    Under rationing, men were allowed 3,000 calories a day - slightly higher than 2,500 recommended today. But the reality is most of us consume as much as 3,100 calories.

    As Dr Toni Steer, a nutritionist with the Medical Research Council, explains: "Whatever people consume today, it is too much. The reason so many of us are overweight is because we eat too much and exercise too little.

Categories