I finally know why are fatter than generations ago!

Fat_Jimi

Damn. Can I literally laugh my *kitten* off??? I actually DO log my cleaning, but I think MFP grossly overestimates burn so I just half it - about 30 cal for 15 mins housework rather than 65, especially since I do eat some exercise cals back.

yea some of their estimats are a little off

it gives you 296 Cal's for an hour of using a ride on lawn mower WTF what so I can claim the same for driving to work, um I dont think so

gimpygramma

Vacuuming has not changed since the 1950s, so that is a really weird example. The only housekeeping activity that I can think of that might be significantly easier now is laundry. Seriously. Name another one and we pretty much do them all the same way. At least I know I do. I learned how to clean from my grandmother who was a bona fide 1950s housewife! So I'm quite literally using her technique.

In the 1950's the average new house was 1,200 square feet. Ours was 600. We didn't vacuum any more often and we had a lot less area to deal with. We cleaned 1 yes ONE bathroom. We had two sets of clothes on the go at any given time. Those that were worn to school or the office and the old ones we changed into when we got home. And we wore them several days before they went in the was. Sheets were not fitted. The accepted practise was to remove and wash the bottom one, and then put the top one on the bottom and a fresh one on the top. 3 beds...3 sheet to wash, not six. We bathed a couple of times a week, washed our hair once a week and reused towels. Grown ups did not wash dishes...kids washed dishes. They also put their own toys away. It was an easy job...typically just dumping them back into a single box. Kids also went outside to play. We did not have to hoist them into car seats, stand around soccer fields, or walk them to and from play dates....but I ramble.

Stormchasegrl

Damn. Can I literally laugh my *kitten* off??? I actually DO log my cleaning, but I think MFP grossly overestimates burn so I just half it - about 30 cal for 15 mins housework rather than 65, especially since I do eat some exercise cals back.

I actually thought it was an overestimate until I got my HRM. Granted, I've always tried to do my housework like it was exercise anyway (yes I dance around like an idiot, but at least I'm active and the HR is up!). I found MFP's number far lower than my own. So for the average person doing housework, I think their estimates are fairly accurate (again, just IMHO).

segooey

No, I read the article. Vacuuming has not changed since the 1950s, so that is a really weird example. The only housekeeping activity that I can think of that might be significantly easier now is laundry. Seriously. Name another one and we pretty much do them all the same way. At least I know I do. I learned how to clean from my grandmother who was a bona fide 1950s housewife! So I'm quite literally using her technique.

Additionally, read what I said about my job. I'm a teacher. I'm up all day. Nurses are up all day for damn sure, and do heavy (people) lifting to boot. Not every profession is sedentary. I'd venture to say that desk jobs are less to blame than the type and amount of processed food we eat. Desk jobs in offices are not a 21st century invention. People sat on their butts at a desk all day to use a typewriter in 1950 just like we use computers now. Something else is upsetting the math there.

I agree that the processed foods are the biggest culprit, people used to eat fresh, locally grown foods and cooked everything at home. I'm still working on staying away from as much processed food as possible, but just cutting back a little has already led to noticeable results. I'll never give up the occasional Whataburger though!

DavPul

Now you know why people say "Abs are made in the kitchen"! It must be from all that mopping and cleaning!

And sammich making. Never leave off the sammiches.

morgennn

Is it bad that I actually log the calories I burn whilst doing any housework? Haha

pudadough

No, I read the article. Vacuuming has not changed since the 1950s, so that is a really weird example. The only housekeeping activity that I can think of that might be significantly easier now is laundry. Seriously. Name another one and we pretty much do them all the same way. At least I know I do. I learned how to clean from my grandmother who was a bona fide 1950s housewife! So I'm quite literally using her technique.

Additionally, read what I said about my job. I'm a teacher. I'm up all day. Nurses are up all day for damn sure, and do heavy (people) lifting to boot. Not every profession is sedentary. I'd venture to say that desk jobs are less to blame than the type and amount of processed food we eat. Desk jobs in offices are not a 21st century invention. People sat on their butts at a desk all day to use a typewriter in 1950 just like we use computers now. Something else is upsetting the math there.

I agree that the processed foods are the biggest culprit, people used to eat fresh, locally grown foods and cooked everything at home. I'm still working on staying away from as much processed food as possible, but just cutting back a little has already led to noticeable results. I'll never give up the occasional Whataburger though!

Same here. Less processed crap. It's tough! But I will never cut out Whataburger completely. We'd lose our Texan cards for that, I think! :laugh:

pastryari

I call BS. Most women I know do their full time job and then come home and do the majority of housework, too. At least that's what my mom did and what I do (I'm not married, so I do all my own housework.) Furthermore, as a teacher, I am up all day, every day. I have more trouble keeping weight off in the summer when I only have housework to worry about. So yeah, I'm calling BS.

People in general are just fatter because we eat more crap food than ever before. Housework hasn't changed, the food and amount of it has.

If you had read the articles, rather than just the titles (like most have) you would have seen that they also attributed it to the fact that we are more technically advanced now than back then and housecleaning is made easier and doesn't require as much effort.

"For one thing, the effort involved is such activities today is less than it once was. Using modern, gliding vacuum cleaners is less taxing than struggling with the clunky, heavy machines once available, and thank goodness for that."


It also referenced that more people are sitting in front of a screen now and are more sedentary than they once were.


"In essence, women had exchanged time spent in active pursuits, like vacuuming, for time spent being sedentary."

Housework, our exercise, and energies expended have most definitely decreased so I'd have to disagree with you about it being the food that is the sole problem.

No, I read the article. Vacuuming has not changed since the 1950s, so that is a really weird example. The only housekeeping activity that I can think of that might be significantly easier now is laundry. Seriously. Name another one and we pretty much do them all the same way. At least I know I do. I learned how to clean from my grandmother who was a bona fide 1950s housewife! So I'm quite literally using her technique.

Additionally, read what I said about my job. I'm a teacher. I'm up all day. Nurses are up all day for damn sure, and do heavy (people) lifting to boot. Not every profession is sedentary. I'd venture to say that desk jobs are less to blame than the type and amount of processed food we eat. Desk jobs in offices are not a 21st century invention. People sat on their butts at a desk all day to use a typewriter in 1950 just like we use computers now. Something else is upsetting the math there.

Vaccuming has changed. They are now smaller, more compact, lighter, and made easier to push.

You seem to think I'm talking about you specifically. This is talking about the population as a whole. Not you and your specific job. Can you really argue and believe that we as a population have not gotten more sedentary? People didn't used to spend hours in front of the TV and/or computer.

Processed food is not evil. Your original post's concluding sentence gives the impression that you think food is the only culprit. I disagree. We can control how much we eat and fast food, processed food, and "junk" foods all consumed in moderation will not result in obesity. Eating at a surplus and being lazy will.

pastryari

No, I read the article. Vacuuming has not changed since the 1950s, so that is a really weird example. The only housekeeping activity that I can think of that might be significantly easier now is laundry. Seriously. Name another one and we pretty much do them all the same way. At least I know I do. I learned how to clean from my grandmother who was a bona fide 1950s housewife! So I'm quite literally using her technique.

Additionally, read what I said about my job. I'm a teacher. I'm up all day. Nurses are up all day for damn sure, and do heavy (people) lifting to boot. Not every profession is sedentary. I'd venture to say that desk jobs are less to blame than the type and amount of processed food we eat. Desk jobs in offices are not a 21st century invention. People sat on their butts at a desk all day to use a typewriter in 1950 just like we use computers now. Something else is upsetting the math there.

I agree that the processed foods are the biggest culprit, people used to eat fresh, locally grown foods and cooked everything at home. I'm still working on staying away from as much processed food as possible, but just cutting back a little has already led to noticeable results. I'll never give up the occasional Whataburger though!

Eating at a surplus, regardless of if the is food is processed or not, will still result in weight gain. Processed food alone is not the "biggest culprit." In respects to just food, overeating is.

jnichel

Right now, I'm going to tell my wife to get her butt busy cleaning the house.....right after she makes my sammich that is.

segooey

I agree that the processed foods are the biggest culprit, people used to eat fresh, locally grown foods and cooked everything at home. I'm still working on staying away from as much processed food as possible, but just cutting back a little has already led to noticeable results. I'll never give up the occasional Whataburger though!

Eating at a surplus, regardless of if the is food is processed or not, will still result in weight gain. Processed food alone is not the "biggest culprit." In respects to just food, overeating is.

Of course the food being heavily processed is not the narrow, simple reason why. Everything is more complex than that, but the heavily processed foods and modern farming techniques, globalization, etc. have led to larger portion sizes, cheap and abundant fatty foods, and 24/7 easy access to all you can eat everything.

foxro

Well, back in the day when
-carpets were cleaned by being pulled outside, hoisted over a line, and beaten until no more dust came out
-dish water had to be brought in from the well, heated on the stove (after bringing in cords of wood from the woodpile), and brought bucket by bucket to a wash bin
and ect.. housekeeping was quite a lot of work. I imagine the muscle mass on women was near equal to men (esp farming wives, as they had farm duties on top of house duties). They had no need for extra exercise.
Now, compare that to pressing a button on the dishwasher, or running an electric vaccume....

Exactly, most of my senior relatives were farmers who worked long hours 7 days(with Sunday off maybe for church). Many doing mostly manual labour, but wow did we have good cookin

SuzieQ724

Just finished 6 loads of laundry. Hope that counts for something

SwimFan1981

Eating too much ****ty food.

disawell

Just finished 6 loads of laundry. Hope that counts for something

it does, whether exercise or not. You do a valuable thing for your family