"... Could Be Linked to Obesity..."
Kimegatron
Posts: 772 Member
So I'm reading the new issue of Parents magazine... Not even 1/2 way in, I have read 3 articles already saying "such and such" is or could be linked to obesity...
Isn't what you feed yourself, or your children, as in quantity, the only thing linked to obesity, aside from medical issues??? What is going on?!
Drinking more than 12oz of caffeine a day COULD be linked to obesity
Giving antiobotics can cause tummy troubles and have been linked to obesity
What you talk about at the dinner table COULD/IS linked to obesity...
Isn't what you feed yourself, or your children, as in quantity, the only thing linked to obesity, aside from medical issues??? What is going on?!
Drinking more than 12oz of caffeine a day COULD be linked to obesity
Giving antiobotics can cause tummy troubles and have been linked to obesity
What you talk about at the dinner table COULD/IS linked to obesity...
0
Replies
-
There's a different between a link and a cause, IMO. A link can be indirect but still a link. For example, if dinner conversation is very calm and enjoyable, people may linger a bit and graze more. Any obesity down the road is obviously directly attributable to excess calories but there could be an indirect lifestyle link.0
-
I lol'd; this just in----
Posting on MyFitnessPal now linked to obesity...0 -
The problem with these "links" is that they're presented as meaningful findings to a world that is desperate for a solution that doesn't involve admitting that you overeat.0
-
It just really seems... like a far stretch. Is everything just going to be linked now?0
-
Kimegatron wrote: »It just really seems... like a far stretch. Is everything just going to be linked now?
6 Degrees of Obesity.
Now instead of Kevin Bacon, they all just end in bacon.0 -
They say "linked" because "cause" wouldn't be accurate, but they still want to give the impression of "cause."0
-
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
6 Degrees of Obesity.
Now instead of Kevin Bacon, they all just end in bacon.
LOL!!!
0 -
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
Beware of news stories that imply causation from correlation.0 -
Well, obesity is about what you eat, but consider this - your body is supposed to be able to keep you at a reasonable weight without extra help. That is, the whole point of hunger and satiety is to keep you at a healthy body weight, and your body has mechanisms to regulate these.
The fact that so many of us need to resort to artificial methods like calorie counting just to not be obese anymore tells you something about that weight regulation system is broken. It's true that we can use technology to augment our lives and achieve the results we want, but it would be better if our bodies could do that on their own - if we could just use hunger and satiety to keep our weight in line.
I think research into why obesity is on such a huge rise is useful so not everyone needs to go through what we are to be healthy.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »Well, obesity is about what you eat, but consider this - your body is supposed to be able to keep you at a reasonable weight without extra help. That is, the whole point of hunger and satiety is to keep you at a healthy body weight, and your body has mechanisms to regulate these.
The fact that so many of us need to resort to artificial methods like calorie counting just to not be obese anymore tells you something about that weight regulation system is broken. It's true that we can use technology to augment our lives and achieve the results we want, but it would be better if our bodies could do that on their own - if we could just use hunger and satiety to keep our weight in line.
I think research into why obesity is on such a huge rise is useful so not everyone needs to go through what we are to be healthy.
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.0 -
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Kimegatron wrote: »It just really seems... like a far stretch. Is everything just going to be linked now?
6 Degrees of Obesity.
Now instead of Kevin Bacon, they all just end in bacon.
Am listening to "Footloose" right now, actually. Does this count as being linked?
0 -
rankinsect wrote: »Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
There have been very significant changes to both lifestyle and wealth in the past four generations, at least in the western world. Technology has advanced more in the past 50 years than it has in all of human history prior to that.
The baby boomers were nowhere near as sedentary as subsequent generations, because even though they worked at desk jobs, the basic everyday things they did in life required more movement. Need to buy something? They went to the store; we order online. Want to watch TV? They walked over to it to change the channel; we use Netflix and a remote. Need to look something up? They went to the library; we check Wikipedia. And so on, and so forth.
And the wealth thing is significant too. For most of human history, being fat was a sign of wealth; the poor didn't have enough to eat. In the past 50 years or so in western nations, obesity is inversely linked to wealth; it's the wealthy who have time to go to the gym or hire personal trainers or cook kale and spinach salads. The poorer you are, the more you will end up relying on fast food and on "approved" foods on food stamps and on foods that can be quickly consumed between your multiple part-time jobs.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
Baby boomers were sedentary as adults, yes, but much more active as kids. No video games, cartoons were only on tv Saturday mornings.
0 -
Eating too much food is the only direct link to obesity.0
-
Kimegatron wrote: »So I'm reading the new issue of Parents magazine... Not even 1/2 way in, I have read 3 articles already saying "such and such" is or could be linked to obesity...
Isn't what you feed yourself, or your children, as in quantity, the only thing linked to obesity, aside from medical issues??? What is going on?!
Drinking more than 12oz of caffeine a day COULD be linked to obesity
Giving antiobotics can cause tummy troubles and have been linked to obesity
What you talk about at the dinner table COULD/IS linked to obesity...
2/3 of American society is linked to obesity.0 -
Magazine purchases is linked to obesity.0
-
-
rankinsect wrote: »
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
Not that significant of changes? Who told you that?
Baby boomers were engineered for war through the school systems. JFK made PE a priority as a way to make 18 year olds physically ready for military-grade endurance.
They didn't have devices like today. Their entertainment was all outdoors, hardly ever indoors.
Today, PE is put on the backburner because we are too burdened with paying for everyone else's convenience and comfort in society. Fitness and nutrition were always unimportant since the 70s/80s. Now that everyone has diseases (which a good majority are linked to obesity), everyone needs a pill for something, and most jobs are either sedentary, enveloped in highly accessible horribly overpriced food (people dont cook in this century), or both. I speak in generalities, but these are things baby boomers didn't have to deal with.
We are creating diseases that are highly linked to nutrition, and obesity is directly related to nutrition. For most of these people, they are preventable if some doctor doesn't give them a bandaid (a pill) and educates them on nutrition and tells them to move their *kitten*. Problem is...advice isnt profitable, and we live in a society that likes profit too much. Just check out the names of Bowl Games this year. Ridiculous.
If a person eats right for their physical output, he/she will never become overweight/obese, or have most these diseases that are linked to something.
I eat tons of fatty meats, tons of coffee, have had tons of fast food, and I am on the upper end of overweight...I don't have one disease, or take one gosh damn pill. My cholesterol levels are better than 90% of "healthy" people.
The difference is...I move my *kitten*. So long as you move, your body knows what to do. Its Darwinian. Like a person said before me here: our bodies haven't evolved to handle unlimited food source with less energy expenditure.
That's it.0 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »rankinsect wrote: »
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
Not that significant of changes? Who told you that?
Baby boomers were engineered for war through the school systems. JFK made PE a priority as a way to make 18 year olds physically ready for military-grade endurance.
They didn't have devices like today. Their entertainment was all outdoors, hardly ever indoors.
Today, PE is put on the backburner because we are too burdened with paying for everyone else's convenience and comfort in society. Fitness and nutrition were always unimportant since the 70s/80s. Now that everyone has diseases (which a good majority are linked to obesity), everyone needs a pill for something, and most jobs are either sedentary, enveloped in highly accessible horribly overpriced food (people dont cook in this century), or both. I speak in generalities, but these are things baby boomers didn't have to deal with.
We are creating diseases that are highly linked to nutrition, and obesity is directly related to nutrition. For most of these people, they are preventable if some doctor doesn't give them a babdaid (a pill) and educates them on nutrition and tells them to move their *kitten*. Problem is...advice isnt profitable, and we live in a society that likes profit too much. Just check out the names of Bowl Games this year. Ridiculous.
If a person eats right for their physical output, he/she will never become overweight/obese, or have most these diseases that are linked to something.
I eat tons of fatty meats, tons of coffee, have had tons of fast food, and I am on the upper end of overweight...I don't have one disease, or take one gosh damn pill. My cholesterol levels are better than 90% of "healthy" people.
The difference is...I move my *kitten*. So long as you move, your body knows what to do. Its Darwinian. Like a person said before me here: our bodies haven't evolved to handle unlimited food source with less energy expenditure.
That's it.
Drugs are profitable while advice isn't. Do these 2 images help?
Isn't everything liked to obesity and cancer nowadays? Always through oddly biased studies. Where they reach so far they could teach yoga classes.
Apples linked to obesity. This study paid for by the citrus fruit coalition.
0 -
food could be linked to obesity
quick everyone stop eating!
whatever. i dont read crap like that cause it pisses me off.... if people would make their kids play outside instead of plopping them in front of a screen, a lot of the issue would be solved.....
0 -
My kids' activity is not remotely like mine was at their age.rankinsect wrote: »
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
I left the house after breakfast and came back when the streetlights came on. They move, but nothing like that.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Kimegatron wrote: »It just really seems... like a far stretch. Is everything just going to be linked now?
6 Degrees of Obesity.
Now instead of Kevin Bacon, they all just end in bacon.
Am listening to "Footloose" right now, actually. Does this count as being linked?
Ban dancing, and all the kids get obese.0 -
I think having working eyeballs is linked to obesity, because when I see food, I am more likely to want to eat it.0
-
Kimegatron wrote: »I think having working eyeballs is linked to obesity, because when I see food, I am more likely to want to eat it.
Hahahaha! This made me literally spew water out of my nose.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
We used to temper the changes that segacs referenced through cultural restrictions on eating: for example, by having certain ideas about what proper meals were, about when mealtimes were (and not eating overmuch at other times), eating as a socially-regulated activity (family meals). Now we don't, and more and more it seems people eat all the time and think a meal isn't protein, veg, and starch (or some such), but whatever yummy thing I feel like eating in whatever portion since we have no clue what a proper amount is anymore.
If you think humans should be able to naturally regulate our eating, that wouldn't matter, but why on earth would we have ever evolved to do that? We never had to learn to deal with this kind of situation, so it wouldn't have given people a survival advantage. So it's not surprising that many of us cannot -- we need some kind of cultural or mental restriction on what we eat (and so MFP).0 -
goldthistime wrote: »rankinsect wrote: »
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
Baby boomers were sedentary as adults, yes, but much more active as kids. No video games, cartoons were only on tv Saturday mornings.
Even Gen X. The vast majority of my childhood involved lots and lots of outdoor play and rules about TV watching.
The same is often true of my friends' children, as they make time to take them to all kinds of activities that involve physical activity, but it seems like that's a lot more work today (and likely not the case in all neighborhoods or with less advantaged parents). When I was a kid it was more like "go outside and play."0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »rankinsect wrote: »
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
Baby boomers were sedentary as adults, yes, but much more active as kids. No video games, cartoons were only on tv Saturday mornings.
When I was a kid it was more like "go outside and play."
Play where? My local park area at the end of my street used to have monkey bars, slippery dips, etc
It was ripped out and replaced with one of those swing things with the pole in the middle.
Like a seesaw crossed with a swing set.
It's like councils etc are to scared of lawsuits over injuries.
If a baby boomer broke their arm would the parents sue the council? Or just get a cast on it?
Seems there are a lot of factors that have led to obesity, some in our control, some aren't.
0 -
Yeah, I'm Generation... um, Generation No-Man's-Land-between-X-and-Y... and we spent our childhood outside playing in the street. When it got dark it was time to come inside. When we got a little older we'd hop on our bikes and go around the neighbourhood, and end up at whoever's house was closest for dinner. Nobody had cell phones. The rule was you had to phone if you were going to be elsewhere for dinner, other than that it was just assumed you were fine. We didn't have any video games, and the computer was strictly for homework.
I compare that to my friends' kids, and even the active ones don't have that much freedom or that much time to play. Their activity is more scheduled, and there always needs to be a parent supervising the kids at the park or whatever, or else someone might call the cops. We went to the park and played all the time and nobody would have thought twice about there not being an adult around.0 -
Kimegatron wrote: »I think having working eyeballs is linked to obesity, because when I see food, I am more likely to want to eat it.
Hahahaha! This made me literally spewlemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »rankinsect wrote: »
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
Baby boomers were sedentary as adults, yes, but much more active as kids. No video games, cartoons were only on tv Saturday mornings.
When I was a kid it was more like "go outside and play."
Play where? My local park area at the end of my street used to have monkey bars, slippery dips, etc
It was ripped out and replaced with one of those swing things with the pole in the middle.
Like a seesaw crossed with a swing set.
It's like councils etc are to scared of lawsuits over injuries.
If a baby boomer broke their arm would the parents sue the council? Or just get a cast on it?
Seems there are a lot of factors that have led to obesity, some in our control, some aren't.
Pardon my assertiveness...but I believe most problems within our control can usually be traced back to the government.
I would expand on that, but I have not the time. I must go to my Adolescent Development class and debate why there should be no school sports in high schools. :-)
(For the record, I believe they should be there...but I picked a more challenging side to argue).0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions