Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Does where you live influence your weight & fitness?
Replies
-
I also agree. I seriously doubt that you all are eating very much of those foods, and probably eat healthy most the time. You all know you're healthy despite eating a little junk not because of it! I grew up eating frozen dinners and junk food and hardly any vegetables except corn. If I hadn't gotten on a health kick at 16, I'd probably have the same chronic diseases, by now, that my parents have.
Corn is a grain.
More significantly, eating a bad diet (meaning inadequate nutrients) is bad for you, and that certainly applies to eating a diet with no vegetables.
But that doesn't mean that eating some junk food equates to eating a bad diet, as was claimed, or that occasional ice cream or diet coke is "consuming poison."7 -
I went back to the original post and it was actually a really good question but then the op had to follow it up with the whole junk food makes you fat and It's poisonous thing and then I had to laugh at the 54 disagrees.11
-
by John Staughton (BASc, BFA) last updated - January 31, 2020
A common question is often heard around the dinner table – is corn a vegetable? The answer is a bit more complicated than you might expect.
Is Corn a Vegetable?
When debating whether corn is technically a vegetable, or whether it belongs to the cereal family, there are a few important things to consider.
A vegetable is any edible part of a plant, so when you eat corn on the cob, you are eating a vegetable.
However, each of the individual kernels of corn is considered a whole grain, so using a strict definition of corn as a vegetable isn’t totally true. By definition, a whole grain is a small, hard, dry seed of a grass plant. The endosperm (the internal white part) of the corn kernel is used to prepare cornstarch. So, when you use cornstarch, you are using the corn kernel as a whole grain.
That being said, since the corn kernels contain seeds, when they are popped into popcorn, the definition changes again, technically making popcorn a fruit. A fruit is an edible part of the plant that contains a seed or matured over of the flowers.
Corn is a grain.
More significantly, eating a bad diet (meaning inadequate nutrients) is bad for you, and that certainly applies to eating a diet with no vegetables.
But that doesn't mean that eating some junk food equates to eating a bad diet, as was claimed, or that occasional ice cream or diet coke is "consuming poison."
2 -
I don't know, but I just assume the person was just trying to get her point across about how bad junk food is compared to the healthy whole foods we could eat instead for the same amount of calories...not claiming soda and cheetos are literally poisonous. Maybe it's because we tend to use flowery language like that here in the South.3
-
On MFP, using hyperbolic flowery language when one doesnt literally mean that - not a good idea.
other people aren't mind readers and don't know you don't mean it and your point is lost.
Poster said "Sodas like Coke and Pepsi, even the zero calorie kind are pure poison! "
-which doesnt come across to me, even allowing for hyperbole, as just meaning healthy food is better for same amount of calories - and anyway that wouldnt make sense for the zero calorie kind of soda , since they have no calories
Of course the poster could come back and clarify exactly what they meant - but it was posted nearly a year ago and not sure if she is still around to do that.
11 -
Prisons probably have nutritionists or dieticians that plan their meals as inexpensively as possible around the USDA dietary guidelines ( like in schools and other government run institutions). & if it's anything like the movies, aren't the prisoners always outside weightlifting, haha?If eating low quality food for years ACTUALLY caused chronic disease, then explain how prison inmates have been in penitentiaries for decades eating some of the lowest quality foods 3 times a day and NOT suffering many of the maladies that the average very overweight/obese population is suffering from?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
If so, I'd have to disagree that they're eating the lowest quality foods. Powdered mashed potatoes is healthier than chips and a can of corn is healthier than cheetos, for example. They probably drink more coffee and tea than soda, i bet.3
-
paperpudding wrote: »On MFP, using hyperbolic flowery language when one doesnt literally mean that - not a good idea.
other people aren't mind readers and don't know you don't mean it and your point is lost.
4 -
There aren't any dieticians. The inmates make the food that's delivered to them. Put it this way, the average cost to FEED an inmate in the CA penal system 3 meals a day is just under $5.Prisons probably have nutritionists or dieticians that plan their meals as inexpensively as possible around the USDA dietary guidelines ( like in schools and other government run institutions). & if it's anything like the movies, aren't the prisoners always outside weightlifting, haha?
As for working out, a lot of prisons have removed dumbbells and plates because they were used as weapons.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
5 -
Well the population does have commissary and that's mostly just junk food like chips and candy.If so, I'd have to disagree that they're eating the lowest quality foods. Powdered mashed potatoes is healthier than chips and a can of corn is healthier than cheetos, for example. They probably drink more coffee and tea than soda, i bet.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
4 -
If eating low quality food for years ACTUALLY caused chronic disease, then explain how prison inmates have been in penitentiaries for decades eating some of the lowest quality foods 3 times a day and NOT suffering many of the maladies that the average very overweight/obese population is suffering from?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Where are you getting this information from? I don't think this is accurate. Inmates in general gain weight during incarceration, and their risk of "maladies that the average overweight/obese population suffer from" isn't less than those outside prison.
I have never seen a study that shows prisoners are healthier than the general population. They might have some benefits in the treatment of chronic illness that perhaps very low income people wouldn't have access to for financial reason. But if you are going to hold them up as an example of good health you are going to have to provide some data for that.
6 -
There aren't any dieticians. The inmates make the food that's delivered to them. Put it this way, the average cost to FEED an inmate in the CA penal system 3 meals a day is just under $5.
As for working out, a lot of prisons have removed dumbbells and plates because they were used as weapons.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Per Today's Dietitian there are RDs working in corrections. If you look at the article California had 22 of them as of publication date.
https://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/0616p32.shtml3 -
To the OP's question in the title, I definitely think where one lives can affect his or her weight and fitness for a number of reasons. One is how readily available healthy choices are at a price that those who live in the area can afford. This was mentioned before in reference to "food deserts" in another debate post. Another factor is how easy it is to access fitness-related activities. Even something as simple as walking may not be easy in certain towns or communities--either for accessibility reasons or safety reasons.
The last (and maybe most important, IMO) is the area's cultural beliefs and values about weight and fitness. As the OP mentioned, in LA, so many people are body-conscious, and I'm sure it's more likely that someone who is overweight may be looked down upon. The societal pressure may make someone more likely to engage in activities (healthy or unhealthy) to maintain a certain "look." I have lived in suburban Chicago for 21 years, and Chicago itself for 4 of these. However, I grew up in Indianapolis. Although both midwestern cities, I'm almost surprised when I go back to visit my family how people's looks differ in both places. Generally speaking, it seems people where I live seem to be of average weight (meaning not overweight), and there are more varieties of food available--not just "healthy," but in terms of food overall. I don't know if it's that it's more socially acceptable to be overweight there, or just the attitudes about health, weight and food in general.
Now that I'm thinking about this more, I think the pressure to "conform" to societal expectations about one's weight and fitness is probably more directed to his or her more immediate social circle and surroundings. Even within the county where I live, I can see how living in one town may differ from living in another in regards to weight and fitness.5 -
Where are you getting this information from? I don't think this is accurate. Inmates in general gain weight during incarceration, and their risk of "maladies that the average overweight/obese population suffer from" isn't less than those outside prison.
I have never seen a study that shows prisoners are healthier than the general population. They might have some benefits in the treatment of chronic illness that perhaps very low income people wouldn't have access to for financial reason. But if you are going to hold them up as an example of good health you are going to have to provide some data for that.
There's pretty good data on health conditions in prison (in the US, anyway). Prisoners tend to have more chronic disease than non-prisoners and heart disease is a leading cause of death for former prisoners and prisoners. But some people are going INTO prison with these conditions and prison is a high stress environment for many, which confounds simple links to diet or activity. Some people are getting more health care in prison than they would on the outside, but the quality of the health care isn't always that great.
https://www.newsweek.com/double-time-chronic-diseases-chronic-problem-4900096 -
janejellyroll wrote: »
There's pretty good data on health conditions in prison (in the US, anyway). Prisoners tend to have more chronic disease than non-prisoners and heart disease is a leading cause of death for former prisoners and prisoners. But some people are going INTO prison with these conditions and prison is a high stress environment for many, which confounds simple links to diet or activity. Some people are getting more health care in prison than they would on the outside, but the quality of the health care isn't always that great.
https://www.newsweek.com/double-time-chronic-diseases-chronic-problem-490009
The poster I was responding to made the assertion that we can conclude that "low quality" food is not unhealthy because inmates eat low quality food, and are healthier than the general population. My point is that there is no evidence that incarcerated people ARE healthier than the general population. In fact the opposite is true, prisoners are in general more obese and less healthy than the general population, which invalidates his claim. I don't see anything in the article you posted that supports his original assertion.
"Interpretation: The Canadian correctional environment can be considered obesogenic, with most inmates experiencing undesirable and rapid weight gain during their incarceration. Rates of obesity increased dramatically during incarceration, and could put inmates at increased risk of obesity-related health problems."
https://www.cmajopen.ca/content/6/3/E3475 -
As a criminal justice researcher, I can say for a fact that incarcerated people are less healthy than the general population, and that their poor health while incarcerated has reverbations for the rest of their life, even when they're out. As we all know, health is about more than just food and weight. Almost every person who enters a incarceration will leave with a disability or a mental health disorder. In many facilities, prisoners are only allowed outside for one hour a day. And that's not talking about the thousands of people in solitary confinement for long periods of time. I don't think it's in our best interest to discuss the health of incarcerated people, who are probably suffering the most i
health wise n our society.
Going back to the original post, public health researchers have pretty much shown that your location does affect your health. People in poor communities live in food deserts where it's much easier to find and afford McDonald's than it is to get broccoli. And someone else mentioned that your friends and social network also heavily affect what you eat. I think it goes without saying that people who live in healthier communities, or who have healthier friends, are going to be making better food and exercise choices. And that includes for their families, which also has direct implications for child obesity.
It's an unfortunate reality, but also makes me think a lot about how we need to tackle health health from a structural or neighborhood and policy perspective. It's not only about people's individual choices.8 -
janejellyroll wrote: »
There's pretty good data on health conditions in prison (in the US, anyway). Prisoners tend to have more chronic disease than non-prisoners and heart disease is a leading cause of death for former prisoners and prisoners. But some people are going INTO prison with these conditions and prison is a high stress environment for many, which confounds simple links to diet or activity. Some people are getting more health care in prison than they would on the outside, but the quality of the health care isn't always that great.
https://www.newsweek.com/double-time-chronic-diseases-chronic-problem-490009
I'm not questioning the underlying thesis of poorer than average health among prisoners and former prisoners. But this particular sentence needs some comparison data, because heart disease is THE leading cause of death in the U.S. overall (even in 2020 it beat out covid deaths). So it's not saying much that it should be a leading cause of death for prisoners and former prisoners.5 -
As a criminal justice researcher, I can say for a fact that incarcerated people are less healthy than the general population, and that their poor health while incarcerated has reverbations for the rest of their life, even when they're out. As we all know, health is about more than just food and weight. Almost every person who enters a incarceration will leave with a disability or a mental health disorder. In many facilities, prisoners are only allowed outside for one hour a day. And that's not talking about the thousands of people in solitary confinement for long periods of time. I don't think it's in our best interest to discuss the health of incarcerated people, who are probably suffering the most i
health wise n our society.
Going back to the original post, public health researchers have pretty much shown that your location does affect your health. People in poor communities live in food deserts where it's much easier to find and afford McDonald's than it is to get broccoli. And someone else mentioned that your friends and social network also heavily affect what you eat. I think it goes without saying that people who live in healthier communities, or who have healthier friends, are going to be making better food and exercise choices. And that includes for their families, which also has direct implications for child obesity.
It's an unfortunate reality, but also makes me think a lot about how we need to tackle health health from a structural or neighborhood and policy perspective. It's not only about people's individual choices.
👆THIS
ALL OF THIS ☝🏼3 -
The poster I was responding to made the assertion that we can conclude that "low quality" food is not unhealthy because inmates eat low quality food, and are healthier than the general population. My point is that there is no evidence that incarcerated people ARE healthier than the general population. In fact the opposite is true, prisoners are in general more obese and less healthy than the general population, which invalidates his claim. I don't see anything in the article you posted that supports his original assertion.
"Interpretation: The Canadian correctional environment can be considered obesogenic, with most inmates experiencing undesirable and rapid weight gain during their incarceration. Rates of obesity increased dramatically during incarceration, and could put inmates at increased risk of obesity-related health problems."
https://www.cmajopen.ca/content/6/3/E347
I'm not disagreeing with you. I don't know what evidence supports the assertion that inmates are healthier, but it doesn't match what I have seen. Sorry for not making that clear.
I don't necessarily agree that food is the main issue (I think there are multiple factors at play here), but it probably is an issue.1 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »
I'm not questioning the underlying thesis of poorer than average health among prisoners and former prisoners. But this particular sentence needs some comparison data, because heart disease is THE leading cause of death in the U.S. overall (even in 2020 it beat out covid deaths). So it's not saying much that it should be a leading cause of death for prisoners and former prisoners.
The point I was trying to make (and obviously failed to do) is that prison is not protecting people from the chronic health conditions that exist outside of prison. In fact, evidence shows that prisoners are more prone to some chronic health conditions.1 -
Speakeasy76 wrote: »To the OP's question in the title, I definitely think where one lives can affect his or her weight and fitness for a number of reasons. One is how readily available healthy choices are at a price that those who live in the area can afford. This was mentioned before in reference to "food deserts" in another debate post. Another factor is how easy it is to access fitness-related activities. Even something as simple as walking may not be easy in certain towns or communities--either for accessibility reasons or safety reasons.
The last (and maybe most important, IMO) is the area's cultural beliefs and values about weight and fitness. As the OP mentioned, in LA, so many people are body-conscious, and I'm sure it's more likely that someone who is overweight may be looked down upon. The societal pressure may make someone more likely to engage in activities (healthy or unhealthy) to maintain a certain "look." I have lived in suburban Chicago for 21 years, and Chicago itself for 4 of these. However, I grew up in Indianapolis. Although both midwestern cities, I'm almost surprised when I go back to visit my family how people's looks differ in both places. Generally speaking, it seems people where I live seem to be of average weight (meaning not overweight), and there are more varieties of food available--not just "healthy," but in terms of food overall. I don't know if it's that it's more socially acceptable to be overweight there, or just the attitudes about health, weight and food in general.
Now that I'm thinking about this more, I think the pressure to "conform" to societal expectations about one's weight and fitness is probably more directed to his or her more immediate social circle and surroundings. Even within the county where I live, I can see how living in one town may differ from living in another in regards to weight and fitness.
I don't intend this as disagreeing with you, as I think you're right, I intend just to be extending the conversation along this general line.
I don't necessarily think what I'd call social *pressure* is the only factor in a cluster of related things, either, if "pressure" is seen as a deliberate or forceful sort of thing.
I think humans like to fit in, and most of us kind of automatically do some things just because that's what people in our family or community do. We perceive those things as normal, we like being normal people ourselves, etc. Generically (not just about weight-related things), we *can* decide to behave outside the norms in some ways, sometimes without any great social penalty if we do so, but I think many of us are sort of on autopilot in a lot of areas. We only have so much discretionary attention to pay to things, so are unlikely to examine every area of our lives vs. go with the flow in some areas.
As a non-diet/exercise example, I think certain types of music are popular, and most people are more likely to be aware of the popular music through routine exposure to it, and may therefore be more likely to like some examples within the popular music, vs. some more unusual niche style. Over decades, which style of music is commonly popular changes (folk was relatively more popular in 50s/60s vs. now, for example; it's still around but not as mainstream). I don't think that tendency for particular things, like musical tastes, to be popular is because those things are abstractly "better", I think there's a certain exposure/trend/fashionability aspect to it. At any given time, there'll be people who prefer a different style of music that isn't as generally popular, like maybe jazz, classical, bluegrass or whatever. Being interested in an unusual thing and pursuing it aren't opposed or bullied, necessarily, but the unusual thing is less likely to "just happen".
I feel like some of those same "softer" influences apply to eating and exercise, too: If we don't have a reason to examine our own behavior, maybe just don't have the attentional bandwidth to do so at a particular time, we're likely to autopilot to the eating and activity patterns that are common in our family, community, etc., because they seem like normal ways to behave.2 -
10,000% yes.
If the mountains weren't so tall, or if gravity was less strong, I would eat more. That's my #1 motivation to set the tacos down.7 -
I live in Italy where the majority are at a healthy weight. I see very few obese and they tend to stand out. Also the Italians don't cater to obesity. I's harder to find clothes in a larger size (I'm tall and have this problem without being overweight), and they don't make larger chairs for theaters, cinema, airplanes, buses, etc.... Of course, if people start getting bigger, then they may have to adapt. With their love of going to the beach and wearing bikinis, it's a great incentive to keep their weight down---Italy has a lot of coast.5
-
snowflake954 wrote: »I live in Italy where the majority are at a healthy weight. I see very few obese and they tend to stand out. Also the Italians don't cater to obesity. I's harder to find clothes in a larger size (I'm tall and have this problem without being overweight), and they don't make larger chairs for theaters, cinema, airplanes, buses, etc.... Of course, if people start getting bigger, then they may have to adapt. With their love of going to the beach and wearing bikinis, it's a great incentive to keep their weight down---Italy has a lot of coast.
If you go to a typical US beach weight doesn't seem to be much of an influencer on type of beachwear for many. Right, wrong or indifferent.
I'm not sure what they do when home but when at beaches in the US and Mexico I see quite a few European men, including Italians, wearing banana hammocks, or at least I think they are, hard to tell, since their gut hangover covers most of the hammock. Not a good look.5 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »
If you go to a typical US beach weight doesn't seem to be much of an influencer on type of beachwear for many. Right, wrong or indifferent.
I'm not sure what they do when home but when at beaches in the US and Mexico I see quite a few European men, including Italians, wearing banana hammocks, or at least I think they are, hard to tell, since their gut hangover covers most of the hammock. Not a good look.
Ha,ha,.... I'd invite you to my beach and then see what your comment would be. I can only comment on what I see in Italy, since I don't go to beaches in the US or Mexico. Great bods here.5 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »
If you go to a typical US beach weight doesn't seem to be much of an influencer on type of beachwear for many. Right, wrong or indifferent.
I'm not sure what they do when home but when at beaches in the US and Mexico I see quite a few European men, including Italians, wearing banana hammocks, or at least I think they are, hard to tell, since their gut hangover covers most of the hammock. Not a good look.
Saw this same thing on the beaches in Rio - the younger folks tended to be fairly fit, but that didn't stop the older males from wearing the banana hammocks covered by gut rolls.2 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »If you go to a typical US beach weight doesn't seem to be much of an influencer on type of beachwear for many. Right, wrong or indifferent.
I'm not sure what they do when home but when at beaches in the US and Mexico I see quite a few European men, including Italians, wearing banana hammocks, or at least I think they are, hard to tell, since their gut hangover covers most of the hammock. Not a good look.
My brother calls those bathing suits "grape smugglers"
Where I am it's kind of the opposite: all the young, fit guys wear long baggy board shorts.
But truly, it does seem like there's more of a "wear what you like whatever your shape" attitude, and that's got to be a good thing.
2 -
I don't intend this as disagreeing with you, as I think you're right, I intend just to be extending the conversation along this general line.
I don't necessarily think what I'd call social *pressure* is the only factor in a cluster of related things, either, if "pressure" is seen as a deliberate or forceful sort of thing.
I think humans like to fit in, and most of us kind of automatically do some things just because that's what people in our family or community do. We perceive those things as normal, we like being normal people ourselves, etc. Generically (not just about weight-related things), we *can* decide to behave outside the norms in some ways, sometimes without any great social penalty if we do so, but I think many of us are sort of on autopilot in a lot of areas. We only have so much discretionary attention to pay to things, so are unlikely to examine every area of our lives vs. go with the flow in some areas.
As a non-diet/exercise example, I think certain types of music are popular, and most people are more likely to be aware of the popular music through routine exposure to it, and may therefore be more likely to like some examples within the popular music, vs. some more unusual niche style. Over decades, which style of music is commonly popular changes (folk was relatively more popular in 50s/60s vs. now, for example; it's still around but not as mainstream). I don't think that tendency for particular things, like musical tastes, to be popular is because those things are abstractly "better", I think there's a certain exposure/trend/fashionability aspect to it. At any given time, there'll be people who prefer a different style of music that isn't as generally popular, like maybe jazz, classical, bluegrass or whatever. Being interested in an unusual thing and pursuing it aren't opposed or bullied, necessarily, but the unusual thing is less likely to "just happen".
I feel like some of those same "softer" influences apply to eating and exercise, too: If we don't have a reason to examine our own behavior, maybe just don't have the attentional bandwidth to do so at a particular time, we're likely to autopilot to the eating and activity patterns that are common in our family, community, etc., because they seem like normal ways to behave.
Yes, I think you said this better than I did. By societal pressure, I was thinking more of conformity, and in general just now wanting to stick out.
Among my 2 closest friends (who still live close to where we grew up), I am definitely the most health conscious and "fit'" I guess. My best friend is obese and basically has the diet of a 5-year old (as she jokes). There is always a part of me that feels weird or like they might be judging me for ordering a healthier entree, or putting half of it in a box when we go out to eat. In the beginning, there might have been little comments here and there, but at this point I generally just do me and don't worry about it. It DOES take more of a conscious attention and effort to not just eat how they would for fear of how it "looks," but I also know my body doesn't like it when I eat that way as far as how it makes me physically feel.
6 -
Show me pictures of obese inmates who've spent at least a year in prison. I've been to several prisons with friends who are CO's and if you compare the population of obese there you're talking maybe 1%.
Where are you getting this information from? I don't think this is accurate. Inmates in general gain weight during incarceration, and their risk of "maladies that the average overweight/obese population suffer from" isn't less than those outside prison.
I have never seen a study that shows prisoners are healthier than the general population. They might have some benefits in the treatment of chronic illness that perhaps very low income people wouldn't have access to for financial reason. But if you are going to hold them up as an example of good health you are going to have to provide some data for that.
NEVER said prisoners were healthier than general population. I stated they don't suffer many of the maladies that many overweight/obese do and that's because the prison population per capita isn't overweight/obese in the same percentage as general population. I KNOW for a fact that 65% of the prison population isn't in the overweight/obese category like the US population is.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
1 -
I've been to several prisons with friends who are CO's and if you compare the population of obese there you're talking maybe 1%.
An interesting insight.
I would love to see some peer reviewed articles about the difference between that 1% and the general prison population.
Although I would not be surprised if there aren’t any.
My guess (and it is only a guess) is there might be some genetic component. Either in an inability to feel sated. Or an incredibly efficient metabolism. But again. That’s just a guess.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.6K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.1K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions