Opinions? Somewhat "fat" is OK?

2»

Replies

  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 31,724 Member
    edited September 2021
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    SnifterPug wrote: »
    This is one of those things I have mixed feelings on. Because yes you can be overweight (significantly so, even), and have 'perfect' health metrics across the board- except for that number on the scale. I'm on that spectrum, myself.

    And having those metrics, despite what the scale says, is a fantastic thing.

    However, that does not negate or remove the fact that increased weight, not speaking of vanity pounds, or possibly 20-30 extra pounds (though that might be getting borderline, I don't know where the cut off would be exactly), puts a person at increased risk for any number of health issues including cardiovascular disease or heart attacks and diabetes- even with no previous issues or warning. That is simple fact.

    What we also don't know (or at least I don't know if there have been any studies) is whether there are cumulative effects of obesity. Younger people with obesity are, I suspect, living with a health time bomb.

    Anecdotally, my father in law was obese and in rude health for many years until he died suddenly of pancreatic cancer in his early 70s. My husband is morbidly obese (has been for years) and all of his health metrics were totally fine for years. Until one day they weren't. And now the unhelpful habits are deeply ingrained in him and nothing will change. He would maybe exercise more but his knees won't permit it these days.

    I was thinking about this thread again today because the study was reported in our mainstream press. I wonder who funded the study. Because it is a total gift to the fitness industry. They for years have peddled the myth that you can lose significant amounts of weight by going to the gym. People are beginning to rumble that. But now they can say "Meh. Lose weight or don't. But you need to be fit, whatever. So come to the gym." I have no axe to grind with gyms as I (now) love exercise. But it seems to me that very few big studies are not funded by someone with some sort of vested interest.

    I was thinking this exact same thing and your phrase "Younger people with obesity are, I suspect, living with a health time bomb" encapsulates it perfectly.

    I was also thinking specifically of knee issues, having been plagued with that myself for the last 12 years.

    Yeah, I've got knee issues, too, and I'm certain the decades of obesity (and only slightly fewer decades of too little exercise) were major contributors to that. There's no incidence in my family, for example, so unlikely to be genetic.

    Bigger deal on the time bomb front, speaking as a woman who experienced it: Some types of cancer are substantially more likely if overweight/obese. Diagnosed with one at stage III (about as advanced as it gets without being nearly certainly fatal, and relatively quickly) in my 40s, I'm grateful to have lived to be 65.

    There are no guarantees of bad outcomes if overweight/obese/inactive, no guarantees of longevity/health if a healthy weight and active . . . but it's a question of playing the odds, hedging the bets.

    I suspect that some people believe reaching a healthier weight/activity zone would require deprivation and sweaty misery. I'm quite certain that's not universally so . . . perhaps not even commonly so.
  • Speakeasy76
    Speakeasy76 Posts: 961 Member
    edited September 2021
    I have so, so many thoughts on this. Like others have questioned, how much "fat" is ok to be healthy? Also, is focusing on exercising REALLY the only thing that would improve health while also shifting the focus away from dieting for weight loss?

    Yes, I think when people are "put on a diet" it often fails because there's often no thought about how to do it in a way that is sustainable for life. A huge part of that is focusing not only on quantity but quality of foods, which is equally (if not more so) important. I do believe, having personally experienced this myself, that focusing on nutrition for better health vs. as just to lose weight can be a better approach to sustainable weight loss. However, we also need to learn some form of portion control if we don't have it innately built in us (which, if we're overweight, either we became a lot less active but still ate the same, or never really had that "inner voice" to begin with).

    It's interesting how this article fails to mention that bigger portion sizes and more access to and variety of fast food and convenience food just MIGHT be contributing, combined with more and more people living mostly sedentary lifestyles. Look at how many Starbucks alone there are in most places, and all the calorie bombs the have--most in liquid form that really aren't that satiating. Oh, and more people are not only under stress, but rely on maladpative behaviors (i.e., overeating, drinking, etc.) to cope. Also, the general public has very little knowledge about good nutrition, and it doesn't help that several popular diets are often unsustainable long-term and still rely on the gimmick of "fast" weight loss.

    I've heard the claim that you can be "fat and fit" by measuring numbers like cholesterol, A1C, and blood pressure. Yeah, sure, those can be normal when you're obese--my best friend is a perfect example of this! She also knows that her weight alone puts her at increased health risks, including inflammation. Genetics also play a role in one's propensity to develop high cholesterol, blood pressure and AC1. Also, what about other things that aren't measured regularly--like atheroscerlosis and inflammation, or sleep quality and muscle/joint functioning? Overweight and obese people are at increased risk for sleep apnea, something that can be deadly if not treated.

    I agree that we simultaneously have an obesity crisis in the crisis while continuing to be weight/look-obsessed. So I think something can be said for shifting focus away from losing weight for looks as opposed to health, but I think it's also a generally false notion that you can be "fat" and just as fit than if you weighed less and were still equally as active.

  • robertw486
    robertw486 Posts: 2,379 Member
    Quite a number of studies have linked low cardiorespiratory fitness with increased risk of mortality, regardless of many other factors including age and weight. Naturally, being at a healthy weight with increased fitness is even better, but weight alone doesn't increase risks as much as some might think.

    Having poor cardio fitness can bring any weight group into a higher risk than people with Type II Diabetes, High Blood Pressure, Smokers, or High Cholesterol levels.

    And some also show that an obese person with good cardio health and ability is often at lower risk than many healthy weight person with any of the above.

    So for me it's a no brainer really. While being at healthy weight is obviously better with all other things being the same, having less cardio ability is always worse, all other things being the same. And from the studies I've seen, the cardio ability actually seems to have more impact than just weight, at least up to the obese categories.

    So I'd rather maintain a cardio base and make weight secondary myself. But the best option is both.
  • jonathanrtaylor
    jonathanrtaylor Posts: 3 Member
    edited September 2021
    Surely this isn't a zero-sum game; the focus should be exercise and diet, not on one or the other. Bizarre article imo.
  • drmwc
    drmwc Posts: 972 Member
    Here is the original article:
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004221009639

    It seems odd to me; being overweight is clearly bad and exercising too little is also clearly bad. It is unclear to me why addressing one better than addressing both. It is easier to be active whilst small than whilst big.
  • penguinmama87
    penguinmama87 Posts: 1,158 Member
    drmwc wrote: »
    Here is the original article:
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004221009639

    It seems odd to me; being overweight is clearly bad and exercising too little is also clearly bad. It is unclear to me why addressing one better than addressing both. It is easier to be active whilst small than whilst big.

    I think there's a lot of motivations to untangle, some of them maybe more noble than others. I've never been part of the "fat acceptance" movement (beyond agreeing wholeheartedly that every person has dignity and is worthy of being treated with kindness and respect, and you can't know a person's character by their size), but I do think it's worth it to push against the notion of "thin at any cost." Lots of people do really horrible things to their health in order to get/stay thin (or at least their idea of it), or don't pursue things that would be good for their health because they don't see the direct link to weight loss - things like good sleep, or exercise even if it isn't the super calorie-burning kind, or learning to prepare and enjoy a wider variety of foods.

    My own family seems to be pretty lucky genetically, and I used to tell myself that it would be fine for me to be overweight long term because my own health markers were excellent and so were my parents, who have been overweight or obese all their adult lives - but now that my parents are getting close to 60, I've been able to see how things are getting much more difficult for them and they complain a lot more about aches and pains and various medical troubles - things my grandparents didn't deal with at all or if they did, decades later. I'm not interested in that. I'm still a few pounds over normal BMI range but am definitely the healthiest and feel the best I have ever felt. I expect to maintain that into the normal range and keep it up. The last time I was in a normal range I was not very active (I was a moody, angsty teenager who had deep things to think about, no time for going outside and enjoying life). I don't think I'll have to pick between them, but I like this me, even a little overweight still, better than that one!
  • MikePfirrman
    MikePfirrman Posts: 3,307 Member
    When I lost my weight originally, 165 was an ideal weight for me (I'm not real tall, like 5' 9" and a half). Medium sized guys always add that 1/2 inch like it's a big deal!

    After working out, pretty hard and consistently, both cardio and weights, for well over 10 years, a good weight for me now is like 187. I've put on a lot of muscle.

    With Covid-19, I put on around 7 to 8 lbs and was around 200. Even with the exercise, my waist was over 35 inches. My waist is where it comes off last (and my face second to last). I've lost the face weight again but my waist is just shy of 35 inches again. Now, I do have really strong abs, but that's the metrics that I look at most -- is my waist less than half of my height.

    I would like to believe that all my cardio work (I'm very fit, cardio wise, for someone my age, because I do roughly 6 to 7 hours of cardio a week -- two hard very hard sessions included) has me at great health, but that waist measurement, to me at least, is just as important. I'm at around 194 right now and I'd bet I'm only 23% body fat, but there's so much research on how vital it is to keep your waist less than half your height that I work very hard at that all the time. It's ongoing.
  • juanwilly1
    juanwilly1 Posts: 26 Member
    I imagine that I probably fall into this category. I'm 39, I've weighed as much as 240 lbs (not pregnant, anyway) and as low as 180 which, arguably probably would still put me in this category, even though that's my ideal weight (personally, I liked how I looked and felt at that weight). Currently I'm about 217ish.

    I'm healthy - quite, actually. I have a sedentary job, but outside of that, i'm very active at home (i''m on my feet and moving until about 45 minutes before I go to bed) and workout 5-6 days a week. My blood sugar is good. My blood pressure is great, and even on the low end of great. I do not feel tired and slovenly and gross - I did at 240, but I do not currently. I lift weight, I run, I do a lot of Les Mills classes. I don't get out of breath going up stairs or anything. i have many friends who either are or were overweight and not active and they all talk about being so tired and exhausted at the end of the day and on weekends, so much so that it keeps them from living life. I don't ever feel like that. My joints and back dont hurt - i don't notice the aches and pains that a lot of people seem to have as they get near 40.

    I'm sure that there's an argument to be made that eventually those things will happen to me at some point, but I suspect that argument can be made for a lot of people. My work friend down the hall, for example, is in very good shape...but has high cholesterol and blood pressure.

    I surely think you can be fat and fit. I also don't think that being fat allows me to be as healthy as I could be - surely I COULD be healthier. But that doesn't mean I'm not fit and healthy like this.

    That being said -re: the original post. Those excerpts in quotations are great points. Focusing on being "fat" never once made me feel better about myself. what it normally does is throw me into a cycle of emotional eating and crying. I surely have needed "mirror checks" before - I surely have had to recognize that i NEEDED to lose weight, and that was a starting point. But anytime I've ever actually been successful it was by understanding myself as capable of whatever it is that I wanted to do and whatever goal I actually set. Paying attention to the non-weight benefits of exercise is leaps and bounds ore healthy and helpful for me to focus on and it's what keeps me going back to do more of it.

    This is exactly ghe point of the study
    AKTipsyCat wrote: »
    I've been 175 and not active, and I've been 175 and active - and let me tell you those are two very different me's - especially at 5'4. When "weight loss" just means some random number on a chart I don't think it's always conducive to a healthy way of life - I see lots of "skinny fat" people. When I was lifting and doing hot yoga all the time, and at 175 - I looked and felt amazing! (trying to get back there now, lol) but it also encouraged me to try and eat better because - yeah, really hard to put your forehead on your knee when there are layers of fat in the way... and food has a tendency to morph into something that gives you energy (not a cure for boredom, a bad day, etc.)

    There are always issues when you take a blanket statement and try to make it apply to everyone... especially if you are going to do an either/or take. In my opinion, both are important and they go hand in hand, but I think that trying to be active really helps reinforce trying to do other things to make yourself healthier... where often a sole focus on "weight" doesn't so much, and can actually lead you down several unhealthy paths... just my .02

    Exactly! Just focusing on a weight loss number is NOT beneficial.
  • juanwilly1
    juanwilly1 Posts: 26 Member
    I am the OP and I posted to offer some hope to those who feel badly about their ability to not be impacted psychologically from the number on the scale. Many on MFP are not happy with their weight as am I, yet I am fastidious about exercise and workout, mostly cardio/running/body weight resistant pushups, etc., at least 4 x weekly! I am 72 years of age and have never been morbidly obese yet I know so many who are and they suffer from low self-esteem, fatigue and a self-imposed inability to exercise or lose weight. They are defeated before they start! That is the point of the posting: To give hope to those that feel that they are just a number on the scale and a quite high number at that!
  • MikePfirrman
    MikePfirrman Posts: 3,307 Member
    juanwilly1 wrote: »
    I am the OP and I posted to offer some hope to those who feel badly about their ability to not be impacted psychologically from the number on the scale. Many on MFP are not happy with their weight as am I, yet I am fastidious about exercise and workout, mostly cardio/running/body weight resistant pushups, etc., at least 4 x weekly! I am 72 years of age and have never been morbidly obese yet I know so many who are and they suffer from low self-esteem, fatigue and a self-imposed inability to exercise or lose weight. They are defeated before they start! That is the point of the posting: To give hope to those that feel that they are just a number on the scale and a quite high number at that!

    I was morbidly obese. Not judging others, but having a realistic view of my health. Living in denial about what carrying extra weight does to the human body, to me, also isn't helpful.

    Sure, what you're saying is correct (in this case) -- health is a continuum and not always a straight line. Being "OK" can be construed as different meanings. Nothing wrong with accepting yourself as you are and patting yourself, or others, on the back for how far you've come (or just doing something today to be more healthy -- and you'll see I do that quite a bit on the "What was your Workout Today" thread). But accepting a level of fat as healthy is entirely different.

    That's all we're distinguishing -- the difference between the two.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    SnifterPug wrote: »
    This suggests there is nothing imprudent about exercise but points out that it is not always feasible for the very obese to exercise effectively.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811477/

    The British Heart Foundation has suggested there is no such thing as "fat but fit":

    https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/news/behind-the-headlines/weight-and-heart-risk

    Personally, exercise was the key to my weight loss. Not the doing of the exercise - the weight loss was managed by diet. But the enjoyment of the exercise and the desire to do more of it and achieve my goals. Ultimately it comes down to individual motivations, though. I used not to live a healthy lifestyle and I became overweight because I didn't care enough to change my behaviour. Now I do care enough. But I had to find that within myself and even if a doctor had looked me in the eye and said "you must do XYZ and stop ABC" I don't think that would have given me the will to do it.

    That's the kind of thing everybody should ignore. There are a lot of people doing really great science, unfortunately there are also plenty of bad science reporters, and we all need a caveat emptor attitude when we read it. Fatness and fitness both exist on a scale of a gradient. It's not that you're either fat or not and you're either fit or not.
  • AshHeartsJesus
    AshHeartsJesus Posts: 460 Member
    You can't out exercise a bad diet...so if you want to be "fit" it is food AND moving your body. But if you care about your soul and eternal body exercise and food profit little in the long run. My hope and salvation is in LORD JESUS forever means more then anything we can do now carnally.