|
|
|
|
|
| | 2/3d's US overweight or obese????Page 3 of 8 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8) |
People are fatties overwhelmingly because they overeat, not because they don't exercise.
This is not true, and doubly not true if you are a woman.
Proper aerobic and strength training exercise increases lean muscle mass, and therefore your metabolic rate. The reason for this is a pound of muscle is more metabolically active and therefore requires more calories to sustain it.
You can also WEIGH MORE if you have a high lean to fat mass ratio. It is FAT that makes you ill, not body mass. All those weight lifters and atheletes out there with 30 BMIs are not at a higher risk of illness (provided they aren't taking steroids) than a man with a BMI of 21. In fact, if that 21 BMI man is 22 percent body fat, his chances of having a heart attack are greater than the 30 BMI athelete with a fat mass of 10 percent or less.
Women naturally have much less lean mass than men, and once they are past their 20s many will find it close to impossible to maintain a normal weight if they don't exercise. The older you get, the harder it is to do it with diet alone. All people lose muscle mass as they age, and if they don't exericse they will not only get fat but be more susceptible to injury and an unhealthy old age.
If they quit overeating, start eating nutritious food, they'll achieve normal weight without the false obstacle of exercise.
For the reasons I mentioned above, exercise is anything BUT a false obstacle. The older you get, the more important it is. | |
|
| |
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/27/2008 9:59:28 AM | ^ ^ ^ ^ Nope. I'm 5'4", weigh 120 pounds and wear a size 2. At the age of 56 I can still wear a string bikini, I'm THAT buff.
But if I sat on my azz, I'd be wearning a granny suit next week at the beach.
Exercise makes ALL the difference, especially for us 50 and over women. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/27/2008 11:36:05 AM | I am happy to say that I am no longer one of these statistics!!
Havent been o/w in 6months or "obese" in 2 years.
The whole while, my BP, calcium, blood sugar, etc etc, were all perfectly spot on normal and I was always told I " dont look it" when the number would come up.
I am now a size 12, sometimes 10 depending on the clothing style. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/27/2008 1:30:16 PM | | This issue is central to the real health care debate. All the money in the world won't save you if you treat your body like crap. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/27/2008 10:30:38 PM | ^^^^^^ as flyonthewall said.... Exercise is important.. eating healthy and maintaining an active lifestyle are both mainstays of healthy body weight and a healthy physicque.
satx78218 .. do you like being disagreeable just for the attention? or are you always so eager to shoot down what other people say.
Firstly, that link you provided, did you read it entirely? It is an EDITORIAL published in the nephrology journal. Not only did the people upon who's information this is being based NOT complete their own research, they were only REVIEWING other studies and literature. And we ALL know that we can find information to support JUST about anything we want to out here. It all depends on the type of research that is being done, the methodology and how the variables are controlled. Nevertheless, just as I had stated it says they found evidence that individuals who are more active, live in hot climates, etc require MORE water intake. Well now, to WHAT did they compare that intake?? How did they derive it was 'more'?? They must have had some basis they were looking at..
The editorial is published in the June 2008 issue of the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (JASN). ... To investigate the true benefits of drinking water, Dan Negoianu, MD, and Stanley Goldfarb, MD, of the Renal, Electrolyte, and Hypertension Division at the University of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia, PA, reviewed the published clinical studies on the topic. They found solid evidence that individuals in hot, dry climates, as well as athletes, have an increased need for water. In addition, people with certain diseases benefit from increased fluid intake.
Now to be fair, the quote I put up there continues to state there is no REAL evidence that the standard 8 glasses of 8 oz of water has come from any 'clinical' study. Who cares? As one of my great professors says, absence of proof is NOT proof of absence. Just because they have failed to provide CLINICAL quantities to live up to their own idea of scientific acceptance does not mean that it doesn't exist or that it isn't important. I already said that it wasn't necessarily the 'absolute' amount.. but one that is often provided and cited.. and yes.. in schools. As in Princess Anne Public School, as in Wembley Public School, as in Sudbury Secondary School, as in Dr's offices, and health clinics and Canada's food guide, etc.
If you're eating well, on average, then you don't consume excess calories and don't need to exercise muscles to burn it off, matching your caloric intake to the basal requirement.
I never meant to say that you need to 'exercise' muscle to burn off the excess calories. I was indicating that MUSCLES burn more calories.. they require more energy to exist/function... basally.. and as such, exercising and developing muscles is a BONUS to anyone who is trying to lose weight. It will obviously also increase their daily caloric intake.
If the academic community thinks Wikipedia is dominated by errors, then the academic community is welcome to correct them. Of course, there are endless, raging controversies within the academic community about the facts. So who's "right" among academics?
Awww, now you done gone and killed the value of your own posted literature. I mean, after all, the author(s) of that editorial are part of the academia world.. And, as you said, 'so who's "right" among academics?'
The academics I know are too busy performing and publishing their own research.. to be bothered with the veracity of wikepedia. I'm not saying it doesn't have some helpful information, but I personally would rather grab an article from pubmed or another comparable publisher than wikipedia. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/27/2008 11:44:40 PM |
satx78218 .. do you like being disagreeable just for the attention?
Yes. Observe how he disregarded everything I said to him bar taking one small piece and still trying to deliberatly obfuscate the subject rather than dealing with his mistakes. This is his mode of operation at all times, ducking and weaving.
Firstly, that link you provided, did you read it entirely?
As demonstrated most recently previously in the fish oil thread, no he does not read the material he posts at all. What he does is google a certain phrase and posts the first article with that phrase in it. Even if the articles purpose is to demonstrate the flaws in that phrase, like the one in the fish oil thread.
If at any point anyone does manage to pin him down for a moment, he switches to ad hominem until he can obfuscate enough to wriggle out. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/28/2008 10:31:23 AM | "real health care debate"
Yep, 100s of $Bs of avoidable health "care" expenses from self-inflicted diseases arising from bad diet and no exercise in a land and water polluted by 10s of 1000s of FDA/USDA-approved chemicals.
The Japanese, the NHS, are measuring the waists of all employees and scolding those who are over the limits.  | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/28/2008 11:21:36 AM | "do you like being disagreeable"
Just because I disagree with you and your 1/2 gallon of water/day doesn't mean I'm disagreeable, but I appreciate your rhetoric.
"only REVIEWING other studies and literature"
meta-research, researching the research isn't a legit activity? Putting such info a journal of _neprhology_ has NO significance?
"information to support JUST about anything we want"
I'm still waiting for you to provide information other than conventional wisdom, health babble, hearsay, "often provided and cited", about 1/2 gallon water per day. "Citing" what, other hearsay?
All of these institutions are recommending 1/2 gal water/day, but you provide no scientific studies showing 1/2 gallon/day has any impact on health.
"MUSCLES burn more calories"
True, but not significantly for average people. Here are several physiology people commenting on muscle and weightlifting, esp for women:
"Weight-Loss Theory Is Losing Some of Its Strength"
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE4DC163FF932A15754C0A9639C8B63&scp=1&sq=muscle+calorie&st=nyt
==
"the average amount of muscle that men gained after a serious 12-week weight-lifting program was 2 kilograms, or 4.4 pounds. That added muscle would increase the metabolic rate by only 24 calories a day."
Weights Build Muscles, But Not the Manly Kind
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9801E0DB123CF930A15755C0A9649C8B63&scp=3&sq=jack+wilmore&st=nyt
So carrying extra muscle mass around doesn't burn much calories, esp not compared to 2000 calories/day burned by basal metabolism (no exercise at all).
I'm very pro-exercise to obtain/maintain fitness, but exercise to lose weight is Fool's Gold compared to caloric deficits. Average people who start running caloric deficits (always assume healthy-only intake) AND exercising are giving way too much credit to the exercise.
Still waiting for you to cite __JUST ONE STUDY__, JUST ONE!, that shows that 1/2 gallon water/day had ANY health benefit, or ANY impact on health ... | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/28/2008 12:52:05 PM |
meta-research, researching the research isn't a legit activity? Putting such info a journal of _neprhology_ has NO significance?
Whether or not the results of meta-research are valid depends on the methods. You have to set up valid criteria. Then you let the chips fall where they may, excluding studies that both support and disprove your hypothesis, if they don't fall within the criteria.
It doesn't matter WHERE a study is published. If the methods are good, then it's useful; if the methods are bad then it is not.
"Weight-Loss Theory Is Losing Some of Its Strength"
First of all, you realize this is a 3-year old article, and is based on a bunch of interviews, and a few journal articles -- not any kind of comprehensive review of the literature.
Weights Build Muscles, But Not the Manly Kind
This article is even older (from 2002), and FWIW Gina Kolata, who wrote this article is a BIG TIME exercise junkie. So if she thought it did no good, my guess is she wouldn't lift weights and go to spin class.
Here's a picture of her from this year. You can tell by looking at her neck that she's big time into exercise.
http://science.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/a-new-you-gina-kolata-on-fitness/
I'm very pro-exercise to obtain/maintain fitness, but exercise to lose weight is Fool's Gold compared to caloric deficits. Average people who start running caloric deficits (always assume healthy-only intake) AND exercising are giving way too much credit to the exercise.
Dunno. Twenty years ago I was eating little, and getting blobby. Today after 20 years of weight lifting and other exercise I eat 2,000 calories per day minimum, and I'm TINY. I'm eating almost 17 calories per pound (given 2,000 kcal/day) where the average sedentary person will probably gain weight at much more than 10-12 calories per pound.
If I'm on a long hike, I can eat up to 3,000 calories in a day. I'm no kind of exception, most people who train with me eat quite a lot of calories to continue to train.
So carrying extra muscle mass around doesn't burn much calories, esp not compared to 2000 calories/day burned by basal metabolism (no exercise at all).
Unless you are a very big woman, you're not going to find a woman with a 2,000 calorie basal metabolism.
I'm very pro-exercise to obtain/maintain fitness, but exercise to lose weight is Fool's Gold compared to caloric deficits. Average people who start running caloric deficits (always assume healthy-only intake) AND exercising are giving way too much credit to the exercise.
It doesn't matter how much "percentage" is applicable to diet versus exercise. You will find very, very few people who can maintain a weight loss long term without regular exercise. I suggest that you read some of the studies from the National Weight Control Registry (NWCR),
http://www.nwcr.ws/
which is an epidemiological study of people who have lost more than 30 pounds and kept it off for more than a year. There are many studies emanating from this cohort, and they have found that the average person in the NWCR exercises one hour EVERY DAY.
Exercise is considered a mainstay not only of weight loss, but maintenance of that weight loss. If you are a serious weight lifter, you burn just as many calories in an hour of lifting as you can in an hour of spinning. Personally I know I'm much more wasted after lifting than any other physical activity I do.
Just like with any activity, intensity counts for a lot. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/28/2008 9:06:43 PM | Ah, crisis-mongering.
I love the assumption that "fat" people are automatically lazy and unhealthy. I'm in excellent health, yet I'm fat. My thin friends have hideous cholesterol and blood pressure, smoke, and can't go up a set of stairs without gasping for breath.
OH NO! That must mean THINNESS IS UNHEALTHY.
FAT is not what is unhealthy. Some people are simply designed to be bigger. An unhealthy lifestyle is what is unhealthy. Perhaps the west could actually do something about this "epidemic" if we stopped perpetuating inaccurate stereotypes and started emphasizing accurate information and making healthy lifestyles affordable for all.
Some links/quotes for those that are curious.
On the uselessness of BMI's and the assumption that excess weight automatically equals poor health:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-04/mu-pah043008.php
“What this study really says, Sabiston explained, is that one cannot assume that someone who is physically active necessarily eats a healthy diet – or the reverse, that someone who is more sedentary or has a high BMI by definition eats a diet of junk food. This study drives home the point that as a society, we’re primarily focused on extrinsic things like appearance and weight versus the betterment of health,” Sabiston said. “From a public health perspective, this means we should probably focus on people who are at a healthy weight or even underweight, and emphasize that healthy eating is not just about weight-change.”
On the consequences of weight bias:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/weightloss/2008-05-20-overweight-bias_N.htm
"Reported discrimination based on weight has increased 66% in the past decade, up from about 7% to 12% of U.S. adults, says one study, in the journal Obesity. The other study, in the International Journal of Obesity, says such discrimination is common in both institutional and interpersonal situations — and in some cases is even more prevalent than rates of discrimination based on gender and race. (About 17% of men and 9% of women reported race discrimination.
And this blog post, with some fascinating quotes from nutrition text books some might find interesting. Not an unbiased source, but the books he quotes from are nutrition text books.
http://www.bigfatblog.com/i-read-it-textbook | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:06:16 AM | ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ You can keep thinking that if you want.
It's true that if you are thin and engage in unhealthy activities that you can be as unhealthy as a fat person, but that doesn't mean that fat people aren't ALSO unhealthy.
Fat is a metabolic tissue that signals hormones like leptin and insulin. These hormones and numerous others signal to your brain about your nutritional status. HOWEVER, in a fat person the transporter molecules get saturated and not enough of the signal gets to the brain. Illness results.
It's not always the same illness, but very few fat people live to be middle aged without getting nasty diseases, including diabetes, heart disease andcancer. Plus they all suffer from skeletal issues because of the excess weight.
Now this DOES NOT apply to low-fat atheletes that have additional muscle mass (and therefore additional body weight). It is the FAT on the body that causes the illnesses.
Take this from someone who has been writing about health, and writing health care legislation for over 30 years, and who has also served over the years on various boards, including the American Diabetes Association and American Heart Association. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 6:36:08 AM |
Take this from someone who has been writing about health, and writing health care legislation for over 30 years, and who has also served over the years on various boards, including the American Diabetes Association and American Heart Association.
Ya know... I hear this crap ALL the time. "Take it from me... I've studdied".
I would be more apt to listen to Omans who has actually accomplished losing the weight. ONLY because he has first hand experience to the emotional struggle that goes along with it.
Someone who has written about it or studied it... HAS NO CLUE the hell thos of us who are trying to lose have to go through. I cannot sit at a bench in the park eating my yogurt after a 3 mile walk without someone who's studied all about fat and losing it and knows nothing about me, walking up to me, telling me that I should be out working off the calories I am eating.
Sorry buddy, you can sit there telling me what you have read or written about till you are blue in the face, but unless you have actually had to struggle with actually losing the weight... don't tell me to "take it from you" that you understand how fat effects a human being. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 6:48:57 AM |
Sorry buddy, you can sit there telling me what you have read or written about till you are blue in the face, but unless you have actually had to struggle with actually losing the weight... don't tell me to "take it from you" that you understand how fat effects a human being.
I have to really strongly disagree with you.
Why does her body shape make a difference with what she said in her post ?
We have experts on all kinds of subjects. You don't have to experience something to be an expert on it. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 6:53:12 AM | First of all, your contention was that being fat isn't a health risk, and you haven't said anything above to dispute that.
Second, I lost 40 percent of my body weight 20 years ago, and have kept it off since. I don't know what "emotional struggle" you're talking about. I just stopped mindlessly shoveling food into my mouth without thinking and started back on my exercise program. I don't see why I would have needed to be fat at one point to have credibility, but it's one more thing you can add to the "resume".
BTW, got no idea what an "oman" is supposed to be and please don't tell me, lol.
Edit: Buddy? Do you think I'm a man? I'm a 56 year old woman who will be sitting on the beach in her string bikini next week thanks to everything "I don't know" about nutrition and exercise! | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 12:39:19 PM | With all due respect, I'd rather have actual citations (such as those that I provided) rather than your I'm sure very accurate assurance on your expertise. Call me a stickler for the details.
As an aside, with the current legislation going through committee about oil speculators, and the past legislation voted in regarding gas taxes (both of which were passed AGAINST economist consensus), I generally don't leave my scientific information to legislators or the 'experts' that cater to them. Just for future reference. Also--I do believe you confused my post (which actually had evidence for my contention, evidence you did not reply to, but that I have supplemented with additional research before) with the post of another PoF'er who complained about your not understanding the plight of overweight people. > I < never made any such assumption.
If you're truly interested in a scientific study of the facts, here are a few reading suggestions, with select passages . Any errors are mine, as I transcribed all of this.
Big Fat Lies, 2002, By Glenn A. Gaesser, Steven N. Blair
"The health risks associated with obesity are much the same as those associated with a sedentary lifestyle and poor diet (which also contributes to obesity). . . The fact that some of the most common health health problems associated with obesity, such as high blood pressure, glucose intolerance, and blood lipid disorders, can be ameliorated independent of weight loss supports this observation."
He continues with the following:
"State-of-the-art techniques used to assess the degrees to which fat deposits clog arteries--the chief cause of cardiovascular disease--in most instances show that there is no connection between fat-clogged arteries and obesity. Fat ON the body and fat in the arteries are different and not necessarily related. "
"Body fat can be beneficial, depending on its location. Thigh and hip fat...has been reported to be associated with lower risk of cardiovascular disease and possibly type 2 diabetes, especially in women."
"Men and women medically classified as overweight and obese who exercise regularly and are physically fit, yet remain above the height-weight tables or body mass index charts, have lower all-cause death rates than thin men and women who do not exercise and are unfit."
"Weight loss does not necessarily improve health or lengthen life."
"The "thinner is better" studies frequently cited by health professionals are far out numbered by studies showing that--aside from the very extremes--body weight is fairly unrelated to health status and death rates or that weights above those recommended by the height weight tables are actually better for longevity."
The obesity myth: why America's obsession with weight is hazardous to your health, 2004, by Paul F. Campos
"The reason why the disease of obesity doesn't kill those who suffer from it and why it is impossible to cure is because it doesn't exist. "Obesity" is the name that medical science has given to that level of increasing body mass that, in and of itself has significant health consequences for a person's health. The problem with this definition is that, subject to exceptions, at the extreme statistical margin, medical science has been unable to determine the existance of such a level, let alone fix it's precise location.
Suppose it was discovered that people who owned at least six pairs of blue jeans also tended to be more sedentary than people that did not. Suppose further that this group suffered from marginally poorer health than others. Now suppose that for many year's the medical profession's response was to attempt to get rid of those pants. Finally, after several decades of complete failure, a new generation of researchers come up with the idea of more or less forgetting about the blue jeans and instead getting the group to be less sedentary. The results are startling: Basically this new research holds that you can own many pair of blue jeans and, as long as you're not sedentary, you will still be in far better health than people who don't own blue jeans and are sedentary."
Good Calories, Bad Calories, 2007, by Gary Taubes
"The trouble with the science of obesity as it has been practiced for the last sixty years is that it begins with a hypothesis--that "overweight and obesity result from excess calorie consumption and/or inadequate physical activity" as the Surgeon General's Office recently phrased it--and then tries and fails to explain the evidence and the observations."
Again, any error's or typos are mine. Perhaps, flyonthewall, you can reply with something other than conjecture, sweeping statements, and fairly offensive "I stopped stuffing my face and got thin" comments. Then we can actually have an adult discussion. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 3:58:56 PM | So nobody's can cite just a single study that recommends 1/2 gallon water per day, and what benefit, if any, a 1/2 gallon supplies?
"everybody knows it" is just silly bullsh!t from the herd's echo chamber.
I bet almost nobody here drinks 1/2 gallon water/day and not doing so has no effect. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:32:34 PM | I really - really - really love the assumption from the FFs (fitness fanatics) that overweight people do nothing but shovel food into their mouths. I am over weight because I have poor eating habits and never got enough exercise growing up (and even now) due to various reasons (which are all personal and not up for public scruitiny). My eating habits aren't that I eat too much, or I eat nothing but junk food, it's how I eat and when I eat that seems to be the issue not to mention other health issues I have that make losing weight I've put on since I was 15 years old, very difficult and incredibly challenging - though not impossible.
I can't tell you the last time I had junk food. But some days I couldn't tell you the last time I ate, either. That's my problem. I am a chronic meal skipper and because of work, I eat much later in the day than I should just so I can keep going at work. My other issue is portion control; so while some days I may only eat once, the amount I eat is enough for 2 meals.
I had my body fat tested recently for health issues and my doctor made a note that women are clinically obese at 35% fat; mine is at 33%; not great by a long shot and it is something that I'm actively working on.
To whomever said there are no emotional issues with food - I'm glad that wasn't YOUR case. But for many of us who see food and weight as a constant struggle, there is an emotional component. I know exactly what mine is and I'm getting help on changing it.
I am fat, it's not because I am constantly shoveling food into my mouth; or doing nothing but laying on the couch, it's a mix of reasons that include meal skipping, portion distortion, psychological relationships with food (either good or bad), and lack of continued exercise over the last several years.
This is why I stopped going to a normal gym and instead go at midnight in the hospital gym - these attitudes about fat people that are so pervasive and misinformed, and down right cruel. People talking and giving every one of us a broad stroke of the brush without first pausing to think about the individual reasons that someone is the way they are. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:48:53 PM |
Big Fat Lies, 2002, By Glenn A. Gaesser, Steven N. Blair
I've known Steve Blair for years, he's very overweight and has bias. In addition, both of the cites you made were to books NOT SCIENTIFIC STUDIES.
I've worked as peer review for major scientific publications, so believe me, I know more than a little bit about proper methods.
And kinda tough if you don't like the way I lost weight. That's exactly what I did. I learned what 2,000 calories actually is and didn't kid myself that 3,000 was actually 2,000. In addition, I went back to the workouts I did in high school when I participated in team sports. The two of those together got the weight off and kept it off.
There are only 100 or so people in the world who can blame their genetics for being fat. Everyone else can lose weight by modifying their diet and exercising. I'm not saying it would necessarily be easy, but they would lose weight given a low enough intake and a high enough physical activity level.
The 100 people who have little ability to control their weight have monogenic deficits to genes like leptin and the leptin receptor. Those who have leptin deficits will lose weight on leptin injection. Those with deficits to the leptin receptor cannot be helped.
In addition, about 5 percent of the world population have various polymorphisms to the melanocortin-4 receptor. Those people have a tougher time losing weight, but they can do it. Further those people who watch their diet for their entire lives remain normal weight or not much above normal weight, compared to other individuals with the same mutations who do not watch their diet.
I'm not suggesting that it is necessarily EASY, but it can be done by almost everyone.
The one thing I can tell you is that it is NOT conjecture. Everything I've said has been proven in mutliple studies. What is juvenille is to take facts in evidence and call them conjecture, sweeping statements or offenisve.
See:
Binge Eating as a Major Phenotype of Melanocortin 4 Receptor Gene Mutations. Branson R, et al. N Engl J Med. 2003 Mar 20;348(12):1096-103.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/348/12/1096
A leptin missense mutation associated with hypogonadism and morbid obesity. Strobel A, et al. Nat Genet. 1998 Mar;18(3):213-5.
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v18/n3/abs/ng0398-213.html
(Full text not on-line for free)
There are also multiple later studies on leptin deficient individuals showing that leptin injections reduces body weight to normal. Of course, those injections need to be continued for life.
I had my body fat tested recently for health issues and my doctor made a note that women are clinically obese at 35% fat; mine is at 33%; not great by a long shot and it is something that I'm actively working on.
Actually you can be 35 percent body fat and weigh 130 pounds, which would not make you obese even if you were 5' tall (however, it would make you unhealthy). And FWIW, the borderline for an unhealthy amount of body fat is 32 percent.
A person with more than normal body weight would not be considered obese if the additional weight was due to muscle, and low body fat. That occurs frequently in male atheletes, but rarely in females (yeah, there are a few female body builders, but most female atheletes -- even body builders -- are quite slim).
If you want to exercise and watch your weight you can do it. I know people in wheel chairs, people with fibromyalgia, with rheumatoid arthritis who work out religiously in the gym. Christopher Reeve worked out on a daily basis even though he was a quadriplegic.
In fact, if you'd like to read a really inspiring story look up Pat Rummerfield. He was never fat, but he's the only fully functioning quadriplegic in the world. His injury was every bit as bad as Chris Reeves' but you would never know it. The guy can't even feel his body, but yet he walks, competes in triathalons, and races cars. (And no, I'm not saying every paralyzed person could do this, but they can improve their lives by being more active).
FWIW, I have a couple of very, very bad injuries, and if it wasn't for religiously spending one hour on a pilates reformer every day I'd barely be able to walk. But I consider that small potatoes next to stories like Pat Rummerfield's or Chris Reeves'. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 6:02:59 PM | More exercise inanity. Can these people really be so stupid?
"UK and US guidelines on kids' physical activity levels need rethinking
Physical activity at the government-recommended level and obesity-related health outcomes: A longitudinal study"
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-06/bmj-uau062708.php
==============
The words diet, nutrition, eat don't even appear in article. Exercise is the only solution?
The problems, as for adults, are kids over-eating and eating crap, after being heavily marketed to by the food corps as soon as enfants start watching TV.
The solution is 1 hr exercise/day?
These people have real gall to cash their paychecks. Excercise works somewhat, but kids don't exercise. So the mucky-mucks are "rethinking" when they need to be re-employed in different jobs.
Food marketing and nutrition ignorance are overwelmingly more power than exercise programs for kids. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 6:19:00 PM |
So nobody's can cite just a single study that recommends 1/2 gallon water per day, and what benefit, if any, a 1/2 gallon supplies?
"everybody knows it" is just silly bullsh!t from the herd's echo chamber.
I bet almost nobody here drinks 1/2 gallon water/day and not doing so has no effect.
Yo man just don't drink water, no one is asking you to. You're an annoying piece of shit, nothing I hear from you makes sense. I can't believe I am wasting my time on this. Took me 5 seconds, enjoy. You should really stop giving advice. I am a lot younger and probably have done 1000x more researching than you. It took me a while to understand how the body works and what how to lose weight.
http://my.clevelandclinic.org/healthy_living/exercise/hic_the_benefits_of_water.aspx
"The human body, which is made up of between 55 and 75 percent water (lean people have more water in their bodies because muscle holds more water than fat), is in need of constant water replenishment." | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 6:42:20 PM |
I've known Steve Blair for years, he's very overweight and has bias. In addition, both of the cites you made were to books NOT SCIENTIFIC STUDIES.
So you took one co-author of one (of three) cited books, tossed out an ad hominem, and arbitrarily threw out the book, the following two, and the entire post and the quotes contained therein? That doesn't sound like a very open-minded scientific mentality.
I've worked as peer review for major scientific publications, so believe me, I know more than a little bit about proper methods.
Yet you addressed genetic abnormalities that I never addressed, and completely ignored the main point--that it's possible to be 'overweight' and healthy.
And kinda tough if you don't like the way I lost weight. That's exactly what I did. I learned what 2,000 calories actually is and didn't kid myself that 3,000 was actually 2,000. In addition, I went back to the workouts I did in high school when I participated in team sports. The two of those together got the weight off and kept it off.
I had no problem with the way you lost weight, simply your assumption that others embark on the same unhealthy behavior (shoveling food in your mouth, specifically) that you did. What an odd argument. So because YOU binge ate, stopped exercising, and gained a significant amount of unhealthy weight, clearly other overweight people have done the same thing? Anecdotal evidence, and decidedly unscientific. I find it ironic that you disparage these "books" as being inefficient, when all three (not two as you stated, which suggests you didn't do much else but skim my fairly well thought out and cited post) cite those all-hailed scientific studies considerably, especially Mr. Taubes.
I believe that's all for today, folks. Its a little depressing to debate with such an obviously inadequate "expert." If these are 'experts', what kind of information is being used to legislate health policy? | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 7:14:17 PM | Ok problem with a lot of people is this. On a normal day say some obese person eats 4000 cals for example. They decide to diet and cut down to 1000-1500 cals, basically starving. They do this for a while and their body gets used to that amount of calories. At some point they give up and go back to their normal eating habits. When they cut down to 1500 cals, sure they lost weight. When you go back to your original eating habits (4000 cals), you will gain weight. Everything you lost will be back and much more. It's why you need to count how many calories you eating and cut down calories a bit. Maintain the same diet and do a lot of cardio/weight lifting. If you want to cut down calories again go ahead but not too much. Keep cutting calories at a controlled pace.
DIET and CARDIO = Losing weight
If you can't lose weight, you're doing something wrong. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 7:32:34 PM | Oh Lord more misconceptions.
So you took one co-author of one (of three) cited books, tossed out an ad hominem, and arbitrarily threw out the book, the following two, and the entire post and the quotes contained therein? That doesn't sound like a very open-minded scientific mentality.
You cited three mainstream, non-scientific books. How am I supposed to react? They are NOT scientific studies. Not one of them.
Yet you addressed genetic abnormalities that I never addressed, and completely ignored the main point--that it's possible to be 'overweight' and healthy.
Up until recently Steven Blair was the director of the Cooper Institute, and part of his mission was to encourage exercise in overweight individuals. The average obese or overweight person who exercises is heathIER than the average sedentary obese or overweight person, but not healthier than the average normal weight person who exercises. Obese people who incorporate physical activity into their lives will definitely be healthier, but will still get obesity related comorbidities at a higher rate than a normal weight person.
Nonetheless, I think what Dr. Blair does is great. If they aren't willing to lose weight, better to have overweight people moving. It improves their health.
In case you're interested, here's a recent picture of him:
http://health.nytimes.com/ref/health/healthguide/esn-exercise-qa.html
Even though the Q&A is not dated, I can tell it's relatively recent, because he didn't leave Cooper all that long ago.
I had no problem with the way you lost weight, simply your assumption that others embark on the same unhealthy behavior (shoveling food in your mouth, specifically) that you did. What an odd argument. So because YOU binge ate, stopped exercising, and gained a significant amount of unhealthy weight, clearly other overweight people have done the same thing?
LOL, this is entertaining at least.
First of all, I didn't binge eat. A binge is categorized as eating more than 2,000 calories at a seating. I only ate MORE than I should have at each meal. I consider that shoveling food into your mouth. Eating a quart of Hagen Daaz is just pure gluttony, and qualifies as binge eating.
Second, I didn't STOP exercising, I just didn't do it with the intensity that I did when I participated in competitive sports. I still walked a few hours a week and would push some weights around once in a while. But that wasn't going to keep the lard off, especially with eating more than I should.
ALL overweight people eat too much and exercise too little -- with the exception of those 100 people with rare genetic mutations. Even children with Prader-Willi Syndrome can be kept normal weight by watching their diet.
Anecdotal evidence, and decidedly unscientific. I find it ironic that you disparage these "books" as being inefficient, when all three (not two as you stated, which suggests you didn't do much else but skim my fairly well thought out and cited post) cite those all-hailed scientific studies considerably, especially Mr. Taubes.
Um, no. I gave you the scientific evidence for uncontrollable obesity. With everyone else obesity is the result of a combination of bad diet, poor exercise habits and a certain amount of genetic predisposition. People predisposed to diabetes can avoid and reverse early disease and glucose intolerance with weight loss and exercise. Similarly people with a genetic predisposition to obesity can do the same (and sometimes they are tied together).
I'm not disputing that it is HARDER for many people to be normal weight, lose weight, and maintain weight loss. Regardless, it is possible for almost everyone to do so. It depends on how much effort you are willing to put into it. | |
|
| 2/3d's US overweight or obese????
Posted: 6/29/2008 8:12:17 PM |
If you want to exercise and watch your weight you can do it. I know people in wheel chairs, people with fibromyalgia, with rheumatoid arthritis who work out religiously in the gym. Christopher Reeve worked out on a daily basis even though he was a quadriplegic.
First, thanks for your response to my post - flyonthewall. :)
I know I can do it. In the last month-and-a-half alone I've lost 10 pounds of fat and gained a few pounds (can't remember the actual number the trainer gave me) of lean muscle. I'm not disappointed about the number on the scale going up, it's natural and I know I can do it. With my conditions though, it does make losing weight very challenging but, like I said, not impossible. I just have to modify my lifestyle a bit. :) | |
|
|
|
|
Page
3
of
8 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
|
|
Home
login 
