Obesity is unhealthy, why is it being embraced?

nooneisthegoat wrote:

fat at 27 wrote:

To feel superior.

They might also say there's a public health crisis, but they wouldn't support the type of policy that would actually help with it because it would be too authoritarian. The solution, in their eyes, is relentless public shaming, as can be seen here in this thread.

because public shaming works. societies in asia with a shaming culture have very few obese people. I thought democrats support shaming. They are doing it 24/7 to unvaccinated people.

It also causes other problems like higher rates of suicide. Everyone uses shame when it fits their agenda.

nooneisthegoat wrote:

fat at 27 wrote:

To feel superior.

They might also say there's a public health crisis, but they wouldn't support the type of policy that would actually help with it because it would be too authoritarian. The solution, in their eyes, is relentless public shaming, as can be seen here in this thread.

because public shaming works. societies in asia with a shaming culture have very few obese people. I thought democrats support shaming. They are doing it 24/7 to unvaccinated people.

Exactly, obesity is a leading factor in Covid deaths. Treat the problem at the root….and listen to your coach when he tells you your arse is the largest in the field.

nooneisthegoat wrote:

fat at 27 wrote:

To feel superior.

They might also say there's a public health crisis, but they wouldn't support the type of policy that would actually help with it because it would be too authoritarian. The solution, in their eyes, is relentless public shaming, as can be seen here in this thread.

because public shaming works. societies in asia with a shaming culture have very few obese people. I thought democrats support shaming. They are doing it 24/7 to unvaccinated people.

I’ve got bad news for you.

It’s who we are we are large and proud, own it soy boy weakling.

Many on the left think that if you haven't taken a Covid vaccine, you shouldn't get health care. Indeed, that is already happening across the country, most notably at the Cleveland Clinic with a transplant patient who will now likely to die. What we should really do, if a behavior-based rewards system is our path, is not give health care to people with a BMI over 35. It is 100% their choice to be that unhealthy and the rest of us shouldn't have to subsidize that level of stupidity.

Dr Yuengling wrote:

They dont need ‘medical intervention.’ Eat less/healthier, exercise more. Works for pretty much everyone.

What? Are you forcing "healthy diet" and "exercise" on the freedom fighters? Whatever happened to the people's constitutional rights to being sedentary and eating junk foods? Don't tread on them!

77 ships wrote:

CrispyChicken wrote:

Q: Obesity is unhealthy, why is it being embraced?

A1: Because people can't handle the truth.

A2: Because people are soft and lazy.

A3: Because corporate Big Food and corporate Chain Restaurant don't want to lose revenue.

A4: All of the above.

Correct answer: The Democrats are embracing new voting block. "Come to us(vote for) and we will help you. You are victims. We won't stand for those who wish to discriminate against you."

Please don’t make this a Republican vs Democrat thing. Republicans worship an orange lard, and when I think of stereotypical republican I think of an obese 40-60 year old male with a m aga hat.

Obesity isn’t a Democrat or republican trait. It’s a lazy middle-class US citizen trait.

Dr Yuengling wrote:

appleapple wrote:

I don't think this is a very accurate understanding of the issue. There is a movement to embrace all body types because we know that no weight loss intervention (with the exception of bariatric surgery, which is a different can of worms) has proven successful in more than 5% of those who attempt it - no other medical intervention with those results would be celebrated or prescribed. The majority of people can't just "choose" to lose weight, and their attempts to loose weight perpetuate a cycle of weight gain. These people will have better health outcomes if they focus on the things they can control and accept the things they can't.

They dont need ‘medical intervention.’ Eat less/healthier, exercise more. Works for pretty much everyone.

Yes, at the small risk of being rude, I think that appleapple's take constitutes false sophistication. And, in turn, gives an excuse to those who become and stay obese. Obesity rates are way up. So, were the physiological near-impossibilities of losing weight that appleapple appears to claim NOT in existence a few decades ago? Was a non-obese person in 1975 living in a different set of physical rules?

Of course not. Sustained weight loss can be hard. But it is not anywhere near impossible for most people. And indeed, the chances of any given person achieving it DECREASES as we increasingly tell people - both explicitly and implicitly (e.g., clearly obese people now featured in commercials) - that it's not at all their fault.

If public shaming worked in this situation, no one would be fat. Fat people are already subject to public shame and have been for decades.

nonequals wrote:

Dr Yuengling wrote:

They dont need ‘medical intervention.’ Eat less/healthier, exercise more. Works for pretty much everyone.

Yes, at the small risk of being rude, I think that appleapple's take constitutes false sophistication. And, in turn, gives an excuse to those who become and stay obese. Obesity rates are way up. So, were the physiological near-impossibilities of losing weight that appleapple appears to claim NOT in existence a few decades ago? Was a non-obese person in 1975 living in a different set of physical rules?

Of course not. Sustained weight loss can be hard. But it is not anywhere near impossible for most people. And indeed, the chances of any given person achieving it DECREASES as we increasingly tell people - both explicitly and implicitly (e.g., clearly obese people now featured in commercials) - that it's not at all their fault.

What should we tell obese people that will help them? They already know that they are overweight and that they should improve their diet and/or exercise. I seriously doubt that any of them wouldn't prefer to be slim. That some have accepted it, doesn't mean they are happy about it.

Simply don't suggest that it's fine. That's all. Not endorsing "shaming."

But it's also true that it's hard. And many obviously aren't terribly inclined to do enough about it. One could see "normalizing" obesity by showcasing it with happy smiling faces in commercials as counterproductive (or even the final nail in the coffin of likelihood).

Put another way, just because shaming is bad, it doesn't mean that "glorifying" (at the risk of using too strong a word) isn't ALSO bad. We should do neither.

appleapple wrote:

I don't think this is a very accurate understanding of the issue. There is a movement to embrace all body types because we know that no weight loss intervention (with the exception of bariatric surgery, which is a different can of worms) has proven successful in more than 5% of those who attempt it - no other medical intervention with those results would be celebrated or prescribed. The majority of people can't just "choose" to lose weight, and their attempts to loose weight perpetuate a cycle of weight gain. These people will have better health outcomes if they focus on the things they can control and accept the things they can't.

By this rationale, the only explation for the fact that every generation is heavier than the last would be that we are genetically predisposed to evolve this way. Of course that's ridiculous.

An unhealthy food supply and ever increasing sedentary life styles have caused the obesity crisis.

For one - There should be a disclaimer at the beginning of those Old Navy commercials with the morbidly obese women dancing around explaining the risks of obesity.

nonequals wrote:

Yes, at the small risk of being rude, I think that appleapple's take constitutes false sophistication. And, in turn, gives an excuse to those who become and stay obese. Obesity rates are way up. So, were the physiological near-impossibilities of losing weight that appleapple appears to claim NOT in existence a few decades ago? Was a non-obese person in 1975 living in a different set of physical rules?

I think a few things have changed.

Unhealthy processed foods have become more widely available, and also relatively cheaper. You have to try harder to find healthy food, and it is usually more expensive.

People have become generally busier for whatever reason. That means less time both for exercise and home cooking.

There are way more technological devices to encourage sedentary lifestyle.

Kids spend less time playing outside for safety concerns.

As more people become fat, the more "normal" it feels to be fat. This happens without any conscious "acceptance."

Probably a few more that have slipped my mind.

Obesity rates are way up, but the reasons why are multifactorial. One important thing to note is that people are moving from the "overweight" category to the "obese" category at faster rates than the "normal" category to the "overweight" category. Again, there are tons of factors to consider, but with what we know about dieting being more correlated to weight gain than weight loss because of metabolic adjustments we make in response to low energy availability, it's fitting that those more likely to be attempting weight loss interventions are the group getting heavier. Essentially, The group of people at a "normal" bmi are relatively stable and inflated obesity rates are being driven up in large part by those on the heavier end of the spectrum.

It's also worth noting that in 1975, the BMI standards were different. They changed in 1998 and made the standards tighter, so that overnight 29 million Americans who had been considered normal became considered overweight. So while, yes, people are heavier on average now than in 1975, the difference is often really inflated by this change in the measurement standards. Here's an archived WP article about it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/guideposts/fitness/optimal.htm

There are absolutely structural parts of life today that contribute to a heavier population - more food processing, more food marketing, a more medicated population, a population with higher rates of diagnosed mental health conditions, etc. These are all big, societal differences. Those are the things we should be examining in the interest of population health, not prescribing diets to people when we know they will fail.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17469900/

I'm all about a big pharma discussion though - I think a large part of lowering the overweight and obesity standards was to give drug companies 29 million more people to market weight loss drugs to.

This is an article about the bias treatment fat people receive when seeking medical care. Things like this also have to be a part of the conversation about worse health outcomes correlated with obesity.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4381543/

fat at 27 wrote:

nooneisthegoat wrote:

because public shaming works. societies in asia with a shaming culture have very few obese people. I thought democrats support shaming. They are doing it 24/7 to unvaccinated people.

It also causes other problems like higher rates of suicide. Everyone uses shame when it fits their agenda.

I'm guessing the ratio of obesity related death to shame induced suicide is about 1000:1

Most apple sauce is loaded with added sugar. That alone should disqualify you from any discussion about diet and nutrition.

just realized apple sauce is not your handle rendering that attempt at humor now solely at my expense.

It's a conundrum for liberals because they worship victimhood and they think obesity might be on the list

Imagine not knowing about the best pre-run nutrition in the game

https://shop.gogosqueez.com/AppleApple/p/GGS-001103&c=GoGoSqueez@OnTheGo