A Life Apart: The Toll of Obesity
slate.com
slate.com
If you can, I'd recommend watching "Fed Up" [0], a documentary which tries to show that the problem is a bit more complex than just people being lazy ("light" food being effectively worse, complete lack of food education, lobbying at it's worse etc). As many documentaries, it has a rather clear agenda, but it's interesting nonetheless.
I probably should have said "underestimated", please forgive a foreign speaker :)
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/07/news/la-heb-obesity-...
("Might be" because of In a news conference that was the centerpiece of a second annual "Weight of the Nation" conference in Washington, D.C., Finkelstein said it was unclear whether the galloping rate of growth has slowed because of public policy initiatives aimed at preventing child obesity, greater societal awareness of obesity's risks, or because Americans have hit the maximum level of fatness a population can sustain., that last bit would not be a success...)
You seem to consider the fact these percentages are "growing less" as a success, but in my eyes, it is a failure to implement drastic measures, so (IMHO) you'd be also underestimating the problem.
On the other end of it, you have the question of how far drastic measures can go and still be compatible with a reasonable society.
I was pointing at the change in the slope as evidence that the programs are (perhaps) having an effect, not that everything was all fixed and a great success. I'm perhaps optimistic, because I think countering obesity in children is the most important thing to be doing, and because I think that over time people will tend to learn habits that are useful in the face of food abundance (which is a reasonably recent phenomenon when you look at it in terms of generations).
I seem to be losing weight myself (I'm about 220 lbs.) very slowly, since my pants are starting to be loose. A few people around me have noticed that I have lost weight, at least around the middle.
I remember a scene about a mother going to the store, and buying 'light' oreos/chips/other stuff, and giving that to their kids instead of the regular ones to their kids and then complaining he didn't lose weight and taking as a conclusion that 'dieting' and 'exercise' doesn't really work. Never considered that maybe a carrot stick or an apple would be better, she would just buy diet soda/cookies/chips.
This is very much the same as for cigarettes, and why the "light" label on those has been banned for years.
But she made it in relation to the fact that for some categories (i.e. the US has had a constant increase in obesity for kids ages 2-5 which are not naturally not "sitting all day" types) moving more is not enough, and I felt the underlying points are still valid (school food is crap, adults are unable to understand what "healthy food", that "eat healthy" is not "eat less" etc).
Baring psychological issues, it's really not hard at all to pick a diet and adhere to it. It literally requires a few hours of upfront effort and a bit of time each day. I was able to go from about 300 lbs as a 6'3" male to 210 lbs with significant muscle mass added by following a basic diet and lifting 3 times a week, and I literally started on a whim.
If you want to lose weight, I would start by getting an idea of what you already eat using http://www.myfitnesspal.com/
Once you get an understanding of your habits, head on over to http://iifym.com/iifym-calculator/ and select a diet plan which will make you the happiest (low carb, low fat, zone, stricty calorie deficit etc). Every morning, plan your meals using myfitnesspal and the output from iifym.
It's really that simple.
Obviously it's not that simple is it. You had to dedicate a long and sustained effort to lose weight you didn't want! If it were simple it wouldn't have taken 50% extra body mass for you to act and learn how to lose weight.
I really do congratulate you, but let's not pretend this is an easy problem, or it simply wouldn't exist!
I never paid attention to what I ate, I ate until I was stuffed, I drank way too much beer, and I never exercised. Basically I was lazy and didn't give a shit. This was the normal lifestyle of most people I knew who were 16-22. The ramifications of being fat were not enough to overcome the perceptions of the difficulty of dieting and exercise I gleaned from most people, so I didn't even try. In fact, dieting was not difficult, so when I actually tried it with an established plan I had immense success.
If it takes even more than what I tried then I hardly believe it's even worth it. I'd rather live happily for one less year than never get to eat fulfillingly and live on a bootcamp exercise regimen.
One of the main problems people have with counting calories is accurately being able to do so. While I don't think counting calories is for everyone, if you do try again, try to weight everything you eat. Don't forget the teaspoon of olive oil in the salad and those kinds of small things that add up. Research has shown that comparing food logs of people that say they have a slow metabolism and that they count calories, when subjected to something I think is called, reverse isotope water (or similar), shows that they are not accounting for a lot of the things they eat.
Also, a month isn't a long time to notice changes even on the scale. It isn't uncommon to not drop weight due to water retention during a few weeks (depending where you start) when starting a diet.
Apparently my BMI is 'obese' but I don't feel or look 'obese', by whatever value of obese seems to be my intuition gained over time, oddly. Maybe overweight is so common that it looks normal.
BMI is not really accurate on the individual level. Most athletes will score on the 'overweight' range for example while athletes that play in weight division sports will be in the 'underweight' category a lot of the time (I was for example, but I doubt anyone would consider me underweight at the time).
You also don't have to live a bootcamp experience, since essentially all your weightloss will come from not eating too much. Calories are flexible though, if you note which foods you get most saity/calorie then it is better to go with those foods than others that may be "healthier". In my case the key turned out to be meat and higher fat content plus bread.
Your month may have sucked, but you can absolutely do it, you will live better for it and whether you die earlier or not your quality of life is going to be much, much better when you aren't fat. It isn't just a matter of dying earlier - that tradeof may seem worthwhile - but a matter of whether you will spend ten years in a wheel chair, whether you can reach your own butt to wipe yourself, whether you need a machine to make sure you don't die in your sleep, etc.
You can totally do this. I know because I have been down that route and yes, the payof is worth it. Email me.
The water/muscle sound like reasonable explanations.
My overweight relatives had reasonable mobility etc into their 80s while still being overweight, so maybe my genetics are fine for it, but being healthier might be a net positive as you say anyway. I'll consider it.
In the same way that some people drink massive amounts of alcohol in college and turn into alcoholics ruining their lives and liver, and others just 'phase' into a more healthy lifestyle, clearly some people find it harder to do what you did than you.
One conclusion is that they just don't try hard enough, and they're not as 'good' as those who do. They willingly choose to live a lesser life. Because they're lazy or whatever.
The other, more complicated (and I'd argue less arrogant and more empathic) conclusion is that the psychology of addiction is different for different people, and approaches that work for one person don't work for others. And rather than saying 'it's really that simple', we should research the problem and devise solutions that take into account the simple fact that some people apparently drink until their liver gives up and all that's good in their life is eventually gone, or that some people apparently eat and grow fat and hate themselves and live 'lesser' lives instead of getting in shape.
Having spent a lot of time with 'highly successful and driven' people, and having spent a lot of time with fuck-ups who suffered from a variety of addictions, I've come to the conclusion that being that hard to define 'good' has little to do with it. Instead, it seems that the difference is mostly upbringing and environment (where this environment was usually not a choice, but rather a circumstance).
I've been lucky to be surrounded by both happy, successful people and major 'fuck-ups', and as a result my life currently occupies a mostly happy space. But I have no illusions that this is primarily the result of my personal choices and willpower, as willpower itself is a result of upbringing and environment.
Sure, my will and choices matter. I don't want to remove personal agency entirely. But even if my current (happy) state of being is 50% a result of factors outside of myself, it's enough to realize that I'm fucking lucky, and those who fare worse than me need support and researched solutions rather than 'it worked for me, so it should work for you'.
Obesity appears to be highly heritable. For this reason a careful balance must be struck between encouraging people to control their weight and not blaming them for have been dealt worse cards than their naturally slim neighbors (until we have a cure).
Around the time I started my first bout exercising and eating normally, I worked with basically an entire office of developers who were fitness nuts. Guys who can run a 10K faster than I could dream at my height, and lift nearly 2 of me. Their secret? Watch what you eat, log it if you have to (you'll be surprised that you really don't know what in the hell you're consuming), and get some exercise. Surprisingly sitting in an office chair for 8 or more hours and living the startup life isn't all that great for your well being... Anecdotally, my latest job affords me great flexibility meaning I can get out and kayak every damn day when it suits me. It's great exercise to fight the current for hours at a time, I enjoy it immensely, and guess what? I don't have to hit the gym as often, maybe throw in some running/other strength exercise to "even things out".
[...]
> Broke up, started eating less, working out more.
> Around the time I started my first bout exercising and eating normally, I worked with basically an entire office of developers who were fitness nuts. Guys who can run a 10K faster than I could dream at my height, and lift nearly 2 of me.
So you broke up with a (in this context) toxic girlfriend, and found yourself surrounded by fitness nuts.
I truly applaud the fact that you used your situation to get in shape, but at the same time it's important to realize that you used your situation. I know many people who are not working with fitness nuts, or who for various reasons are still in relationships with 'toxic' partners. And that is all the difference.
I don't mean to start an argument, by the way. I just want to point out that this is a thorny problem. I often feel that the best way to help people in unhealthy environments is to remove them from that environment. But I've also experienced that this is hella difficult, because as social creates many of us are terrified of losing our SO, family, or familiar environment. And that is sometimes the primary impediment to a better, healthier, and happier life.
It's like watching City of God or The Wire and hearing that the average age of death is in the twenties. I found myself almost screaming at the characters on screen to just fucking move and find a better place. And yet, as shown in The Wire, even the characters that had a chance to move to a better place eventually came back, because this 'other' place was just too weird and lonely and unfamiliar.
I guess what I'm getting at is, sans biological issues, all one needs is to exercise and to watch what they eat. Hell, watching what you eat is very important regardless. Of course being a good developer, I realize there are edge-cases out the ass. We're people, not machines.
All that said, the mental aspect is always gonna be the toughest part to overcome. You have to be willing to break the habits, and commit to your change. Not everyone has the mental acuity to a) comprehend their shortcomings and b) commit to fixing them. How much of that blame lies on the individual and how much on upbringing/society/etc. is up in the air, largely on a person-to-person basis. I'm just lucky enough to have grown up around enough toxic activities to be able to see things for how they are, and to have the acuity/strength to change things if need be.
'Normal' (non-overweight) people usually don't have to pay attention to what they eat either, still they don't gain weight.
As someone who's tried to lose weight (with on and off success) for years. Once you are in this place, you have to apply much tighter heuristics. Your body isn't giving you the right messages about food. (e.g. Can I have 3 slices of pizza today, is this salad actually lower calorie than that slice of pizza, which one will make the rest of the day easier.) Your body dopes you with Serotonin every time you eat. trying to lose weight has many withdrawal like aspects to it.
Suddenly you find yourselves with a new job and are now driving to work, and week by week you gain weight until you wake up one day and think fuck.
This is sort of like someone who makes $500,000 a year claiming that getting out of debt is easy because they were able to do it after they finally stopped buying mansions and sports cars left and right.
such a tired excuse
96% of the population is in the range of 1680-2320kcal daily
http://examine.com/faq/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-peop...
This is where you come in and say, "Oh well, the person with the lower metabolism should eat less." So now the person with the lower metabolism has to eat a meal's worth of food less than the other person just to maintain their weight to say nothing of losing it. And I'd wager the person providing their body with 1600kcal is probably feeling sluggish and depressed all day. Which is why I include willpower.
not for fatties, that's an entree's worth
Not particularly. If I had a high metabolism I would not have put on the weight easily in the first place.
> and abundant energy and willpower. Not overeating requires willpower every waking moment... forever.
In my opinion, successful dieting isn't a willpower issue, it's a systems issue. I have designed a straight forward system which works for me: Every morning I wake up and plan my meals in accordance with my diet plan. I then only eat those meals. I schedule in time to go the gym and follow my schedule. When I arrive I do my prescribed exercise routine and I leave. There are no decisions to be made on food choices or exercise throughout the day because I have already made the decisions without any internal conflict before I start my day. The emotional component is completely abstracted away and very little willpower is necessary to maintain adherence.
I think this is one of the biggest problems with people's mentality on dieting and getting in shape. They think they need to force themselves to be adherent against their will. In reality you only need to discover and set up systems which facilitate good behavior. There is very little willpower involved on a day to day basis if this is done, and in fact, the more success you have the more you will want to adhere.
>In my opinion, successful dieting isn't a willpower issue.... I wake up and plan my meals in accordance with my diet plan. I then only eat those meals.
Imagine a recipe for overcoming drug addiction. In the morning, you decide not to take drugs. Then you don't take drugs that day. This is nonsense.
When you're hungry and low on energy, it's a constant battle. You have a burning awareness that any moment you could go get something to eat. I'm glad it doesn't work that way for you, seriously.
>Not particularly. If I had a high metabolism I would not have put on the weight easily in the first place.
Sure you would. Eating a surplus is easy. You already said you ate until you were stuffed, didn't exercise, and consumed too much beer. This is why I used the money example. You can make a huge amount of money and still burn it.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/82/1/222S.long
It isn't that hard to lose weight. It is very hard to keep it off.
Just the 'lifting 3 times a week' will take out a lot of the working population out of the picture. Why? If include commute to gym, working out time and shower/etc, we are looking at least 6 hours per week. Add the gym costs/going to the gym costs and you have maybe 100 bucks a month as a cost. We are fortunate we can spend that time/money on ourselves, but seriously, a lot of people can't. Heck, if you take 80% of the comments here in HN how they work 60+ hours a week in their startups, I doubt even us techies will have the time to do so.
In my country (and I think the USA as well) obesity is highly correlated with low income.
Then you have the psychological aspects to it. Stress is a major contribution to over eating. If everyday you are worried if you have enough at the end of the month for rent, you wont stop, go online, get a recipe, go to the grocery store to get fresh vegetables, come on, cook for an hour to have a nice healthy meal... You most likely will pick up a microwavable lasagna and be done with it.
I don't disagree with you that losing weight is easy, it is, basically "eat less than what you need", but being able to do that, based on many many factors isn't as easy.
(congrats on the weight loss)
You don't necessarily need to "go to the gym" though. There are lots of bodyweight exercises that can produce great results. Not just pushups, either:
http://www.beastskills.com/tutorials/
http://www.dragondoor.com/articles/building-an-olympic-body-...
Some of those exercises are very difficult - the only one I can do is the single leg squat (pistol). But pullups, dips, pistols, sprinting, kettlebells (cheap one-time purchase) can take you a long way.
I gained a bit back after getting married, and I've gained 10 pounds a year on average since my son was born.
As for not affording a gym, that's nonsense. Bodyweight fitness exists and it works great.
Last year I met a super skinny tall Indian dude. He asked my help on how to get in shape (I'm tall but not so skinny), so I invited him to join me for a bodyweight workout in the free public park. He joined me, stuck with the program ("if you do 7 pushups today, try 8 tomorrow"), and got into considerably better shape.
He works 6 days/week and probably earns about 10,000rs/month ($150, maybe $300-400 after adjusting for cost of living). He can't even afford an internet-capable phone to visit the /r/fitness FAQ. Rather than making excuses, he just decided that fitness was more important than TV and made it happen.
Damn right it does. I struggle with weight, and have done so all my life. After my divorce 7 years ago i piled on the kilo's. Combination of overeating, and being lazy. I started a gym a few times, and got personal trainers involved at some point. All the same thing: pound the treadmill and stairmaster for an hour, and go home.
I have been on and off diets and few, if any, are long term doable for me.
Last October, I hooked up with a personal trainer who is totally awesome, and got me into the "if you do 7 today, try 8 tomorrow" perspective. The first weeks were brutal, and very, very hard, but his approach was to find my limit, and push me ever so slightly over it. I used to go 3 times a week, half an hour, early morning. Now I also join in with evening sessions.
Everything we do is bodyweight training, boxing, kickboxing, and some cardio workout. No running (it would destroy my knees anyway), just simple stuff: squats, pushups, pull ups (from a horizontal position, working to "proper" pull ups), etc. His mantra is "small victories, every day".
It works. Although he does give me gentle nudges about my eating habits every now and then ("eat less meat, more green veg. Drink water with lemon") he emphatically doesn't want me to worry about dieting. "Get fit, and the weightloss will follow".
I have lost about 20 kilo's so far, feel better than I have in a very long time, and have an unbelievable amount of fun doing it (I am lazy, and I hate working out)
Bodyweight training is where it's at.
There's the problem. Obesity IS a psychological issue for 90% of obese people. It is not a disease that can be combatted with simple will.
More accurately, barring psychological, physiological, or economic issues, its not hard to pick a diet and exercise pattern and adhere to it and lose weight.
> I was able to go from about 300 lbs as a 6'3" male to 210 lbs with significant muscle mass added by following a basic diet and lifting 3 times a week
Look, I'm a male whose been able to loose substantial weight without even having a structured diet just a few loose guidelines on eating patterns -- plus ballroom dancing, and then adding in other activity later once the weight loss was well under way (and that, more to improve performance for dancing than for weight loss.)
But I also recognize that being male is, itself, a substantial advantage for both weight loss and muscle building over much of the population. And I've known lots of other people for whom my pattern wouldn't work as well (many of whom have succeeded in weight loss, with much greater difficulty) for reasons that aren't primarily psychological.
I don't know if media tries to overcomplicate the issue, but you are definitely oversimplifying it.