 |
|
Another Diet Forum > General Discussions > Tough Love JSABD-style > A Matter of Can't or Won't: Your Thoughts? |
| Moderated by: Nir | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
JSABD Distinguished Member 
|
In the US 73% of the people are either fat or obese. Are they really that ignorant about nutrition as to chronically over eat? If they are ignorant is it by choice? Fat people are fat and 95% of them stay fat. What is your theory as to why? Can anyone come up with a valid reason (not an excuse) for why people can't get thin and stay thin? Don't hold back. |
|||||||
|
cportwine Distinguished Member 
|
I would say cause food taste good and eating is enjoyable...just like drinking, smoking or any other addiction... |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
cportwine wrote: I would say cause food taste good and eating is enjoyable...just like drinking, smoking or any other addiction... We are all addicted to food in the same sense we are addicted to air and water. There are flavorful foods that are low in calories. Why don't they substitute those foods. 3 apples contain less calories than a cubic inch of cheese and apples take much longer to eat. Are they addicted to the food or to the pleasure that it gives them? |
|||||||
|
TheVonSays New Member 
|
Kind of piggy-backing off of what was just said...In this day and age, conformity is at a low, I suppose. That picture for, what's sexy and what's good just doesn't matter to people. Not everyone wants to be a toothpick. Even with some media outlets pushing that "appealing image" some people could care less how others want them to live their lives. So, they live it how they want to live it. Sure, there can be health risks. BUT they likely view it the same way as they do everything else. There is a consequence with anything you do and just because you choose to eat what you want and look how you want, there is no guarantee on life expectancy unless it's just VERY ridiculous. And that's true for both sides....Basically, it's all about how people view themselves. If they feel good, or think they look good, it doesn't honestly matter what the world thinks of their size. So, they indulge in the things that make them happy in the long-run. |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator 
|
1) people care about the short-term pleasure rather than the long-term consequences. or if you prefer to express it as a moral judgement (and I know you do) they are glutens. 2) people generally would rather not know about nutrition, or be able to 'rationalise away' what they come across. 3) certain foods (junk foods, processed foods etc.) almost appear to have been designed to be physically addictive - sodium, MSG, sugar, fat. The type of foods that require a willpower of iron to MODERATE. So most people don't moderate - they eat plenty of these foods. 4) if you are a healthy weight or make healthy choices you are the odd one out. You draw attention to yourself. It is safer in the herd. Fat amongst a majority of fat people - you will not stand out. 5) It would appear that governments will not rock the boat, they don't want to upset their voters - or the corporations who manufacture these non-foods A lot of this applies to an extent to other self-abuse such as smoking and excessive alcohol consumption. Some people only want to change when they've hit 'rock bottom', whether this is a self-esteem issue, a feeling of lack of control over food, or a medical crisis |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member 
|
More and more food dollars are being spent outside the home and on eating out. Many restaurants don't publish the caloric content of their food. Or if they do, it's on their website, not handily available. I think at least one experiment of having caloric contents published on actual restaurant menus next to the food descriptions did cause people to eat fewer calories. And yeah, many people are ignorant about nutrition, and not all by choice either. The US government hasn't helped much. Telling people to cut down on fat caused people to overeat carbohydrates, especially refined ones, which made the obesity problem a lot worse. The US government subsidizes corn and soybeans, and corn is used to make sugar aka high fructose corn syrup. Food companies make foods that are especially designed to bypass normal hunger cues and encourage overconsumption and even a sort of addiction. Our general modern environment is loaded with enticements to eat. TV ads push fast food and sugary snacks, even during kiddie programming. Willpower can be easily overwhelmed by the constant push to eat. I am reading the book Food Politics by noted nutritionist Marion Nestle. She talks about the political maneuverings about the USDA food pyramid over the years. I think the World Health Org has warned about consuming sugary soft drinks for years, but the US refuses to for political reasons. As for the getting thin part, it's hard to resist temptation all the time and temptation is everywhere. I guess you could call it an excuse, but it's true. I think that's why 95% of people losing weight in the Western world regain it. Some of us are super prone to overeating and bingeing. I fall into that category, def. I've lost weight, gained it, lost weight, gained it. I lost 78 lbs for my wedding and fell off the wagon. I'm fat again. I gave into temptation and I was in denial while I ate and gained it all back again. But hey, I'm still trying, lol. When you're fat it's easy to rationalize and deny that you have a problem. Probably true for any bad habit like smoking, drugs, drinking. So yeah, it's a matter of won't. But you really have to want to lose weight so badly that it's more important to you than basically anything else. And you have to be willing to be super super careful for the rest of your life. To me, that seems exhausting and overwhelming and depressing sometimes. For me, it's a "won't" that feels a lot like "can't" pretty often, if that makes sense. Sorry for rambling, HTH. Last edited on 9 Jun 2011 12:17 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Nir wrote:3) certain foods (junk foods, processed foods etc.) almost appear to have been designed to be physically addictive - sodium, MSG, sugar, fat. The type of foods that require a willpower of iron to MODERATE. So most people don't moderate - they eat plenty of these foods. For #3, it's not in doubt. It's not "appear" Foods are engineered to entice people to eat more of them, or eat them super quickly and easily. Agree with the other things, def. It is difficult to put short-term pleasure behind long-term consequences. And often now you are forced by circumstance to have to do that over and over during the course of a day. Cookies brought in by a coworker. Happy hour after work at the bar, free drinks and appetizers. Your kid wants to try the new sugary cereal and he throws a tantrum when you won't buy it. Your kid has to sell chocolate bars to raise money for her school. You have to work late and on your way home you drive by Mickey Ds..... My sense is that people are confronted with these daily temptations to eat a lot moreso now than 20-30 yrs ago. Which would account for the "obesity epidemic", because more temptation means they give in more too. |
|||||||
|
cportwine Distinguished Member
|
Yea, things are marketed to make you want them and we are challenged everyday. But, you can't blame over eating on that. No one forces anyone else to eat. No one can shove it down your throat. You are making the choice to eat those things. I do think Nir is right on the addition part to junk foods. Most people that quit eating junk food will have with drawls of some sort. I think you pointed out a very good factor. There are certain things in those foods that make you want more and eat more of them. I totally agree with that and it's not marketing...it's what is in the foods themselves. So, it's important to try and eat healthier foods not just to lose weight but for health reasons. I also agree with others on the fact that in this day and age we live in, it can be very overwhelming and depressing for allot of people. So, if food is what gives them some comfort then they take it over being healthy and skinny. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
cportwine wrote: Yea, things are marketed to make you want them and we are challenged everyday. But, you can't blame over eating on that. No one forces anyone else to eat. No one can shove it down your throat. You are making the choice to eat those things." True, but I was thinking about this today at lunch. It seems to me that willpower today is probably the same as it was 30 years ago. But now there are more temptations to overeat. I'm thinking it's kind of like abstinence education and teens having sex. Teens in the 50s and whatnot were more chaste, but they also didn't see sexually stimulating stuff on TV and they didn't have nearly as many opportunities to sneak away and be sexually active without parents knowing it. After all, mom usually stayed home and dad spent less time commuting to and from his job, and culturally teens were just not left alone with each other for long amounts of time. Abstinence education basically tells horny teens "Just say no to having sex. If you've already had it, just stop now." But abstinence education hasn't been effective in turning around teen pregnancies. Teens understand the link between having sex and getting pregnant (most of them), but they need a lot more willpower in the current modern-day environment than they did in the 50s to say no. So simply telling them "Just say no to sex" isn't working too well to keep teen pregnancies in check. Let's say the general environment in the 50s through 70s was such that the average level of people's willpower kept most people from becoming fat. What I see happening now is that the general environment today presents both more temptations and more opportunities to overeat. So it takes greater-than-average willpower or else greater-than-average disinterest in food to keep from getting fat. I saw this quote on another blog where several people were arguing the same viewpoint of the OP's viewpoint....the majority of Americans are fat today because they are eating too much and are too lazy. One person who lost weight and has kept it off 2 yrs said this: Anytime something pertaining to the majority of the population is regarded, implicitly or explicitly, as abnormal I become skeptical. For instance, overweight due to lack of ?óÔé¼?ônormal?óÔé¼?Ø will power.So yes, it is a matter of personal responsibility at the individual level. But at a societal level, telling people "Just say no to overeating." is not going to be any more effective than telling teens "Just say no to having sex." The majority of people are going to stay fat unless something in the overall environment changes. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
cportwine wrote: Yea, things are marketed to make you want them and we are challenged everyday. But, you can't blame over eating on that. No one forces anyone else to eat. No one can shove it down your throat. You are making the choice to eat those things. A couple more thoughts, sorry: 1) True that nobody forces you to eat bad food, but the fact that bad food is pushed into your face more often by advertising and by being around it more can wear down your resistance to refusing it. Willpower is a limited resource, and too much temptation will eventually overcome most people's willpower. That's why the most effective way to "stay sober" if you're a recovering alcoholic is to avoid bars, avoid being put in situations where you're offered alcohol or tempted to drink alcohol, and to avoid hanging out with your former drinking buddies. Staying slim after weight loss may also require some radical means to avoid being constantly put into temptation. Maybe even giving up TV if the TV ads for fast food are too tempting. 2) Another great quote I found online: "It is a matter of what each person puts into his or her mouth and what is out there to put into their mouths.?óÔé¼?Ø (adapted from Dr Frank Sacks, Harvard School of Public Health)." 3) Another great quote: "To fight obesity...as an individual matter we need ?óÔé¼ÔÇ£ Education and more education, more vegetables and far less sugar in our diets.(many efforts now started around the country). As a societal matter ?óÔé¼ÔÇ£ We need to adopt the tobacco model. It worked. Put a R.IS.K.- (Reduction In Sickness Kitty) tax (a V. A.T. in reverse) on sugar, salt and fat (which can be addictive ?óÔé¼ÔÇ£ (read The End of Overeating by Dr. David Kessler). And we need to stop Big Food from taking over all our farm land and help small farmers. We need to stop subsidizing obesity! The devil is in the politics." |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
I am at the point in my eating where taxes on sodium, sugar, white flour and oils will not affect me. Yet somehow they still feel 'wrong' to me. Maybe I'll feel different if they're implemented and I get used to what is.For me, it's a "won't" that feels a lot like "can't" pretty often, if that makes sense. When I felt like that, in relation to binge-eating that I could not stop (late 2006), it was time to get counselling and go to Overeaters Anonymous. |
|||||||
|
lynn40 New Member
|
I am opposed to taxes on food based on their fat, sodium, etc. For one thing, it's an intrusion on my personal liberty.?é?áFor another thing, this is just another sneaky way for the government to squeeze more money out of taxpayers. Does anyone really think the government actually cares about people? Come on.?é?á Moderation should be promoted. No food should be labeled as inherently "good" or "bad." Fat taxes and the like will not solve the obesity problem. Obesity will continue to rise right along with the government coffers---more of our money to waste.?é?á?é?á Finally, I don't like the idea of furthering the idea that some foods are "bad" while others are "good." That is furthering the old-fashioned diet mentality that has been a contributor to the increasing weight gain in this country (ever since people started focusing more on formal dieting, we've been steadily gaining weight). More knowledge does not necessarily lead to changed behavior.?é?á The average American today probably knows more about nutrition than any time in the past, yet we are fatter than ever.?é?á I?é?ábelieve that our obesity problem is?é?ádue to the?é?á easy, cheap availability of tasty foods along with today's "live for the moment,"?é?áself-indulgent, "I?é?ádeserve it" ?é?ámentality. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
lynn40 wrote: I am opposed to taxes on food based on their fat, sodium, etc. For one thing, it's an intrusion on my personal liberty. For another thing, this is just another sneaky way for the government to squeeze more money out of taxpayers. " Remember, the United States government heavily subsidizes corn and soybeans. Corn alone is the common denominator in most junk foods. If the government didn't subsidize these crops, then prices on junk foods and sodas would rise anyway. I have no problem with the government taxing these items to help taxpayers by subsidizing the medical costs associated with eating too many of these foods. Besides, this isn't an intrusion on personal liberty. Absolutely nobody has to consume junk food and soda. You could just avoid buying junk food and thus "opt out". Much like non-smokers don't worry about the high cost of cigarettes due to cigarette taxes. Does anyone really think the government actually cares about people? Come on. Insofar as wanting to keep a healthy and productive tax base and an expanding economy it does. Unfortunately, it seems to care more about corporate profit than the health of its citizens right now. Moderation should be promoted. No food should be labeled as inherently "good" or "bad." There are foods for which the nutritional harm outweighs the nutritional benefits. So yes, there are good and bad foods in that sense. Doughnuts have way more nutritional liability than benefit, for instance. Fat taxes and the like will not solve the obesity problem. No one thing will solve the obesity problem. But these sorts of taxes would definitely help. As would more restrictive interventions such as limiting the food advertising directed at kids, junk food sponsorships of schools, and requiring calorie counts on menus. It wouldn't solve it, but it might just stop it from increasing. Finally, I don't like the idea of furthering the idea that some foods are "bad" while others are "good." That is furthering the old-fashioned diet mentality that has been a contributor to the increasing weight gain in this country (ever since people started focusing more on formal dieting, we've been steadily gaining weight). See what I said above. Some foods are best avoided or minimized. Are you sure you don't work for the restaurant industry? LOL. You sound like one of their spokespeople. More knowledge does not necessarily lead to changed behavior. Exactly, which is why, if the US gov't were serious about the obesity problem, they would not rely on knowledge alone to fight it. Just as with cigarettes. The average American today probably knows more about nutrition than any time in the past, yet we are fatter than ever. Yes, but again, there is a lot of misleading advertising associated with food. The "health halo" phenomenon. I believe that our obesity problem is due to the easy, cheap availability of tasty foods along with today's "live for the moment," self-indulgent, "I deserve it" mentality. I honestly don't believe that people's personal morality with regard to food has changed that much in the past 30-40 years. The "If it feels good, do it" zeitgeist emerged in the mid-to-late 60s, and yet obesity didn't really start to pick up in the US until the mid 1980s. I do agree with you on the easy availability of artificially cheap (due to subsidization) tasty food being a big factor, though. If you read the book _The End of Overeating_ and _Food Politics_, you will also see that corporate interests have consistently pressured the US government to give out bad or incomplete nutrition information. That certainly plays a role. And the fact that corporations have actually engineered foods to be hyperpalatable, almost addicting. That's another big factor in the rise of obesity, I believe. From a public health standpoint, unless and until the US Government puts the interests of its citizens before those of large corporations, obesity will continue to be a huge and probably growing problem. Relying on individual Americans' willpower when the deck is so firmly stacked against them foodwise won't work, as we have already seen. |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
(inspired by recent entry in Suenos diary) Is readiness and availability of (processed) foods a factor? Foods are available in supermarkets and restaurants. If we each had to prepare our own food in our own kitchen, from original ingredients and without short-cuts of processed foods, it would require a lot of effort and dedication to become overweight/obese. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Nir wrote: If we each had to prepare our own food in our own kitchen, from original ingredients and without short-cuts of processed foods, it would require a lot of effort and dedication to become overweight/obese. Which is a large part of why, in the not-too-distant past, it was much easier to remain slender. Heck, think of how hard it would be to get fat if we had to grow our own vegetables, mill our own flour, and slaughter our own animals! |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member 
|
thank you, PuffsPlus, for that well thought out response. You basically said everything that i was thinking, but more more coherently. Awesome |
|||||||
|
lynn40 New Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: "Are you sure you don't work for the restaurant industry? LOL. You sound like one of their spokespeople." Are you sure you don't work for the government? You sound like a politician. I believe in personal responsibility and liberty, not letting Big Brother and the nanny state tell me what to eat, when to eat, when to **it, etc. Where does it end? According to your post, you believe that it's fine to tax people, and if I don't want to pay those taxes, I can just not eat junk food, right? Well, I suppose you must feel the same about cigarette bans, then---oppose them, I mean. After all, if the nonsmokers don't want to breath in that cigarette smoke, they should can just not go out to restaurants. But, I don't want to highjack this thread anymore than I already have. I'll just suffice to say that there are those who have no problem with a nanny state and those who do. Never the twain shall meet. . . |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
lynn40 wrote: Are you sure you don't work for the government? You sound like a politician. Ha, I wish! If I were a politician, I'd try to encourage healthful eating and ending of subsidies of unhealthful eating. I believe in personal responsibility and liberty, not letting Big Brother and the nanny state tell me what to eat, when to eat, when to **it, etc. Where does it end? Yeah, except as I established previously, adding a tax to something is not infringing on your liberties. You can always opt out of buying it. Besides, you're using the "slippery slope" logical fallacy, otherwise known as the "Excluded middle". As in, no middle ground, we have a junk food tax now and tomorrow the military will be raiding our homes and seizing our cans of Coke! Heaven almighty, where does it end? Will they be throwing us in prison tomorrow for chugging Mountain Dew??? Well, I suppose you must feel the same about cigarette bans, then---oppose them, I mean. After all, if the nonsmokers don't want to breath in that cigarette smoke, they should can just not go out to restaurants. Very inept and false analogy. Smoking cigarettes does nothing to promote public good, public health, or add to the economy by encouraging worker productivity. Smoking's economic liabilities outweigh its economic positives. Smoking reduces productivity due to illness and leads to increasing health care costs. Can't say the same for encouraging healthy eating. Taxing junk food to pay for health care is analogous to taxing cigarettes for the same reason. Last edited on 17 Jun 2011 05:28 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
When I don't know the why of something it usually boils down to the 2 major motivators, fear and money with money being the strongest. In the long run obesity costs the health care system less because fat people die sooner but in the short term it a health care bonanza for the medical industry and a long term bonanza for the junk food industry. In most cases I think that most fat people can with some effort not be fat. There are some with rare conditions like Prader-Willi syndrome he cannot control their eating but 99.9999% of people can. They choose not to do so for the reasons given by others in this thread. I think that sometimes ridicule and shame will provide the motivation fat people need to cause them to reform their behaviors. If anyone wants me to shame and ridicule them let me know.  |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
JSABD wrote: I think that sometimes ridicule and shame will provide the motivation fat people need to cause them to reform their behaviors. If anyone wants me to shame and ridicule them let me know. Wow, how could anyone turn down a generous offer like that, JSABD? And why would shame and ridicule work any better than any other weight-loss method? Shaming people into weight loss was pretty much the standard "treatment" for it until maybe the last 10-15 years. And still is among some. Last edited on 19 Jun 2011 08:02 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: JSABD wrote:I think that sometimes ridicule and shame will provide the motivation fat people need to cause them to reform their behaviors. If anyone wants me to shame and ridicule them let me know. Actually coddling fat people and the diet industry telling them that diet failure was not their fault when clearly it was. The only country to reduce it's obesity has been Singapore and they have used shame and ridicule. Here is what I would tell gluttons. You knowingly and willfully eat too much. You can give me no valid reason for not reforming your totally self-indulgent behavior. You know that deep down you can choose to eat responsibly but you also know deep down you choose not to do so. On a regular basis you WILLFULLY choose self-indulgence over self-control and personal and social responsibility. SHAME ON YOU! SHAME ON YOU and SHAME ON YOU!! Who wants a JSABD fattitude adjustment? Last edited on 19 Jun 2011 10:01 pm by JSABD |
|||||||
|
suenos Distinguished Member 
|
@JSABD: If negative consequences were permanent deterrents to engaging in a particular behavior, than you would have long ago stopped peddling your peculiar approach to weight control over the internet. I mean you?óÔé¼Ôäóve been actively promoting the same idea for YEARS on multiple fitness related websites under different aliases - and have repeated been banned from these sites because, although you start out reasonable, you eventually escalate into nasty and abusive behavior that results in your being banned from said sites - in fact you?óÔé¼Ôäóve been banned at least two or three times from CPH - yet here you are again, a new IP and alias in place, once again starting out reasonable in this thread, and slowing escalating to your default behavior. @ OP and everyone else. I think there are a lot of interrelated and complicated factors related to America?óÔé¼?£s increasing obesity, and no one solution, but childhood obesity is the thing that bothers me the most?óÔé¼?ªand unlike adults, there?óÔé¼Ôäós pretty much no ?óÔé¼?ôindividual responsibility?óÔé¼?Ø involved because children don?óÔé¼Ôäót get to choose how much of the family budget to spend on food - or which foods get purchased. But, I?óÔé¼Ôäóm not a parent, and I don?óÔé¼Ôäót get to point the blame finger at parents who do chose because I don?óÔé¼Ôäót live their reality. A couple of things I see that make me reluctant to go ?óÔé¼?ôthey (parents) shouldn't?óÔé¼Ôäót be feeding their kid junk?óÔé¼?Ø: At my local grocery store, a bag of 12-15 oranges costs $5 and 10 peaches cost $10. A giant bag of nacho chips costs $2 and a big package of cookies costs $3. If I wanted to buy snacks for two (theoretical) kids and only had x number of dollars to spend on food for the week - it would make more sense (economically, not necessarily health wise) to spend $5 and get a week worth of snacks instead of $15. I can get 5 boxes of store brand mac n cheese for the price of a head of lettuce?óÔé¼?ªand on and on. My church runs a huge pantry and I can tell you that 90% of what we can provide is highly processed food in cans and boxes because that?óÔé¼Ôäós a) what?óÔé¼Ôäós affordable for people to donate in large quantities and b) shelf stable which is important because we don?óÔé¼?£t have an expensive refrigeration system. So we get the cans of soda, the mac n cheese, the cookies, the canned beans (more sugar in that than a candy bar sometimes), along with the potatoes and rice. When you rely on the ?óÔé¼?ôkindness of strangers?óÔé¼?Ø to help feed your family, you?óÔé¼Ôäóre not going to walk away empty handed (with an empty belly) because the pantry had boxes of spaghetti and jars of tomato sauce containing HFCS instead of fresh eggplant and sundried tomatoes. Then there?óÔé¼Ôäós what I think of as the ?óÔé¼?ôno?óÔé¼?Ø factor. When there is a very small amount of disposable income left after paying rent/mortgage, utility bills, clothing, transportation, etc., raising kids in a low income household involves a lot of ?óÔé¼?ôno?óÔé¼Ôäós?óÔé¼?Ø?óÔé¼?ªno you can?óÔé¼Ôäót go here, do that, own this, participate in that. One of the few areas of ?óÔé¼?ôyes?óÔé¼?Ø unfortunately involves junk food. I might not be able to take my two kids out on a random Saturday night for a movie that?óÔé¼Ôäós gonna cost me $30 I don?óÔé¼Ôäót have, but I can make a fun family night out of Netflix and ice cream and cookies for less than $10. I don?óÔé¼Ôäót have an answer to childhood obesity, or even a theory really, I just think?óÔé¼?ªit?óÔé¼Ôäós complicated. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
suenos wrote:
You have me confused with someone else. Apparently others have the same idea. Shame as a way to change behavior is big in Asian countries and Asians are the leanest people in the world. There is no valid reason for why people can't eat the correct amount of calories. If there is I would love to hear it. People don't like what I am saying is because they have no comeback. If I were to ask them to explain why they are not a glutton they will not give a straight answer. They will blame food. I'm not fat and I spend a lot less on food that a fat person does. Church huh? The Bible has a lot to say about gluttony as did St Thomas. If I were a pastor and somebody obese came to my pantry begging for food I'd tell them to take a hike... a long hike before I would help them indulge their sin but doing that would be politically incorrect even though Jesus would have done the same thing. Matthew 11:19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ?óÔé¼?£Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!?óÔé¼Ôäó Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds.?óÔé¼?Ø Philippians 3:19 Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. Proverbs 23:20-21 Be not among drunkards or among gluttonous eaters of meat, for the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, and slumber will clothe them with rags. Proverbs 23:21 For the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, and slumber will clothe them with rags. Proverbs 23:2 And put a knife to your throat if you are given to gluttony. 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you? If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him. For God's temple is holy, and you are that temple. Deuteronomy 21:20 And they shall say to the elders of his city, ?óÔé¼?£This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.?óÔé¼Ôäó Psalm 78:18 They tested God in their heart by demanding the food they craved. As a Christian it is your duty to rebuke sin and clearly gluttony is a sin or God is just a big bad bully like me. This is an academic discussion not an attack on gluttons. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
JSABD wrote: You have me confused with someone else. Apparently others have the same idea. Shame as a way to change behavior is big in Asian countries and Asians are the leanest people in the world. Suenos has it right -- you've posted various and sundry places online as "Ball", "Balldez", "CG Brady", "Chris Brady", "Fat Bastard", "BFB", "Proud FA", "Educator", "Mr. Objective", "V2 Rocket", "The Converter", "Mr Hate", "M2ICE", "Truth", "Married2ASweathog?", "Testaclese", "TC Patriot", and who knows how many other aliases. You sure do get around! And just about everwhere you go you eventually get banned. Often more than once on the same forum, as Suenos pointed out. Suenos is also right that you've been pushing the "punish and shame gluttons to get them to lose weight" message for years online. But guess what -- people are getting fatter! The percentage of Americans becoming overweight has increased even during the time you have been pushing your "diet plan". I call that proof that your approach clearly doesn't work. You're pedding just another failed fad diet! Congratulations--that puts you in the esteemed company of the late Dr. Atkins. As far as Asian countries go, obesity is rising in them too, Singapore included. http://news.xin.msn.com/en/singapore/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4444466 Singapore had a very heavy-handed, gov't-backed approach to getting kids to lose weight that worked. Overweight kids were forced to do extra exercise and their diets were closely monitored and limited by their schools. From what I can tell by reading on the Internet, it made some overweight kids feel singled out and shamed, but it wasn't a program based on "shame and ridicule" as you claimed. But the obesity rates in adults kept on rising in Singapore and is still rising, so the heavy-handed approach didn't produce lasting results once the kids became adults and their diets and activity levels weren't monitored by the government anymore. Force fat kids to exercise and eat healthily, and they'll lose weight. Left to their own devices once they grow up, and most of them will regain weight. There ya go--more proof the "shame and ridicule" diet (even though that's not what it really was) doesn't work in the context of the obesogenic Western foodscape that requires above-average willpower in order to resist weight gain. Something for the people on these forums to feel good about: if you lose weight and keep it off, you have way better willpower than the average person.  Last edited on 20 Jun 2011 03:41 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Found this online written by the wonderful Dr. Marion Nestle, an academic nutritionist who studies food policy: http://www.uspolicy.be/headline/why-are-so-many-americans-overweight She answered the question, "Why are so many Americans overweight?" In the United States, obesity levels began to rise in the early 1980s. Abundant evidence suggests calorie consumption began to increase at that time, though little evidence demonstrates physical activity declined. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Found this really interesting article on willpower online, and why the recession may have made Americans gain weight: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/02/opinion/02aamodt.htmlThe brain has a limited capacity for self-regulation, so exerting willpower in one area often leads to backsliding in others. The good news, however, is that practice increases willpower capacity, so that in the long run, buying less now may improve our ability to achieve future goals ?óÔé¼ÔÇØ like losing those 10 pounds we gained when we weren?óÔé¼Ôäót out shopping. ... [A]ctivities that deplete willpower include resisting food or drink, suppressing emotional responses, restraining aggressive or sexual impulses, taking exams and trying to impress someone. Task persistence is also reduced when people are stressed or tired from exertion or lack of sleep. emphasis above is mine, btw... In the short term, you should spend your limited willpower budget wisely. For example, if you do not want to drink too much at a party, then on the way to the festivities, you should not deplete your willpower by window shopping for items you cannot afford. Taking an alternative route to avoid passing the store would be a better strategy. ... and the good news: Focusing on success is important because willpower can grow in the long term...In psychological studies, even something as simple as using your nondominant hand to brush your teeth for two weeks can increase willpower capacity. Last edited on 20 Jun 2011 09:49 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
JSABD wrote:You have me confused with someone else. Apparently others have the same idea. Someone has suggested you suffer from brain damage. I did not realise this would also impact on your theory of self. Here, by way of example, is a brief selection of your posts in 2006 and 2008. forum26/2145.html view_topic.php?id=7136&forum_id=19&jump_to=98085#p98085 |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
Nir wrote: JSABD wrote: I am not promoting a theory. I leave that to people like Atkins who ate himself to death with his low carb theory that has been disproved 40 years ago. I am asking a question and that question is it a matter of can't or won't? If it's a matter of can't then having a diet forum or is silly. If it is a matter of can't then selling diets and diet books and weight loss supplement is fraud. I did not even get interested in weight loss or the obesity epidemic until 2008 so your the thread to which you are posting links to are not mine. The question is simple enough. Is it a matter of can't or won't? Can most fat people reform? If the answer is yes then the reason the people remain fat and gluttonous is because they won't do what is required of them. What is required of them? What does a person need to do in order not to be a fat or obese? Let me put it another way. What would happen if obese people were to eat the USDA recommendation for calories per day for a year and burn an additional 500 a day through moderate exercise? We know what would happen but Nir, you know as well as I do very few fat people will give an honest answer to that question. You know as well as I do that they will make outrageous and unfounded claims about impossibly slow metabolisms. In other words they will slip into a delusion, a state of denial or just outright lie about it. I know you know I am right and I know that you cannot agree with me for fear of being called a bully. I read a thread today on a weight loss forum from somebody shilling a weight loss scheme that involved selling worthless products to people trying to buy their way thin. The OP asked why they wanted to lose weight. Most of the answers were for entirely selfish reasons. There is nothing wrong with doing it for vanity, health and longevity but I can tell you most of those people giving those answers will fail. If food is trumping all those reasons now simply making affirmations will not change what is going to happen in a month or two after they go back to their old habits and behaviors. Fat people talk a good diet but they rarely stay on one. I have a good diet. I choose to eat healthy foods and I choose to avoid unhealthy foods. It's not vanity. I do it out of a sense of responsibility. I enjoy candy and cake and cheese and steak but I use the word enjoy. I fat person would say he loves those foods. I love my family more... a lot more. They mean more to me than yummy food and at this point if I have any cravings it is for healthy food. Fat people like to blame fast food and HFCS and they have a point but there is no reason why people cannot eat mindfully. Yes, there is a lot of bad food out there but responsible people are not eating it. A matter of can't or won't? Will somebody give a straight answer? |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
JSABD wrote: ....I am asking a question and that question is it a matter of can't or won't? Gosh, I think you just answered your own question. Seeing as how you're on a diet forum and all. I did not even get interested in weight loss or the obesity epidemic until 2008 so your the thread to which you are posting links to are not mine. Liar, liar, pants on fire, Mr. Brady. Some of the threads that I and other people have dug up that you wrote date back to 2003. Your screeds are so repetitive and your phraseology so peculiar and distinctive (not to mention the frequent typos and grammatical errors) that these are very clearly your words. You seem to have forgotten that posting on the Internet is a forever thing that can come back to haunt you. And you are aware that there are various pattern-recognition software applications out there that can analyze a writing samples and figure out how likely it is that two or more things were written by the same author? But anyway, putting your lies about authorship aside.... The question is simple enough. Is it a matter of can't or won't? And has been answered, both by yourself and others. Weight loss can be done, yes, but it's difficult. For most people who do it, it is a lifelong struggle. Just look at Oprah, for instance. She's had at least three big loss and then regain cycles. But I give her credit for never giving up. Can most fat people reform? If the answer is yes then the reason the people remain fat and gluttonous is because they won't do what is required of them. Reform?! What are we, criminals? Anyway, remember that the "what is required to lose weight" is difficult, and the nature of safe weight loss is slow. Therefore, people attempting to get to a difficult goal that takes a lot of time and endurance to achieve will tend to slip up once in a while. This is particularly true when they are constantly faced with temptation, as dieters are. As has been established earlier in this thread, willpower is a limited resource that gets exhausted when constantly tested. But as this is a weight loss forum, I don't think anyone here doubts that ELMM (Eat less, move more), when done for a sufficiently protracted period of time will, in fact, lead to weight loss. You know as well as I do that they will make outrageous and unfounded claims about impossibly slow metabolisms. In other words they will slip into a delusion, a state of denial or just outright lie about it. I know you know I am right and I know that you cannot agree with me for fear of being called a bully. These are baseless generalizations based on your own prejudices and nothing more. And, as this is a diet forum (you did realize, that, right?), people here are looking for real-life solutions and advice in to how to achieve weight loss, not denial or excuses. People in denial would not be trying to lose weight at all. There is nothing wrong with doing it for vanity, health and longevity but I can tell you most of those people giving those answers will fail. If food is trumping all those reasons now simply making affirmations will not change what is going to happen in a month or two after they go back to their old habits and behaviors. Here we go again. Yes, you think people should only want to lose weight for altruistic reasons, like "being a good citizen". Except that actual scientific research argues otherwise. Being a "good citizen" is a nebulous goal, whereas having concrete goals such as reaching a certain weight or dress size are actually much better predictors of eventual weight loss. There's this data bank called the "National Weight Control Registry" that actually tracks this sort of thing. Fat people talk a good diet but they rarely stay on one. Because staying on a diet is #%@&! hard in the modern Western world, when one is faced with the constant pressure and temptation to eat that requires better-than-average willpower to resist. No big mystery there. I have a good diet. I choose to eat healthy foods and I choose to avoid unhealthy foods. It's not vanity. I do it out of a sense of responsibility. I enjoy candy and cake and cheese and steak but I use the word enjoy. I fat person would say he loves those foods. I love my family more... a lot more. They mean more to me than yummy food and at this point if I have any cravings it is for healthy food. And you want, what, a gold star for this? Congratulations for having good eating habits. *clap clap clap* If I had a quarter, I'd tell you to call someone who cares. Fat people like to blame fast food and HFCS and they have a point but there is no reason why people cannot eat mindfully. Yes, there is a lot of bad food out there but responsible people are not eating it Eating mindfully is a challenge and requires constant vigilance. Some of us are more wired than others to respond to external rather than internal cues to eat. Some of us do oxidize fat slightly different than others, being more prone to store it rather than burn it off. Some of us have stronger willpower to resist food than others. Some of us have leptin levels that make us less sensitive to feelings of satiation and fullness. So yes, eating carefully is possible, as is weight loss; it's just really freakin' difficult. And the level of difficulty will vary from individual to individual. And as with any difficult task, some people will fail, some will get discouraged, some will give up completely, and some will just keep plugging away at it and not let setbacks keep them from ultimately reaching their goal. I think those of us on here are trying to be in the latter group. Last edited on 20 Jun 2011 10:13 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Anyone else going to try the brushing-teeth-with-your-non-dominant-hand trick tonight?  |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: JSABD wrote:....I am asking a question and that question is it a matter of can't or won't? RightDon't try. DO IT! Last edited on 20 Jun 2011 11:27 pm by JSABD |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
JSABD wroteThey blame and make excuses like you have done. I can show you how to set goals and reach them. How, Mr. Brady? By peddling your ineffectual shame-on-gluttony approach to dieting? LOL. By selling me your unpublishable diet book? (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95454) You're just another failed wanna-be diet guru, because.... 1) You aren't selling anything new, just "Eat Less, Move More" repackaged as moral righteousness (which, by the way, Gwen Shamblin already used with the "Weigh Down Workshop" about a decade ago) with a touch of Volumetrics thrown in. and 2) You're nasty, abusive, and tactless, with all of the charm of a rotting corpse. More importantly, why would anyone want your diet advice when you have nothing but a track record of failure at selling it? Over and over and over you post to weight loss sites trying to get potential weight-loss clients to use your approach, and over and over and over you fail to sell it and instead get banned for jerky behavior. CG Brady, I think it's time for you to find a new line of work. Or a good therapist. Last edited on 21 Jun 2011 04:17 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member
|
*applaud* PuffsPlus, not only are you my favorite kind of tissue, you are also my hero. (I've been wanting to call this dude out for years!) Last edited on 21 Jun 2011 04:00 pm by zenobia |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: JSABD wroteI bet YOU are FAT. What keeps you fat is your attitude. Telling the truth is not abuse so keep doing that you are doing. Lie and eat and lie and eat and lie and eat and then say., Golly gee folks I have plateaued and I just can't figure out why. Can somebody PUHHH LEASE salve me with the lies I want to hear like I'm eating too many carbs or my metabolism has slowed to a crawl BOOO HOOOO woe is me."They blame and make excuses like you have done. I can show you how to set goals and reach them. If you have the honesty and the courage you would say, "WTF I have been trying to lose weight for years, what have I got to lose doing what this guy says? If you were serious about not being fat you would not be fat. For someone accusing another person of failure you are the failure. All you have to do is to stop doing something and that is to stop eating too many calories. You can do that but you won't. What you would lose if you PM is your massive ego. You are afraid of getting your feeling hurt aren't you. You don't want to hear the truth. You know it is a matter of won't because if it were a matter of can't you would quickly explain why. Let's say that you came up with a valid reason for why you and other chronic over eaters "can't" lose weight. If you had the courage and intellectual honesty to identify the can't then maybe there would be a solution but there isn't a can't and deep down you know that. You know that every time you eat some self-indulgent food and you will every and everyone but yourself. When someone challenges your attitude with a simple and fair question you get mean and aggressive. Speaking generically to all fat people: If your regard for your health and your family meant more to you than food then why are you still fat? This is a fair question and you know it is a fair question and perhaps, if you have the courage to answer it you will decide and discover that there are more important and more important and gratifying things than food. You do not have a valid reason for why you and nearly every other fat person can't feed themselves in a responsible manner so instead or trying you will get hostile and act like the victim when you are in fact not the victim. The victims of your disregard for you health are the people in your life and society as a whole. Every single time you choose to put something in your mouth it IS a choice and YOU know it. What makes you fat and keeps you fat is YOU! You know it. If you are a women and you are exceeding 2000 calories a day you are probably eating to much. The number for men is 2500. There is now valid reason for why a person cannot keep his or her calories at or below 2000 and 2500 respectively. You know and I know and everyone else knows it's WON'T. Whether your refusal to eat responsibly is a moral failing is up to you to decide. For me it would be. If you would like a diet plan that is easy and effective PM me and then share it with everyone. What is more important to you, winning and argument with me or being healthy for yourself and your family? Again, it's your choice.  |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
zenobia wrote: *applaud* Your hero just got PWNED. It looks like the only ones getting called out are people who eat to much on a regular basis and then deny it or blame it on everything but themselves. It's the blind leading the blind. Here are two simple ways not to be fat. 1. Watch what fat people do and then don't do it. 2. Watch when lean people do and then do it. Can you do that? If no, why not? Last edited on 21 Jun 2011 04:53 pm by JSABD |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
So who's with me on trying the brushing-your-teeth-with-the-non-dominant-hand thing for the next couple of weeks? Zenobia? Nir? |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
Why is it sooo hard. Fat people in this thread are blaming the to food that is available for their obesity. There is a very simple solution. DON'T EAT IT! or EAT LESS OF IT! Last time I went food shopping the store had lots of fruits and vegetables and lean meat and dairy products and plenty of whole grain food. I didn't by a giant tub of ice cream, chips and dip, cookies, cakes, sausage and bacon, frozen pizza, Pop Tarts and candy. I rarely eat in fast food restaurants and when I do I don't order a massive meal packed with salt fat and sugar and 1000+ calories. So how hard is it really to eat responsibly? It isn't hard and you know it and you know that if you are fat you caused it. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
So who's with me on trying the brushing-your-teeth-with-the-non-dominant-hand thing for the next couple of weeks? Zenobia? Nir? |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member
|
*non-dominant hand raised* ME! ME! |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
There is another defense mechanism at work here. It's called avoidance. |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
Would anyone who feels particularly strongly that JSABD should be banned please state a reason. (in a PM, if you prefer) |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
I'll state a couple of reasons he should be banned. 1) Chris Brady aka JSABD has registered at and been banned at this site for bad behavior before. 2) He shows no sign of having learned from his previous bans and shows absolutely no intention of behaving better this time around. His true abusive and insulting self is emerging, just as suenos had predicted. 3) Ineffectual as he is at doing it, Brady is essentially spamming this place to drum up some business for his "weight loss coaching" biz. Hence the repeated requests to have people PM him so they can learn his supereffectiveheretoforeunknowntohumanity diet plan! Or, as Brady put it: If you would like you can bury the hatchet and you can PM me and I can tell you some things that will make it easier for you. and If you would like a diet plan that is easy and effective PM me and then share it with everyone. Last edited on 21 Jun 2011 08:07 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
Nir wrote: Would anyone who feels particularly strongly that JSABD should be banned please state a reason. (in a PM, if you prefer) Nir, I think you should make that call. In the US we have (well used to have) something called free speech. Popular speech does not need protection but unpopular speech does. I asked a challenging question and I proposed a controversial solution to obesity ie challenging the insidious lies and misinformation spread by the weight loss saboteurs from the fat acceptance movement who go onto weight loss forums and make weight loss sound impossible. In the US obesity kills 400K people each year. We lost less Americans in the entire war in South East Asia... around 60K. That being said, misinformation kills. Fat people telling other fat people how to lose weight is like going to a doctor to quit smoking who also smokes. There needs to be a voice of reason that confronts BS. Weight loss and dietary reform is not the near impossible task that the weight loss industry and the fat acceptance movement would want us to believe. There is no magic to losing weight. Losing weight merely requires making dietary changes and moving a little more. It requires mindful selection of food. Why is that difficult? It require minimal effort. Why is it so difficult to buy healthy food and eat it? This question will not receive and honest answer and therein lie the problem. It also proves that it is not can't but won't. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: I'll state a couple of reasons he should be banned. Kelly, why don't you educate everyone here about HAES. I am not trying to get business. I will do it for free. How about Kelly going through the process and show how it won't work. Expose me for the fraud you say I am. Start a thread and discredit it right here for everyone to see. Do you have the courage? I know who you are and what you represent and so does Nir. Go peddle your fat and fit to people who are really stupid. Get all your fat flunkies from ISSA and NAAFA to call MeMe Roth, Jamie Oliver, and Mike Karolchyk a fat phobic Nazi. I hope Nir keeps you around so that I can further expose you. You won't take my challenge because you know I would further expose you. You get your butt handed to you on TV every time you defend the obese lifestyle and now you are here to sabotage people who need to lose weight. You are an evil person Kelly and your agenda is killing people. Here is your chance Kelly. Start a thread and prove me wrong. Discredit my methods for all the world to see. Here's your chance. Now let's here your excuses for not doing it. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Interesting that you would appeal to Nir for help considering how badly you insulted him back in 2006: forum19/2127.html Because he took issue with some of your distortions, you told him he was fat; I guess that's because you think telling someone that he or she is fat is a huge insult? Anyway, then when Nir corrected you and told you he had lost weight and kept it off, you told him he still "sounded like a fat person". Nir correctly cut through your BS back then too, just as I and others have on this thread today, almost five years later. Deja vu all over again. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: Interesting that you would appeal to Nir for help considering how badly you insulted him back in 2006: Kelly you have the opportunity to debunk me but all you can do is lie and accuse me of being someone I am not. Based on the fact that you only 21 posts and most of them are about me I really don't think you are here to lose weight. I think you are here to discourage people and sabotage their efforts with all your negativity. You are attacking me because what I am saying makes people get real and address the real reasons for why they fail to lose weight and you can't stand it. 73% of Americans are fat or obese and people like you won't be happy until 100% are. I think what really set you off was my reference to fat parents and childhood obesity. Your organization doesn't have an answer to that other than to deny the detrimental effects obesity has on human health. You really avoided the issue. Here is your chance to debunk my method right here in public. You have a chance to discredit this "fat hater" but you decline. Why do you fear the truth so much Kelly? Put up or shut up. Start the thread. Put your money where your mouth is. BAWK BAWK! Here is some incentive.  Last edited on 21 Jun 2011 09:57 pm by JSABD |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
zenobia wrote: *non-dominant hand raised*Just tried it for the first time tonight. Felt weird, but I'm all for keeping up with it if it helps me resist the goodies at work. OT, is that a Japanese Bobtail cat in your avatar? I love JBTs! |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member
|
i tried it before work, too. it seemed to take a lot longer. so this is supposed to help resist temptation, huh?? interesting. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
zenobia wrote: i tried it before work, too. it seemed to take a lot longer. so this is supposed to help resist temptation, huh?? interesting. According to the NYT article in willpower, anyway, yes. Given that willpower is a limited resource that can nevertheless be increased with practice, the key (so I'm inferring) to increasing willpower overall is to work on stretching its boundaries without depleting it utterly. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
Why are you trying to derail this thread. |
|||||||
|
Scoobees Distinguished Member 
|
  |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
Scoobees wrote: Been here since 2006 I see. Have you lost and weight yet?  |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, Canadian physician and bariatric researcher and writer of the "Weighty Matters" blog taking another doctor to task for blaming the obesity epidemic on parents feeding kids junk food (emphasis mine):While I know Dr. Berman recognizes many of the complexities of obesity in modern society, the average Joe/Jane doesn't. They don't think about the psychology of eating, socio-economics, co-morbid medical problems, predatory advertising, environmental obesogens, genetics, the cheap costs of calories, food hyperpalatability, lack of proper nutritional education in our schools, etc., etc. To them, societal obesity is a consequence of us spending too much time eating our proverbial, "chocolate sandwiches". They think it's all about laziness and gluttony, and that parents, "just saying no" and willpower would make this all go away. Though certainly not intentionally, Dr. Berman's tweet reinforced that message. And in another blog post, explaining the rise of obesity in Western countries: ...[L]ife nowadays goes out of its way to push energy intake. Virtually each and every one of us inadvertently consumes more calories than we used to, thanks to such things as our faster pace of life, federal farm subsidies that drive the increased availability of low-cost calories, an exponential rise in food advertising (especially the advertising targeting children), increased reliance on meals purchased outside of the home, scientifically engineered hyper-palatability, the health-halos of front-of-package health claims, mindless eating cues, growing portion sizes and the incredible failing of public health officials to provide useful, evidence-based guidance on nutrition and energy balance. Terrific blog: http://www.weightymatters.ca/ |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
JSABD wrote: I am not trying to get business. I will do it for free. You've posted on other weight loss sites stating something like, "And you don't even have to pay me unless you want to." Which is a backdoor way of trying to get money. But the fact that you can't even "sell" your diet plan for free despite years of attempting to do so just highlights your failed status as a wanna-be diet guru. You rag on Richard Simmons and Robert Atkins and Bob Greene because you're jealous of their success at publishing several books each and marketing their diet plans and actually making money off of them. Heck, even Kelly Bliss (who I am not, by the way) got a book published! But you couldn't and you can't, Chris Brady. As the saying goes, "You can't even give it away for free." Or how about, "You couldn't sell an ice cube to an eskimo!".  I don't believe in "Health at Every Size" in the way the fat acceptance groups sell it, although they are correct that anyone of any size will be healthier eating whole foods and exercising. And weight loss is certainly possible. It just takes work and dedication to do it and maintain it in the face of constant temptation and a world that minimizes physical activity. Put simply, dieting ain't easy in today's world. Real obesity researchers who study the subject for a living and publish papers on it all acknowledge that reality (see previous posts quoting Yoni Freedhoff and Marion Nestle for starters). |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, Canadian physician and bariatric researcher and writer of the "Weighty Matters" blog taking another doctor to task for blaming the obesity epidemic on parents feeding kids junk food (emphasis mine): Are you a NAAFA member or are you just with ISSA now? Folk, this is classic fat acceptance propaganda. That is such total BS. Now were are blaming the schools for not telling kids that junk food is bad and fruits, vegetables, whole grains and lean meat, fish and dairy are good. That is up to the parents. Parents feed their kids the same food that they eat. Good parents feed them good food and bad parents feed them bad food. We don't need some egg head or a weight loss saboteur like you saying that obesity is complicated. It isn't but you want it to be so that fat people can manufacture more lame excuses for why they won't eat responsibly. Who's to blame and what's to blame. 1 The Schools (We need entire classes from K -12 telling kids what is on the USDA food pyramid) 2. HFCS (even though it's been around for 60 years) 3. Genes (even though people were not fat 35 years ago they gene fairy suddenly injected them with the dreaded fat gene but mostly in America) 4. Carbs (carbs are evil and they make people fat. Even though the rural Chinese, Amish and the 7th day Adventists get 70% of their calories from carbs and are the healthiest most long lived people in the world and few of them are fat it still is the evil carbohydrate and the fat gene that makes people fate) 5. Blame the McDonalds (Even though they do offer healthy choices) 6. It's the advertisers! They are preying on poor and weak minded people and when they see a Whopper on TV they will die if they don't have one. They have turned the already unthinking masses into unthinking eating machine. They have planted micro chips in their brains so that when the see a food commercial or drive by the golden arches they automatically go to the drive thru window and and order 5 big mac, fries and a shake and a hot apple pie. 7. Environmental Obesogens? Here are a few..   Hmm... I call it junk food. Silly me8. Socio-economics (Poor folks can't afford to buy food and cook it so they have to order pizza and go out to eat fast food but thankfully the have the mysterious fat gene and they only have to eat 6000 calories a day as they watch their widescreen HD TVs and drive their gas guzzling SUVs 9. Food is too cheap! Yes that's it people are poor and that can't afford food because calories are so cheap. That makes perfect sense. You fat acceptance girls are soooo rational and logical. Sorry to burst you junk science bubble with this reality. The countries with the most palatable foods are France, Italy and Japan and they are the leanest. So your theory that humans CAN'T resist tasty food is BUNK. The French, Italians and the Japanese are doing it well. There is a difference between and epicurian and a hedonist/glutton. America is a country of greedy gluttons and the UK is a close second. Canada has the same food scape and the US but it's obesity rate is less than half and people spend more time indoors in great white North. Obesity and the obesity epidemic is a symptom of a sick and decadent culture. We are a modern day Roman Empire and the only thing that is missing are the vomitoriums. As unpopular as it is to say. The American culture is food centric, vulgar and deranged. All the BS theories justifying gluttony and obesity that are put forth to salve fat people do not bear close examination. The only person who can stop from being fat is you. I have offered you help either publicly or privately and you would rather try to win an unwinnable argument than get unfat and allow others to see how it's done. Also, you can discredit me during the process but your fear is that what I do works and you really don't want something that works. You just want to look for and make lame excuses that don't even pass the giggle test. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: JSABD wrote:I am not trying to get business. I will do it for free. I make a living doing this but not everything is about the money. I don't want to patent it. You don't even know what is is that I do and you don't even want to find out. You sound very Republican with your lies. I have nothing but respect for Richard Simmons. Atkins was a quack and Bob Greene is a fraud and a sellout to Kraft foods which is one of the biggest manufacturers of junk food in the world. The are no real obesity researchers. What there are are people who get money from big pharma to create weight loss drugs and conduct meaningless experiments on lab rats and last I knew there was not an obesity epidemic in the rat population. I study people. I watch what fat people do. I see what they buy. I know how they think and I know all their lame excuses. You have an opportunity not to be fat but you would rather argue. If your desire to change your eating behaviors were sincere you would give this a try. You can prove to me and everyone that it doesn't work or you can lose weight. Only one of two things can happen. Either way you win. I don't think you want to lose weight. I don't think you want to give up your junk food. I think you are here to discourage people who do want to lose weigh and reform and I think anyone reading this thread can tell that. This is a weight loss forum for getting help and instead of doing that you are arguing with somebody you think is a fool. I don't think you are very honest or very nice. I think you are a troll and saboteur form the FA movement and I have a really good idea who you are. If MeMe Roth can make mince meat out of you on cable news You won't stand a chance with me. I suspect that you wish to remain fat and miserable because you get some sort of a payoff from it and that payoff is culinary pleasure. BTW, I have taught over 100 people how to do this therapeutically and they are having success. Seeing as how you have all sorts of "science" about obesity perhaps you would like to tell us the success rate for dieter in the US. More specifically tell us what % of people who attempt permanent weight loss succeed. I created this method because of the dismal track record the multi billion dollar weight loss industry has do date. I have read many many diet books and they all have the same flaw. None of them adequately address compliance and behavioral change. Some have good nutrition such as Richard Simmons, Dean Ornish, Pritikin, and Suzanne Sommers ect... and others like Atkins, South Beach and the Zone are horrible. Again, this is your chance to either discredit me publicly or lose weight. So far you have chickened out. Last edited on 22 Jun 2011 04:19 pm by JSABD |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Obesity and the obesity epidemic is a symptom of a sick and decadent culture. We are a modern day Roman Empire and the only thing that is missing are the vomitoriums. As unpopular as it is to say. The American culture is food centric, vulgar and deranged. But then, how does your "sick and decadent culture" theory of obesity explain the rise of obesity in laboratory animals? Oh wait, you're not even aware of that, are you? Because you just said, ...last I knew there was not an obesity epidemic in the rat population. But here is what some recent research has found: Increasingly caloric diets and lack of exercise are usually cited as major causes of human obesity. These factors undoubtedly play a role in Americans' expanding waistlines, said lead study researcher David Allison of the University of Alabama, Birmingham. However, Allison said, the new obese animal findings point to additional, yet-unidentified causes for the uptick in obesity. See the whole article at http://www.livescience.com/10277-obesity-rise-animals.html Last edited on 22 Jun 2011 04:37 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
JSABD wrote: I make a living doing this but not everything is about the money." Another lie: you're an HVAC engineer, Mr. Brady. You bragged about that on this very forum when you were "Ball", claiming that you got 100% on the EPA portion of your engineering exam or some sutch. And I see now you've moved onto insulting Republicans. Whom is the next target of your hatred? Southerners? Evangelical Christians? I know you like to put them down too. Last edited on 22 Jun 2011 05:53 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member
|
...and Attached Image (viewed 475 times): |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: JSABD wrote:I make a living doing this but not everything is about the money." You keep changing the subject. If I were a HVAC engineer I would would not have just paid to have the A/C fixed in my car and my freezer fixed. Whom is you next target of hatred you ask? Your grammar sucks. It should be who is your next target of hatred not whom. Don't try to sound smart it only make you look dumber. You are faulting the person "whom" who you think I am for talking smak about Evangelicals, Southerners and Republicans. First off I am a Southerner. I have no use for the religious right and today's Republicans either although I was a Reagan Democrat. Forgive me but I have no use for racists, Jew haters, evolution deniers and gay bashers either. And even though I was a Reagan Democrat one of my favorite people in the world is Jimmy Carter who is a Southerner and a devout Christian. I even quoted scripture regarding the biblical view on gluttony in this very thread. So then if you disagree with my stance on gluttony and if you are a Christian then you also disagree with the Bible and to a true Christian the Bible is the final authority on everything. And once again you chicken out and refuse to accept my challenge. You are new here and here to lose weight and nearly all your posts have been about me. You are not here to lose weight. You are here to convince others that weight loss is an exercise in futility. That's really cruel and really sick. I am here to tell dieters that they can do it and that it is not an exercise in futility but rather the right thing to do for themselves and others. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: Obesity and the obesity epidemic is a symptom of a sick and decadent culture. We are a modern day Roman Empire and the only thing that is missing are the vomitoriums. As unpopular as it is to say. The American culture is food centric, vulgar and deranged. You fat acceptance girls pull this kinda #%@&! out all the time. I read that on Big Fat Blog. Is that where you are from Kelly? Nir, check out Big Fat Blog. It is a fat acceptance site. It's members are aggressively anti weight loss and the cite hair brained pseudo science to justify their gluttony and hatred for the truth, skinny women and men who are sexually repulsed by fat women. They think that the 2nd law of thermodynamics is sexist. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
zenobia wrote: ...and Keep PuffsPlus around. Let's make an example of her so that the serious dieters can see all the anti diet propaganda exposed. There are about 10,000 members of the FA movement. They and their hive mentality exist in a place called the fatosphere. Most fat people don't identify with wacko organizations like NAAFA who spread dangerous lies like fat and fit and HAES. NAFFA does influence some really stupid people or people with mental problems. This year obesity will claim over 400,000 Americans and NAAFA will deny that obesity kills. PuffsPlus is probably from Big Fat Blog because I recognize the propaganda. She is here to discourage dieters by saying weight loss is next to impossible when in reality it isn't. If she were sincere about losing weight she would not be arguing with me but instead she would be discussing ways to lose weight and make better food choices. She won't accept my challenge for two reasons. 1. She knows she can't BS me. 2. She has no desire to lose weight. Re read everything she has posted and you will see what I am getting at. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
JSABD wrote: Simply. The lab animals that get fat are purposely genetically damaged....What they do with rats is destroy a gene that control leptin and unlike humans rats don't have a prefrontal lobe in their brain that allows them to practice self-control. That's not what the article says. The article is talking about genetically normal animals. |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member
|
Keep PuffsPlus around.maybe i didn't make myself clear... JSABD (or Ball, or one of the other names you have used through the years- and yeah, it's pretty clear)= Attached Image (viewed 484 times): |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
LOL, Zenobia!! You remind me of that comedy sketch from Jon Cryer on Conan O'Brien after he was "outed" by Charlie Sheen as a troll. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hy9icLB81Zk Last edited on 22 Jun 2011 05:52 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: JSABD wrote:Simply. The lab animals that get fat are purposely genetically damaged....What they do with rats is destroy a gene that control leptin and unlike humans rats don't have a prefrontal lobe in their brain that allows them to practice self-control. Stop lying. 99% of animals don't get fat and there was a time not so long ago when most people didn't get fat either even when food was plentiful and cheap. I have owned several dogs and none of them got fat because I fed the correctly. People can feed themselves correctly but they don't because they won't. It really IS that simple. Give me a valid reason form your own head why you can't eat under 2000 calories a day everyday. What is stopping you from eating a 2000 calorie diet designed for optimal human health? If WON'T answer that question with a straight and honest answer then it is obvious you are not here to lose weight or to help others. Give me a valid reason or reasons for why you can't eat 2000 calories per day of healthy food that is best for humans. This is not a loaded question; it is an important question that you refuse to answer because you and I both know the answer. We both know that there is no valid reason and as soon as you and other fat people admit that you will be on your way to reforming your eating habits. Show some intellectual honesty, psychological fortitude and courage and give me a straight answer. If you are honest enough to say, "I can eat the proper diet but I don't really want to badly enough." then you are at least at a starting point where you can get to a place where deep down you will want to give up the nasty health robbing foods you normally eat. I am not offering my help because I like you. I don't like what you represent and I don't like the fact that you are consciously or unconsciously sabotaging yourself and others and I really hope you don't have kids. For me there is no pleasure stronger than my love for my kids. If it meant eating glass to keep them healthy I would do it so giving up junk food and eating responsibly is no effort for me at all. I don't love food. I like it. I love my kids and that makes it really easy to behave in a responsible manner. If a food can hurt them or hurt me or isn't the very best for them I won't buy it. I used to eat junk food before I know how bad it was but I was responsible enough to stop. This doesn't make me a hero. That's just how it is. The people who reform their eating habits are the ones who are altruistic. The ones who don't are hedonistic. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
zenobia wrote: Keep PuffsPlus around.maybe i didn't make myself clear... What is trollish about this post. Nobody else is responding other than you and puff and nobody is forcing her to respond. I have been on message boards when the really was a troll and the mature people ignore trolls. It is really easy to call unpopular speech trolling. If there is a troll here is would be Puff. Obviously she is only interested in arguing with me and not interested in weight loss. If she were interested in getting healthy she'd be discussing that instead of lying about me. |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member
|
and i 've been on message boards where this one really lonely dude keeps coming back after having been banned numerous times but has a skull so thick it just won't sink in... it's pretty bloody annoying (and quite trollish). but yeah, you are right. you are now ignored. |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
The junk science you presented is about as junky as it gets. If I locked you is a cell and fed you 2000 calories a day the most weight you could maintain is 135 pounds. That is an immutable scientific reality. If you were to feed yourself 2000 calories a day of any food of your choice the results would be the same. The laws of physics are stubborn. On a point of fact, a 50 year old 5 foot female given 2000 calories a day in your cell would maintain her weight of 248lb. If she wanted to keep her weight at 135lb she'd be eating 1385 calories. A 35 year old 5'10" sedentary woman on 2000 calories would be 197lb, in case you need to see some variation. (Using RMR and a 1.2 sedentary multiplier.) 2000 would never be a good number of calories for a woman to eat unless she is ACTIVE. If you're going to throw figures around perhaps you should show your working out. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Other factors of modern life that contribute to involuntary weight gain: air conditioning and sleep deprivation. See http://www.fashionin.net/lifestyle/food/home-temperature-sleep-loss-tied-to-obesity-study/ Americans are very much sleep deprived. Also see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-michael-j-breus/sleep-weight-loss_b_881186.html |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
This is interesting: epigenetic fetal programming may predispose individuals towards obesity even while they are still in utero. See http://www.the-aps.org/press/journal/03/14.htm . If you were malnourished while your mother was pregnant and/or you were born with a low birthweight (as I was), you're more likely to become obese later in life. I believe I've seen the same claims made about overnourishment (overeating) during pregnancy, as well. Also, maternal smoking during pregnancy (like mine did; thanks, mom!) predisposes a fetus to develop obesity later on in life. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: Other factors of modern life that contribute to involuntary weight gain: air conditioning and sleep deprivation. involuntaryDefinitionin?é?Àvol?é?Àun?é?Àtar?é?Ày[ in v?â??ll?ëÔäón t?â?¿rree ] ADJECTIVE 1. compelled: required or exacted against somebody's will or wishes 2. uncontrollable: spontaneous or automatic, and not controlled or controllable by the mind in?é?Àvol?é?Àun?é?Àtar?é?Ài?é?Àness NOUN WOW! Even though sleep burns less calories than being a wake it is why people are fat. So burning calories actually cause weight gain. WOW! Eating is involuntary just like breathing. I bet I am eating something now and not even aware of what it is. I bet I ate a whole cheese cake but I must have the metabolic rate of a race horse because I'm not fat. Eating is SOOOO involuntary that when we go to buy food we don't even know we are doing it. That sucks because I may be eating a cheese cake right now and not even be aware enough to enjoy it.  |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: This is interesting: epigenetic fetal programming may predispose individuals towards obesity even while they are still in utero. You have blamed you gene. You have blamed the food supply. You have blamed your involuntary brain. You have blamed sleep deprivation and now you are blaming your mother. It's your fault mommy. That is happening big time east Africa where starvation is rampant all these kids there who are born to malnourished mothers are going to Japan to become sumo wrestlers. My mother smoked too and none of us are fat. You are really getting desperate. It's really low blaming your mother unless she was feeding you the way mothers feed their kids today. I think it's time to put your grown up pants on and stop the silly blame game. You rattled off a whole bunch of reasons why you think you can't lose weight and since there are no solution to you imagined problems don't you think it's pretty foolish to try to lose weight. Why don't you go back to Big Fat Blog and hate skinny women and whine about the fat hating world? OR let me help you. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
I don't want your help, CG Brady. Nobody wants your help. Everywhere you go online, people always end up wanting you to leave. Perhaps you should devote some introspection as to why that is. In the meantime, please leave me alone and stop offering me your ridiculous "diet" advice. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: I don't want your help, CG Brady. Nobody wants your help. Actually I have helped over 200 people reform and improve their lives and health. You forgot the granddaddy of excuses. "I'm and emotional eater" Leave you alone??  You are such a victim! I am not the one coming to your threads and telling lies about you. You are stalking me. I don't give diet advice. I help people find the tools they need to reform their eating behaviors and lifestyle. Kelly, I know who you are and I have seen you get pwned many times when you try your dieting doesn't work routine. You are not here to lose weight. You are here to tell people who want to lose weight that it is much too difficult. You just want to discourage people so that you can justify your weight and behavior. You chickened out. You have the opportunity to go through my program and prove to yourself and me and everyone here that it doesn't work. Then you would have it immortalized for all to see. Right now this thread has gotten over 1000 views and all people are seeing is you being very dishonest and avoiding the issue. What the 500 or so people who read this thread have learned is that they are NOT powerless over food and that reaching and maintaining a healthy weight is well withing their reach. Just be honest enough to answer this one question. I am going to ask it in another thread that you can hyjack but here it is. I will put it in a large font so you don't miss it. Do you think that you are powerless over food? It requires a yes or no answer so..... are YOU powerless over food? I |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
Referring back to the first post, PuffsPlus wrote: Some of us are super prone to overeating and bingeing. I fall into that category, def. I've lost weight, gained it, lost weight, gained it. I lost 78 lbs for my wedding and fell off the wagon. I'm fat again. I gave into temptation and I was in denial while I ate and gained it all back again. But hey, I'm still trying, lol. PuffsPlus explains that she knows how to lose 78lb, which fits in with her recent reply that she does not require advice. It is difficult to tease out whether she is trying to lose weight or not at this moment in time. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Nir wrote: It is difficult to tease out whether she is trying to lose weight or not at this moment in time. Yes, I am. I'm following a similar diet to the one the nutritionist put me on before, with some exceptions: more fat (more monounsaturated fat) and more protein. I find I do best on a moderate carb (from complex carbs) diet with about 30-35% calories from fat. I guess you could call it a personalized version of the "Mediterranean Diet". I'm minimizing refined carbs. Also, the nutritionist had limited me to a sugary treat only once a week. Trying to stick to that too. So far this week, so good. This time I'm giving up diet soda also. I think it makes me crave sugary things. That's been hard. I adore Diet Coke.Some differences now: I'm not watching the scale, though I'm counting cals. I'm just going by clothing fit and how I feel. I'm actually a bit too chicken now to step ion the scale. I've also had problems with bulimic periods in the past, even when I lost the 78 lbs. Want to avoid that now. I am having a hard time keeping up my "diet mojo", which is why I'm posting here. I am having a much harder time resisting temptation this time. When I lost the 78 lbs, it was to look good for my wedding and to fit into my wedding dress. I made both of those goals. This time, there is no time pressure and no deadline to lose X lbs by. Also, I am doing much personal research on willpower and the role of the environment and brain wiring in promoting and sustaining obesity. That's why I started posting in this thread, even though I knew CG Brady wasn't really looking for a serious discussion on the topic when he started it. He never is on any of the zillions of diet sites he posts on. But he had gone away from here for a couple of months and I thought this was worth a discussion. The topic intrigues me. The book _The End of Overeating_Â really opened up my eyes. I do think it's important for anyone overweight or obese to forgive themselves. The blame for being fat is most certainly NOT entirely ours. We are NOT moral or personal failures or "greedy gluttons" because we're fat, no matter what the rest of the ignorant world thinks. But, CG Brady is right about one single thing: it's not entirely our fault we're fat, but only we can make ourselves less fat. And we may never be able to get down to a "normal" BMI for many reasons. But we can become no longer obese or no longer severely obese, at least. I hate to give up so much personal info here, because I know I will shortly be attacked for it. This isn't really a "safe" place to discuss personal diet struggles at this time. But, if it helps anyone else out there, that is a good thing. That's why I keep posting. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Environmental chemicals are acting obesogenically, acting on babies and fetuses to promote fat cell production and later obesity: http://www.newsweek.com/2009/09/10/born-to-be-big.html The evidence now emerging says that being overweight is not just the result of personal choices about what you eat, combined with inactivity," says Retha Newbold of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) in North Carolina, part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). "Exposure to environmental chemicals during development may be contributing to the obesity epidemic." Emphasis mine. The article mentions the alarming prevalence in obesity in 6-month old babies, who obviously aren't eating at Mickey D's. Last edited on 23 Jun 2011 01:00 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
To Nir Dieters more often than not lose weight and they gain it back and then some. This happens for several reasons of which they remain unaware but it all comes done to ignorance and as they say ignorance is bliss. If you were to give most fat people a basic nutritional quiz they will fail miserably. I think you will agree. If we are to believe PuffsPlus she is doing some version of Atkins and she, if she is legit is eating a lot of fat even though it is the good fats. I doubt if she knows the number of calories in a gram of fat. Think about it Nir. Why do you suppose dieters/fat people remain ignorant about the very things that are killing them. Perhaps if you were to ask them some basic nutritional questions it would snap them out of ignorance and denial. I don't know how sleazy the diet industry is in other parts of the world but in the US it is very sleazy and they prey unwitting fat people who are desperate to lose weight but are looking for a some magic solution. If PuffsPlus is legit then she does need help from someone in the know. Maybe she will listen to you but here is what I would tell her and then ask her. There are 9 calories in a gram of fat. There are 4 calories in a gram of protein and a gram of carbs. There are 3500 calories in a pound of fat. Crash diets/starvation ultimately fail. Gradual weight reduction works well. Diet failure IS the fault of the dieter. Anyone who wants to lose weight and keep it off would be more successful if they ate real food and ate frequently. I recommend a book called Volumetrics. It's a fancy sounding name for something very basic but the pictures in the book are very motivating. It compares food. It will for instance show 3 bright shiny apples next to a candy bar or a bowl of dip next to a beautiful salad. If a person eats at their BMR they will lose a minimum of 1 pound per week per 100 pounds of body weight per week.  VS  The tortoise wins.Losing weight is not a war on fat. It is quest for good health and nutritional reform. I don't worry about hurting their feeling because their feelings are not really hurt. A fat person has to become are comfortable with the word glutton as a drunk becomes comfortable with the word alcoholic. Drunks will squawk and whine if you call them an alcoholic and gluttons react the same way. The reform rate for drunks is 35% but to the best of my knowledge the reform rate for gluttons is 5%. There are 2 reason for that. 1. People can live without alcohol but they can't live without food. 2. As a society we confront alcoholism and we don't salve alcoholics nor do we excuse their behavior. We hold them accountable because they won't/don't hold themselves accountable. PuffsPlus gravitated to this thread and she avoided every question and put up smoke screen after smoke screen and excuse after excuse. She passed up an opportunity to either lose weight or discredit me. I think in part she was asking for help but I think a bigger part of her is here to sabotage other whether she realizes it or not. Let's really honest. Fat people are weak-willed and through years of vulgar self-indulgence they lack impulse control. Most of the foods they eat are treats and rewards but they do nothing remarkable to earn those rewards. Eventually they feel entitled when they clearly are not. Then they pass these patterns of behavior onto others. Food/junk food becomes their salve. While it is not a physical addiction it is a mental one. I would ask PuffsPlus and others like her these simple and fair questions. If you ate a meal that is large in bulk and low in calories every 2 to three hours would you be extremely hungry? Do you have a valid reason for why you cannot eat 5 - 7 meals each day that total your basal metabolic rate? Tell me any other honest reason for why you cannot get to an maintain a healthy body weight? |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: Other factors of modern life that contribute to involuntary weight gain: air conditioning and sleep deprivation. Air conditioning? OMG! Calories a a measurement of heat and when the body gets cold it burns more calories to maintain temperature. If you work out in the cold and breath cold air it cools your body and it that air is dry it cools you off even more so your body has to burn even more calories to maintain 98.6FStop with the excuses and junk science. People need to eat more in the winter in order to maintain their weight and body temperature. We burn less calories when we are sleeping. You and all your junk science will not defeat the immutable laws of physics. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: Environmental chemicals are acting obesogenically, acting on babies and fetuses to promote fat cell production and later obesity: Obesogenically isn't even a word. The Canadians have the same environment we do and they have less than 1/2 the obesity we do. There are no such thing as obesogens other than "obesogenic" behavior. If the article were true then everyone would be fat. If all the excuses you have presented so far were true everyone would be fat. Everyone isn't fat and the fact remains If i were to lock you in a room and feed you 2000 calories a day it would be impossible for you to get fat and you know that. Here are you excuses: Cold air/from the air conditioner makes you fat (Air conditioning has been around for 60 years when people were not fat) Sleep deprivation even though there is no evidence that Americans are any more or any less sleep deprived than they were 40 years ago. Poverty is causing obesity. That is beyond absurd. The fact is poor people are not always the smartest or the most ambitious people and if you compare obesity maps with IQ maps you will see that in the US the states with the highest levels of obesity also have the lowest average IQ and the highest levels of fundamentalist Christianity. The truth is, ignorance and low IQ cause obesity. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1531487/The-greater-your-weight-the-lower-your-IQ-say-scientists.html The question may be does being fat lower your IQ or does having a low IQ make you fat? One of the smartest men in the world I Steven Hawking. The man is 100% sedentary and he's not fat. Everything you came up with is unfounded conjecture and is shot down by reality. If I fed 1000 fat people 2000 calories a day in less than a year none of them would be fat. If they stayed at that level for the rest of their lives the men would weight about 125 pounds and the women would weigh about 135 pounds. It would not matter what the source of those calories were; the body weights would be the same. The article is absurd. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Per Dr. Yoni Freedhoff's blog, the Canadian obesity rate is 24%, compared to the American rate of %34. 24/34 = the Canadian rate of obesity is 70% of the American rate, not "less than half". That's the only piece of misinformation I'm going to debunk for now.... |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
Personally I have a range of tricks for obtaining low calorie healthy foods on a minimal budget but I do not know if they would work for the average poor American. Perhaps you have local knowledge of how much healthy eating costs at your locality to share. Again with those pesky details 1) she said she's on a modified 'Mediterranean Diet', not 'Atkins' (differences in particular would be that Atkins would be lower in carbs and higher in fat) 2) i've already adressed 2000 calories as being unsuitable for inactive women, try 1200-1500 as a more realistic number. 3) you seem to be arguing with 'air conditioning'. I have to ask myself if you clicked the link. the article says that those in a HEATED home were more overweight than those in cool homes. In other words why are you arguing with the article if you agree with it. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Nir wrote: 3) you seem to be arguing with 'air conditioning'. I have to ask myself if you clicked the link. the article says that those in a HEATED home were more overweight than those in cool homes. In other words why are you arguing with the article if you agree with it. Actually, both air conditioning and artificial indoor heat have been implicated in contributing to obesity. Temperature extremes on both ends force your body to work harder to maintain homeostasis, which in turn results in more calories burned. So turning down AC in the summer and turning down the heat in winter can help burn a few more calories. And you will save energy $$ and it will be better for the environment. A win-win all around! Last edited on 24 Jun 2011 08:48 am by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: Nir wrote:3) you seem to be arguing with 'air conditioning'. I have to ask myself if you clicked the link. the article says that those in a HEATED home were more overweight than those in cool homes. In other words why are you arguing with the article if you agree with it. Artificial indoor heat?  WTF is Artificial indoor heat? When the Native Americans had fires in their teepees and other dwelling for heat was that artificial heat? OMG this is just too absurd. There has to be a temperature at which the body burns most calories. What is that temperature Puffy? How many calories per day does temperature effect? Here is why that's a pile of #%@&!. You really need to get real is really want to lose weight. Posting absurd junk science based on laughable theory is not helping you lose weight. You are looking for every excuse under the sun to justify your obesity. Now you are talking ambient temperatures and saying they can control weight gain. Definition: Heat energy (or just heat) is a form of energy which transfers among particles in a substance (or system) by means of kinetic energy of those particle. In other words, under kinetic theory, the heat is transfered by particles bouncing into each other. In other words....heat is heat. There is no such thing as artificial heat. Again, Puffy you need to stop the lame and absurd excuses if you are legit and serious about losing weight and reforming your behavior. You have come up with nearly a dozen reasons (all bogus) for why you can't lose weight but so far you have not come up with one reason for why you can. Give us all one reason for why you can lose weight. I still think that you are a fat acceptance troll trying to sabotage dieters. Climates are different all over the globe. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
10 contributors to obesity that have become more pronounced in recent times:Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/27/health/webmd/main1757772.shtml1. Sleep debt. Getting too little sleep can increase body weight. Today's Americans get less shut-eye than ever. In all fairness, one of my heroes, Dr. Marion Nestle, has called these factors a "possible distractors" from the number one way to fight obesity: eating less and moving more. Still, these factors still help explain the steady rise of obesity since the mid-1980s and the shifting to the right of the bell curve for body weight. Interesting that obese people are more fertile. I had always read that obesity was an impediment more than a help to fertility. Perhaps it's just the tendency to store fat that correlates with increased fertility. The link between older mothers and kids being more predisposed towards obesity is thought to be because older mothers are more likely to have gestational diabetes (this is what I read in a recent article; having trouble finding the link though). Having diabetes while pregnant increases the chance that the baby born will be obese later in life. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: 10 contributors to obesity that have become more pronounced in recent times:Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/27/health/webmd/main1757772.shtml1. Sleep debt. Getting too little sleep can increase body weight. Today's Americans get less shut-eye than ever. We can add more unproven excuses to the list. Older mothers cause obesity. Gestational diabetes cause obesity. Fertility causes obesity. I think the sun and the moon cause obesity because babies are born during the day or on a moonlit night they will be fat. Only people born during a solar or lunar eclipse will not be fat. It the mother pets a dog or a cat the baby will be obese. Air is a huge cause. If the mother breathes in air the baby will be fat. Oxygen is responsible for life and breathing it causes things to grow including fat cells. Is there valid reason for why you cannot keep your calories near 2000 a day and is there any valid reason for why you cannot stay on the sort of diet that Nir is on? Last edited on 24 Jun 2011 04:16 pm by JSABD |
|||||||
|
McBalls Senior Member
|
So... According to PuffsPlus, the reason we are obese is: -We aren't being lazy enough. -Our air isn't clean enough for us to be thin. -Making our bodies 'artificially' cold will make us fat, even though studies show that a reduction in body tempurature leads to more calories being burned. -We aren't smoking enough! And here I thought we needed cleaner air, but I guess you can't get much more pure than carbon coating your lungs. Maybe I'll try smoking to lose those last 15lbs. Light cigs, of course; I AM on a diet. -Medication can lead to weight gain, but it's mostly indirect. I'm not gonna argue that the medical industry is poisoning us. Many medications increase appetite, and others make you tired, but few simply pack weight on you. -Americans are getting older and more Hispanic? Are you serious? This hardly makes any sense. Yes, there are more Hispanic Americans than ever, but the fact that they are getting fat(just like everyone else of every other race and age group) is more likely due to their adoption of an American lifestyle, rather than their race. -Our mothers are cougars. Despite women typically reaching their sexual prime later than men, sex with an woman 35 and up will make your kids fat. -Grandpa and Grandma were fat. When they had Ma or Pa, their bodies genetically told Ma and Pa to become fat because it worked for Pappy and GamGam. It's all in the code. And now, because your ancestors were fat and unhealthy, you have no choice but to be the same way. -Obese women are more fertile and therefore will produce more fat people than anyone. Got to remember- obesity is a genetic evolution that can be passed on. Nevermind the increase in ovarian cysts/PCOS, yeast infections, endometrial/cervical problems/cancer that come with being so overweight. The fact that you survived those while also pregnant means your kids will be stronger, healthier, and larger than other children. -Right. Mom and Dad were fat, like Grandma and Grandpa. Obesity is a part of evolution, and when two genetically evolved people like your fat parents have a baby, it's guaranteed that their baby will continue this evolutionary advancement and become even more obese. Hey, by this logic, the lifestyle the people in Wall-E live isn't too far into the future! Awesome! You aren't talking out your arse at all Puffs! The best part is, this information is something you just picked up on the net and decided to believe, because that justifies your weight. You know and I know that being obese isn't an advancement, its a hinderance. Would you want your children to catch your 'superior' fat gene? To have them bullied throughout school and persecuted for their weight just because you were too? That's sickening. Being fat is not something to be promoted. Why would you lose almost 80lbs if you really believed you could be healthy at any size? You know #%@&! well that it's unacceptable to be obese. If you are actively doing something about your weight, then good for you. You have my respect. But the solution is not to go around the web telling other people eating healthy and exercising is a sham when it should be the standard. You would have a much easier time just losing the weight, rather than trying to make the world fat. |
|||||||
|
jannypan Past Member
|
There are flavorful foods that are low in calories. Why don't they substitute those foods. Last edited on 25 Jun 2011 12:42 am by |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member
|
hi McBalls and WELCOME to the forums!!!!!         Nice to see a fresh "face" around here!!!! |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
McBalls, If you go back and read all the posts (the real ones, skipping Brady's screeds), and read at least some of the articles I linked to, you'll see that the answer to "why are so many of us fat?" is way more nuanced than that. The epigenetic programming in the fetal or newborn environment that promotes weight gain later in life is an established fact, although the actual mechanism isn't completely understood. Well, few subjects of scientific research are completely understood, but I digress. One factor that has been implicated is that the epigenetic changes promote more fat cell formation. Fat cells give off hormonal signals, basically "begging" the body to fill them up. There's also the proportion of brown fat to white fat that is possibly altered. Brown fat does not promote obesity, whereas white fat does. You have to consider the role of hunger and appetite in the etiology of obesity as well. For example, it's been established in experiments that some obese or overweight people have impaired hunger and satiation signals. If you're not hungry and you get fuller faster, you are prone to eat less. I had my own experience with this when taking Topamax, a drug that is used to treat epilepsy, bipolar disorder, and migraines (I took it for the latter). A doctor put me on Topamax every single day to prevent migraines. Now, Topamax typically causes weight loss in studies, although it has so many unpleasant side effects that it has not been approved to use as an actual weight loss drug. So I, who have been some degree of overweight to obese nearly all of my life, and who at the time was a big junk food eater and at the time was not paying attention to my diet at all, figured Topamax wouldn't cause any weight changes in me. I also wasn't weighing myself so I had no idea on a week-to-week basis how my weight was fluctuating. Well, I lost 15 lbs on Topamax in six months without even trying. How did that happen? I am really not sure. I did not realize this had occurred until I noticed my clothes were slightly looser and so I went and weighed myself. So how did Topamax make me lose weight? Did it dampen my appetite? Make me lose interest in food? Topamax alters how you taste foods, so maybe food was just less tasty to me and so unconsciously I was eating less of it. The point is, an outside force caused me to lose weight and I had no realization whatsoever that this was happening. So it's not difficult for me to believe at all that outside forces can also cause us to gain weight when we don't even realize that this is occurring unless we step on the scale. |
|||||||
|
McBalls Senior Member
|
Outside forces may contribute to your weight gain. But it all comes down to eating less and moving more. If you had a thyroid problem, and your thyroid made it impossible to lose the last ten pounds, that would be a health issue and acceptable. I mean, ten pounds isn't all that big of a deal. But if you decide that those ten pounds are a ticket to blame the next 150 on your thyroid you're mistaken. That's you giving in and allowing yourself an excuse to get fat. Medication, like I agreed with in the first place, can indirectly lead to weight gain. In some cases, it's unavoidable. But it's still usually not a ticket to morbid obesity without a little help from your lifestyle. All I'm trying to say is that, yes, outside factors (family, income, medicine, quitting smoking, poor airquality and therefore less exercise, etc.) can all CONTRIBUTE some ten pounds or so to your frame. But clearly, since there are people out there who maintain a reasonable weight, this isn't the be all and end all of what your body has to be. "You have to consider the role of hunger and appetite in the etiology of obesity as well. For example, it's been established in experiments that some obese or overweight people have impaired hunger and satiation signals. If you're not hungry and you get fuller faster, you are prone to eat less." You have impaired hunger and satiety signals because obese people tend to eat a lot faster. If you eat a meal in under 20minutes, you will not recognize you are full, and are therefore likely to go back for seconds. Take your time with your food, ENJOY it even, and then you'll see that your built in signal jsut wasn't being given a chance to work. Again, it's no excuse. Topamax made you lose weight? Well you said it made food less tasty to you. It's like having a cold, you can't taste anything, so why eat? And still, it only made you lose, what? 15 pounds? You're agreeing with me in the end. Outside factors only influence so much. If you are adding ten pounds for each factor you can think of, then yes, you'll gain weight if you happen to be unlucky enough to have each of them in your life. And then, in most cases, it's still a matter of lifestyle. Hi Zenobia. Your name reminds me of Spirited Away, even though it's slightly different. As much as everyone is gonna think I'm JSABD or whatever he's calling himself here, I am actually a seperate person. Our friend, Chris, has some valid points to make, but he gets very carried away sometimes. I don't really think it was right for him to come to a forum and trash people that are actively doing something about their health. But I also don't think it's okay that Puffs here is telling others to blame their weight entirely on environment. Environment, like your weight itself, is something that can be changed. I realize that I'm gonna sound real rude here, but this woman is someone I have been at it with before, and she doesn't seem to get that you can't blame your weight on your grandparents and the world. My grandparents were fat. My mom is fat. I'm not fat. There goes that theory. I had a small battle with the chub when I was young, but that wasn't genetic. It was because my mom fed me Wendy's, McDonald's, Chef Boyardi, potato chips, white bread and CocaCola. That was my diet all throughout childhood. I'm still not making the most of myself, I admit, but I do try to stay relatively fit and keep my weight within a normal BMI. My sister is skinnier than me and she grew up the same way. She was actually overweight at one point. You can't blame everything on your parents. It was certainly my mothers fault that I ate nothing but #%@&! when I was little, but I'm an adult now, and responsible for my own body. |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member
|
All I'm trying to say is that, yes, outside factors (family, income, medicine, quitting smoking, poor airquality and therefore less exercise, etc.) can all CONTRIBUTE some ten pounds or so to your frame. But clearly, since there are people out there who maintain a reasonable weight, this isn't the be all and end all of what your body has to be. I completely 100% agree with this statement. i also really loved that movie (spirited away). As much as everyone is gonna think I'm JSABD or whatever he's calling himself here, I am actually a seperate person. Our friend, Chris, has some valid points to make, but he gets very carried away sometimes. I don't really think it was right for him to come to a forum and trash people that are actively doing something about their health. ok. yes, he does. pretty much always. I have actually agreed with a number of his points in my mind, but there are also points that i do not agree with (which i have contended here or on another thread). I think a difference of opinion is a really good thing- it's how we learn... but misinformation and being just plain cruel is not what we are about here, hence the frustration. I also totally agree that weight cannot be blamed on environment alone. we all make choices and these choices lead to consequences. some people's choices are more informed than others. some people's choices lead to consequences that i personally may not agree with, but that person is free to make those choices. because we are a health and weight loss forum, and this forum was created with the intention of helping people reach and maintain a healthy weight, if people are posting discouraging remarks or are here with intentions opposite of what this board represents, we will certainly work to resolve the issue. again, welcome |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
McBalls wrote: All I'm trying to say is that, yes, outside factors (family, income, medicine, quitting smoking, poor airquality and therefore less exercise, etc.) can all CONTRIBUTE some ten pounds or so to your frame. But clearly, since there are people out there who maintain a reasonable weight, this isn't the be all and end all of what your body has to be. Agreed. I don't think anyone is inevitably destined to become obese, except for perhaps a very small percentage of unlucky people with severe genetic or medical disorders. Remember, all of the factors that the I article I linked to listed are possible contributors to the obesity problem. Look up the word "predisposition". Someone who is predisposed towards alcoholism doesn't have to become alcoholic and can still give up booze if he does happen to fall into alcoholism. It just might be harder for him to avoid it in the first place and to fight it once he falls into it. Avoiding obesity is possible and losing weight and maintaining a lower weight is most certainly possible. But it's often difficult--with the exact degree of difficulty varying from person to person--and requires a kind of mindfulness and vigilance in today's world that wasn't required a long time ago. More people in America are fat today not because they are immoral gluttons compared to the people of previous generations, but because it's easier now to become fat than it ever has been. My husband and I just came back from hiking around a the ruins of a 19th century farmstead nearby a river. There was an "ice house" about a quarter mile from the river. My husband remarked how hard it must have been and how much work must have been involved in hauling big slabs of ice from the river banks uphill and to the ice house. As I remarked earlier in the thread, it must have been a lot easier keeping slender when you had to grow and harvest your own vegetables, slaughter and roast your own animals, and mill your own flour. Also, the concept of gluttony emerged in at a time in Western civilization when it would have taken dedicated and deliberate overeating and hoarding of food to become fat. Last edited on 25 Jun 2011 04:49 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: McBalls wrote:All I'm trying to say is that, yes, outside factors (family, income, medicine, quitting smoking, poor airquality and therefore less exercise, etc.) can all CONTRIBUTE some ten pounds or so to your frame. But clearly, since there are people out there who maintain a reasonable weight, this isn't the be all and end all of what your body has to be. Now you are singing another tune Puffs. Will you now explain why you can't eat a diet at or under 2000 calories from this day forward for the rest of your life? This is not directed at you Puffs but a lot of girls get married and every year they pack on the pounds. They squirt out a couple of kid and then they really blimp out. Then they pass their bad habits on to their kids and that is tragic. That is the pattern and unless you break the cycle you will pass the same behavior and illnesses onto your kids. Here is another question. Which do you love more, your junk food or your family? Put another way... What means more to you, your junk food or your family? and put even another way.. Is your desire for junk food stronger than your love for your family? |
|||||||
|
zenobia Distinguished Member
|
don't forget about the men packing it on! ?óÔé¼?óWomen in their teens and early 20s who continued to date but didn't cohabitate gained an average of 15 pounds over five years; their male counterparts added about 24 pounds. ?óÔé¼?óNewly married women in that age group packed on 24 pounds in five years; newly married men gained 30 pounds. (emphasis mine) http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-10-22-marriage-weight_N.htm |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
zenobia wrote: don't forget about the men packing it on! There are more fat men than women. It's close but there really are more fat men. It is also interesting that wives complain more aggressively about fat husbands. Men are very apologetic and walk on eggshells when complaining about it. It must be worse for women being married to a fat man than vice versa. I could never get aroused by a fat woman but there are men who can until they reach a certain size. Fat women still look like women ... well sorta but fat men often resemble women with their pregnant bellies and man boobs. Then there are the physical challenges men face with their giant bellies and lack of stamina. |
|||||||
|
suenos Distinguished Member
|
This is really, really sad. Reading through this thread I remembered when I first joined this site - several years and several pounds ago. I was at the highest weight I'd ever reached in my life (spitting distance of 200lbs on a 5'2 frame) and the lowest point emotionally because I'd lost before and failed to maintain the loss twice before. And I don't remember anymore what prompted me to make that first post, and that first diary entry, but it was the first step that pretty much transformed my life because - from day one - there was nothing but unconditional support for my goal to lose weight and get fit. There was plenty - and I mean plenty - of people in the "real world" who were quite sucessful in making me feel ashamed of my body, and my eating habits, and my perceived lack of "character" for having that body and those eating habits - but finding this place was like finding an oasis. It was a place where I could feel "safe" finally being open about my struggles with food...and explore those issues with people who had the same problems without feeling shamed or "less than" in any way even when I stumbled. And, in large part due to receiving that support and understanding, I was, for the first time able to not only meet my goals but suceed in the hardest part - keeping it off. But this thread (and the spawns of this thread) is just the exact opposite....honestly, it's disgusing. The ridicule of a long time member who has, even while facing her own problems has been nothing less than 110% of everyone else (yea, I'm talking about the 'have you lost weight yet' comment to Scoobs, the name calling, the dogmatic insistance there there is one and one way only to lose weight and keep it off, and now making fun of the sexual appeal (or lack of) of obese/overweight men and women. "Fat women still look like women ... well sorta but fat men often resemble women with their pregnant bellies and man boobs." Really? This is the kind of forum we want to be now? |
|||||||
|
McBalls Senior Member
|
That guy should be totally ignored, if not banned from this site. I'm totally on his side on a lot of points, but his presence isn't needed in a place like this. It's probably more discouraging than people who tell others dieting is wrong. M2, you should go write more BFB articles, those are hilarious. But although I find your stuff funny, there's a time and a place man. I know MFS is running out of people to prank, but trolling a fat acceptance forum beautifully and elaborately is much better than trolling these places. I think a lot of people on these calorie counting websites are atleast doing something about themselves, so there's no need to come here crying 'Eat beast!' and 'Glutton!'. I think if someone is doing something about their situation, they're probably already reading themselves the riot act of fat in their own head, no need to make them feel worse. You need to go to a fat acceptance forum and set up an elaborate troll ID, get in there, and get them to set you up with their strawmen. After you have them show you the 'ropes', start gently pointing out the flaws in their logic. After you fluster them, unleash the real, hit-home points. If that means getting all "Bigger, Fatter" vulgar, go for it. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
McBalls wrote: You need to go to a fat acceptance forum and set up an elaborate troll ID, get in there, and get them to set you up with their strawmen. After you have them show you the 'ropes', start gently pointing out the flaws in their logic. After you fluster them, unleash the real, hit-home points. If that means getting all "Bigger, Fatter" vulgar, go for it. Aside from the fat that CG Brady does this already, I really can't see why you're encouraging him to do this. Especially as you have shown you can be a rational person, McBalls. Much of the discussion on fat acceptance sites is just looking for support and advice in how to navigate the world and survive in a larger-than-average body or in a MUCH-bigger-than-average body. I will say that this was NOT the case for Kate Harding's "Shapely Prose" blog, which was all about politics and anger. But Harding closed that one anyway. But the forum I was on that Chris Brady trashed was more an emotional support site than anything else. But M2/Chris Brady doesn't distinguish or care. One of the most touching anecdotes I remember from one FA forum was of a woman participating in one of the organized NAAFA pool parties. This middle-aged super obese woman actually wept in the pool, because for the first time ever she felt safe about being out in public in a bathing suit. There was nobody around who was going to taunt her or give her dirty looks for being a fat woman in a swimsuit. And she had loved swimming when she was younger, but for many years had been too afraid to go swimming in her present supersized state. And they tend to focus on and discuss how to handle the special forms of discrimination that fat women face. Women are socially punished (by men and women) and judged more harshly than men for much lower degrees of overweight than men are. Even though, from a health standpoint, it's more dangerous for men to be overweight at the lower degrees than women. There's enough hate in this world, why encourage yet more? And again, M2/Chris Brady isn't telling the "fat acceptors" anything new. They already hear that relentless drumbeat of "You should be ashamed. You are a bad person" over and over and over again from the general world. Yeah, some of the FA stuff is wrong and misinformed, but why not focus on attacking it in neutral territory, such as the comment section of newspaper articles. Or start another "Unfat Blog", as the original seems to be pretty much dead. Last edited on 26 Jun 2011 08:55 am by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
McBalls wrote: But I also don't think it's okay that Puffs here is telling others to blame their weight entirely on environment. Environment, like your weight itself, is something that can be changed. I realize that I'm gonna sound real rude here, but this woman is someone I have been at it with before, and she doesn't seem to get that you can't blame your weight on your grandparents and the world. Good grief, McBalls. Have you even read the earlier parts of the thread? Nowhere have I said that you can blame your weight entirely on the environment. And, hello, I have also posted that I know that from personal experience, because I have lost weight before. Most recently I lost 78 lbs, although I have gained a bunch of it back over the last few years. On the other hand, I have said that you can't blame fat people entirely for being fat. Nor is it correct to assume that all fat people are lazy, weak-willed, and gluttonous. And, more importantly, I have linked to actual scientific research supporting that assertion. There are forces pushing those of us with a susceptibility to getting fat into the actual overweight or obese phenotype. That's why I've been posting the links to this thread from actual scientific research. And I believe some are surprising and are things that people probably wouldn't guess on their own contribute to higher or lower body weight. Take the turning-down-the-artificial-heating-and-air-conditioning factor. Or the "brushing your teeth with your non-dominant hand" bit. To resist becoming some degree of overweight in America requires above-average effort and willpower. That is why the average American is overweight. To lose weight and maintain that loss requires above-average effort and willpower. General gripe: I don't know what it is about message forums, but frequently I see an inability to understand nuance or complex issues. Look people, it's not entirely a matter of, "You're fat because you're an immoral greedy glutton with no self-control when it comes to food!" or "Body weight cannot be controlled at all. It's entirely genetic." In my personal experience, the FA forums are no different than "My Fat Spouse", btw; they are just as dogmatic with the "You can't control or change your body weight!" argument. If you go and read the blogs out there dedicated to actual obesity and food policy research, you begin to see that this is a much more complex issue than the average person thinks it is. Last edited on 26 Jun 2011 10:20 am by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
jsp1129 New Member
|
The majority of us have struggled with our weight at one point or another, and we all know the older we get, the more stubborn the fat is. For guys it?óÔé¼Ôäós around the mid-section, for ladies the hips. Most diets don?óÔé¼Ôäót work, or only work temporarily. Fortunately there are some products that truly work, but they are few and far between it seems. |
|||||||
|
McBalls Senior Member
|
Right, I get it. It's a combination of factors. Is that an excuse? No. That's what you don't seem to be getting. You can write paragraph upon paragraph explaining away each of the ten pounds you accumulated. Ultimately, you are responsible for your body. If you feel that your environment isn't conducive to your goals, then change it. Don't go down the sweets aisle at the store, don't go into the kitchen at work when you know someone has a birthday, don't hit up the bakery for a pastry lunch, don't hang around with fat friends or even thin friends who discourage you. You talk as if the very fact that there is an opposition, in our society, to losing weight is an excuse to have gained it. Your coworkers discourage you? Tell them to stick it. Some skinny women are catty and full of pride around fat chicks, and that just means their looks are probably all they have going for them. They maintain a highschool mentality of putting others down to raise your own self esteem. That chick that told you to 'Keep going.' Was either a jerk, or she didn't mean it that way. If you've never truly been overweight, it can be hard to understand how certain comments might affect someone who is. jsp- Actually there are men that gain around the hips and women that gain around their mid-section. It's much more unhealthy to have weight around the middle than on the hips thighs and buttocks. If you are born apple-shaped, with your fat distributed mainly in the middle, you are at an increased risk of heart problems and diabetes. Body type plays a huge role on the effects diet and exercise will have on you. |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
jsp1129 wrote:Fortunately there are some products that truly work, but they are few and far between it seems. As long as your focus is finding the perfect "product", you are unlikely to lose weight and keep it off. May I suggest you read the tutorial? |
|||||||
|
McBalls Senior Member
|
I don't know how, but I missed the part in JSP's post about diet products. The only 'diet' products you should be buying are whole foods from your local grocer or a set of weights. There are diet pills that work. But if you're going that route you might as well try slimming down with methamphetamine. They have the same adverse effects on your body that hard drugs do, because they are stimulants or 'uppers'. Haven't you ever seen Requiem for a Dream? That old lady babbling about the dress and being on television will be you. Or atleast, you'll degenerate mentally like she does. It's best if you lose weight/get fit through healthy eating habits. That doesn't even necessarily mean you will lose weight, but the quality of your body will improve with proper dietary changes and the addition of exercise. You're better off relying on a tailor's tape than the scale. In a month, you could exercise and eat right, and totally maintain your weight, but if you measure yourself, you'll be thinner. No one is saying you have to lose everything tomorrow, or even in a month. In fact, the most permanent changes in body often result from gradual changes in lifestyle. Those diet pills and all that garbage will make you lose proper body mass as well. You'll likely lose a combination of water (through dehydration- many 'weight loss pills' are actually simply diuretics), or muscle (from the unnatural stimulation your body recieves from the drugs). You could get to 100lbs this way, and you still wouldn't look 'thin' in your mind. This is because you have simply wasted your muscles, and your body hung onto the fat instead. However, if you actually work your muscles and eat a sensible diet, they will naturally burn off the fat themselves. If you starve, your body values fat. If you eat right and exercise, your body values muscle mass, and therefore even if you gain a little weight, you be gaining lean mass while losing all the fluff. Crash diets, diet pills and all the various short-cuts will only lead you to 'skinny-fatness', or thinness without fitness. I guarantee, unless you're ill, that isn't the look you want. So you're better off starting the right way and slowly getting where you want. I would also like to add that those boxed 'diet' bars and shakes you can buy are a huge sham and a waste of your money. You can spend hundreds on their products and if you follow them, you WILL lose the weight. However, you're eating nothing but sugary junk, and all those spikes in your blood sugar are gonna leave you craving nothing but more junk. It's much easier to fall off the wagon if you're craving sugar (it's highly addictive, afterall), and thus much easier for you to spend another hundred dollars giving their products another go. Don't buy into that. Take the five minutes it takes out of your day to count calories and eat healthfully. Don't spend hundreds to ruin your health. |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
Liked the above post. btw found an interesting article about behavioural economics: http://www.choicesmagazine.org/magazine/article.php?article=142 |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
McBalls wrote: Right, I get it. It's a combination of factors. Is that an excuse? No. That's what you don't seem to be getting. You can write paragraph upon paragraph explaining away each of the ten pounds you accumulated. Ultimately, you are responsible for your body. I am not looking for an excuse; I've already posted I'm trying to lose weight again. Not to mention, I don't feel I need an excuse. My weight is of concern to myself, my husband, and my doctor. Quite frankly, the fact that I'm overweight is nobody else's business, including yours, except for those aspects of it I choose to discuss with you. My being fat is not an excuse for you or anyone else to treat me poorly, either. I've also posted on this very thread, several times, that ultimately we are the only ones who can reduce our own body weight. I'm also not looking to "get skinny". I'm looking to go from "obese" to "overweight", because I think that maintaining it would be a realistic goal for me. Being "skinny" would not. But also, McBalls, why do you keep trying to bring the subject about to me and my own personal struggles with weight? The stuff I've discussed and posted here goes back to answering the question, "Why are 73% of Americans overweight?". It's discussing the issue of overweight at a population level, not at a persona level (although yes, I have discussed myself in this thread too, but I'm not trying to make this thread about me). Last edited on 26 Jun 2011 08:51 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: McBalls wrote:Right, I get it. It's a combination of factors. Is that an excuse? No. That's what you don't seem to be getting. You can write paragraph upon paragraph explaining away each of the ten pounds you accumulated. Ultimately, you are responsible for your body. Why are only 3% of Japanese obese? Why are 8% of Italians obese? Why is the Bible belt so fat? Why is the US obesity rate more than double that of Europe? The answer is simple. Less gluttony and more personal responsibility. Look how low you set your goals Puffy. Why not simply eat the right amount of calories everyday? You are not here to lose weight. You are here to convince yourself and others that it can't be done so that you can justify your behavior and salve your guilt. The truth is, you are fat and you caused it. You brought it on yourself. It's time for you to grow up. |
|||||||
|
McBalls Senior Member
|
*Titter, Titter* Wow. It is my business, because you are posting on a PUBLIC website/forum about it. If you don't want anyone to talk to you about it, you probably shouldn't post your stats here. If you want only positive comments about your lack of progress, then you should talk to someone you love about your issues. On the internet, you are subject to feedback both positive and negative, and quite frankly I have had a few bones to pick with some of your philosophy of 'healthy living'. You can take it in stride, and quit spouting the same things, or accept it as fact and change your life for the better. Yeah, even making it to the overweight category is an improvement, of course it is. But, you can think about setting goals from there when you get there. Ignore the skinnies who give you backhanded remarks at work and get on with your life. Yep, we agree there. Everyone is ultimately responsible. Uhh... Your personal struggles? I thought I was being pretty general in most instances, with a few responses directed at you, because YOU replied to me and told me your personal struggles and bogus science-fiction 'facts'. I also don't like how you try to shut down M2, because not only does that feed him, but you're reducing yourself to the same mentality. I don't think that person really, truly hates fat people, I think he feels strongly about the issue and expresses his opinions in a beligerent manner to vent. It's not appropriate, but everyone knows he's a troll. You don't need to go from webpage to webpage telling everyone that he's some braindamaged guy. How do you even know that? Sometimes I wonder if you aren't him. You're like the total opposite, and his trolling is so elaborate I don't flipping doubt that he creates his own opposition. Your points are strawmen most of the time. It's like you set out bait for him. =| I notice the only real point that you make is about the medical industry/pharmaceutical drugs, that seems suspicious. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
McBalls wrote: I also don't like how you try to shut down M2, because not only does that feed him, but you're reducing yourself to the same mentality. I don't think that person really, truly hates fat people, I think he feels strongly about the issue and expresses his opinions in a beligerent manner to vent. I'm not trying to shut down M2/Chris Brady. I'm exposing him and his agenda, as well as his lying about his credentials. He's also constantly and avidly on the prowl for fat people to attempt to "cure" and then eventually solicit for money, so my hope is to prevent anyone from being taken in. My goal was also to get the truth about Chris Brady out there for search engines to pick up, so whenever he tries to sell himself as "CG Brady, author and weight loss coach", anyone who googles "CG Brady" will get the full story on who he really is and what he's really about, as well as his history--specifically his years of failure as a wanna-be diet guru. CG Brady's brain damage is relevant because it may explain his lack of empathy and his perseveration on this subject. And Brady does a lot more than expose his opinions "in a belligerent manner". He's called for physically hurting fat people as part of getting them to lose weight on at least three websites. On MFS, Brady has called for physically abusing women who gain weight. He's encouraging hate and he lies about himself and his qualifications. As to how what I know about Chris Brady, I've provided explanations and plenty of links to his "work" going back to 2003 elsewhere on this site. Most of what I know about CG Brady comes from his own postings; he's revealed plenty about himself, including his brain damage. If you are really that interested, look up my older posts on the subject on this site. But anyway, we've discussed M2 to here to death. I'm not here to talk about M2/Chris Brady anymore. The regular posters have seen him before and now know who he is as well as his history. McBalls, I thought you were an actual rational interlocutor until this last post of yours. I will be ignoring you also from here on out. Last edited on 27 Jun 2011 07:19 am by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: McBalls wrote:But I also don't think it's okay that Puffs here is telling others to blame their weight entirely on environment. Environment, like your weight itself, is something that can be changed. I realize that I'm gonna sound real rude here, but this woman is someone I have been at it with before, and she doesn't seem to get that you can't blame your weight on your grandparents and the world. I have presented you with an opportunity to either discredit my weight loss method or lose all you excessive weight and you won't do it. You are not serious about losing weight. If you put 1/10th the effort on losing weight as you do making excuses for why nobody can you would be lean and healthy. I suspect that your morbid obesity is a symptom of a much deeper problem. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: McBalls wrote:I also don't like how you try to shut down M2, because not only does that feed him, but you're reducing yourself to the same mentality. I don't think that person really, truly hates fat people, I think he feels strongly about the issue and expresses his opinions in a beligerent manner to vent. |
|||||||
|
McBalls Senior Member
|
Your ignorance was predicted. It's quite typical for people with your attitude to fight with and finally ignore reason. You are totally another sock puppet though. I know it. If you aren't, you really do belong in NAAFA. It blows my mind that either of you tries to misinform others about their health. It's sick and wrong. But all too convenient considering how perfectly you represent your given extremes. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
McBalls wrote: Your ignorance was predicted. It's quite typical for people with your attitude to fight with and finally ignore reason. I what way? |
|||||||
|
McBalls Senior Member
|
Yuh-huh. I mean, come on man. I've seen you in action on like 8-10 websites and you get way carried away at times. You're hilarious, but this is the wrong place to ridicule anyone other than the kleenex troll. |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
TV advertisements for sugary and fatty foods are playing a role in childhood obesity and ought to be taken off the air, a leading group of pediatricians says. http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-fast-food-tv-ads-20110627,0,4493308.story |
|||||||
|
McBalls Senior Member
|
It's true. I'm of the opinion that the fight against obesity should start with the children. We're all adults, and therefore responsible for ourselves. But we are also responsible for our kids, and people are getting very lazy when it comes to feeding their children. I see kids 1, 2, 3 years old that are obese, the mother/father is usually much the same. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. But it's your job as the tree to toss it as far as you can if you're instilling unhealthy habits on them. I think, a lot of obese parents put up with the comments and bullying, and they come out 'on top' of it all still obese. To them, they've overcome that and obesity is now a part of their identity. They pass these 'winning' behaviours on to their kids, since they made it through, and the cycle continues. If I were a parent, I would not want my child to go through the same thing. I would be the one to give them heck for their lifestyle, not others. After all, that's what being a parent is about- you're instilling views and perceptions on someone that will one day be out there living in the same cruel world you are. Would you not want their experience to be better than your own? Especially in this case? You are a parent to your child, not a friend. Friends share good times and food and drink and all that. Parents need to be firm about what their child eats. If they refuse chicken and broccoli because they want pizza, they can't be too hungry then. Don't give in, and in an hour they'll grudgingly ask for you to heat it up for them. Then, they eventually learn they might as well just eat in the first place, since no one likes microwaved leftovers. It won't kill them to let them go to bed hungry one night to teach them if they keep refusing. An overnight fast is better for someone than 3 slices of double cheese pepperoni pizza. I'm not by any means saying starve your kids, lol! But if they are hungry like that, they will learn quickly not to take anything for granted. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: TV advertisements for sugary and fatty foods are playing a role in childhood obesity and ought to be taken off the air, a leading group of pediatricians says. Now it's TV commercials?  It's bad parents who buy that slop and feed it to their kids. People need to stop playing the blame game. They know this slop is bad for their kids but they buy it and feed it to them anyway. That is willful conduct and blaming advertisers. If these sweet treats were fed in moderation it would not be so bad. No matter how you try to explain it away it comes down to personal responsibility and choice. Parent who make bad choices for their kids should not have kids. Fat women should not get pregnant. They are neither mature or responsible enough to be parents. They won't even take proper care of themselves. I know that this if politically incorrect to say but we all know that it's the truth. |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member 
|
Hi JSABD, Your original question in this thread was Can't or Won't. You've made it very clear that you believe the answer is Won't. In general, I would say that you're right. It's probably true that many people don't make the effort (including me until recently), but I don't think that applies to everyone. Some people have posted on this forum saying that if they consume 2000 calories per day (which is what you promoted), they don't lose weight. They want to lose weight, they do what you've suggested, and they still don't lose it. I think most people CAN lose weight if they try hard enough, but I believe that there is a small percentage of people who don't seem able to, even after trying all the right things concerning nutrition and exercise. This particular thread has been an interesting read. You seem to be attacking PuffsPlus a lot. She never said that she CAN'T lose weight (she has lost it before), she just says that it's hard. It is hard. If it wasn't hard, obesity wouldn't exist. But even though it's hard, the fact that we're doing it anyway should be considered as something admirable, rather than being referred to as gluttons, liars, and lazy people. And it's not true that we're unable to blame ourselves. I know that I'm to blame for my being overweight. We are able to accept blame. As overweight people, we don't have a built-in instinct to blame everybody else (some might do that, but not all of us, and that trait isn't limited to overweight people, there are people of all shapes and sizes who look for somebody to blame for things that go wrong, and there are people of all shapes and sizes who are quite happy to accept ther blame themserlves), and as you admit, sometimes the blame shouldn't go to the overweight person. Sometimes it's not their fault (as in the case of children, and certain adults). So yes I do agree with you that most people CAN lose weight. But I also accept that it's not easy. And when someone starts the weight-loss journey, and makes some small steps in the right direction, commendation (rather than ridicule) encourages them to keep going. Last edited on 13 Jul 2011 08:47 pm by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
Tankgirl Distinguished Member 
|
Jb, brady, whatever you're fooling nobody. Give it up already! Atkins slipped on the ice and hit his head. You should know what damage a brain injury causes. He could have been hit by a car and PETA and PCRM would have blamed it on his diet! Why? Because it's great publicity for a vegan diet. As much respect as I have for people that can live 100% vegan diet, it doesn't work for everyone. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/11/nyregion/just-what-killed-the-diet-doctor-and-what-keeps-the-issue-alive.html?ref=robertcatkins And since I KNOW you're a T Colin Campbell fanboy, have you heard about the debunking done on it by Denise Minger? Since you're the expert of all thing Nutritional please do yourself a favor and read The Vegetarian Myth. Again if you other posters are Vegan, frutarian, vegetarian - more power to you. This was just for one particular troll. Man I feel better! mustbe Warcraft withdrawl I haven't smacked a troll around in months! Last edited on 14 Jul 2011 04:39 am by Tankgirl |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
Denise Minger rocks. Very thorough debunking of "The China Study": http://rawfoodsos.com/the-china-study/ Personally, I found that low fat and high carb, even high complex carb, never worked for me for losing weight. I was also vegan as teen for a while. Pretty much lived on whole wheat bread, brown rice, tofu, and vegetables. I'd eat and then an hour later I'd be starving. Low fat/high refined carb was even worse. I'd eat a Lean Cuisine at lunch and be dizzy and hungry an hour later. All the refined carbs would just shoot my blood sugar up and then crash me down. Moderate carb/moderate fat works much better for me. Less hunger, tastier food. Even Dr. Yoni Freedhoff of the "Weighty Matters" blog is coming around to endorsing a moderate-carb, moderate fat diet rather than low fat and high carb. Last edited on 13 Jul 2011 09:18 pm by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: Denise Minger rocks. Very thorough debunking of "The China Study": http://rawfoodsos.com/the-china-study/ 
Minger has been discredited. The China Study is the best research on human nutrition to date. Campbell did not have an axe to grind. Minger does. You are fat as heck Puff and it really is offensive to hear a fat person say "I'd be starving" Maybe if you did starve you'd gain some humility. |
|||||||
|
Tankgirl Distinguished Member
|
Personally what works for me is moderate fat ( to save on calories- I don't like pork nearly enough to be worth the caloric "sticker shock", for instance) Grain free , no sugar except what's in berries and other fruits. Why is not eating grains is such a big deal? Yeah, carbs have less calories per gram, but who: 1. can eat a half cup of rice, pasta etc.and be satisfied? 2. gets enough vegetables, anyway? (unless you're on ETL of course And about the AC thing: Experience- wise I agree. We don't have it. If the heat over 80 it's to hot to cook so I live on protein shakes. over 90 and it's too hot to eat so I fast to not feel it as much - or live on cold shrimp and cucumber slices. Needless to say I drop weight because I'm under 1000 calories a day during the worst of it! Last edited on 14 Jul 2011 05:12 am by Tankgirl |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
Tankgirl wrote: Personally what works for me is moderate fat! Hi Tankgirl, How would you define moderate fat? Over the last couple of months, my fat intake has been in between 25% - 30% (protein about 30%, and carbs 40 - 45%). That seems to work for me. I'm not sure if that would be described as moderate fat or not. Tankgirl wrote: Why is not eating grains is such a big deal? Yeah, carbs have less calories per gram, but who: When I started, I found half a cup of rice left me still feeling hungry. But now I find it ok. It might sound silly, but I've found that the longer I cook it, the more filling it becomes. I know that makes no sense, but that's how it works on my body. |
|||||||
|
Tankgirl Distinguished Member
|
Lol, sorry moderate in fat in low carb land is just shy of "ridiculously high fat",my allowance is 47-82 grams. But for me it's enough to say under 1700 calories a day. Since everything else that's not meat or the occasional nuts (trying to avoid those because unsalted are hard to find) is fruit, veggies, or yogurt, fat is most of my calories. But for me that's cutting back. I can't BELIEVE the calories I used to eat up in just mayo and ranch. I just remember that 1/2 cup portion of starch from my LA weight loss days. I either wound up throwing it on a salad, into a soup or just saying "Why bother?" and skipping it altogether. Nowadays to me pasta is just kind of bland, and I prefer the vegetable versions. Last edited on 14 Jul 2011 05:48 am by Tankgirl |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
Tankgirl wrote: Lol, sorry moderate in fat in low carb land is just shy of "ridiculously high fat",my allowance is 47-82 grams. But for me it's enough to say under 1700 calories a day. Since everything else that's not meat or the occasional nuts (trying to avoid those because unsalted are hard to find) is fruit, veggies, or yogurt, fat is most of my calories. But for me that's cutting back. I can't BELIEVE the calories I used to eat up in just mayo and ranch. OK, I suppose if you're not eating starches, then the percentage of fat would be higher, because fruit and veg have very litle calories. My fat intake comes from eggs, fish, houmous (or hummus, depending on where you live), avocados, seeds, and ev olive oil. I don't cook with oil. If I want to "fry" something, I do it in lemon juice, then perhaps add the olive oil at the end, because I know that olive oil changes properties when heated. Tankgirl wrote: I just remember that 1/2 cup portion of starch from my LA weight loss days. I either wound up throwing it on a salad, into a soup or just saying "Why bother?" and skipping it altogether. Nowadays to me pasta is just kind of bland, and I prefer the vegetable versions. I've always found pasta dull. It only tastes nice, in my opinion, if it's covered in a creamy sauce, which, of course, is not recommended. But I do enjoy rice. I always have brown rice, it tastes better than white, and of course, it's healthier. But I still have to watch the portion size, because it does contain a lot of calories. Before I started eating healthy, I never measured anything, I would just pour the rice into the pan. And whatever amount I made, I would always eat it (not just referring to rice). Measuring quantities is probably one of the best habits that I've started using. |
|||||||
|
Tankgirl Distinguished Member
|
lol creamy sauce- you mean Alfredo? It's great on broccoli! But this time of year, that's just to heavy for me. BTW: It's HILARIOUS that we're hijacking JB's thread with food talk! Last edited on 14 Jul 2011 06:20 am by Tankgirl |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
Tankgirl wrote: BTW: It's HILARIOUS that we're hijacking JB's thread with food talk! He won't mind us doing that. He did it to me. I started a thread about Cheat Days (you made a post on it). And now the two of them (JSABD and PuffsPlus) are fighting again, this time on my thread. I don't mind. I don't like all the name calling, but it is interesting to see their opinions. On the Cheat Days thread, you disagreed with me, but there was no name calling. That's what forums should be like. It's healthy to disagree respectfully, but when people start getting personal, and calling each other names, it loses it's objective. Last edited on 14 Jul 2011 06:32 am by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
Tankgirl Distinguished Member
|
I'm familiar with him on another site. I agree with him in some ways when it comes to motivation - I'm willing to do things for Hub and our "planned and hoped for, but not on the way yet" kids, that I wouldn't have done for myself. But he takes way to much pleasure in grinding fat people into the dirt. I only disagree with cheat days because I think it's better to adapt what you want to fit within the guidelines of whatever diet you believe works best for you. I've come up with some of my best recipes that way  , and I usually wind up preferring the adapted version. Last edited on 14 Jul 2011 06:40 am by Tankgirl |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
Tankgirl wrote: I'm familiar with him on another site. I agree with him in some ways when it comes to motivation - I'm willing to do things for Hub and our "planned and hoped for, but not on the way yet" kids, that I wouldn't have done for myself. But he takes way to much pleasure in grinding fat people into the dirt. I do agree with a lot that JSABD says, and I also agree with a lot of what PuffsPlus says. They both have interesting information to give. And I'm happy that PuffsPlus has said she's going to start losing weight again, and I'm happy that JSABD is already healthy. But I think respect is needed. Encouragement goes a long way in helping people reach their goals. Tankgirl wrote: I only disagree with cheat days because I think it's better to adapt what you want to fit within the guidelines of whatever diet you believe works best for you. I've come up with some of my best recipes that way I've got no problem with you disagreeing on Cheat Days. As you say, whatever works best for a person is the way to go. Last edited on 14 Jul 2011 08:47 pm by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
IOM, Clarification: I'm not "fighting" with Chris Brady/JSABD, I'm pointing out a few of his more egregious mistakes and bad logic. Debunking him completely would take a whole new message board. For instance, JSABD/Chis Brady just claimed that Denise Minger's debunking of the China Study has been discredited but provides no evidence of that claim. Typical. But anyway, I'm not getting drawn into the petty namecalling and stuff, no worries. I'm focusing on a few of the claims posted and not the poster himself. So, back to the business of talking food and diet: ItsOnlyMe wrote:
You didn't ask me directly, IOM, but I'll chime in as we're talking about "moderate fat". I hope you don't mind... Personally, what works for me is 25-30 percent protein, 30-35 percent fat, and 35-40 percent carbs (from complex carbs). The combo of too little fat plus refined carbs and minimal protein makes me get hungry in between meals, dizzy, and headachey. Last edited on 14 Jul 2011 07:46 am by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: IOM, Do you want to debunk me? Take the Puffs Plus Challenge. The truth is folks she is not here to debunk anyone. She is here to try to convince everyone here that weight loss is impossible. She is on another board stalking another person and claiming he is Chris Brady. That person is in touch will me through this board. Puffs Plus is an operative for something called the fatosphere and the Fat Acceptance movement. They militantly anti male and anti diet and anti logic and anti science and anti health. Denise Minger is selling a book and she is a stooge for the beef industry. http://www.vegsource.com/news/2010/07/china-study-author-colin-campbell-slaps-down-critic-denise-minger.html Colin Campbell is the world's foremost expert on epidemiology and nutrition and Denise Minger is a pitiful hack. About the only community interested in the kind of thing Minger is attempting would be the pro-beef Weston Price Foundation and the meat industry. Minger may find helpers coming forward from those ranks and offering their assistance; many have already tried unsuccessfully for years to attack and undercut the message of Dr. Campbell's life work. On their own website, the Weston Price people express how thrilled they are that Minger has joined in their attempts to discredit Dr. Campbell's work. (In fact, Minger is a fan of the Weston Price Foundation and recommends their work to others. You can read an expose about the Price Foundation at the end of Dr. Campbell's article -- which includes the revelation that Price himself, the founder, actually recommended a vegetarian diet to his family as the most healthy.) I hope Campbell sues her. The beef industry slapped an attack lawsuit on Oprah Winfrey when she exposed the dangers of eating American Beef. Minger is a pimp for the beef industry and Puffs Plus is a COWard and a liar who will not take my challenge. She claims to want to discredit me. All she has to do is take my weight loss challenge but she won't because she is not here to lose weight or help others. She is here to discourage dieters and sabotage their life saving efforts. Deliberately sabotaging the life saving and health improving efforts of others is evil. She is also here to stalk me because I and people like me have been telling the truth on the fat acceptance movement for many years and today the movement that once had close to 1 million members has less than 10,000 and is not a compilation of splinter groups of angry jealous fat feminists who have neither a cause or a clue. People like me have received death threats from these wackos. They have wished cancer on MeMe Roth and her children. People like us have been called Nazis and while the fat acceptance crazies have compared the imagined plight of fat people with holocaust victims. |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: You didn't ask me directly, IOM, but I'll chime in as we're talking about "moderate fat". I hope you don't mind... Hi PuffsPlus, Of course I don't mind. I don't think JSABD will mind either (this being his thread) that we've slightly strayed from the original subject. As you know, my thread on Cheat Days ended up being about Seventh Day Adventists and Fridges! But I don't mind that. I'm happy to hear all different views on all different topics. Your macronutrient percentages are not so different to mine. It seems that I do have a bit more starch than you. My main sources of starch are rice, quinoa, and oats. I do have a little bread (I know that's controversial) but not much. I?é?áhave about two slices every second day, and it's not made of wheat. We make our own bread from non-wheat flour. I never?é?áspread margarine or butter on my bread. I spread houmous (hummus) on the bread. But as I said, I don't have much bread (I might have three or four slices on a Sunday, my cheat day - another controversial topic). Until two months ago, I never gave any thought to nutrient ratios. But since I started, I experimented until I found what ratios work for me. And for something to work (in my opinion), it needs to accomplish two things: 1. Make me feel satisfied (not hungry) 2. Be effective in helping me reach my goal For me personally, the ratios I mentioned earlier do both of the above. But I know that everyone is different. I have to have protein at every meal. I tried food combining in the past, and if it was a starch meal (with no protein), I'd still feel very hungry (note to JSABD: No I don't mean starvation. Yes I'm aware that, as an overweight person, any pangs of hunger I feel are not serious or dangerous, compared to those who are really malnourished). I know people who have toast and marmalade for breakfast, and they feel satisfied. I can't do that. I guess it shows that we're all different, and what works for one doesn't work for another, and if someone says they have the perfect weight-loss programme, it might not be perfect for somebody else. Note to JSABD: I believe that you don't mind us talking about nutrient ratios on your thread. It keeps the thread active, and pushes it to the top of the list, but if you don't want me to do it, just say so, and I'll respect your wishes. I know there are some disagreements on various subjects, but I don't believe it's a bad thing. The more viewpoints that?é?áget expressed (even if they're at the extreme opposites of the spectrum), the bigger picture we build. I know you like to quote the bible. Proverbs 15:22 basically says?é?áthat when we get together and talk (or debate) we accomplish more. IOM ?é?á Last edited on 15 Jul 2011 08:48 am by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
Puffs is saying that a certain ratio works for her. She's fat. She has been fat for a very long time. Philippians 3:19 Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. Proverbs 23:20-21 Be not among drunkards or among gluttonous eaters of meat, for the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, and slumber will clothe them with rags. Proverbs 23:21 For the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, and slumber will clothe them with rags. Proverbs 23:2 And put a knife to your throat if you are given to appetite. Gluttony seems to be a sin that Christians like to ignore. We are often quick to label smoking and drinking as sins, but for some reason gluttony is accepted or at least tolerated. Many of the arguments used against smoking and drinking, such as health and addiction, apply equally to overeating. Many believers would not even consider having a glass of wine or smoking a cigarette but have no qualms about gorging themselves at the dinner table. This should not be! Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, ?óÔé¼?ôDo not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags.?óÔé¼?Ø Proverbs 28:7 declares, ?óÔé¼?ôHe who keeps the law is a discerning son, but a companion of gluttons disgraces his father.?óÔé¼?Ø Proverbs 23:2 proclaims, ?óÔé¼?ôPut a knife to your throat if you are given to gluttony.?óÔé¼?Ø Physical appetites are an analogy of our ability to control ourselves. If we are unable to control our eating habits, we are probably also unable to control other habits, such as those of the mind (lust, covetousness, anger) and unable to keep our mouths from gossip or strife. We are not to let our appetites control us, but we are to have control over our appetites. (See Deuteronomy 21:20, Proverbs 23:2, 2 Peter 1:5-7, 2 Timothy 3:1-9, and 2 Corinthians 10:5.) The ability to say ?óÔé¼?ôno?óÔé¼?Ø to anything in excess?óÔé¼ÔÇØself-control?óÔé¼ÔÇØis one of the fruits of the Spirit common to all believers (Galatians 5:22). |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
Yes the bible does say that gluttony is a sin, but it doesn't ever say that being overweight is a sin (fatness, in the bible, is often described as a postive thing). As we know, there are several reasons why a person can be overweight; it doesn't necessarily mean that the person is a glutton. It's true that gluttony is one reason for being overweight, but it's not the only reason. Even if someone is overweight due to gluttony, once that person decides to make some changes (even some small steps), he is trying to conquer the gluttony. Paul told the Corinthians that's what some of them had done, and now they were clean in the sight of God (1 Corinthians 6:10-11). We can't judge! (Matthew 7:1) We don't know everybody's personal situation, and why they might be overweight. But what we can do is provide encouragement when they decide to start a weight-loss journey. Last edited on 15 Jul 2011 02:21 pm by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
I'm going to stay out of the bible study. Fat intake is a subject of personal interest. Currently, whilst eating for weight maintenance or muscle gain at a 2500-3000 calorie range, fat intake ranges: last year average 24.7% (range of values 7.8% - 45.2%) last month average 31.4% (range of values 23.8% - 42.5%) so over time my fat intake (almost exclusively from avocado and raw seeds and nuts) has gone UP. Compare this with eating for weight loss at a 1800-2100 calories (July - August 2009) average 10.8% (range of values 5.1% - 23.9%) why did I eat low fat? At that particular point in my journey I wanted to eat a lot of food (as measured by weight and volume) to experience fullness - this led me to food choices like fruit, starchy vegetables and non-starchy vegetables which are typically low in fat. food weight average 3347g (range of values 1260g - 4692g) in pounds: average 7.4lb (range of values 2.8lb - 10.3lb) So did eating low-fat work? It kept me satisfied and I continued losing weight until I no longer wanted to lose weight (which was a good idea, because at that point I was just heading out of the healthy weight range and into 'underweight'). Would a higher-fat diet work for me? At the time I preferred more fruits and starchy vegetables like potatos, so it would not have gone with those preferences. Over the last 2 years I have adjusted food quantities down, now only eating 60% of the amount (by weight and volume = approximately 2kg) whilst eating 50% more calories. With produce intake down, calorie-dense intake is up. This can either be low-fat stuff (like oats, air-popped popcorn, muesli etc.) or high-fat stuff (like avocado, seeds and nuts). Hardly any produce is high-fat. Consuming avocados, seeds and nuts at the same time as your salad increases your ability to absorb nutrients from your salad, perhaps as much as tenfold! |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
Hi Nir, So you've found that low-fat (10% of calories) worked for you in losing the weight, and 25%-30% works for you to maintain it. My weight-loss fat percentage is the same as your weight-maintenance fat percentage, and it works for me. I imagine I would feel very hungry on 10% (JSABD: I don't mean starving). Again it shows that we're all different. Your fat comes from avocados, seeds, and nuts. Do you ever have eggs, fish, or olive oil? I suppose the lesson we learn here is that our fat should come from healthy sources, (and that would apply to almost everybody) but the exact percentage varies from person to person. |
|||||||
|
Nir Senior Administrator
|
I have small portions (20g-30g) of fish and meat each once a week, just enough to clearly not be a vegan, and yet I practically eat like one. I take 3g fish oil capsules daily - no other oil. (I've been told to go for the nuts and seeds rather than oils made from them; the fish oil is a compromise - marginally less polluted than the fish itself) eggs very rarely (don't buy them, had a hard-boiled egg when visiting a friend) |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
ItsOnlyMe wrote: Yes the bible does say that gluttony is a sin, but it doesn't ever say that being overweight is a sin (fatness, in the bible, is often described as a postive thing). As we know, there are several reasons why a person can be overweight; it doesn't necessarily mean that the person is a glutton. It's true that gluttony is one reason for being overweight, but it's not the only reason. The Bible contradicts itself on everything. The only way one can get fat and stay fat is through constant over eating. Most people would consider that gluttony. Most people don't conquer their gluttony/over eating/food lust even though it is within their means. They dance around the issue and look for something else to blame but they rarely are serious about finding a solution or applying that they know will work. ie moderation and self-control. I know everybody thinks I'm a meany but I am a heck of a lot nicer than diabetes and heart disease. |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
JSABD wrote: I know everybody thinks I'm a meany but I am a heck of a lot nicer than diabetes and heart disease. My opinion: Actually, I don't think you're being a (deliberate) meany. I do believe that you mean well, using the tough love approach. I just think that you're wrong about obese people not being serious about making changes. This forum contains many obese/overweight people who have made the required changes. Yes, I agree with you that some obese people blame everybody else, but not everyone's like that. In another recent thread, you call obese women promiscuous. Maybe some are, but surely not all of them! Where I disagree with you is in your generalizations. Yes there probably are obese people who are gluttons, liars, etc., but there are many who are definitely not! As I say, just my opinion. PS - I do enjoy interacting with you - I hope you don't get banned. I know you say a lot of controversial stuff, but that gets people writing more posts, defending everything you attack, and that's what a good forum / debate is all about. (Just go easy on PuffsPlus - I don't think attacking one person is helping anybody). |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
JSABD wrote:Philippians 3:19 Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. JSABD wrote: The Bible contradicts itself on everything. You can't use the bible as an authority, then discredit it. Last edited on 15 Jul 2011 04:52 pm by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
Tankgirl Distinguished Member
|
Just a personal note for why my particular diet works for me: When I'm on a low carb diet, (Atkins, Primal, maybe someday paleo)The only time I feel any hunger is when I'm actually physically hungry. the rest of the time, I don't even think about eating.It's great to be able to concentrate on other things. For me that's freedom -I remember back to when I used to eat white flour/ sugar stuff and I had this constant appetite. It was like a mosquito buzzing in my ear. The last time I was on a structured diet that included sugar/ flour (LA weightloss), I was eating more calories and had that "hunger" all the time, almost obsessively. The only thing that I could do to even put a damper on it was take hoodia.That stuff is really expensive!As good as hoodia is, If I can "hack" my diet not to need it, that's more money to put towards other things. It also means I don't have to be scared of my own appetite, which is amazing |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
ItsOnlyMe wrote: JSABD wrote:I know everybody thinks I'm a meany but I am a heck of a lot nicer than diabetes and heart disease. I have dealt with a lot of fat people and I have asked them some very tough questions. Let it suffice to say that from what I have seen they are not brutally honest. I have spoken with many doctors and health professionals and the general consensus is that when it comes to diets and what they eat most of them lie. Excuses very often are lies. When they admit the truth and make a serious and accurate accounting of calories there will be no turning back. As to Puffs: I was here before she was and she came here and made a bee line for me. She's a stalker. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
ItsOnlyMe wrote: JSABD wrote: |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
JSABD wrote:the people who take the Bible the most literally are the fattest. Really? People who take the bible the most literally are the fattest? So there are no slim people who take the bible literally? So atheists and agnostics have self control, and bible readers don't? Every time we see an obese person, are we to assume "There goes another bible student"? What about your beloved Seventh Day Adventists? You've told us a number of times that they remain thin, and they know how to practise moderation. Yet they stay pretty close to the basics of the bible. Don't you think that, instead of one group of people having the monopoly on fatness, both fitness and obesity can happen to some people in the majority of social, religious, and racial groups? You'll probably answer that some races (like the Chinese) are in general very thin. But once they move to America or the UK, don't they have the same probabilities as everybody else to either stay thin or to become overweight? You might also reply that some religious groups practise abstinence, fasting, and self-denial. That's true, but we both know that many slim attractive fit people aren't practising those things. The way I see it is: We cannot target one group of people as being obese. Some Christians are fat, some are thin. Some atheists are fat, some are thin. Some rich people are fat, some are thin. Some poor people are fat, some are thin. Some manual workers are fat, some are thin. Some office workers are fat, some are thin, etc etc. |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
Nir wrote:I have small portions (20g-30g) of fish and meat each once a week, just enough to clearly not be a vegan, and yet I practically eat like one. Hi Nir, It sounds very disciplined and strict. But obviously it's worked. Results make it all worth it. You've proved to all of us that it can be done with self-discipline and determination. I hope your example inspires others. Personally, out of all the things you restrict, eggs would be the ones that I would find the hardest to give up. I eat eggs most days, and I am losing the weight. But if a doctor ever told me to stop eating them, I would have to do it. I guess after a while you get used to it (like milk drinkers who change from whole to skimmed, or people who take sugar in coffee/tea and then stop - after a while, they find the taste of what they used to consume unpleasant). Thanks for letting us know about your fat intake. |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
JSABD, Although I'm disagreeing with you on a number of things in this thread, at least we agree on George Harrison's music! All Things Must Pass and Extra Texture are my two favourite solo albums that he did. And, of course, he knew about real hunger (Bangladesh). Last edited on 15 Jul 2011 09:26 pm by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
ItsOnlyMe wrote: JSABD wrote: The 7th Day Adventist interpret the Bible in such a way that they eat in a responsible manner as per scripture. The Southern Fundies like the Pentacostals and Southern Baptists are cafeteria Christians in more way than one. Most Christians are cafeteria Christians because if they were to follow it they would be killing male homosexuals as per Leviticus 20:13. The pick the parts of the Bible that fit their world view. The 7th Day Adventist have a world view that sees the body of the holy spirit and they are responsible. The Southern fundies teach a gospel of condemnation and abundance. Hard core conservative Southern Christians are the fattest. I'm right on this one, http://www.suntimes.com/4490719-417/religion-and-obesity-study-links-church-and-being-fat.html PRAISE THE LARD! More proof! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42256829/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/t/praise-lard-religion-linked-obesity-young-adults/ The study, conducted by researchers at Northwestern University, found that young adults who frequently attended religious activities were far more likely to become obese than those who didn?óÔé¼Ôäót. ?óÔé¼?ôOur main finding was that people with a high frequency of religious participation in young adulthood were 50 percent more likely to become obese by middle age than those with no religious participation in young adulthood,?óÔé¼?Ø says Matthew Feinstein, the study?óÔé¼Ôäós lead investigator and a fourth-year medical student at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. The study, presented at a meeting of the American Heart Association, followed 2,433 men and women starting between the ages of 20 and 32 for 18 years. Study subjects were all of normal weight at the beginning of the study. By the end, however, those who had attended a religious function at least once a week were more likely to be obese, posting a body mass index of 30 or higher. Previous research by Northwestern Medicine has found a correlation between religious involvement and obesity in middle age and older adults. Need more proof? http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/features_julieshealthclub/2011/03/religion_and_obesity_can_church_make_you_fat.html Non religious people are smarter and leaner. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence#Studies_comparing_religious_belief_and_I.Q I realize that this a a bitter pill to swallow but it is the truth. Last edited on 16 Jul 2011 01:03 am by JSABD |
|||||||
|
PuffsPlus Distinguished Member
|
IOM, just a little background on JSABD/Chris Brady: forum19/7657-2.html . See my last two posts in that thread. I've argued with him here and on another board. But now I'm mostly done with that. He thrives on the attention and arguing with him is ultimately pointless. Even I've accepted that. Last edited on 16 Jul 2011 02:56 am by PuffsPlus |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
PuffsPlus wrote: IOM, just a little background on JSABD/Chris Brady: forum19/7657-2.html . See my last two posts in that thread. The only people arguing with me are you and that other fat acceptance troll. It it is so pointless why have you been stalking me here ( I was here first) and on MFS (I was there years before you showed up) The serious dieters here are already onto you and you are here to serve as an example of what not to do. You are the poster girl for fattitude. Since you have been here after reading your lame excuses and BS reasons for why people can't lose weight (furnaces) several people have PM'd me telling me they have had a breakthrough. Because of you Puffy there are 3 people who will never be fat again because after reading your absurd fact free declarations they now get it. Stick around. Your tactics are backfiring and people are losing weight and YOU can't stand it. The offer still stands Puffs. |
|||||||
|
awdev4 New Member
|
Until I found a good program for me, I didn't necessarily choose to stay fat, but I didn't have the right mindset to lose weight and keep it off. I was the classic yo-yo dieter. Now since changing my mindset on Jan 1st this year (with a cool program my girlfriend recommended), I've lost 32 lbs. My goal is 60 lbs and I think I can get there, as long as I keep my mindset right, follow my program and fight to keep my old bad habits from creeping back in. Old Amber (me) would've said that it was not my fault that I was fat and would've justified my fatness anyway I could. The new me would blame myself if I got fat again, especially with the program, information and tools I now have and have been using since the 1st of the year. There's really no reason I can't continue to lose weight, so that's my ongoing goal. Have a great night! Amber |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
awdev4 wrote: Until I found a good program for me, I didn't necessarily choose to stay fat, but I didn't have the right mindset to lose weight and keep it off. I was the classic yo-yo dieter. Perfect! You will reach your goal. Stick with the program. Last edited on 16 Jul 2011 04:21 am by JSABD |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
JSABD, Thanks for the references. I read them, and they were very interesting. Julie Deardorff made some good points. She gave a few reasons why some religious people might be obese: 1. Religious gatherings often may center around eating traditional, high-calorie comfort foods. 2. People with weight problems find more acceptance and less judgment in church groups. 3. Religious faith gives some sort of physiological high similar to physical exercise, but without burning calories. 4. Weight gain is common after marriage, and marriage is advocated in the bible. 5. Avoiding alcohol and tobacco may result in indulgence in overeating. And the article by Diane Mapes referred to church potlucks, where people have spaghetti, meatballs, and cake. I agree that these are valid points to consider. But Ms Mapes also added that "Not all churches worship at the altar of sugar and salt, though." That's the point that I've been making. Yes there are obese churchgoers, but not all of them. That's basically what I maintain. And we weren't talking about churchgoers, we were talking about bible readers. There is a difference. The way churches are described in these articles, sounds to me like they are viewed as social clubs, somewhere to meet and eat. Most genuine bible believers don't bother with any of that. They read the bible, live a good life, and don't do the spaghetti and meatballs thing. I agree that people who join a church just so that they can get together and eat, will tend toward being overweight. But although some churchgoers seem to go just for the food, many bible readers focus on the more important things, personal and spiritual fulfilment. They couldn't care less what's on the menu at the local church. Many bible readers don't even go to a church. They're not in it for the social life, or the entertainment. No, their beliefs are far more serious and personal than that. Food is not the core of their beliefs or practices. These ones have the same chance at staying slim as the rest of society in the countries in which they live. That is a good point about finding acceptance (and less judgment) in a church. That's probably true. But it means that the person was fat, before joining the church. It wasn't the bible that made him/her fat. He/she was already fat before discovering the bible. But still, I accept the point that unhealthy eating seems to be tolerated more than smoking or drinking. So I think we're both right. There are some church groups that focus on food. I'm amazed that some churches put the emphasis on spaghetti and cake!! I'd never heard of that one before! But at the same time, there are genuine bible readers, who quietly follow what they believe the bible is telling them, and they aren't influenced by the meet and eat brigade. I'd say that if any religion makes food the focal point, those attending need to be asking themselves why they have joined. So I think it's a draw: JSABD: 1 ItsOnlyMe: 1 Anyway, I didn't join this forum to talk about the bible, I'm here to read about fat loss. I just had to defend bible readers, as they were being described as the fattest. But what you probably meant was certain churchgoers, not bible readers. I enjoyed our discussion. Last edited on 16 Jul 2011 11:36 am by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
The old time monks would put ashes on their food to dull the flavor so they would not derive too much pleasure from it. The fact that the Bible strongly admonishes gluttony but it is not spoken to from the pulpit tells me that churches are more concerned with keeping members than teaching the Gospel. It's quite hypocritical IMO. I call what people do today food lust. From Wikipedia Gluttony in Christianity Church leaders from the Middle Ages (e.g., St. Gregory the Great, St. Thomas Aquinas) took a more expansive view of gluttony, arguing that it also consists of an anticipation of meals, the eating of delicacies, and costly foods, seeking after sauces and seasonings, and eating too eagerly.[2] St. Gregory the Great, a doctor of the Church, described five ways by which one can commit sin of gluttony, and corresponding biblical examples for each of them:[3] 1. Eating before the time of meals in order to satisfy the palate. Biblical example: Jonathan eating a little honey, when his father Saul commanded no food to be taken before the evening.[1Sa 14:29] 2. Seeking delicacies and better quality of food to gratify the "vile sense of taste." Biblical example: When Israelites escaping from Egypt complained, "Who shall give us flesh to eat ? We remember the fish which we did eat in Egypt freely ; the cucumbers and the melons, and the leeks and the onions and the garlic," God rained fowls for them to eat but punished them 500 years later.[Num 11:4] 3. Seeking after sauces and seasonings for the enjoyment of the palate. Biblical example: Two sons of Eli the high priest made the sacrificial meat to be cooked in one manner rather than another. They were met with death.[1Sa 4:11] 4. Exceeding the necessary amount of food. Biblical example: One of the sins of Sodom was "fullness of bread."[Eze 16:49] 5. Taking food with too much eagerness, even when eating the proper amount, and even if the food is not luxurious. Biblical example: Esau selling his birthright for ordinary food of bread and pottage of lentils. His punishment was that the "profane person . . . who, for a morsel of meat sold his birthright," we learn that " he found no place for repentance, though he sought it carefully, with tears." [Gen 25:30] The fifth way is worse than all others, said St. Gregory, because it shows attachment to pleasure most clearly. To recapitulate, St Gregory the Great said that one may succumb to the sin of gluttony by: 1. Time (when); 2. Quality; 3. Stimulants; 4. Quantity; 5. Eagerness Last edited on 16 Jul 2011 01:35 pm by JSABD |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
I agree with most of what you said (or quoted), but I need to add this point: Yes, the bible does condemn gluttony, but it does not condemn finding pleasure in eating. Ecclesiastes 5:18-19: 18 Behold, what I have seen to be good and fitting is to eat and drink and find enjoyment in all the toil with which one toils under the sun the few days of his life that God has given him, for this is his lot. 19 Everyone also to whom God has given wealth and possessions and power to enjoy them, and to accept his lot and rejoice in his toil?óÔé¼ÔÇØthis is the gift of God. Ecclesiastes 9:7: 7 Go, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart, for God has already approved what you do. Ecclesiastes 10:19: 19 Bread is made for laughter, and wine gladdens life, and money answers everything. As for Phinehas and Hophni (Eli's sons), Esau, the people of Sodom, and the Israelites who wanted meat, they were rightly punished, because they more emphasis on food than on sacred things. Yes they were gluttons. We agree on that. As for Jonathan, it wasn't God who commanded not to eat, it was Saul (1 Samuel 14:24), who had already made some foolish choices (1 Samuel 13:13). Jonathan was not a glutton. He had been fighting all day. He was tired and hungry. He hadn't heard his father's rash command not to eat. By having a taste of honey, he was breaking no biblical law. So we agree again that gluttony is condemned in the bible, regardless of what the pulpits teach, but remember that enjoying food is not condemned. Last edited on 16 Jul 2011 03:05 pm by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
I think it contradicts itself. It actually tells gluttons to kill themselves and it orders the stoning of gluttons. Enjoying food is one thing but an immoderate use of food is considered a sin punishable by death in the Bible and most non Christians consider a moral failing. |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
JSABD wrote:I think it contradicts itself. It actually tells gluttons to kill themselves and it orders the stoning of gluttons. That's not a contradiction. Enjoying food in moderation is good, gluttony is bad. No contradiction. And where in the bible does it tell anyone to kill themselves? Last edited on 16 Jul 2011 05:03 pm by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
ItsOnlyMe wrote: JSABD wrote: What the Bible says about Fat People First of all, it is important to understand that God really likes fat. So I suppose he likes fat people, too. (He's probably overweight himself.) All the fat is the Lord's. -- Leviticus 3:16 Even God's sword is fat (and bloody). The sword of the LORD is filled with blood, it is made fat with fatness. -- Isaiah 34:6 God even likes fat animals. He plans to feed people to to them to make them nice and fat. Thus saith the Lord GOD; Speak unto every feathered fowl, and to every beast of the field ... Ye shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth ... And ye shall eat fat till ye be full, and drink blood till ye be drunken, of my sacrifice which I have sacrificed for you. -- Ezekiel 39:17-19 God makes the diligent fat. (Lazy people are always skinny.) The soul of the sluggard desireth, and hath nothing: but the soul of the diligent shall be made fat. -- Proverbs 13:4 God makes liberals fat, too. (I guess religious liberals should be the fattest of all.) The liberal soul shall be made fat. -- Proverbs 11:25 If you put your trust in God, he will make you fat. He that putteth his trust in the LORD shall be made fat. -- Proverbs 28:25 Being fat is is sure sign of righteousnous in the eyes of God. The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree ... they shall be fat and flourishing. -- Psalm 92:12-14 Seeing as how one cannot get fat without eating to much the Bible is contradicting itself. Last edited on 16 Jul 2011 07:23 pm by JSABD |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
You've made some good points! First, we're focusing on humans, not swords or animals. The bible does indicate that fatness is a blessing (not obesity, but fatness). For someone to be described as fat in bible times, it meant that food was plentiful, they weren't going to starve. They would flourish. That is a blessing and a reward. It could mean the difference between life and death. Fatness didn't mean being unhealthy or obese. That would not be a blessing. Fatness meant being healthy, it meant not being boney. It meant not being so deprived of food that health was in danger. Fatness meant wellness. Obesity does not mean wellness. Fatness, by today's definition, does not mean wellness. Just the opposite. If somebody in bible times saw an obese person, they wouldn't think that person had been blessed or rewarded. There were obese people in bible times. King Eglon was obese (Judges 3:17). He was described as exceeding fat. The International Standard Version says: and went to present the tribute to King Eglon of Moab. Now Eglon happened to be a very obese man. (The Hebrew word used to describe's Eglon's obesity was a different word to the one in Proverbs about the liberal soul being fat). He was so obese that Judges 3:21-22 says: 21 And Aod put forth his left hand, and took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly, 22 With such force that the haft went in after the blade into the wound, and was closed up with the abundance of fat. So that he did not draw out the dagger, but left it in his body as he had struck it in. And forthwith by the secret parts of nature the excrements of the belly came out. He died! His obesity got him killed! His fatness was not a blessing or a reward! He was not regarded as being healthy! But when fatness is used in a positive sense in the bible, it doesn't mean being morbidly fat or obese. It means "not skinny". There were many skinny people in those days because food was hard to get. By skinny, I don't mean the attractive slim shape we think of today, no I mean really skinny due to malnutrition. Fatness, which was the opposite of that, meant the opposite of malnourished. It meant the person was healthy, not overweight, except the exeedingly fat or obese ones like Eglon. Fatness then had a healthy meaning. Fatness today does not! Apart from the exceptions (like Eglon), most people from bible times would have been shocked to see today's obese adults and children! Last edited on 16 Jul 2011 08:49 pm by ItsOnlyMe |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
It was tough to get fat back then. They ate a diet high in plant based carbs and they probably did not have type 2 diabetes, MS heart disease or as many cancers. Today it is easy to get fat and that goes to the deadly sin of sloth. People eat out and live on convenience foods. They are lazy and the claim to be too busy. They ride when they should walk. We are humans beings with advanced brains but many of us don't use them. People choose the path of least resistance. Obesity is a symptom of a culture in steep decline. Pride is excessive belief in one's own abilities, that interferes with the individual's recognition of the grace of God. It has been called the sin from which all others arise. Pride is also known as Vanity. Many women are guilty of this but fat women are worse. They refer to themselves as BBWs That is prideful. IMO people should not always put themselves first. Envy is the desire for others' traits, status, abilities, or situation. I have seen it time and time again where the fat girls gang up on the skinny one. Skinny B _ I _ T _C _H is politically correct Gluttony is an inordinate desire to consume more than that which one requires. This speaks for itself and greedy gluttony is the American way. Lust is an inordinate craving for the pleasures of the body. Food is a pleasure of the flesh! Anger is manifested in the individual who spurns love and opts instead for fury. It is also known as Wrath. The fat acceptance girls are a very angry bunch! Greed is the desire for material wealth or gain, ignoring the realm of the spiritual. It is also called Avarice or Covetousness. This also goes to ego and selfishness. It makes altruism impossible when I ask fat people why they want to lose weight they rarely offer an altruistic reason. If you look at the success stories here you will see that the successful ones did it for more than themselves. Sloth is the avoidance of physical or spiritual work. YEP! |
|||||||
|
ItsOnlyMe Member
|
Most of what you said in your last post is pretty much correct. I'm not disagreeing with it. The reason for my previous post was to explain why the bible condemns gluttony yet at the same time it treats "fatness" as a blessing. Fatness didn't mean obesity. It meant wellness. As you rightly say, it was hard to become obese in those days. The people who did become obese, like Eglon, were rich. He was a king. He didn't have to worry where his food came from. He would just shout the order, and the food would arrive. But he was the exception. Today, it's a different story. There are lots of Eglonites. Food is just as available to most people today as it was to ancient kings. And you're absolutely right about envy, pride, etc. But don't go believing that those qualities only belong to some obese people. People of all sizes can be envious, proud, etc. A skinny person is probably not envious of an obese person's health, but he/she can be envious of wealth, family, etc. |
|||||||
|
Bamagirly Senior Member 
|
When my Dad's mother prepared a meal, she would have to go out to the woodshed to get wood to build a fire in the stove. In order to have meat, she had to catch and ring the neck of a chicken in the yard, pluck its feathers, and whatever else was necessary to prepare it. She had to roll out dough by hand. She had no refrigerator so she had to go to the box kept in the creek to retrieve butter and flour. The flour was kept there because they had to grind it themselves and it would go rancid if not kept cool. She was up before the chickens preparing breakfast. By the time breakfast was over, she had some time to wash out some clothes on the washboard before it was time to start preparing lunch. The difference in that time and today is all about convenience. |
|||||||
|
JSABD Distinguished Member
|
Bamagirly wrote: When my Dad's mother prepared a meal, she would have to go out to the woodshed to get wood to build a fire in the stove. In order to have meat, she had to catch and ring the neck of a chicken in the yard, pluck its feathers, and whatever else was necessary to prepare it. She had to roll out dough by hand. She had no refrigerator so she had to go to the box kept in the creek to retrieve butter and flour. The flour was kept there because they had to grind it themselves and it would go rancid if not kept cool. That's a big part of it but things were convenient since the mid 50's. Americans have grown weak and greedy. |
|||||||
|
Tankgirl Distinguished Member
|
The problem is for the average person, we don't even know how strong we need to be until the unthinkable happens. |
|||||||
|
Kay.Maxim New Member
|
I have to agree. Eating feels good or people wouldn't do it. |
|||||||
