Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

cdc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 271 posts

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#171

Post by Kluny »

scarface74 wrote: post #43

How many of these people are actually "overweight" as far as health and how many are "overweight" according to BMI? When I was in the best shape of my life from my mid 20s to my mid 30s, working out 12 hours a week (part time fitness instructor and a runner) with a body fat of 12% (measured with calipers) and a 29-30 inch waist, I was according to the BMI calculations 30 pounds overweight. Even now weighing 10 pounds…

There are a couple different calculations you can use. Here's a good calculator I found. http://www.calculator.net/ideal-weight-calculator.html

It tells me that my correct weight according to BMI is anywhere from 118 to 159. Now, I know if I weight 159lbs, I'd be fat. 118 doesn't seem especially healthy to me either - I'm at my lowest weight ever right now, 128lb, and my clothes are hanging off me like I'm a skeleton. All the other calculations are telling me 134-138 are right for me, which matches my normal weight. I think I'm down right now because I've been weight training and not taking in enough extra calories to gain weight, but if I lose any more weight than this I'm gonna start chugging olive oil or something. No way am I going down to 118.

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#172

Post by forapurpose »

natethinks wrote: post #89
izietto wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm italian and I visited united states a couple of months ago. In my opinion the biggest problem is that you don't have decent food at affordable prices. Healthy food has nonsensical high prices and if you want something at a human price you don't have much choice except fast food. What a shame.

I find healthy food to be very accessible in the United States if you cook for yourself. Most of our grocery stores have huge varieties of produce and lean proteins are relatively inexpensive. I think eating fast food is becoming more and more common as well as people buying pre-made packaged foods to heat up at home which are often just as unhealthy as fast foods.

> Most of our grocery stores have huge varieties of produce and lean proteins are relatively inexpensive

It depends on where you live. In the U.S. poor and working class neighborhoods often lack grocery stores. The only options are convenience stores where fresh, healthy food is very expensive, availability is limited, and quality is poor. I've read that the problem is on such a wide scale that it significantly impacts health. Cities work at attracting grocery chains to poor neighborhoods.

Try it yourself: Try shopping for groceries in a neighborhood with those demographics in your town. Or just layer a map of income with a map of grocery stores; I think I can predict where you will find the Whole Foods.

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#173

Post by dsfyu404ed »

pascalxus wrote: post #145
martingordon wrote: post #71

When you're poor, you prioritize calories over nutrition, and Americans are becoming increasingly "poor". From https://twitter.com/hugwins/status/963282840292032512?lang=e... : > When you are in a place where it's eat food that gives you no vitamins, no protein, no micronutrients, etcetera, or eat food that does not give you enough basic breakdown of glucose to get your body through another day, you do not have the l…

But McDonalds and fast foods are much more expensive than healthy foods like rice, beans, rolled oats and potatoes, onions (all can be had for less than 1$ per pound). They should allow people to purchase those foods, and maybe even publish a guide on how to stretch each dollar farther. as i said before, Beans especially are very well balanced, super high in fiber, protein and micronutrients.

Time is money.

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#174

Post by lotsofpulp »

scarface74 wrote: post #43

How many of these people are actually "overweight" as far as health and how many are "overweight" according to BMI? When I was in the best shape of my life from my mid 20s to my mid 30s, working out 12 hours a week (part time fitness instructor and a runner) with a body fat of 12% (measured with calipers) and a 29-30 inch waist, I was according to the BMI calculations 30 pounds overweight. Even now weighing 10 pounds…

I know it's anecdotal, but from NY to FL to TX to CA, I don't find myself commonly walking amongst people who are too fit to throw off BMI.

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#175

Post by bogomipz »

_dark_matter_ wrote: post #107
bogomipz wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"This is directly related to the way American cities are designed. It’s a car centric culture where big houses are far away from each other." New York City is perhaps one of the most walkable cities in the world. It's also a place where you absolutely do not need a car and the majority of residents don't have a car. Yet 34% or New Yorkers are overweight and 22% are obese.[1] The BMI statistic for the EU are none too…

I think you may have proven the point. That's less than half the general population.

I don't believe so.

Given that its a reference for one of the great "walking cities", I think it disputes the OPs assertion "the design of American cities" and "car culture" are substantial contributors.

In other words whether one walks or or drives to McDonalds probably matters very little.

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#176

Post by lazerpants »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #123
wjn0 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. Highly effective and widely prescribed.

What do the meta-studies have to say about statins and life expectancy? Back then, before we had statins we had clofibrate. It decreased cholesterol levels just fine but overall mortality went up. Also, why isn't dietary adjustment the first-line treatment for high cholesterol?

"Unfortunately, even the strict very low saturated fat, lowcholesterol American Heart Association Step 2 diet only minimally lowers serum cholesterol. Hunninghake et al found a mean 5% reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol in patients following this program and discouragingly found an equivalent 6% fall in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, so that ratios were unchanged. Low-fat diets as commonly prescribed rarely produce significant LDL declines. Studies performed on controlled metabolic units where intakes are rigidly enforced can demonstrate cholesterol reductions of 15% with diet alone; however, in the real world, people can rarely replicate these results."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1312230/

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#177

Post by lhorie »

3pt14159 wrote: post #8

This is directly related to the way American cities are designed. It’s a car centric culture where big houses are far away from each other. That means driving everywhere. That means long commutes. That means TV over communal activity. That means big grocery runs with shelf stable food. Then pile on hyper sweet drinks and nutritional misinformation campaigns, and of course Americans are going to be overweight. The wor…

> It’s a car centric culture

I don't really see the correlation. In Brazil, obesity is commonly associated with lower incomes, and if you were to correlate with the transportation system usage patterns there, one might misguidedly conclude that public transit usage is related to obesity. It seems more logical to make a correlation with lack of food variety (in both cases, cheaper food tend to be heavy on carbs and fats) and sedentary lifestyle

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#178

Post by LinuxBender »

stevekemp wrote: post #127
nicolashahn wrote: post #40

Anyone have statistics on what % of those overweight adults are actually healthy, or at least have an acceptable body fat %? Many athletes and weightlifters would be considered overweight by BMI due to muscle mass. And according to the "Adults" PDF, that's the metric they're using. It's probably not a large percentage but I get ticked off a bit to know that you can be in the "overweight" BMI category and have clearly…

"Healthy" is such a nebulous term it is hard to reply in a serious fashion. Many HAES-advocates, for example, would claim they're extremely healthy despite weighing 300lbs+. Any poor effects are just coincidental, and the weight is not a cause. The best way of discovering how healthy somebody is? Perform an autopsy. Beyond reporting on aches, pains, lumps, worn out joints, the simple fact is people can appear very he…

What is the deepest most complete diagnostics we can run on humans without them having to be dead? I would be interested in such a lab exercise even if it cost a lot.

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#179

Post by shados »

3pt14159 wrote: post #8

This is directly related to the way American cities are designed. It’s a car centric culture where big houses are far away from each other. That means driving everywhere. That means long commutes. That means TV over communal activity. That means big grocery runs with shelf stable food. Then pile on hyper sweet drinks and nutritional misinformation campaigns, and of course Americans are going to be overweight. The wor…

I moved from Canada to the US a few years back, and gained an enormous amount of weight and gained a bunch of health issues, all food related. Here's my take on it.

Food is much, MUCH cheaper. Not a big difference at the grocery store for whole produce and raw ingredients (though it is cheaper). But the processed foods, premade stuff, deserts, drinks, etc? A fraction of the cost.

Restaurants are also much, much cheaper. Where I used to work, going to the sit down restaurant next door downtown brought me down 20-25 bucks. A similar restaurant downtown where I now live has equivalent food for 8-10 bucks. I make 4 times my Canadian salary and pay a lot less taxes, so effectively, it's virtually not worth it for me to cook, if my only constraint was money.

Sugar in EVERYTHING. Food that used to be a little bit sweet (not necessarily health, but not the end of the world) is drenched in sugar. I have to be careful when I get an orange juice in case its sugar added. A milkshare at the local icecream shop has way more sugar. Sugar sugar sugar EVERYWHERE.

Ordering food is also way easier, with formerly Foodler, GrubHub, Doordash, etc. I have no idea if those services became common up north after I left, but that was a big change, being able to order from 100 different restaurants at any point in time, sometimes in the middle of the night, with a few mouse clicks.

The portions: Cheesecake Factory exists up north, but it's not considered normal. Here, while the portion sizes are certainly above average, they aren't exactly unique either. You have Outback and the like all service you enough food to last you 3 days.

I also find it a lot more common to have fatty or sugary snacks at the office, and soft drinks, etc.

I'll shamefully admit I have zero self control when it comes to food. I have a sweet tooth like no other. But the price and availability constraints in my hometown stopped me from going overboard. For a while I was pretty much flush at my "recommended" weight. After I moved here? Things got really bad for me.

Re: Obesity and Overweight Prevalence for the U.S

#180

Post by whoisjuan »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #133
whoisjuan wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public policy, lack of education, overall culture and scale and dominance of food corporations. I'm not surprised with this data. The best example to understand this is to go to your nearest US convenience store. Price of an Arizona Iced Tea 23oz can = $0.99 Price of the average bottle of water 16 oz = $1.50 Any poorly educated individual wouldn't understand the health implications of gulping 70g of liquid sugar when…

Do people really not understand that drinking 23oz of empty calories day after day will make you fat? People aren't really that ignorant, they make choices, often driven by short term desire. The corporations get this, but I feel like you are using poor as a synonym for stupid. We gotta stop treating poor people like they are dumb helpless animals, it gives them no agency.

Dude. It's pretty easy to say that. You're educated and you definitely understand well the implications of sugar consumption. It's easy to imply this just because of your presence here.

Someone uneducated will not understand this well. It's not about being stupid or being poor either. You don't hear people blaming their problems on sugar...

I consume sugar products because they are delicious (dopamine release). However, I have the knowledge and education to make a conscious decision about moderation. I know how to read a food label. I know how to calculate the amount of sugar in a product. I know these things because I got access to education that allowed me to understand this.

No fucking Iced Tea Can is telling you that. You know what is telling you? Price: 99 cents, Flavor: Great... There's your problem. It's not about being stupid. It's about not having enough data to understand the implications of those decisions.

Uneducated people don't know about caloric guidelines or recommended processed sugar intake. The only mental filter for consumption of any edible product is its availability and personal flavor appeal.

Post reply on HN