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

Adult Obesity Facts

cdc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 236 posts

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#141

Post by waiseristy »

minikites wrote: post #87
waiseristy wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't get addicted to 2 lbs of turnips and some bacon fat. You get addicted to three 1500 calorie McDonalds meals per day

Doesn't that mean the cause is related to car culture (drive-thru) and processed foods, not just overeating?

I think you are reading too far into my McDonalds example. There are plenty of McDonalds without a drive through, who still overserve their customers. There are also plenty of people who are overweight just because they love to cook and eat tasty food (soul food!).

Why are chefs nearly always overweight? They work incredibly hard and tax their bodies for 10 hours a day. They aren't sitting in drive throughs. Maybe it has to do with the fact that they are around food all day and consume large quantities of it

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#142

Post by ultrarunner »

kiba wrote: post #62
rjbwork wrote: post #2

We've designed our cities, suburbs, food industry, and society such that the average person is at least overweight, nearing obese. If the average person suffers from what should be an anomaly, perhaps it is less a personal failing than a societal failing and we should try to fix the societal problems generating the poor outcome.

Yes, exercise is good for you, and should be taken, but diet seems to be the most important factor. Research had came out indicating that exercise doesn't really do much good in losing weight. Might help in maintaining weight.

I realize that this discussion is focused on obesity, but the above response comes out every time weight loss is discussed. It may well be accurate in many cases, but I don't think it encompasses the full picture of health. For example, smoking has shown to aid weight loss, but the outcome of taking up smoking is a skinnier person with a new set of comorbidities.

If the desired outcome is an improved quality of life, exercise has a plethora of mental-health benefits [0], cardiovascular and energy improvements[1], and has negative correlations with some of the risk-factors of obesity, like type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, and some cancers [1][2].

I would hate for someone to read the common response and conclude that since obesity is causing their problems and weight loss seems more affected by diet changes, that exercise doesn't matter and can be safely skipped. To have a different life a lifestyle change is needed.

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470658/ [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6172294/ [2] https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/fitness/in-dept...

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#143

Post by coffeefirst »

echelon wrote: post #31
rjbwork wrote: post #2

We've designed our cities, suburbs, food industry, and society such that the average person is at least overweight, nearing obese. If the average person suffers from what should be an anomaly, perhaps it is less a personal failing than a societal failing and we should try to fix the societal problems generating the poor outcome.

People love to rail on suburbs, but I'd be willing to bet that sugar is the real problem. Sugar is in everything. Snacks, restaurant food, drinks, sauces. It puts the metabolism into a bad state and desensitizes the body to its deleterious effects. Before you know it you're overweight, mentally foggy, and pre-diabetic. Not a good place to start working out or going for outdoor activities. People exercise and walk mor…

It's probably both.

It's true that countries where they don't put sugar in everything—or don't use HFCS at all—don't have this problem.

It's also true that between 1950 and 2000 portion sizes went up. For everything. If you travel in France and Italy, known for butter and pasta heavy cooking, respectively, their servings are half the size of the typical American restaurant.

At the same time, if you go from a walking city in the US to a suburb where it's all cars all the time, the visible difference if you just look around at people is jarring. Sure, cities might eat differently, but not that differently.

I'm not anti-car, but in some places the 100% sedentary lifestyle is a big part of the problem.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#144

Post by gnarcoregrizz »

cf100clunk wrote: post #88

Purely from my own viewpoint, the general size of U.S. restaurant portions in comparison with those in any other country I've visited is noticeably larger. Dishes are more likely to contain processed food products, less likely to contain fresh vegetables, and more likely to contain higher levels of sugars and salt. Again, just my own take. I found when working in Texas and the deep south that booking a room with a ki…

Well, Texas is home to some of most overweight cities in the US. However, I agree on all points. Portions are way too big at the majority of places around the US. I get portion anxiety when portions are too large, I feel like I have to eat it all and end up over eating and feeling ill. Places that don't supersize their portions are generally more expensive. Better off making food at home.

People still complain about portions being too small at places with massive portions, restaurant owners feel pressure to keep them large.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#145

Post by patorjk »

MattGaiser wrote: post #114
patorjk wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to believe in that, and I felt my problem was I was eating too much and not moving around enough, however, I recently started a "lazy keto" diet and am currently down 30 pounds (back to a normal BMI - and I didn't even change how much I exercise). I don't watch my calories at all, nor do I starve myself. I just watch my carbs. It's been really eye opening. There's a lot of talk online about how processed foods…

> I don't watch my calories at all, nor do I starve myself. The key question though is not whether you are paying attention, but whether they are down or not. It is possible that you are getting full on fewer calories.

It's possible, but if I am, it means protein and fat are better at keeping me satiated. The standard American diet is high in carbs, and it could be that processed carbs aren't very good at keeping someone full.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#146

Post by throw8383833jj »

hncurious wrote: post #82
rjbwork wrote: post #2

We've designed our cities, suburbs, food industry, and society such that the average person is at least overweight, nearing obese. If the average person suffers from what should be an anomaly, perhaps it is less a personal failing than a societal failing and we should try to fix the societal problems generating the poor outcome.

Unpopular opinion: It's both a personal and societal failing, but personal choice is dominant. You can choose to eat rice and beans and drink water. You don't have to eat hamburgers and fries and drink sugar.

You are right that it's about personal choice. But, so is Drugs. but they are highly adictive. Once you are addicted, it's much harder to quit.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#147

Post by gtt »

hncurious wrote: post #82
rjbwork wrote: post #2

We've designed our cities, suburbs, food industry, and society such that the average person is at least overweight, nearing obese. If the average person suffers from what should be an anomaly, perhaps it is less a personal failing than a societal failing and we should try to fix the societal problems generating the poor outcome.

Unpopular opinion: It's both a personal and societal failing, but personal choice is dominant. You can choose to eat rice and beans and drink water. You don't have to eat hamburgers and fries and drink sugar.

No, I don't think this hypothesises agrees with observable evidence https://slimemoldtimemold.com/2021/07/07/a-chemical-hunger-p...

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#148

Post by arlattimore »

People are less active these days compared to 10, 20, 30 years ago. Accessibility to food, not necessarily good food has increased and the combination of the two leads the average person down a pretty bad path.

This could be helped if the average person took more responsibility for their own health and wellbeing, easier said than done as there are many pressures on people now that weren't present 10, 20, 30 years ago.

While exercise is an important aspect of weight management, the single biggest factor is nutrition. So while I'd love to see more people getting off the couch, for no other reason than they'll feel better for it - addressing the food component is critical.

To make big strides in addressing this epidemic around the world, governments would need to start making sugar and fast food unattractive by imposing significant taxes. In parallel, they'd need to make high quality, nutrient dense foods cheaper so it is the obvious choice 6 out of 7 days.

At face value, that seems might seem daunting or unachievable but many governments have incrementally increased taxes on cigarettes as an example. As they get progressively more expensive, it gets harder for the average person to justify spending that money and coupled with education programs in schools and so forth it changes peoples behaviour over time.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#149

Post by lkey »

yupper32 wrote: post #23

Every time I comment on one of these threads, I mention how most people don't know about the most fundamental component of weight control: Calories-in calories-out. And then I get a mass of people complaining that "it's not that simple! x y and z also impact weight!" I think so much has to do with these two points: 1. Most don't know about CICO. 2. Many who do throw it away as not useful. We should be teaching this i…

Knowing calories matter doesn't solve a thing. You pointing it out like it's a revelation indicates you don't understand the difficulty of what you expect.

Let's say you are now 120 lbs over weight. You know CICO. How long will it take you to get skinny, assuming you ate nothing at all until you hit your goal weight? A pound of fat is 454g. A gram of fat contains 9 kcal. Being 120 lbs over weight means you have to burn 9x454x120. Let's say your basal metabolic rate is 2000 kcal/day 9x454x120/2000 => 245 days of not eating a single thing. Is this a reasonable thing to expect society to adopt en masse? Do you think you could starve for that long? Could you instead only eat 700 calories a day for 3-4 years?

It's a privilege of both time and wealth in the US to be able to tightly control your diet and eat healthy, most American's can't afford the luxury. A more reasonable position is to just accept that some people are going to remain fat and focus on positive health outcomes for those people. 'Educating' them about simple arithmetic that doesn't change the fact that losing 100+lbs of weight is a multi-year commitment you cannot break if you wish a modicum of success.

I say this as a person who did lose 80lbs when I reached adulthood and successfully kept it off.

Edit re your edit: "Downvotes mean I'm onto something" is not a wise stance to take almost ever. I didn't downvote. but I'd wager the reason folks are downvoting you isn't because they hate trivially obvious facts, it's more to do with your analysis being shallow compared to the scale and complexity of the actual problem.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#150

Post by rm445 »

wccrawford wrote: post #21
yehudalouis wrote: post #3

Nitpicking is pointless here, but the phrasing was immediately confusing to me. "US Adults are 42.4% obese" leads me to believe that all US adults are 42.4% of the way to becoming obese, where as in actuality it appears that 42.4% of US adults are obese.

I'm medically "obese", but nobody looking at me would say that. Whenever I tell people that I'm dieting, they're surprised and often tell me that I look good. So with the medical definition of obese not matching what peoples' eyes tell them, I'm not surprised that 42% are "obese".

Do you really think anyone reading this is going to think you're anything other than an obese person with polite friends and a mild case of self-delusion?

Of course, there are many nuances. Your musculature (though surely if you were a bodybuilder you'd have said so). Your sex, both for where fat sits on your body and for social expectations. The clothes you wear. Normal human variation - if your femurs just happen to be -2 standard deviations in length, your BMI will always be higher than it would be otherwise.

Someone with a BMI just into the thirties can still have a good level of walking-around fitness, look good in a shirt, etc. They wouldn't stand out in today's society. But the medical risks are still increased in a statistical sense. It being normalised may make people feel better but doesn't solve the medical issue.

Post reply on HN