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

“Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

bigthink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 397 posts

Re: “Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

#351

Post by DiscourseFan »

inglor_cz wrote: post #15
DiscourseFan wrote: post #4

I think the article is arguing that there is such a thing as being healthy with a high BMI? It's just that those people generally don't have an excessively high body fat %. But if we are going by BMI, there are plenty of people who have "healthy obesity", on account of muscle mass. I've been working out for many years and I think I have a healthy body fat percentage but since I'm not very thin its hard to tell withou…

"there are plenty of people who have "healthy obesity", on account of muscle mass." The sheer amount of muscle you would need to exceed BMI 30 (obesity threshold) is pretty rare to see "in the wild" and you have to ask how many such people abused steroids etc. to grow so muscular. Natural Homo sapiens build is fairly lean, we are no Neanderthals. A very fit guy from a normal city gym may have BMI in the overweight te…

I think you're imagining that they have an insane amount of muscle with low body fat, but I'm saying somebody who could be at the higher end of healthy body fat but with plenty of muscle might actually be overweight or even obese by BMI, even if they are perfectly healthy.

Re: “Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

#352

Post by xtracto »

TrackerFF wrote: post #282

Dunno about you guys, but back when I was verging on being outright obese, I felt like shit. Sweating from doing pretty much any physical activity, sleep apnea, summers were horrible due to the heat and extra sweating, clothes never fit and just looked bad, non-existent interest from the other sex, and people in general being more unfriendly (trust me on this one, the difference is like night and day) - and just a ge…

I blame this to political correctness. Someone who is fat is only that. She/he is overweight, unhealthy and got a problem. They should get help and get treated. That's it. If someone tells them that, they should take it as an oxymoron. It's like telling someone was how has a bad cough that they should cover their mouth while coughing as nd should check their lungs. It's just that.

But for some reason, acknowledging that someone is fat/unhealthy became an offense. People "know" that they are unhealthy but decide to live that way and feel offended. I blame the current health system. Because even if sick people wanted to get treatment, the may not be able to afford it.

Re: “Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

#353

Post by jodrellblank »

gruez wrote: post #290
jodrellblank wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment unpacks into a whole world of ideas around obesity which get pushed under the rug by just saying it's "your choice" and you need "discipline" and "diets" to fix it. Most thin people don't stay thin by discipline - or not much discipline. Most thin people don't stay thin by team sports and weightlifting. Most thin people aren't going on diets, ever. Most thin people aren't "choosing" to be thin, they have…

>1950 had 10% of Americans being obese. Now 35% are. Has there been a decrease in weightlifting since then? A paucity of dieting? No, surely both of those are on record highs with gym memberships and Weightwatchers being so profitable. What about a collapse of discipline - through one of the most productive times in human history, today with lowest unemployment in 20 years? >[...] >Like: car dependent suburbia It see…

In 1950 40% of people were living in the suburbs. Now 55% are[0]. And that's against a population growth from ~148M then to ~330M now, so 59M suburban people then compared to 180M now and corresponding pressure that would make on size of car parks, moving shops out of centers to places they can have larger car parks, combined with more households with car ownership since 1950 and more cars per household. More population needing more housing, houses trending larger suggests they are more likely suburban or rural than city center, meaning larger overall suburbs and therefore further to travel to get anywhere.

Pew Research[2] says suburbs have grown 6.4 million people by migration from cities and rural populations between 2000 and 2018. Ten fastest growing communities in America in 2021 are suburbs[5].

Car companies made and sold about 58 million cars in the USA in the 1950s decade[3].

Eisenhower's interstate highway act was 1956, and miles of highway has increased by hundreds of thousands since 1990[4].

[0] https://www.insider.com/vintage-photos-levittown-suburbs-50s... and https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2018/05/22/demogra...

[1] https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter8/urban-trans...

[2] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/02/5-facts-abo...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_automobile_industry_i...

[4] https://www.statista.com/statistics/183397/united-states-hig...

[5] https://legallysociable.com/2021/09/19/the-ten-fastest-growi...

Re: “Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

#354

Post by beej71 »

29083011397778 wrote: post #329
leidenfrost wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many fat shamers use t Health as an excuse to allow themselves to treat fat people like shit. Unfortunately getting into that argument is a minefield. Just let them be adults and manager their life as they please. At one point they might becone fed up with life as a fat person and they'll make the effort. And it they don't, well, there are people who smoke from teenage years all the way to the grave But, either eay,…

> But, either eay, people dont humiliate smokers the way they do with fat people No, we just tax the shit out of tobacco, exclude them from certain insurance plans, blame and shame them about smoking indoors or inside vehicles, and tell smokers to go huddle outside and off to the side, away from doors, windows, and air intakes, while they do the thing we don't like. Or were you thinking of air travel, where the diffe…

The analogy breaks down. I don't shame anyone for smoking. But if you want me to breathe your smoke, that's another story.

Re: “Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

#355

Post by jhanschoo »

scoofy wrote: post #331
sorenjan wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few years ago I read a paper where they checked the correlation between CT measured body fat percentage and a lot of easily measured and calculated figures, in the same style of BMI (w/h²). I haven't been able to find it again, but if I remember correctly BMI was actually pretty good, although worse for women than for men, and the best measurement included waist circumference.

Why do we assume that fat is bad for you, but muscle is always good for you. The blood necessary to maintain excessive muscle is still excessive to normal humans, and may put strain on the heart. Only our skin grows with our muscles, other organs do not grow in tandem. I've always thought that while BMI is crude, it still is reasonable for measuring metabolic syndrome, considering that many of the things associated w…

Do you have anecdotes or other evidence of someone experiencing heart issues because they were too muscular?

It seems to me that in the usual case where a person develops muscle mass by working out, this isn't a problem because whatever "blood necessary to maintain excessive muscle" is negligible in the face of the body adapting to improve the cardiovascular system in order to serve muscular oxygen needs during workout. Of course, heart problems due to an unhealthy person ramping up exercise too quickly is a concern, but this is separate from your concern.

One also observes that athletes in general have lower heart rates than the average person; whatever additional burden their muscles impose, their cardiovascular system is way more adapted to handle that due to exercise.

Re: “Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

#356

Post by jxidjhdhdhdhfhf »

csa wrote: post #279
birksherty wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weight being mostly of muscle is different than mostly of fat. When we say obese, it's the later one.

> When we say obese, it's the later one. Really? Would you mind telling that to my former doctor who wrote down in my chart that I was “obese” just based on my height, weight, and a quick visual scan? She was starting into “substantial lifestyle change” talks before I showed her my data. She didn’t reverse course until I showed her my dexa scan and told her my diet and exercise regimen. My point is that there are ple…

The opposite is often the case too though. There are plenty of fat, beer-bellied dudes who think they aren't obese because they have some muscle.

Re: “Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

#357

Post by Drblessing »

copperx wrote: post #40
raspyberr wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no hack. Exercise is non-negotiable. Our lifestyles are far too sedantry for our bodies' evolution. If you are not willing to add a small amount of exercise into your life, you are admitting that you are happy to at least have health issues later in life or at most willing to live a shorter life.

Exercise is essential for health, but not the best bet to lose weight, isn't it?

Exercise is 100% the best bet to lose weight.

For a simple empirical study, ask every person you meet/know that is fit, and nearly everyone will say they exercise.

Specifically, cardio. If you're goal is to lose weight, you shouldn't touch weights until your BMI < 22. Just run or swim a few times a week.

Re: “Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

#358

Post by Drblessing »

amrocha wrote: post #214
knicholes wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's right. Diet is the key to "losing weight."

"Exercise" is a bad way to lose weight because what is traditionally considered as exercise is 30 minutes to 1 hour of high intensity activities. If you live a sedentary life, exercise isn't going to help. Passive exercise, that you do throughout the day, though, is a great way to expend calories. Walk more, bike for transport, use a standing desk, etc. That's the difference between 1500 calories and 2200.

> Exercise is a bad way to lose weight

Exercise is not a bad way to lose weight.

Re: “Healthy obesity” doesn’t exist. It is unequivocally bad for you

#360

Post by nullc »

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #232
dogma1138 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure that is true, it seems like the preference was always for small highly calorically dense meals. The 3-4 meals + the constant availability of food is definitely new.

Yeah, humans are evolved to go long periods without food and then to have massive feasts and gorge on food when a prey is caught, say. The human brain's ability to use ketones(byproducts of fat metabolism) for energy is actually unique to humans, suggesting a selective pressure towards surviving starvation in our evolutionary past.

> suggesting a selective pressure towards surviving starvation in our evolutionary past

our brains use a very large share of our total energy; so that adaptation may just be a requirement of additional brain energy use and not a adaptation particularly for starvation levels higher than other animals.

Post reply on HN