The average American woman now weighs 166 pounds — as much as a 1960s man

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

A moderate factor. But it doesn't explain why in the U.S. you come across many morbidly obese people, and yet among people of the same ethnicity and genetic make-up elsewhere in the world morbid obesity is almost unheard of. Way more 300+ lb people in Minnesota than in Sweden.

Of course not. Nor did I suggest it did.
It is a factor though when you start to isolate groups of people who are making similar lifestyle changes and seeing dramatically different results.

[polak]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

That's not true. Maybe you're projecting.

I don't know. All our generation and every generation since has been spoon fed since were old enough to listen was how screwed every aspect of life will be when "we grow up".

The environment? F***ed.
The economy? F***ed.
Overpopulation? F***ed.
World politics? F***ed.

On top of that, we don't/didn't have our parents generation and their parents generations achieving great goals that left us in awe. We're not going to the moon, instead we scrapped the shuttle program. We're not expanding positively anymore. Everything society seems to do has a negative spin.

The only advancements we see, technological ones, are immediately lambasted as negative. "Your generation spends all its time in front of the tv/video games/internet/phone" or "social media melts your brain". Instead of celebrating the fact that we can access all the worlds information at a click of the button, or connect with people that we normally would lose contact with, our parents and their parents make it sound like it's a bad thing.

We live in the best time that humans have ever experienced on this planet yet all we hear is negative, negative and negative.

Now that rant was way off topic but that's why I'm pessimistic. That's why it's hard to look to the future with any sort of excitement.

I know, woe is me.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by polak

I don't know. All our generation and every generation since has been spoon fed since were old enough to listen was how screwed every aspect of life will be when "we grow up".

The environment? F***ed.
The economy? F***ed.
Overpopulation? F***ed.
World politics? F***ed.

In my generation it was nuclear war, which a lot of people thought was pretty likely, and would kill off everyone on the planet. We watched TV shows about it when I was elementary school. Check out the Day After on youtube sometime. But unless you're a miserable person by disposition, you get over it and get on with your life.

Last century it was influenzas that killed millions on millions, or wars where young men were all conscripted into hellish battlefields. Before that it tyrant kings governing by mad whim, religious persecution and pogroms, the horrors of the industrial revolution and working in a mine or factory until you coughed up your lungs at 41, the relentless grinding poverty of being a smallhold farmer (which accounted for about 90 per cent of the people on the planet). Illiteracy, superstition, random violence (rates of violence today are a small fraction of what they were 300 years ago). And yet people carried on. Had lives. Found happiness.

Any midde-class person in 2015 North America who feels sorry about their lot in life is an idiot lacking any sense of perspective. 99 per cent of the people who have walked the planet would trade places with you in an instant. By almost any standard, this is the best time to be alive. Of course, people who want to feel sorry for themselves won't believe that. But then they would be miserable in any time or place in history.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

In my generation it was nuclear war, which a lot of people thought was pretty likely, and would kill off everyone on the planet. We watched TV shows about it when I was elementary school. Check out the Day After on youtube sometime. But unless you're a miserable person by disposition, you get over it and get on with your life.

Last century it was influenzas that killed millions on millions, or wars where young men were all conscripted into hellish battlefields. Before that it tyrant kings governing by mad whim, religious persecution and pogroms, the horrors of the industrial revolution and working in a mine or factory until you coughed up your lungs at 41, the relentless grinding poverty of being a smallhold farmer (which accounted for about 90 per cent of the people on the planet). Illiteracy, superstition, random violence (rates of violence today are a small fraction of what they were 300 years ago). And yet people carried on. Had lives. Found happiness.

Any midde-class person in 2015 North America who feels sorry about their lot in life is an idiot lacking any sense of perspective. 99 per cent of the people who have walked the planet would trade places with you in an instant. By almost any standard, this is the best time to be alive. Of course, people who want to feel sorry for themselves won't believe that. But then they would be miserable in any time or place in history.

I think that some people are only happy when they are unhappy.


I think Polak might fall in that camp.

[polak]

Notice how everything you listed was happening at that time?

I'm saying the future looks bleak cause all we hear is how bleak it will be. Whens the last time you heard someone say something good about how the future will be?

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Any midde-class person in 2015 North America who feels sorry about their lot in life is an idiot lacking any sense of perspective. 99 per cent of the people who have walked the planet would trade places with you in an instant. By almost any standard, this is the best time to be alive. Of course, people who want to feel sorry for themselves won't believe that. But then they would be miserable in any time or place in history.

And I agree with you. We are living in the best time in the history of humanity. I said it in my post. I just think it's funny that people are shocked that we're pessimistic about the future when every single person is telling us to be.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Oversimplification. But you are welcome to take that view.

It's the most affective view if personal health is the goal. It's easy to get caught up in the minutae of details, as the human body is an uncomprehendably complex system. People who get caught up in the details are the people looking for excuses to quit.

I've yet to see "Eat healthy and work out like you mean it" fail.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Any midde-class person in 2015 North America who feels sorry about their lot in life is an idiot lacking any sense of perspective. 99 per cent of the people who have walked the planet would trade places with you in an instant. By almost any standard, this is the best time to be alive. Of course, people who want to feel sorry for themselves won't believe that. But then they would be miserable in any time or place in history.

People are pretty quick to overlook the fact that things are better than they have ever been. Even a King from the middle ages would be brought to their knees in awe over the services available to the average Canadian.

Don't let the fear mongers of this world rule your mind, they are only interested in your money and in controlling you.

[polak]

Because people are apparently skipping this part of my post:

Originally Posted by polak

We live in the best time that humans have ever experienced on this planet yet all we hear is negative, negative and negative.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Matata

It's the most affective view if personal health is the goal. It's easy to get caught up in the minutae of details, as the human body is an uncomprehendably complex system. People who get caught up in the details are the people looking for excuses to quit.

I've yet to see "Eat healthy and work out like you mean it" fail.

All I'm saying is that is an easy attitude to have if that approach gets you really good results. For those that struggle to get those results, the motivation is tougher.
I would strive to have more empathy for each individual case instead of judging them using a blunt perspective.
The "you are fat so you must be lazy" doesn't help people wrestling with their weight.
Because - the human body is indeed complex - and it includes emotions. Understanding that and what buttons to push with different people is important to facilitating healthy changes.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by polak

Because people are apparently skipping this part of my post:

You're right, I did miss it. Sorry.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by polak

The problem is, those extra years are added on to the worst part of life.

Obviously moderation is key, you don't want to die when you're 40, but man, you get one life. Enjoy it.

Yeah, but it's not like unhealthy people just have great lives until they're 70 and then drop dead. They're far more likely to have health issues all through middle age before dying early. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not spend that time of my life with things like diabetes, mobility problems, or cardiovascular disease regardless of whether I die at 65 or 95.

[polak]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Yeah, but it's not like unhealthy people just have great lives until they're 70 and then drop dead. They're far more likely to have health issues all through middle age before dying early. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not spend that time of my life with things like diabetes, mobility problems, or cardiovascular disease regardless of whether I die at 65 or 95.

Yeah I agree. Moderation is key.

I just can't imagine living a straight edge, super clean, all health oriented life. But to each their own.

[Devils'Advocate]

Mehn. I lost weight not because it added years to my life but because it added life to my years.

[Wastedyouth]

As someone who was 70 kgs from about the age of 15 till I was 28 (because of sport) and now am hovering at 102 kgs. I can tell you that I have never been happier, healthier, more mentally and physically stable or gotten more enjoyment out of life.

I think the problem with this discussion is people throwing around an generalized term "overweight". What does that even mean? How are you defining over weight?

The need to feel "skinny" is as much of a mental disease as the need to overeat. When I was competing, as I mentioned, I was 70 kgs. I am 5'10". By BMI I was in the mid range of healthy. I had a caliper fat% test done by a sports research company at a national competition and they told me my body fat was at 4.5%. I was told I needed to gain weight as I was extremely unhealthy (I didnt/couldnt put on weight or i would never make my weight category). In my mind, when I looked in the mirror, I felt like I was still too fat. Looking back on my old pictures and recalling the mindset I had, I cringe at the thoughts.

I am now 102 kgs. If you looked at me, I would look like an average looking person. Most people assume im about 85-90 kgs. But if you were to read my weight and height without seeing me, you would assume im an overweight person. By the BMI index, I am obese.

Which is why the term "overweight" is a joke. As is the BMI. The need to be skinny is such a first world problem.

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

I am now 102 kgs. If you looked at me, I would look like an average looking person. Most people assume im about 85-90 kgs. But if you were to read my weight and height without seeing me, you would assume im an overweight person. By the BMI index, I am obese.

Which is why the term "overweight" is a joke. As is the BMI. The need to be skinny is such a first world problem.

The BMI basically screws up the whole discussion: it's a useless tool when applied to individuals.

Consider Michael Backlund for example. Listed at 6 feet and roughly 200 lbs, he's got a BMI of 27, which lands him squarely in the "overweight" camp.

In order to barely squeak into the "normal" category, he'd have to lose about 15 pounds. Does anyone really believe Backlund would be healthier if he lost 15 pounds?

But even worse, Backlund could actually lose as much as 60 pounds and still be in the "normal" category. Does anyone really believe Backlund would be healthier if he lost 60 pounds?

Personally, I think he'd have to either develop anorexia or cancer to pull that off - neither of which is very healthy based on everything I've read.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Mehn. I lost weight not because it added years to my life but because it added life to my years.

*Dr Phil crowd cheers enthusiastically*

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

The BMI basically screws up the whole discussion: it's a useless tool when applied to individuals.

Consider Michael Backlund for example. Listed at 6 feet and roughly 200 lbs, he's got a BMI of 27, which lands him squarely in the "overweight" camp.

In order to barely squeak into the "normal" category, he'd have to lose about 15 pounds. Does anyone really believe Backlund would be healthier if he lost 15 pounds?

But even worse, Backlund could actually lose as much as 60 pounds and still be in the "normal" category. Does anyone really believe Backlund would be healthier if he lost 60 pounds?

Personally, I think he'd have to either develop anorexia or cancer to pull that off - neither of which is very healthy based on everything I've read.

Reminds me of doing fitness testing when in Uni, a mate of mine that played high level rugby got a BMI of morbidly obese.

The Fat ####!

[V]

I think it's well established that BMI is a terrible metric for actual athletes.

What I want to know is how relevant it is for regular people. I just punched in my weight and height of 6'3" and 200 lbs and it tells me I'm overweight. There's not a lot of muscle weighing me down either, but still, there's no way anyone would say I'm overweight.

[Traditional_Ale]

Good health is the slowest possible way to die.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by chemgear

It's the same reason you see BMI complaints all the time. Sure, there are rare specific cases that the measurement may not fit or evaluate quite well. But people use that to try to dismiss the fact that the number keeps growing and growing and growing.

It's like standing inside your home complaining that the wallpaper on the one wall doesn't match that well with the lamp - when your entire house is in fact full engulfed in flames and is starting to slide off the side of a cliff. You might be right but you're missing the big picture.

Originally Posted by V

I think it's well established that BMI is a terrible metric for actual athletes.

Yup, agree with you there.

The problem isn't that BMI isn't universally applicable for every single individual case. It's that the BMI number keeps growing and growing as people get fatter and fatter and fatter.