Comments on: The latest statistics on obesity

By: Carolyn Blakeney

Carolyn Blakeney — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 22:39:06 +0000

Perhaps we should look at a time span greater than 10 years to determine if activity levels have been reduced. I’m convinced that over the past generation or two (or more), they HAVE been significantly reduced, but that is not the only factor in the obesity epidemic.

The commercial food production industry that enjoys considerable subsidies to float it along caters to an innate consumer desire to stock up during times of plenty. Whether or not we actually benefit from that type of plenty. So, although almost none of us have to ‘plow the back forty’ on a daily basis, so to speak, in modern times, we are encouraged to eat as though we still expended that type of energy. And when we overload and cripple our personal machineries with excess calories, fat, and additives not present in a more natural food supply, nature steps in and culls the litter.

Should we be surprised?

By: cathy richards

cathy richards — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:11:41 +0000

Gina — good point about people needing to know how to read labels, but the unfortunate thing is that things with labels are pretty processed. Packaged healthy stuff (frozen veggies) can definitely add to people’s health, but mostly we need to get away from packages. Know how to read labels, yes, but decreased the number of things in your kitchen with labels.

By: Gina

Gina — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:30:54 +0000

I work for a company that helps shoppers make product decisions at the grocery store and we very often hear how confusing food labels are. Programs like NuVal and Guiding Stars were developed to help people make smart choices based on nutritional factors but even those are confusing shoppers.

We need to better educate consumers on food. Food topics like portion sizes, calories, good fats, long-term effects of HFCS, GMOs, hormones, additives and chemicals in our foods, along with demonstrating how easy it can be to make smarter choices. Even with limited access to fresh, healthy foods, there’s a range of options but it’s hard for shoppers to make the best choice.

When we can convince people that it’s worth the time, money and energy to eat better (and move more), we have a fighting chance of beating obesity and disease.

By: Cathy Richards

Cathy Richards — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:53:08 +0000

Measurements of activity do not accurately measure movement. This study just shows that self-reported activity has not changed.

Dr. Mark Tremblay has done some excellent studies with adults and children wearing accelerometers. Incidental movements that few people would think to report can make a world of difference — chopping vegetables instead of using pre-prepared, getting up to change the channel instead of using a remote, parking 20 spots further away than usual, having a house with stairs instead of a bungalow…Small bits add up which is really important for non-athletic people.

By: Stuff you may have missed… at 10,000 Monkeys and a Camera

Stuff you may have missed… at 10,000 Monkeys and a Camera — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:27:10 +0000

[...] • Times Free Press: Climate change and fat Tennesseans (would you like 1,000 calories with that?) [...]

By: Plk2k

Plk2k — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:17:50 +0000

It is not that simple to say obesity rates are increasing due to “eating more calories”. These big corporations and companies who genetically modify their foods and continually thrive on advertisement for profit lose site of the real costs behind their products. Over processed foods is what is causing obesity and diabetes rates to sky rocket. In larger cities and in more impoverished states, obesity rates are higher. Why is that? It is certainly not due to just “eating more calories” than other cities and states. This is partially due to the lack of access to freshly produced foods (veggies and fruits mainly), this term is called a “food desert”. Here, these neighborhoods carry the profile of lower waged workers, supporting their families on wages such as $6 an hour. It is impossible to sustain a healthy diet with this type of wage, especially if it’s a single parent home. Healthy choices are at a minimum to these families and neighborhoods because surrounding areas within a 2 mile radius are substantially over populated with convenience stores and fast food restaurants. In some cases, stores such as Food Lion, Giant, Kroger, and Safeway are as close as 5 miles out which makes it hard to access if transportation is not easily available (i.e car, bus). There is more to obesity than just “eating more calories”! There are economical and political structures that enforce their power on poorer communities that leave them no CHOICE but a poor diet.

By: Cook_Food

Cook_Food — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 02:22:35 +0000

The Kerry Trueman quote above starts to get at the problem, but does not go nearly far enough. The public health issue is not at all that people are fat (reality check: many many fat folks are perfectly healthy, eat well, and exercise; some medical studies have shown that being too thin carries as much or more of a risk of death than being what our culture considers too fat). The problem, to oversimplify things hugely, is processed foods and environmental toxins.

But obesity is a target because it plays into our culture’s obsession with thinness and hatred for fat.

I’d like to see the pro-food movement become more skeptical of the medical industry’s claims about obesity. Weight loss is a multibillion-dollar business. We’re already skeptical of Big Ag; it’s time to widen our view and see that there’s more to the story on obesity as well.

By: Jon

Jon — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 15:11:59 +0000

Not really, PotatoPro. Eventually it stabilizes because fat cells consume calories too. It just happens that fat cells consume fewer calories than other cells.

By: PotatoPro

PotatoPro — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:22:39 +0000

Thank you for pointing out this interesting set of new data on obesity. Highly appreciated.
Just wondering about your interpretation that people are eating MORE calories. Shouldn’t the conclusion be that people are still EATING TOO MUCH calories. That in itself would cause obesity to rise (for a generation or so) while if people would EAT MORE obesity would start to rise faster?