Obesity is not a choice

Soldato
Joined
28 Nov 2002
Posts
11,202
Location
Cumbria
Lack of willpower to stay healthy is exactly what it is. It's a lot easier to sit on the sofa eating takeaways than doing exercise and preparing fresh wholesome food.

having the willpower to abstain from unhealthy or calorie laden sugary food gets worse the more you consume (from my own experience) and it’s so easy these days to get a quick fix. It’s also tough to eat healthy when the options to do so are limited when you look at the pre prepared food in shops , fast food places, takeaways, etc

I find prepping your own food is the only real way if you want to eat healthy , I often take my own food with me if I go out for the day as most of the food available will be rubbish
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Dec 2014
Posts
5,781
Location
Midlands
Fair enough - we'll have to agree to disagree. I think we should be free to make our own choices in life, and the only way for that to work is if we accept that people have to be responsible for their own actions.

For me, it doesn't work.

Because we surely must both accept that;

1.> The food industry directly seeks out and targets children, (the root cause)
2.> Children are more susceptible to the types of advertising than adults, because children are more impressionable and lack experience, they can be more easily exploited.
3.> Once children get a 'taste' for bad food, they're more likely to become obese, and even addicted, the die is cast - they carry that behaviour into adulthood - now you have a population of obese adults

If you accept those three points (which are pretty clear) it seems hard to accept, when people point the finger and say 'tut, tut - it's all your fault' when clearly there are far bigger forces and vast sums of money at play from the start.

Lack of willpower to stay healthy is exactly what it is. It's a lot easier to sit on the sofa eating takeaways than doing exercise and preparing fresh wholesome food.

Try looking at the problem differently, and ask 'why should I even need willpower' ?

As an animal, you're not supposed to have willpower to turn down food, it makes no sense from a biological perspective to walk away from rich, sweet food. Indeed - there are literally no metabolic pathways or hormonal pathways which exist in the body which will cause someone to be repulsed, or turn their nose up at energy dense food. Because from an evolutionary perspective - it makes no sense that we'd evolve a sense of self control for us to turn down food, because we evolved at times when food was scarce.

I spent about 10 years as a wildlife photographer, when you watch animals eat - they have their fill, whether it's lions on a carcass or fish feeding - they all eat until they're absolutely stuffed, and even when they're stuffed they find ways to store it, or save it. Because in their environment, that's how you stay alive, and it was the same for humans up until a few thousand years ago.

Now drop somebody into today's environment, which is absolutely saturated with infinite amounts of sweet, rich, food - with no metabolic, or hormonal pathways present which prevent them from overeating, relying on willpower for the majority is never going to be enough, because willpower is weak compared to the mechanisms the body has evolved, which override almost any sense of self control.
 
Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
29,975
Location
Norrbotten, Sweden.
Has Britain changed so much in 5 years?
Megacorps pumping corn syrup into children's stomachs without the parents consent, because they are too busy eating "4 bigmacs" everyday.... How on earth do these fat people afford all that fast food? I wish I could afford takeout 4x a day...

People being saying this **** for at least 30 years and nothing changes, a new generation born into it. People don't want to change, time to just get over it.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
1 Dec 2017
Posts
293
Half the "cerials" in aldi contain chocolate. Somethings gotta change.

I don't think fun cereal is necessarily the problem, but rather a lack of education around nutrition. You can lose weight and be healthy whilst enjoying food that is bad for you ... so long as you balance it out. One bowl of cereal is fine so long as you actually stick to the correct portion and understand that the other food you eat that day should be far healthier. This obviously doesn't take into account spikes in blood sugar which I admit I don't know much about.
 
Caporegime
Joined
9 May 2004
Posts
28,568
Location
Leafy outskirts of London
I don't think fun cereal is necessarily the problem, but rather a lack of education around nutrition. You can lose weight and be healthy whilst enjoying food that is bad for you ... so long as you balance it out. One bowl of cereal is fine so long as you actually stick to the correct portion and understand that the other food you eat that day should be far healthier. This obviously doesn't take into account spikes in blood sugar which I admit I don't know much about.

Cereals are actually a big problem, when combined with the 'most important meal of the day' BS.

A bowl of cereal, some toast, or some fruit are the quickest breakfast options, but are pretty much all just carbs that will be burnt off quickly and leave you starving long before lunch. Probably how Elevenses got created.

Having a good fat and protein rich breakfast with eggs, avo, etc, will do a much better job of longer term satiation, and if that isn't viable, you are probably better off learning to fast your mornings away.

I was a cereal/toast kid, and was usually starving by 10am and eating my packed lunch early, and then wasting money on junk from the tuck-shop later in the day.

Afternoons at home were pretty much either giant bowls of coco-pops, towers of white toast and butter, or ramen noodles. All awful, but thankfully I was a very active kid/teen so burnt off any excess calories. Now it would seem easy to blame my parents, but actually my mother taught me to love cooking from scratch, batch cooking and freezing, etc. It was just that my brother and I ate like monsters, and we didn't have much money, so cheap carbs were always stocked in the cupboards.

When I think about it though, there were only 2 chubby kids in my year throughout highschool, and never obese. Was a private school though, might have had an impact on that.
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Oct 2002
Posts
26,946
Location
Boston, Lincolnshire
Always when doing the school run you see mega fat women and their children are also mega fat. You think it is genetic but also see it when they come round for sleepovers with your child. They look at us weird because our freezer is empty and our fridge is crammed with fresh meat and veg. My daughter used to complain because her friend had McDonald's 4 times a week but starting to get the picture now!
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Nov 2005
Posts
8,650
Location
Southampton
As someone who should be ~75Kg and ballooned out to ~95Kg in 2016 before finally waking up to the reality of where my life was heading, of course I had a choice... I continued to eat too much high Calorie food when my exercise regime reduced at various points in my adult life. While being quite strict with snacking, I got down to ~73Kg in August 2017, after beginning to cycle for fitness (rather than just commutes) from Jan 2017. Problem is, I crave carbs, especially during the winter months when my Seasonal Affective Disorder kicks in. There's no mystery as to why I've been back at ~81Kg since Jan 2018, too many hot cross buns; peanut butter sandwiches; chocolate raisins etc.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jun 2006
Posts
12,369
Location
Not here
Has Britain changed so much in 5 years?
Megacorps pumping corn syrup into children's stomachs without the parents consent, because they are too busy eating "4 bigmacs" everyday.... How on earth do these fat people afford all that fast food? I wish I could afford takeout 4x a day...

People being saying this **** for at least 30 years and nothing changes, a new generation born into it. People don't want to change, time to just get over it.

Easy, where I used to live one piece of chicken breast, 3 chicken wings, fries and a drink for £2.50. That's less than a pint in most places.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Mar 2010
Posts
21,912
Hadn't really considered before that facebook/google could be complicit with targetted advertising for the likes of Coca-Cola say .. Dominoes ..... ???

When Coca-Cola wanted to push iced-tea drinkers to consider its Gold Peak brand this summer, it didn’t target people like most brands do by using their search history. Instead, it combed through consumers’ photos on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter and served them ads based on images they shared on those platforms.

Gold Peak tapped into an image recognition engine that identified people who posted images that featured glasses or jugs of iced tea, displayed emotions such as happiness and excitement as well as contained cans or bottles of its competitors, including Snapple, Honest Tea, Lipton and others. Those people were then served Gold Peak ads on 40 mobile sites and apps after leaving Instagram, Facebook and Twitter.
yes it's from 2017 https://digiday.com/marketing/coca-cola-targeted-ads-based-facebook-instagram-photos/

would these companies take targetted advertisiing from NHS, or, seems like a philathropic perosn like Gates should engage.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2006
Posts
23,376
OFC its a choice, stop shoveling in KFC. How many obese people are there in poor countries? Not a lot I suspect.

I eat a lot of crap myself. But I also exercise so never put any weight on.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Sep 2009
Posts
9,628
Location
Billericay, UK
Changing the language doesn't change problem. Typical of the BBC to address issues around the social problem rather then discus the problem itself and how it could be remedied.

Growing up in the 80's and 90's there was a drive by the government which encouraged people to eat less meat and eat more carbohydrates in the believe that eating more breads, pasta and rice would be better for you. As it turns out most of the carbs we eat were refined ones (white bread, white pasta etc) and were hopeless in terms of nutritional value. It wasn't until the mid/late 90's when advice was changed to get use eating less refined carbs and more brown bread/pasta/rice. I would say that this government policy done more damage to the nations health then smoking ever did as you only need to look around you to see it's consequences today.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
20 Mar 2012
Posts
2,308
Location
London(ish)
For me, it doesn't work.

Because we surely must both accept that;

1.> The food industry directly seeks out and targets children, (the root cause)
2.> Children are more susceptible to the types of advertising than adults, because children are more impressionable and lack experience, they can be more easily exploited.
3.> Once children get a 'taste' for bad food, they're more likely to become obese, and even addicted, the die is cast - they carry that behaviour into adulthood - now you have a population of obese adults

If you accept those three points (which are pretty clear) it seems hard to accept, when people point the finger and say 'tut, tut - it's all your fault' when clearly there are far bigger forces and vast sums of money at play from the start.



Try looking at the problem differently, and ask 'why should I even need willpower' ?

As an animal, you're not supposed to have willpower to turn down food, it makes no sense from a biological perspective to walk away from rich, sweet food. Indeed - there are literally no metabolic pathways or hormonal pathways which exist in the body which will cause someone to be repulsed, or turn their nose up at energy dense food. Because from an evolutionary perspective - it makes no sense that we'd evolve a sense of self control for us to turn down food, because we evolved at times when food was scarce.

I spent about 10 years as a wildlife photographer, when you watch animals eat - they have their fill, whether it's lions on a carcass or fish feeding - they all eat until they're absolutely stuffed, and even when they're stuffed they find ways to store it, or save it. Because in their environment, that's how you stay alive, and it was the same for humans up until a few thousand years ago.

Now drop somebody into today's environment, which is absolutely saturated with infinite amounts of sweet, rich, food - with no metabolic, or hormonal pathways present which prevent them from overeating, relying on willpower for the majority is never going to be enough, because willpower is weak compared to the mechanisms the body has evolved, which override almost any sense of self control.

Indeed, temptation exists, immoral marketing campaigns with large sums of money behind them exist and children are more susceptible to these things. I still hold people responsible for their own actions though. I just don't find it acceptable that people can claim that they're not in control of what they eat. It's not always easy, but then that's life.

So if I ridicule you for being deliberately obtuse, that's different to ridiculing you for being deliberately ignorant... or is it just ridiculing, regardless?

Well it's still ridiculing, but you can't take the same action and apply it to two completely different scenarios expecting the same result. It's like taking aspirin for a headache, and taking it for cancer. You still took aspirin, but if you expected your cancer to go away then you'd be in for a surprise.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Mar 2007
Posts
3,875
Just another thing to add to the list of things Millennials blame for their own failures.

It isn't my fault I can't get a job.
It isn't my fault I feel sad all the time.
It isn't my fault I can't afford a house.
It isn't my fault I chose computer games over going to sleep.
....and now....it isn't my fault I am fat.

What an odd post. Being obese and overweight is far more common in people aged 45 and over, which is increasingly going to become a problem with our ageing population and people living longer lives.

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN03336
 
Associate
Joined
20 Mar 2012
Posts
2,308
Location
London(ish)
In one I am ridiculing a human.
In the other I am ridiculing a human.
In another I am ridiculing a human.
In yet another, I am ridiculing a human.
In every such scenario I would except them to feel bad, and quite possibly come over to deck me for being a ****.

How then are they different scenarios?
Moreover, at certain points, being fat and being gay were both considered a choice that the ridiculed party had made, hence the ridiculing.

I've explained exactly how it's different, in very simple terms.

I realise that at one point being gay was considered a choice, but that doesn't make it true. I accept that for a small percentage of fat people, there could be medical conditions that mean it's not a choice. That doesn't mean that the people who live a sedentary lifestyle and fill their faces with rubbish haven't got a choice.
 
Back
Top Bottom