Obesity crisis in Ireland Mod Note post 1

Wibbs

Hammer89 wrote: »

Picture a cocktail sausage poking out of Leo Sayer's hair

Great, you bollocks. I just pissed meself. :D:D:D

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

joe40 wrote: »

I once heard a doctor of health professional being interviewed about health promotion. He was asked what was the single most important thing a person could do for their health, his answer was "choose your parents carefully"
Lifestyle choices obviously impact our health but you're right it does not eliminate risk. Cancer can be down to just ****ty bad luck.
I'm not saying we should not strive to reduce risks by leading a healthier lifestyle but there are other significant factors at play for individuals

Weirdly, my parents were very strict with the goodies when we were children. And we ate out like once a year and maybe only had two takeaways a year.

So I guess I’m just reeeaaallly unlucky.

joe40

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

joe40 wrote: »

I once heard a doctor of health professional being interviewed about health promotion. He was asked what was the single most important thing a person could do for their health, his answer was "choose your parents carefully"
Lifestyle choices obviously impact our health but you're right it does not eliminate risk. Cancer can be down to just ****ty bad luck.
I'm not saying we should not strive to reduce risks by leading a healthier lifestyle but there are other significant factors at play for individuals

Weirdly, my parents were very strict with the goodies when we were children. And we ate out like once a year and maybe only had two takeaways a year.

So I guess I’m just reeeaaallly unlucky.

I didn't think of it in terms of how we were reared, more the genes we inherit.
Sorry to hear about the diagnosis hope all well.

_Brian

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

You’re missing the point. For someone who has been very overweight all their lives, hunger is going to much more of an issue than someone who hasn’t. Again, there is hard science behind this but it will be ignored because it doesn’t suit. Could you fight massive hunger for decades? I think even the person with the greatest willpower would struggle. But something something personal responsibility. Despite the person writing the post being human and therefore flawed.

I appreciate it’s a struggle, it’s anstruggle because the person over ate and under exercised for so long ignoring their persona responsibility.

Now it’s stil the burn more than you eat, no matter what else, these facts never change.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

_Brian wrote: »

I appreciate it’s a struggle, it’s anstruggle because the person over ate and under exercised for so long ignoring their persona responsibility.

Now it’s stil the burn more than you eat, no matter what else, these facts never change.

Yes, that’s a scientific fact. But we’re not in test tubes. We’re living, breathing things. And obdurately quoting the laws of thermodynamics or whatever doesn’t change that.

It’s easy to be blasé about “sure what’s a little hunger” if you’re not the one affected. To maintain that calorie deficit you are so nonchalant about, some people will have to deal with immense hunger. Forever. Every single day, day in, day out for the rest of their lives. It won’t lessen with time. Could you do that? I couldn’t. I feel lucky that pretty small portions sate me.

There’s a reason why there’s such recidivism amongst long-term people who lose weight. I find it interesting how few people are curious about why. And bleat about personal responsibility. There is nobody in this thread who doesn’t in some way ignore personal responsibility. Not a one. So what makes one person’s failing more egregious?

Galwayguy35

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yes, that’s a scientific fact. But we’re not in test tubes. We’re living, breathing things. And obdurately quoting the laws of thermodynamics or whatever doesn’t change that.

It’s easy to be blasé about “sure what’s a little hunger” if you’re not the one affected. To maintain that calorie deficit you are so nonchalant about, some people will have to deal with immense hunger. Forever. Every single day, day in, day out for the rest of their lives. It won’t lessen with time. Could you do that? I couldn’t. I feel lucky that pretty small portions sate me.

There’s a reason why there’s such recidivism amongst long-term people who lose weight. I find it interesting how few people are curious about why. And bleat about personal responsibility. There is nobody in this thread who doesn’t in some way ignore personal responsibility. Not a one. So what makes one person’s failing more egregious?

I was very fat untilIi was 17, there was no mystery to it I was shoving all the wrong kind of food in my gob and too much of it.

I cut out sweets chocolate and crisps and walked every day, nearly 30 years later I've never put the weight back on.

If a person really wants to lose weight they can do it.

Wibbs

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I was very fat untilIi was 17, there was no mystery to it I was shoving all the wrong kind of food in my gob and too much of it.

I cut out sweets chocolate and crisps and walked every day, nearly 30 years later I've never put the weight back on.

Fair play G, but there's a huge difference between someone at 17 doing it and someone of 37 or 47.

AllForIt

Wibbs wrote: »

Fair play G, but there's a huge difference between someone at 17 doing it and someone of 37 or 47.

Yeah but on the impressive side 30 years ago he realized what he was doing wrong where there wasn't all kinds of nutritional info available, or easily available.

Nowadays even with all the info available there are still those who aren't convinced about why they are overweight. Slow metabolism, lack of exercise, genetics are the preferred excuses explanations rather than the obvious one.

Macy0161

munchkin_utd wrote:

As for where to go, theres loads of Eurocamp (and other operators at the same sites) along the Adria coast beside Venice which seems like a handy place if youre not driving. You'd need to spend 30 or 40 euro on a taxi to get there and back from Venice airport. From looking for a week in that area in August, theres a massive difference between the simpler sites which for me were coming out at 800ish for a week for a caravan in a place with a basic pool and beach access and the mega sites like Union Lido (which have cart tracks and I dont know what) which were about 2grand a week.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote:

There’s a reason why there’s such recidivism amongst long-term people who lose weight. I find it interesting how few people are curious about why. And bleat about personal responsibility. There is nobody in this thread who doesn’t in some way ignore personal responsibility. Not a one. So what makes one person’s failing more egregious?

I would suggest it's because they do a diet, rather than make sustainable changes to their diet. Too big a change in too short a time frame, rather than a gradual change over the medium and long term.

What I eat now is nothing like what I was eating when I started to focus on losing weight - actually it was just pretty much portion control at that point. I was never hungry the whole way through to be honest. That's not to say it was easy, but I'm not sure it was hunger rather than temptation of nice stuff tbh. If I was hungry it was because I had to make up for a poor choice somewhere else.

I did it tracking calories, which I still do as I ain't going back. But I always kept my few pints, my beer and crisp night once a week. Always had my dessert after Sunday lunch etc.

AllForIt

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

It’s easy to be blasé about “sure what’s a little hunger” if you’re not the one affected. To maintain that calorie deficit you are so nonchalant about, some people will have to deal with immense hunger. Forever. Every single day, day in, day out for the rest of their lives. It won’t lessen with time. Could you do that? I couldn’t. I feel lucky that pretty small portions sate me.

There’s a reason why there’s such recidivism amongst long-term people who lose weight. I find it interesting how few people are curious about why. And bleat about personal responsibility. There is nobody in this thread who doesn’t in some way ignore personal responsibility. Not a one. So what makes one person’s failing more egregious?

I'm sorry but this is just not correct. I don't doubt this is the way you genuinely feel about it but your wrong.

First of all if your hungry on your diet which by diet I mean a calorie deficit diet to get down to your optimal weight then you doing it all wrong.

Secondly whatever strategy you employ to maintain a calorie deficit you do not have to do it forever as you say - if you are doing it right of course. You do it until your at an optimal weight, duration of which all depends on how overweight you are.

I suspect when you speak of 'hunger' your not talking about actual starvation but your hunger psychologically for the foods that you would prefer to eat.

My short advice to you is vegetable fiber rich foods and lean protein meat in moderation is the way to go. Because they fill you up, keep you satiated for longer than carby foods, staving off the hunger pangs for longer, and are so much lower in calories that it's not that hard to keep in a calorie deficit to loose that weight.

pumpkin4life

Wibbs wrote: »

Fair play G, but there's a huge difference between someone at 17 doing it and someone of 37 or 47.

Yeah thats the thing.

When most people are fat, they're fat and they remain fat for the rest of their lives.

There won't be a solution to so called obesity problem.

I'm not convinced there is an obesity crisis. Look around you and most people, men and women, are good looking nowadays. The "obesity crisis" was stopped before it got out of hand and it is less common to eat junk food now than it used to be. It's rare I see someone just eating a bag of crisps or a bar of chocolate in public these days the way they would have 10 or 15 years ago. Anecdotally, even kids and teenagers don't eat nearly as much junk as my peers and I did when we were younger, and the junk they do eat has less sugar and the drinks in particular are disgusting artificial-sweetener-containing crap that has either lower amounts of sugar or none.

AllForIt

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not convinced there is an obesity crisis. Look around you and most people, men and women, are good looking nowadays. The "obesity crisis" was stopped before it got out of hand and it is less common to eat junk food now than it used to be. It's rare I see someone just eating a bag of crisps or a bar of chocolate in public these days the way they would have 10 or 15 years ago. Anecdotally, even kids and teenagers don't eat nearly as much junk as my peers and I did when we were younger, and the junk they do eat has less sugar and the drinks in particular are disgusting artificial-sweetener-containing crap that has either lower amounts of sugar or none.

Yes, we never looked so good. Don't see what the problem is myself. The whole issue is completely overblown.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

AllForIt wrote: »

I'm sorry but this is just not correct. I don't doubt this is the way you genuinely feel about it but your wrong.

First of all if your hungry on your diet which by diet I mean a calorie deficit diet to get down to your optimal weight then you doing it all wrong.

Secondly whatever strategy you employ to maintain a calorie deficit you do not have to do it forever as you say - if you are doing it right of course. You do it until your at an optimal weight, duration of which all depends on how overweight you are.

I suspect when you speak of 'hunger' your not talking about actual starvation but your hunger psychologically for the foods that you would prefer to eat.

My short advice to you is vegetable fiber rich foods and lean protein meat in moderation is the way to go. Because they fill you up, keep you satiated for longer than carby foods, staving off the hunger pangs for longer, and are so much lower in calories that it's not that hard to keep in a calorie deficit to loose that weight.

Answer me a straight question - did you look at any of the links provided earlier in the thread that address the physiological reasons why keeping weight off is so much harder for anyone who has been obese long-term?

This is not stuff I’m just pulling out of my arse. This is hard science. These people will feel hungry at the calorie deficit and if they reach goal, they will continue to feel that hunger. They’re not doing it wrong. Most can deal with the hunger for a while but eventually it gets too hard to live with. This is for physiological reasons, not psychological.

Oh, and I’m not overweight. I’m not sure where you got the impression that I was. So I’m bemused by your dietary advice to me at the end of the post. I lost a good chunk of weight a few years back. Wasn’t hard because I’d spent most of my life at a healthy weight. And honestly, I don’t rate your advice. Fat is not the enemy, my weight loss diet involved unprocessed meats of varying fat contents, some gloriously fatty. I also ate lovely carbs. I just adjusted portion size and really cut down on my sugar intake. People can stick their skinless chicken fillets and less-5%-fat round mince up their hoops. It’s very possible to have a variety of different foods (some high fat) and maintain a healthy weight (unless you are the aforesaid long-term obese person) if you reduce your portions. Sugar is the only thing I think needs to be almost completely cut out.

Gimme A Pound

If I have porridge, bread or a scone for breakfast, that's it - hungrier than usual for the day, and way more sugar cravings.

Two eggs or an egg and a rasher - full until lunch, and only wanting tuna or boiled chicken with lots of salad.

Protein is the way forward.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

AllForIt wrote: »

Yes, we never looked so good. Don't see what the problem is myself. The whole issue is completely overblown.

<Cosmo cover image>

How many people do you think are going to look at her and think “I want to look like that.”? Seriously? Her appearance on the cover might bolster some of those of similar weight but there’s nothing aspirational about it. Having her on the cover is a token gesture.

Svelte models are still in the vast, vast majority and remain the aspirational touchstone.

Marvin Flabby Twinkle wrote: »

If I have porridge, bread or a scone for breakfast, that's it - hungrier than usual for the day, and way more sugar cravings.

Two eggs or an egg and a rasher - full until lunch, and only wanting tuna or boiled chicken with lots of salad.

Protein is the way forward.

I’ve never found that. A mix of protein and carbs is the ideal for me. Just protein doesn’t satiate me. Nor just carb.

Gimme A Pound

Yeah it does vary to be fair. Porridge keeps some people going until lunch.

Cookie_Monster

I came across an interesting pieces recently about how more processed foods, such as say white bread, take less energy to eat and digest, than wholemeal, or mince vs a piece of steak. They reckoned something so small would add 1kg a year to you potentially.

So not necessarily even the calorie content of a piece of food, but the actual energy requirement to process it is important too.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

......... To maintain that calorie deficit you are so nonchalant about, some people will have to deal with immense hunger. Forever. Every single day, day in, day out for the rest of their lives. It won’t lessen with time...........

That's horsesh1t.
200g of carrots has 80kcals.
200g of Spinnach has 46kcals.
90g of rice has 300kcals
200g chicken breast 300kcals
500g greek yoghurt 300kcals
A pear 100kcals
A tomatoe 25kcals
3 egg ommelette 300kcals
A slice of bread 100kcals including a scrape of spread.
Spices and many sauces have little to no calories

You can eat loads and be on a 200kcal/day deficit very very very easily and be full all the time.

Your hungry forever theory is utter and complete spoof, ignoring the 30 stone folk who quite likely are hopeless cases. Most obese folk are overweight by amounts that can be addressed relatively easily if the will is there, the will quite often just isn't there.

The general concensus is eat whole, unprocessed foods to a large degree.
Ignoring that, you can drop a kg in 2 weeks with a 550kcal deficit a day
that accepted I track my calories and have never noticed weight altering with what I eat, calories in v calories out seems to be the 95% critical factors.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I came across an interesting pieces recently about how more processed foods, such as say white bread, take less energy to eat and digest, than wholemeal, or mince vs a piece of steak. They reckoned something so small would add 1kg a year to you potentially.

So not necessarily even the calorie content of a piece of food, but the actual energy requirement to process it is important too.

valoren

Hammer89 wrote: »

Said this before a bunch of times, I used to have a small dick when I was obese - like really small. Picture a cocktail sausage poking out of Leo Sayer's hair and you're basically picturing me naked, when I was big. Sorry for the imagery. In fact, I didn't even have a dick. In a flaccid state, I only had a bit of foreskin. Had I been circumsised, you would've just seen my helmet. Picture Darth Vader poking his head out of a window. Sorry for this imagery again, but it's important you get the point.

Now, I did have a knob, but much of the shaft was buried beneath some pubic fat, which concealed most of my dick in a flaccid state. In an erect state, a lot more came out obviously, but even then some inches were hidden. When I lost weight, I rediscovered quite a lot of the knob I thought had been lost to obesity forever, but I don't know if I can emphasise how crushing and lonely my teenage years were. Who can you talk to about having a small dick? Even your one from Samaritans was laughing down the phone. She wasn't. I didn't ring them obviously that was a joke.

The crazy thing is, I wasn't the exception. I'm probably breaking the obese man's Omerta here, but if you see a really fat male in the street, best believe they have a small dick. The fatter the man, the smaller his knob; not because they're all just really, really unlucky in the genetic lottery, but because you can't gain huge amounts of weight without a lot of it going in the pubic region, which can envelope your poor willy.

If you want to stop young lads from getting obese, tell them this. Don't tell them about diabetes and heart disease and all this bollox. Statistically most of them will swerve those health complications for decades, but what they can't prevent is a significantly smaller dick. It's inevitable. They don't know that they're eating away their genitals, effectively, but they need to know. They also need to know that the damage is reversible, and that weight loss will restore their genital region to its factory settings, but they probably don't.

*I'm talking about really fat men here. I don't want some 15-stone man, with a normal penis, thinking I'm spreading lies about him.

A campaign could be started on this approach calling it "Can you see your Knob?"

1. Get naked.
2. Stand erect. Your posture, not your knob.
3. Staying in an upright posture, shoulders back, look down.
4. If you can see your knob, you're grand.
5. If you can't see it, you need to shift the pounds.

Zorya

valoren wrote: »

A campaign could be started on this approach calling it "Can you see your Knob?"

1. Get naked.
2. Stand erect. Your posture, not your knob.
3. Staying in an upright posture, shoulders back, look down.
4. If you can see your knob, you're grand.
5. If you can't see it, you need to shift the pounds.

Girls could play too by standing real close to their guy, and if they can't see their lads lad past their own tummy it's time to ditch the biscuits.

323

Root of the problem is obvious if just look at any store today, tesco, supervalue, aldi, lidl, more than half the aisles are high sugar processed carb garbage and Low Fat (High sugar.

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I was very fat untilIi was 17, there was no mystery to it I was shoving all the wrong kind of food in my gob and too much of it.

I cut out sweets chocolate and crisps and walked every day, nearly 30 years later I've never put the weight back on.

If a person really wants to lose weight they can do it.

Well done

Wibbs wrote: »

Fair play G, but there's a huge difference between someone at 17 doing it and someone of 37 or 47.

Disagree. Was at the higher of the ages you mentioned, exercised fairly regularly and eating mostly the recommended right kinds of food. Ended up well over 19st.


Solution, turn the recommended food pyramid upside down. (It has never been based on any scientific facts). Won't be hungry again and will loose weight.

I my case went down 3 st in 5 weeks, then another before stabilising, stayed around that this last few years.

DEFTLEFTHAND

I used to practice intermittent fasting when I was younger. (preparation for the start of hurling training)

I'd take a week and eat lightly every second day, on the fast day I'd consume only water. I'd drop about a stone during the week.

The problem is you start getting high off the fasting, it gives you a rush.

The tendency then is to start pushing further than 1 day.

Trump Is Right

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I came across an interesting pieces recently about how more processed foods, such as say white bread, take less energy to eat and digest, than wholemeal, or mince vs a piece of steak. They reckoned something so small would add 1kg a year to you potentially.

So not necessarily even the calorie content of a piece of food, but the actual energy requirement to process it is important too.

Yep, there is a lot of truth in this from my experience...

And it has actually been said, that an apple has negative calories... but only if you eat it intact with the skin... this is because all the fibre and low glycemic carbs actually force your body to work so hard to digest, that you end up burning more than the total calories in the apple!! :eek:

(so don't bring apples with you if you're in a survival situation - because they'll eat YOU!!) :pac:

Hammer89

valoren wrote: »

A campaign could be started on this approach calling it "Can you see your Knob?"

1. Get naked.
2. Stand erect. Your posture, not your knob.
3. Staying in an upright posture, shoulders back, look down.
4. If you can see your knob, you're grand.
5. If you can't see it, you need to shift the pounds.

What I would do (and I'm being deadly serious here) is invite the parents of every child in the school into the hall one evening. Then I'd pay a very morbidly obese fella to just stand there naked on the stage for an hour. I'd organise it in every school around Ireland. I'd be beside him holding one of those long sticks that college professors use to point out things on the blackboard, and I'd point to his knob and say to the audience, 'Forget diabetes, this will, with 100% certainty, happen to your sons if you steer them down a path of obesity. It's not strictly your fault, because no need for judgement here mums and dads, but you are the gatekeepers of your child's eating habits and therefore it's your responsibility to ensure they avoid becoming like Martin here'.

Listen, it's extreme, but I think it's probably time for extremes. What it isn't time for is another stupid ad from Safefood, in which the slim son and daughter of a nuclear family reach for a packet of Tayto and a Penguin bar and then in the next shot it's the same children, but seven stone heavier. I get it. They're trying to illustrate just how fast obesity can happen, but it's not all that helpful. If you want to stop that slim boy from reaching for the junk food then show him a fat man's cock, or what's left of it.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Augeo wrote: »

That's horsesh1t.
200g of carrots has 80kcals.
200g of Spinnach has 46kcals.
90g of rice has 300kcals
200g chicken breast 300kcals
500g greek yoghurt 300kcals
A pear 100kcals
A tomatoe 25kcals
3 egg ommelette 300kcals
A slice of bread 100kcals including a scrape of spread.
Spices and many sauces have little to no calories

You can eat loads and be on a 200kcal/day deficit very very very easily and be full all the time.

Your hungry forever theory is utter and complete spoof, ignoring the 30 stone folk who quite likely are hopeless cases. Most obese folk are overweight by amounts that can be addressed relatively easily if the will is there, the will quite often just isn't there.

The general concensus is eat whole, unprocessed foods to a large degree.
Ignoring that, you can drop a kg in 2 weeks with a 550kcal deficit a day
that accepted I track my calories and have never noticed weight altering with what I eat, calories in v calories out seems to be the 95% critical factors.

Have you read anything about this? Any of the scientific stuff, peer-reviewed journal articles on the topic? If not, then you are calling me a spoofer from a place of a lack of knowledge. Which takes some cojones.

Dial Hard

A lot of people on this thread should start reading The Angry Chef's blog and books.

Wibbs

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Have you read anything about this? Any of the scientific stuff, peer-reviewed journal articles on the topic? If not, then you are calling me a spoofer from a place of a lack of knowledge. Which takes some cojones.

The whole weight loss/diet/exercise industry is chock full of BroScience™ and ChickThink™, it's how it thrives year on year, so not too surprising to see all sorts of half truths and fallacies that keep getting trotted out.

DEFTLEFTHAND

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

......... I'd drop about a stone during the week. ............

You'd need a 49k kcal deficit to drop a stone :pac:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Have you read anything about this? Any of the scientific stuff, peer-reviewed journal articles on the topic? If not, then you are calling me a spoofer from a place of a lack of knowledge. Which takes some cojones.

Yeah, I've read loads on dieting and losing weight.
If you eat high volume, low calorie food you will feel full and still be in a calorie deficit.

1/2 kg of carrots has less calories than a Mcdonalds double cheese burger. You don't see many fat cnuts eating lots of carrots.