Social stigma about weight?!

Madge · 14-02-2007 01:32PM

jsb wrote:

Just cause people people can tell the difference between 2 different food types about which is healthier doesn't mean they actually have a clue about how to put a good diet together.

Erm, yeah right! :rolleyes: Everyone knows you need to have 3 main meals a day- breakfast, lunch and dinner. As I said people know what food is good or bad. E.g. coco pops Vs porridge for breakfast or green veg, brown rice and grilled chicken Vs a big pizza or fry for dinner.

jsb wrote:

Also the fact that you said that special k diet "probably" wasn't that healthy would suggest that you probably don't even know how to put a good diet together for yourself.

? How so?

jsb wrote:

This coupled with the over the top advice given out by tv shows like "you are what you eat" just compounds the amount of misinformation out there

What is wrong with the advice given out on that show?

justsomebloke · 14-02-2007 02:26PM

Madge wrote:

Erm, yeah right! :rolleyes: Everyone knows you need to have 3 main meals a day- breakfast, lunch and dinner.

actually no most people would suggest that you eat 6 small meals a day as oppose to just 3 meals a day this way you help to keep your metabolism higher

Madge wrote:

As I said people know what food is good or bad. E.g. coco pops Vs porridge for breakfast or green veg, brown rice and grilled chicken Vs a big pizza or fry for dinner.

yes but you are just using extremes to varify a point, would a lot of people understand why they should eat whole grain products like pasta, bread and rice as oppose to ordinary pasta, bread and rice. Also would people know rather then just eating their "greens" that they should know that they should try and get vegetables and fruits of as many different colours as possible.

Madge wrote:

? How so?

well you suggested that it was only "probably" unhealthy as in you weren't completely sure. the problem is that with the special k diet you have 2 portions which at 117calories per portion means that between waking and your dinner you are only getting 234calories and then if say your dinner is at most 500-600 calories, your daily calorific intake is at most 834calories, chances are it is going to be a lot less. As the average daily calorific intake for a woman is approx 2000 this means that you are going to be servirly undereating. Cause of this your body is going to go into starvation mode and is going to use a higher proportion of muscle as an energy source. This loss of muscle then leads to your metabolism drastically decreasing so when you do come off the diet and start eating properly again you are going to put on more weight and probably end up with a higher BF% then when you started

Madge wrote:

What is wrong with the advice given out on that show?

well for one the presenter got her doctorate from a correspondence college that also gave a doctorate to a dead cat, not knocking her certificate but I think the creditability of the college might not be the best

dame · 14-02-2007 06:19PM

Also, half the crap Gillian McKeith tells people to eat can only be bought in a health-food shop and comes in a little jar with her name on it! Things like this switch people off. Not everyone wants to spend a fortune to follow all the various superfoods that "experts" say they "should" be eating.

There's the whole organic is best, everything else is crap debate too. Organic happens to be more expensive and the message people are subliminally getting is that non-organic is absolute crap and you'de be as well off eating cardboard cos as it'll have about as healthy as that pesticide-ridden, artifically ripened muck. It is easy to see why people get confused and then believe what they see on a packet with ready-made food that says "Healthy Eating", "lowers cholesterol" or whatever.

I agree that people can be very judgemental and that it is not politically correct to call people fat but seems to be acceptable to complain at and about people who are too thin. I'm a size ten myself but I've a friend who's taller and thinner than me (she's 5"8' and all her family are tall and slim) and she wears size 8 clothes. She eats mostly healthy food but never denies herself anything nice either. I've seen her eat twice as much as other girls when we've been out and these girls comment that she "must be bulimic or something". She also gets comments when out shopping from complete strangers, things like "eat something FFS" or "anorexic b1tch", although surprise surprise, those comments usually come from fat people! There's definitely a double-standard there - you'd probably get a gang forming to lynch you if you called a woman out shopping "fat"!

cooperguy · 14-02-2007 09:04PM

Madge wrote:

What is wrong with the advice given out on that show?

Dont get me started with that woman. If anybody can tell me a scientific reason to look at peoples sh1t that cant be found out much easier another way please tell me, it just a tacky gimmick to make people watch.

Not to mention the crap she says using the odd sciency word to make it look credible but as soon as you actually look at it, it turns out to be complete and utter tripe.

nesf · 14-02-2007 09:16PM

dame wrote:

Also, half the crap Gillian McKeith tells people to eat can only be bought in a health-food shop and comes in a little jar with her name on it!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,,2011098,00.html

Enjoy

Terry · 14-02-2007 10:05PM

nesf wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/badscience/story/0,,2011098,00.html

Enjoy

Call her the Awful Poo Lady, call her Dr Gillian McKeith PhD: she is an empire, a multi-millionaire, a phenomenon, a prime-time TV celebrity, a bestselling author. She has her own range of foods and mysterious powders, she has pills to give you an erection, and her face is in every health food store in the country.

Developed with her husband in mind, perhaps?

nesf · 14-02-2007 11:11PM

Terry wrote:

Developed with her husband in mind, perhaps?

Someone married her? :eek:

Terry · 14-02-2007 11:27PM

I've no idea. I was just guessing.
I'm just going to remove that link though because of this (from the same source).

But those who criticise McKeith have reason to worry. McKeith goes after people, and nastily. She has a libel case against the Sun over comments they made in 2004 that has still not seen much movement. But the Sun is a large, wealthy institution, and it can protect itself with a large and well-remunerated legal team. Others can't. A charming but - forgive me - obscure blogger called PhDiva made some relatively innocent comments about nutritionists, mentioning McKeith, and received a letter threatening costly legal action from Atkins Solicitors, "the reputation and brand-management specialists". Google received a threatening legal letter simply for linking to - forgive me - a fairly obscure webpage on McKeith.

She has also made legal threats to a fantastically funny website called Eclectech for hosting a silly animation of McKeith singing a silly song, at around the time she was on Fame Academy.

Most of these legal tussles revolve around the issue of her qualifications, though these things shouldn't be difficult or complicated. If anyone wanted to check my degrees, memberships, or affiliations, then they could call up the institutions, and get instant confirmation: job done. If you said I wasn't a doctor, I wouldn't sue you; I'd roar with laughter.

If you contact the Australasian College of Health Sciences (Portland, US) where McKeith has a "pending diploma in herbal medicine", they say they can't tell you anything about their students. When you contact Clayton College of Natural Health to ask where you can read her PhD, they say you can't. What kind of organisations are these? If I said I had a PhD from Cambridge, US or UK (I have neither), it would only take you a day to find it.

But McKeith's most heinous abuse of legal chill is exemplified by a nasty little story from 2000, when she threatened a retired professor of nutritional medicine for questioning her ideas.

Shortly after the publication of McKeith's book Living Food for Health, before she was famous, John Garrow wrote an article about some of the rather bizarre scientific claims she was making. He was struck by the strength with which she presented her credentials as a scientist ("I continue every day to research, test and write furiously so that you may benefit ..." etc). In fact, he has since said that he assumed - like many others - that she was a proper doctor. Sorry: a medical doctor. Sorry: a qualified conventional medical doctor who attended an accredited medical school.

Just copy and paste if you want to read it.

EDIT: nesf, I can't remove the url tags from your post. could you try to remove them, please?
EDIT: julep Terry, naughty that editing my post...

nesf · 15-02-2007 12:48AM

Terry wrote:

EDIT: nesf, I can't remove the url tags from your post. could you try to remove them, please?

You have to "Go advanced" and then uncheck the box saying "Automatically parse links in text".

Terry · 15-02-2007 12:55AM

Ahh, I see. I was clicking the "remove uRL" thingy.

Edit: Indeed. Actually I was thinking that instead of posting we could just edit and re-edit the same post over and over again. What do you think? -nesf

15-02-2007 07:37AM

Terry wrote:

Edit: Indeed. Actually I was thinking that instead of posting we could just edit and re-edit the same post over and over again. What do you think? -nesf

Why not just resurrect this posting topic from the board archives, (which seems to repeat itself every few months), and just cut and paste your previous answers to the new post, and delete the former? Well, that would solve the problem of this repetitious and weighty theme, while at the same time thinning down what would otherwise be a fat piece of data storage?

Terry · 15-02-2007 11:21AM

Terry wrote:

Ahh, I see. I was clicking the "remove uRL" thingy.

Edit: Indeed. Actually I was thinking that instead of posting we could just edit and re-edit the same post over and over again. What do you think? -nesf

Message recieved. Point taken. Sorry.

nesf · 15-02-2007 03:55PM

Terry wrote:

Message recieved. Point taken. Sorry.

There was no point to be taken, I was just pulling the piss....

nesf · 15-02-2007 03:56PM

Blue_Lagoon wrote:

Why not just resurrect this posting topic from the board archives, (which seems to repeat itself every few months), and just cut and paste your previous answers to the new post, and delete the former? Well, that would solve the problem of this repetitious and weighty theme, while at the same time thinning down what would otherwise be a fat piece of data storage?

That sounds far too much like real work...

Alf. A. Male · 24-03-2014 11:43AM

AMK93 wrote: »

What are your thoughts on the song?

I think if the best home you could find for it is a 7 year-old thread, that says all I need to know about it. I won't hold my breath for the difficult second album.

ThunbergsAreGo · 24-03-2014 11:46AM

I have been unable to exercise due to back issues for the last three months and have not put on any weight.

You are what you eat, people just need to have a bit more care and as mentioned cook for themselves. It doesnt have to cost a bomb, Aldi/Lidl/Dunnes etc. all have specials on vegtables weekly/bi-weekly

Social stigma about weight?!

Comments