90% of adults will be overweight by 2030

TomoBhoy · 23-11-2013 03:05PM

foxyboxer wrote: »

It can't prevent death either.
But I think it would certainly reduce the cancer risk if you are genetically predisposed to certain cancers.

How does it reduce it ?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 23-11-2013 03:10PM

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

It isn't necessary for discussions about women's bodyshapes to be cuntty though. And even though there's the "Women put most pressure on themselves" thing (which can be true) you don't see it from women to each other here on Boards, which is specifically where Legs is referring to.

it's not neccesary for most discussions on boards to be cuntty, but they tend to end up that way.
and you do quite often see the pressure from women.. well, pressure might not be the word.. but you see quite a few negative comments about thin women.
not as often as you see men commenting on womens body shape alright but then that's always going to be the way when there's so many more men on here than women and of the women on boards you probably have a chunk that are sensitive to the issue and unwilling to wade in so it skews it even further.

Wibbs · 23-11-2013 03:15PM

TomoBhoy wrote: »

Did someone sit down and watch Wall E then write a report ?
Load of ballocks the same amount of fat people in the 80/90's to now

I really dunno about that. Certainly kids in the 70's were slimmer. Only one "fat" kid in my year all the way up to the early 80's and he'd be considered pudgy at best today.

Dean0088 wrote: »

It's odd. When a guy bulks up or loses weight he'll have a group of mates congratulating him. But if a girl sheds pounds (or commits the immortal sin of actually lifting weights) she's opening herself up to as many vile comments as she was when she was overweight. For every person admiring Michelle Obamas physique, there's four or five saying "she looks like a man".

If you can untangle that ball of yarn you're better than I.

Some reckon it's sexual competitiveness that's at work there. Clearly men can be competitive, if not more so, but have more avenues where they play that out. Saw an interesting programme(ch 4 IIRC) and it they had set up a fake shop selling clothes at bargain basement prices. Then they let separate groups of men and women in to peruse the clothes. In both cases they had a male model and a female model among the punters and had clothes planted that would fit them perfectly. What they found was the men talked less with each other, but if the male model guy put on one of these perfect fit shirts or jackets and asked the opinion of the other blokes if that item was the one to go for compared to a random choice, the other blokes would steer them correctly and say yep pick the "planted" item, cos it suited. The women were generally quite different. Far more likely to say the perfect fit didn't suit the model type and even steer them to something crappy. They would give good advice if the woman asking was not as attractive as them, but if she was more attractive then far less so.

Obviously this was a fake social environment and they would be very different if they were friends say, or older people(these were all in their 20's) but other similar studies have found similar observations.

But I would agree that as ageneral thing, I have heard far more dodgy comments about other women's appearance from women than from men(though it's often quite subtle).

Wibbs · 23-11-2013 03:27PM

TomoBhoy wrote: »

How does it reduce it ?

There are a few debated mechanisms that seem to strongly show exercise has a protective effect on cancer and overall death rates. That said I'd not be so sure running would be one of them and might depend on the individual. Joint wear would be an issue for a start. Exercising too much increases injury risk and lowers immunity. There would be a gender aspect too. Men in general of course have higher bone densities, thicker tendons and bigger joints, so can take high impacts better for longer. They're also again in general more designed for running. Look at top female runners, they have more "boyish" shapes. Narrow hips, slightly built, whereas an hourglass figured woman isn't going to be as efficient as a runner. Plus one could argue that as a species overall we're not designed to run for great distances. Sure better than some of our ancestors like Neandertals, but not as good as others like Erectus. Even tribal lads who practice a form of hunting where they run an animal into exhaustion don't run like you'd run a marathon. They start and stop a lot(and they're built like anorexic whippets

). That crossfit type training seems to be more suited to how we're built.

Though recent research has shown even "easier" methods that don't require hours in the gym or on a track, namely very high intensity bursts of exercise that last only minutes. Of course gyms ain't gonna push that one, just as turkeys won't vote for xmas. Diet wise it seems intermittent fasting/low food intake is the way to go.

ruthloss · 23-11-2013 03:30PM

Wacker The Attacker wrote: »

I'm already a fattie.

I'll also probably be dead by 2030

I'm a bit of a handful meself, nobody's complaining though.;)

Sheldons Brain · 23-11-2013 03:34PM

Everyone should be injected with Ryan Tubridy's genes.

foxyboxer · 23-11-2013 03:37PM

TomoBhoy wrote: »

How does it reduce it ?

Does regular physical exercise have any health benefits?

If you are genetically predisposed to getting cancer, it doesn't follow that you will get cancer.

As an aside, In terms of running being tough on the body, of course it is, especially if we have to run on concrete a lot.

If someone has never run before they will get hurt and pain obviously but consistently doing any exercise will strengthen the body. Which is a good thing of course. Most people who run are doing it too fast anyway. Hurting themselves and deciding it's not for them. Slowing down allows people to run consistently.

Fukuyama · 23-11-2013 03:42PM

Wibbs wrote: »

Some reckon it's sexual competitiveness that's at work there. Clearly men can be competitive, if not more so, but have more avenues where they play that out. Saw an interesting programme(ch 4 IIRC) and it they had set up a fake shop selling clothes at bargain basement prices. Then they let separate groups of men and women in to peruse the clothes. In both cases they had a male model and a female model among the punters and had clothes planted that would fit them perfectly. What they found was the men talked less with each other, but if the male model guy put on one of these perfect fit shirts or jackets and asked the opinion of the other blokes if that item was the one to go for compared to a random choice, the other blokes would steer them correctly and say yep pick the "planted" item, cos it suited. The women were generally quite different. Far more likely to say the perfect fit didn't suit the model type and even steer them to something crappy. They would give good advice if the woman asking was not as attractive as them, but if she was more attractive then far less so.

Obviously this was a fake social environment and they would be very different if they were friends say, or older people(these were all in their 20's) but other similar studies have found similar observations.

But I would agree that as a general thing, I have heard far more dodgy comments about other women's appearance from women than from men(though it's often quite subtle).

Interesting. I would have guessed it was some insecurity complex driving them to put down the achievement of others.

What your study doesnt quite explain is that, in a society where females are encouraged to do more activities seen as masculine (sports, certain jobs etc...), when they do, they're put down by other women.

More and more girls are getting into lifting weights. It stops the 'skinny fat' physique people mentioned earlier in the thread. And it'll give a woman a rock hard body and respect from even the most chauvinistic of male gym goers. Yet I've had female friends comment on how 'disgusting' ( :pac: ) they looked or that women shouldn't lift. :rolleyes:

TomoBhoy · 23-11-2013 03:42PM

foxyboxer wrote: »

Does regular physical exercise have any health benefits?

If you are genetically predisposed to getting cancer. It doesn't follow that you will get cancer.

Pretty much it does like I said I've seen families wiped out with cancer being the cause, and I'm talking people being in their 20/30's.

Fukuyama · 23-11-2013 03:47PM

Wibbs wrote: »

There are a few debated mechanisms that seem to strongly show exercise has a protective effect on cancer and overall death rates. That said I'd not be so sure running would be one of them and might depend on the individual. Joint wear would be an issue for a start. Exercising too much increases injury risk and lowers immunity. There would be a gender aspect too. Men in general of course have higher bone densities, thicker tendons and bigger joints, so can take high impacts better for longer. They're also again in general more designed for running. Look at top female runners, they have more "boyish" shapes. Narrow hips, slightly built, whereas an hourglass figured woman isn't going to be as efficient as a runner. Plus one could argue that as a species overall we're not designed to run for great distances. Sure better than some of our ancestors like Neandertals, but not as good as others like Erectus. Even tribal lads who practice a form of hunting where they run an animal into exhaustion don't run like you'd run a marathon. They start and stop a lot(and they're built like anorexic whippets ). That crossfit type training seems to be more suited to how we're built.

Yet 'hourglass' shape would be ideal for kickboxing, lifting and contact sports like rugby or hurling. Check out female basketball players too

The risk of over exercising only presents itself with top athletes. For the average joe, you could run for two hours, six days a week and still be fine (provided you're eating right).

foxyboxer · 23-11-2013 03:54PM

The greater the distance, the closer the performance levels between men and women. Men kick women's asses in sprints. In ultra marathons women regularly beat men.

Frank Lee Midere · 23-11-2013 04:08PM

Back to the report. The claim seems incredibly dubious - we are talking about 15 years time. There are probably more than 30% of the adult involved in sport cycling etc. these kind of stats tend to project statistical increases assuming no negative feedback. Imagine if 5% of the population is overweight in 1970 and 10% in 1980, extrapolating forward at a 100% increase per decade you get 20% in 1990, 40% in 2000, 80% in 2010 and 100% somewhere between 2010 and 2020. This kind of extrapolation is naive. Eventually the rate of change slows down.

I don't actually see Ireland as much fatter than when I grew up ( I was born in 1975) except perhaps the bottom 20%. Middle class people look the same.

Legs.Eleven · 23-11-2013 04:08PM

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

you mean men pay attention to and maybe even talk about women? and on a website that is overwhelmingly male this might become apparent?
I find that difficult to credit

Nope, not what I said at all. Try again.

judgefudge · 23-11-2013 04:11PM

Dean0088 wrote: »

While I'd agree with you - I'd say most of the pressure comes from women themselves.

I mean, what comments that are made by men about overweight women seem to me to be returned in-kind by women towards men. Both men and women are visual creatures and make comments. Magazines and newspapers are filled with skinny female models. But they're also filled with blokes with 4% body fat and huge muscle density - something which simply cannot be sustained even by pro bodybuilders for anything longer than a 24 hour period. There are unrealistic expectations on both sides of the fence.

The most vile, disgusting comments I've heard about women have come from other women (normally uttered behind someones back).

It's odd. When a guy bulks up or loses weight he'll have a group of mates congratulating him. But if a girl sheds pounds (or commits the immortal sin of actually lifting weights) she's opening herself up to as many vile comments as she was when she was overweight. For every person admiring Michelle Obamas physique, there's four or five saying "she looks like a man".

If you can untangle that ball of yarn you're better than I.

Agree with most of your comments so far. But I'd actually have to disagree with this one. I've found that the first people to point out the weight of a women with "oh jesus, state of yer one" are the guys I know and hang out with. Its surprising how little I hear that from female friends (I'm female, mid 20s). Maybe I just have nice friends

I'm sure guys do compliment and encourage other guys, but women do that too. I constantly hear, "you look great, did you lose weight" or "I love that dress, its very slimming" etc. among my friends.

I think theres a misconception that all women are nasty and jealous and just can't wait to see each other fail. I certainly don't feel that way about my friends, and as far as I know they don't feel that way about me.

Fukuyama · 23-11-2013 04:23PM

judgefudge wrote: »

Agree with most of your comments so far. But I'd actually have to disagree with this one. I've found that the first people to point out the weight of a women with "oh jesus, state of yer one" are the guys I know and hang out with. Its surprising how little I hear that from female friends (I'm female, mid 20s). Maybe I just have nice friends

I'm sure guys do compliment and encourage other guys, but women do that too. I constantly hear, "you look great, did you lose weight" or "I love that dress, its very slimming" etc. among my friends.

I think theres a misconception that all women are nasty and jealous and just can't wait to see each other fail. I certainly don't feel that way about my friends, and as far as I know they don't feel that way about me.

You're quite right and maybe I jumped the gun. But when I've heard such comments from women it always struck me as odd. Although, when I think about it now, maybe these women in particular wouldn't be the most secure in their own skin or proactive about their health.

Yeah. Guys can be hard - particularly when in a group. And I'll hold my hands up and say I'm guilty of comments like that, particularly when with all male friends and there's a few pints down the hatch. While not condoning it, I feel it comes from a different angle. When guys say it it's pretty much saying 'not a chance would I fancy her'.

At the very least, there's a level of honesty in saying it out loud too. Slightly better than waiting until later to have an echo-chamber gossip-fest.

And I'll admit to find it quite shocking when I see a morbidy obese, 5 ft 5 woman in her twenties. My gut reaction is the same as when seeing someone that's very young get ill (cancer, etc...). All I can think is "fcuking hell. That's a waste". And as obesity is preventable it shocks me all the more.

Not saying that about slightly overweight people. Some people look better with a higher bodyfat percentage.

judgefudge · 23-11-2013 04:30PM

Dean0088 wrote: »

And I'll admit to find it quite shocking when I see a morbidy obese, 5 ft 5 woman in her twenties. My gut reaction is the same as when seeing someone that's very young get ill (cancer, etc...). All I can think is "fcuking hell. That's a waste". And as obesity is preventable it shocks me all the more.

Not saying that about slightly overweight people. Some people look better with a higher bodyfat percentage.

I don't know whether its because women tend to be shorter, but I do think if I walked into a bar and there was a fat woman and a fat man, I would notice the fat woman more.

It seems, according to that study anyway that there are as many overweight men as women, it just doesnt seem to be as obvious. Maybe because men carry their weight differently (around their stomach usually) or because they're taller. Maybe its just more socially acceptable for a guy to be 'big' or something.

Turtwig · 23-11-2013 04:33PM

study wrote:

It is
important to note that there have been plateau’s observed in
obesity levels in a selection of countries worldwide, were these
to occur in Ireland they would alter these projected trends
beneficially.

Given that the rate of overweight and obesity in the US is only projected to reach about 50% by 2030 why the f**k does anything think Ireland will be at 90%?

MadsL · 23-11-2013 04:37PM

foxyboxer wrote: »

There's a magic bullet cure all for Western diseases.

It's called Running.

"You don't stop running because you get old or ill, you get old and ill because you stop running"

Knee surgeons love you guys...

"You don't stop running because you get old or ill, you get old and ill because you stop running"

It wasn't Jim Fix who said that was it....54 when he died right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Fixx

Fukuyama · 23-11-2013 04:39PM

judgefudge wrote: »

I don't know whether its because women tend to be shorter, but I do think if I walked into a bar and there was a fat woman and a fat man, I would notice the fat woman more.

It seems, according to that study anyway that there are as many overweight men as women, it just doesn't seem to be as obvious. Maybe because men carry their weight differently (around their stomach usually) or because they're taller. Maybe its just more socially acceptable for a guy to be 'big' or something.

Men tend to get beer bellies. Men also tend to work more physically active jobs (I'm thinking brick layers, delivery men, warehouse staff). So they could have a diet of chicken fillet rolls and coke but the muscles in their arms and legs would carry the weight better. Their big beer belly is about the only noticeable feature. That and the multiple chins.

Height would also 'stretch' the weight out. I've also known a few 'big' blokes who somehow manage to convince themselves that their fat layers actually constitute muscle. So maybe that mindset rubs off on others.

Short people, of both genders, are going to look a lot worse and have it be more noticeable if they pack on an additional six stone.

Fukuyama · 23-11-2013 04:43PM

Jernal wrote: »

Given that the rate of overweight and obesity in the US is only projected to reach about 50% by 2030 why the f**k does anything think Ireland will be at 90%?

You're fudging numbers here.

The US is not projected to reach 50% overweight. They've already surpassed that. 33% is overweight. While andother 33% is obese. So, 66% of people in the US are overweight (with many in the higher category of obesity and beyond).

Ireland's overweight and obese currently make up around 33% of our population. We're where the USA was in 1990. And we're rapidly gaining.

Outside of the US, Ireland consumes the most soft drinks per head in the world. We love fast food and plenty of carbs too.

Turtwig · 23-11-2013 04:59PM

Dean0088 wrote: »

You're fudging numbers here.

The US is not projected to reach 50% overweight. They've already surpassed that. 33% is overweight. While andother 33% is obese. So, 66% of people in the US are overweight (with many in the higher category of obesity and beyond).

Ireland's overweight and obese currently make up around 33% of our population. We're where the USA was in 1990. And we're rapidly gaining.

Outside of the US, Ireland consumes the most soft drinks per head in the world. We love fast food and plenty of carbs too.

I need to wake up.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo · 23-11-2013 05:11PM

I'd like to see food thought as part of the school programme. Even devoting one hour per month to food education in primary school would give a good foundation and make a big improvement to food knowledge among younger people. I'm sure Religion can sacrifice an hour per month towards this.

It may not be possible in secondary school to have home economics classes for everyone because current facilities won't allow it but even an hour per week of nutritional education with a bit of practical demonstration should be done for the full 6 years in my opinion. I only really learned to cook when I moved out of home and started to lose a bit of weight (I didn't need or want to lose weight just to say). I picked up the basics fairly quickly but it's taken me a few years to become competent and confident in my food ability.

Also, my school shop sold almost only sugared items, fizzy drinks, chocolate, jellies and things like that, crazy stuff really thinking about it.
We need to start treating sugared items like these with the same disdain we now treat smoking.

Educating the kids of today to be the adults of tomorrow is the best way to tackle obesity.

Fukuyama · 23-11-2013 05:30PM

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

I'd like to see food thought as part of the school programme. Even devoting one hour per month to food education in primary school would give a good foundation and make a big improvement to food knowledge among younger people. I'm sure Religion can sacrifice an hour per month towards this.

It may not be possible in secondary school to have home economics classes for everyone because current facilities won't allow it but even an hour per week of nutritional education with a bit of practical demonstration should be done for the full 6 years in my opinion. I only really learned to cook when I moved out of home and started to lose a bit of weight (I didn't need or want to lose weight just to say). I picked up the basics fairly quickly but it's taken me a few years to become competent and confident in my food ability.

Also, my school shop sold almost only sugared items, fizzy drinks, chocolate, jellies and things like that, crazy stuff really thinking about it.
We need to start treating sugared items like these with the same disdain we now treat smoking.

Educating the kids of today to be the adults of tomorrow is the best way to tackle obesity.

+1

My school had a little shop run by the transition years. It was all jellies, coke, crisps and chocolate.

The local shops supplied much the same.

I went to an all boys school so home economics wasn't even offered. One day my art teacher mentioned how boys wouldn't want to do home economics anyways. This was met by around thrity lads all agreeing that they'd rather bake a pie or learn how to sow (you know, actual life skills) than paint a fcuking clay pot.

Soft Falling Rain · 23-11-2013 05:31PM

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

You can literally hear the LOUD NOISES that they've trying to make. In other words, sesationalist rubbish.

May I qualify this by saying that the article suggests every disease is going to increase by 90%. Strokes, cancer, obesity, what a load of ****ing ****.

_Redzer_ · 23-11-2013 05:37PM

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

May I qualify this by saying that the article suggests every disease is going to increase by 90%. Strokes, cancer, obesity, what a load of ****ing ****.

Ageing, more long lived population with abundance of high fat, sugar diets and greater exposure to pollutants in the environment, coupled with an ever more sedentary lifestyle. No, I don't think it's too sensationalist at all to be honest.

Makes sense that most diseases like cancer and diabetes will increase as well as risk of stroke.

Soft Falling Rain · 23-11-2013 05:48PM

_Redzer_ wrote: »

Ageing, more long lived population with abundance of high fat, sugar diets and greater exposure to pollutants in the environment, coupled with an ever more sedentary lifestyle. No, I don't think it's too sensationalist at all to be honest.

Makes sense that most diseases like cancer and diabetes will increase as well as risk of stroke.

By 90% though as the article suggests? If that was the case then that film Wall-E was freakishly accurate.

Fukuyama · 23-11-2013 05:54PM

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

By 90% though as the article suggests? If that was the case then that film Wall-E was freakishly accurate.

Fatties in America actually protested about the film and called for a boycott of Disney.

Soon after, Disney increased the number of mobility scooters in their theme parks.

That seemed to quell their angry, giggling rage.

foxyboxer · 23-11-2013 05:58PM

MadsL wrote: »

Knee surgeons love you guys...

"You don't stop running because you get old or ill, you get old and ill because you stop running"

It wasn't Jim Fix who said that was it....54 when he died right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Fixx

Never needed surgery. I've never been injured actually after multiple marathons over the years. If you're over weight and start running, then yes you'll likely have knee problems.

Not a fixx quote but looking at his pre running lifestyle there it seems like that was a primary contributor to his death not the act of running.

A runner died after this year's Dublin Marathon. Should people stop running marathons now as it has the potential to be fatal?

_Redzer_ · 23-11-2013 06:04PM

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

By 90% though as the article suggests? If that was the case then that film Wall-E was freakishly accurate.

No, I'm not agreeing with that exact figure because I honestly don't know, but I strongly agree with the idea that all those problems will sharply increase in future. I wouldn't call bullshít on it so quick.

Wattle · 23-11-2013 06:05PM

90%? Absolute nonsense. I was up in Marlay Park today and both carparks were jam packed. There's more and more groups of cyclists on the road, lots of runners too and the gym I go to does a roaring trade. A fair number of people make physical fitness a part of their lives so there's no way it's ever going to reach 90%.

90% of adults will be overweight by 2030

Comments