Obesity crisis in Ireland Mod Note post 1

JupiterKid · 06-02-2019 6:51pm

I was in a convenience store around the corner from my workplace at lunchtine today and whilst I ordered from the lady at the deli counter to make up a sandwich for me, three people with small children ordered sausage rolls and chicken nuggets (very big bags,) for their kids.

At the till, one of the kids threw a tantrum and her mother got her an ice cream bar to quieten her down instead of saying no.

I can't help but think its lots of actions like these that are fuelling the problem.

freshpopcorn · 06-02-2019 6:52pm

Snow Garden wrote: »

You would not believe how many primary school PE hours are re-diverted for some other nonsense reason (e.g. communion work or another mass) or just because the lazy teacher didn't feel like doing it.

When will parents wake up and push religion out of the education system? Most are such cowards.

There should be some level of physical activity every single day.

A few years ago the local priests basically said all preparation for the Communion would be done outside of school on a few evening and and a few Sunday masses before the day.
So minimal stuff would be done in school.
Guess what happened a campaign was set up to have it all done in school. It was mainly done by a man who hates the church/always complaining about it.
In the end they made a few changes/etc but people weren't willing to put a bit of effort in.
This is the kind of rubbish you've to out up with.

LirW · 06-02-2019 7:00pm

freshpopcorn wrote: »

A few years ago the local priests basically said all preparation for the Communion would be done outside of school on a few evening and and a few Sunday masses before the day.
So minimal stuff would be done in school.
Guess what happened a campaign was set up to have it all done in school. It was mainly done by a man who hates the church/always complaining about it.
In the end they made a few changes/etc but people weren't willing to put a bit of effort in.
This is the kind of rubbish you've to out up with.

Reminds me of that priest in a Carlow parish who said he isn't doing a set date for communion and kids can get it at any Sunday mass that suits them.
Parents were rioting and one mother dragged her kid to the papers and they printed an article with the kid in ridiculous praying poses ("Why does God not love me?")
Same mother was protesting against the church months earlier during the referendum campaign.

My son's school does a lot with the kids in regard of keeping them informed and healthy. But all the effort is for nothing when parents don't pull their weight.

metaoblivia · 06-02-2019 7:02pm

joe40 wrote: »

Once you have excess weight your body will fight to keep it.

Yes. I have a cousin who has been obese her entire life. Her mother was obese and that's how she grew up. She's never weighed under 200lbs in her adult life (she's also 5"10, so just a big woman in general).

My cousin now has two kids, both of whom are perfectly average in size - not overweight at all. That's because my cousin cooks healthy meals for her family. She also began working out 5 times a week a little over a year ago and lost 40lbs in fairly short order. And then she stopped losing weight. She was eating healthy and still working out (weights and resistance training with some cardio), but the weight was no longer shifting. Despite her weight loss, if you were to see her on the street, you'd definitely think she was obese.

My cousin isn't lazy. She works full time with special needs children, has two children of her own, refurbishes vintage furniture and attends local markets regularly to sell those items, plans family meals, continues to work out 4-5 times a week. But if she wants to ever be a "normal" size, she's going to have to fight for it because her body has settled into a weight range. And if she ever gets to that normal size, she'll have to continue fighting just to maintain that weight for the rest of her life. It's an incredibly tough cycle to be in and has to be demoralizing to hear others - who don't have to fight as hard to maintain a normal weight - accuse her of just being lazy and not having the willpower.

Richard Hillman · 06-02-2019 7:08pm

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

Do enjoy but don't expect me to pay for your heart surgery, your gastric bypass, your diabetes treatment, your cardio vascular problems, eye surgery or kidney treatment.

A lot of treatment in hospitals could have been avoided if the patients had watched their diets and moved off the couch.

Its ignorance and a lack of self control - there is plenty of education there, just see google.ie

For whatever you will pay for with a surgery, you'll pay multiple times for late age Alzheimer's or dementia. 24 hour care and misery for all parties. Even if a person avoided those ills and Lived healthily until they are in their 90s, that's 20+ years of a state pension.

Widdensushi · 06-02-2019 7:10pm

Snow Garden wrote: »

You would not believe how many primary school PE hours are re-diverted for some other nonsense reason (e.g. communion work or another mass) or just because the lazy teacher didn't feel like doing it.

When will parents wake up and push religion out of the education system? Most are such cowards.

There should be some level of physical activity every single day. The kids love it.

It's not the schools responsibility to raise your children, obviously they have to give guidance but if the children are obese it's not the schools fault

freshpopcorn · 06-02-2019 7:11pm

LirW wrote: »

Reminds me of that priest in a Carlow parish who said he isn't doing a set date for communion and kids can get it at any Sunday mass that suits them.
Parents were rioting and one mother dragged her kid to the papers and they printed an article with the kid in ridiculous praying poses ("Why does God not love me?")
Same mother was protesting against the church months earlier during the referendum campaign.

My son's school does a lot with the kids in regard of keeping them informed and healthy. But all the effort is for nothing when parents don't pull their weight.

They also moved it from a Saturday to a Sunday.
All the parents had to was up sell it to the kids bit they made a drama out of it to them. All the same crap was said.

They are lots of teachers out there who try and do extra activities that they don't have to but they do it for the kids. Regarding to encourage activity/etc.
Sometimes when schools do extra curricular sports/etc they have to be paid or fundraised for because not everything is free. The thought of contributing €5 towards something tough horrifies parents.
Schools/teachers understand that some families may have financial issues.

ceadaoin. · 06-02-2019 7:18pm

Snow Garden wrote: »

You are right. Diabetes will be an epidemic very soon.

Parents know the harms and yet almost compete to 'spoil' their kids.

Everything in moderation. I find the kids who are denied sweets or who are given them as a reward for good behaviour only become almost obsessed with them. These are the kids who stuff themselves with rubbish when they get the chance and grow up to have an unhealthy attitude to food.

My daughter has cookies, chocolate etc. And to be honest, she would have something like that everyday. There's no lunch box police here! She even has McDonald's once a week after her swimming class, someone call social services! But she eats home cooked meals most of the week, swims, rides her bike and scooter and is very healthy and borderline underweight (the doctor isn't concerned, it's her body type, she is tall and small framed like I am)

Snow Garden · 06-02-2019 7:19pm

Widdensushi wrote: »

It's not the schools responsibility to raise your children, obviously they have to give guidance but if the children are obese it's not the schools fault

Wow I guess you totally missed the point i.e. PE should not be skipped. It's only 30 minutes twice a week in primary so if it cannot be done on a particular day for some reason, then it should be rescheduled.

Also if it is too wet to let the kids into the yards, they should do some physical activity indoors where possible. I know one large primary school that does Zumba in the hall on wet days.

It wasnt me123 · 06-02-2019 7:31pm

Richard Hillman wrote: »

For whatever you will pay for with a surgery, you'll pay multiple times for late age Alzheimer's or dementia. 24 hour care and misery for all parties. Even if a person avoided those ills and Lived healthily until they are in their 90s, that's 20+ years of a state pension.

I don't mind paying for a OAPs pension, just not their pension and multiple hospital stays.

I agree that anyone being kept healthy just to suffer from dementia or Alzheimer's or MND etc, is not good - for them or the public purse.

Dalomanakora · 06-02-2019 9:37pm

TheBoyConor wrote: »

I have a major issue with SW and the way they have this whole syns based points scoring system.
From the outset it creates a negative mindset surrounding food by calling certain foods or food types "syns". It is bringing in guilt and shame about food which is not helpful. That same guilt and shame can drive people to comfort eat. But hey, SW is a business and it is in their interests for their clients not to succeed and blame themselves when they don't so that they keep coming to SW.

I actually agree with everything you say tbh. There's a lot I don't agree with in SW, and the over-reliance on some processed foods irritates me massively - although they're trying to fix this now by adding small "syn" values to those Muller light poison yogurts, and the pasta mugshot thingies.

For me, it's about accountability. I follow SW loosely. If I start craving sugar, I know my body wants more protein, so I'll have a couple of nuts or some fatty meat.

But going to a weekly weigh in with friends keeps me accountable and on track, whereas I know I'd honestly struggle without having to answer to someone

Dtp1979 · 06-02-2019 9:45pm

metaoblivia wrote: »

Yes. I have a cousin who has been obese her entire life. Her mother was obese and that's how she grew up. She's never weighed under 200lbs in her adult life (she's also 5"10, so just a big woman in general).

My cousin now has two kids, both of whom are perfectly average in size - not overweight at all. That's because my cousin cooks healthy meals for her family. She also began working out 5 times a week a little over a year ago and lost 40lbs in fairly short order. And then she stopped losing weight. She was eating healthy and still working out (weights and resistance training with some cardio), but the weight was no longer shifting. Despite her weight loss, if you were to see her on the street, you'd definitely think she was obese.

My cousin isn't lazy. She works full time with special needs children, has two children of her own, refurbishes vintage furniture and attends local markets regularly to sell those items, plans family meals, continues to work out 4-5 times a week. But if she wants to ever be a "normal" size, she's going to have to fight for it because her body has settled into a weight range. And if she ever gets to that normal size, she'll have to continue fighting just to maintain that weight for the rest of her life. It's an incredibly tough cycle to be in and has to be demoralizing to hear others - who don't have to fight as hard to maintain a normal weight - accuse her of just being lazy and not having the willpower.

Your cousin isn’t lazy. If she wants to lose more weight then she has to consume less calories.

AllForIt · 06-02-2019 10:14pm

The expression 'everything in moderation' does't quite work anymore because of what we eat nowadays.

Specifically, if you eat biscuits/cake/junk food every day, which are either full of hydrogenated fat or sugar or both, and you are not overweight indeed even slim, you still have a problem.

I'll keep this post short rather than go into further details about it but suggest you google 'trans fat' and read the dangers of it. Especially if your happy your children are eating it every day and they are not overweight because it's a little bit more problematic than that. https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-smart/fats/trans-fat

Cake Man · 06-02-2019 10:30pm

metaoblivia wrote: »

But if she wants to ever be a "normal" size, she's going to have to fight for it because her body has settled into a weight range. And if she ever gets to that normal size, she'll have to continue fighting just to maintain that weight for the rest of her life. .

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. No human body just "settles into a weight range". You're weight is dictated by how many calories you consistently take in, it's as simple as that. If you are consistently taking in less calories than your body needs, you WILL lose weight. To claim otherwise means you'd be trying to defy the laws of thermodynamics. If your cousin isn't losing weight, it's because he/she simply isn't in a calorie deficit. That's all it is, not this concept of the body "settling into a weight range" crap, which smacks of a defeatist attitude and "Oh I'm just going to give up because obviously my body doesn't want to shift the weight..." mentality.

ceadaoin. · 06-02-2019 10:31pm

AllForIt wrote: »

The expression 'everything in moderation' does't quite work anymore because of what we eat nowadays.

Specifically, if you eat biscuits/cake/junk food every day, which are either full of hydrogenated fat or sugar or both, and you are not overweight indeed even slim, you still have a problem.

I'll keep this post short rather than go into further details about it but suggest you google 'trans fat' and read the dangers of it. Especially if your happy your children are eating it every day and they are not overweight because it's a little bit more problematic than that. https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-smart/fats/trans-fat

Yeah I know about trans fats. It is possible to buy products such as biscuits that don't contain them. It's being phased out anyway and products are all labelled. Other than that my heart is extremely fine, resting heart rate in the low to high 50s, I don't have high cholesterol and never have (and I have a check up including bloods yearly). So I'm not gonna panic about my 7 year old eating a couple of cookies with her lunch that also features fresh fruit and vegetables. Pretty sure she is not at risk of high cholesterol at her age

Saying with certainty that someone "has a problem" with their health despite knowing nothing about them is scaremongering nonsense tbh.

mickrock · 06-02-2019 10:35pm

FutureGuy wrote: »

We are now being told that it's ok to be fat.

It's not ok. It's damaging. People need to take some responsibility for themselves.

NEWSFLASH!

It seems that being "overweight" is healthier than being of "normal" weight. Although scientific studies indicate this, it's not considered PC to promote this sort of information. Here's what Dr Malcolm Kendrick has to say:

'Despite the fact that study after study has demonstrated quite clearly that "overweight" people live the longest, no one can bring themselves to say: "Sorry, we were wrong. A BMI between 25 and 29 is the healthiest weight of all. For those of you between 20 and 25, I say, eat more, become healthier." Who would dare say such a thing? Not anyone with tenure at a leading university, that's for sure.

In truth, this discussion should not quite stop here. For even when we get into those with a BMI greater than 30, those who truly are defined as "obese", the health dangers are greatly overestimated, mainly because of the widespread use of what I call the statistical "clumping game". Obesity researchers are world-leading experts at the clumping game. In most studies, the entire population is divided ("clumped") into four groups: underweight, normal weight, overweight and obese – obese being defined as a BMI of 30 and above. That means those with a BMI of 31 are clumped together as part of a group which includes those with a BMI of 50 – and above. What does this tell us about the health problems of having a BMI of 31? Well, absolutely nothing.

There is no doubt that becoming heavier and heavier must, at some point, damage your health and reduce your life expectancy. Where is this point? Well, it is certainly not anywhere between 25 and 30, and it could be even higher. Indeed, I have seen research on Italian women showing that a BMI of 33 was associated with the longest life expectancy. In other studies, where obesity was actually further sub-divided, those with a BMI between 30 and 35 lived longer than those of so-called "normal" weight.'

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...-10158229.html

Gimme A Pound · 06-02-2019 11:43pm

I think addiction to sugar (including stodgy carbs) is a thing though. I mean you have people (like me) who get pudgy due to just eating too much and being a lazy arse during the winter, and then the days get longer and the weight is lost easily enough.

But then there are people who are so massively obese that I don't think they have an off switch. Nobody wants to get to that size. Every now and again (usually that time of the month) I have an uncontrollable craving for junk food. Imagine feeling that way all the time. Nobody would choose that - must be a kind of hell.

joe40 · 06-02-2019 11:46pm

Cake Man wrote: »

metaoblivia wrote: »

But if she wants to ever be a "normal" size, she's going to have to fight for it because her body has settled into a weight range. And if she ever gets to that normal size, she'll have to continue fighting just to maintain that weight for the rest of her life. .

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. No human body just "settles into a weight range". You're weight is dictated by how many calories you consistently take in, it's as simple as that. If you are consistently taking in less calories than your body needs, you WILL lose weight. To claim otherwise means you'd be trying to defy the laws of thermodynamics. If your cousin isn't losing weight, it's because he/she simply isn't in a calorie deficit. That's all it is, not this concept of the body "settling into a weight range" crap, which smacks of a defeatist attitude and "Oh I'm just going to give up because obviously my body doesn't want to shift the weight..." mentality.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/why-its-so-hard-to-lose-excess-weight-and-keep-it-off-the-biggest-losers-experience-2018031213396

Not sure if this copied properly, but it is much harder for a person who was previously overweight to maintain a healthy weight than for a person that was never overweight to begin with.
If you and me were the same (healthy) weight but I was previously overweight we could not have the same lifestyle. I would be much more prone to putting weight on and would have to be extra vigilant.
Obviously not impossible but losing weight is much easier than maintaining weight loss.

Wibbs · 06-02-2019 11:50pm

Cake Man wrote: »

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. No human body just "settles into a weight range". You're weight is dictated by how many calories you consistently take in, it's as simple as that.

Actually it's not that simple[edit] Joe got ahead of me.

. It's a simplistic view of human metabolism alright, but that's about it.

It has been known and shown for many a year that the body does indeed fight to say at a certain weight. The so called set point. This works well in average weight people, but for the long term obese it's very different. It seems the longer the body is at a particular weight the more it sees around that weight as "normal". This can be seen in very underweight people, even those suffering from anorexia. They don't put on weight nearly as quickly as their intake would suggest. Here's a study from 2010(it's been backed up even more since, but the ones I can find are behind a paywall for researchers).

It's a bit long as the actress said to the bishop, but the pertinent part is this;

There is evidence for the idea that there is biological (active) control of body weight at a given set point. Body weight is the product of genetic effects (DNA), epigenetic effects (heritable traits that do not involve changes in DNA), and the environment. Regulation of body weight is asymmetric, being more effective in response to weight loss than to weight gain. However, regulation may be lost or camouflaged by Western diets, suggesting that the failure of biological control is due mainly to external factors. In this situation, the body’s ‘set point’ (i.e., a constant ‘body-inherent’ weight regulated by a proportional feedback control system) is replaced by various ‘settling points’ that are influenced by energy and macronutrient intake in order for the body to achieve a zero energy balance.

So nope, it's not quite "as simple as that". That's before we get to the gender differences in weigh gain and loss which are many.

mickrock wrote: »

NEWSFLASH!

It seems that being "overweight" is healthier than being of "normal" weight. Although scientific studies indicate this, it's not considered PC to promote this sort of information.

I've read a few of them alright. Though I would say that most were lax on the matter of cofactors in this result. Things like socioeconomic background, population origin(different populations gain weight in different ways. EG Some African populations are more prone to weight gain than some East Asian populations), geographic origin(a fat Italian lass is likely eating a very different diet than a fat Australian), even factors like smoking. (Smokers tend to be thinner). I noted the effect was much greater for women than men and extra weight in men was more correlated with earlier mortality.

There's also the matter of those overweight oldest people studied. Those say 90 years old would have become fat on a very different diet than 20 year olds today. They were also much less likely to be overweight kids. If you look at the trajectory of medium levels of weight gain, they start off as normal kids and teens and in the twenties the weight creeps up, then by the forties "middle aged spread" is evident in both sexes. A while ago I read a study of dress sizes of European women divided by country and age group. And a few interesting things emerged. Irish women were more likely to be overweight at 25, but they stayed in and around that weight into middle age, whereas Italian women were more likely to small of frame, like two, even three dress sizes smaller, yet they tended to shoot up in weight after their mid 30's and were the same size or bigger than Irish women of that age and up. This trend tended to be common through Europe, except for French women, they tended to buck the trend and showed the least weight gain through life. It's the stinky cheese and wine.

So when they're interviewing fat 90 years olds, in the studies I've read they're very rarely asking the questions about what their weight and weight changes were throughout life. Again very different to someone who has been overweight since four, rather than forty.

That said I'd well be inclined to believe much of it. Maybe the monkey brain thinks "I'm fat, times must be good, better reproduce like mad and to do that let's stay healthier"?

Naos · 07-02-2019 12:15am

Wibbs wrote: »

Makes sense S as muscle is heavier than fat.

Well, its not really. 1kg of muscle will weigh the same a 1kg of fat, muscle just takes up less space.

SusieBlue wrote: »

I just checked my BMI,out of interest.
According to the chart, I'm very overweight, and very close to becoming obese.

I'm a size 8-10 and have 17% body fat. My shape is lean and in proportion.
I'm not an athlete, I go to the gym 3/4 times a week, eat relatively well and get my 10k steps in.
I wouldn't consider myself to be super fit or anything like that.

To be fair for a woman at 17% BF you'd want to be very lean, how was this measured? And what is your height and weight?

Richard Hillman wrote: »

There is no crisis. Vested interests need to come out with more extreme "Report's" and "Studies" to seem relevant.

Anyway, who wants to be a 5k run a day person, when all that will happen is that you'll end up in a nursing home in your 80s, unable to remember your children's name and having somebody wipe your bum for you.

Enjoy your lives.

I hear this bandied around a lot and to be fair, it's a poor view. It is a good feeling to be able to run 5km, go on a hike or simply walking up the stairs without being out of breath.

Most people who eat crap and don't exercise just don't realise how clouded their minds are most of the time. It's only when your eat well and your energy levels stabilise that your realise it.

07-02-2019 12:24am

I don't understand why people always chime in with 1kg = 1kg. We know what he meant.
Next time i pick up a heavy box I'll have to see if someone jumps around the corner to tell me 1kg of heavy box is the same as 1kg of anything else

Macy0161 · 07-02-2019 12:27am

Only scientific evidence of sugar addiction is from rodents. Nothing proven in humans.

We like high sugar high fat foods because they taste nice, not because of an addiction.

Fwiw, I was a prop forward from when I started mini rugby, "big boned" my whole life, until I decided I wasn't. My body has responded to calorie deficit rather than settling at a particular (over) weight.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 07-02-2019 12:52am

metaoblivia wrote: »

Yes. I have a cousin who has been obese her entire life. Her mother was obese and that's how she grew up. She's never weighed under 200lbs in her adult life (she's also 5"10, so just a big woman in general).

My cousin now has two kids, both of whom are perfectly average in size - not overweight at all. That's because my cousin cooks healthy meals for her family. She also began working out 5 times a week a little over a year ago and lost 40lbs in fairly short order. And then she stopped losing weight. She was eating healthy and still working out (weights and resistance training with some cardio), but the weight was no longer shifting. Despite her weight loss, if you were to see her on the street, you'd definitely think she was obese.

My cousin isn't lazy. She works full time with special needs children, has two children of her own, refurbishes vintage furniture and attends local markets regularly to sell those items, plans family meals, continues to work out 4-5 times a week. But if she wants to ever be a "normal" size, she's going to have to fight for it because her body has settled into a weight range. And if she ever gets to that normal size, she'll have to continue fighting just to maintain that weight for the rest of her life. It's an incredibly tough cycle to be in and has to be demoralizing to hear others - who don't have to fight as hard to maintain a normal weight - accuse her of just being lazy and not having the willpower.

Post of the thread.

But it will be criminally overlooked because people love to ride the sanctimony pony. Anyone who advertises their weakness, such as smokers, overweight and obese folk, watch out!

Case in point:

Cake Man wrote: »

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. No human body just "settles into a weight range". You're weight is dictated by how many calories you consistently take in, it's as simple as that. If you are consistently taking in less calories than your body needs, you WILL lose weight. To claim otherwise means you'd be trying to defy the laws of thermodynamics. If your cousin isn't losing weight, it's because he/she simply isn't in a calorie deficit. That's all it is, not this concept of the body "settling into a weight range" crap, which smacks of a defeatist attitude and "Oh I'm just going to give up because obviously my body doesn't want to shift the weight..." mentality.

No, there’s hard science supporting exactly what Metaoblivia has said about her cousin. I hope you read some of the links that have been provided to you on the topic a few posts up from mine. To disregard them would be a bit obstinate.

And your reply to Metaoblivia just plain saddened me. Here is someone (her cousin) who is really trying and is still being judged. I honestly don’t know how anyone could read that post and feel anything but empathy.

Ardillaun · 07-02-2019 1:10am

In the middle of that interesting but difficult article from 2010, the authors seem to introduce the concept of a chow diet without a great deal of explanation:

It is tempting to speculate that imperfect body weight control is due to our present lifestyle habits, which offset biological control. This idea is in line with animal studies in which so-called cafeteria (or Western) diets resulted in hyperphagia (i.e., the animals lost intake control), progressive weight gain, and obesity when compared with a normal chow diet [45]. Switching back again to a chow diet, the rats normalized their body weights (i.e., the animals readjusted their weights to previous levels), and in the long term, this resulted in a normal weight trajectory [45].

They might have added something like this for casual readers like myself:

https://multipurina.ca/en/rodents/products/

It would appear that thinness, like extreme obesity, is largely a heritable trait:

https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1007603

Our obesogenic environment acts on genetically vulnerable individuals to increase their weight. As in so many conditions, some families are more resistant than others.

The message I get from all this on the intake side is to increase my fruit and raw veggies, cut down on the desserts, sugar and alcohol, and do a bit of intermittent fasting at least once a week.

Wibbs · 07-02-2019 1:10am

Naos wrote:

Well, its not really. 1kg of muscle will weigh the same a 1kg of fat, muscle just takes up less space.

You don't say?

bluewolf wrote: »

I don't understand why people always chime in with 1kg = 1kg. We know what he meant.
Next time i pick up a heavy box I'll have to see if someone jumps around the corner to tell me 1kg of heavy box is the same as 1kg of anything else

1kg of feathers sprang to mind B.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Post of the thread.

But it will be criminally overlooked because people love to ride the sanctimony pony.

Do you ever ponder why some religious and political regimes and cultures kick off OD? They target the curtain twitching holier than thou sanctimonious set. Crawthumpers are crawthumpers almost regardless of the subject matter.

Ardillaun · 07-02-2019 1:20am

BTW one of the world’s major experts on obesity hails from Finglas:

http://www.ucd.ie/medicine/ourcommunity/ouralumni/alumniprofilesinterviews/profstephenorahilly/

You will notice he’s not exactly the scrawniest specimen you ever laid eyes on. In this department all we can do is our best.

Zorya · 07-02-2019 8:17am

Richard Hillman wrote: »

For whatever you will pay for with a surgery, you'll pay multiple times for late age Alzheimer's or dementia. 24 hour care and misery for all parties. Even if a person avoided those ills and Lived healthily until they are in their 90s, that's 20+ years of a state pension.

What are you saying here? Some sort of oblique argument for euthanasia, it looks like. So what if people are 50 years on a state pension? Do you want to cull those who take too much pension? Do you want to refuse people operations in case they live too long afterwards?

The laugh is money is made up data messed around with to create the idea of scarcity. But we should begrudge the elders a share of the fantasy funds, eh.

And I know a lot of people seem to have some kind of fashionable contempt not only for aging but also for life itself, but only 5%, maximum 10%, of elderly people get dementia. I would say at 90% plus the odds are in our favour. Very, very many old people live on independently in their homes to advanced age, with a little bit of help maybe if needed, though many of the wiry ancients around these parts refuse even that. I have seen men well over 80 climb farm gates no bother to them. And indescribably old women cycling calmly in the hills.
There was a time when people had a reverence for old people.

It wasnt me123 · 07-02-2019 10:23am

Zorya wrote: »

What are you saying here? Some sort of oblique argument for euthanasia, it looks like. So what if people are 50 years on a state pension? Do you want to cull those who take too much pension? Do you want to refuse people operations in case they live too long afterwards?

........

No that's not what he was saying - don't go off on a rant without looking at the posts before it!

He was responding to a post I said that people can eat what they like as long as I don't have to pay for their surgeries in later life when they've abused their bodies like the complications of diabetes, strokes, heart disease etc.

I think the point he was making, quite well actually, is that do we pay for medical treatment in later life to "fix" poor eating when younger or have all these healthy people (who didn't eat badly when younger) just being kept alive with awful diseases like dementia etc. and we pay their pensions.

So do we pay for the medical treatment or their pensions when they have no quality of life!

Zorya · 07-02-2019 10:30am

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

No that's not what he was saying - don't go off on a rant without looking at the posts before it!

He was responding to a post I said that people can eat what they like as long as I don't have to pay for their surgeries in later life when they've abused their bodies like the complications of diabetes, strokes, heart disease etc.

I think the point he was making, quite well actually, is that do we pay for medical treatment in later life to "fix" poor eating when younger or have all these healthy people (who didn't eat badly when younger) just being kept alive with awful diseases like dementia etc. and we pay their pensions.

So do we pay for the medical treatment or their pensions when they have no quality of life!

I read the posts before it.
I actually responded to the very post of yours that you mention by quoting a Danish study which shows that it is those with higher BMI who have lowest mortality risk. Bloody bastards living longer.

You will pay for lots of things in your life, and a lot of it to subsidise the very, very rich. You will bail out bondholders and banks and pay for environmental damage done by huge corporations. You will pay for plenty of surgeries on people who have eaten well and been good. You will pay for children who are not yours to be educated. You will pay for ornery ol' fools who refuse to lie down and die. What ya gonna do about it.

''So do we pay for the medical treatment or their pensions when they have no quality of life...'' ~ How about yes? Like civilised humans.

It wasnt me123 · 07-02-2019 10:34am

Zorya wrote: »

I read the posts before it.
I actually responded to the very post of yours that you mention by quoting a Danish study which shows that it is those with higher BMI who have lowest mortality risk. Bloody bastards living longer.

....

Look at it again, I didn't quote any Danish study!

Better still go have a coffee and breathe

Zorya · 07-02-2019 10:36am

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

Look at it again, I didn't quote any Danish study!

Better still go have a coffee and breathe

Think you better have the coffee

Twas I what quoted the Danish study.

Macy0161 · 07-02-2019 10:36am

Zorya wrote: »

Think you better have the coffee Twas I what quoted the Danish study.

Have a coffee and a danish?

Zorya · 07-02-2019 10:38am

Macy0161 wrote: »

Have a coffee and a danish?

_Brian · 07-02-2019 10:38am

metaoblivia wrote: »

Yes. I have a cousin who has been obese her entire life. Her mother was obese and that's how she grew up. She's never weighed under 200lbs in her adult life (she's also 5"10, so just a big woman in general).

My cousin now has two kids, both of whom are perfectly average in size - not overweight at all. That's because my cousin cooks healthy meals for her family. She also began working out 5 times a week a little over a year ago and lost 40lbs in fairly short order. And then she stopped losing weight. She was eating healthy and still working out (weights and resistance training with some cardio), but the weight was no longer shifting. Despite her weight loss, if you were to see her on the street, you'd definitely think she was obese.

My cousin isn't lazy. She works full time with special needs children, has two children of her own, refurbishes vintage furniture and attends local markets regularly to sell those items, plans family meals, continues to work out 4-5 times a week. But if she wants to ever be a "normal" size, she's going to have to fight for it because her body has settled into a weight range. And if she ever gets to that normal size, she'll have to continue fighting just to maintain that weight for the rest of her life. It's an incredibly tough cycle to be in and has to be demoralizing to hear others - who don't have to fight as hard to maintain a normal weight - accuse her of just being lazy and not having the willpower.

If she wants to loose more weight she needs to be burning significantly more calories than she is consuming. This is a life long habit of being fat that she is trying to shed and it takes hard work.
Busy people can be fat, they’re still eating more than they’re burning, that’s how it works.

If you continuously burn more than you consume then your body has to draw on its fat reserves to fuel itself, it can’t get the energy from anything else.

I’m not saying she’s lazy, but being busy doesn’t mean she is burning off the calorie. And activities are secondary, eating controlled volumes of calories is the primary. If she’s not loosing weight then she’s missing something or just being untruthful about what she is consuming.

Macy0161 · 07-02-2019 10:41am

AllForIt wrote: »

The expression 'everything in moderation' does't quite work anymore because of what we eat nowadays.

Specifically, if you eat biscuits/cake/junk food every day, which are either full of hydrogenated fat or sugar or both, and you are not overweight indeed even slim, you still have a problem.

Everything in moderation does really work, because I don't believe the intent is biscuits/ cake/ junk every day. But sometimes, as part of a healthy balanced diet, everything in moderation. Diet changes are likely to be more sustainable with no foods or food groups completely excluded, and less likely to lead to a binge/ blow out.

Zorya · 07-02-2019 10:42am

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

Look at it again, I didn't quote any Danish study!

Better still go have a coffee and breathe

:pac: and I have just seen that you thanked me for quoting it in response to your post.

(I had a rough night too, damn insomnia, so I'll let you off on previously good behaviour.)

Naos · 07-02-2019 10:43am

Wibbs wrote: »

You don't say?

1kg of feathers sprang to mind B.

Well, I do say because you're throwing out a comment that is incorrect. "Makes sense as muscle is heavier than fat".
How exactly does that make sense and if you know it to be false, why not just say the true statement?

bluewolf wrote: »

I don't understand why people always chime in with 1kg = 1kg. We know what he meant.

Next time i pick up a heavy box I'll have to see if someone jumps around the corner to tell me 1kg of heavy box is the same as 1kg of anything else

I do not get your heavy box analogy at all - what has that got to do with what I said?

Wibbs · 07-02-2019 10:55am

Naos wrote: »

Well, I do say because you're throwing out a comment that is incorrect. "Makes sense as muscle is heavier than fat".
How exactly does that make sense and if you know it to be false, why not just say the true statement?

I'm not sure if you're being serious, or ...

You said: Well, its not really. 1kg of muscle will weigh the same a 1kg of fat, muscle just takes up less space. No shit Sherlock. I said muscle is heavier than fat.

OK. Let's break it down to the dumbest of levels. Is lead heavier than wood? Would I not be a moron if I said, nope wood is heavier than lead? If I said 1kg of lead was the same weight as 1kg of wood I'd be correct, but that's not what we're talking about is it? Now we can get into mass and densities and all that, but I'm not sure that's going to help if you're coming out with statements like these.

I do not get your heavy box analogy at all - what has that got to do with what I said?

*Insert facepalm meme here*

ct5amr2ig1nfhp · 07-02-2019 10:55am

The obesity crisis, and I believe most of us agree it is a crisis, is mostly down to poor parenting and lack of personal responsibility IMHO. While the state and education system have their role to play, it is up to individuals and parents to educate themselves and their children on a healthy lifestyle.

If I was to pick one contributing factor, it is lazy parenting.

Driving to school day in day out when you're within 5 minute walking distance and the sun shining
Pasta or pizza EVERY evening, dumped in ketchup or butter, not a sign of any meat or veg
Tolerating BS in relation to meals "I don't like X, I don't like Y so I am not eating it"
Shoving tablets in kids face to keep them quiet, game consoles, TV for hours so mammy or daddy can have a moment to themselves
ZERO participaction in exercise, teams, outdoor or indoor activities
Parents not able to boil a f**king egg FFS.
The list is endless...

The sugar tax is an absolute farce btw. I am disgusted that was even entertained. It's right up there with off licence closing times and minimum pricing on alcohol.

07-02-2019 10:58am

It's indeed a huge problem.
It's a contributing factor to why the HSE is w@nked, hospitals full of fat cnuts and their associated ailments.

Dalomanakora · 07-02-2019 11:01am

Augeo wrote: »

It's indeed a huge problem.
It's a contributing factor to why the HSE is w@nked, hospitals full of fat cnuts and their associated ailments.

I was a "fat cnut" until last year (still a little overweight) and the couple of times I was in hospital, it wasn't weight related. One was a suspected burst ovarian cyst, one was sepsis and has resulted in me needing numerous surgeries from complications.

Funnily enough, I saw FAR more drunken assholes and far more old people with colds in A&E those nights than I did fat people

Marengo · 07-02-2019 11:03am

If we all jogged on the spot for the time equivalent we spend typing messages here on boards, social media etc.. We'd have no problems, half joking, half in earnest

Zorya · 07-02-2019 11:12am

Dalomanakora wrote: »

I was a "fat cnut" until last year (still a little overweight) and the couple of times I was in hospital, it wasn't weight related. One was a suspected burst ovarian cyst, one was sepsis and has resulted in me needing numerous surgeries from complications.

Funnily enough, I saw FAR more drunken assholes and far more old people with colds in A&E those nights than I did fat people

And how about stupidity as a factor? I'm not fat but I came within centimetres of killing myself stone dead last year and when I was in hospital I confessed to the doctor that I was so embarrassed that it was my utter jaw-dropping stupidity that almost killed me. He reassured me that if stupidity was ruled a reason not to treat people in A and E they would have very few patients.

Dalomanakora · 07-02-2019 11:13am

Zorya wrote: »

And how about stupidity as a factor? I'm not fat but I came within centimetres of killing myself stone dead last year and when I was in hospital I confessed to the doctor that I was so embarrassed that it was my utter jaw-dropping stupidity that almost killed me. He reassured me that if stupidity was ruled a reason not to treat people in A and E they would have very few patients.

My own jaw dropping stupidity in not seeking medical attention earlier is why I ended up with sepsis :pac: Lots and lots of us stupid arseholes in there too :pac:

It wasnt me123 · 07-02-2019 11:24am

Zorya wrote: »

:pac: and I have just seen that you thanked me for quoting it in response to your post.

(I had a rough night too, damn insomnia, so I'll let you off on previously good behaviour.)

If I did I removed it cos it isnt their now and go patronise someone else.

Its lazy parenting that has children/teenagers overweight and leads to terribly bullying and fat shaming in children which they carry into later life.

Easier to give in and be a friend then say no and be a parent.

zell12 · 07-02-2019 11:53am

DailyMail - No wonder we've got an obesity problem
– look how a Sunday roast has gone from sparse to supersize over the decades

Macy0161 · 07-02-2019 11:54am

Marc Important Shampoo wrote: »

If I was to pick one contributing factor, it is lazy parenting.

Driving to school day in day out when you're within 5 minute walking distance and the sun shining

Just to pick one that I don't necessarily agree with - our society has been allowed be dominated by the private car. Vulnerable road users, including children walking or cycling to school, are actually blamed for putting themselves in danger*.

The car is king, and yes I believe it is contributing to obesity, as an active commute has been shown to be one of the most sustainable (in terms of people keeping it up) forms of exercise people can do. But there's a risk of labelling it laziness when there's understandable concerns about letting children walk our roads.

We're currently having that debate as parents ourselves. Well within walking distance, but the speed and amount of distracted driving we see on the short stretch without a footpath is a real fear.

*have a look at countless threads and comments on motors and cycling. It's basically everyone else get out of the way of the motorist. The RSA and Gardai carry on the victim blaming with the solution PPE, rather than motorist behaviours and enforcement.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp · 07-02-2019 12:48pm

While I see where you're coming from and agree with the safety aspect, particularly in a rural environment and/or where there is lack of footpaths, the majority of children would have access to a footpath from home to school (particular in the larger cities, Dublin, Galway, Cork).

Macy0161 wrote: »

Just to pick one that I don't necessarily agree with - our society has been allowed be dominated by the private car. Vulnerable road users, including children walking or cycling to school, are actually blamed for putting themselves in danger*.

The car is king, and yes I believe it is contributing to obesity, as an active commute has been shown to be one of the most sustainable (in terms of people keeping it up) forms of exercise people can do. But there's a risk of labelling it laziness when there's understandable concerns about letting children walk our roads.

We're currently having that debate as parents ourselves. Well within walking distance, but the speed and amount of distracted driving we see on the short stretch without a footpath is a real fear.

*have a look at countless threads and comments on motors and cycling. It's basically everyone else get out of the way of the motorist. The RSA and Gardai carry on the victim blaming with the solution PPE, rather than motorist behaviours and enforcement.

07-02-2019 1:54pm

Dalomanakora wrote: »

I was a "fat cnut" until last year (still a little overweight) and the couple of times I was in hospital, it wasn't weight related. One was a suspected burst ovarian cyst, one was sepsis and has resulted in me needing numerous surgeries from complications.

Funnily enough, I saw FAR more drunken assholes and far more old people with colds in A&E those nights than I did fat people

Apologies, folk with heart disease etc from being fat don't end up in hospital, silly me. Also A&E is representative of the general hospital population too. No such thing as planned procedures etc, silly me again.

An of course, you are representative of all fat cnut patients, cheers for the heads up.

Naos · 07-02-2019 2:17pm

Wibbs wrote: »

I'm not sure if you're being serious, or ...

You said: Well, its not really. 1kg of muscle will weigh the same a 1kg of fat, muscle just takes up less space. No shit Sherlock. I said muscle is heavier than fat.

OK. Let's break it down to the dumbest of levels. Is lead heavier than wood? Would I not be a moron if I said, nope wood is heavier than lead? If I said 1kg of lead was the same weight as 1kg of wood I'd be correct, but that's not what we're talking about is it? Now we can get into mass and densities and all that, but I'm not sure that's going to help if you're coming out with statements like these.

Ok Wibbs.

Obesity crisis in Ireland Mod Note post 1

Comments