Westside Steve Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 Steve, I don't think poor people are more likely to be overweight because they are lazy and just don't work. More likely it has to do with the food that is readily available is bad for you, and healthier food is harder to get ahold of and more expensive. I mentioned in one of my earlier posts that I consider this a different situation than "non poor" Americans being fat because their parameters are different. poor people are poor in the first place primarily because they are lazy or stupid.of course you are completely wrong about how much it cost to eat healthy. As was mentioned before a McDonalds meal will cost you 6 or 7 bucks. how much is a bag of cheese doodles or a case of soda pop or a carton of cigarettes? a diet high in whole grains low in fat and high in vegetables with a small amount of lean meat is about the best way to eat and all that is available at the grocery store with your food stamps. it is also the most cost effective way to shop passing by the prepared foods and the cakes and the bag snacks and the Coca Cola and the sugar pops. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 poor people are poor in the first place primarily because they are lazy or stupid. of course you are completely wrong about how much it cost to eat healthy. As was mentioned before a McDonalds meal will cost you 6 or 7 bucks. how much is a bag of cheese doodles or a case of soda pop or a carton of cigarettes? a diet high in whole grains low in fat and high in vegetables with a small amount of lean meat is about the best way to eat and all that is available at the grocery store with your food stamps. it is also the most cost effective way to shop passing by the prepared foods and the cakes and the bag snacks and the Coca Cola and the sugar pops. WSS Chicken nuggets, fries and a 32 oz coke. Ghetto food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 Chicken nuggets, fries and a 32 oz coke. Ghetto food. You forgot to make it a diet coke because they have "the sugar". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 6 to 7 dollars? Shit. What the hell do you get at McDonalds? I mean, I get like 3 McChickens and 2 or 3 McDoubles and that is $6, but I don't think most people eat that much. I also don't think most poor people are poor because they are lazy or stupid. You don't know their individual situation or the environment they were brought up in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 6 to 7 dollars? Shit. What the hell do you get at McDonalds? I mean, I get like 3 McChickens and 2 or 3 McDoubles and that is $6, but I don't think most people eat that much. I also don't think most poor people are poor because they are lazy or stupid. You don't know their individual situation or the environment they were brought up in. pick any of the sandwiches and make it a value meal tell me what it costs. Go to the grocery store get a loaf of cheap bread on sale cheap hamburger and a bag of potatoes for 6 bucks. give me a list of reasons someone would be poor that don't include being lazy or stupid. Being born of lazy and stupid parents certainly falls under my guidelines. there are a percentage of students who succeed very well even from the shittiest schools. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 https://backstreets.com/setlists.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 Yeah I don't get on board with the "well there is no way out of their situation" trains of thought. I grew up really poor. Homeless shelter at one point after a house fire because we had no money saved because saving means you have excess money. Dad worked hard and we bounced back. Since we were poor, we got tuition assistance and thus we were able to go to college. Older sister is now a lawyer, I work in GIS, my younger brother owns his own HVAC company. If you are too dense or lazy to help yourself, no amount of social spending is going to save you. Example: my younger sister is a colossal waste of time and lives in project housing with two kids. Has zero initiative and lives off the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 I read the article, and it makes sense. I still feel like it essentially gives those that are overweight or obese a pass. I'm guessing for this reason that a belief like this would gain support in the Amerjcan public quickly, as so many of us are fat. No body has perfect genetics though. I have awful eye sight, terrible allergies, etc. I deal with it and it affects how I go about things. Having genes that make you more predisposed to not getting the same positive feeling from eating as others, causing you to eat more, doesn't necessarily give you a pass. Plus, with the number of overweight and obese people in the US, I'd have a very hard time believing it is all due to this genetic deficiency. In my mind it just eliminates self control and personal responsibility from the equation. You're telling people it is n9t their fault they eat awful and aren't active. That just seems like a slippery slope to people not being held accountable for other negative actions. Yes, it may be harder for someone to resist that cake than it is for someone else, but they need to know what is best for their health. That being said, if this research helped develop a more affective "dieting" pill, then great, more power to ya. Use what you have at your disposal. If this research helps us better understand the problem and our bodies better, fantastic. I totally get that sone people struggle with weight due to hormonal imbalances or whatever. I have a hard time believing the explosion of fat people has to do with the increases number of crappy food and that everyone one has poor genetics. It is just a situation where someone could be lazy and make terrible health decisions and suffer the same consequences as someone with a legitimate problem. It is unique in that sense and calling it a medical condition out of their control is dangerous IMO. You then have the public paying for the health care and services of the guy with the bad genes, plus the 6 other lazy dudes. It might get overdiagnosed. Like, for the same reason I feel there are way too many kids that supposedly have ADD. Instead your kid just not paying attention, not being smart, not being a good student (which could be blamed on you, the parent), you get to say "No, it is ADD! Not my fault!" and throw drugs at the situation. I definitely don't want a pass, as you know from reading my SciAm article. I want a paradigm shift. This is the current paradigm, all of it based partly on myth or stigmatization: - Fat people are that way because they have no self control and don't make good choices. - The key to weight loss is diet and exercise. - fat people are solely responsible for their condition. Here is the paradigm I want to see: - fat people are fat for many different reasons, ranging from hormonal issues, genetic issues, to psychological ones and we must also recognize that for biologically susceptible individuals, the salt/fat/sugar foods intensely marketed in our society are harder to resist for them because of food addiction. - the key to weight loss is eating the foods we are evolutionarily adapted to eating. Generally that means eating foods in their naturally occurring state with as little processing as possible. - fat people must be empowered to become their own agents of change. Stigmatizing them only makes them crave comfort, which they will seek in the foods making them fat in the first place. - society as a whole benefits from fat people losing weight as the reduced healthcare will bring healthcare costs down. I can't think of any other condition that leads to so many other health risks. Therefore we need to transition from a society that stigmatizes, mocks, and alienates obese people to one that supports them as people and supports their weight loss while educating them. For me,the real drive for weight loss came from the knowledge of how the food industry is turning us into cash cows. That and the fact just today I'm coming home from my second disk surgery in 10 years. So I think if you give fat people the kind of knowledge that lights a fire (I always say I took the red pill ala the matrix by educating myself on the food industries tactics), a support network, and a real sense of consequences, they will lose weight. I'm down to the lowest weight I've been since I got married and I'm gonna keep going until I hit 200 lbs. I'm with you on ADD, too, I think it is over diagnosed as well. However, it is important to remember that ALL behavior is biology, including being lazy, or hyperactive, etc Where else would it come from, unless you believe in a soul or spirit that inhabits us and is part of the behavioral equation? The question is what behaviors effect people so much that their quality of life suffers? And do we always have to medicate? I don't think we do, their are other ways to alter the biology for benefit without drugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 I think Woody is right to an extent, but only partially. It's too easy to take the cheap shot at big corporations and her evil manipulative ways. The fact is, as I said, the override of natural selection has allowed genetics to take over morph. You can look around and see that most people can eat whatever they feel like eating. Metabolism. There are a few who have to fight it everyday. Not everyone who eats at mcdonald's is obese. Not everyone who drinks beer is an alcoholic. There are wide variations in the level of addiction among cigarette smokers. Some people just have to struggle constantly. How about gambling addiction? I can't comprehend that that would compel me to lose everything I have. But it effects some people and they have to battle with that every day of their lives. I would bet there's not one person on this board who has experienced firsthand the torture it is to stay off heroin that affect some people. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 I think Woody is right to an extent, but only partially. It's too easy to take the cheap shot at big corporations and her evil manipulative ways. The fact is, as I said, the override of natural selection has allowed genetics to take over morph. You can look around and see that most people can eat whatever they feel like eating. Metabolism. There are a few who have to fight it everyday. Not everyone who eats at mcdonald's is obese. Not everyone who drinks beer is an alcoholic. There are wide variations in the level of addiction among cigarette smokers. Some people just have to struggle constantly. How about gambling addiction? I can't comprehend that that would compel me to lose everything I have. But it effects some people and they have to battle with that every day of their lives. I would bet there's not one person on this board who has experienced firsthand the torture it is to stay off heroin that affect some people. WSS Sure, I agree he has a point, I just think it's a lot more complicated then that as you can probably tell from my insanely long wall of text above lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Sure, I agree he has a point, I just think it's a lot more complicated then that as you can probably tell from my insanely long wall of text above lol. Oh I agree with you on a great many points sir. And the self control issue is by no means equal across the population. As with alcoholism 10 drinks is not enough but one is too many. I wonder if woody believes that the problem of homosexuality could be Alleviated by just a little bit more self control among that 3%. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Oh I agree with you on a great many points sir. And the self control issue is by no means equal across the population. As with alcoholism 10 drinks is not enough but one is too many. I wonder if woody believes that the problem of homosexuality could be Alleviated by just a little bit more self control among that 3%. WSS Homosexuality is not a medical problem/illness like obesity is. Your comment makes no sense, even being tongue in cheek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Homosexuality is not a medical problem/illness like obesity is. Your comment makes no sense, even being tongue in cheek. Medical problem? I thought it was natural. Because it happens, you know, like, in nature and stuff, dude. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 I definitely don't want a pass, as you know from reading my SciAm article. I want a paradigm shift. This is the current paradigm, all of it based partly on myth or stigmatization: - Fat people are that way because they have no self control and don't make good choices. - The key to weight loss is diet and exercise. - fat people are solely responsible for their condition. Here is the paradigm I want to see: - fat people are fat for many different reasons, ranging from hormonal issues, genetic issues, to psychological ones and we must also recognize that for biologically susceptible individuals, the salt/fat/sugar foods intensely marketed in our society are harder to resist for them because of food addiction. - the key to weight loss is eating the foods we are evolutionarily adapted to eating. Generally that means eating foods in their naturally occurring state with as little processing as possible. - fat people must be empowered to become their own agents of change. Stigmatizing them only makes them crave comfort, which they will seek in the foods making them fat in the first place. - society as a whole benefits from fat people losing weight as the reduced healthcare will bring healthcare costs down. I can't think of any other condition that leads to so many other health risks. Therefore we need to transition from a society that stigmatizes, mocks, and alienates obese people to one that supports them as people and supports their weight loss while educating them. For me,the real drive for weight loss came from the knowledge of how the food industry is turning us into cash cows. That and the fact just today I'm coming home from my second disk surgery in 10 years. So I think if you give fat people the kind of knowledge that lights a fire (I always say I took the red pill ala the matrix by educating myself on the food industries tactics), a support network, and a real sense of consequences, they will lose weight. I'm down to the lowest weight I've been since I got married and I'm gonna keep going until I hit 200 lbs. I'm with you on ADD, too, I think it is over diagnosed as well. However, it is important to remember that ALL behavior is biology, including being lazy, or hyperactive, etc Where else would it come from, unless you believe in a soul or spirit that inhabits us and is part of the behavioral equation? The question is what behaviors effect people so much that their quality of life suffers? And do we always have to medicate? I don't think we do, their are other ways to alter the biology for benefit without drugs. I realize not all obese people are that way because they are lazy and have no self control. But like ADD is overdiagnosed, I feel like the number of obese people that are told they are that way because of hormone imbalances or whatever will also be higher than what it is in reality. Who wouldn't want to hear that it actually isn't your fault? This will just flood the market with medication to fix the issue, whether people need it or not. But like I said, if they develop some meds that make weight loss super easy, more power to you. As Steve said, it is easy to just take shots at these large corporations, but I don't think they deserve 100% of the blame. I understand that we shouldn't demonize these people. But at the same time I don't think we should lie / coddle them. There are "fat acceptance" groups that want to claim this is a healthy lifestyle, which is dangerous. It is not healthy to be very overweight. Everyone's bodies are different, yeah, but there is a limit. Most people have something in their genetics that makes something more difficult for them than other people. Eyesight, immune system, allergies, learning ability, etc. A lot of these groups just need to deal with it, which may mean having to try harder and put more effort into something than a normal person would. I am hesitant to basically tell every obese person that they are off the hook. I do realize that some actually have this issue though. Like I said, I just think the accountability still needs to be there some Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Medical problem? I thought it was natural. Because it happens, you know, like, in nature and stuff, dude. WSS That is what I said... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 I realize not all obese people are that way because they are lazy and have no self control. But like ADD is overdiagnosed, I feel like the number of obese people that are told they are that way because of hormone imbalances or whatever will also be higher than what it is in reality. Who wouldn't want to hear that it actually isn't your fault? This will just flood the market with medication to fix the issue, whether people need it or not. But like I said, if they develop some meds that make weight loss super easy, more power to you. As Steve said, it is easy to just take shots at these large corporations, but I don't think they deserve 100% of the blame. I understand that we shouldn't demonize these people. But at the same time I don't think we should lie / coddle them. There are "fat acceptance" groups that want to claim this is a healthy lifestyle, which is dangerous. It is not healthy to be very overweight. Everyone's bodies are different, yeah, but there is a limit. Most people have something in their genetics that makes something more difficult for them than other people. Eyesight, immune system, allergies, learning ability, etc. A lot of these groups just need to deal with it, which may mean having to try harder and put more effort into something than a normal person would. I am hesitant to basically tell every obese person that they are off the hook. I do realize that some actually have this issue though. Like I said, I just think the accountability still needs to be there some Yeah I'm disgusted with the fat acceptance groups. I dunno if you read my blog article on my own website or on Scientific American, but I got in a long debate with members of these type of ppl in the comments on the SciAm version. It is extremely dangerous to condone this lifestyle, and yes, industry isn't 100% to blame. They, IMO don't get as much blame as they deserve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted April 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 What about fat pride? If it's hormones, well, they were born that way. So, being 400 lbs of blubber is natural, and a good thing. Woody is a fatophobe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Are we seriously trying to compare being fat (9 out of 10 fatties got there via Little Debbie and not a thyroid problem) to being gay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Ugh... It was only a matter of time until Cal tried the bring this spin here... It is over his head. That's fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Are we seriously trying to compare being fat (9 out of 10 fatties got there via Little Debbie and not a thyroid problem) to being gay? That is exactly what I was responding to when I wrote this scientific American article. It's ludicrous to compare the two. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/09/10/anti-obesity-is-not-the-new-homophobia/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Yeah, I agree with you. That's ridiculous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted April 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 fat because of hormones, gay because of ? I was being sarcastic, using the same dumb argument for the fun of it. It would apply to both. But typically, libs only argue points when they are in their agenda's favor. If they aren't in their agenda's favor, those points are no good. Funny how that works, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 i'm not gonna explain the difference it isnt worth the effort Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted April 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 woody translation: "uh...because I like gay, but I don't like obese" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted April 10, 2014 Report Share Posted April 10, 2014 Fat people are a drain on the tax payers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 Who said anything about small scale? We don't live in an age where they are all comparing this stuff on paper. You can make data models that can cover literally millions of different variables because everyone has access to each other's data over the course of decades. But carry on. I am sure you were the first person to ever consider there are "thousands of variables" involved. Yeah, small scale. Unless there is some duplicate earth somewhere where scientists can control EVERYTHING, any test, model, whatever it is small scale. Also, more input from researchers= more opportunity for bias to enter their "research." I'm not going to plan my future on what some "model" tells us is going to happen. Everyone knows the earths climate has been cyclical since history started being recorded. He'll even most of Greenland was thawed out and farmable it was discovered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 More researchers providing input means leas influence from bias or false data Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.