A CNN map shows the American obesity epidemic since 1985, and it’s freaky. Why is it happening? High fructose corn syrup? Fast food? Cheap carbohydrates? Lack of moral fiber?
Tell us what you think in the comments. What has changed since 1985?
Obesity in the US [CNN via Digg]
More From Consumerist
-
CDC Study Reveals That At Least 20% Of People In Each State In America Are Obese
-
As If We Need Another Reason To Hate BPAs, Study Links Them To Higher Childhood Obesity Rates
-
AMA Says Money From Soda Taxes Should Be Used To Fight Obesity
-
Group Calls For Limits On Sugar In Soft Drinks
-
Coca-Cola Taking Its Head Out Of The Sand, Addressing Obesity For The First Time In Ads
GO MICHIGAN.
@bbbici: Hell no if you can count the ribs on a girl thats called starvation. Its totally gross. I would rather see a mildly plump girl anyday than a walking skeleton.
@rocnrule: “Someone else did it” is not an excuse to be rude to other people.
1. Let’s not make excuses for fat people because they have health problems, most of the reason *why* they have health problems is because they are fat.
2. I think the disposable income theory has alot of merit. Back in the day you were on one income and your Dad (in most cases) would never by that crap because he had to buy the staples. Things like McDonald’s, ‘eating out’, and ice cream were rare treats that your parents would ‘splurge on’. Add to that the fact that Mom would be making your lunch and dinner.
3. Most ‘fad’ diets are only fads because people don’t follow through on them. My wife and I both lost a lot of weight on the South Beach Diet years ago and we still cook and prepare 90% of our own meals. We very rarely go out to the major fast food chains (we hit White Castle once or twice out of novelty, and of course pizza every once in a while). But anyway, my point is that if you follow through and actually make a dedicated lifestyle change, it works.
I was curious so I started Googling. Here is the percentage of the state population living below the poverty line, as well as the ranking of per capita income, in each of the >25% states:
Alabama: 16% / 41th
Arkansas: 16.4% / 48th
Kentucky: 16% / 42nd
Louisiana: 16.8% / 50th
Michigan: 12.3% / 24th
Mississippi: 17.3% / 49th
Tennessee: 15% / 36th
Texas: 16.7% / 27th
West Virginia: 15.8% / 47th
Compare the 15% – 19% range:
Colorado: 9.9% / 8th
Connecticut: 9.1% / 1st
Massachusetts: 9.7% / 2nd
Montana: 14.6% / 39th
Rhode Island: 11.5% / 13th
Utah: 9.5% / 45th
Vermont: 8.2% / 22nd
I’m no expert or anything and I know there are a lot of factors. Just found this interesting.
@markwm:
No, HFCS 55 is 55% fructose – HFCS 90, which is in most non-beverage items, is 90 PERCENT artifically elevated fructose. And it’s what your body does with that physiologically that may be impacting weight. Because your body does not metabolize it until AFTER it is sent to the liver, it also does not detect that those calories have been consumed while you are eating. Thus delaying your fullness signal, and prompting you to consume more calories. Also, the calories from fructose, since it is not metabolized until after it goes to the liver, turns into fat FIRST – and is then available for use.
And just in time for this debate: [Yahoo! News]
Study: Obesity is Socially Contagious
People who notice their friend packing on pounds might want to steer clear if they value their sleek physiques.
A new study finds that when the scale reads “obese” for one individual, the odds that their friends will become obese increase by more than 50 percent.
The study, published in the July 26 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, suggests that obesity is “socially contagious,” as it can spread among individuals in close social circles. The likely explanation: A person’s idea of what is an appropriate body size is affected by the size of his or her friends.
Conversely, the researchers found that thinness is also contagious.
@rocnrule: I hear that a lot, but I somehow doubt any significant portion of us are densely muscular rather than just plain fat.
Is THIS why the TSA is banning cheese?
Seriously: the problem is that meals are prepared for people doing manual labor (construction, etc) and we’re eating those meals, sitting on our asses at work or reading blogs instead of going out. We drive instead of walking or taking a bicycle – I looked down town today, and the only place with a bike rack was the library.
After I get paid, I’m getting a bike for getting to work – it will pay for itself in the gas I don’t buy, in five months, even taking into consideration that there are days that I’ll need my car (doctors’ appointments, supermarket, having to shuttle one or both my parents, et cetera). I’ll still have a big butt, but maybe I can get rid of some of the excess thigh.
The main thing that has changed since 1985 (in 1998, precisely) is that the definition of “obese” was adjusted to include more people in it. The fact that powerful drug companies sell weight loss drugs to people who are defined as “obese,” and that these companies have immense influence among the sort of people who make these determinations, is probably a *complete* coincidence.
Perfectly average people became “obese,” and scare stories about the increase in “obesity” still fill the news today, despite the fact that people have about the same range of weights that they always did.
People believe it because everybody likes a good moral panic, and it’s easy to believe “back when I was young, why, we weren’t full of moral turpitude like these fat kids with their terrible parents!” That shit *sells*.
Here’s an article on the change:
[edition.cnn.com]
Via BigFatBlog:
[www.bigfatblog.com]
If there were no other amazing consequence to the moral panic caused by telling everyone they’re “obese,” we need only look to the fact that a pharmaceutical company is raking in bucks on a drug which will give you uncontrollable diarrhea but produces a small amount of weight loss. And they think that it will make them healthier, because weight and health are considered to be the same thing. Now *that* is a marketing *coup.*
A number of things have changed, a lot of them contributing to a snowball weffect on health.
We started allowing junk food advertising on Saturday mornings. Now, the majority of food ads aimed at kids are for poison.
Junk food has gotten continually cheaper and easier to find. When I was a kid in 1985, the nearest fast food was at the mall ten miles away. My dad’s meal was just like mine, only without a toy. Today, I could choose from six places within walking distance of my house- all of which serve larger portions than they did thirty years ago. Worse, it’s all made of items that are artifically priced low because my tax money subsidizes it.
There is a lot more available prepackaged food- groceries now have a tiny area devoted to fresh food, and miles and miles of boxes of “thirty minutes or less” packages filled with salt and cheap carbohydrates. YTou can get three meals a day out of boxes that don’t need refrigeration or even heating now.
There is corn syrup (ie, cheap carbohydrate sweetener)in everything- even bread, meat, condiments, soup. Everything is sweeter.
We don’t drink water. Again, when I was a kid, soda was an occasional treat, now nobody will drink unsweetened liquids- even schools and hospitals have vending machines. (The only clear memory of a VMs I have circa 1985 were at gas stations and laundromats.)
Then there is the near impossibility of natural exercise- we drive evrywhere now, and even if we wanted to, where is there to walk to?
@enm4r:
BMI makes SOME sense when you’re looking at large populations. Really heavy muscular folks, people with Paget’s disease and such (people who would have very high BMI but aren’t fat) are relatively rare, as are small people whose weight is mostly fat (low BMI but are fat)
Of course, even if you’re only somewhat towards those extremes, it seems unfair to you. And if someone is telling you personally that you’re too fat based on your BMI, it is. But when looking at nations as a whole, it isn’t nearly so stupid.
Natural foods are better PERIOD.
This is the SIMPLEST WAY IT CAN BE PUT:
Being CHEAP is bad because:
cheap=bad;
cheap_occurs_by=debt=excessive_pricing_disorder
<–
Caused by “business”/ the big bubble known as the US market
–>
cheap_also=corn_syrup
exhibit_A_summary=the problems in the USA are INTERCONNECTED.
Business=US market=china=cheap=cheap food=cheap nutritional content=cheap is bad=if you can’t figure it out from here, I don’t know what to say.
As for the why should I spend more money if I’m already poor issue, well, you probably wouldn’t be in this position IF people weren’t cheap, that 50$ pant is probably made in some place where they can make it for a reallllly cheap price, I know, I come from one emerging country{southeast Asia(starts with a B)[NOT INDIA]}, the quality is often good{the [non-government related] businessman there have good intentions and often want to sell good things}, but the workers are OFTEN/ALWAYS underpaid {I know alot of people}. And that not the beginning, now when in the USA, the pant probably costs ~40$, 30$ more than it should be {5$ for pant, 5$ for profit}.
And now think about this, paying $60 for a pant that lasts 3 years is better than paying 40$ for a pan that lasts 1 year.
[(60/3)and(40/1)} is the cost of the pant per year respectively.
@JuliusJefferson: And it is soooo good. What is this obsession with looking like an escapee from a famine anyway? Wish I had some weight.
@Sherryness:
I don’t believe you’re correct. HFCS 90 is rarely used in food.
See this UMD article (from today, no less!) and this glossary. HFCS-55 and HFCS-42, which more closely mimic sucrose, are much more commonly used.
A number of sites claims HFCS-90 is more common in baked goods, but I’m not sure where that statement comes from, I can’t find an authoritative location for that statement.
@mathew: Uh, I think the first line of that article you linked to has a typo in it, especially since the industry contention in the article is pretty clear and says HFCS does indeed contain fructose, so clearly it’s related to it.
These HFCS-is-a-boogeyman articles consistently rely on the mistaken thought that HFCS = 100% fructose, which it isn’t. See my reply to sherryness too.
@bbbici:
Not really. Thirty bananas in a day wouldn’t take much effort, although I wouldn’t want to be near your toilet once they did what too many bananas can do.
Caloric density has increased as food costs have come down. The entire agribusiness industry is an economic system, and as such, is interested in delivering “more” for “less”. Technology has radically increased the industry’s ability to do so (The work I do is related to ag production and new product development). You have to REALLY care and be invested in everything you put into your mouth in order to counteract the billions of dollars that the industry puts creating things that you want. Most people are simply not focused on it in their daily lives.
@Sherryness: Actually, I work with baked goods for a food manufacturer and we don’t use HFCS 90. In fact, according to [www.newsdesk.umd.edu], “HFCS-90 is mainly used in the production of HFCS-55, but is seldom directly added to foods and beverages.”
OK, so, this has been bugging me for a while. I’ve done a little research (granted, not exhaustive) and I haven’t been able to find what I’m looking for, which is scientific evidence that the HFCSs commonly used in food and drink, not fructose itself, is metabolized differently than sucrose. If any of the many HFCS detractors who post here can point me in the right direction, I would really appreciate it. In lieu of any hard evidence, however, it sounds a whole lot to me like the latest “x is incredibly bad for you!!!” crap that tends to happen when people just repeat what they’re told.
Again, if anyone can point me towards evidence to the contrary, I’ll retract what I’m saying here.
@bbbici:
@Murph1908:
@jgkelley:
@jamesdenver:
If you haven’t already seen It I recommend the documentary ‘The End of Suburbia’
Here are two clips
burbs are the slums of the future
[www.vsocial.com]
Life in the burbs
[www.vsocial.com]
@JuliusJefferson:
I starved for a week when I visited in-laws In Alabama. I’m vegetarian and they tried to feed me veggies laden in Crisco and lard…or cooked in chicken broth!:-P
1. If this topic interests you, try this book: [www.amazon.com]
2. The BMI scale may not work for 100% of the population, but it does work for most of it. The ranges were put where they are to correlate with chance of health problems due to weight, not some random “what looks good” standard. Just because the extremes like NFL players don’t fit doesn’t mean we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.
3. The solution? Teach your kids how to eat and exercise, and do it by example. One family at a time is how things will change.
I’m labeled as “obese” by my doctor. And, I’m a guy who wears 32-inch waist pants. 5’6″, 166 total cholesterol, 110/60 blood pressure, 185 pounds, apparently makes me obese. I think I’m being punished for actually working for a living, and not being a vegetarian. Until I start showing signs of heart disease, I’m not giving up my bologna and Havarti cheese sandwiches for lunch!
You CAN survive without AC in July in the Deep South. I work in an un-air-conditioned factory in Alabama. First, don’t worry about salt, except if you aren’t getting enough. Then, you need to drink lots of water. Coffee or soft drinks are no good. Water, and lots of it. There’s a hell-period every spring of about 7-10 days, where the temp first pushes up into the 90s, and you feel like dying. Keep pushing and drinking that water. Your body will adjust, and you’ll stop feeling so bad. Of course, having a 65-degree room to sleep in, when you’re off work, is nice…
@AcidReign: 185 for a 6′ tall person is slightly overweight. 155 is the max for 5’6″. Odds are you’re overweight. Of course it depends on whether that extra weight is muscle or fat. For the overwhelming majority of people, it’s fat.
I don’t see how you think you are being punished. Your health is something entirely separate from what other people think.
Bioengineered foods they feed the hogs, cattle, chicken (fattening them up for market) are also fattening us up. The states that have high obesity also have high poverty rates. Cheap food (macaroni & cheese, hot dogs, etc) are cheap on nutrition too. We shouldn’t be laughing at this, we should be demanding an explanation. Why are they trying to kill off poor people? Also, some of these red states are in rural areas where there isn’t much public transportation. The people have to drive everywhere instead of walking or running to catch a train.
Michigan (like Mississippi, Louisianna, Alabama)has lots of blacks; Texas has lots of Hispanics; Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia has lots of poor whites.
They need poor hungry (and fat) people to work their lousy minimum wage jobs.
No wonder it is hard to find thin, attractive, healthy people these days. Better move to Europe I guess!
@supra606: How many athletic people with high BMI’s do you see running around these days? Like 1 in 200? How many blubbery 290 lb walmart walrusses do you see shuffling around? 199 in 200?
I wasn’t a fatty until I started with the low fat foods they were pushing so long ago..I ate bacon and eggs and “real food” most of my life and was a normal weight.
It doesn’t help that now have a desk job.. but 4 days a week of working out, and watching my diet has not allowed me to drop a pound in 2 years… I really think the chemicals in our food and food packinging is a big factor for all of us… time will tell.