By the time I hit puberty, I literally was a freak. Very few people were my size, and fewer people were overweight. So in the last 35 years, what has changed? Are people dumber, lazier, and less motivated than people in the past? Why is this trend only seen in eating/exercise/weight (people are more educated and working more hours and spending more time in "productive" activities than people in the past, and sleeping less also)?
The social, economic, and cultural changes are partially responsible for the fact that 1 in 3 Americans are overweight 1 in 3. Not entirely, but partially.
Thank you, thank you. Kaplods I have long read and respected your contribution, and I support you on your position in this thread as well. But THIS...finally, someone who agrees with me!
SOMETHING CHANGED 30-40 years ago. SOMETHING in our world changed, and our bodies are reacting to it. This period of time is nothing from an evolutionary viewpoint, so whatever it is that changed, our bodies haven't had time to change with it and they're coping the best they can. Yes, it is up to me to make "the right choices". Putting that argument aside, the fact still remains that our bodies are responding to stimulus. I refuse to believe that we have all become lazy and complacent. I am not lazy, I am not stupid, I am not unmotivated. I deeply resent the assumption that I am any of these things on the basis of my size and appearance.
Now, it falls to me to figure out what's going on, and deal accordingly. As it falls to each of us. But it's a tremendous disservice to discount that challenge just because some of us, as individuals, have figured it out.
Society was not responsible for me buying 1/2 gallons of ice cream and treating them as single servings. Society never forced me to shovel M & M's (peanut, of course ), down my throat. Nor was it society that made me stop doing those things either. The "good" choices were always available to me. I just chose to ignore them.
Oh, me too. However, many people do not have the upbringing and education to know that the scads of things advertised as healthy are not really very healthy. I think some of the worst stuff out there is the stuff labelled "diet." Yet those are the first things many will choose when trying to get healthier. Many have never been taught to be skeptical when reading a menu and choosing a "salad" because it may nonetheless have 1200 calories. I find it very easy to think these things are so obvious to everyone, but ... they aren't. And besides just plain compassion, footing the bill for their medical costs is also motivation for more truth in advertising, and support for healthier food to have a fighting chance at being chosen.
I thin everything you said is true and important and crucial. But I don't think it goes far enough.
Oh, me too. However, many people do not have the upbringing and education to know that the scads of things advertised as healthy are not really very healthy. I think some of the worst stuff out there is the stuff labelled "diet." Yet those are the first things many will choose when trying to get healthier. Many have never been taught to be skeptical when reading a menu and choosing a "salad" because it may nonetheless have 1200 calories. I find it very easy to think these things are so obvious to everyone, but ... they aren't. And besides just plain compassion, footing the bill for their medical costs is also motivation for more truth in advertising, and support for healthier food to have a fighting chance at being chosen.
I thin everything you said is true and important and crucial. But I don't think it goes far enough.
:looks for a dadgum thumbs up emoticon and is coming up empty:
Oh, me too. However, many people do not have the upbringing and education to know that the scads of things advertised as healthy are not really very healthy. I think some of the worst stuff out there is the stuff labelled "diet." Yet those are the first things many will choose when trying to get healthier. Many have never been taught to be skeptical when reading a menu and choosing a "salad" because it may nonetheless have 1200 calories. I find it very easy to think these things are so obvious to everyone, but ... they aren't. And besides just plain compassion, footing the bill for their medical costs is also motivation for more truth in advertising, and support for healthier food to have a fighting chance at being chosen.
I thin everything you said is true and important and crucial. But I don't think it goes far enough.
You bring up some very valid points.
But not to sound like a broken record, when deciding to lead a healthy lifestyle, one MUST delve further. One must not leave it up to any one or any thing but themselves. And yup - take responsibility for what goes into ones mouth. Leaving nothing for granted - it's just that important.
Once I made the decision to be healthy and became a calorie counter, choosing that method because I knew I needed forced portion control and set limits, a whole new world opened up to me. It's THEN, that very second, that I STARTED doing some detective work and left no stone unturned. Left nothing up to chance. It was my health afterall. It's just too vital to leave it up to anyone else. Thank goodness I don't have to rely on anyone else. As the saying goes, "if you want something done right, do it yourself".
I'm not looking to argue, please believe me. I see your point. I really do. It would be fantastic if "society" made things simpler or more clear or - whatever - but that's just not the case. It is too big and broad a task and society is just not up to it.
This kind of, but not exactly, reminds me of the folks who say, "I don't have time to eat healthy". It falls somewhat into the same category. They're kind of interested in eating/being healthy, but not totally committed. I think interest alone is not enough. Perhaps those are the ones who start out cutting back on portions, "watching" themselves, etc. Head for the "diet" foods and the salads while eating out, without investigating further. Which I personally found not adequate enough to produce long lasting results.
But once you are totally and completely committed to being healthy, once you make it a tippy top priority - that's when REAL change occurs. That's when you educate yourself. That's when you become so dedicated that you seek the answers.
Society - life - is full of many, manychoices - and one must therefore choosevery, very carefully.
Last edited by rockinrobin; 05-18-2009 at 07:18 AM.
Reason: Added a thought
I'm only saying that sometimes a person (or at least some people) DO need something outside themselves. Yes deciding and committing yourself to the work are integral components, but they are necessary, but not sufficient for success. A person can do everything they can think of, with every ounce of their willpower, and still not be successful because they haven't thought of something that is contributing to the weight gain. If they don't know they need help, or don't know that outside help is available, where to look for it, or think they don't have access to it; no matter how committed, they could fail.
Some of those factors such as medical factors (like my bc, insulin resistance, and borderline thyroid issues) often do require outside assistance that isn't always available.
Learned helplessness is real. If a person fails often enough, they start to believe (with what feels like certaintly) that they cannot succeed. I've been more persistant than most, because in all other areas of my life, I've been able to succeed tremendously (usually with far, far LESS effort than with weight loss). Trying harder was a trap, not a solution, because I didn't have all the information that I needed.
I've been told so often that I must have been "more committed," this time, or finally been willing to "work harder," but that's not my experience. I'm almost succeeding despite myself, almost trying to prove I think that I really can do this "hardly trying." I'm doing the bare minimum over and above my usual. Taking "progress over perfection," to mean that so long as I am making an improvement, I don't have to work any harder until my progress stalls. It's really been the "lazy way to weight loss."
Some people (even fairly intelligent people) don't know that they need to work smarter, not harder - they rush at that brick wall over, and over, and over again - not knowing that they can succeed, but are on the wrong path.
How interesting this thread is! What wonderful gems it contains.
Obviously, the "right" path is different for each of us. One or more "keys" to successful weight loss/maintenance were outside our reach until our most recent attempts.
Finding all of the keys that are needed to unlock this very special treasure can be daunting. There is no map that will tell you where to look, or even how many keys you will need.
As I read everyone's posts, I do sense one common thread throughout. Everyone tackled their weight loss just as they would any other problem/obstacle in their life. They assessed the situation, made a plan, gathered data, evaluated the results, and continued the cycle.
I do believe that this is one of the main reasons I was able to succeed this time, when I had failed so many times before. Instead of making an emotional decision to lose the weight, I completely removed my emotions from the equation.
I made a decision to commit one year of my life to work on this problem. I amassed the resources I needed to be successful.
Community and support - 3FC, my family and friends Knowledge - 3FC, books, other websites Tools to carry out my plan- Healthy foods, recipes, exercise equipment, and DVDs, walking shoes, etc. Tools to analyze data - Fitday, scales - food and body, tape measure, mirror
I guess what I'm trying to say, is that - no matter how we "name" it - what words we use, those of us that are succeeding actually have more similarities than differences in our approach to weight loss.
We tend to focus on the last key or two that we needed to find, but for most of us - now that we stand with a full ring and compare our keys - there are many commonalities.
My final keys were community and accountability (journaling). Colleen's was finding the right plan. For others, it was personal responsibility. Our journeys look very, very different - but the keys we are using ...
(If you are still reading, and I get way too philosophical when I'm home sick and trying to keep my mind occupied)
I'll get off my now. And thanks to everyone that contributes to this thread! I am enjoying it immensely!
Last edited by CountingDown; 05-18-2009 at 05:49 PM.
Finding all of the keys that are needed to unlock this very special treasure can be daunting. There is no map that will tell you where to look, or even how many keys you will need.
This is why I think that weight loss research is extremely valuable, even if sometimes (heck, usually, I think) the researchers are asking the wrong questions, at least they're looking. And I think the danger is minimal of some of the research or information providing new excuses (such as the "cold" virus that is associated with weight gain, or the book we're discussing talking about "conditioned hypereating," and the deliberate encouragement of this by the companies that sell us food (and "food-like" substances, which is probably a more accurate discription of some of these products than to call them "food"). Information doesn't MAKE people make excuses. A person wanting an excuse doesn't need a new one, when all or any of the old ones will suffice (or they'll invent a completely new one of their own making - but they would have found an excuse regardless). Excuses don't fall on people though. People find excuses, excuses don't find people. People who aren't going to use an excuse, are going to use the new information appropriately (at worst, saying "huh, that's kind of interesting, but it doesn't apply to me, or it doesn't change what I'm doing). That kind of person is going to read this book, and say "huh, maybe it's a really good idea for me to avoid these kinds of foods, because they're likely to trigger what the author is talking about (I haven't read the book yet, just partial clips from reviews online).
Or a person reading about the "fat virus," may have an extra reason to make sure they and their families use good prevention strategies like proper hand-washing (not a bad decision, whether you're talking about a fat virus, or the swine flu).
Quote:
Originally Posted by CountingDown
As I read everyone's posts, I do sense one common thread throughout. Everyone tackled their weight loss just as they would any other problem/obstacle in their life. They assessed the situation, made a plan, gathered data, evaluated the results, and continued the cycle.
That was another brick wall for me. It was very difficult for me to think and treat weight loss as a skill just like any other, instead of the emotionally-charged, backward way we're taught to think of weight loss. Mostly, we're taught (by seeing, reading, hearing about how "every one else is doing it"), that dieting is someting that you're supposed to be absolutely perfect and best and most dedicated to in the beginning, and then weight loss and other measures of success success and also strict compliance to your food plan will taper off as you progress. However, treating it as just another skill to master, I was a lot less hard on myself when I made mistakes. To do otherwise, is like tripping on a step and deciding you need to throw yourself to the bottom of the staircase. But, the more I treated weight loss just like all of the other wondeful skills I've mastered and all of the accomplishments I've made in my life, the more I succeeded. Also, I found out that I am not "naturally" an emotional or disordered eater. Simply choosing not to make dieting about emotions and morality, combined with refusing to resort to starvation diets (the second half may be actually most important), the disordered emotional eating came to a screeching halt. This actually ties in with a recent study of rats, that found that hungry (on calorie-reduced diets) rats ate in response to stressors of all kinds, but rats that were not on diets, did not. This isn't saying that I believe people don't have more control over their eating than rats, but I think it does show that when you're restricting your calories, you need to know that eating in response to stress may be a natural reaction. That doesn't mean that you use that as an excuse. Not at all, but it does give a person a good reason to be prepared. Knowing that if you're reducing calories, you may be more prone to eat during stress, gives you a "heads up" to ward against doing so. Plan ahead, have strategies planned...
Interesting discussion. The idea of a company Pavlov's dogging me is really irritating. Of course, it's the job of marketers to get people to buy their stuff, be it bread or cocaine. But the research he talks about in articles about how the brain responds differently in people who fall into that hyperstimulated category is especially interesting. Not so much a matter of willpower as it is brainpower, training.
Eating is a complex act, and I do think it has a number of biological and psychological factors. For some people, the just do it approach works, while others are helped by understanding the whys and hows.
I think it may be helpful for me to develop a list of dopamine-stimulating ideas and activities to help retrain my brain. Thnk happy (non-food-related) thoughts.
I was really happy to have read some of the ideas in this book. I haven't finished it, but it was he first thing that introduced me to the possibility that I wasn't just some awful, weak, fat person, but that there were things happening in my body that played a part too.
It doesn't diminish personal responsibility for making bad choices, but I think there is truth that things do happen in your body to make you want more when you eat things like fat an sugar.
Hey Chickiegirl - I definitely did better this time around when I realized my body is not the sabotoging enemy I thought it was. My body does what thinks is BEST to keep me alive and healthy - it doesn't understand diets, it thinks "bad harvests." Now, I admire the body's power in making the most outof minimal calories and I work WITH my body, not against it. We're a team
Man! This thread has provided me with some excellent Saturday-morning reading.
I'm about two-thirds through reading "The End of Overeating" and I'm astounded by how many dendrite connections are going on in my head. Fat on fat on salt, conditioned hypereating, the compass deal, all of it. Aha, aha, aha, I am getting it! Rather than seeking out a therapist to get to the bottom of what I assumed MUST be some suppressed emotional issue making me fat, I may just need to look at this with the practicality of a behavioral therapist. Logical, I love it.
Consequently, I was financially strapped the week I'd read this. I ended up having to pay bills and mortgage out of the same paycheck. I had, like, six dollars to get me through two weeks. I work from home, so had no commute expense, and rather than charge groceries (or convenience foods!) I decided to live off of what I already had in my cupboard. Note: my usual pattern is that I eat healthy foods at home, but because of working long hours I often make awful choices in the name of convenience.
I lost FOUR POUNDS without intent, just by cooking foods I had in the pantry. They weren't terribly interesting, but they weren't awful, either: chili with leftover steak, potato-pea curry, oatmeal, peanut-butter toast. I didn't ever go hungry, the foods weren't "diet" foods, and I even had a few random snacks during the week. I didn't have as many fresh vegetables as I like to use, but it was an absolute eye-opener to me that there are many ways to make healthier choices.
While I get that it's all about your own choices and not necessarily the responsibility of the government or food industry, it seems there's a little hoodwinking going on.
If I make a hamburger at home, it's made out of grass-fed beef, and topped with whatever I have on hand (not usually things like onion rings, bacon, cheese, sour cream, or all of the above). I'd be willing to bet that any homemade meal using reasonable cooking means is way healthier than these concocted restaurant meals that have added who-knows-what and prepared in ways not common to the average household kitchen. Then, it is on me, the consumer, to research before going to the restaurant what I am going to eat. That somewhat defeats the purpose of "convenience" food, to me. And this is assuming I win the battle of not being swayed by over-the-top creamy fried-cholesterol goodness on the menu.
Wow, just a great book. Go read it, hopefully it's been out long enough that the library doesn't have a long waiting list for it.
I refuse to blame restaurants and food producers for the width of my posterior. They didn't force-feed me, despite making the food delicious, scrumptious, and somewhat addictive.
I'm an adult. I know what happens when I eat food that isn't healthy for me. I sometimes (used to be frequently) choose to eat it anyway. I am responsible for what I eat--not my government, the restaurants, my parents, or anyone else--me.
The responsibility for the layer of blubber covering my body is lies with the person typing this post. No one made me this way except for me.
ETA: The responsibility for the weight I've lost also lies with me. To give away the responsibility of my starting weight tarnishes part of the accomplishment of achieving the current weight. The loss is solely my responsibility, as well.
Last edited by AZ Sunrises; 02-12-2011 at 03:07 PM.
I refuse to blame restaurants and food producers for the width of my posterior. They didn't force-feed me, despite making the food delicious, scrumptious, and somewhat addictive.
Restaurants are responsible for using products like that 'fat juice' and not listing that in the menu. There is no truth in advertising without that info and the government is complicit by not requiring the facts to be revealed. This hush hush truth OR "its in the fine print of a 500 page report' in the food industry should be stopped. Only the government can require the labeling of products as having added hormones, genetic alterations and additives to food products like that fat juice. And it should be in plain language not some chemically enhanced mumbo-jumbo.
I'm an adult. I know what happens when I eat food that isn't healthy for me. I sometimes (used to be frequently) choose to eat it anyway. I am responsible for what I eat--not my government, the restaurants, my parents, or anyone else--me.
I didn't always know that a restaurant hamburger was way higher in fat than the one I make in my kitchen. There are still restaurants that do not post their nutritional info and they never will unless it is required by the govt. They should at the very least be required to post their use of the food enhancers.
The responsibility for the layer of blubber covering my body is lies with the person typing this post. No one made me this way except for me.
True, so true. I will own it all. But I can't get rid of the idea that the use of the fat juice food enhancers and my unknown consumption of it is a little like a drug dealer giving out candy laced with crack. I shudder to think of all the years I have been ignorant of the fat juice. Its not because I am dumb but because I am naive.
ETA: The responsibility for the weight I've lost also lies with me. To give away the responsibility of my starting weight tarnishes part of the accomplishment of achieving the current weight. The loss is solely my responsibility, as well.
Yep, and I have been more successful this time by staying away from known sources fat juice.....It still bugs me...how long was I unknowingly exposed to it? Are there sources of it of which I am unaware?
Its hard enough to change, I shouldn't have to dig to get the information to make an informed decision on what to eat.
I refuse to blame restaurants and food producers for the width of my posterior.
Making this about "blame" entirely misses the point the author is making - knowing what's in your food, and knowing why some foods are much easier to overeat than others.
Reading this book has changed the way I look at processed and restaurant food. I haven't cut back on processed food and eating out because it's the restaurant or junk food makers "fault" that I am fat. I cut back on those foods, because reading the book has convinced me that it's much easier to overeat foods that have been designed to be difficult to resist (it's not a "new" invention, the fat/sweet/salt flavor combination has been "addictive" for thousands of years, and humans have manipulated that. It's not "evil" it's just yummy, and people like making yummy food, but when you're trying to lose weight you have to control the yum factor to some degree. You don't have to eat horrible tasting food, but you do have to be wary of foods that are so delicious they'll call to you from the fridge or cupboard).
Learning even in my home cooking to avoid the sugar/salt/fat combination has been an incredibly effective tool. I remind myself that I can have sweet, salty, and fatty foods to some degree, but combining the flavors and textures can be risky business. I've learned to be as respectful of food properties as I am of medications. Knowing the physiological and psychological effects of food, is about taking responsibility, not pushing it off on someone else.
If you actually read the book, it seems clear the author is not villanizing the food industry. In fact he talks about speaking with food industry personal who obviously were not aware of the connection. It's not a consipiracy against the consumer, it's just that making foods cheap and tasty is at odds with making foods healthier. Information, not blame.
Knowledge is power. This book changed my life, because it made me realize that my powerlessness over some foods was more physiological than psychological. Sure shoring up willpower could be effective in the short term, reducing the need for willpower has helped a lot more. I have far more success when I choose not to eat the foods that are most difficult to control.
If I buy a gun and shoot myself, it's not the gunmaker's fault, but if I don't buy a gun, I can't shoot myself. If I'm feeling severely depressed, that isn't the time to buy a gun.
I look at difficult-to-resist food the same way. The risks outweigh the benefits.
I do still sometimes eat those foods, but I almost have to look at it as if I were indulging in a recreational drug (something I never did) or alcohol (which I rarely did). I can choose to get drunk, but I should avoid putting myself in a position in which I would be tempted to drive drunk.
If I'm going to eat a food that is going to trigger hunger, I need to set it up in a way that limits the degree of damage I can do with that hunger.
I'm not going to hurt anyone (but myself) under the influence of a brownie sundae, but protecting myself means not making a batch of brownies and having a half gallon of ice cream in the freezer. Buying one individual cup of icecream at the grocery store makes more sense because it's a way to limit
the damage I can do.
As with other potentially "addictive" substances, some people will choose to abstain all together. Others will choose to use only in specific circumstances.
One of the problems though is that we know alot more about the potential dangers of drugs and alcohol than we do about foods. We don't think of food that way. We probably should, because foods do have drug-like properties. They may be more subtle, but that only means it can be harder to identify and understand them.
This book along with those of Gary Taubes' really helped me understand the power of foods, and why what I eat is as important as how much (even when eating only "healthy" foods).
), down my throat. Nor was it society that made me stop doing those things either. The "good" choices were always available to me. I just chose to ignore them.
and 
I get way too philosophical when I'm home sick and trying to keep my mind occupied)
now. And thanks to everyone that contributes to this thread! I am enjoying it immensely!
