Article on Obesity



~patches~ wrote:
> I found this rather interesting article on obesity that gives a few more
> points than others voiced on the recent "food snob" thread. I thought
> it might be of interest to others here.
> http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060326/LIFESTYLE03/603260398/-1/ARCHIVE

IMO too many people cast themselves as victims in this and many other
things. There are choices we should make about how to live our lives
and as far as I'm concerned if someone chooses to be a couch potato
that's perfectly fine but I don't want to hear a lot of grizzling about
how the wicked food companies are at fault. My wife and I were smokers
for many years, I gave up some years before she was diagnosed with lung
cancer; she survived it (11 years now!) but knows perfectly well that
smoking was her choice and certainly wouldn't join in any suit against
the tobacco companies.
 
Good For you, I am fat. I know why, it is because I love to eat, I know
what I can do about it, eat less, excercise more. Nobody's fault buy my
own.

Jerry
 
jerryeveretts wrote:

> Good For you, I am fat. I know why, it is because I love to eat, I know
> what I can do about it, eat less, excercise more. Nobody's fault buy my
> own.
>
> Jerry
>

Jerry, this was a direct response in relation to another thread that has
been ongoing here. If you don't find the article helpful or are not
participating on the other thread, perhaps you should do yourself a
favour and killfile the topic.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Anthony" <[email protected]> wrote:

> ~patches~ wrote:
> > I found this rather interesting article on obesity that gives a few more
> > points than others voiced on the recent "food snob" thread. I thought
> > it might be of interest to others here.
> > http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060326/LIFESTYLE03/603260398
> > /-1/ARCHIVE
>
> IMO too many people cast themselves as victims in this and many other
> things. There are choices we should make about how to live our lives
> and as far as I'm concerned if someone chooses to be a couch potato
> that's perfectly fine but I don't want to hear a lot of grizzling about
> how the wicked food companies are at fault. My wife and I were smokers
> for many years, I gave up some years before she was diagnosed with lung
> cancer; she survived it (11 years now!) but knows perfectly well that
> smoking was her choice and certainly wouldn't join in any suit against
> the tobacco companies.
>

I'm glad your wife is ok. :)

I take personal responsibility for my own physical condition.
Granted, I have a couple of medical problems that contribute, but I also
have health insurance.

There is a new weight loss drug becoming available next month.
Can't think of the name of it at the moment, but I recall reading
nothing but good about it over the past couple of years.

I'll be trying it as soon as it comes out...
All of the "side effects" appear to be positive.

More later when I get the damned name of it!
--
Peace, Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-*****." -Jack Nicholson
 
"OmManiPadmeOmelet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> I'll be trying it as soon as it comes out...
> All of the "side effects" appear to be positive.

"Seizures, detached limbs, blindness, hair loss, vomiting, numbness in
extremities, weight gain, stroke, agonizing pain in breasts, itchy skin,
dizziness. Speak to your doctor if you experience any of these bonuses".
 
OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Anthony" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>~patches~ wrote:
>>
>>>I found this rather interesting article on obesity that gives a few more
>>>points than others voiced on the recent "food snob" thread. I thought
>>>it might be of interest to others here.
>>>http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060326/LIFESTYLE03/603260398
>>>/-1/ARCHIVE
>>
>>IMO too many people cast themselves as victims in this and many other
>>things. There are choices we should make about how to live our lives
>>and as far as I'm concerned if someone chooses to be a couch potato
>>that's perfectly fine but I don't want to hear a lot of grizzling about
>>how the wicked food companies are at fault. My wife and I were smokers
>>for many years, I gave up some years before she was diagnosed with lung
>>cancer; she survived it (11 years now!) but knows perfectly well that
>>smoking was her choice and certainly wouldn't join in any suit against
>>the tobacco companies.
>>
>
>
> I'm glad your wife is ok. :)
>
> I take personal responsibility for my own physical condition.
> Granted, I have a couple of medical problems that contribute, but I also
> have health insurance.
>
> There is a new weight loss drug becoming available next month.
> Can't think of the name of it at the moment, but I recall reading
> nothing but good about it over the past couple of years.
>
> I'll be trying it as soon as it comes out...
> All of the "side effects" appear to be positive.
>
> More later when I get the damned name of it!

Om, what I thought was good about this article and in direct relation to
the "food snob" thread is that the issue of obesity is multifauceted.
All the players hold some part of the blame. Now the individual is
ultimately responsible for the food they eat but the manufacturers have
really made this difficult. A lot of people don't realize all the other
stuff in the pre-made mixes or meals so they make them at home and think
they are doing the right thing not even realizing what they are putting
in their bodies. These people think they are cooking and even here it
comes up the cheats of using canned soups or mixes or that semi-homemade
topic that always resurfaces.
 
~patches~ wrote:
> jerryeveretts wrote:
>
> > Good For you, I am fat. I know why, it is because I love to eat, I know
> > what I can do about it, eat less, excercise more. Nobody's fault buy my
> > own.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
>
> Jerry, this was a direct response in relation to another thread that has
> been ongoing here. If you don't find the article helpful or are not
> participating on the other thread, perhaps you should do yourself a
> favour and killfile the topic.

Perhaps you thought I was *****ing or complaining? I was not, this was
a good for you... you quit smoking, you know the risk, as do I, and
here is my input. If I was annoyed or not interested, I would not have
replied.
thanks.
 
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 16:42:16 -0500, ~patches~
<[email protected]> wrote:

>jerryeveretts wrote:
>
>> Good For you, I am fat. I know why, it is because I love to eat, I know
>> what I can do about it, eat less, excercise more. Nobody's fault buy my
>> own.
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>
>Jerry, this was a direct response in relation to another thread that has
>been ongoing here. If you don't find the article helpful or are not
>participating on the other thread, perhaps you should do yourself a
>favour and killfile the topic.


Why because he refuses to be a victim?

He's discussing the article, isn't he? a lot of peopel want somebody
to blame. And as long as they blame other people and companies, they
will not have to take responsibility for their actions.

I am overweight too. I exercise some, but not enough. And I eat too
many high calorie things. I love desserts. I love fried food. It's my
own fault I am overwieght.


--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "OmManiPadmeOmelet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > I'll be trying it as soon as it comes out...
> > All of the "side effects" appear to be positive.
>
> "Seizures, detached limbs, blindness, hair loss, vomiting, numbness in
> extremities, weight gain, stroke, agonizing pain in breasts, itchy skin,
> dizziness. Speak to your doctor if you experience any of these bonuses".
>
>

<grins>
Actually the side effects on this one are lowered cholesterol and, for
some people, smoking and drinking cessation. It works on the brain
chemistry for breaking addictions.
--
Peace, Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-*****." -Jack Nicholson
 
In article <[email protected]>,
~patches~ <[email protected]> wrote:

> Om, what I thought was good about this article and in direct relation to
> the "food snob" thread is that the issue of obesity is multifauceted.
> All the players hold some part of the blame. Now the individual is
> ultimately responsible for the food they eat but the manufacturers have
> really made this difficult. A lot of people don't realize all the other
> stuff in the pre-made mixes or meals so they make them at home and think
> they are doing the right thing not even realizing what they are putting
> in their bodies. These people think they are cooking and even here it
> comes up the cheats of using canned soups or mixes or that semi-homemade
> topic that always resurfaces.


It's very true. :) That is why people need to try to educate themselves
on nutrition. I wish they'd teach it in school! I know that I had to
learn to read and interpret labels. It's not an instinctive thing.
--
Peace, Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-*****." -Jack Nicholson
 
jerryeveretts wrote:

> ~patches~ wrote:
>
>>jerryeveretts wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Good For you, I am fat. I know why, it is because I love to eat, I know
>>>what I can do about it, eat less, excercise more. Nobody's fault buy my
>>>own.
>>>
>>>Jerry
>>>
>>
>>Jerry, this was a direct response in relation to another thread that has
>>been ongoing here. If you don't find the article helpful or are not
>>participating on the other thread, perhaps you should do yourself a
>>favour and killfile the topic.
>
>
> Perhaps you thought I was *****ing or complaining? I was not, this was
> a good for you... you quit smoking, you know the risk, as do I, and
> here is my input. If I was annoyed or not interested, I would not have
> replied.
> thanks.
>
You must have me confused with someone else. I've *never* smoked a day
in my life! Smoking is not or has ever been allowed in our home either.
DH is exactly the same way having never smoked. Perhaps you are
replying to someone else?
 
Meghan Noecker wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 16:42:16 -0500, ~patches~
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>jerryeveretts wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Good For you, I am fat. I know why, it is because I love to eat, I know
>>>what I can do about it, eat less, excercise more. Nobody's fault buy my
>>>own.
>>>
>>>Jerry
>>>
>>
>>Jerry, this was a direct response in relation to another thread that has
>>been ongoing here. If you don't find the article helpful or are not
>>participating on the other thread, perhaps you should do yourself a
>>favour and killfile the topic.
>
>
>
> Why because he refuses to be a victim?

No Meghan, because for some reason - see my other reply - he has me
confused with someone else. I took his reply as being a little snipping
with the "Good for you bit". Proper quoting would have solved this
before it became a problem.
>
> He's discussing the article, isn't he? a lot of peopel want somebody
> to blame. And as long as they blame other people and companies, they
> will not have to take responsibility for their actions.
>
> I am overweight too. I exercise some, but not enough. And I eat too
> many high calorie things. I love desserts. I love fried food. It's my
> own fault I am overwieght.
>
>
> --
> Meghan & the Zoo Crew
> Equine and Pet Photography
> http://www.zoocrewphoto.com
 
"~patches~" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Anthony" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>~patches~ wrote:
>>>
>>>>I found this rather interesting article on obesity that gives a few more
>>>>points than others voiced on the recent "food snob" thread. I thought
>>>>it might be of interest to others here.
>>>>http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060326/LIFESTYLE03/603260398
>>>>/-1/ARCHIVE
>>>
>>>IMO too many people cast themselves as victims in this and many other
>>>things. There are choices we should make about how to live our lives
>>>and as far as I'm concerned if someone chooses to be a couch potato
>>>that's perfectly fine but I don't want to hear a lot of grizzling about
>>>how the wicked food companies are at fault. My wife and I were smokers
>>>for many years, I gave up some years before she was diagnosed with lung
>>>cancer; she survived it (11 years now!) but knows perfectly well that
>>>smoking was her choice and certainly wouldn't join in any suit against
>>>the tobacco companies.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I'm glad your wife is ok. :)
>>
>> I take personal responsibility for my own physical condition.
>> Granted, I have a couple of medical problems that contribute, but I also
>> have health insurance.
>>
>> There is a new weight loss drug becoming available next month.
>> Can't think of the name of it at the moment, but I recall reading nothing
>> but good about it over the past couple of years.
>>
>> I'll be trying it as soon as it comes out...
>> All of the "side effects" appear to be positive.
>>
>> More later when I get the damned name of it!
>
> Om, what I thought was good about this article and in direct relation to
> the "food snob" thread is that the issue of obesity is multifauceted. All
> the players hold some part of the blame. Now the individual is ultimately
> responsible for the food they eat but the manufacturers have really made
> this difficult. A lot of people don't realize all the other stuff in the
> pre-made mixes or meals so they make them at home and think they are doing
> the right thing not even realizing what they are putting in their bodies.
> These people think they are cooking and even here it comes up the cheats
> of using canned soups or mixes or that semi-homemade topic that always
> resurfaces.

The standard nutritional label has been around for what - 7 years? 10?
Failure to understand them by now is no excuse.
 
I am not confused I was explaining the "good for you" comment, not YOU
specifically, I was explaining my wording toward Anthony. As if I need
to continue to explain myself so you can understand what is going on.

~patches~ wrote:
> >
> You must have me confused with someone else. I've *never* smoked a day
> in my life! Smoking is not or has ever been allowed in our home either.
> DH is exactly the same way having never smoked. Perhaps you are
> replying to someone else?
 
jerryeveretts wrote:

> I am not confused I was explaining the "good for you" comment, not YOU
> specifically, I was explaining my wording toward Anthony. As if I need
> to continue to explain myself so you can understand what is going on.

You don't need to explain yourself to me. I understand perfectly. What
would be nice is to include some part of to whom you are replying as a
quote to avoid misunderstandings. Since I started this thread and
missed Anthony's reply it appeared you were replying to me. I see you
have included a quote and reply here, so thanks.

>
> ~patches~ wrote:
>
>>You must have me confused with someone else. I've *never* smoked a day
>>in my life! Smoking is not or has ever been allowed in our home either.
>> DH is exactly the same way having never smoked. Perhaps you are
>>replying to someone else?
>
>
 
~patches~ wrote:
>
> You don't need to explain yourself to me. I understand perfectly. What
> would be nice is to include some part of to whom you are replying as a
> quote to avoid misunderstandings. Since I started this thread and
> missed Anthony's reply it appeared you were replying to me. I see you
> have included a quote and reply here, so thanks.
>
Sorry for the confusion
 
Meghan Noecker wrote:

> I am overweight too. I exercise some, but not enough. And I eat too
> many high calorie things. I love desserts. I love fried food. It's my
> own fault I am overwieght.
>

I have a few extra pounds, and I am a big guy to start with. I work out at
the Y at least 5 days a week plus I have a very tough one hour riding lesson
every Sunday. If I swim 1000m per day along with the 8 weight stations I use
I can manage to lose 1 pound every week or two. If I lay off for a few day or
two and don't cut back seriously on intake it starts to come back.

I don't really eat that much but it may be the wrong things. I eat a bowl of
oatmeal for breakfast and maybe once or twice a week I have some toast with
it. I sometimes have a sandwich for lunch, but more often a bran muffin and
coffee. I don't have huge servings of dinner. Maybe the culprit is that bowl
of cereal that I have and hour before bed :-(
 
Doug Kanter wrote:
> The standard nutritional label has been around for what - 7 years? 10?
> Failure to understand them by now is no excuse.

Knowing what's in the contents is one thing, knowing what to make of
that information is another. We are bombarded in the most strident way
by "experts" holding wildly differing views of healthy eating -
Atkins, Ornish, the US Government, the Eades, Dr. Phil, on and on, plus
not only do the recommendations often conflict but they also change all
the time - eggs are good for you, no they're bad for you, no they're
okay, butter is better than margarine, or worse, or better, carbs are
good, carbs are bad, there are good carbs and bad carbs, etc. etc. etc.
It's not easy to sort out. Having been overweight for many years I
decided to change about three years ago, I've done the research and
reached a diet and exercise plan that I can live with and that keeps my
labs and BP in limits and my body fat low. But I don't think that it,
or any other plan, would be universally suitable - each of us has to
figure it out.
 
"Anthony" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Doug Kanter wrote:
>> The standard nutritional label has been around for what - 7 years? 10?
>> Failure to understand them by now is no excuse.
>
> Knowing what's in the contents is one thing, knowing what to make of
> that information is another. We are bombarded in the most strident way
> by "experts" holding wildly differing views of healthy eating -
> Atkins, Ornish, the US Government, the Eades, Dr. Phil, on and on, plus
> not only do the recommendations often conflict but they also change all
> the time - eggs are good for you, no they're bad for you, no they're
> okay, butter is better than margarine, or worse, or better, carbs are
> good, carbs are bad, there are good carbs and bad carbs, etc. etc. etc.
> It's not easy to sort out. Having been overweight for many years I
> decided to change about three years ago, I've done the research and
> reached a diet and exercise plan that I can live with and that keeps my
> labs and BP in limits and my body fat low. But I don't think that it,
> or any other plan, would be universally suitable - each of us has to
> figure it out.
>


Here's an excellent source - a newsletter that's brief, accurate, impartial
and best of all, CHEAP. From the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
They're not afraid to slam food manufacturers. And, the newsletter's helpful
in terms of deciphering the nutritional label claims.

Nutrition Action Newsletter.
www.cspinet.org


Example:
CSPI Calls for FDA Crackdown Against Deceptive Trans-Fat Claims

'0 Grams Trans' Labels Mislead Consumers about Foods High in Artery-Clogging
Saturated Fat
The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) today urged
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to take enforcement action against
companies making misleading trans-fat claims on food labels. CSPI says that
any claim of "0 grams trans" on foods high in saturated fat is inherently
misleading, since consumers might think such a product is good for one's
heart health. Manufacturers such as Sara Lee, Mrs. Smith's, and Nestle
misleadingly label several of their products "0 grams trans," even though
they have 4 to 11 grams of artery-clogging saturated fat. The FDA considers
4 grams and up to be a high level of saturated fat.

"Just because a food doesn't have any trans fat doesn't by itself make it a
health food," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Companies
shouldn't foster confusion by making trans-fat claims on foods high in
saturated fat, and the FDA shouldn't let them get away with it."

The products described in CSPI's complaint are:

* Mrs. Smith's Apple Pie: A prominent red banner over the brand name states
"0g trans fat per serving." One serving of the product contains 7 grams of
saturated fat.

* Mrs. Paul's Crunchy Fish Fillets: A banner stating "0 grams trans fat per
serving" appears directly above the brand name. One serving of the product
contains 5 grams of saturated fat.

* Spectrum: Organic All Vegetable Shortening: A yellow highlighted batter
stating "0 grams trans fat" appears on the front label. One serving of the
product contains 6 grams of saturated fat.

* Nestle Crunch Ice Cream Bars: A banner over the large-print word "Crunch"
states that there is "0g trans fat!" One serving of the product contains 11
grams of saturated fat.

* Sara Lee Pumpkin Pie: The label states that the product has "zero 0g
transfat." One serving of the product contains 4 grams of saturated fat.

The FDA currently prohibits food companies from making "saturated fat free"
claims for foods that have virtually any trans fat. CSPI says the agency
should have a corresponding rule prohibiting "0 grams trans" claims on foods
high in saturated fat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back