Yes, we've been neglectful. We've actually been back onto good eating habits along with continuing our walks for the last few weeks. My scale broke, but if my pants are an indication, I've lost at least a few little pounds.
Back on track
Things that are hard to get back to resisting: baking (I so LOVE to bake!), putting sauces on food to make them more palatable, and choosing butter OR jam for toast; not both. In comparing stories, I hear much about how people think they are eating better, but can't lose weight. One thing I notice on counting calories is they skip counting cream in coffee, butter on toast, etc, etc. So, this is my official statement to remind people, you must count everything that passes your lips, even if they are hanging on to something else like a little parasite. Low fat, low calorie dressings still add calories to your salad. Nuts may contain good fats, but also a lot of calories. Adding croutons, nuts, raisins, OR bacon bits to a salad can make it more tasty. Adding all of them makes it a hamburger (from the calorie perspective.)
It's all about choices and when you are confining yourself to a strict diet of difficult choices, it makes other things easier to avoid. Today I thought I might treat myself to that leftover cupcake from book club last week. I kept it covered, but took a bite and...it was tasty, but a little dry. Not delectable so I realized that in my moment of weakness I was about to sell out several hundred calories for that disappointment and I threw it away. If I'm going to have a goodie, it better be melt in the mouth, taste-bud party delicious. Otherwise I'll save it for a reliable tasty goodness like my favourite creamer in coffee or a little cheese on my tomato bisque lunch.
Other things: I turned on TV the other day to while away some time while making a Halloween decoration only to be confronted by a certain TV doctor (from over the rainbow?) who I regard highly, but who I do disagree with on rare occasion, touting the evils of artificial sweeteners. Look, I know they aren't good for you, but I still say if you are trying to lose weight, unless you are the rare breed who can change their life completely overnight and not be tempted by anything, then it's a lesser evil. In order to make the whole diet thing doable, I, personally, being a human being with thoughts, feelings, temptations, and weak moments, must have one treat a day to get me through. For me, it's diet soda. Sure I'd do better if I quit the soda, but that's unrealistic. Asking someone to be 100% perfect in how they eat and how much the exercise is the unrealistic bit. For some people, having nutra sweet makes them crave MORE sweets so if that's the case, they shouldn't use this substitute. No one can do our exact diet because it wouldn't work for someone else.
Anyone who wants to eat healthy must hear the news every day and
consider becoming anorexic because it's impossible to make sense of one
study after another. That being said, This TV Dr. mentioned the cancer
risks associated with artificial sweeteners and this bothered me. Just
because you've heard something for decades doesn't make it true. The
fact is the one study showing cancer risks to mice in the 70s has been dis-proven hundreds of times. I lost the article with the exact numbers,
but I assure you it was a reputable source. Besides, artificial
sweeteners do not affect diabetes or tooth decay. (I thought it did,
but according to a New York Times article comparing sweeteners, they do
not! Good to know!)
I have some to realize that the knowledge we gain in high school health class is like basic math. It's find for everyday life, but in order to solve REAL problems (like imbalance, losing weight, gaining weight, making up for allergies, etc) you need to know Calculus Nutrition. I'm becoming a bit more Algebraic Nutritionist with all my research, but the way I live and eat day to day is more remedial. I just feel so bombarded with information saying whatever choice you make is the wrong choice. It's completely overwhelming! Of course, the information they fill our heads with is maintaining perfect nutrition. If you're off, you'll need to compensate, and if you need to lose weight, well, forget it. There really is, imo, no way to lose weight and still eat everything you're supposed to eat. Still, it's better than OVEReating bad fats so I'll only defend the choices to a point.
When you are in a group, especially with women, there will always be that person who has the answer to your problems, too. If you tell them you are doing everything, they will have the key to why you aren't losing weight. They can be wrong, but still convinced because it is what worked for them. There are the ones who convince you it's easy if you just hit the right formula or do this one trick they know.
It does get easier, I'll give them that, but it's not easy. I repeat, is in not easy. Not at any point, and especially at the jumping off point. I think it's the combination of too much BAD information from sources people trust (the news, TV doctors, and uninformed physicians - who act like experts, but let's keep in mind they are required to stay refreshed on their specific specialty and between that, patients, and a personal life are unlikely to become armchair experts in anything else like nutrition), pressure from friends and family, people who make it sound like your social obligation to be thin, and people who make it all sound so easy that sets many people up for failure when it comes to weight loss. At some point, just close your eyes, point, commit to a plan, and follow it no matter what else you learn along the way. Of course if you realize you're not eating foods with potassium, you could adjust your diet to include bananas or if you have low iron, it might be good to pile on spinach to the salad or eat more meat, but every time a study pops up or someone tells you you are doing it wrong is not enough reason to quit or sabotage the plan.
Workouts
Last note, a few weeks ago I was told about a webpage <a href="http://www.skimble.com/">Skimble</a>. It has a great variety of workouts and it's easy to find what you need to focus on. It is designed as a smart phone app, but for those of us who like our phones stupid, it's still easy enough to navigate and do in front of the computer screen. We walk 7 days a week, but I do my other workouts 2-3 times a week (my goal is 3-4, but I have to be proud of every little accomplishment these days!) and I have found mixing these in keeps it lively. Not all require equipment, but many do. It's just another nice resource.
Showing posts with label tv. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tv. Show all posts
Friday, October 12, 2012
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
The truth about 'obesity'
I'm not saying that if you are obese, you don't need to lose weight. I'm not saying there isn't something to the numbers of overweight and obese people in the world. Unfortunately, I caught an episode of The Talk today (I don't typically watch these types of shows; partly because they are shallow, but mostly because they get me riled up) so what I am going to say is that I believe there is a certain amount of publicity out there that is working AGAINST us, not FOR us.
Let's start with the truth about the supposed increase in obesity. Twenty years ago obesity was measured on a scale of body mass percentage. Now with the misapplication of BMI (an index originally used as a scientific statistical tool which does not take into account bone structure, muscle, or other factors such as the amount of fat a woman is supposed to carry in comparison to men!) the new scale has increased the number of people who would qualify as overweight by up to 50% according to medical websites. This accounts for nearly the entire statistical increase of overweight, obese, and morbidly obese people.
Let's turn to the episode of The Talk I made the mistake of watching today. I don't mean to pick on anyone - the only reason I would turn to the show ever is that I have secretly paid attention to Holly Robinson since starring in 21 Jumpstreet (great show!), I always thought Leah Remini did great guest spots on comedies, Sara Gilbert played the best "depressed teen" for years - so much that I watched Roseanne even though I didn't really like the show, and Sharon Osborne's accent is just plain entertaining - but I'm going to name names in order to keep things straight.
They begin by showing the current cover of Men's Health magazine. On the cover is some congressman with his shirt open and his sexy abs looking nicely oiled. I was not offended by the nice body, of course, but the comments that followed brought to my attention the way that we use weight to justify shallow opinions! Candace Cameron Bure, guest hosting, started by saying something along the lines of "he's bringing awareness to obesity." No! He is flaunting a well toned body, but that is not linked to obesity. Working out until you have that kind of toned muscle; applying oils to make the appearance even more aesthetically pleasing, choosing the open shirt and that particular pose - these are all things that have nothing to do with health or bringing awareness to anything other than the fact that he has a nice body. No matter what you say, posing like a model simply does not relate to weight issues. It's shallow. I am not in better health because I buy nice shoes, am I? No, but they make my feet pretty and I want to show them off so I will wear them and claim it's about health and somehow it becomes a less arrogant quest.
Am I the only one who sometimes feels like people jump on the anti-obese bandwagon because they don't want to look at fat people? They are often not pretty to look at so if we focus instead on "health", then we can guilt fatties into losing weight so they are more pleasing to look in the eye. No one asks a thin person about their health. No one assumes a thin person has health problems even though there is a large percentage of the 'thin' population that is malnourished and there are many people who don't exercise or eat properly.
Holly Robinson Peete went on to say that the magazine cover is not an exploitation because she likes his abs, she likes abs, and she likes looking at a six pack. Right, but it is an exploitation because his abs are not and should not be the reason why we vote for him.
Julie Chen claimed that seeing him like that might encourage her to look at the issues. I think she gives way to much credit to the public. Again, people vote on aesthetic appearance whether they should or not and frankly, he's exploiting that with his appearance. He's clinched the deal for the next election, imo, by knowing which part of himself to sell. A sad reality in which we live...
In the next segment, the ladies took on an Atlanta ad campaign where a child stands before the camera and says she doesn't like going to school because the kids tease her for being bigger than they. Not that it makes a lot of difference, but the child they showed is not nearly as obese as some kids I've seen. They chose one who was pleasantly plump so that you wouldn't automatically turn away. The campaign then goes on to post statistics that are disputable; the percentage of kids who are now considered obese (see above for change in definition), the number of kids who are overweight in Atlanta (again based on the new definition by which, I might mention, George Clooney is overweight in comparison to his height), and the fact that kids will not live as long as their parents.
In a previous post, I mentioned that it's about the example we set. Of course we want to be good role models for our children, but we also need to let our children be children. Instead what we are doing with an ad like this is saying that it's okay for children to intimidate other children if they are fat because fat is unacceptable. We are also telling kids that if they are overweight, they should feel bad about themselves. Somehow we think this will jolt them into better eating habits, but the fact is, a child does not know how to deal with this pain. They do not think like adults. They don't have the same control over their lives that an adult does, therefore the only way to make themselves better is to escape into a world of television and video games (T.V. never teases a child) and food. It is my perception that this only increases the problem until they become adults with such a huge weight problem, the idea of turning it around is incredibly intimidating.
I talked about the booklet I received from school for my daughter, too. I feel like it also gave unrealistic expectations that would just cause a child to feel bad about himself or herself if she can't keep up. What's the incentive of a child who has little control over his or her life to improve things when the expectations are so high? I simply don't think that the information is being presented appropriately to encourage healthy choices in children. We brainwash them with adult thoughts and don't really account for balance.
As for obese children not outliving their parents, the statistics claim that obesity may only reduce lifespan by a few months. Others claim it could be up to ten. The problem here is that there is no solid information and all studies are disputable to the point that it may not shorten life spans at all! Additionally, evidence does show that many obese children have obese parents - therefore if there is a link, their parents likely have the same problem working against them.
After that had been covered, a comment was tossed out that obesity is linked to cancer, strokes, and type 2 diabetes. The links to cancer and strokes are tenuous at best and because the studies have been focused on weight, I think the attitude is dismissive. No where near the money is tossed at studies that try to make these links between anything other than weight so by blaming it all on weight, we may be missing other important and preventative factors. As for type 2 diabetes, it is linked much more strongly with a sedentary lifestyle than obesity. It looks like it is related to obesity because many large people are sedentary and have trouble processing sugars, but if that were the case, then only obese people would have type 2 diabetes. The truth is, there are many people with type 2 diabetes who are and always have been thin.
Next, Leah Remini spoke about her child and how "she wants the white pasta, she wants the carbs, she wants the bad stuff. CARBS ARE NOT BAD! Pasta is all right. It’s the serving size that is the problem. Read the labels. You can still give her the food she likes, just in portion control. Jane loves pasta and sauce, but we don't serve it with garlic bread or added meat anymore. By pre-measuring the pasta and sauce instead of having them both self serve, we find a normal serving size to be plenty filling. Save the garlic bread for another night so you don't overdo the carbs, but we need to stop thinking they are bad just by existing.
Leah then went on to say that she can't change her daughter because she has already introduced these foods. I get where she is coming from, but you don't know until you try. Jane likes a lot of the substituted foods we eat in this house - even some I was certain she wouldn't. When it comes to other things, we make compromises and keep trying things until she is happy as well. It's not easy, but it can be done if you care enough about your child's health to go through the process.
Right before the end of the segment, Holly then went on to say that it needs to be more convenient. Well, it is, but you have to get over the brainwashing we have going on. A happy meal with chicken nuggets, apples, and apple juice is quite healthy. Take some time to sit on the internet and look up other drive through menus. Salads are not automatically a good choice, but there are a few good ones out there. Seeing the Arby's version of the chicken salad sandwich is not the same as the Subway Apply Orchard (with the added mayo, nuts, etc, it is higher calorie). A burger at Wendy's might be lower calorie than a similar one at McDonald's. If you really care, take the time to look them up so you can still grab a bite in a hurry.
Of course, I have this whole idea that has nothing to do with weight loss, too. If you're getting fast food all the time and claiming that it's because of time, maybe it's time to slow down your life. We do not need to be running a race that doesn't allow time to enjoy a meal. In fact, if you enjoy your food, you tend not to need as much of it. Slow down! It is okay to skip signing your kid up for every sport and just encourage them to ride their bike around the block with you. It is okay to find time to relax at least a few days a week.
In the end, it's about excuses. As long as we keep making excuses, we are not ready to change our eating habits. A person either changes them or doesn't. Commit.
*Not a proper bibliography, but a bulk of my information comes from USA Today and The New York Times, both of which quoted doctors, scientists, and the New England Journal of Medicine.
Let's start with the truth about the supposed increase in obesity. Twenty years ago obesity was measured on a scale of body mass percentage. Now with the misapplication of BMI (an index originally used as a scientific statistical tool which does not take into account bone structure, muscle, or other factors such as the amount of fat a woman is supposed to carry in comparison to men!) the new scale has increased the number of people who would qualify as overweight by up to 50% according to medical websites. This accounts for nearly the entire statistical increase of overweight, obese, and morbidly obese people.
Let's turn to the episode of The Talk I made the mistake of watching today. I don't mean to pick on anyone - the only reason I would turn to the show ever is that I have secretly paid attention to Holly Robinson since starring in 21 Jumpstreet (great show!), I always thought Leah Remini did great guest spots on comedies, Sara Gilbert played the best "depressed teen" for years - so much that I watched Roseanne even though I didn't really like the show, and Sharon Osborne's accent is just plain entertaining - but I'm going to name names in order to keep things straight.
They begin by showing the current cover of Men's Health magazine. On the cover is some congressman with his shirt open and his sexy abs looking nicely oiled. I was not offended by the nice body, of course, but the comments that followed brought to my attention the way that we use weight to justify shallow opinions! Candace Cameron Bure, guest hosting, started by saying something along the lines of "he's bringing awareness to obesity." No! He is flaunting a well toned body, but that is not linked to obesity. Working out until you have that kind of toned muscle; applying oils to make the appearance even more aesthetically pleasing, choosing the open shirt and that particular pose - these are all things that have nothing to do with health or bringing awareness to anything other than the fact that he has a nice body. No matter what you say, posing like a model simply does not relate to weight issues. It's shallow. I am not in better health because I buy nice shoes, am I? No, but they make my feet pretty and I want to show them off so I will wear them and claim it's about health and somehow it becomes a less arrogant quest.
Am I the only one who sometimes feels like people jump on the anti-obese bandwagon because they don't want to look at fat people? They are often not pretty to look at so if we focus instead on "health", then we can guilt fatties into losing weight so they are more pleasing to look in the eye. No one asks a thin person about their health. No one assumes a thin person has health problems even though there is a large percentage of the 'thin' population that is malnourished and there are many people who don't exercise or eat properly.
Holly Robinson Peete went on to say that the magazine cover is not an exploitation because she likes his abs, she likes abs, and she likes looking at a six pack. Right, but it is an exploitation because his abs are not and should not be the reason why we vote for him.
Julie Chen claimed that seeing him like that might encourage her to look at the issues. I think she gives way to much credit to the public. Again, people vote on aesthetic appearance whether they should or not and frankly, he's exploiting that with his appearance. He's clinched the deal for the next election, imo, by knowing which part of himself to sell. A sad reality in which we live...
In the next segment, the ladies took on an Atlanta ad campaign where a child stands before the camera and says she doesn't like going to school because the kids tease her for being bigger than they. Not that it makes a lot of difference, but the child they showed is not nearly as obese as some kids I've seen. They chose one who was pleasantly plump so that you wouldn't automatically turn away. The campaign then goes on to post statistics that are disputable; the percentage of kids who are now considered obese (see above for change in definition), the number of kids who are overweight in Atlanta (again based on the new definition by which, I might mention, George Clooney is overweight in comparison to his height), and the fact that kids will not live as long as their parents.
In a previous post, I mentioned that it's about the example we set. Of course we want to be good role models for our children, but we also need to let our children be children. Instead what we are doing with an ad like this is saying that it's okay for children to intimidate other children if they are fat because fat is unacceptable. We are also telling kids that if they are overweight, they should feel bad about themselves. Somehow we think this will jolt them into better eating habits, but the fact is, a child does not know how to deal with this pain. They do not think like adults. They don't have the same control over their lives that an adult does, therefore the only way to make themselves better is to escape into a world of television and video games (T.V. never teases a child) and food. It is my perception that this only increases the problem until they become adults with such a huge weight problem, the idea of turning it around is incredibly intimidating.
I talked about the booklet I received from school for my daughter, too. I feel like it also gave unrealistic expectations that would just cause a child to feel bad about himself or herself if she can't keep up. What's the incentive of a child who has little control over his or her life to improve things when the expectations are so high? I simply don't think that the information is being presented appropriately to encourage healthy choices in children. We brainwash them with adult thoughts and don't really account for balance.
As for obese children not outliving their parents, the statistics claim that obesity may only reduce lifespan by a few months. Others claim it could be up to ten. The problem here is that there is no solid information and all studies are disputable to the point that it may not shorten life spans at all! Additionally, evidence does show that many obese children have obese parents - therefore if there is a link, their parents likely have the same problem working against them.
After that had been covered, a comment was tossed out that obesity is linked to cancer, strokes, and type 2 diabetes. The links to cancer and strokes are tenuous at best and because the studies have been focused on weight, I think the attitude is dismissive. No where near the money is tossed at studies that try to make these links between anything other than weight so by blaming it all on weight, we may be missing other important and preventative factors. As for type 2 diabetes, it is linked much more strongly with a sedentary lifestyle than obesity. It looks like it is related to obesity because many large people are sedentary and have trouble processing sugars, but if that were the case, then only obese people would have type 2 diabetes. The truth is, there are many people with type 2 diabetes who are and always have been thin.
Next, Leah Remini spoke about her child and how "she wants the white pasta, she wants the carbs, she wants the bad stuff. CARBS ARE NOT BAD! Pasta is all right. It’s the serving size that is the problem. Read the labels. You can still give her the food she likes, just in portion control. Jane loves pasta and sauce, but we don't serve it with garlic bread or added meat anymore. By pre-measuring the pasta and sauce instead of having them both self serve, we find a normal serving size to be plenty filling. Save the garlic bread for another night so you don't overdo the carbs, but we need to stop thinking they are bad just by existing.
Leah then went on to say that she can't change her daughter because she has already introduced these foods. I get where she is coming from, but you don't know until you try. Jane likes a lot of the substituted foods we eat in this house - even some I was certain she wouldn't. When it comes to other things, we make compromises and keep trying things until she is happy as well. It's not easy, but it can be done if you care enough about your child's health to go through the process.
Right before the end of the segment, Holly then went on to say that it needs to be more convenient. Well, it is, but you have to get over the brainwashing we have going on. A happy meal with chicken nuggets, apples, and apple juice is quite healthy. Take some time to sit on the internet and look up other drive through menus. Salads are not automatically a good choice, but there are a few good ones out there. Seeing the Arby's version of the chicken salad sandwich is not the same as the Subway Apply Orchard (with the added mayo, nuts, etc, it is higher calorie). A burger at Wendy's might be lower calorie than a similar one at McDonald's. If you really care, take the time to look them up so you can still grab a bite in a hurry.
Of course, I have this whole idea that has nothing to do with weight loss, too. If you're getting fast food all the time and claiming that it's because of time, maybe it's time to slow down your life. We do not need to be running a race that doesn't allow time to enjoy a meal. In fact, if you enjoy your food, you tend not to need as much of it. Slow down! It is okay to skip signing your kid up for every sport and just encourage them to ride their bike around the block with you. It is okay to find time to relax at least a few days a week.
In the end, it's about excuses. As long as we keep making excuses, we are not ready to change our eating habits. A person either changes them or doesn't. Commit.
*Not a proper bibliography, but a bulk of my information comes from USA Today and The New York Times, both of which quoted doctors, scientists, and the New England Journal of Medicine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)