<p>the downside to being overweight has nothing to do with appearance. if you think being fat is fine, then don’t knock on anyone for doing drugs, cutting themselves, drinking excessively, or huffing keyboard cleaner. living a ‘fat’ lifestyle typically kills you faster than all of those.
@BlueDevilBBall</p>
<p>I dont. lol. Besides I lead the most unhealthy lifestyle, and im aware of it. I smoke, drink excessively and dabble in drugs.</p>
<p>On a tangent though, I think we are looking at things from different perspectives. I believe, and seen from visit’s that people in north america, the us particularly, are EXCESSIVELY FAT. Like im talking nutty professor, fat. When you say fat, are you referring to that?</p>
<p>Cuz round here, when I say fat, I mean moderately, plump, like Jack Black fat.</p>
<p>Jack Black would be considered obese.</p>
<p>Nutty professor fat is severely obese - morbidly obese.</p>
<p>thisismyhandle</p>
<p>the US is very fat. during the academy awards the other night, diet coke had a ‘heart healthy’ commercial. nothing about sugar water or chemical pseudo-sugar water should ever be on the same planet as ‘heart health.’ yet coca cola is one of the most profitable companies around.</p>
<p>i’d argue that ‘jack black fat’ is worse than pure morbid obesity. in the latter case, it is often an issue of hormonal imbalance. many people end up 600 pounds that do not eat much worse than the rest of us. the people that can down 9 slices of pizza and a couple of large sodas that have junk around their midsection and neck that shouldn’t be there have much more to worry about.</p>
<p>cornell’s freshman buffet style meal plans don’t help.</p>
<p>Except that morbid obesity due to hormonal imbalances is treated with hormone therapy.</p>
<p>For the overweight to obese category (especially the obese category) there is little to do in terms of alternate weight loss strategies.</p>
<p>Once someone balloons up into severely or morbidly obese there are surgical and prescription options. But before that, you are left with diet and exercise.
And not saying that diet and exercise are bad to be left with, but I think for a lot of people who are overweight or obese, they have tried diet and exercise, and without a huge willpower, they often fail.</p>
<p>I think we need to go back and change the culture surrounding food before we can become healthier as a country.
And it’s not the Cornell dining’s fault at providing buffet style meal plans. Those who don’t eat much, don’t.</p>
<p>^obviously.</p>
<p>in fact, most people who are morbidly obese due to thyroid issues are not medically treated. so that kind of debunks your “they get treated” theory.</p>
<p>the problem is that people want to reach “goals.” i want to lose 20 pounds, i want to get down to X% bodyfat. what happens when you reach your goal? very rarely can people who want to reach such goals remain at their target(s). </p>
<p>fitness is a lifelong journey, there is no finish line. some people cut weight, and that’s fine, but they think they’ve done it all. that’s why so many just put the weight right back on. </p>
<p>it’s not cornell dining’s fault that they provide buffet meals. everyone is responsible for what goes into their own bodies… but… i think you’re confusing “eating little” with “eating healthy.” </p>
<p>i eat about 3000 calories a day, but it’s in a 5:3:2 protein:carbohydrate:fat ratio. i run between 7-9 miles a day and have around 6% bodyfat. you can’t just say “eat less.” you can eat nothing but a few ounces of olive oil and gain weight.</p>
<p>I think you are confusing being fit and being healthy.
I’m not looking to make everybody in the US into a 6% body fat gym trainer. Instead, it’d be nice if we could curtail the health problems that are associated with being obese. By getting people into healthy weight categories first, maybe we can worry about changing people onto 5:3:2 protein:carbohydrate:fat ratio diets.</p>
<p>And so you can just say eat less.
If we only had smaller portion sizes, we would reduce the tendencies to be so obese.</p>
<p>chendrix,</p>
<p>do you not get it? a “small” big mac does not replace an egg white omelet with onions and tomatoes. portion size has absolutely nothing to do with true obesity in this country. i can give you a shake, worth about 1500 Kcalories that will do you a lot of good. you can also get a “number 6” medium value meal at mcdonalds worth fewer Kcalories. </p>
<p>fit and healthy belong in the same breath.</p>
<p>And you think someone who is used to eating supersized number 1s can just up and switch to eating only egg white omelets?</p>
<p>I think you are delusional. Radical changes in diet are not realizable. People will switch back as soon as they can because they haven’t been weaned off of their old high fat high sugar diet and onto something healthier.</p>
<p>Portion size is the very first step. After they are used to eating normal portions (based on caloric content) then you can start to worry about the type of nutrition they are getting.</p>
<p>well, obviously it’s not an overnight thing. we think of food in entirely the wrong way. food should be thought of as nutrition. something that keeps us alive. we want to ‘enjoy’ it too much. i didn’t bring the nutrition ratios up to seem snooty, but the point is that people just pump fat and refined sugars into themselves and then have the audacity to wonder why they are out of shape.</p>
<p>dealing with portion size is much more difficult than dealing with nutrition content. someone who is used to supersized number 1’s will have a much tougher time only taking two bites out of their burger and only downing 5 or 6 fries than they will with changing the foods-- you’ll be surprised with how many healthy options actually taste good.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s hard to convince somebody who was raised on eating Twinkies that mangoes taste good.</p>
<p>mangoes aren’t very healthy… atleast not the kinds we get here in india… sugars sugars and more sugars</p>
<p>mangos have low glycemic index so they aren’t that bad. and its a fruit so got nice nutrients!</p>
<p>I frankly have no idea how nutritious mangoes are. But they are definitely an acquired taste and they are probably just a bit more healthy for you than Twinkies.</p>
<p>Going along with this threat, does anyone know where there are just regular scales at Cornell? Are there ones in Appel/Helen Newman?</p>
<p>there is a scale in the helen newman men’s locker room…</p>
<p>and i thought there used to be one near the HNH fitness center entrance</p>
<p>mangoes are delicious. both chendrix and devil make good points, and i think the problem to your debate is to combine both of your ideas. obviously organic foods are going to be better than foods from mcdonalds that contain artificial ingredients and preservatives but it is also important to watch your total caloric intake. you cannot assume that everyone is able to consume 3000 calories a day because they do not burn off 1000 calories from running 7-9 miles a day. not everyone has 6% body fat. the more lean mass you have, the more calories you burn off. obviously you are going to be able to eat more than someone who would be overweight-obese. you cannot assume that everyone can consume x calories. height/weight/genetics/gender all play huge factors how much you can consume without becoming fat. somatotypes are important to note when creating our diets. you see people who can eat whatever they want and not get fat. obviously being an ectomorph will not gain the same amount of weight as an endomorph eatng 5000 calories.</p>
<p>i think the american heart association says something like multiply your weight x 10 and thats your daily caloric intake to MAINTAIN weight…</p>
<p>add 500 cals to increase muscle/bulk
discount 500 cals to lose weight</p>