http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2009111...
It may be a "duh" moment of sorts, but I've seen a lot of arguments of lack of recess/P.E. in schools as part of why kids now days are fatter. Seems the activity level over the past few years or so hasn't changed much,. What has is the sh*t we feed kids.
So when are we going to start legislating HFCS out? As well as other stuff we know is crap?
So when are we going to start legislating HFCS out? As well as other stuff we know is crap?
Being that I'm sitting next to the wife who's watching King Corn right now, I would hazard a guess of 'not in my lifetime'.
There is no direct link between HFCS and diabetes because, well, you know, you eat other foods too. Like apples. Apples = diabetes. Duh.
I find the study interesting but a little misleading. I don't doubt that America's exercise habits haven't changed since 1991. That was six years after the Nintendo Entertainment System had been introduced. Or, as the article says,
The information was collected by asking participants to self-report their exercise habits, which is a notoriously unreliable method - people are not very good at gauging their activity accurately.
I'd like to see today's high school kids compared to kids from, say, 1960.
Still, the study highlighted some encouraging trends. For instance, the percentage of teens who spent more than three hours a day in front of the TV dropped from 1999 to 2007, from 43% to 35%. While Wang acknowledges that students may simply be substituting computer or other sedentary screen time for television-viewing, he notes that it's still a trend in the right direction
No, it's not a trend in the right direction. replacing cigarette smoking with a cocaine addiction definitely lowers the amount of cigarettes you smoke, but it's not a trend in the right direction.
]
So when are we going to start legislating HFCS out? As well as other stuff we know is crap?
it'd be a metric buttload easier just to remove the subsidies on corn manufacturing. Corn syrup is cheaper than sugarcane because the American Taxpayer is giving them free money.
it'd be a metric buttload easier just to remove the subsidies on corn manufacturing. Corn syrup is cheaper than sugarcane because the American Taxpayer is giving them free money.
Speak it brother. Damn corn.
If we're just going general I'll lay some blame on the increasing portion sizes of our meals. Everything's jumbo sized and 20 ounces of bottled corn water is a quick drink with fountain drinks getting up to over 40-60 ounces and hamburgers going up to a pound or more. And fries? Heck, we'll just fill a three foot square box with fries and stick it with every combo meal. I don't remember fast food meals being so big when I was a kid. When Hardee's/Carl Jr's is selling meals that weigh in at several thousand calories a piece it becomes easier and easier for people to consumer several times the amount of calories they actually need every single day. Just how well does the average office worker's body process 6 or 7 thousand calories a day?
There was an interesting study a while back I heard about on NPR. They tracked public school kids with no PE break against private school kids with PE, and another scheduled break for led exercises. The jist is there was no difference in overall activity for the kids. The private school kids got their workouts during the day, and relaxed in the afternoon when school got out, and the public school kids went nuts playing outside in the afternoon. What they found was that weight/weight gain was almost solely tied to foods served at the different places.
If we're just going general I'll lay some blame on the increasing portion sizes of our meals.
Yep. Portion sizes have skyrocketed, exercise has diminished greatly, food has gotten unhealthier, and education simply hasn't caught up. It's quite a bit cheaper to feed a family on processed junk and/or fast food than it is to buy fresh products, and a helluvalot more convenient that trying to grow your own fruits/vegetables or raise your own animals -- which is why poor people are typically mroe obese than rich (that and the fact that lypo is a rationed resource under the American Elective Healthcare system ;))
The obesity epidemic is a monstrous, multi faceted issue. Inevitably you'll have sects of people trying to push some of the blame from their facet onto others. That's what's happening in the article.
In a podcast I was listening to (either SciAm, NPR Science Friday, or PRI's The World: Science, i forget which one) they were talking about the massive difference cooking made to our evolutionary development. Some simple processing of our food--like the addition of heat--made it much easier for us to extract more calories and nutrients from our meals.
Fast forward to today's ultra-processed foods, especially the snack foods mentioned in the article, and you can see where there might be some connection.
There is no direct link between HFCS and diabetes because, well, you know, you eat other foods too. Like apples. Apples = diabetes. Duh.
HFCS is a long way from apples. Michael Pollan's book "An Omnivore's Dilemma" had a great chapter in it that talked about how corn is pretty much reduced to a multitude of chemical compounds, which are then reassembled to make modern processed foods.
I don't know if any research has been done on it, but it doesn't take a genius to realize that if you consumed 100kcals of HFCS and 100kcals of apples that your body would keep more of the energy from the HFCS simply because it was so processed. Your body wouldn't have to spend much energy to break it down into usable sugars because it already was in that form. Apples, on the other hand, have all that fiber and cellulose the body has to digest before it can extract the energy.
As the original article said, even a couple of extra kcals a day can add up to pounds at the end of the year.
Seth wrote:it'd be a metric buttload easier just to remove the subsidies on corn manufacturing. Corn syrup is cheaper than sugarcane because the American Taxpayer is giving them free money.
Speak it brother. Damn corn.
Of course, sugar is also much more expensive than it has to be due to tariffs. We could get sugar from Brazil for about $.04 per pound, if the tariffs weren't there. So the government has messed with the market both ways; making one product cheaper, and another more expensive.
But, as mentioned, it's about what you eat. There's a simple solution, though; allow health insurance to be tied to your weight. Give people a monetary incentive to lose weight, or not gain it in the first place. Kids just eat what their parents eat; you have to fix the parents' habits, first.
How about obese parking spots that are just at the other end of the lot from where you want to go?
Has anyone else seen those hilarious full-page ads companies have been taking out to try and get public opinion back on the side of HFCS? You can smell the stench of desperation through the paper.
Has anyone else seen those hilarious full-page ads companies have been taking out to try and get public opinion back on the side of HFCS? You can smell the stench of desperation through the paper.
the popsicle commercials are the best. "it's got HFCS in it. I thought you loved me."
The subsidies on HFCS, grains, and cramming the stupid food guide pyramid down peoples throat for a century have all lead to being one disgusting fat f*cking country.
How about obese parking spots that are just at the other end of the lot from where you want to go?
I can tell you from my experience coaching little league and basketball, many of our kids aren't anywhere near as active, fit or tough as we were. I know that sounds like a "when I was a kid we walked to school, uphill both ways" but kids just don't play the same way we used to.
There is also an issue of allowance. My cousin is a tick older than me. She has 7-15 year old kids, 4 of them. Her kids are the ONLY ones who play outside. In the summer and after school, my parents almost never saw me and my brother if weather permitted. We were playing hockey, baseball, football in the street, in the yard.
My cousin has actually had parents complain that her kids are at risk by playing outside.
Long story short, the admins nerfed life, and we all got softer for it.
I can tell you from my experience coaching little league and basketball, many of our kids aren't anywhere near as active, fit or tough as we were. I know that sounds like a "when I was a kid we walked to school, uphill both ways" but kids just don't play the same way we used to.
Why is that - I can't imagine that kids don't play outside as much as we did because kids have changed. Are we not encouraging them enough? Is it the media attention given to the rare bad incidents that occur (which surely occurred as often in our youth)? Or are the people that say that TV etc. is doing it right (I hope not).
Maybe it's just colder outside now, although that flies in the face of global warming.
Incidentally, if anyone knows why my quotes don't quote right, please let me know. It's beginning to irritate me.
I overheard a couple of folks at work talking about not letting their kids play outside when it gets too hot, cold, wet, bad air quality wise, etc. because they can't afford for their kids to get sick.
It costs money for kids to have a cold? If anything it is cheaper since they eat less when lying in bed all day.
Incidentally, if anyone knows why my quotes don't quote right, please let me know. It's beginning to irritate me.
It's a "feature" designed to prevent spambots from being able to use any forum code. New members (as denoted by the 'coffee grinder' tag under your name) don't have the ability to use tags until you've posted a certain amount. I'm not sure what the threshold number is, but once you're no longer a coffee grinder, you're good to go.
Darktan wrote:Incidentally, if anyone knows why my quotes don't quote right, please let me know. It's beginning to irritate me.
It's a "feature" designed to prevent spambots from being able to use any forum code. New members (as denoted by the 'coffee grinder' tag under your name) don't have the ability to use tags until you've posted a certain amount. I'm not sure what the threshold number is, but once you're no longer a coffee grinder, you're good to go.
There is also a time component. After a few weeks, you'll be fine, even if you haven't reached your 51st post (the cutoff for Coffee Grinder)
Why is that - I can't imagine that kids don't play outside as much as we did because kids have changed. Are we not encouraging them enough? Is it the media attention given to the rare bad incidents that occur (which surely occurred as often in our youth)? Or are the people that say that TV etc. is doing it right (I hope not).
Maybe it's just colder outside now, although that flies in the face of global warming.
Incidentally, if anyone knows why my quotes don't quote right, please let me know. It's beginning to irritate me.
I think it's a combination of things. First, the media and the horror stories of sexual predators have most parents afraid that if they let their kids outside unsupervised that they'll certainly be abducted, raped and killed. Long gone are the days of parents telling their kids "go outside and play and be home by dark".
Secondly, there's just way too much other shit for kids to do. Most of them don't involve moving their asses off the couch. 200 plus cable channels, craptastic on demand, PC's and consoles let them have the sporting and competitive experience while only exercising their thumbs.
I've noticed another strange oddity. Kids seem to have forgotten how to put together a pick up game. Maybe it all the uber structured soccer, basketball, baseball programs and their associated "clinics". I used to leave the house with my glove and go find a game, if I couldn't find one we'd round up friends and start one. Now it seems that if it's not structured it just doesn't happen.
I do know this...we're doing a HUGE disservice to our kids. We need to put our fears behind us and let them be kids again. They need to understand that it's ok to fall down, skin your knee and keep playing. You won't die if you don't run right home and take a Bactine bath and plaster on 7 Band-Aids.
For the first time in my sons life I've actually started to tell him "get your ass outside an do something". In other words, I've turned into my mother.
There has never been any society in all of human history that has been so safe, and there probably has never been any society as fearful.
There has never been any society in all of human history that has been so safe, and there probably has never been any society as fearful.
I was talking about this recently, and I think it's actually symptomatic of a population-wide lack of understanding of probability and numeracy.
For instance, 40,000+ people die every year on America's roads. How many die through terrorism? The odds of me dying in a car accident are far, far greater than the odds of me dying from an act of terrorism?
Yet, we're spending billions (trillions?) on a war to ostensibly reduce terrorism. Where's the billions we're spending on reducing traffic deaths? Or heart disease? Or cancer?
Likewise, the chances of my child's life being ruined by a paedo seem to me to be vastly outweighed by the chances of my child's life being ruined by obesity/diabetes/heart disease.
I think you might be surprised how much money we've spent on those over the years, but the war on Terror has two distinct things going for it:
1) Terrorists are "not us", and it is much easier to go after those we label as not being included in our tribe/unit
2) Defending against military threats is something the government is specifically tasked with, protecting us from us many would argue should not be in the purview of the government
There has never been any society in all of human history that has been so safe, and there probably has never been any society as fearful.
Really? I just am failing to comprehend what it is like to live in fear constantly, why would anyone chose to live like that?
There has never been any society in all of human history that has been so safe, and there probably has never been any society as fearful.
So it's the lack of safety (spiders, crocodiles, snakes, drop-bears, Russell Crowe, etc.) that have kept aussie kids healthy? good to know 
I think what we're seeing today is, in many ways, a weird separation of fitness according to class and resources. Those with the resources schedule their kids for all manner of activities from martial arts (as day care) to gymnastics, math camp, football, or just about anything resource intensive. Those without them often find it easier and more affordable to park their kids in front of the computer or game system.
As others have mentioned, it seems a rarity to see the gaggle of neighborhood kids involved in spontaneous free play.
I think what we're seeing today is, in many ways, a weird separation of fitness according to class and resources. Those with the resources schedule their kids for all manner of activities from martial arts (as day care) to gymnastics, math camp, football, or just about anything resource intensive. Those without them often find it easier and more affordable to park their kids in front of the computer or game system.
As others have mentioned, it seems a rarity to see the gaggle of neighborhood kids involved in spontaneous free play.
That's part of the problem though Paleo, if it isn't a scheduled activity the kids are likely to just sit home and play Halo. We've scheduled all the spontaneity out of them.
As for the "fear" issue. I hate to say this but I blame the cable news. Every time something bad happens it becomes the ad naseum story for days if not weeks. Anyone remember Natalie Hollaway? ONE girl disappears and it's on the national news every day for over a week. I feel horrible for her parents but do I really need to know about this? Is it really necessary for every news outlet to beat me over the head with every story about every child. Sure the crimes are horrifying but I just don't want to know about them anymore. Sometimes I wish we were back in the 1800's when it comes to news.
The over reporting is what makes it seem like it's much more statistically significant.
Pages