If obesity is really so out of control, how come we are living longer than ever? As far as denying it, we have had the same health warnings for over 50 years. You can go back to the surgeon generals of the 1950s and hear the same rhetoric they are spouting now. Our theories about calories in vs. out are simplistic and out of date. THEY are part of the problem, one of the VERY reasons obesity has increased. (Although the latest stats have it leveled off!) And who in God's name thinks we are in denial when young girls are more afraid of fat than cancer or losing a parent. It is the NUMBER ONE thing women would like to change about their lives. I can not feel one bit sorry the economy is crashing. We get what we deserve. My number one thought is FINALLY something to talk about beside diet babble!
I am glad you feel "lucky" to control your weight. I feel "lucky" to be weigh 220lbs at 5"7" and be PROUD to admit it, using my 25Plus years of sociology to understand society can be wrong sometimes. As far as EMTs being insensitive; well, one of the men I date is a firefighter/EMT and if I ever heard him make a joke like that it would be over.
With all due respect, I feel the same way about your response being nonsense. Reactionary nonsense!!! There have been different proposals made for HOW the calories should be made available. I personally have NO objections whatsoever to making all that kind of info available on REQUEST for people who WANT it. But there have been proposals to put it right next to the menu so there is no way to avoid it. Because of the social delusions that fat people are happily munching away on junk food, oblivious to the health warnings around them. The real situation is that most fat people are on code red and desperately doing everything possible to diminish themselves ASAP! Many fat nags who do not have financial motives (like CSPI) have NO CLUE of the sensibilities of fat people. The factions that DO have financial agendas, like Pharma, know how fat people work inside and out. Which is why so many health campaigns are designed to increase stigma and social pressure. It is about successful marketing, rather than true understanding. Funny, though that both factions use the same means despite their different motives!
Supermarkets are NOT like restaurants. One can buy their food and take it home, not sit and suffer the judgments of their dining companions and wait staff. But to turn that argument around, most people eat at home more than out. Why haven't labels made a difference!!!!!!!!!!!! I am not writing to argue though, or change minds of the unchangeable. I write for the small percent who are sick to death of weight obsession and want another perspective!
Back in my days as an EMT, we used to joke about the virtues of a national fat tax -- not to mention standards for assessing and means of collecting it. I'll bet the jokes are getting even harsher now:
Obesity taxes ambulance gear
Heavy-duty stretchers would cost Gilmanton
By MEG HECKMAN
Monitor staff
February 27, 2008
Doctors, politicians and pundits have long debated the ramifications of America's expanding waistline, but for folks in Gilmanton, the potential cost of societal girth is crystal clear: $15,812. Enough money to buy ambulance equipment designed with hefty patients in mind.
If voters approve at next month's town meeting...
[Full story at the link.]
I realize that by no means everyone is as lucky as I am in being able to control my weight without dieting if I can make myself exercise consistently, and that for some their obesity is truly intractable. I also realize that the weight-loss game is one of the most exploitive in this lofty culture of ours. And no question about it: jokes about fat are cruel and beauty is more than skin deep.
BUT...the obesity epidemic really is a serious problem, and it's getting worse. Denial is madness.
A very apt choice of words in this field of knowledge. Yes, I do have some previous experience in what was then the fully R&D pharamaceutical industry and which by-and-by also became marketing and PR-led (certainly in terms of expenditures).
But if you'll forgive me, this is my first time submission here - I read it quite often and receive rss feeds - an issue came up today which I believe holds both guiding hands mindset as well as variation in method aka deliberate deceit. Of interest to all PRwatch readers.. It would not be the first time that Down Under has served as testbed for elsewhere..
With all due respect, your arguments are complete nonsense. You seem to be saying that listing calorie counts on restaurant menus is inherently a form of harassment of people who eat there. If that's the case, shopping in grocery stores must already be a humiliating and traumatic experience, since U.S. law requires foods in grocery stores to be labeled with nutrition information that includes not just calories, but carbohydrates, fat content, sodium, sugar, etc.
If you want to avoid the "guilt" of knowing how many calories are in the food you eat, of course you have the option of not reading the nutritional information, just as many (probably most) people don't read the nutritional labels on grocery store foods. It's absurd, however, to suggest that this information should not be made available to consumers. Currently it is simply impossible to obtain meaningful nutritional information from many restaurants, including some of the large chains. Here, for example, is the "nutritional information" page on the website of Outback Steakhouses:
You'll notice that the word "calorie" does not even appear anywhere on the page, or anywhere else on their website -- not terribly surprising, since their "appetizers" alone include items like the "Bloomin' Onion w. Dressing" ([http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070803231428AA5E6qr 2310 calories]) and "Aussie Cheese Fries" ([http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-appetizers-aussie-tizers-aussie-cheese-fries_f-Y2lkPTI3NzM2JmJpZD0xMzM1JmZpZD04ODk1OSZlaWQ9MjQ1ODgwNTY5JnBvcz0zJnBhcj0ma2V5PU91dGJhY2sgU3RlYWtob3VzZQ.html 2900 calories]), either of which by itself would exceed the 2,000 calories per day established by the FDA as the Daily Reference Value for a normal adult.
If obesity is really so out of control, how come we are living longer than ever? As far as denying it, we have had the same health warnings for over 50 years. You can go back to the surgeon generals of the 1950s and hear the same rhetoric they are spouting now. Our theories about calories in vs. out are simplistic and out of date. THEY are part of the problem, one of the VERY reasons obesity has increased. (Although the latest stats have it leveled off!) And who in God's name thinks we are in denial when young girls are more afraid of fat than cancer or losing a parent. It is the NUMBER ONE thing women would like to change about their lives. I can not feel one bit sorry the economy is crashing. We get what we deserve. My number one thought is FINALLY something to talk about beside diet babble!
I am glad you feel "lucky" to control your weight. I feel "lucky" to be weigh 220lbs at 5"7" and be PROUD to admit it, using my 25Plus years of sociology to understand society can be wrong sometimes. As far as EMTs being insensitive; well, one of the men I date is a firefighter/EMT and if I ever heard him make a joke like that it would be over.
With all due respect, I feel the same way about your response being nonsense. Reactionary nonsense!!! There have been different proposals made for HOW the calories should be made available. I personally have NO objections whatsoever to making all that kind of info available on REQUEST for people who WANT it. But there have been proposals to put it right next to the menu so there is no way to avoid it. Because of the social delusions that fat people are happily munching away on junk food, oblivious to the health warnings around them. The real situation is that most fat people are on code red and desperately doing everything possible to diminish themselves ASAP! Many fat nags who do not have financial motives (like CSPI) have NO CLUE of the sensibilities of fat people. The factions that DO have financial agendas, like Pharma, know how fat people work inside and out. Which is why so many health campaigns are designed to increase stigma and social pressure. It is about successful marketing, rather than true understanding. Funny, though that both factions use the same means despite their different motives!
Supermarkets are NOT like restaurants. One can buy their food and take it home, not sit and suffer the judgments of their dining companions and wait staff. But to turn that argument around, most people eat at home more than out. Why haven't labels made a difference!!!!!!!!!!!! I am not writing to argue though, or change minds of the unchangeable. I write for the small percent who are sick to death of weight obsession and want another perspective!
Back in my days as an EMT, we used to joke about the virtues of a national fat tax -- not to mention standards for assessing and means of collecting it. I'll bet the jokes are getting even harsher now:
http://www.cmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080227/FRONTPAGE/802270302/1043/NEWS01
[Full story at the link.]
I realize that by no means everyone is as lucky as I am in being able to control my weight without dieting if I can make myself exercise consistently, and that for some their obesity is truly intractable. I also realize that the weight-loss game is one of the most exploitive in this lofty culture of ours. And no question about it: jokes about fat are cruel and beauty is more than skin deep.
BUT...the obesity epidemic really is a serious problem, and it's getting worse. Denial is madness.
Zin@zinwatch
A very apt choice of words in this field of knowledge. Yes, I do have some previous experience in what was then the fully R&D pharamaceutical industry and which by-and-by also became marketing and PR-led (certainly in terms of expenditures).
But if you'll forgive me, this is my first time submission here - I read it quite often and receive rss feeds - an issue came up today which I believe holds both guiding hands mindset as well as variation in method aka deliberate deceit. Of interest to all PRwatch readers.. It would not be the first time that Down Under has served as testbed for elsewhere..
With all due respect, your arguments are complete nonsense. You seem to be saying that listing calorie counts on restaurant menus is inherently a form of harassment of people who eat there. If that's the case, shopping in grocery stores must already be a humiliating and traumatic experience, since U.S. law requires foods in grocery stores to be labeled with nutrition information that includes not just calories, but carbohydrates, fat content, sodium, sugar, etc.
If you want to avoid the "guilt" of knowing how many calories are in the food you eat, of course you have the option of not reading the nutritional information, just as many (probably most) people don't read the nutritional labels on grocery store foods. It's absurd, however, to suggest that this information should not be made available to consumers. Currently it is simply impossible to obtain meaningful nutritional information from many restaurants, including some of the large chains. Here, for example, is the "nutritional information" page on the website of Outback Steakhouses:
http://www.outback.com/foodandmenus/nutritionalinfo.aspx
You'll notice that the word "calorie" does not even appear anywhere on the page, or anywhere else on their website -- not terribly surprising, since their "appetizers" alone include items like the "Bloomin' Onion w. Dressing" ([http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070803231428AA5E6qr 2310 calories]) and "Aussie Cheese Fries" ([http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-appetizers-aussie-tizers-aussie-cheese-fries_f-Y2lkPTI3NzM2JmJpZD0xMzM1JmZpZD04ODk1OSZlaWQ9MjQ1ODgwNTY5JnBvcz0zJnBhcj0ma2V5PU91dGJhY2sgU3RlYWtob3VzZQ.html 2900 calories]), either of which by itself would exceed the 2,000 calories per day established by the FDA as the Daily Reference Value for a normal adult.
Pages