Everyday Systems

http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreykab ... -be-wrong/

Interesting:

Among the other frequently cited factors that the authors dismiss are: 1) that physical activity has decreased in the population over recent decades – in fact, it has increased; 2) that fruit and vegetable intake has decreased – in fact, it too has increased; 3) that leisure time has decreased – it too has increased; and 4) that a lack of supermarkets in poor neighborhoods and characteristics of the “built environment†promote obesity – in fact, available data do not provide strong support for these linkages.

and most interesting:

This analysis suggests that, rather than one particular category of foods, what is driving the obesity epidemic is the sheer quantity of intake of food – and calories – that have become standard in our society.

which is one of Reinhard's basic tenets.

This is from two years ago: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/scien ... .html?_r=0

"The epidemic [of obesity] was caused by the overproduction of food in the United States.

Beginning in the 1970s, there was a change in national agricultural policy. Instead of the government paying farmers not to engage in full production, as was the practice, they were encouraged to grow as much food as they could. At the same time, technological changes and the “green revolution†made our farms much more productive. The price of food plummeted, while the number of calories available to the average American grew by about 1,000 a day.

Well, what do people do when there is extra food around? They eat it! This, of course, is a tremendously controversial idea. However, the model shows that increase in food more than explains the increase in weight."

On another note, a piece of very interesting information this observer said is that it actually takes a deficit of an average of 100 calories a day FOR THREE YEARS to sustain a 10-lb. weight loss. "if you don't cheat." This means it takes a deficit of 109, 500 calories to "lose" 10 lbs,- and keep it off. NOT 3,500.

Keep going!

"This analysis suggests that, rather than one particular category of foods, what is driving the obesity epidemic is the sheer quantity of intake of food – and calories – that have become standard in our society."

This is one of the seemingly most ignored, yet (since becoming acquinted with No S) obvious points, concerning obesity "out there". Thank you for posting this article. Unfortunately there is no money to be made in personal calorie reduction and skipping rope. I don't skip rope, but I am sure you all get the point.

Over43 wrote:"This analysis suggests that, rather than one particular category of foods, what is driving the obesity epidemic is the sheer quantity of intake of food – and calories – that have become standard in our society."

I was a "there are bad foods" person for so long. Low fat for a while, low carb for a LONG while, and have finally realized you can gain weight eating anything, if you eat enough of it.

And it breaks my heart when I see my niece and others pounding their bodies with exercise and yet not losing weight; mostly because they aren't modifying their diet. But something else I've learned is that you can't tell folks what to do about weight ( overeating really, is the problem, weight is the symptom ). They have to come to it on their own.

Over43 wrote:Unfortunately there is no money to be made in personal calorie reduction

Exactly.

I still think that the highly restrictive forms of dieting that have been promoted WHILE so many forms of manufactured foods are being pushed has exacerbated the problem. (I don't think it is the main cause, but right up there.) Making people think they have to go without forbidden foods for weeks or months on end doesn't lead to moderation for most of them.

Great article, thanks for sharing the link. I read it with much interest.

It's interesting but also can't be the whole story because I have yet to meet someone who becomes obese from the sheer amount of vegetables they eat. I guess the problem is that they eat vegetables on top of all the fried stuff. I'm not saying fried stuff is bad - in moderation it isn't. But people consume too much food and snacking is still a big part of this because if you have a 3 plate rule it doesn't matter how much food is produced.

Also: leisure time is often counted including commuting and housework. It's not like the 60s where you worked 5 minutes from your door and housework was done by one person full time. True leisure time hasn't increased for most people according to other studies. Time off-work has increased slightly.

Vegetables are not most people's snack of choice. It's the availability of the sheer volume of processed food that doesn't need refrigeration and permission to eat all the time AS WELL as a subconscious proscription against eating. Vicious circle.

We may have more leisure time, but most of us are less active. This is largely due to labor saving devices. When I was growing up it took more movement to accomplish a lot of our daily activities. You got out of the car to manually open the garage door; laundry was usually hung on a line to dry; you walked behind a mower to mow the lawn and no one had snow or leaf blowers. You raked or shoveled. Many people scrubbed floors on their hands and knees or used a mop that was wrung out by hand. Washing machines and dryers were in the basement, so you went down and up stairs several times for each load of laundry. Even dishes were washed and dried by hand. Oh, and clothes and bedding were usually ironed.

In addition we didn't rely so much on cars. Most families had one car. Many people were able to walk to work, to buy groceries and pay bills. Unless you lived in a rural area, kids walked to school. If kids participated in sports or other activities, they walked to and from.

All of these seemingly little things add up to a lot of energy we're not spending. Add in larger portions of food, even healthy food, and snacking 24/7 and there's a recipe for weight gain. Exactly how much weight gain depends on how little activity one gets and how many extra calories one consumes.

oolala53 wrote:Vegetables are not most people's snack of choice.

Oh, I totally agree with this, my point was just that one can't blame the sheer quantitiy of food (if there was a massive over-production of broccoli no one would be obese) but I think it's more complex. It's the fact there is sugar in a ridiculous amount of food and most food is processed.

However, I am all for reducing the "obesogenic environment" I also think sugar should be stopped to be substituted asap and vegetables planted instead.

I think vegetables aren't the "snack of choice" because most of us have to be hungry in order to want vegetables.

Now that I am usually hungry at mealtime, I definitely "like" my freggies much more.

And broccoli is not subsidized, as corn is. It's the subsidizing of particular crops that lend themselves to processing. If all we were doing was eating plain old corn, I doubt there'd be the extent of overeating there is.

I know I've read that some think it would make much more sense to be subsidizing the growing of vegetables. I wouldn't oppose that, as long as they are not thinking of potatoes as a vegetable.

It's just basically a perfect storm for overeating. In my more airy-fairy moments, I think of it as the result of the fervent prayers of our ancestors, just centuries late. Who could have ever thought it would be a problem to have cheap, available, plentiful food? Though even in the middle ages, fasting was recommended for religious purposes. I doubt that would be promoted by any society in which there was not evidence of overeating.

eschano wrote:It's interesting but also can't be the whole story because I have yet to meet someone who becomes obese from the sheer amount of vegetables they eat. I guess the problem is that they eat vegetables on top of all the fried stuff. I'm not saying fried stuff is bad - in moderation it isn't. But people consume too much food and snacking is still a big part of this because if you have a 3 plate rule it doesn't matter how much food is produced.

Not necessarily. Vegetables alone, after all, hardly constitute a healthy diet. You can easily get fat off of eating too many generally healthy foots, like nuts, dairy and whole grains.

So, yes, I agree that it's an overall consumption of too much food, but that 'too much' doesn't have to include fried or otherwise 'bad' food (though I also agree that there's nothing wrong with fried food in moderation).