Obesity
- Thread starter isuno1fan
- Start date
Here's the thing, many of those obese people rely on taxpayer money to pay for them to live becuase they are on "disability". It's a sad and sick trend that's just getting worse and worse. As soon as these types stop taking taxpayer money because they are lazy, they'll stop catching flack from us hardworking taxpayers.
protein shakes are a bit overrated, your paying a high price on a weight gainer that you could get from milk and eggs.
8k of calories? no way. that would require the guy to be 6'7" and 700 lbs. I think hes just way off in counting.
michael phelps even doesn't eat that much during offseason
Look Tyler, whether you are right or not, that has no place here.
Whether I am here or not....... soap has no place here.
Yep.
Pretty damn sure this depends on where you go, but yeah you are correct about one thing. The obesity rate has definitely gone up in the last 20 years.
From reading this thread, pop (soda) is generally regarded as the top culprit in the high calorie intake daily "food war". So why do people just drink diet pop? It has zero calories and tastes fine to me. That's all I have drank when I want a pop ever since they came out with the stuff. Cokezero is particularly good, IMO. If I get ahold of a regular pop now it tastes like syrup and almost gags me.
I don't think it's THAT overrated. I buy my whey from buybulkwhey.com: Bulk Whey Protein Powder on sale! and it costs around 5 dollars a pound. A pound gives me 16 servings of about 24 grams of protein each, and has about 120 calories. An egg has about 6g and 75 calories (depending on the size), so I'd have to eat 4 eggs (and 300 calories) to equal one serving of whey. To equal one pound of whey, I'd have to buy and consume more than 5 dozen eggs. I could do a similar comparison with milk or cottage cheese or just about any other type of protein as well.
So price-wise, it's a better deal, IMO. And on top of that, it's way more convenient to throw down a protein shake after working out than it is to try and eat 8 eggs quickly (and consume at least twice as many calories). Not to mention that whey protein is absorbed faster (which is important post-workout).
And, in addition to all that, I'm not eating a ton of fat, cholesterol and carbs along with the protein.
Whole foods DEFINITELY have the most important place in a diet. I eat a ton of high protein foods. I try and get it wherever I can, but it's really hard to get 200 grams or so of protein a day (which is my personal goal) just from whole foods.
No, he was eating 3 or 4 double quarter pounders a day, in addition to pizza and whatever he could get his hands on to stuff calories in his body. He said he was miserable constantly, and only put on about 10 lbs.
Michael Phelps isn't trying to gain weight though. He's just trying to maintain muscle. Since he is so lean, any calories he burns off in excess of what he consumes is going to come from muscle. So he's gotta keep his calorie intake up to fuel his exercise. That's why he eats 12k a day when he's training. If he was trying to GAIN while training, he'd be having to eat 14-16k calories a day.
That's pretty nuts.
What taxpayer money am I taking by being fat? I pay for my insurance and I'll probably die sooner so you'll have all that money I paid into social security. Also, where does it stop?
Should we outlaw motorcycles because they are more dangerous than cars?
Should we just kill people at a certain age so they don't get Alzheimers?
Should sex be outlawed since the people could get HIV and cost the taxpayers millions of dollars?
Should we just ban all bad food? Since it's bad for everyone why not just ban it? You know that piece of pizza is not good for you no matter how much you exercise so why not just ban it?
I agree that some of the obese end up costing the taxpayers a lot of money but I'm not big into regulating lives. Once you start regulating it doesn't seem to stop. We are becoming more and more of a nanny state. Don't eat meat, don't leave your lights on, don't smoke, don't tan, don't own a gun, etc. It's fine that they warn us that these things are bad/dangerous but that's where it should end.
Because, depending on the dietitian that you talk to, some consider artificial sweeteners to be even worse for you than HFCS. The reason being is by eating/drinking something "sweet", your pancreas releases insulin - however, it has no sugar to regulate. Do this enough times and your pancreas becomes desensitized stops releasing insulin, so when you do dump a bunch of sugar into your body, your pancreas doesn't release insulin to deal with it. Viola - Type II diabetes.
It's controversial, and not all dietitians agree, but it makes a certain amount of sense. When it comes right down to it, pop is one of the worst things you can put into your body on a regular basis. You are much better off with water, tea, coffee, or even Gatorade (although consistent consumption of Gatorade is about as bad as downing sodas).
Obese people, in the larger population (not any one person in particular), drive up the cost of healthcare. This cost is eventually borne by the taxpayer through increased cost of services for Medicaid and Medicare, as well as society as a whole through increased cost of healthcare in general, resulting in increased premiums, more expensive services, and, as people age, an increased burden on younger generations.
Motorcycles are an inappropriate comparison because that is a self-selecting pool of people. Your choice to ride a motorcycle does not affect me in any way, really, aside from sharing the road. Perhaps a better example would be banning people from driving tractor-trailers for personal use everywhere because they do excessive damage to roads. In that case, operators of tractor trailers have to be licensed properly, and pay higher taxes than everyone else in order to operate. They are also banned from many roads for one reason or another.
Alzheimers, as far as we know, does not have a root cause in lifestyle. And nobody is suggesting killing fat people, either.
This is actually a good comparison. Sex hasn't been outlawed, but the promotion of healthy lifestyles (i.e. promoting safe sex) and awareness programs have been fairly effective in limiting the spread of HIV in wealthy countries. In countries where such things don't exist, HIV has been, and is, a serious problem. Noone has said "don't have sex" (well nobody in a regulatory capacity), but they have said "here's what can happen if you do, and here are some free condoms".
There is nothing wrong with indulging occasionally in things that aren't good for you. I don't think anyone is really suggesting that seriously. Again, I compare health and finance. It's ok for some people to go out and buy a 5k TV, because they are financially healthy and can afford it, and responsible to pay for it. It's really not acceptable to society for someone that has no hope of paying for it to go out and buy the same thing and then spread that poor choice on the back of the taxpayer.
If you live a healthy lifestyle, a piece or two of pizza, or ordering that scary looking thing you posted earlier, is no big deal every once in a while. It's when your lifestyle can no longer support those excess calories that obesity begins to creep up on you. And that begins to effect everyone around you, eventually.
If the obese were cut off from the health care system and forced to pay for the risks associated with their lifestyle (i.e. the way auto insurance works for teenagers), I'd say go crazy with the food. Blimp up to 400 lbs and enjoy it. You're just going to have to pay for it. That's not the case, however. Because the risk pools are created artificially in relation to the actual health risk - generally in the US, through the fact that you work at the same place - the cost of poor health choices is shared by coworkers regardless of their health.
Imagine the incentive to lose weight you'd have if you made half as much as your co-workers because you had to pay for healthcare costs that were 5-10x higher than theirs.
It's a question of how much society (and by society I'm not referring solely to gov't) should have to "pay" for the irresponsible actions of the individuals in it. If you're going to have common, shared services - which are inescapable in any society - you're going to have to have some norms and expectations in order to gain access to them in a fair manner.
I used to pump sugar in my body like no other. Loved Pepsi. Until my doctor noticed my blood-sugar was spiraling out of control. Went on some pills called Metformin. Changed my diet. Work out on a regular basis.
Viola- no more pills.
Type II diabetes can be avoided if you make serious life changes.
Viola- no more pills.
Type II diabetes can be avoided if you make serious life changes.
Isn't it pretty damn obvious that I'm not talking about people such as yourself? You obviously have a career and in no way depend on other taxpayers to pay your way through life. Get a grip guy.
Just because you're taking in protein doesn't mean it's more complete than any other source of protein. The protein structure of various foods/sources of nutrition changes. For example, the protein structure from animals (i.e. certain types of meat) is much more complete than the protein you would get from a vegetable for example (yes, vegetables have protein).
There's some proteins now that are much, much, MUCH higher quality than others and higher than say, milk. These proteins now too include other essential nutrients and/or amino acids to help in recovery and development.
The main point though is that just because you can take in 20 g of protein from one source doesn't mean it's equal to 20 g of protein from another source (another example..Peanuts..the protein structure for them is semi bad actually).
