We're number 5, we're number 5!!

Zamboni

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

Saying "Eat salmon and brocccoli instead of potatoes/rice/pasta" isn't a trategy that is going to work.

Teaching people why the likes of salmon and broccoli would be better choices or what a portion size is if they want to have potatoes/rice/pasta is much more likely to work.

Apologies AV - I suppose I am more responding to this quote

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

A lack of empathy or interest in understanding why people act the way they do will help no-one.

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

Portion sizes are great but what happens when you are still hungry after carefully measuring your portions sizes? Do you really think it works? Do you think people are going to stick with it if they are always hungry?

AND WHAT ABOUT THE HYPERBOLE?

WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!ELEVEEEENNNNN

If someone is eating proper food, then there won't be a problem with feeling hungry.

Bruno26

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

AND WHAT ABOUT THE HYPERBOLE?

WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!ELEVEEEENNNNN

If someone is eating proper food, then there won't be a problem with feeling hungry.

What?

Gobs***e comes to mind.

Essien

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

If someone is eating proper food, then there won't be a problem with feeling hungry.

This.

I had 250g of spuds yesterday and I was stuffed for the evening. Real food FTW.

Ralphdejones

Don't eat crap and mind the calories in verus the calories out ?

Is this not the way or what ?

Essien

Ralphdejones wrote: »

Don't eat crap and mind the calories in verus the calories out ?

Is this not the way or what ?

This is the way.

Bruno26

Ralphdejones wrote: »

Don't eat crap and mind the calories in verus the calories out ?

Is this not the way or what ?

Yes to first part but no to second part.

http://time.com/2988142/you-asked-are-all-calories-created-equal/

Alf Veedersane

And so it begins.

Again.

Ralphdejones

Essien wrote: »

This is the way.

Bruno26 wrote: »

Yes to first part but no to second part.

Fckin Typical. Let us know whenever you make your minds up.

MD1990

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

Saying "Eat salmon and brocccoli instead of potatoes/rice/pasta" isn't a trategy that is going to work.

Teaching people why the likes of salmon and broccoli would be better choices or what a portion size is if they want to have potatoes/rice/pasta is much more likely to work.

I never said that it was a strategy al all though. Was just pointing out that many people have too much carbohydrates & then an example of what I eat. Way too much jumping to conclusions in that post.

Essien

Ralphdejones wrote: »

Fckin Typical. Let us know whenever you make your minds up.

Apologies.

Aside from Bruno and a few vested interests, the rest of the world has made it's mind up. Your initial post is still correct.

Alf Veedersane

MD1990 wrote: »

I never said that it was a strategy. Was just pointing out that many people have too much carbohydrates & then an examle of what I eat.

I didn't say you said it was a strategy. I was just using what you said to make my general point.

Which was that there is no point telling people what they should east and what they shouldn't eat.

They need to be made aware of what good and bad choices are.

Zamboni

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

They need to be made aware of what good and bad choices are.

We are long, long past the awareness stage.
It was not effective.

61% of all adults and 25% of 3-year-olds are overweight or obese; 26% of 9-year-olds have a body mass index outside the healthy range

We are at the emergency direct intervention stage.
But of course that won't happen because of anti-nannystaters and political indifference and public service politics.
Look at the effectiveness to date of SAGO and HI - Still pushing the food pyramid from safefood- And most people don't know who or what they are (without googling).
They have no KPI's - just large expense claims.
Even McLoughlin just got put out to pasture from the DOH to HI. Footnote in the press. Nobody bats an eyelid.
Up to date DOH guidelines for GPs is heavily based on dealing with the problem after the event - also misguidedly focused on exercise for weight loss.
On a macro level the state agencies don't know how to deal with this.
On a local level GP's don't know how to deal with this.

Meanwhile...

Bruno26

Essien wrote: »

Apologies.

Aside from Bruno and a few vested interests, the rest of the world has made it's mind up. You're initial post is still correct.

A good start would be informing people that calories in calories out is not a good way to eat sustainably. Making the right food choices is the only way to implement sustainable nutritional habits.

Alf Veedersane

Zamboni wrote: »

We are long, long past the awareness stage.
It was not effective.

I don't remember any awareness campaign. SAGO is a talking shop and HI hasn't come out with any particular awareness campaign that I'm aware of.

But there's more to it than a few ads on the tv. Being made aware of good choices won't come from an ad showing a good choice being made.

Corkgirl18

Parents have a lot to do with it. Throwing chicken nuggets and chips into the deep fat fryer or getting a takeaway a few times a week isn't going to cut it.

People need to read food labels. You can get pasta salads (something people might perceive as healthy) in Tesco that are nearly 1000kcal and loaded with salt!
Swapping out your white breads, pastas etc for things like brown rice or grains like quinoa add adding extra fruit and veg goes a long way.

walshb

I have seen 2000-2500 calories laid out on a table and it seems not all that much. Not surprised we are above 3000 calories.

walshb

Zamboni wrote: »

61% of all adults and 25% of 3-year-olds are overweight or obese; 26% of 9-year-olds have a body mass index outside the healthy range

I have always have issues with these figures. It's the way they are put. How about 75 percent of 3 year old are NOT obese, or 74 percent of 9 year olds have a healthy BMI?

The 61 percent of all adults being overweight is something we can work on.

Zamboni

walshb wrote: »

I have always have issues with these figures. It's the way they are put. How about 75 percent of 3 year old are NOT obese, or 74 percent of 9 year olds have a healthy BMI?

Mmm ok, that's what we should be focusing on. Maybe send a letter of complaint to the author of the report?

walshb

Zamboni wrote: »

Mmm ok, that's what we should be focusing on. Maybe send a letter of complaint to the author of the report?

Why would I send a letter of complaint? 75 percent of 3 year olds are not obese. I'd see that as a positive. What do you want? All adults to be the same? The 61 percent adults overweight I would see as a negative.

Zamboni

walshb wrote: »

75 percent of 3 year olds are not obese. I'd see that as a positive.

If you are serious with this statement we have nothing further to discuss.

Alf Veedersane

walshb wrote: »

75 percent of 3 year olds are not obese. I'd see that as a positive.

If you had 4 children and one was obese would it not matter because the other 3 weren't?

walshb

Zamboni wrote: »

If you are serious with this statement we have nothing further to discuss.

What figure would make you want to discuss? And what figure would make you happy? You do realize that they are 3 years of age? Also, you must realize that not all humans are identical. Not everyone can be 6 feet tall and broad and strong and healthy and thin and happy etc...

Again, 1/4 3 year olds have a BMI that is above the recommended. 3/4 do not. That's a grade B in old money!

walshb

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

If you had 4 children and one was obese would it not matter because the other 3 weren't?

It would matter. I would want them all to be healthy. What a silly question. Like it or not not all children on earth can conform to these "perfect" standards.

Alf Veedersane

walshb wrote: »

It would matter. I would want them all to be healthy. What a silly question. Like it or not not all children on earth can conform to these "perfect" standards.

There's a difference between wanting a child to not be obese and wanting a child to be perfect.

walshb

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

There's a difference between wanting a child to not be obese and wanting a child to be perfect.

Being obese or small or tall or whatever is part and parcel of life for humans. Of course, in a perfect world all humans would conform to the "best" standards that we set as an intelligent and civilized society. We do not live in this fictitious world. We live in the real and natural world. If the figure was 2/4 or 3/4 are obese, yes, I would be worried. 1/4 or 1/5 is not worrying IMO. It's a fairly standard and decent result.

The 61 percent of Irish adults being "technically" overweight is a lot more startling a figure.

I bet that if we had the capability to monitor/compare these figures for the past 100 years or so then we would still have something similar. 1/4 or 1/5 3 year olds are obese. And, I bet that in 100 years from now the figures would be very similar. It's called life.

Alf Veedersane

walshb wrote: »

Being obese or small or tall or whatever is part and parcel of life for humans. Of course, in a perfect world all humans would conform to the "best" standards that we set as an intelligent and civilized society. We do not live in this fictitious world. We live in the real and natural world. If the figure was 2/4 or 3/4 are obese, yes, I would be worried. 1/4 or 1/5 is not worrying IMO. It's a fairly standard and decent result.

The 61 percent of Irish adults being "technically" overweight is a lot more startling a figure.

I bet that if we had the capability to monitor/cpmpare these figures for the past 100 years or so then we would still have something similar. 1/4 or 1/5 3 year olds are obese. And, I bet that in 100 years from now the figures would be very similar. It's called life.

So, we don't need to address childhood obesity?

walshb

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

So, we don't need to address childhood obesity?

Who said that? My point is that it's being phrased to exaggerate and fool. Tackle it all you want, and I bet the figures will still be similar. 1/4 is a good figure. 2/4 and 3/4 is worrying.

BWT, what figure would please you? And don't say 0/4. Something believable....

walshb

walshb wrote: »

I have always have issues with these figures. It's the way they are put. How about 75 percent of 3 year old are NOT obese, or 74 percent of 9 year olds have a healthy BMI?

The 61 percent of all adults being overweight is something we can work on.

The problem is that fat kids are far, far more likely to end up as fat adults. It's also indicative of kids being set down a path of unhealthy living as well as the health issues that go with it.
When it used to be under 10% (probably much less) of kids who were fat there was still the issue of "middle age spread" later.

Alf Veedersane

walshb wrote: »

Who said that? My point is that it's being phrased to exaggerate and fool. Tackle it all you want, and I bet the figures will still be similar. 1/4 is a good figure. 2/4 and 3/4 is worrying.

BWT, what figure would please you? And don't say 0/4. Something believable....

You're saying that the figures will always be the same. Is that not implying it's pointless trying to tackle it?

I'm not saying there is a threshold figure that would be acceptable. I'm saying it's something that needs to be addressed rather than just sitting back saying it's fine because a quarter is less than a half.

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

The problem is that fat kids are far, far more likely to end up as fat adults. It's also indicative of kids being set down a path of unhealthy living as well as the health issues that go with it.
When it used to be under 10% (probably much less) of kids who were fat there was still the issue of "middle age spread" later.

But that is trying to predict the future. I agree, fat kids tend to become fat adults. No issue there. It's life. It is nature.

I would prefer an in-depth study that compares this 1/4 3 year olds have a BMI that is above the recommended. Compare it to other eras, populations, lifestyles etc etc. After this in-depth study how alarming is it really? Just a blanket statemnet like we have means nothing. Means less when you phrase it as I did.

Zamboni

walshb wrote: »

Being obese or small or tall or whatever is part and parcel of life for humans. Of course, in a perfect world all humans would conform to the "best" standards that we set as an intelligent and civilized society. We do not live in this fictitious world. We live in the real and natural world. If the figure was 2/4 or 3/4 are obese, yes, I would be worried. 1/4 or 1/5 is not worrying IMO. It's a fairly standard and decent result.

The 61 percent of Irish adults being "technically" overweight is a lot more startling a figure.

I bet that if we had the capability to monitor/compare these figures for the past 100 years or so then we would still have something similar. 1/4 or 1/5 3 year olds are obese. And, I bet that in 100 years from now the figures would be very similar. It's called life.

The 61% were children once too. Overweight/obesity rates would have been negligible at best.

Now take your 25% 3 years olds of today and extrapolate what that could look like in an adult population in a couple of decades.

[hint] it will be higher than 61%

walshb

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

You're saying that the figures will always be the same. Is that not implying it's pointless trying to tackle it?

I'm not saying there is a threshold figure that would be acceptable. I'm saying it's something that needs to be addressed rather than just sitting back saying it's fine because a quarter is less than a half.

Address it all you want. I am not saying do not address it. I am saying that claiming it to be alarming is scaremongering and exaggeration. Not saying that you are claiming this. It's not perfect, but it's not near bad either. It's grade B.

Zamboni

walshb wrote: »

But that is trying to predict the future. I agree, fat kids tend to become fat adults. No issue there. It's life. It is nature.

I would prefer an in-depth study that compares this 1/4 3 year olds have a BMI that is above the recommended. Compare it to other eras, populations, lifestyles etc etc. After this in-depth study how alarming is it really? Just a blanket statemnet like we have means nothing. Means less when you phrase it as I did.

Let's commission the "It doesn't matter how fat we are as long as we are not the fattest" study.

Super logic there...

Zamboni

Hang on a minute - Hanley posts a Daily Mail link and then vanishes from thread.

I can picture him now

Alf Veedersane

walshb wrote: »

Address it all you want. I am not saying do not address it. I am saying that claiming it to be alarming is scaremongering and exaggeration. Not saying that you are claiming this. It's not perfect, but it's not near bad either. It's grade B.

It's a figure we should try to improve.

That way there's a better chance of bringing down the adult obesity figure in the future.

walshb

Zamboni wrote: »

The 61% were children once too. Overweight/obesity rates would have been negligible at best.

Now take your 25% 3 years olds of today and extrapolate what that could look like in an adult population in a couple of decades.

[hint] it will be higher than 61%

The 61 percent is alarming. Trying to throw this into the 3 year old category is stretching it. Do the study properly. These 61 percent of adults, what were they like as 3 year olds? It needs in-depth analysis. As it stands today, 1/4 3 year olds have a BMI that is above the recommended. You cannot make this anything other than 1/4. Unless you can predict the future for these 3 year olds?

Hanley

Zamboni wrote: »

Hang on a minute - Hanley posts a Daily Mail link and then vanishes from thread.

I can picture him now

Man since I've posted this thread I've ripped up some floors, painted walls, coached clients, wrote blog posts, eat several meals, hit a bench PR and a ton of other ****.

I'm opening a new gym on Monday so I'm off my face. But I am reading along

Tiddlypeeps

walshb wrote: »

Who said that? My point is that it's being phrased to exaggerate and fool. Tackle it all you want, and I bet the figures will still be similar. 1/4 is a good figure. 2/4 and 3/4 is worrying.

BWT, what figure would please you? And don't say 0/4. Something believable....

1 in 4 3 year olds being obese is not a good figure, regardless of what way you phrase it.

I wouldn't be against it being considered a form of child abuse to allow a young child to become obese and sanctions applied accordingly, mandatory classes, fines for failure to comply etc.

I can understand parents allowing a child to get a little overweight because of ignorance but there is no way they don't spot there is a problem before it gets to the obese stage so that means they chose to allow it to happen. A parent totally controls what a young child eats, so there is no excuse for not making changes when it's obvious what you are doing is harming the child.

I think the current generation of adults are a lost cause, you can help a few but you won't help most of them. The lifestyle is ingrained from childhood for most so it's very difficult to change even if they actively want to. You can fix it for the next generation by making life difficult for parents that allow it to happen.

walshb

According to The Irish Heart Foundation: "One in ten 5-12 year olds is overweight and a further one in ten is obese. In total, 22% of 5-12 year olds are overweight or obese."

Again, this figure is far from startling. 78 percent of our 5-12 year olds are within healthy limits.

Irish Teenagers (13-17 years)

One in five teenagers is overweight or obese (11% overweight and 8% obese)
9
.
There has been a significant increase in teenage obesity since 1990 with an 8-fold
increase in males (1% to 8%) and a 2-fold increase in females (3% to 6%)

While there has been an increase in comparison to other eras, it's still 80 percent 'healthy' for this age group.

seamus

Sala wrote: »

How is 200 cals burned in 2.5 minutes jumping jacks or running up and down stairs??

And they were kind of doing OK until then, too.

The problem is that you're trying to shoehorn a "you will burn X calories in Y minutes" into an activity which is fundamentally variable. How many stairs? How many jumping jacks? At what intensity?

I could jog up and down the stairs at a nice easy pace for 2.5 minutes, there's not way I've burned 200kcal. Likewise I could do one jumping jack every second for a grand total of 150jumps, and suddenly that's 200kcal? Eh, no.

At a guess I'm going to say that someone has put in a decimal point by accident or overlooked something key in making that infographic. 200kcal/2.5min == 4800kcal/hour. I'm not even sure if it's biologically possible to use energy at that rate.

walshb

Tiddlypeeps wrote: »

1 in 4 3 year olds being obese is not a good figure, regardless of what way you phrase it.

What figure would you look at and say "ok, that is not worrying or startling?"

And it is not obese, it is BMI not within a recommended limit. Big difference there. BMI is a recommendation. It's open to interpretation somewhat.

Mellor

walshb wrote: »

Being obese or small or tall or whatever is part and parcel of life for humans. Of course, in a perfect world all humans would conform to the "best" standards that we set as an intelligent and civilized society. We do not live in this fictitious world. We live in the real and natural world.

I agree.

If the figure was 2/4 or 3/4 are obese, yes, I would be worried. 1/4 or 1/5 is not worrying IMO. It's a fairly standard and decent result.

I'd disagree with this. 1 in 4 is far too high for 3 year olds. The percentage will only go up as they age.

An acceptable rate, for childern 12 and under, would be 1 in 10 imo

The 61 percent of Irish adults being "technically" overweight is a lot more startling a figure.

How are you oblivious the the link between the two?

I bet that if we had the capability to monitor/compare these figures for the past 100 years or so then we would still have something similar. 1/4 or 1/5 3 year olds are obese. And, I bet that in 100 years from now the figures would be very similar. It's called life.

Are you joking?
There's no way it was that high 100 years ago. Even 20 years ago I'd say it was nowhere near that.

This info probably exists somewhere. Or at least over a decent period.

Alf Veedersane

walshb wrote: »

.
There has been a significant increase in teenage obesity since 1990 with an 8-fold
increase in males (1% to 8%) and a 2-fold increase in females (3% to 6%)

While there has been an increase in comparison to other eras, it's still 80 percent 'healthy' for this age group.

In short, it's getting worse.

secondrowgal

Zamboni wrote: »

Now you're talking.
I'm sick to death of people telling me they eat healthy and lots of vegetables blah, blah, blah.
Spend an hour looking at the checkout counters in any supermarket in the country - that's the truth.

Supermarkets have a ratio of about 5 processed food aisles for every one fresh unadulterated produce.

I may be an outlier, but I don't buy ANY of my F&V or meat in a supermarket - I buy them in a green grocer's and butcher's shop.

Of course, I am not a fan of processed food myself either, so I wouldn't be buying fizzy drinks, TV dinners, or equivalent that often, mostly never.

However, I eat BUCKET loads of spuds and butter! I am a Carbo Queen!!

walshb

Mellor wrote: »

I agree.


I'd disagree with this. 1 in 4 is far too high for 3 year olds. The percentage will only go up as they age.

An acceptable rate, for childern 12 and under, would be 1 in 10 imo


How are you oblivious the the link between the two?


Are you joking?
There's no way it was that high 100 years ago. Even 20 years ago I'd say it was nowhere near that.

This info probably exists somewhere. Or at least over a decent period.

So let's see these figures and tables that gives an in-depth analysis from years gone by. Otherwise it's blanket statements and figures and guessing.

20 years ago if they did a decenet survey on 3 year olds. What approximate figure would you expect to see for the percentage of them being overweight or obese?

I am well aware of linking the 3 year old with the adults. Again, lets us visit this figure when the 3 year olds become adults. That is the key. Otherwise it's guess work.

I don't think 78 percent of 5-12 year olds being in the healthy range is a worrying figure at all. You'd like it 90 percent, fair enough.

Mellor

walshb wrote: »

Irish Teenagers (13-17 years)

One in five teenagers is overweight or obese (11% overweight and 8% obese)
9
.
There has been a significant increase in teenage obesity since 1990 with an 8-fold
increase in males (1% to 8%) and a 2-fold increase in females (3% to 6%)

While there has been an increase in comparison to other eras, it's still 80 percent 'healthy' for this age group.

So a dramatic increase of obesity.
So that's blows your theory that it's always been like that out of the water.

For reference;
In the US, in the 60s, 4.2 percent of 6 to 11 year olds were obese.
In 1988, it was 11.3 percent. In 2001, just over 16 percent. The last survey, from 2008, 19.6 of 6 to 11 year old kids were obese.

Note, it's obesity only, figures for overweight would be higher again.

walshb

Mellor wrote: »

So a dramatic increase of obesity.
So that's blows your theory that it's always been like out of the water.

For reference;
In the US, in the 60s, 4.2 percent of 6 to 11 year olds were obese.
In 1988, it was 11.3 percent. In 2001, just over 16 percent. The last survey, from 2008, 19.6 of 6 to 11 year old kids were obese.

Note, it's obesity only, figures for overweight would be higher again.

That's a teenager survey. I am asking about the 3 year olds.

ger664

I agree with WalshB here, while obese children most likely turn into obese adults I would say that 100% of the parents of these children will most likely fall into the 61% of adults category. Tackling the issue in adults/teenegaers will have a bigger effect on the number of obese children we have as a percentile in the future. Diet and eating habits are taught/learnt and the biggest influences in our education are our parents.

Alf Veedersane

ger664 wrote: »

I agree with WalshB here, while obese children most likely turn into obese adults I would say that 100% of the parents of these children will most likely fall into the 61% of adults category. Tackling the issue in adults/teenegaers will have a bigger effect on the number of obese children we have as a percentile in the future. Diet and eating habits are taught/learnt and the biggest influences in our education are our parents.

It doesn't have to be either/or.