Why is it normal/OK to be obese in Ireland?.

silverharp

Graces7 wrote: »

PS sugar in moderation is not "bad". The anti sugar obsession is unhealthy.

what does moderation even mean? to me moderation would be the amount of sugar consumed a 100 or 200 years ago assuming you mean not including sugar in natural whole foods and secondly someone who has lived 30 or 40 years on a high sugar diet should probably eat less sugar than someone who happened to have a healthy diet.

wakka12

Deleted User wrote: »

Fúck that. I shouldn't have to pay through the nose for a Coke because other people can't control themselves or because parents can't parent. We're already paying a sugar tax on soft drinks, and it will make very little difference to the national obesity rates.

We really need to figure out a way to solve such problems without trying to tax our way out of them.

Yeh taxing is not the way to go. Fat people know they're fat, and I don't see the big deal with there being fat people but it seems to really get under most peoples skin for some reason, but the health information is widely available , we are bombarded by it, every single person knows the negative effects of over eating and lack of exercise, everyone knows whats healthy, we are independent adults, and should be left to our own accords. it shouldn't be anyones problem to try and make people skinny. I don't get why it can't just be left the way it is, whats the big problem with people being fat, everyone would be better off just caring about themselves
And I don't buy the extra taxes because of the health services obese people demand, there are plenty of other mental and physical illnesses caused partly or largely by lifestyle that will result in minor tax increases for everyone but nobody cares about that, I think those people making that argument just hate looking at fat people tbh

Graces7

silverharp wrote: »

what does moderation even mean? to me moderation would be the amount of sugar consumed a 100 or 200 years ago assuming you mean not including sugar in natural whole foods and secondly someone who has lived 30 or 40 years on a high sugar diet should probably eat less sugar than someone who happened to have a healthy diet.

I mean not obsessing. It has become almost a religion. Like the term "healthy diet" which has no real universal meaning. Just.... jargon. guitl tripping... Food is or should be a pleasure,

If you are not overweight/underweight or suffering some obvious nutritional lack?

"you should"?

and as a previous poster says, judging folk by their weight or appearance?

silverharp

Graces7 wrote: »

I mean not obsessing. It has become almost a religion. Like the term "healthy diet" which has no real universal meaning. Just.... jargon. guitl tripping... Food is or should be a pleasure,

If you are not overweight/underweight or suffering some obvious nutritional lack?

"you should"?

and as a previous poster says, judging folk by their weight or appearance?

people that arent obese are getting type 2 as well. no parent would hand their kids cigarettes but giving them of 500kg of sugar before they can make their own choices....

tedpan

tedpan wrote: »

You may as well ban all soft drinks, the diet or no sugar options are far worse for you with ingredients like phenylaniline and aspartame.

I totally disagree with any form of sugar tax but this is a total myth peddled about aspartame being bad for you.

con___manx1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fúck that. I shouldn't have to pay through the nose for a Coke because other people can't control themselves or because parents can't parent. We're already paying a sugar tax on soft drinks, and it will make very little difference to the national obesity rates.

We really need to figure out a way to solve such problems without trying to tax our way out of them.

Well why should we pay through the nose for alcahol because other people cant control themselves ? We will very soon thanks to that idiot simon harris.

AudreyHepburn

This era of ‘Big Is Beautiful’ and plus size models has a lot to answer for. We wouldn’t dream of celebrating or pussyfooting around someone who was dangerously underweight so why has it been decided that it’s ok promote obesity?

And it’s not just about appearance no matter how much some of us would like it to be. Obesity is dangerous to your health in too many ways to count.

I am another who thinks very hard of paying extra for anyone who can’t/won’t control their eating and/or refuses to exercise.

Zubeneschamali

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

We wouldn’t dream of celebrating or pussyfooting around someone who was dangerously underweight

The fashion industry has been doing exactly that for 40 years.

greenspurs

Youd think that the amount of people wearing grey tracksuits, and lycra leggings that we would be the fittest country in the world ..................................

Carlos Orange

greenspurs wrote: »

Youd think that the amount of people wearing grey tracksuits, and lycra leggings that we would be the fittest country in the world ..................................

That is probably related to the way people think walking for 15 minutes is exercise.

greenspurs

psinno wrote: »

That is probably related to the way people think walking for 15 minutes is exercise.

Walking to the shop for breakfast rolls and coke ?

topper75

frozenfrozen wrote: »

obesity isn't a wacky haircut

No - it is in fact a health service spend timebomb.

All taxpayer opinions are valid and entitled on this.
If you pay tax over the next few decades - don't let anybody shut you down when you express your disgust at obesity.
When expensive medical treatments for diabetes, heart disease, and a whole pile of other complications are on the taxpayer, 'what other people look like' very much matters to us. Unless we get a guarantee of all fatties going private, it becomes our business.

.......

psinno wrote: »

That is probably related to the way people think walking for 15 minutes is exercise.

Walking for 15 minutes IS exercise. Just a small amount of it.

PlaneSpeeking

Oh look, ANOTHER fat bashing thread.

Must be Tuesday.

Dial Hard

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Oh look, ANOTHER fat bashing thread.

Must be Tuesday.

In fairness, this one is ancient. Just got resurrected over the weekend for some reason.

Carlos Orange

....... wrote: »

Walking for 15 minutes IS exercise. Just a small amount of it.

Walking for 15 minutes is exercise in the same way standing up is.

B0jangles

topper75 wrote: »

No - it is in fact a health service spend timebomb.

All taxpayer opinions are valid and entitled on this.
If you pay tax over the next few decades - don't let anybody shut you down when you express your disgust at obesity.
When expensive medical treatments for diabetes, heart disease, and a whole pile of other complications are on the taxpayer, 'what other people look like' very much matters to us. Unless we get a guarantee of all fatties going private, it becomes our business.

Has it not already been pointed out that according to the statistics, obese people are less of a drain on the health service than others because they tend to die younger?

If you REALLY want to reduce the strain on the health service, you need to bring in a Logans Run policy - mandatory euthanasia at 80.

Try going around shouting that people's grannies and grandas are a disgusting burden on society with their hip replacements and their dementia. See how you get on.

.......

psinno wrote: »

Walking for 15 minutes is exercise in the same way standing up is.

Im sorry but this is b0ll0x.

Walking is exercise. Depending on how vigorously you walk it may be light exercise but its still exercise.

I have been prescribed walking as an exercise after knee surgeries. To suggest its not exercise is nonsense.

TerrorFirmer

I don't think you can really compare the inevitable and natural onset of aging (and paying tax to support the same) with people being overweight through excess indulgence.

Carlos Orange

....... wrote: »

I have been prescribed walking as an exercise after knee surgeries. To suggest its not exercise is nonsense.

Standing raises the heart rate and calorie usage relative to sitting. I wouldn't consider it exercise. When I had problems with my knee I was supposed to lie on my bed with my leg extended over the edge of the bed. I wouldn't consider that exercise either.

B0jangles

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

I don't think you can really compare the inevitable and natural onset of aging (and paying tax to support the same) with people being overweight through excess indulgence.

a.) So you can tell simply by looking whether or not a person is 'good' obese - illness, medication etc or 'bad' obese - self-indulgence? That's quite a skill, you should tell the medical community.

b.) Costs are costs - healthy, long-lived people cost more than unhealthy, short-lived people. If you want to cut the cost, you need to get rid of those tiresomely long-lived people - maybe we can develop some kind of screening tool for longevity and levy an extra tax on those who test positive?

Carlos Orange

B0jangles wrote: »

b.) Costs are costs - healthy, long-lived people cost more than unhealthy, short-lived people. If you want to cut the cost, you need to get rid of those tiresomely long-lived people - maybe we can develop some kind of screening tool for longevity and levy an extra tax on those who test positive?

Not sure that is really true. People with long illnesses cost more than people with sudden deaths. If you just want to tax people based on life expectancy you would tax rich people and women. That seems like a decent proxy.

topper75

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

I used to be critical of fat people, in an insecure-judging-others-to-make-myself-feel-less-shitty kind of way but having done some work in mental health, I now see the reasons behind obesity and now I have empathy with fat people. They must be having a hard time with their demons, just like we all do, it's just they deal with them differently than I do.

I used to have this kind of oneupmanship re dealing with my crap; 'oh I might have crap to deal with but I don't numb myself with <insert addiction>'. But I do numb myself with other things, like anger as a distraction and the thing is, just like those with food addiction.. I can't stop it! God knows I've tried.

So no more judgement from me. I'm no better.

Mental health issues certainly didn't begin in the 1990s here.
Widespread obesity pretty much did.
Ergo there is something else at play.
We need to get away from an all pain must be numbed by any means you like mentality. When I say we, I mean the entire western world.
Empathy is good with other people, but never to the extent where it facilitates or accepts self-damage.

B0jangles

psinno wrote: »

Not sure that is really true. People with long illnesses cost more than people with sudden deaths. If you just want to tax people based on life expectancy you would tax rich people and women. That seems like a decent proxy.

The need for medical care almost inevitably rises as people get older; therefore if you sincerely want to reduce the cost burden on the taxpayer, you need to get rid of the old people.

It's not likely to be a popular position, given that most of us hope to be old some day.

In Ireland, as in the rest of the world, greater numbers of people are living longer with one in four of us expected to be aged 65 or over by 2036. The fastest growing and oldest group (those who are over 75 or over) is expected to rise by 66% in approximately the same period. With this demographic shift the prevalence of ageing associated illness such as stroke and dementia and those with multimorbidity and frailty also dramatically increases, creating a substantial shift in health care demands and a growing requirement for experts in the field of gerontology.

https://www.tcd.ie/medicine/medical-gerontology/


If, on the other hand, you just want a handy cover for being nasty to fat people because you are comfortably certain you could never be so weak and shameful as to become one of them, blaming them for the rising costs of the health service is very convenient..

Carlos Orange

B0jangles wrote: »

The need for medical care almost inevitably rises as people get older; therefore if you sincerely want to reduce the cost burden on the taxpayer, you need to get rid of the old people.

It's not likely to be a popular position, given that most of us hope to be old some day.

As a group costs rise as you get older but that is just a general trend. Health spending is a correlated to age but is a function of health. You wouldn't get rid of old people you would ration health spend on an individualised basis and allocate individuals a lifetime budget.

_Brian

MarkY91 wrote: »

Seen a kid yesterday who was so obese he could barely walk down the street. He was scoffing a bag of chickatee crisps....


His ma was the typical teenage inner city ma so the poor kid would obviously be getting fed crap for every meal.

My wife works in this field of work.
She had a young mother in who was explaining that the 3 month old seemed to like the taste of chickatees. I died a bit inside when I heard that - it’s child abuse !

TerrorFirmer

B0jangles wrote: »

a.) So you can tell simply by looking whether or not a person is 'good' obese - illness, medication etc or 'bad' obese - self-indulgence? That's quite a skill, you should tell the medical community.

The vast, overwhelming majority of people who are fat, are fat because of overindulgence, it would be absolutely absurd to suggest otherwise.

Unless there's some mysterious disease rife in Ireland I'm unware of that's to blame for us being one of the (if not the) fattest countries in Europe?

We're talking in the board context of obesity in Ireland here, so I've no idea what your clarvoyant comment is even supposed to mean (or have you just imagined that I like to actively target and abuse fat people in my spare time?).

b.) Costs are costs - healthy, long-lived people cost more than unhealthy, short-lived people. If you want to cut the cost, you need to get rid of those tiresomely long-lived people - maybe we can develop some kind of screening tool for longevity and levy an extra tax on those who test positive?

Sure, but there's a difference between what we should be paying for, and what we can reasonably have an issue with paying for.

EG A lethally intoxicated person should have the right to be treated in an A&E, but doesn't mean it's not a waste of resources that shouldn't be happening.

I don't think anyone on this thread has an issue with age-related costings, unless you can correct me on that.

Getting old has been a part of life for hundreds of thousands of years. Obesity as a normal, everyday societal standard is a somewhat more recent trend.

B0jangles

psinno wrote: »

As a group costs rise as you get older but that is just a general trend. Health spending is a correlated to age but is a function of health. You wouldn't get rid of old people you would ration health spend on an individualised basis and allocate individuals a lifetime budget.

So kids who manage to beat cancer for example, will get reduced access to healthcare when they get old?

What happens when you use up your budget - do they put a big red X on your medical file or do they just shove you out the hospital door?

B0jangles

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

The vast, overwhelming majority of people who are fat, are fat because of overindulgence, it would be absolutely absurd to suggest otherwise.

Unless there's some mysterious disease rife in Ireland I'm unware of that's to blame for us being one of the (if not the) fattest countries in Europe?

We're talking in the board context of obesity in Ireland here, so I've no idea what your clarvoyant comment is even supposed to mean (or have you just imagined that I like to actively target and abuse fat people in my spare time?).
Sure, but there's a difference between what we should be paying for, and what we can reasonably have an issue with paying for.

EG A lethally intoxicated person should have the right to be treated in an A&E, but doesn't mean it's not a waste of resources that shouldn't be happening.

I don't think anyone on this thread has an issue with age-related costings, unless you can correct me on that.

Getting old has been a part of life for hundreds of thousands of years. Obesity as a normal, everyday societal standard is a somewhat more recent trend.

Just on this point - do you think hundreds of millions of people from radically different cultures all over the world simultaneously got lazier and greedier in the last 50 years? Ever wondered why there is a global obesity epidemic.
(before you ask, no, I don't claim to know why it's happening, but I sure as hell don't think it's because they all suddenly got lazy.)


And on your opening statement

'The vast, overwhelming majority of people who are fat, are fat because of overindulgence, it would be absolutely absurd to suggest otherwise.'
That is 100% an assumption, based on nothing whatsoever.

Carlos Orange

B0jangles wrote: »

So kids who manage to beat cancer for example, will get reduced access to healthcare when they get old?

What happens when you use up your budget - do they put a big red X on your medical file or do they just shove you out the hospital door?

Why not. It doesn't seem any worse than killing healthy people because they are 80. If the goal is to limit health spending it make more sense to do something based on health spending instead of using something that is at best a rough proxy for health spending.

B0jangles

psinno wrote: »

Why not. It doesn't seem any worse than killing healthy people because they are 80. If the goal is to limit health spending it make more sense to do something based on health spending instead of using something that is at best a rough proxy for health spending.

You do realise that I am not actually in favour of culling the elderly, right?


It was supposed to be an obviously insane suggestion to highlight the fact that there is no real basis for the 'fat people are a drain on the health service, therefore it's actually morally and economically justified to treat them like crap' - argument.


That argument is and always was, just a handy excuse for a bit of good, old-fashioned bullying.

TerrorFirmer

Just on this point - do you think billions of people from radically different cultures all over the world simultaneously got lazier and greedier in the last 50 years? Ever wondered why there is a global obesity epidemic.
(before you ask, no, I don't claim to know why it's happening, but I sure as hell don't think it's because they all suddenly got lazy.)

Increasing incomes, or increased access to incredibly affordable high-calorie processed foodstuffs? Not necessarily directly correlated, can be independent factors either. Fundementally? People are simply consuming too many calories.

I didn't mention lazy once in my post. Being lazy doesn't make you gain weight. Eating too many calories does that. You could hit the gym for two hours a day and still be fat. You could lie around on a couch all day long and have 10% bodyfat and a slim figure if your diet is decent. Weight loss and having a normal BMI does not actually requier any exercise whatsoever, technically.

Anyone seriously into their physical image will tell you 'the kitchen' actually matters far more than the gym.

That is 100% an assumption, based on nothing whatsoever.

Literally, from the World Health Organisation.

The fundamental cause of obesity and overweight is an energy imbalance between calories consumed and calories expended.

It's a societal/cultural crisis in the developed world (and catching up in poorer ones too, presumably for reasons I've mentioned above, like access to high-density calories for low cost) and you're actually suggesting the root cause isn't over-indulgence. You do realise at this point you're in conspiracy theory territory.

I don't have an exact figure for how many people are overweight due to medical related weight retention but I don't think you'd find any medical professional on the planet that would try and claim that the massively overwhelming prevalence of obesity is anything other than excess consumption.

B0jangles

Describing the global obesity epidemic as the result of 'over-indulgence' is making a moral judgement, it is not simply an observation.

It is a moral judgement that anyone who has spent any time overweight has faced over and over again. Describing the problem in such terms does nothing whatsoever to prevent or reverse the trend; it is profoundly unhelpful and largely counterproductive.

The majority of people are motivated by encouragement and hope, not shame. Keep on using the language of judgement and shame all you like, but stop pretending you're doing it for the good of society.

Carlos Orange

B0jangles wrote: »

You do realise that I am not actually in favour of culling the elderly, right?

That kind of rhetorical style works better if you ignore that health spending is rationed. Once you accept that health spending is rationed you are more open discussing how to do it.

silverharp

B0jangles wrote: »

Describing the global obesity epidemic as the result of 'over-indulgence' is making a moral judgement, it is not simply an observation.

It is a moral judgement that anyone who has spent any time overweight has faced over and over again. Describing the problem in such terms does nothing whatsoever to prevent or reverse the trend; it is profoundly unhelpful and largely counterproductive.

The majority of people are motivated by encouragement and hope, not shame. Keep on using the language of judgement and shame all you like, but stop pretending you're doing it for the good of society.

I’d have sympathy , people are playing with a deck stacked against them, bad government information , a food industry that makes a lot of $$$$ peddling cr@p pretending to be food, a medical establishment where nutrition isn’t one of their strong points and a pharma industry that thinks everything can be cured with a pill

TerrorFirmer

But it is over-indulgence. Why are you so eager to slap down common english as 'shaming'? What should I have said? Fat people are eating too much? Because they are; that is quite literally the fact of the matter; nowhere have I judged anyone morally or otherwise (except in your own head, where you create your own intepretations based on how you feel about yourself).

If I'd made comments about people 'stuffing their faces', 'have no control' or something similar, that might be understandably construed as a moral judgement, but claiming 'over-indulgence' is a phrase of hate/bullying/deliberately engineering shaming is just nonsense.

To be honest you're arguing with yourself over and over on this topic, creating strawman arguments as well as using deflection.

B0jangles

Its synonyms suggest otherwise:

synonyms: intemperance, immoderation, excess, overeating, overdrinking, overconsumption, prodigality, lack of restraint, gorging, surfeit, debauch, debauchery, dissipation, dissoluteness, greed, gluttony, orgy; informal binge
"overindulgence in food and drink"

It is a phrase that has entirely negative connotations

You may not see it as such, but the general consensus does not agree with you.

If people are struggling in their lives - working long hours to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table, they will find comfort wherever they can - food and drink are easy and immediate. Telling people to forgo that completely dependable comfort which is here and now for the distant hope of maybe having a healthier old age, or, even better! for the benefit of the national exchequer is a very hard sell.

Help people live happier, less stressed lives and they won't feel the need to take the pain away with food, or alcohol or drugs (illegal or prescription).

lawred2

Stonedpilot wrote: »

A genuine question.

The amount of people that are gargantuan on this Island is so high I'm surprised the island doesn't sink. It's seen as like a disease by many. I remember living in a houseshare with Eastern European girls and they often commented at how absurdly fat they thought Irish women are.

It's bizarre to me that in other countries it's seen as a problem and thus people try and sort it but here the people whom are tremendously overweight are seen to have an ailment,disease, are poor unfortunates etc like its the same as leukemia or something.

I remember Katie Hopkins was on the Late Late Show making the point you can't be happy and fat (I don't know I don't care frankly) but they cut to a obese lady in the audience who had only just opened her mouth and the audience were in rapturous applause. No matter what she said they would have clapped.
Katie asked the question 'Why are you clapping?. Are you clapping because she is overweight is that it?.'

That kinda sums up the attitude here. Being fat, unhealthy and obese is something to be proud of and God forbid anyone point out it's lunacy to be the size of a manatee.
Strange. Now I will say I have all the respect in the World for people who do something about it work out, eat healthy, get involved in classes, long walks etc. Fair play to them and well done. But then there are other folk whom see it as a God given right to be obese and to be angry with everyone, and to take up a seat and a half everytime they sit on a plane,bus or train squishing whomever is unfortunately beside them.
Had a few incidents recently where I seen very overweight people be angry with total strangers.

I mean I attended a talk recently and the guy doing it was so overweight he got tired standing up and walking around the lecture room!.

As far as I'm aware no country is as tolerant to obesity as Ireland, no way does France,Italy,Spain etc see it as the norm here.

Odd.

they would be correct

stratowide

silverharp wrote: »

I’d have sympathy , people are playing with a deck stacked against them, bad government information , a food industry that makes a lot of $$$$ peddling cr@p pretending to be food, a medical establishment where nutrition isn’t one of their strong points and a pharma industry that thinks everything can be cured with a pill

I'd agree with all the above.We are being peddled nonsense about nutrition.

But surely in this day and age ignorance of good nutrition is no excuse.
All the information is out there for anyone to educate themselves.

People need to take a bit more responsibility for themselves.

TerrorFirmer

B0jangles wrote: »

Its synonyms suggest otherwise:

Give the crusade a rest, honestly - They're synonyms. It's not a consensus of anything.

There are words there that are obviously inappropriate (as well as completely inaccurate from a technical POV) - gorge, debauchery, lack of restraint, whatever.

Note I did not use those, for obvious reasons, as it exceeds completely the factual nature of the statement.

And then there are words that are completely benign and factual - overeating, excess, overdrinking, over-indulgence, immoderation.

Literally, just harmless words that represent the facts of the matter in a pretty neutral fashion.

What would you prefer I used to describe why people are overweight?

Is there some sort of dictionary-approved correct term to use, without apparently shaming, abusing and attacking people who are obese?

Blacktie.

stratowide wrote: »

I'd agree with all the above.We are being peddled nonsense about nutrition.

But surely in this day and age ignorance of good nutrition is no excuse.
All the information is out there for anyone to educate themselves.

People need to take a bit more responsibility for themselves.

While this is true it takes a good while to filter the good from the bad. You have everyone screaming out their magic pill for you. You have the keto diet, vegan, vegetarian, paleo, low fat, low carb, carnivore diet, primal etc etc. It's not as easy as the information is all there, how do you not just get it!

silverharp

stratowide wrote: »

I'd agree with all the above.We are being peddled nonsense about nutrition.

But surely in this day and age ignorance of good nutrition is no excuse.
All the information is out there for anyone to educate themselves.

People need to take a bit more responsibility for themselves.

youre right, I'd love to have the info I do now that simply wasn't available in any accessible way in the past. Essentially you have to be a bit of a skeptic but nobody is telling people to be skeptics. I guess over time a newer generation of doctors and dieticians might nudge things the right way or people will change by example

Chinasea

sibergoth wrote: »

have you been to America ?

Yes and we are on par if not worse.

mathie

Blacktie. wrote: »

While this is true it takes a good while to filter the good from the bad. You have everyone screaming out their magic pill for you. You have the keto diet, vegan, vegetarian, paleo, low fat, low carb, carnivore diet, primal etc etc. It's not as easy as the information is all there, how do you not just get it!

And amidst all the confusion of being told X is healthy one day and X is unhealthy the next we have the masses just going "you can't win" and not bothering in the slightest.

It's like a crutch to eat garbage.

shesty

I started using an app last year to track food intake.Started at 1200calories a day.

There is so little in 1200 calories.And there is so much food.I mean it's everywhere!!!I am not obese, I could do with losing maybe a stone.I am active fit and healthy and this was part of me reforming my habits.But the first while it really sank in how much food there is pushed in our faces everywhere - I mean I walk down the street of my local town, and there's numerous coffee shops with cakes, there's grocery shops with a huge range of sweets and chocolate front and centre everywhere, and that's not counting takeaways-burgers, chips, pizza, thai,indian,chinese etc (which I don't eat).

It is really hard to resist and a simple thing like meeting a friend for a cup of coffee and maybe a scone drives you a good 400cal over the 1200 limit, assuming you also eat a breakfast, lunch and dinner ....and nothing else.

I have no solution really other than to start realising we need to completely reform our eating habits and start teaching them that young.It's a massive problem

.......

Chinasea wrote: »

Yes and we are on par if not worse.

You clearly havent been to Texas then.

Chinasea

....... wrote: »

You clearly havent been to Texas then.

Indeed I have.

.......

Chinasea wrote: »

Indeed I have.

Well you must have been to the skinny corner because walking down O Connell street in Dublin you will not see anywhere NEAR the level of obesity you will see in downtown Dallas.

The sizes simply dont compare. You will see a lot of overweight people in Ireland. But you wont see anywhere near as many as the truly staggering morbid obese you see in the US where people are going round on little golf carts because they cant walk anymore.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

shesty wrote: »

I started using an app last year to track food intake.Started at 1200calories a day.

There is so little in 1200 calories.And there is so much food.I mean it's everywhere!!!I am not obese, I could do with losing maybe a stone.I am active fit and healthy and this was part of me reforming my habits.But the first while it really sank in how much food there is pushed in our faces everywhere - I mean I walk down the street of my local town, and there's numerous coffee shops with cakes, there's grocery shops with a huge range of sweets and chocolate front and centre everywhere, and that's not counting takeaways-burgers, chips, pizza, thai,indian,chinese etc (which I don't eat).

It is really hard to resist and a simple thing like meeting a friend for a cup of coffee and maybe a scone drives you a good 400cal over the 1200 limit, assuming you also eat a breakfast, lunch and dinner ....and nothing else.

I have no solution really other than to start realising we need to completely reform our eating habits and start teaching them that young.It's a massive problem

I think portion sizes are a big problem. I was watching a documentary style thing set in the 70s the other night, and the dinner plates they used would be considered as large side plates nowadays. It's the same when you eat out - every sandwich comes with crisps or chips, a side of potatoes is usually enough for at least two people, a slice of cake is a huge big wodge.

We really need to start getting used to more normal portion sizes. There's a point where you've had enough food to fill you but just keep eating because it's there in front of you and it seems a shame to waste it. You can easily consume several hundred unnecessary calories a day that way.

Chinasea

....... wrote: »

Well you must have been to the skinny corner because walking down O Connell street in Dublin you will not see anywhere NEAR the level of obesity you will see in downtown Dallas.

The sizes simply dont compare. You will see a lot of overweight people in Ireland. But you wont see anywhere near as many as the truly staggering morbid obese you see in the US where people are going round on little golf carts because they cant walk anymore.

OK we see different things.

Either way it is not a competition that either country should be in sadly.

Look at the likes of Dealz. They are everywhere now and sell mountains of junk for nott'in.