Obesity

[BoldonLad]

If you go into any of the supermarkets they all have a value range, take ham for instance, you have a huge range of price variation, from the processed stuff, which even looking at it is 25% fat, to the expensive hand sliced stuff that looks very lean, lots of the cheap stuff has added stuff to make it cheap, the stuff the more expensive items have removed.

I am not attempting to compare Asda Smart Price products with ASDA Special, or the equivalent Tesco, Morrisons Etc etc, What I am saying is, buying a loaf of bread and some cheese (or ham whatever), to make (several) sandwiches is cheaper than buying take-away sandwiches, similarly it is cheaper to make a meal, than buy a take-away. Plus of course, if you make it yourself, you know what is going in to it. In just the same way, buying a jar of coffee to make several cups of coffee, is cheaper than nipping into Costa/Starbucks etc etc.

I am not saying that I don't do these "convenient" things, but, I do not fool myself into believing they are cheaper.

 

[BoldonLad]

BoldenLad, I also was born in 1947 and If I had to post a synopsis of my childhood you could just have written it. In those days there was an occasional fat child and unfortunately they would get a 'hard time' Today, overweight/obese is almost the new 'normal' Peer pressure to look similar to the majority has largely been removed.

If we can just find a few more vintage 1947s, we might have a statistically significant sample!

 

[matticus]

So, to sum-up 40 years of changes:
- it's easier to get crappy food, more often
- it's easier to burn less calories

The psychology is less easy to summarise - my hunch is that humans haven't changed much. The two factors above have simply conspired to create health problems for those of us with the mental tendencies to do the wrong thing.

Where is my PhD certificate??

 

[Scaleyback]

So, to sum-up 40 years of changes:
- it's easier to get crappy food, more often
- it's easier to burn less calories

The psychology is less easy to summarise - my hunch is that humans haven't changed much. The two factors above have simply conspired to create health problems for those of us with the mental tendencies to do the wrong thing.

Where is my PhD certificate??

I think you have just 'cut thru' the pseudo babble and 'nailed it' hereby you will be know as Professor matticus and your PhD certificate is in the post.

 

[matticus]

I think you have just 'cut thru' the pseudo babble and 'nailed it' hereby you will be know as Professor matticus and your PhD certificate is in the post.

I feel honored. I would like to thank the following people who contributed to the research on this thread, but ...

well actually they're all idiots, and I've never met most of them.

 

[battered]

Are you as happy as a pig in sh*& ?

Yeah, mostly. I like my job. I fix food factories, meaning I solve quality and hygiene problems, improve communication and engagement, and so on. I'm on the bench at the moment, a pandemic and leaving the EU have pretty much stopped everything other than chucking the stuff out of the door.

 

[newfhouse]

What is the opposite of a "conscious choice" an unconscious choice ? 😊

Perhaps, yes. Or maybe compulsion, addiction, persuasion. Sometimes people engage in patterns of behaviour that they know to be harmful; sometimes that’s why they do it. It’s not ignorance, laziness or a lack of moral fibre.

I’m not trying to say that this is the only reason for obesity - remember, nothing is that simple - but it is a significant part for some. No amount of taxation will dissuade them, and shaming will likely have the opposite effect.

 

[battered]

I'm unconvinced by your thesis. Put that cap and gown puchase on hold.

I never had any problem getting crappy food 40 years ago. Fast food outlets aren't something amazing that were invented recently. I used to virtually live in Bilal's in Camberwell, what a kebab-master he was. And which came first, the chicken or the egg? Do fast food outlets drive obesity, or do obese people create demand for fast food?

I also never had any problem in burning less calories 40 years ago. Nothing much has changed there that I can see.

So I don't think it's that simple.

you'd do better to ask what came first, a population of chickens or a number of eggs. Nobody cares about the fate of an individual chicken. The behaviour of a thousand chickens, well that's worth looking at.

 

[Reynard]

The bottom line is, Humans are hardwired to fill up when there is plentiful food in order to survive the famine that's round the corner - the legacy of our hunter-gatherer past. Except in this day and age, and certainly in the western world, famine in incredibly unlikely. But our bodies still want us to eat as much as possible - just in case.

Also, re grazing vs proper mealtimes. When you graze, it's almost impossible to keep track of what you've eaten. It's been examined in various scientific studies, but I've also noticed that from my own experiences of "the munchies" i.e. if you're constantly snacking, you end up eating far more than you otherwise would. Whereas if you sit down to a proper meal, you can see in front of you exactly what you're about to shovel down the hatch.

And one point that's been raised several times on "Eat Well for Less" is that the body doesn't have to work as hard to extract the nutrients from processed food as it does from the home cooked equivalent. And as a result, you take in more calories because a) they're more accessible and b) because your digestive tract doesn't work as hard, you don't get that "fuller for longer" feeling and ergo you get the munchies and hit the snacks.

 

[battered]

So... why can't fast food be part of the causes?

[I'm not saying it definitely IS! I'm saying that the other confounding factors don't RULE OUT fast food being a cause.]

It is part of the cause. But ask why again. Because it's gratifying. Mammals week out gratification, that's one thing that drives us. There's a reason why food, warmth and sex are gratifying. Without them we die and the species is screwed. Someone earlier said that you can't blame dogs for overeating because they don't know when they will next eat. Well, humans are historically no different, and the last few hundred years that have allowed most of us to escape famine have not affected our primal urges.

 

[newfhouse]

Because it's gratifying.

This is clearly true, but I think only part of the picture. Eating is so much more than an enjoyable process by which we extract energy from food. It has emotional, psychological and social meaning and context too.

 

[battered]

This is clearly true, but I think only part of the picture. Eating is so much more than an enjoyable process by which we extract energy from food. It has emotional, psychological and social meaning and context too.

Of course it does. That's why it's gratifying. Gratification takes many forms.

 

[battered]

The bottom line is, Humans are hardwired to fill up when there is plentiful food in order to survive the famine that's round the corner - the legacy of our hunter-gatherer past. Except in this day and age, and certainly in the western world, famine in incredibly unlikely. But our bodies still want us to eat as much as possible - just in case.

Also, re grazing vs proper mealtimes. When you graze, it's almost impossible to keep track of what you've eaten. It's been examined in various scientific studies, but I've also noticed that from my own experiences of "the munchies" i.e. if you're constantly snacking, you end up eating far more than you otherwise would. Whereas if you sit down to a proper meal, you can see in front of you exactly what you're about to shovel down the hatch.

I know this is true. In addition I have a hypothesis (cue Monty Python, ahem: I have a theory) that the preparation of food increases this engagement in food and reinforces the awareness of what you are about to put down your throat.

And one point that's been raised several times on "Eat Well for Less" is that the body doesn't have to work as hard to extract the nutrients from processed food as it does from the home cooked equivalent.

I'm not convinced about this. I don't think, and I have seen no evidence that suggests, that 100g of minced beef turned into a McDo is any easier for my body to digest than 100g of minced beef that I have turned into, say, spag bol. It may be easier to eat, it may be more appetising (hard to imagine, my spag bol is fantastic) but once down your throat your body can't tell whether the minced beef particles came in as a burger or as spag bol.

And as a result, you take in more calories because a) they're more accessible and b) because your digestive tract doesn't work as hard,

Not convinced. (a) no evidence, (b) no evidence.

you don't get that "fuller for longer" feeling and ergo you get the munchies and hit the snacks.

This I agree with, it's a satiety thing. Now if you said that fast food is easier to *eat*, I'd go along with you. It is well observed that obese people eat more quickly than thin people, it is equally well observed that there is a time lag between having had enough to eat and the "you have eaten enough" signal being received by the brain. It's therefore more than plausible that stuff you can just cram down your maw is going to be eaten in greater quantity than stuff that you have to cut up, chew, etc.

 

[BoldonLad]

.....

Also, re grazing vs proper mealtimes. When you graze, it's almost impossible to keep track of what you've eaten. It's been examined in various scientific studies, but I've also noticed that from my own experiences of "the munchies" i.e. if you're constantly snacking, you end up eating far more than you otherwise would. Whereas if you sit down to a proper meal, you can see in front of you exactly what you're about to shovel down the hatch.

......

Agree, reference grazing. In my experience, a similar effect occurs when drinking alcohol. If I drink in a manner, get a drink, finish it, get another one etc etc, then, I find it (fairly) easy, to control my intake, and, avoid outright drunkeness.

However, in say a party situation, where gales are topped up, without ever becoming empty, then, I am afraid, outright drunkeness is a frequent outcome

 

[Reynard]

I'm not convinced about this. I don't think, and I have seen no evidence that suggests, that 100g of minced beef turned into a McDo is any easier for my body to digest than 100g of minced beef that I have turned into, say, spag bol. It may be easier to eat, it may be more appetising (hard to imagine, my spag bol is fantastic) but once down your throat your body can't tell whether the minced beef particles came in as a burger or as spag bol.

Not convinced. (a) no evidence, (b) no evidence.

There have been studies done, but it escapes me where - they were referenced on "Eat Well for Less" however.

I should have been clearer that it is on processed food versus the home cooked version of the same thing. Highly processed and refined foods (and yes, ready meals are processed to within an inch of their life) are easier for your gut to extract the calories from than the same thing you've cooked at home from scratch.