[1.] It's gauche to lord 'scientific' knowledge over people without being, y'know, a scientist.

[B.] Sister knows that young Americans, black ones disproportionately, are having their internal organs crushed by overweight before puberty, and has had her genuinely feminine and admirable concern for this nutritional nightmare corralled by the usual collection of moneyed special interests, the ones who've made her and her husband into the spectacular recipients of world adoration we know them to be today.

But that concern is the greatest —and perhaps single— example of genuine concern for other human beings yet detected from any member of that family.

Perhaps if this is the only heartbreak to be recorded for these administrations, we might at least acknowledge that it was for something real and monstrous, no matter how clumsily attacked or readily disregarded.

The problem isn't Michelle or carbs or gross hard taco shells. It's the parents that don't know how to cook, don't care to learn, don't care to teach themselves or their kids how to eat. The inability of Americans to enjoy real food without upturning our snotty little noses pisses me off. On one end you have the flavouress granola crunchers that vacuum out the taste out of things like thai, mexican, indian food and hell even rotisserie chicken which creates an aversion to real food because people assume healthy=cardboard. On the opposite end you have people that think that anything besides pizza and chicken nuggets is gag inducing.

I don't believe in low carb for kids. I would oppose such a menu. They need to be involved in cooking. It's a skill that needs to be learned.

And if lab rats are to be believed it isn't just food causing this. There is an unexplained third factor going on.

An entirely unscientific science experiment on America's children!
Doesn't that apply more to the anti-vax bullshit?

When can we get schools back into the education business and out of the crappy restaurant business? Farm the whole lunch thing out to a third party vendor. Fat or no fat microwaved sysco isn't good for anyone.

We have tacos at school as well as nachos and Philly cheesesteak sandwiches, etc.

Our principal was very upset with Muchelle Obama's new food regulations before school started but there wasn't a big change. Yes the grains are whole grains but that isn't a big issue to me. The fruit and vegetable quality has gone way up and we are getting choices such as watermelon and fresh red pepper that we didn't have before. Our principal has even said that the food quality has improved.

I realize that our school is just a microcosm but that is the story from our end.

". . . and a note from Mrs. Obama that said you'll get used to it"

And that's another one of the reason why I hate the Obamas - they do shitty stuff and tell you that you'll get used to it.

Right, charles.

What you might not "get used to" is the health effects from eating what's supposed to be healthy food but actually is anything but.

Skim milk! We're feeding our kids food with the food value sucked out! In America! In 2015!

I blame the lifestyle choices more than the diet. Get this through your head: we were selected to eat carbs. Everything, from natural history to biology, points to this fact. Anyone who tells you otherwise has precisely 52.7 types of shit for brains.

High-glycemic carbs are not only desirable, but essential after a workout. The insulin spikes that these soi-disant experts dread so much are impossible after a work and the replenishment of glycogen (the stored form of glucose or blood sugar) would be accomplished much too slowly by eating fatty foods.

What we were not selected to do was sit around all day not moving except to pick up the television remote and our only exercise being raising our hands to the keyboard.

That is the fatal flaw in our lifestyle. It's less our diets, and more our want of exercise that's killing us.

"I blame the lifestyle choices more than the diet. Get this through your head: we were selected to eat carbs. Everything, from natural history to biology, points to this fact. Anyone who tells you otherwise has precisely 52.7 types of shit for brains."

We were also selected to be heterosexual, Patrick. Biology points this out. So why are you around to irritate people?

causticf the clueless: We were also selected to be heterosexual, Patrick.

Wrong, as always. Homosexuality exists in every species that reproduces sexually, and has existed in humans since the inception of the race.

Beg, borrow or steal a clue from someone. There's no chance of you manufacturing one on your own.

"This is the new normal; get used to it" is the theme of the Obama presidency. Someday people will look back at him and Michelle the way we look back at Louis XVI.

You're wrong Patrick. Excersise is important but there where no such things as "workouts" in our history that required consumption of carbs immediately after. Why? Because the type of food available for consumption was inconsistent. Starving was normal, living off meat and animal organs was normal. Eating nothing but plants was normal.

High-glycemic carbs didn't exist until farming. Every fruit (aside from berries) we eat is artificial. Plenty of nomadic and hunter-gatherer tribes in Africa do not eat a significant amount of carbs. Think of things like cow blood mixed with milk. Asians do eat carbs and don't "workout", live pretty sedentary and aren't fat. They are starting to get fat though thanks to the introduction of our diet.

Sedentary lifestyle is bad for you but if you want a healthy lean body it's 90% diet. Whether you chose low calorie or high fat is dependent on how your body works.

There is good evidence from lab rats that there is a third factor of why we are getting so fat. It isn't just diet and excersise.

Ppen, I actually feel sorry for you.

You wrote: Excersise is important but there where no such things as "workouts" in our history that required consumption of carbs immediately after.

Uh, common sense? Throughout our history, we hunted, gathered, chopped wood, built things, plowed fields. No, we didn't always go to the gym to simulate work by lifting heavy things, but we did have workouts.

And if you don't think those are workouts, I invite you to eschew technology and try gathering your food by hunting with a spear, climbing trees for fruits and nuts, planting your own food, etc. When you're hospitalized with exhaustion, I'll bring you flowers.

You wrote: High-glycemic carbs didn't exist until farming.

Which has existed even longer than civilization. More to the point, high glycemic carbs exists in other things besides fruit. Honey, for example, which we have enjoyed for as long as recorded history, if not longer.

You wrote: Every fruit (aside from berries) we eat is artificial.

I just love it when people invent facts as they go along.

Tell you what. Go to a gym some time, and tell some natural athlete that he shouldn't be eating high glycemic carbs after his workout. Be sure to note that he'll likely have a body fat percentage lower than he has fingers on one hand.

Trust me, he will make you feel (deservedly) like a total idiot.

Speaking of idiocy, where did you get the idea that fruit was necessarily high-glycemic carbohydrates? You'd be amazed.

"Obesity stems primarily from the overconsumption of food paired with insufficient exercise. But this elementary formula cannot explain how quickly the obesity epidemic has spread globally in the past several decades nor why more than one third of adults in the U.S. are now obese"

"Evidence of that cause-and-effect relationship in humans is still limited, but in laboratory animals and in petri dishes data linking the chemicals to problematic weight gain are mounting. Moreover, the effects in animals appear to be passed on not just to immediate offspring but also grandchildren and great-grandchildren—potentially accounting for some multigenerational obesity."

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-lab-rats-are-changing-our-view-of-obesity/

Obesity and antibiotic link (possibly because it's killing our gut flora)

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/09/opinion/sunday/the-fat-drug.html?emc=edit_th_20140309&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=59924205&_r=0

“In African-Americans, genes played a greater role in causing increased BMI than in Caucasians,” said co-author Prof Christopher Amos from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

http://www.sci-news.com/genetics/article01061.html

"The explanation of obesity as a simple result of positive energy balance fails to account for the scope of variable responses to diets and lifestyles. It is postulated that individual physiological and anatomical variation may be responsible for developing obesity. Girls in poor families develop greater adiposity than their male siblings, a trend not present in richer environments. This indicates strong influence of estrogen on fat accumulation irrespective of poor socioeconomic conditions. Obesity rates in males and females of developed nations are similar, while in poorer nations obesity is much more prevalent in females. Female to male ratio of obesity correlates inversely with gross domestic product. Therefore, the parity of male and female obesity in developed countries may result from male exposure to environmental estrogen-like substances associated with affluence. These hormonally driven mechanisms may be equally active within both sexes in more developed areas, thereby increasing overall obesity."

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0099776

So to conclude it is not as you stated it "less our diets, and more our want of exercise that's killing us."

It is defintly mostly our diets and environmental factors that account for how we are processing food. Excersise is good, and defintly something people need to do but I think given our modern environment it is impractical to suggest to people they need to do a lot of excersise.

On an individual basis you need to figure out what diet works for you. Low carb, low calorie whatever. On a global scale it doesn't appear it is simply our diet and lack of excersise that is causing this epidemic. We are turning genes on and off/ passing fat causing mutations to our children, eating products that destroy our hormonal balance, destroying our gut flora etc.

No, Ppen. You miss the point.

I brought up gym rats because while people in the past arguably got their exercise by the tasks of day-to-day living -- pushing the plow, chopping the wood, etc. -- they did not gain appreciably in strength. Why? Because by failing to include high glycemic carbs in their diet, the body will replenish its lost energy by cannibalizing protein. That's what the hormone cortisol does. It breaks down protein, stripping off the nitrogen and using the rest as carbs. And it doesn't discriminate. It will cannibalize organ tissue, muscle tissue or blood proteins. One just as soon as another.

The assimilation of fat simply takes too long. You do not break down a significant amount of fat to replace lost energy. The conversion simply takes too long. We were selected to store fat to survive starvation situations.

The use of high glycemic carbs after a workout works for several reasons. Not only is it far more efficient than fat in replacing lost glycogen, thus sparing the proteins in blood, muscle and organ tissue, but you cannot store and release fat at the same time. And during periods of exercise, fat must be released. It happens in trivial amounts during anaerobic activities like lifting weights, but it does happen.

Which is why I find Gary Taubes work to be about half done. The only thing he has to say about exercise is that it makes you hungry (which is not by the way, my experience at all). He has failed to address the dietary needs of those who don't have all the daily activity of a typical garden slug. The research is out there.

As for exercise being unnatural, in a word, Bu-u-u-u-ullshit!

It's a hell of a lot more natural than the lifestyles we have now, where the most strenuous activity of the day is pressing keys at the computer. We were selected to perform work. And that's all there is to it.

And the strength athletes are paying a very strange price for their "unnatural" lifestyles. They're bigger, stronger and live longer than their forebears. Go figure. Kind of makes the "unnatural" accusation ring a little hollow, you know?

Common virus contributing to obesity

"Scientists are reporting new evidence that infection with a common virus may be a contributing factor to the obesity epidemic sweeping through the United States and other countries. In laboratory experiments they showed that infection with human adenovirus-36 (Ad-36), long recognized as a cause of respiratory and eye infections in humans, transforms adult stem cells obtained from fat tissue into fat cells. Stem cells not exposed to the virus, in contrast, were unchanged."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070820103224.htm

Obesity and antibiotic link (possibly because it's killing our gut flora)

Ppen, interesting links.

One thing the article mentions:

"Of course though, while farm animals often eat a significant dose of antibiotics in food, the situation is different for human beings. By the time most meat reaches our table, it contains little or no antibiotics. So we receive our greatest exposure in the pills we take, rather than the food we eat. "

And it should be interesting to watch further studies on BPA and obesity and hypertension, but from what I understand, it's still inconclusive in humans.

Mexico recently surpassed the U.S. in percent obese. I wonder if the levels of BPA found in each country correspond accordingly?

http://tak.pt/i/kIcPjCpu

Excersise and diet as we have it now is unnatural because every aspect of our lives is unnatural. And using the argument that athletes live longer--well so does everyone else. All those tasks you're describing where mostly done by people who didn't live well at all. And you're ignoring that those that did live well did so because their diets were extremely narrow.

You're suggesting a level of excersise that is impractical for most people, especially the poor who have the highest rate of obesity.

I also do not fully ascribe to Taubes. So bringing that up is pointless to my argument.

Jason,

I'm curious about the BPA too. My understand of what's going on in Mexico is that it's also an issue that affects the poor--which in its case it's mostly people with high amounts of indigenous non-European ancestry. Their bodies are not used to lactose, or high amounts of sugar. And despite Patrick's assertion that it's a sedentary issue the Mexican poor are used for heavy physical tasks. Farming especially, because if they don't farm they don't eat.

Think what you want...or pretend to think what you want. I maintain that working out more closely approximates the work we were selected to perform than the sedentary lifestyles we "enjoy" now.

So, it's not pushing the plow or chopping wood. So, what? It's still exertion. Which is what our bodies were selected to do.

Ppen: And using the argument that athletes live longer--well so does everyone else.

No, they do not. So sorry. Those who exercise regularly will outlive those who live the sedentary lifestyle (and enjoy a higher quality of life). That's just common knowledge.

Who says I was addressing your argument with my reference to Taubes. I only stated that for his work to be complete, he should delve into appropriate eating habits for pre- and post-workouts. I'd read it.

And if you watched a few informercials, you'd be amazed at how practical a workout can be. No, it not "impractical for most people." That's an excuse.

The level you want is impractical for most people. They don't have the time. They don't have the means. You might be able to but to suggest others live your lifestyle is idiotic. You don't have children, multiple jobs, a spouse. Do you have a car? Because people that need to excersise wont have the time if they need to use public transportation and have multiple outside responsibilities.

How do explain the obesity in Mexicans? Who picks your crops? Farms your animals? Does all the hard physical labor out in the sun? They are even more obese in Mexico where the physical labor is much much harder.

Patrick: Which is why I find Gary Taubes work to be about half done. The only thing he has to say about exercise is that it makes you hungry (which is not by the way, my experience at all).

In an article by Taubes I just found in The New Yorker, he writes: The one thing that might be said about exercise with certainty is that it tends to makes us hungry. Maybe not immediately, but eventually.

To me, the key word there is eventually. I get a lot of exercise when I hike -- and especially backpack -- in the Cascades in the summer. But I don't bring that much food along and feel completely satisfied eating the amount of food that I have so that certainly jives with his "maybe not immediately." However, if he's correct, perhaps I eventually consume more in the days or weeks subsequent to the hike/backpacking trip.

Ppen, you're just diving further and further into an area that you know nothing about. You don't know what level I want. You don't know how long it takes. You don't know how much it costs. You know none of this shit. You just think you do. You'd be amazed at how little time and expense goes into a practical, useful workout.

You've got a head full of garbage on this topic, and I could not be less interested in educating you.

"I could not be less interested in educating you."

Now I get why Rad and lujlp ignore your arguments and instead attack your methods.

Jason: In an article by Taubes I just found in The New Yorker, he writes: The one thing that might be said about exercise with certainty is that it tends to makes us hungry. Maybe not immediately, but eventually.

Which is as meaningless an observation as could ever be expressed.

Everyone gets hungry eventually, whether they exercise or not.

I didn't post that comment, Patrick.

Everything observation is meaningless anyway.
We're all running on a treadmill that goes nowhere.

Party.

Hey, Ppen, off-topic, but I think I remember you said you traveled through Mexico a bit ( or have relatives?). Do you have recommendations on the best places to visit?

If I'm mistaken, apologies.

"You don't know how much it costs. You know none of this shit. You just think you do. You'd be amazed at how little time and expense goes into a practical, useful workout."

Patrick,

Instead of telling us how little we know why not tell us what you are talking about? How much time? How often? What types of equipment do you recommend?

My personal experience with weight loss has been that if I want to lose weight, I must cut back on my consumption. I have assumed a diet of not denying myself anything I really want, but just not overeating. If I want to not be flabby and not be out of breath just jogging a hundred yards, then I've got to exercise. For me, though, exercise does not make me lose weight. I feel better, I look better, but I definitely do not lose weight with just adding exercise to my day.

I've traveled throughout most of Latin America with the exception of the majority of Central American countries.

Is there particular things you like to see/do? I think the north is a shithiole and it is what most Americans associate with Mexico.

My favorite state is Queretaro. It's the safest place to visit, you'll get to see Spanish hidalgos, missions, pyramids, food is good, it's pretty clean, there is an interesting UNESCO where the Spanish lived peacefully with the Otomi? (Can't remeber if that's what they are called). I like the metro areas.

I'm also a big fan of Veracruz. It's in the coastline and many of the people don't look like other Mexicans since they are the descendants of escaped African slaves from the Caribbean that mixed with the locals. The food is different too, slave influenced. The seafood is fantastic. There are plenty of naturey things to do. I like the architecture.

Then there is Oxaca which is pretty popular with tourists and not as fucking depressing as Chiapas.

You should try Pulque. An alcoholic drink popular in Mexico before the Germans arrived and introduced beer. It will make you barf by its consistency but it's an interesting experience nonetheless.

I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad. I just think it's incredibly close-minded to assume that you can't work out because you can't afford a gym or don't have time to go to one. Beachbody puts out a workout that can be done with minimal equipment in your own home. There's even a high-intensity version that only takes twenty minutes.

Is that so impossible?

Can't afford the program? Okay, do you know what a push-up is? Matt Furey is an MMA fighter that only does Hindu Squats, Bridging and Hindu Push-ups. There are ways with just a little determination instead of sighing, "Oh, well. Can't afford the gym, no time to work out, woe is me."

Here's a French dude, homeless, 50 years old and has AIDS. The video is in French, but it's subtitled in English. And he looks AMAZING! (Though I kind of wonder if he's on testosterone supplements, since that's used as an AIDS treatment.) I'm not saying people have to resort to this, but I am saying, essentially, that where there's a will, there's a way.

Don't give up!

Unless you're an alchemist who can transmute the atmosphere into lard, the lard comes from stuffing food into your face -- if you don't eat much food you won't have much lard. Period.

I have a few pills for you Jay. Guaranteed to put 50 pounds on you or my money back!

A completely sterilized gut is an extremely effective weight loss mechanism. Eat as much as you want and you still might starve to death. On the flip side stressing and otherwise unbalancing your gut infestation can cause significant weight gain. That is why antibiotics as well as a variety of other medications cause weight gain. This is with the same food consumption as before medication. Minimizing exposure to preservatives and dyes helps with both appetite control and excessive gut efficiency. Incidentally even mild exercise changes gut populations helping with weight control.

Ignoring your personal biome ignores a large part of the problem.

On the exercise, the wife and I walk a couple miles most days. She is getting close to 170lb, but she expects to lose most of it in a month or so. At least 20lbs on the 7th.

Bravo, Amy! Thanks so much for pointing it out. I know a lot of people are really busy and have more on their plate than I do.

I just believe that if you want to work out, there's a way for everyone. Unless you're Stephen Hawking or in a persistent vegetative state.

Nice. Thanks, Ppen.

Those are exactly the types of places that would be worth a visit. Sounds intriguing.

I read something about Oaxaca years ago -- about the pottery craft, I think-- that sparked curiosity. I guess it has become touristy now?

Our family went to Quintana Roo about 24 years ago. The snorkeling and scuba were fantastic. We also drove to Merida and saw the Mayan ruins. Cancun is a huge tourist mecca and maybe not most "authentic" place. It was fun, though.

Queretaro and Veracruz sound adventurous/cool. That UNESCO place sounds interesting. History, architecture, food, hiking around, or maybe fishing are what I'm going for.

I love Oaxaca. If you go you must see something that a lot of people skip. The former monastery of Santiago Apostol. It looks like a typical Spanish monastery on the outside but once I entered I almost expected a call to prayer to Allah. It even has Arabic script! The Dominicans used indigenous people as slaves and before they were killed off you can see they influenced whatever parts they could just with a Christian twist. It's rare to see something like this, Moor, Gothic, Renaissance, and Mesoamerican. The Catholic Church back in Spain did NOT approve.

The last time I went to Cancun was 20 years ago so I don't remember much. I liked it I just don't remember what I liked about it.

A second read of what I wrote is too cleaver by half. The 20lbs my wife will lose on the 7th is a birth.

Someone's going to have to do a better job of convincing me that there is an "obesity epidemic", based on evidence that's more solid than the badly-thought-out BMI standard (the one that classifies elite athletes as obese). Just because someone saw a fat person in Wal-Mart does not make it so.

The former monastery of Santiago Apostol

Fascinating. I've always marveled at the pictures of Moorish architecture In Andalusia Spain.