The Fat Pack Wonders if It's Time to Slim Down

[Lindacakes]

...when you are going to eat cake for dessert and I love cake ...it is also a good idea to dance around with joy about it!!!

Quel idea!

First, you serve the cake.

Everyone thoroughly enjoys the cake.

Then the rug is rolled back.

The ritual cake dance begins.

The guests cover in sweat.

The gods are appeased.

[Priscilla]

Almost all communities suffer from being mutual admiration societies - you can see it most clearly by looking at the 'Dinner' topic.  It really doesn't matter if you post a picture of something that looks delicious or horrible, people will compliment you on it.  That isn't inherently a bad thing in that topic but it illustrates that as a community we are supportive of each other more or less no matter what.  Blind praise isn't always a good thing - for the person being complemented on the horrible food they cooked it means they'll continue to serve their family gruel.

←

This seems unduly hostile. I think making a connection between positive comments on an amateur food photo and the serving of "gruel," not to mention health problems of any sort, is quite a stretch.

[Lindacakes]

Geez, it was an accident that I posted an ode to the Cake Dance after Melkor's post. How awkward . . .

But, I have to say, American culture is filled to the gills with food guilt and diet advice. And I think it's a fabulous thing that we're having this discussion.

And I think we should be talking about vegetables and health and even exercise. And especially cultural issues and political issues related to food.

But I also think we're here to celebrate the joy of food, the amazing net that holds us together as a planet, the vast vast world that implies. And there aren't too many places you can honestly do that. Hence, I think, the magnet that eGullet is.

[Jesikka]

I thought it was unfair of JP to throw that comment in the mix.  Let's face it; until he had a health scare, HE wasn't addressing it either--on eG or on OTB.  And I'll state publicly that I'm thrilled to read about/see his progress!  Then again, FG claims that he wasn't fully quoted, so we can just blame the media, right?  

←

I disagree. Communities like this one are extremely supportive of people who ignore their weight problems. There are individual examples of weight loss topics and 'blogs' but overall, what this site is great at is as a chronicle of gluttony. This is the ideal place to document it if you spend a week in NYC waking up each morning and going to a couple of different bagel shops to find the one you like best. After breakfast you wander the city for pizza stopping two or three times in the afternoon in the name of science. Throw in some Chinese food while you're at it, and you might as well run up to Harlem to check out the Ghanaian restaurant your cab driver told you about. You then have dinner at a two or three Michelin starred restaurant each night. Nobody is going to post asking if you might have been better off cutting back to only 4,000 calories each day.

It's clear that Jason didn't believe that healthy eating needed to be addressed before his doctor told him he had no choice. I'd say the chances are good that a number of other eGullet contributors are in the same situation Jason was in before he spoke to his Doctor.

Almost all communities suffer from being mutual admiration societies - you can see it most clearly by looking at the 'Dinner' topic. It really doesn't matter if you post a picture of something that looks delicious or horrible, people will compliment you on it. That isn't inherently a bad thing in that topic but it illustrates that as a community we are supportive of each other more or less no matter what. Blind praise isn't always a good thing - for the person being complemented on the horrible food they cooked it means they'll continue to serve their family gruel. For the person who has a BMI of 75 and is getting rave reviews about the two dozen different hot dogs they documented eating that day it means they focus more on gluttony and less on their health.

We as a community really need to think about the impact this blind support has on the other members of the community. Obviously it wouldn't work if this were a hostile environment where everyone trashed each others posts, but there has to be a middle ground where critique and constructive criticism plays a role.

←

I have a hard time understanding why a food bulletin board, which is by its nature driven by the things that its posters are interested in talking about, has any responsibility or right whatsoever to critique the eating habits of other people on this site. I disagree with Melkor's earlier comment about JP's hot dog tasting thread of yore that "No person with any regard for their health would eat two dozen hot dogs in a sitting." No person with any regard for their health would eat two dozen hot dogs on a regular basis. I wouldn't be able to do it once, but I don't think it would be my place to judge someone who wanted to. Like many others have expressed about their vacations, last year I went on a 9 day eating orgy in Paris and didn't gain a pound. Should I not post about that experience lest someone try to repeat it with less walking? Should I be posting about the salad greens I ate for lunch or the same old sashimi I ate for dinner this week? Why would anyone care?

There's nothing wrong with loving good food, talking about good food and eating good food as you see fit. I might have some responsibility to my loved ones (I would certainly see food education as a part of parenting if I were a mother) to comment on health repercussions of their diet, but I think it would be both presumptuous and obnoxious of me to comment on the gluttony of someone I do not have a personal relationship with. If people on egullet are interested in this topic, they'll post on threads like this one.

Obviously my earlier post acknowledged the conflicts of being a foodie and wanting to be healthy. I consider those desires part of my personal attempt to find balance in my life (in all categories). I do what I can to meet these goals- I eat healthy meals during the day and when I'm not at social events, I try to balance high calorie foods with "green things" when I'm out with friends and I use exercise as a way of making up for really indulgent weeks. Maybe I could weigh 10 lbs less if I didn't eat at Ssam Bar regularly, but would it be worthwhile? Would it make sense to travel to Paris or Buenos Aires and not indulge? My own answers to those questions are not always consistent, but I wouldn't want anyone on egullet to judge me for them. I don't think that I would feel differently about these topics if I were overweight and I don't judge anyone on this board for making different decisions.

Personally, I think there has long been way too much emphasis in this country on being thin and looking perfect- particularly for women. Perhaps the Fat Pack is part of a swing in the other direction. I read extensively on topics like sustainable agriculture, corn consumption, nutrition studies, etc. and I agree that obesity and diabetes are major health problems in this country. So are eating disorders and perfectionism. I think discussion is great, but I can't support the idea that this site has an imperative or responsibility to monitor the weight or consumption of its participants.

[melkor]

Personally, I think there has long been way too much emphasis in this country on being thin and looking perfect- particularly for women.  Perhaps the Fat Pack is part of a swing in the other direction.  I read extensively on topics like sustainable agriculture, corn consumption, nutrition studies, etc. and I agree that obesity and diabetes are major health problems in this country.  So are eating disorders and perfectionism.  I think discussion is great, but I can't support the idea that this site has an imperative or responsibility to monitor the weight or consumption of its participants.

←

This has nothing to do with being thin or looking perfect. It has everything to do with not doing your grocery shopping from a motorized cart at age 35 before you drop dead at 50 from a heart attack or have your feet amputated because of your uncontrolled diabetic condition. I haven't had a 'healthy' BMI in a long time, I'm a big supporter of the concept of being overweight and fit. I may eventually lose enough weight for me to be both a healthy weight and fit, but for now just being reasonably fit is a good start. Being thin and unhealthy isn't a good thing either - people just need to take care of themselves, whatever their weight.

[Jesikka]

Personally, I think there has long been way too much emphasis in this country on being thin and looking perfect- particularly for women.  Perhaps the Fat Pack is part of a swing in the other direction.  I read extensively on topics like sustainable agriculture, corn consumption, nutrition studies, etc. and I agree that obesity and diabetes are major health problems in this country.  So are eating disorders and perfectionism.  I think discussion is great, but I can't support the idea that this site has an imperative or responsibility to monitor the weight or consumption of its participants.

←

This has nothing to do with being thin or looking perfect. It has everything to do with not doing your grocery shopping from a motorized cart at age 35 before you drop dead at 50 from a heart attack or have your feet amputated because of your uncontrolled diabetic condition. I haven't had a 'healthy' BMI in a long time, I'm a big supporter of the concept of being overweight and fit. I may eventually lose enough weight for me to be both a healthy weight and fit, but for now just being reasonably fit is a good start. Being thin and unhealthy isn't a good thing either - people just need to take care of themselves, whatever their weight.

←

Right, and that's a great goal for people who choose to adopt it. It's not my place to tell you that you need to lower your BMI, though, and I don't think that's what this site is about. If JP wants to have a blog about eating healthy and losing weight, that's great. If someone else wants to put up a thread about tasting every hamburger in NY and ranking them, that's great with me too. I'll probably be more interested in the latter thread and it might even save me from having to try every hamburger in NY to come up with my list of favorites. It's not that I don't think obesity is a problem, I just don't think it's egullet's problem.

[melkor]

Right, and that's a great goal for people who choose to adopt it.  It's not my place to tell you that you need to lower your BMI, though, and I don't think that's what this site is about.  If JP wants to have a blog about eating healthy and losing weight, that's great.  If someone else wants to put up a thread about tasting every hamburger in NY and ranking them, that's great with me too.  I'll probably be more interested in the latter thread and it might even save me from having to try every hamburger in NY to come up with my list of favorites.  It's not that I don't think obesity is a problem, I just don't think it's egullet's problem.

←

Obesity has gone from being an individual problem to being a shared problem for all of us in this country, regardless of your body weight. That there isn't any sort of health related subforum or even a few health related active topics on the site is a good indication that eGullet doesn't consider healthy eating to be relevant. It's a shame that this is the current state of things - ignoring the fact that the forum software hasn't been updated in two and a half years, the same discussions are rehashed over and over again. I agree that there is substantial value in a topic that discusses every hamburger in NY, I also agree that nobody cares about the salad I had with dinner last night. I still think that there would be significant value in focusing a little bit of energy on health, at a minimum it would provide something different for the community to talk about.

[Chris Amirault]

Two quick points of clarification about "eGullet"'s relationship to healthy eating.

Despite some references here to the contrary, there is no such thing as "eGullet," some protean, omnipotent being that does or does not give priority to one or another food-related topic. As a result, statements about what "it" is or does don't make too much sense. There is an eGullet Society, of which posters are members, and eG Forums are the part of that Society in which our membership starts and promotes food-related topics of interest.

In addition, this claim is untrue:

melkor said:

That there isn't any sort of health related subforum or even a few health related active topics on the site is a good indication that eGullet doesn't consider healthy eating to be relevant. 

←

There are no subforums related to health because we believe that health is relevant to topics throughout eG Forums, and thus the subject should not be merely in this or that subforum. The same is true for other subjects that transcend one broad category, such as food science.

In addition, a great many topics throughout eG Forums are devoted to healthy cooking and eating. To list a few current examples, the Food Traditions and Culture forum in which this topic exists includes a great many such discussions, including

Feed a Cold

Pre/Probiotics

Food Allergy Guidance

Food and Pregnancy

Weight Watchers

Given that this topic is itself health-related, let's stay focused on food, eating, weight, and health. If you have questions or comments about eG Forums, feel free to send me a PM and I'll be happy to address them. Thanks!

[mizducky]

MzDucky for some folks processed carbohydrates  are as addictive and lethal as heroin ...binges can begin with a bowl of Sugar Frosted Flakes and end up with passing out with a bag of chips and a blood sugar of 500 plus...this certainly can be equated with any addict and overdose in my opinion same same.. ....just like for some folks drinking a beer leads to a drunken binge...

←

Oh yeah--I should amend my comments to agree that a number of people, as you have witnessed, do get into some very dire metabolic addictive syndromes with refined carbs, and thus would do well to just drop that category of food out of their lives.

But see, in my mind that doesn't put the ENTIRE category of carbohydrates into the "bad" category. My understanding is that complex carbs, because they don't immediately zap into the bloodstream but take time and energy to metabolize, don't have that effect. It's the "ALL carbs are bad" mantra that I was reacting to, the kind of mindset that misapprehensions of the Adkins diet encouraged. I should add that I'm aware that the Adkins diet as done by the book does indeed include modest amounts of healthy complex carbs--alas, however, it seems that lots of people skip the book and just do what they think is Adkins, including building up this "all carbs are bad" myth.

I also should add that, as someone whose addictive/compulsive/crave foods have always been animal protein and fat, I personally have been way frustrated on how little play this dynamic is given in the diet punditry books as opposed to the whole refined-carbs obsession/compulsion thing. Again, I am NOT saying the carb-addiction syndromes don't exist--far from it! But it's not the key dynamic for every person struggling with a weight issue, and as the article which started this topic hints, I don't think I'm the only person looking for advice on how to deal with meat-o-holism and not finding it out there in the existing weight-loss literature. So that's part of why I had to invent my own approach.

Like most people, I find that being "fat but fit" is OK healthwise, and not even too hard fashionwise. . .

This is important, I think.

BMI is important to epidemiology because it's easy to assess without doing a lot of stress tests and the like, and across large populations a certain BMI does tend to correspond to a certain level of fitness as well. But the problem with epidemiological studies and applying the conclusions on the individual level is that individuals are... well, individual ...

←

This is part of why I more-or-less ignore all those official tables giving "ideal" body weights, BMI, etc. for a given height and gender. I am convinced that those numbers are set way too low--at least I've proven to my personal satisfaction that they're way too low for my own situation. And I proved it the hard way--when I was working with that nutritionist back in my 20s, I got down to what the table said was my "goal weight"--and even the nutritionist had to admit I looked gaunt and unhealthy at that weight. So we backed it up about 10 pounds--but in hindsight even that weight was unhealthy for me; yet I doggedly maintained it for two whole years, unwittingly doing damage to myself that I've been dealing with for literally decades afterward.

So right now, I'm maintaining at a plateau of 190-something, which seems to be the equilibrium point for the amount of calories in/calories out I'm doing. Sure, I could drive that weight down further by either cutting more calories or upping my activity level. But I'm loathe to cut any more out of my food plan--right now it's running around 1400 to 1600 calories daily, and is an amount of food that keeps me satisfied without feeling deprived, so why mess with it? And activity level is sort of contingent on the state of my joints, which are remarkably improved now that they don't have that 140 extra pounds bashing them to smithereens, but still aren't as up to intense exercise as one could wish. So I'm taking it slow.

Oh--but that's another point I want to raise! Seems like a lot--not all by any means!--but a lot of mainstream dieting-think is still IMO way over-emphasizing the fast fix. I can understand the desire to get this overwith ASAP, especially if one's just had a nasty wake-up call from some scary weight-related health crises. But excessively fast weight loss regimens (anything over two pounds loss a week, anything less than 1400 calories/day) carry their own health risks (gout, gallstones, stripping needed nutrients from the body) that need to be carefully managed by close medical supervision. Plus IMO drastic crash dieting is a major setup for reactive binges--the food deprivation triggers the body's evolutionary hard-wired anti-famine response, and boom there you are inhaling mass quantities. Besides all that, drastic dieting IMO doesn't help retrain one's eating habits into healthy routines that can be maintained over the rest of your life.

Obviously, every individual has to decide what works for them--and if the plunging-in-and-getting-it-over-with approach really suits a given individual's life, by all means go for it. Me, however, I feel much better taking the low-and-slow approach. Guess I'm better suited to the marathon than the sprint.

[Katie Meadow]

It's important to remember that a healthy diet is not synonymous with a weight-loss diet. Losing weight is one of many reasons to be on a healthy diet. Everyone has different health needs. After having 18 inches of his intestine removed for a precancerous lesion, my husband needs a very high fibre diet but he also needs a diet with some fat and lots of protein. I need a diet low in cholesterol and salt. Neither of us is overweight. If I spent as much time eating as I do thinking about food and cooking it I would be.

I'm with you mizducky when it comes to carb-phobia. The Atkins and Southbeach diets are meant for a relatively quick weight loss. Anyone who goes on that low-carb type of diet should have their cholesterol tested and have permission of their doctor. One unfortunate consequence of those diets is that they give people the impression that carbs, including complex carbs, are unhealthy and in and of themselves fattening. Pasta Alfredo is high-calorie, but that's not primarily because of the pasta. I don't understand exactly how those low-carb diets work, but it isn't because "carbs are fattening."

In fact, complex carbs that provide a hefty dose of fibre are the opposite of fattening if they aren't eaten with a self-defeating sauce. When anorexics are starting the process of what is called re-feeding--that means getting as much fat and nutrients into their bodies as quickly as possible--nutritionists will often advise them to eat lots of simple carbs but to go easy on high-fibre foods. High fibre complex carbs make you feel full and as a result you are benefitting from fewer absorbable calories; not getting enough bang for the buck, as it were.

Almost no one in this culture escapes having an issue with food, one way or another. As a result, it can be a mine field to discuss healthy eating with people you know and love, let alone with strangers on a thread. If your doctor doesn't tell you to slim down when you weigh 300 pounds he's remiss. If he tells you and you can't listen, you're in the same boat with lots of other people. Denial is huge, and sometimes it takes a close call before a change is made.

I think the best way to encourage healthy eating in this venue is to submit to the appropriate threads recipes that you find healthy and fabulous, whatever your definition of healthy. That way we can up our percentages for inspiration.

[Endy']

We as a community really need to think about the impact this blind support has on the other members of the community.  Obviously it wouldn't work if this were a hostile environment where everyone trashed each others posts, but there has to be a middle ground where critique and constructive criticism plays a role.

←

no, I really don't think that we do.

I'm not disputing that eG "encourages" unhealthy eating -- I think it's clear that gluttony is glorified here (among other things, some positive). I'm saying that the balance you're suggesting is wildly off-topic for eG, a site that celebrates food, its enjoyment, its preparation, its history. I mean...we're obviously not a resource for anyone who eats to live. So, just as it would be off-topic for me to chastise posters for spending lots of money on dinner, or to drag animal rights into _every single thread_, I think the discussion of health and nutrition is better left to a more suitable venue.

certainly one can be interested in food AND be conscious of its health consequences. But such a person could read eG AND nutrition AND exercise sites, no? Don't you think that eG members who are interested in health issues _already_ read sites related to that subject?

Edited March 21, 2008 by Endy' (log)

[melkor]

no, I really don't think that we do.

I'm not disputing that eG "encourages" unhealthy eating -- I think it's clear that gluttony is glorified here (among other things, some positive).  I'm saying that the balance you're suggesting is wildly off-topic for eG, a site that celebrates food, its enjoyment, its preparation, its history.  I mean...we're obviously not a resource for anyone who eats to live.  So, just as it would be off-topic for me to chastise posters for spending lots of money on dinner, or to drag animal rights into _every single thread_, I think the discussion of health and nutrition is better left to a more suitable venue.

certainly one can be interested in food AND be conscious of its health consequences.  But such a person could read eG AND nutrition AND exercise sites, no?  Don't you think that eG members who are interested in health issues _already_ read sites related to that subject?

←

While it's clear that the site isn't a resource for those who eat to live, there's a middle ground between discussing food as utility and being a support group for those who chose to eat themselves to death.

[Endy']

While it's clear that the site isn't a resource for those who eat to live, there's a middle ground between discussing food as utility and being a support group for those who chose to eat themselves to death.

←

of course there is. But if eG were watered down to occupy that middle ground, it would be a bland and characterless site appealing to neither the eat-to-live crowd nor those who live to eat.

Edited March 21, 2008 by Endy' (log)

[K8memphis]

I'm glad the boys are being mindful of thier weight and health problems but they were hardly in the closet with it y'know.

Two other things.

One is The South Beach Diet is being mischaracterized by several posters. I encourage you to read/skim the book.

And the other is this thread is about out of control eating that has produced some out of control weight and the ensuing health issues. Is the opposite true? I say yes. I've controlled hyperactivity with diet. My arthritis with diet. Hot flashes with diet. Improved vision with diet and exercise. Wrinkles can be diminished with diet. Foggy thinking can be greatly improved with diet. So many things can be improved with diet.

The usually untapped power in making certain food choices to bring about certain results is astounding. Unfortunately it is ten thousand times harder to eat right and make the great choices. But when it works it's crazy good.

[Tess]

In addition, a great many topics throughout eG Forums are devoted to healthy cooking and eating. To list a few current examples, the Food Traditions and Culture forum in which this topic exists includes a great many such discussions, including

Feed a Cold

Pre/Probiotics

Food Allergy Guidance

Food and Pregnancy

Weight Watchers

And many more threads, if you look regionally and into home cooking. There have been quite a few food blogs about healthy cooking or cooking that is healthy overall.

I find it interesting that, when I joined Weight Watchers, the eGullet thread on that topic was the only WW discussion online I could find that didn't absolutely suck. It did a lot more than not suck; it pretty much sustained me. I think someone could go through the many pages of that thread and create a healthy-eating program. Plus, it's amusing.

I am still trying to figure out why eG, in particular, would foster such a vigorous discussion, in some ways a re-invention, of a popular weight-loss formula (which in its commercial version is not terribly healthy in my opinion).

[CKatCook]

One of the reasons I like EGullet is because it celebrates food. It seems here in the US we are always being guilted about what we eat, how we eat, and frankly I get sick of it. I know I am overweight, I don't need reminding. I love food, I love to eat and eat well and really, EG has helped with that. Reading Mizducky's experiences inspires me to try portion control, and the cooking threads give me good ideas. I don't think EG has any responsibly at all to teach people how to lose weight.

I think if the medical community came out with more information on what actually works and how to go about it, the issue may be helped. But like myself I think people are sick of being told what is good, what is bad, what is the vitamin du jour, don't eat fat, don't eat carbs, nothing sensible is out there so most people throw up their hands and give up. IMO.

[K8memphis]

I wish I could quit smoking again and get the same results as quitting potato chips and baked goods which are my personal cookie monsters. It is way easier to cold turkey quit something than redirect your eating.

I would love to hear more about why it's so hard. I mean I guess it's obvious, it's just a learned habit. And even though detrimental (as eating the wrong way can become over time that is) the habits are so ingrained one just keeps ping ponging back to the chip & dip bowl like batter dipped over easy lemmings.

So many of us have to get sick over and over again before we a) wise up and b) continue to stay wised up. I mean no matter how wonderful the greater benefits of eating lovely rabbit food...gimme some pizza!

I can see the new Bruce Willis movie now DieHard With a Food Disorder.

Edited March 21, 2008 by K8memphis (log)

[slkinsey]

There was an interesting study that was published over the summer, which I believe has some relevance to various forks in this discussion. More or less, what the study showed is that weight gain (specifically, obesity) is influenced by social ties. To put it in layman's terms, this says that if you hang around with people who are overweight, you are more likely to become overweight yourself. By extension, one might suggest that if you hang around with a bunch of people who engage in or glorify behaviors that lead one to become overweight, you are more likely to engage in these behaviors and become overweight yourself.

Here is the abstract:

Christakis NA, Fowler JH. The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. N Engl J Med 2007;357:370-379

Background The prevalence of obesity has increased substantially over the past 30 years. We performed a quantitative analysis of the nature and extent of the person-to-person spread of obesity as a possible factor contributing to the obesity epidemic.

Methods We evaluated a densely interconnected social network of 12,067 people assessed repeatedly from 1971 to 2003 as part of the Framingham Heart Study. The body-mass index was available for all subjects. We used longitudinal statistical models to examine whether weight gain in one person was associated with weight gain in his or her friends, siblings, spouse, and neighbors.

Results Discernible clusters of obese persons (body-mass index [the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters], 30) were present in the network at all time points, and the clusters extended to three degrees of separation. These clusters did not appear to be solely attributable to the selective formation of social ties among obese persons. A person's chances of becoming obese increased by 57% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6 to 123) if he or she had a friend who became obese in a given interval. Among pairs of adult siblings, if one sibling became obese, the chance that the other would become obese increased by 40% (95% CI, 21 to 60). If one spouse became obese, the likelihood that the other spouse would become obese increased by 37% (95% CI, 7 to 73). These effects were not seen among neighbors in the immediate geographic location. Persons of the same sex had relatively greater influence on each other than those of the opposite sex. The spread of smoking cessation did not account for the spread of obesity in the network.

Conclusions Network phenomena appear to be relevant to the biologic and behavioral trait of obesity, and obesity appears to spread through social ties. These findings have implications for clinical and public health interventions.

Edited March 21, 2008 by slkinsey (log)

[K8memphis]

That's what makes the genetics studies most convincing is proximity, all the family ties of course. Your eyeballs alone are convincing evidence. Just watch families with kids, the apple or watermelon in this case doesn't fall far from the tree.

But umm, this post in the low-carb thread points to a finding that's being published that carb eating begets carb craving.

In a nutshell,

They also found that eating carbohydrates resulted in a strong ghrelin suppression at first, but ghrelin levels rebounded with a vengeance, rising to an even higher level.

Basically, the carbohydrates eventually made people even hungrier than before they had eaten.

A doctor once told me that the Islets of Langerhans in the pancreas create the cravings for sweets. They are special groups of cells in the pancreas that make and secrete hormones that help the body break down and use food. So perhaps they perform like the ghrelin noted in the link. I don't really know scientifically what does it. I can atest however that that raging craving is alive and well in me. Lies just barely dormant waiting for one whiff or crumb or thought to rise up, then it's fight, flight or failure, try again tomorrow. It loves pictures too.

But the previous study points to the fact that hormones certainly can seriously engage one in cravings that are physically demanding.

Interesting huh....she wrote while visions of CheezIts danced in her head.

[Curlz]

There was an interesting study that was published over the summer, which I believe has some relevance to various forks in this discussion.  More or less, what the study showed is that weight gain (specifically, obesity) is influenced by social ties.  To put it in layman's terms, this says that if you hang around with people who are overweight, you are more likely to become overweight yourself.  By extension, one might suggest that if you hang around with a bunch of people who engage in or glorify behaviors that lead one to become overweight, you are more likely to engage in these behaviors and become overweight yourself.

←

Well, I'll skew that data...the majority (if I had to get serious about it, I'd say 85% of my friends/family-and I have a pretty large social circle) don't really share my passion for or interest in food/wine/cooking. They eat and certainly enjoy good food (usually when I lead them to it, and by good, it's often healthier than their regular diet) and most of them eat more than I do, but they don't necessarily care about food. Oh, and three of them are marathon runners. So I'm not a size 6 why...?!?

[Felice]

I don’t understand the notion that a love of food, leads people to be fat and unhealthy. I live in France. I eat anything and everything, including butter, charcuterie, cream, meat, cheese—probably every day in fact— am pretty much obsessed with food, and am certainly not fat or unhealthy. I weigh 115 pounds and am about 5”5. However, I’m sensible and think about what I eat, and for the most part only eat real food, no imitation, no packaged junk, just real food. I buy my meat from a good butcher and prefer to buy local produce from a market rather than the supermarket. I buy great cheese from the cheese shop, made from raw milk. I make sure my bread is made from flour, salt, yeast and water, not filled with ingredients I don’t recognize.

Shopping this way is expensive and I can’t necessarily afford to eat this way, but it’s a choice and I cut out other things to be able to do this.

There are many cultures who love food (France for one obviously), who eat very well and do not have such huge problems with obesity and food-related health problems, so I can’ t help but think that it is the way people are eating and not just hereditary. Not always of course, but I doubt it's the rule in most cases.

I weigh myself quite often and if I have been particularly indulgent, I’m careful for a few days but that doesn’t mean that I am depriving myself and suffering.

[Miami Danny]

If you are 400 pounds, and you need a doctor's diagnosis to tell you something is wrong, you are in denial. A few pounds overweight, of course, is not horrible, unless you're Brittany Spears or Val Kilmer.

For the rest of us approaching or in middle age, excess just doesn't cut it anymore. Saying no to yourself and others isn't easy, but sometimes it has to be done. I just did almost a month of raw foods, no booze or coffee. Try telling people you don't drink alcohol or coffee in Miami. But the scale was my friend, when everyone else scoffed, and I woke up each morning with a clear head.

Now I'm back eating normally, but I've left off the coffee, and I start each day with freshly-made vegetable/fruit juice. After that, it's anything goes. But I tend to eat less now. And execise more.

The whole idea that we 'foodies' are fatter than the rest of the nation is not supported by any facts; and my guess is it is probably quite the opposite. In fact, Mr. Perlow does not mention how much he misses foie gras or pork belly; he misses his pizza and burgers. That leads me to believe that he was getting fat on a lot of junk.

Edited March 21, 2008 by Miami Danny (log)

[gini]

After reading the article and this thread, a few ideas:

eGullet is a forum. If you'd like to see more threads on health/diet/exercise/whatever eating, then start one. You're a user. You have the power.

Unless you are a dependent adult, I don't think you have the right to ask anyone else to watch out for you in terms of your health. It's yours. You're responsible for your body and what goes into it. Whatever you want to put into it, that's your business. If you want to post about it, from salad to lard, cool. That doesn't mean I'm going to eat that lard, but I might enjoy the voyeurism of it.

I find the social network piece very interesting personally as all but one of my friends are in the skinny to normal range. Same thing goes for my family.

I'm glad to see so many user posting about eating real food versus eating junk.

On another site I read, a thread regarding this article had a post by Jim Leff in it, founding member of Chowhound. One of Jim's points in his post was about how he only needs a taste of something if he's planning on spending an afternoon eating his way through fish tacos in San Diego. Just a taste. He doesn't need to eat the whole thing to do a comparative study. I love that.

Anyway, it's great to see some of the big guys taking their health into their hands. Bravo!

[Curlz]

Unless you are a dependent adult, I don't think you have the right to ask anyone else to watch out for you in terms of your health.  It's yours.  You're responsible for your body and what goes into it.  Whatever you want to put into it, that's your business.  If you want to post about it, from salad to lard, cool.  That doesn't mean I'm going to eat that lard, but I might enjoy the voyeurism of it.

←

Darn. We don't have a clapping emoticon! So I'll just for the above.

If I ate all the foods that I talk/read about/look at in markets and restaurants, I'd be dead. Now I realize that I'm just on the Voyeurism Diet!

[mizducky]

I would love to hear more about why it's so hard. I mean I guess it's obvious, it's just a learned habit. And even though detrimental (as eating the wrong way can become over time that is) the habits are so ingrained one just keeps ping ponging back to the chip & dip bowl like batter dipped over easy lemmings.

←

Well, I'll reiterate some of my personal pet theories of why it can be so hard to change food habits--with all the warnings that I'm not a doctor, just an opinionated (if fairly science-savvy) layperson, and YYMV and all that:

1. It's more than just a mere "learned habit." Food behaviors, being survival behaviors, are some of the most deeply ingrained programming in the psyches of all living creatures, not just humans. There's a ton of evolutionarily-developed instinctual drives hard-wired in there, plus behaviors programmed in from birth. Especially in homo sapiens, the brain does a lot of its completion of development from birth through the first couple of years, so a lot of familial/primary-caregiver food behavior gets wired in there in those first couple of years--along with a huge amount of emotional coloration of said programming due to instinctual bonds with one's caregivers.

2. The problem is exacerbated in homo sapiens by the fact that food behavior is strongly driven by one of the evolutionarily oldest and most primitive portions of the brain, the so-called lizard brain or reptilian complex. Yeah, those of you who have read my previous rants on this, I'm on about that again--it's just that this model just makes so much sense to me. This part of the brain we share with reptiles is not rational, is all about survival-drives like feeding, fighting, and, erm, fornication, and is not under the conscious control of the neocortex, the seat of rational thought. This has implications for attempts at changing eating patterns:

Have you ever wondered why you reach for that pile of hot greasy fries while you tell yourself you are on a diet? The answer is that you have three brains, and the older brains were wired to put on weight long ago when food was scarce. Your old brains are not easily controlled by your fancy new brain hardware that reads diet books.

That's not to say that it's impossible to reprogram eating behaviors--it's just that, for many people at least, it's a helluva lot harder than one might expect. Sure, things go fine when you're showering conscious attention on your behavior. But let yourself get distracted by emotions, fatigue, or the million other little things that can draw your rational attention away, and it's amazing sometimes how fast you can find the Lizard Brain taking over and going "RAWR! FOOOOOD!" And then the neocortex attempts to paper over the lapse with a host of rationalizations, and the emotional centers kick in with a bunch of guilt and self-recrimination, and there ya go into a whole what-the-hell screw-the-diet binge.

So far, my answer is just to up the self-consciousness and the behavioral reinforcement to the max--which, I realize, often makes my posts on eGullet sound a bit broken-record-ish ("oh my god, is she perseverating about her damn weight management trip again?!?" ) But if that's what it takes for me to stay on the beam, I'll do it--and hopefully my obsessions will be as forgiven as those of everyone else on this board (as long as we stay on-topic, of course! )

If I ate all the foods that I talk/read about/look at in markets and restaurants, I'd be dead.  Now I realize that I'm just on the Voyeurism Diet!   

←

Exactly. I read about all my fellow eGulleteers eating the lovely super-rich foods that they do, so that I don't have to! Except when I really want to, and in portions that don't blow my routine out of the water.