Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My grandfather was always fat; my mother was thin, until she wasn’t and became fat as an adult and battled it all the rest of her life; I got the fat “gene” and have battled this all my life. I knew of really fat girls in H.S. And was thankful that I was not as fat as they. There have always been fat people. What I am giving you is anecdotal evidence, which is to let you know there have always been fat people. And people tended to get fatter as a general rule as they aged.
There was little concept of fitness, although people did calisthenics and some guys did weightlifting. Old people were not encouraged to work out, as we are today.
I lived through the 1950s. Don’t tell me about how we ate! We had access to a variety of food, for sure. But if you revisit an old cookbook, you will see the starchy casseroles, the canned veggies, the rich desserts, the sweet “salads.” In my family we did not constantly snack, but I think other families probably had free access to potato chips and cookies.
I do know that young kids played outside and had more time to do so. Kids today have homework from a young age. And the world does not seem safe to parents. They tend to schedule playdates. They might not allow them to run freely around the neighborhood. So kids, tethered to their electronics might not be as active as kids used to be.
I suspect environmental factors have exacerbated the tendency of some of us to gain weight. I deplore the feeding of juice to young children. I hate the omnipresence of sweeteners in everything. But you cannot point to the 1950s as being some sort of magic time when everyone was healthy and slim. I know it was not that way.
But on the whole we were much less fat than people of today. I grew up in the fifties too. In our school classroom there would usually be ONE fat kid. And that fat kid would probably have been that way due to some genetic defect. And I do remember one example of exactly that--his mother was slender and she was taking the boy to doctors to find out what was wrong with him. She said he didn't eat any more than anyone else. So out of a class of 30, ONE kid.
Our diets in the fifties weren't perfect but our mothers usually tried to give us a couple of vegetables, a starch and a meat. That was what they were advised to do. For dessert we had canned fruit--not perfect by any means, but around here you couldn't get fresh fruit for half the year. In previous generations, canned foods accounted for a large part of the diet in winter because there was no refrigeration. But look at pictures of people from 1900 or so--they are not fat, and maybe were strong and healthy looking.
We seldom drank soda. It came in small glass bottles and you might have one soda at a birthday party or a day at the beach. You didn't buy it very often like people do today. Ice cream was another rare treat. You might go out for a ride on a hot summer's day and your dad would buy everyone an ice cream cone. That was the extent of the ice cream.
Probably some people did eat huge, hearty meals, but those people worked it off by farm work. Look at old photos back as far a photos go. Look at paintings. The fattest one I can think of is King Henry VIII--a glutton, and since he was a king, he didn't work and get exercise.
There is an epidemic of obesity today and we still have the same genetics we have always had. It's not so much about the genes--genes are something to take into account--but it's more about paying attention to healthy eating and exercising.
I am a firm believer without reading anything: weight issues are a combination of genetics and eating habits. Yes, some families have weight problems because of lack of will power, bad eating problems and lack of exercise, but family history seems to play a big roll as well. There is no one answer fits all in life.
Not necessarily. Whole grains have nutrients and fiber. Fiber is the best thing you can eat. ...
Obesity may be genetic but food choices and a sedentary lifestyle are the main reason people become obese and stay.
Read the article-- genetics are the sine qua non of obesity....The benefits of fiber have been thoroughly debunked.....Grains are good for thiamine and not much else. Check your little nutritional content booklet-- the extra nutrients in whole grain compared to white flour is really quite minimal.
The article points out the research that shows the overweight people don't eat any differently than the normal weight folks. I've given the example of the "easy keepers" at the stable-- horses that maintain good body weight on half the feed of normal horses-- it's all in the genes.
We're bigger now than 50 yrs ago-- heavier, but taller too. It's not that we eat too much now, it's that there was more under-fed people a couple generations ago...Don't forget we live longer now-- life expectancy was only 62 yrs in 1936. How bad can the "Obesity Epidemic" be?
Last edited by guidoLaMoto; 03-02-2019 at 06:01 PM..
Read the article-- genetics are the sine qua non of obesity....The benefits of fiber have been thoroughly debunked.....Grains are good for thiamine and not much else. Check your little nutritional content booklet-- the extra nutrients in whole grain compared to white flour is really quite minimal.
The article points out the research that shows the overweight people don't eat any differently than the normal weight folks. I've given the example of the "easy keepers" at the stable-- horses that maintain good body weight on half the feed of normal horses-- it's all in the genes.
We're bigger now than 50 yrs ago-- heavier, but taller too. It's not that we eat too much now, it's that there was more under-fed people a couple generations ago...Don't forget we live longer now-- life expectancy was only 62 yrs in 1936. How bad can the "Obesity Epidemic" be?
Wrong, the benefits of fiber have not been debunked, at least not by anyone credible.
Even if there is a genetic pre-disposition to be overweight, it doesn't mean that a person HAS to be overweight.
We all have free-will. Someone may claim that former fat people in their family are the reason they are also fat as an excuse for not watching what they eat, eating excessive amounts of food and/or not exercising, but that's all it is - an excuse.
Even if there is a genetic pre-disposition to be overweight, it doesn't mean that a person HAS to be overweight.
We all have free-will. Someone may claim that former fat people in their family are the reason they are also fat as an excuse for not watching what they eat, eating excessive amounts of food and/or not exercising, but that's all it is - an excuse.
Did you even read the article? It often has absolutely nothing to do with the amount that one eats. Short of literally starving themselves (less than 800 calories per day), and depriving their bodies of necessary nutrients, some people cannot lose significant weight. Their body immediately down-regulates its metabolism to this new lowered caloric intake. This sort of dieting can't be sustained long term, and as soon as the person resumes what is considered "normal eating" (1800 to 2000 calories), the weight returns. Others, like my husband, lose weight unless they consume almost twice the normal number of calories, and that's without significant exercise. He has 2 brothers that are the same way. They need to consume very calorie dense foods in quantities that would make most people very uncomfortable just to remain at the extreme lower end of the normal weight category.
It is certainly true. My aunt had two daughters by her first husband who passed away, he was thin and both daughters have always been thin as well. She later remarried and her second husband was short and heavy, she had one daughter with him, and that daughter has always been overweight, just like her Dad. You’d never guess the youngest daughter was even related to the two older ones.
People do have genetic tendencies but that can mitigated. Our biology is not our destiny.
Did you even read the article? It often has absolutely nothing to do with the amount that one eats. Short of literally starving themselves (less than 800 calories per day), and depriving their bodies of necessary nutrients, some people cannot lose significant weight. Their body immediately down-regulates its metabolism to this new lowered caloric intake. This sort of dieting can't be sustained long term, and as soon as the person resumes what is considered "normal eating" (1800 to 2000 calories), the weight returns. Others, like my husband, lose weight unless they consume almost twice the normal number of calories, and that's without significant exercise. He has 2 brothers that are the same way. They need to consume very calorie dense foods in quantities that would make most people very uncomfortable just to remain at the extreme lower end of the normal weight category.
I have lived the life. I have a predisposition to be fat. I have dieted since I was 3 to prevent diabetes from being overweight. Should I have to justify my post to you? Are you supposed to be somebody with that "did you even read the article" taunt?
Sorry, you and your response to my post will never out-class my life experience. Nice try though.
Did you even read the article? It often has absolutely nothing to do with the amount that one eats. Short of literally starving themselves (less than 800 calories per day), and depriving their bodies of necessary nutrients, some people cannot lose significant weight. Their body immediately down-regulates its metabolism to this new lowered caloric intake. This sort of dieting can't be sustained long term, and as soon as the person resumes what is considered "normal eating" (1800 to 2000 calories), the weight returns. Others, like my husband, lose weight unless they consume almost twice the normal number of calories, and that's without significant exercise. He has 2 brothers that are the same way. They need to consume very calorie dense foods in quantities that would make most people very uncomfortable just to remain at the extreme lower end of the normal weight category.
As Dr. Laura has often said. "There are no fat people in concentration camps".
I hope this doesn't give people the impression that they can just eat anything they want. It's not all genetics and if you do have some genetic tendency to gain weight, you have to be aware and stay on top of it.
We never had so many fat people back in the 50s and 60s. Maybe they were eating real food, not fast food. Soda was a treat, not for every day. Few processed foods, it was mostly real food.
Believe what you want, but healthy eating is still healthy eating and that doesn't change.
Yup, we've gotta fight our fat genes. If not just for appearance sake ( and it's not), for the prevention, or at least mitigation of the other chronic conditions such as high blood pressure and diabetes that are made worse with obesity.
Been doing that, with more success sometimes, less success other times, all my life.
And my poor kids have two sets of fat genes from their parents to fight.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
