To Fat to get on a roller coaster?????? (vegetables, addicted, avoid)
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.
I don't blame the ff restaurants for my weight. I do blame them because their advertisements specifically target children whom are as everyone knows especially impressionable and they have no defenses against propogranda.
And what I said about burning them to the ground was the stuff of pure fantasy. Not serious at all.
About my weight. it's not that I'm huge. but even when I was thin I was pear shaped. At my thinnest I was still never what society considers the perfect body. But I don't blame that on anyone. I do love cooking and food and have at times gone overboard. But I'm still eating a healthy diet and exercising. But no amount of that will make me into one of those angular models.
I don't think it will be your weight as a problem. But your height may. You can go and walk around as exercise and ride some things that are designed for your height. The heart attack rides usually require you to be a bit taller if I remember correctly. Any time I have gone to parks there is always the person that skips those fat or thin, young or old. But all that walking around will be good for you. Wear some comfy shoes and a smile. Go have fun!
I'm 5 foot 1 inch. I weigh about 180. I ride some coasters... I'd ride more if I liked those kind of coasters but am not into "straight down' drops. i fit inot the seats and belts okay but I'm a size 16-18..so going with your size is better than weight as far as whether restraints and seats will fit you. As for hieght, I've not been restricted from anything based on that.
I love cooking and food too. Loving to cook is actually an aid in getting to and maintaining a healthy weight, since its much easier to eat healthily home cooked.
Pro weight loss is NOT anti foodie, thank goodness!
It wont be just CD members. The US chamber of commerce wont be too happy either.
Sounds to me like something DESIGNED to undermine ADA, quite frankly.
Heh yeah I can just see the committee responsible for the ADA:
Senator Do-Good: "Well we need to include requirements to accommodate the obese."
Senator Huh: "So, what constitutes obese? 50% body fat over normal for your height/frame size/age? Okay - so then in order to qualify for these accommodations, patients have to 1. get tested, 2. never EVER lose weight beyond that 50%, which means 3. requiring to get tested EVERY WEEK for as long as they want to be considered disabled, 4. let's make that every day since they might be borderline on Tuesday and lose 2 pounds on Wednesday, and no longer be legally disabled on Thursday. And then they'd gain it back on Friday and be disabled over the weekend..ya know how easy it is for obese people to fluctuate 2-5 pounds on a daily basis afterall. Especially women the day before they're due to get their period.
Senator Ridiculous: Oh but that'd be discriminating against women, we can't isolate them based on when they're due to get their periods.
Senator Byte-Me: Ya know what, screw the ADA. Let's just cancel it altogether and save the taxpayers a few billion bucks every year.
All other senators: Sounds good to me.
Motion passed. ADA repealed.
I don't blame the ff restaurants for my weight. I do blame them because their advertisements specifically target children whom are as everyone knows especially impressionable and they have no defenses against propogranda.
And what I said about burning them to the ground was the stuff of pure fantasy. Not serious at all.
About my weight. it's not that I'm huge. but even when I was thin I was pear shaped. At my thinnest I was still never what society considers the perfect body. But I don't blame that on anyone. I do love cooking and food and have at times gone overboard. But I'm still eating a healthy diet and exercising. But no amount of that will make me into one of those angular models.
So you blame the media for the parents' refusal to say "No" to their children, and instead, dragging their kids to fast food joints and forcing their children to eat foods that are bad for them. Because as everyone knows, parents are just their offsprings' sheep, existing to do their bidding.
Fast food joints make money because adults choose to go there. And it isn't the 100-pound 9 year old who's having trouble fitting on the rollercoaster. It's the 300 pound adult, who has probably been an adult long enough to learn that a triple whopper with cheese and bacon with a large fry, is going to contribute to his obesity even if he gets a large diet coke to wash it down.
Give ADULTS who drive their children to these places some credit. And put the blame where it belongs - squarely on the shoulders of those same adults, who KNOW BETTER and choose to do what they do anyway.
240 lbs that's not even 120 kg, how can that be too heavy for any ride? most of my team-mates are that size, thought most of them are at least a foot taller...
240 lbs that's not even 120 kg, how can that be too heavy for any ride? most of my team-mates are that size, thought most of them are at least a foot taller...
Because the security bars that come down over your shoulders, have a maximum "girth" before they will lock in place. If your girth is too wide, the bars can't come down far enough, and won't lock in place.
The OP, being short, and that weight, would be squat - with the bulk of her bulk, right around where that bar needs to close. If her upper arms are especially thick, the bar might not even come down far enough to -touch- her belly, let alone be stopped by it.
In short, it's not a *weight* issue. It's a *size* issue. The parts of her body that need to get out of the way for a security bar to lock securely in place, might not be capable of getting out of the way. Someone who's 6'3" at 240 pounds has the same weight, more evenly distributed over a lot more area, and therefore won't have that kind of problem. Someone who's 7'3" wouldn't have a weight problem either, but their legs might not fit appropriately without risking damage to their knees on the back of the seat in front of them.
The whole thing with rollercoasters is more of a *size* issue than a *weight* issue. That's why you have to be over a certain height to be allowed to ride, and they don't have scales to weigh people in case they don't fit the weight criteria. They don't -have- a weight criteria. Only a size criteria. Whatever weight you are - if the bar won't lock, you can't ride.
The whole thing with rollercoasters is more of a *size* issue than a *weight* issue. That's why you have to be over a certain height to be allowed to ride, and they don't have scales to weigh people in case they don't fit the weight criteria. They don't -have- a weight criteria. Only a size criteria. Whatever weight you are - if the bar won't lock, you can't ride.
Perhaps what they need is a BMI criterion.
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.
