Cyclone Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 Interestingly enough, you can see in still developing nations a pattern which we have already gone through. At a certain stage being obese is actually a sign of success and wealth as only those with money can afford to eat enough to be fat. As time progresses this trend is pushed down the class hierarchy as people realise that being obese is bad for you, until you end up with only the lowest classes having a high incidence of obesity. Can this be put down to lack of education and interest, they just don't realise or care that being obese is bad for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purdyamos Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 Interestingly enough, you can see in still developing nations a pattern which we have already gone through. At a certain stage being obese is actually a sign of success and wealth as only those with money can afford to eat enough to be fat. As time progresses this trend is pushed down the class hierarchy as people realise that being obese is bad for you, until you end up with only the lowest classes having a high incidence of obesity. Can this be put down to lack of education and interest, they just don't realise or care that being obese is bad for you? That's true, and I've always held that far from some parents not knowing the sort of food that is healthy (jam doughnut vs apple = no brainer) there is a cultural underpinning to the disfunctional diet habits. The fact is, healthier options are not out of the price range of most lower class families. But healthy food has become subject to a sort of reverse snobbery. I've heard so many people react with a visceral revulsion to ideas about healthy eating, defensive and aggressive, and down to nothing more than inverted snobbery. *People like us* don't eat *food like that*. It's seen as poncey and vilified accordingly. You can see it in all the programmes like You are what you eat, etc, and the Rawmarsh mums' campaign, and on SF threads that feature mothers of a certain mindset. The reaction of the dinner ladies when Jamie Oliver first presented them with the idea of fresh veg was classic. It isn't logical, but an almost tribal attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 I can go on and on... Agreed. ...what is the point? Agreed again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minesadouble Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 And a damn fine perception it is too Minesadouble. Why thank you kind sir ....I know people like this Thankfully my kid's are not tubby's and love there fruit ..... Have to force feed veg tho lol:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mifsit Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 I totally blame my parents for my weight issues. Chips for every meal, sugary pop and crisps available 24/7. And, to top that off, not allowed to leave the table until you've eaten everything (and being given proper man size portions as a 10 year old). I didn't know any better then but of course I'm better educated now and as my son grows we will not have pop / crisps etc in the house. He will be allowed them as a treat every now and then. I remember being astonished one day on my way home from work on the tram, there was a woman with a toddler in a buggy and he / she had a bottle of lucozade sport. Being into fitness / gym workouts etc nowadays I know perfectly well what the intended purpose of such drinks are and it isn't for kids in prams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bago Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 You find yourself in this situation on quite a few threads though Bago with people apparently misinterpreting what you said. I wasn't having a dig, but you do seem to make implications sometimes without having intended too. There is no out of context, everything you post needs to be able to stand alone or together as a continuous thread of your point Well, you cannot please everyone all of the time. I have never ever seen a forum to have such strict rules on posting ettiquettes. Some people either read the first post and respond to that. We have those posters. Sometimes people just read the whole thread as a converssation and follow that through, and then respond. We have those posters. You're not having a dig at me? I think I am full well aware of what you think especially after that "sexist" thread and I was strung up for it too. Communication goes both ways Cyclone. If other do not have patience with you, then don't, they don't have to read it. Courtesy do not kill people, but apparently writing style does angst. I got that, nearly everyone here disagrees with you though Who mentioned chips? And what mother are you talking about? Yet, do you know what they are disagreeing with? I have always talked about how others are being offensive themselves. Then it went into a rant about how I support bad food blah blah blah... People have their own minds and can insinuate far more than I like tbh. If you read the thread, then you would understand the reference to the chips. The mother who fed her child chips, and what this thread was based on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 No, the thread is about child obesity in general, hence the title. I read pages 1 - 3, then I joined in at around 9 I think. Afraid I missed any specific mention of a single person and/or chips. I do know what i'm disagreeing with though, and that's your statements that people should be bringing their children up however they like. You haven't answered a single question I posed about how far you should extend that attitude though, too difficult? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bago Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 No, the thread is about child obesity in general, hence the title. I read pages 1 - 3, then I joined in at around 9 I think. Afraid I missed any specific mention of a single person and/or chips. I do know what i'm disagreeing with though, and that's your statements that people should be bringing their children up however they like. You haven't answered a single question I posed about how far you should extend that attitude though, too difficult? To be honest, I really do not want to go down that road again with you and be trolled with it. I have been banned before due to unfairness of being personally trolled. So I think I will end it at that, if you don't mind. I do feel that I am justified just to stop posting. If readers think that I am rude by doing so, then that are entitled to think that. I just know what I had to do by following rules of this board. The personal comments are not even necessary since I don't even know the people themselves. Do let's leave it at that. I am sure that people can be mature and move on and be adults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 Isn't it due to stuffing chocolate bar's in their face to shut them up because that's easier to do, offering a bag o crisps for lunch / no fruit etc etc..... No exercise TV in excess Playstations Bumping school PE Just my perception We were in Morrisons() a few months back. There was a woman pushing her (exceedingly) large child round in the trolley - he almost filled the space for groceries:o - he was stuffing his face with something the mother had picked off the shelf and passed to him:rolleyes:. Anyhow, I think I will stop respondng to this. What, again? I read pages 1 - 3, then I joined in at around 9 I think. Afraid I missed any specific mention of a single person and/or chips. Chips got mentioned on page 2 (I think), to which Bago replied "There is indeed nothing wrong with a child living off carbohydrates." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 Ah, must have forgotten the chips reference. There bloody is though. A complete lack of vitamins and minerals, high in starch which after cooking can be rapidly metabolised and soaked through in fat. You could have a worse diet than only chips, but you'd have to try and it would soon kill you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.