Q: I keep seeing this BMI thing everywhere, and I know that my girls aren’t overweight, but their doctors tell them they are and they need to lose weight. If they don’t look overweight, why does it matter if the BMI says they are?

If the question is whether or not the body mass index (or BMI) matters… the simple answer is that in reality, it doesn’t.

No, really.

But before you go writing off your physician’s advice, let me explain it a little clearer.

The BMI is merely a calculation based on your height in correlation to your weight. It is a ratio of what one’s frame is carrying in weight, and used as an estimation of one’s health. Not necessarily their health today, but their health tomorrow.

The idea is that there is a likely height-to-weight ratio that estimates just how much weight a particular frame can manage. Anything beneath that weight can imply that your organs aren’t being supported, you might be suffering an illness or you might be malnourished. Anything above that weight can imply that you have too much fat crowding your organs, you might be suffering an illness or you are “over-nourished,” so to speak.

Look at that paragraph – see all the uncertainty? “Likely,” “can imply,” “might,” “might”… c’mon.

The BMI was invented sometime between 1830 and 1850... before slaves were freed. Think about that.

The BMI wasn’t paid much attention until approximately the 1970s (over 100 years later… think about that, too) when a guy named Ancel (An-sill) Keys created a study titled “Indices of Relative Weight and Obesity” which used the BMI, gave it its “body mass index” name and popularized the simple ratio. Calling it an adequate measure of body fat percentage in the human body, and because it was a cheaper and quicker measure than what most researchers were using at the time, the BMI spread like wildfire. Flaws and all.

I already have a problem with Ancel Keys because he’s the reason why we swear that fat is the reason we’re fat, even though we’ve now suffered through two decades of “fat free/low fat” products and are fatter than we’ve ever been. The details of his Indices study are basically that he studied approximately 7,400 men in five countries. Women? Meh, y’all and your little bodily differences weren’t needed for such a study.

In the 1980s, when the National Institute of Health began advocating the BMI for regular use in treating patients, there were differing values for men and women.. and the marking number for being “overweight” rested somewhere around 27. Once the late ’90s hit, both men and women were now to share the same standard scale, and the marker for being “overweight” was moved down to 25.

Why, you ask? If you ask this guy, he’ll tell you the NIH and the CDC were in cahoots with one another so that they could create an obesity epidemic… thus resulting in more money being given to both entities. I’m a conspiracy theorist and all, but wowzers. The change in the threshold for obesity did result in something like 30million more Americans being classified as overweight.

If there are all these problems with it, why is it still in use? Because, quite frankly, while it’s often wrong… it’s also sometimes right. Though that “overweight” label might hurt some people’s feelings (why, I don’t know), its labels like “underweight” and “obese” that signify much more than the “overweight” category. (Although, I must admit, I doubt you need a scientific calculation to identify an individual as obese. Seems like a waste of time.)

Personally, I think it’s stupid. The body responds to its environment. Some athletes are extremely active, and the body will recognize that it may need to burn calories and lose weight to help accommodate that activity. Those athletes are, by definition, underweight. Some individuals have labor intensive jobs that require lots of heavy lifting, and the body will respond by packing on the muscle. Those individuals, by definition, are overweight. My bodybuilding friends? They’re shooting the BMI the finger because they’re obese.

If the body mass index is merely meant to measure the amount of mass a body should/could carry… and we know there’s a major difference between a body carrying fat and a body carrying muscle, for our doctors to use a measurement that doesn’t quantify muscle in comparison to fat is a medical fail. Seriously. Neither Keys nor the originator of the BMI intended for it to provide such blanket assumptions in such a specific fashion. “You must be like these other people because you share the same height and weight.” That’s what the BMI says. That’s why it’s so stupid.

I, personally, find the body fat percentage to be far more valuable in gauging my physical wellness. The body fat percentage estimates what percentage of your body appears to be purely fat. The “average American female’s” body fat percentage is somewhere around 32%, while the typical athlete is around 22%.

The bf% is a much more valuable number because it acknowledges that those in the overweight category may simply be muscular, and those on the thinner side may still be hiding some fat that needs to be addressed. There is no cheating or hiding behind “unfairness” with the body fat percentage. A caliper or a hydrostatic test is usually used to measure bf% – I use an electrical machine at my gym – but there’s also this quick and dirty calculator that I use to keep track, and it only requires a tape measure. You’ll get two numbers – take an average between the two numbers, and you’ll have a better and much more valuable estimate. If body fat is the issue (not muscle), then getting numbers that address specifically that definitely helps.

Lastly, if your body mass index still has you down… head on over here and see others who, apparently, are in your “weight group” and feel a little bit better about yourself. Lots of beautiful people over there, wondering how or why this arbitrary ratio matters so much. Just like the rest of us. (This one is my personal favorite.)

PS: Show a little love by voting for me in the Black Weblog Awards for Best Health or Wellness Blog category! That’s right – BGG2WL is a finalist thanks to you! Let’s do what we can to bring it home!

Q&A Wednesday: Why Does Body Mass Index (BMI) Matter? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Q&A Wednesday: How Weight Clings To (And Falls Off) The Body
2. Q&A Wednesday: Is This The Size My Body Wants Me To Be?
3. Q&A Wednesday: Weight Changes, Body Awareness & The Creeper Effect

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 16 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: ancel keys, bmi, body fat, body fat percentage, body mass index, CDC, fat head, government, NIH, normal weight, obese, obesity, overweight, underweight, what is normal weight, wtf is normal

Whether it’s Michelle Obama’s health initiatives or programs to make school lunches more healthy, there has been an increasing focus on America’s increasing waistline and obesity epidemic.

However, a suburban community is realizing that there are even more consequences to being overweight than simply high blood pressure and diabetes.

According to WREX in Rockford, Ill., a fire began in a one-story home just before 4:00 a.m. Monday. The two parents, Joe and Delores Herron, escaped, but when firefighters arrived, their daughter and two foster sons, ages 10 and 11, were still trapped inside.

Firefighters were able to get the 2 boys out through the window, but firefighters could not lift Jamaya

Investigators say she weighed more than 500 pounds. through.

Winnebago County Coroner Sue Fiduccia said, “That [the weight] did hamper the fire department and fire rescuers from taking her out a window. They did have to bring her out the door and in doing that, two firefighters we’re actually injured.”

By then, it was too late for Jamaya.

The daughter of a pastor and a singer at the church died at the scene. Fire Chief Derek Bergsten, stated:

“They gave 110 percent, did their best and sometimes we’re not able to save everyone, but we were able to get two individuals out of that structure alive.”

Investigators say Jamaya died from breathing smoke. There will be an autopsy later this week.

Fannie Barbee, a relative of the family, says, “She was very faithful in the church. Whenever I go over there, she was a really nice person.” [source]

Of course, I waited a few days to write about this just because I needed to think without the presence of anger or sadness…

..but then I realized that a little anger might be appropriate.

The video above is from the news clip regarding the events surrounding Jamaya’s passing. (If you’re a subscriber, you may want to visit this post on a computer to view it.)

Far be it for me to disrespect a grieving family, but we’re adults, here. Adults take situations and learn from them all the time. This needs to be one of those situations.

She was the daughter of a pastor and actively involved in her church. Obviously well-known.

All those people in her community… and no one was able to assist her before she reached the 300, 400 or 500lb mark? How does a teenager gain so much weight before they even reach adulthood?

Those of us who read this site know the importance of having a supportive environment full of people who care about us to help us reach our goals. What, in the world, is going on in a church when a girl can be “very faithful” yet still no one was as devoted to her as she was to them?

I mean, I get it – I’m the main one saying that we shouldn’t judge people who stand before us because we don’t know where they are on their journey to wellness. That’s my line. I know it by heart. But Jamaya passed away because no one bothered to stop her before it got to the point where her quality of life was so impacted that she couldn’t even be rushed to safety! This isn’t a young girl who we see outside walking and decide to judge from our cars. This is a girl who no one bothered to intervene with 200lbs ago. Major difference.

Now a while back, I wrote asking the readers of BGG2WL if there was anyone in their lives who was allowed to let them know their weight might be getting out of hand… and a lot of the messages I received publicly and privately implied that no one was allowed to tell them. No one was allowed to make them feel like something was wrong with them for gaining weight. And if you’re 140lbs at 5’8″, that makes sense. No one should be making you feel bad.

Having said that, those of us who are on the path to wellness and are experiencing positive results… You know how hard it was for you to obtain the knowledge you’ve developed. Be it from books, from your peers, even from this site. It is your responsibility to “be the change you wish to see” in your community and be a role model for better health. You don’t have to tell anyone “You’re getting fat” – in all my time, I’ve never used those words – but you can show people that good food doesn’t have to be full of sugar or fat or salt. You can be excited by your own loss and share with people how “easy” it’s been for you. (Maybe “simple” might be a better word.) You can let people know that your success has come from cooking more, being more active, and using less junk foods. People don’t want words, and they certainly don’t want insults. They want to see that something works, then they want to know what that something is. Do you think you’d be here reading MY words if you didn’t know that what I write about worked for me? I doubt it.

I question why no one in Jamaya’s community could be “that kind of person” for her. They had 200lbs worth of time to be there for her, and no one did it. I’ll even put it out there – what kind of emotional damage is a teenager going through that she’d rather continue harmful habits than try to get help? The same kind of emotional damage caused by parents who can get out of a house, yet leave their three children inside?

Sorry, I take that back. But I am a devoted parent and… let’s just say there better be a logical explanation for that part.

That is a beautiful girl lost because no one could save her. No one could get to her fast enough. In more ways than one. It is shameful that we have young girls in our community that need help and, apparently, aren’t getting it. It is shameful that they have no one to talk to about their insecurities and seek out some kind of guidance. It is a pain that we should  all feel that there are women who would rather endure the decreased quality of life than do what they need to do to be on a path to wellness.

Make no mistake about it – this isn’t about her dress size. This isn’t about her appearance, either – look at her, she’s a beautiful girl! This is about the fact that a girl, obviously devoted to her church community, was able to become so large that two individuals were harmed in an attempt to save her while she was impaired. That is a serious problem.

This should make us all look at ourselves. What do we do for those individuals who might be struggling? Do we talk to them, befriend them to see if they’re okay? Do we invite them over for dinner and, even though we might endure the “forget this – I want some real food!” comments, at least show them what healthier food looks like? Do we offer emotional support? Offer to go for a walk with them? Or are we just judging from afar, and make sure we can chip in on the casket?

I know that’s a bit sensationalist, but that’s real talk.What are we doing to stop this kind of silliness?

500lb Teen Unable To Be Rescued From Fire, and I Blame EVERYONE is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. My “Black Women Are To Blame For Everything” Rant
2. Teen Girls, Weight Loss Surgery, Body Image and Class Distinctions

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 33 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: obesity, teenage obesity

No, really. I’m very confused. Let me explain.

A few weeks ago, Marie Claire published this very damning article about health bloggers (many of whom are marathon runners) who inadvertently encourage unhealthy behavior and even – gasp! – eating disorders. The irony of this is that the cover of the particular issue that carried this article featured none other than Victoria Beckham who, while I won’t assume she has an eating disorder herself, most likely serves as “thinspiration” for a lot of eating disorder sufferers who’d literally die to look like her.

So… needless to say, I pretty easily decided that Marie Claire, complete with their “Get Sexy For Your Man!!!!111!1!”/”Lose That Last 5 lbs!!!!!11!1!1!”/”Lose 7lbs In 7 Days!1!!!!!” articles, is pretty darn out of touch with health and wellness. In fact, I never really cared about Marie Claire simply because they’re one of the perpetuants of that “something is wrong with you, buy my product to fix it!” mentality that kills the self-esteem of young girls and women everywhere. It sucks. They suck.

I just… I didn’t expect them to go out of their way to prove me right… and I didn’t expect them to do it not even a month after their last total bomb on those health/wellness bloggers. They just… they stay losing.

In the article titled, “Should Fatties Get A Room? Even On TV?“, the reading audience gets the honor of sitting in on the thought process of a total fat-o-phobe who tries to rationalize her fatophobia:

The other day, my editor asked me, “Think people feel uncomfortable when they see overweight people making out on television?”

Because I can be kind of clueless — I’m not much of a TV person — I had no idea what she was talking about, so she steered me to this CNN article, about the CBS sitcom Mike & Molly. As CNN explains, “the show centers around a couple who meet at an Overeaters Anonymous group [and] has drawn complaints for its abundance of fat jokes [as well as] cries from some viewers who aren’t comfortable watching intimacy between two plus-sized actors.”

My initial response was: Hmm, being overweight is one thing — those people are downright obese! And while I think our country’s obsession with physical perfection is unhealthy, I also think it’s at least equally crazy, albeit in the other direction, to be implicitly promoting obesity! Yes, anorexia is sick, but at least some slim models are simply naturally skinny. No one who is as fat as Mike and Molly can be healthy. And obesity is costing our country far more in terms of all the related health problems we are paying for, by way of our insurance, than any other health problem, even cancer.

So anyway, yes, I think I’d be grossed out if I had to watch two characters with rolls and rolls of fat kissing each other … because I’d be grossed out if I had to watch them doing anything. To be brutally honest, even in real life, I find it aesthetically displeasing to watch a very, very fat person simply walk across a room — just like I’d find it distressing if I saw a very drunk person stumbling across a bar or a heroine addict slumping in a chair.

Now, don’t go getting the wrong impression: I have a few friends who could be called plump. I’m not some size-ist jerk. And I also know how tough it can be for truly heavy people to psych themselves up for the long process of slimming down. (For instance, the overweight maintenance guy at my gym has talked to me a little bit about how it seems worthless for him to even try working out, because he’s been heavy for as long as he can remember.)

But … I think obesity is something that most people have a ton of control over. It’s something they can change, if only they put their minds to it.

(I’m happy to give you some nutrition and fitness suggestions if you need them — but long story short, eat more fresh and unprocessed foods, read labels and avoid foods with any kind of processed sweetener in them whether it’s cane sugar or high fructose corn syrup, increase the amount of fiber you’re getting, get some kind of exercise for 30 minutes at least five times a week, and do everything you can to stand up more — even while using your computer — and walk more. I admit that there’s plenty that makes slimming down tough, but YOU CAN DO IT! Trust me. It will take some time, but you’ll also feel so good, physically and emotionally. A nutritionist or personal trainer will help — and if you can’t afford one, visit your local YMCA for some advice.)

Then again, I guess these characters are in Overeaters Anonymous. So … points for trying?

Then again, I tend to think most television shows are a kind of junk food for the mind and body. The boob tube gives us an excuse to turn off both our brains and our bodies and probably does a helluva lot to contribute to the obesity problem, over all. So … I don’t know.

What do you guys think? Fat people making out on TV — are you cool with it? Do you think I’m being an insensitive jerk?

I have several thoughts as I read this.

1. Mike & Molly, a show that I don’t watch (because, quite frankly, it’s not SVU) about a topic that I’m not interested in (even though I do watch a show about a milkshake, a meatball and a container of fries that all talk.) I don’t watch it because I don’t do sitcoms… and considering the way this society tends to treat fat people, I’m concerned about a TV show with overweight characters making self-degrading fat jokes. I don’t personally like the tone that sets for people who are overweight, and I don’t like that the only way a TV show can have overweight leads is if the topic of the show is that they’re trying to NO LONGER be overweight… as if weight is all that fat people think about. They don’t work, raise families or any of that other cute stuff that thin people do… and even if they do, apparently, people like the author don’t want to see it. For those reasons, the show is not something I’m willing to support.

2. I don’t understand how having overweight TV characters “implicitly promotes obesity.” At all. Letting TV characters reflect the population that’ll actually be watching them is a promotion of obesity? So… is the current lack of overweight TV characters supposed to serve as some element of shaming fat people for, well… being fat? “You aren’t allowed to relate to the TV characters until you lose that weight, fatty!” C’mon, son. TV, and its celebrities… should not mean nor matter this much.

3. “Yes, anorexia is sick, but at least some slim models are simply naturally skinny.” Hold this thought. I’m going to come back to this. “Yes, anorexia is sick, but…” is all you need to remember.

4. “And obesity is costing our country far more in terms of all the related health problems we are paying for, by way of our insurance, than any other health problem, even cancer.” I need people to be clear. Can I get people-who-write-for-big-publications-and-like-to-call-themselves-journalists-but-might-not-be-one-so-much to DEFINE obesity for me? Obesity is defined as “a term used to describe body weight that is much greater than what is considered healthy.” And… what health problems are related to that? The same ones that you can get at ANY weight… the same health problems you WILL get at any weight if you eat like crap. See, thin mints of America, thinking like this is what has y’all thinking you’re ok to “eat ice cream when you feel like it because you won’t gain weight.” It’s not the weight that’s the problem.. its the habits and the consequences of said habits… and one of those consequences happens to be obesity. Attaching the problems to the weight is why America is so health-stupid now, anyway.

5. “So anyway, yes, I think I’d be grossed out if I had to watch two characters with rolls and rolls of fat kissing each other … because I’d be grossed out if I had to watch them doing anything. To be brutally honest, even in real life, I find it aesthetically displeasing to watch a very, very fat person simply walk across a room — just like I’d find it distressing if I saw a very drunk person stumbling across a bar or a heroine addict slumping in a chair.”

…is then followed up by…

“Now, don’t go getting the wrong impression: I have a few friends who could be called plump. I’m not some size-ist jerk.”

Because we’re all familiar with the “I’m not racist – I have Black friends! My Nanny was Black!” mantra. Do her friends know what she truly thinks of them and how “aesthetically displeasing” they are to her while they’re so busy existing?

6. “And I also know how tough it can be for truly heavy people to psych themselves up for the long process of slimming down…But … I think obesity is something that most people have a ton of control over. It’s something they can change, if only they put their minds to it.”

Check this out. “I know how hard it is… but its really easy! Just put your minds to it!” I’m just… I just.. I don’t understand this mentality. She complains about the cost of obesity-related illness in America, but then minimizes that entire issue to fat people just “not putting their minds to it?”

As someone who’s lost over 150lbs, let me tell you something. It’s not “really easy.” It’s not something that can be solved by just “putting your mind to it,” especially when you have no idea what you need to “put your mind to” in the first place. Especially when you don’t have access to the tools necessary to help you in your journey. I’ve done everything from lifting water jugs to jogging with my daughter on my back to help me reclaim my health. I’ve battled, struggled and cried trying to uncover the mental and emotional barriers that have kept me from losing weight. To minimize everything I’ve done, everything I’ve endured and the physical and emotional struggles I’ve had to overcome down to me being able to “put my mind to it” not only insults every fat person in America… but it insults me. It doesn’t give me credit for all the shit I had to conquer in order to be who I wanted to be, and that is a fit person who doesn’t suffer from or struggle with the mental strain of society’s moronic weight stigma… as reflected in this article.

Society perpetuates the very same notion that, later on, winds up being used against itself. “We hate fat people, even though 70% of us are overweight. Yay.” Bizarre. And moronic.

7. Here comes the obligatory weight loss advice. It’s not even terrible advice.. it’s just so… predictible. And while it’s still un-all-emcompassing, it’s “the cure to your fat woes that you’ve been looking for.” I’m glad she’s smarter than 70% of America.

8. We’re not even talking about overweight TV characters at this point. We stopped talking about Mike & Molly after the first paragraph. This entire post was an excuse to rail against those of us who are not the Victoria Beckhams of the world and remind us that our presence is undesirable on the TV screen because we are, well.. who we are. It was her excuse to air out her thoughts of fat people and how they’re just “lazy” because “it’s so easy,” and all they really need to do is just “put their minds to it…” and since they haven’t done that and seen results yet (no signs of whether or not a 300lb person has already lost 150 thus far and is still losing.. all that matters is that person is still fat and should go back into their cave until they’ve lost the other 150), they’re still lazy.

9. I wanted you to remember the “Yes, anorexia is sick, but…” comment because of the following:

PS: As for near-death, I think it’s fair to say I came fairly close to dying from my own eating disorder. (cf. here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/books/chapter-going-hungry.html) And while it took me a very LONG hard time to overcome what I had (anorexia that landed me, at 69 pounds, in the hospital for four months, and eventually turned into bulimia) I worked at overcoming it a long hard time. I think part of the reason I was so strident in my post is because I’ve had an eating problem with psychological and behavioral components that involved a lot of shame and body hatred (and a desire to de-sexualize myself). And–as someone who was a compulsive overeater for a time–I think there are a lot of similarities between overeaters and anorexics, which is perhaps why I was being (admittedly) rather self-righteous. I really do apologize, again, for my insensitivity.

You know who wrote that? The author of this article. She dropped this in the comments. Her earlier “weight loss advice” didn’t even work for her… but it’s the answer to you fat people’s woes.

Someone who overcame an eating disorder dropped this steaming pile of garbage on an editor’s desk as a proposed article? Someone who was anorexic and “eventually” bulimic felt it was appropriate – and indicative of her recovery- to write an entire post railing fat people for being to lazy to “just put their minds to it,” when she admits her own psychological and behavioral components that involved a lot of shame and body hatred?

A desire to de-sexualize herself?

Are you freaking kidding me?

WTF IS THIS? Are the overweight not allowed to struggle with psychological and behavioral issues? Habituation? Issues with sexuality? Are fat people only fat because they’re fat, but those thinmints with eating disorders, ohhhhh they’ve got emotional struggles that have to be respected and considered? Do we even make allowances for, get this – overweight people with eating disorders? Or do they not exist because “obviously the disorder isn’t working?”

She apologizes, but I don’t care. My ability to pity her for her struggles is hindered by her inability to acknowledge her own struggles, herself. My ability to empathize with her on her compulsion is hindered by her inability to empathize with me and people like me – regardless of whether they look like me or not – on our compulsions. We have the same freaking problems, she just had the “luck” (luck, as society would call it, not me) of still managing to be thin in the end. I was fat. Poor me, lucky her. I suppose if it were fat that was prized, I’d have the illustrious honor of talking about how disgusting it is to see skinny people even existing. I’d like to think I’d have enough class to keep my thoughts to myself, though.

Marie Claire, you’re killing me right now. First, you go out of your way to publish an article that alludes to marathon running health bloggers as having eating disorders (and even triggering disordered eating behavior in their readers) for being so health-focused… then you follow that up with a post that, if I were a different woman, might’ve shamed me into feeling like I’d need an eating disorder. Y’know, especially since I would’ve tried the article’s “weight loss advice” and it would’ve failed… since it certainly didn’t address emotional eating, lack of access to healthy food, lack of resources to prepare said food or anything else that isn’t so glaringly obvious and “easy.” Perhaps if your readers spent their money buying carrots instead of your mag, and walking instead of visiting your site… they’d all lose weight?

Aw, if only it were that easy.

Shoutout To The Fat-O-Phobes: Marie Claire vs Fat TV Characters is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. The Fat-O-Phobes Are Showing Their Behinds Again

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 43 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: anti-fat, anti-fat society, bad advice, epic ranting, fat on TV, marie claire, maura kelly, mike and molly, obesity, society

As usual, a few notes:

“Being overweight is infectious. Friends of those who become obese risk a 57% chance of also becoming overweight.”

Really? Oh.

“Studies have shown that binge eating of sugary sweets can cause an addictive response in the brain similar to illegal drugs.”

Again, really? Oh.

“Stress and depression can be temporarily alleviated by eating. Cortisol, a stress hormone, also causes weight to be retained in several key areas. At 9.6%, America has the highest depression rate in the world. 75% of the population considers itself overstressed, up from 59% last year.”

I wonder why that happens.

“The closer a school is to a fast food restaurant, the more student obesity it has. The average American school is only 600 meters away from a fast food restaurant, a seven minute walk or a far shorter cruise to the drive thru. This may be the reason why childhood obesity has quadrupled in the last forty years.”

“Still not worried?” 10% of national medical costs are spent dealing with complications and disease brought on by obesity – roughly $147 billion tax dollars every year.”

“Brought on” by obesity, or “coupled with” obesity? The two are very different. Type 2 diabetes occurs in “skinny” people, too. Not only that, but the same things that cause type 2 diabetes are the same things that cause obesity, so…. just like a person can be overweight and not have diabetes? A person can be diabetic and not be overweight. The longer we continue that stupid philosophy, the longer we continue to deal with these problems because we insist on attributing it to obesity instead of food.

It’ll be a hilarious day, indeed, when we’ve “cured” obesity and people start to realize that type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure are still around. “Well what the hell happened?” “Gee, buddy, I don’t know…”

“The Obesity Olympics…”

…seriously? [insert confused face]

“Still, we choose what we put into our bodies, right? Not entirely – food deserts, areas with little to no access to healthy foods, exist throughout America, eliminating the option to eat healthily entirely.”

For once, a infographic doesn’t completely ignore this issue.

Your thoughts?

Infograph: Obesity In America is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Infographic: The Skinny on Obesity in America
2. Statistics: Obesity By The Numbers
3. What Does An Overweight Surgeon General Mean To America?

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 3 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Fast Food, infographics, obesity, relationships, schools

Should you not feel like clicking that link, I’ll pull some of the more interesting quotes from the article to share below:

But the full-figured African-American nominee is also under fire for being overweight in a nation where 34 percent of all Americans aged 20 and over are obese.

Critics and supporters across the blogsphere have commented on photos of Benjamin’s round cheeks, saying she sends the wrong message as the public face of America’s health initiatives.

Here’s another good one:

“I think it is an issue, but then the president is said to still smoke cigarettes,” said Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine who is now a senior lecturer at Harvard University Medical School. “It tends to undermine her credibility.”

“We don’t know how much she weighs and just looking at her I would not say she is grotesquely obese or even overweight enough to affect her health,” Angell told ABCNews.com.

“But I do think at a time when a lot of public health concern is about the national epidemic of obesity, having a surgeon general who is noticeably overweight raises questions in people’s minds,” she added.

I’m overlooking the “sexist” aspect of this situation simply because I don’t buy that. It feels like an excuse to discuss something other than the fact that the woman appears to be physically unfit. My question is… does the physical appearance really make that much of a difference? Do you really pay that much attention to the Surgeon General to define them as or look to them to be a pillar of health? Is it that serious to you?

One last quote for the road:

Dr. Sarah Lester, a pediatrician from Andover, N.H., told ABCNews.com she lost 30 pounds, setting a good example for her patients’ families.

“I do think it makes a big difference,” said the 38-year-old. “Many ask me how I did it and when I tell them more exercise and eating less many are disappointed. However when they hear even for me there isn’t a magic bullet, I think it helps.”

What do you think?

What Does An Overweight Surgeon General Mean To America? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Choosing The Right Plastic Surgeon
2. News: Telling Parents About Overweight Kids Has Little Impact?
3. More Airlines Making Overweight Customers Buy Extra Seats?

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 15 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: government, health policy, obesity, surgeon general

First Lady Michelle Obama enlisted Beyoncé to help spread the word about her Let’s Move! campaign against childhood obesity in America. Bey re-recorded “Get Me Bodied” as “Move Your Body”, and the workout video to accompany the track is below.

Beyonce Teams Up With Michelle Obama For Workout Video is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. My Quest For Michelle Obama Arms
2. Walmart, Michelle Obama and The Halo Effect
3. What Rush Limbaugh Has To Say About Michelle Obama, And Why I Don’t Care

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 14 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: beyonce, get me bodied, let's move, michelle obama, move your body, obesity

Kids are cruel. I think a lot of us can admit to that. In a lot of cases, many of us have seen bullying or teasing first hand. That being said, how much can advertisements like this:

…contribute to that? Meet Georgia’s new anti-childhood obesity campaign.

Many aspects of “Let’s Move” won near-universal praise. But activists in the fat-acceptance movement and experts who espouse a “health at every size” approach were upset that the campaign encouraged the monitoring of children’s body mass index, or BMI, and thus might contribute to stigmatization of heavier kids.

“The idea of a BMI report card is horrible,” said Paul Ernsberger a professor in the nutrition department at Case Western Reserve University’s School of Medicine in Cleveland.

“To declare we’re going to eliminate childhood obesity – that’s actually a very stigmatizing thing to say,” Ernsberger said. “The overweight child hears that and thinks, `They wish I wasn’t here.’”

Linda Bacon, a nutrition professor at City College of San Francisco, is the author of “Health At Every Size” – a manifesto for a movement stressing a healthy lifestyle rather than weight control. She said the focus by “Let’s Move” on BMI was of dubious medical value and posed potential problems for kids at all weight levels.

“It’s done much more damage than good,” Bacon said. “The larger kids feel bad about themselves, and the thinner kids feel it doesn’t matter whether they exercise or eat well.”

Deb Lemire, president of the Association for Size Diversity and Health, credited Michelle Obama with good intentions and commended various nutrition-related aspects of “Let’s Move.” But she said the emphasis on weight risked worsening the problems of teasing and bullying.

“The message that gets to the kids is, `There really is something wrong with me,’” said Lemire, of Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio. “We’re saying we love you, we want you to have wonderful lives and be successful, but right now you’re just not good enough.” [source]

Let’s be clear – the majority of the critique regarding First Lady Obama’s campaign has to do with the fact that she “tackles childhood obesity,” not the fact that she “wants to encourage healthier lifestyles for children.” It’s literally a game of semantics, and the person you’re talking to will determine how the picture is painted for you. It’s all about marketing – the perception that the language choice leaves in your mind. The phrase “healthier lifestyles for children” gives you the image of kids playing in a school playground at recess. The phrase “tackling childhood obesity” puts a very specific picture in one’s mind of the fact that there is “a problem” that needs “tackling” and what “the problem” looks like: fat kids. And really, do you ever want to contribute to a climate that encourages looking at or treating any child as if they’re a problem?

There’s also the issue of how we tackle the problem, if we are among those who see a problem. I recently saw a special on The Today Show where a woman was proposing giving different meals to the “overweight” kid in the family, and giving the “skinny” kid the “treat-esque” meal. I was literally – literally disgusted. I’m almost certain that there are people who think this is a good idea, but here’s the reality of it all – both kids should be eating the same meal. Why? Because a healthy meal will help everyone’s weight stabilize – if someone needs to gain, if someone needs to lose, it will stabilize it. If one child shouldn’t be drinking sugary pink milk, then no child should be drinking it.

This is mildly indicative of the “languaging problem” that Let’s Move is accused of: instead of encouraging healthy living and more nutritive environments for all children, one could infer that the only ones who need to be taught healthier habits are the overweight children… because they wear their “problem” visibly. So let’s suppose that you have a kid who’s easily 20lbs overweight, who has a 1yr older sister who is maybe 10lbs underweight. At the dinner table, the two have visibly different meals. If you don’t think, the next time those two get into a sibling battle, that the “that’s why you have to eat the fat kid meals!” joke won’t come up – because, remember, kids are cruel – you’re fooling yourself.

And suppose that the mentality of “fat kid meals” is a pervasive one. Suppose a state like Georgia – a state that, apparently, thinks that shooting video of overweight children and putting them on billboards makes sense – decides to start offering up “fat kid meals” at lunch. The line between “preventing overweight children from becoming more overweight” and “punishing the fat kids for being fat” looks a little thin – hell, it’s also not too far from “rewarding the thin kids for not being fat.”

Children need to eat. Children need to burn energy. Both of these elements, together, foster growth. They’re important. However, there’s a certain point in a human’s life where the growth process slows down considerably, and eating habits need to be a little less “habit” and a little more “mindful.” Thin children who never learn how to eat healthily – children who are allowed to eat junk their entire lives simply because they never became overweight – become overweight adults with horrible ingrained habits. We cannot ignore that. Talking to kids in terms of what’s healthy or not – regardless of whether or not they like the foods, and regardless of whether or not they ever give up the unhealthy foods – still gives them a clear delineation between what “healthy” is and is not. It gives them their own barometer for when they go off to college and are unleashed on the hell that is… the college food court.

Having said all that, you’d think I’m anti-”childhood obesity movements.” I’m not… at least, not just yet. The reality is that adults do need to talk about these things. We do need to be able to get past that frantic feeling of “oh, I need to tend to you because you’re getting too big” and realize that it’s necessary for both kids to grow up and regulate their health properly. The reality of this is, even if this was shrouded in secrecy and only discussed with other adults…. we still have to trust those adults to get beyond their own biases and attitudes about being overweight to treat those kids like, well, kids. We still have to trust them to remember that bullying and joking on kids about something they cannot change overnight is wrong, and to not tacitly condone it. Can we always do that?

It’s hard to impart that feeling of sensitivity to adults who know that we do need to make sure that all of our children are healthy, because we’re so used to simply targeting people who “look like they need help” (read: fat people.) I can see both sides of the issue – although I took considerably more time explaining the argument against it, I’m still not completely sold – and think both sides are valid, but I have to wonder: is there a way to incorporate some size-sensitivity into a message that helps everyone learn healthier habits and, inadvertently, a little weight management? Or do you think this is all blown out of proportion?

The “Let’s Move” Campaign: Is Childhood Obesity Talk Going Too Far? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Infographic: “The Childhood Obesity Epidemic”
2. “Let’s Move” Pairs With The NBA For New Commercial
3. The AJC Asks: Do You Talk “Skinny,” But Eat “Fat?”

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 25 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: childhood obesity, first lady michelle obama, first lady obama, flotus, let's move, obesity

Harvard University child obesity expert Dr. David Ludwig’s recent claim that some parents should lose custody of their severely obese children has sparked outrage among families and professionals across the country.

The national outcry led one family to share how its personal experience with the matter damaged their lives.

Ludwig, an obesity expert at Children’s Hospital Boston and associate professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, shared his divisive idea in an opinion piece that ran in the Journal of the American Medical Association Wednesday: that state intervention can serve in the best interest of extremely obese children, of which there’re about 2 million across the United States.

“In severe instances of childhood obesity, removal from the home may be justifiable, from a legal standpoint, because of imminent health risks and the parents’ chronic failure to address medical problems,” Ludwig co-wrote with Lindsey Murtagh, a lawyer and researcher at Harvard’s School of Public Health.

The topic has quickly generated controversy, and the majority of experts contacted by ABC News disagreed with Ludwig and Murtagh’s ideas.

Dr. David Katz, founder of the Yale Prevention Center, said that there was no evidence that the state would do a better job of feeding children than their parents.

Dr. David Orentlicher, co-director of Hall Center for Law and Health at Indiana University of School Law, also disagreed, saying that based on past instances, child protective service agencies might be far too quick to place overweight children in foster care.

Mind you, I’m the mother of a little girl who “exercises” around the house and, afterwords, asks you to “touch her muscles!” That being said, I’m also a mother who was pretty overweight as a child. Looking back on what my life was like, the only difference between my mother and I was the fact that she wasn’t overweight. She ate the exact same way I did.

Let me backtrack. I know who David Ludwig is, and he gets my respect. Do I understand where he’s coming from? Absolutely. Parents who display an unwillingness to do what needs to be done for their child – be it food, adequate shelter, etc – need to be assessed. However… I feel like there’s a part of this that he’s missing, simply because of the phrase “In severe instances of childhood obesity, removal from the home may be justifiable, from a legal standpoint, because of imminent health risks and the parents’ chronic failure to address medical problems,” here.

I’ve said this before:

in a lot of cases, the kids are overweight because the parents are overweight, as well. No parent [who takes proper care of their child regardless of weight issues] intentionally wants to jeopardize their child’s livelihood. In a lot of cases, the child’s weight is a mirror of the weight of the parents, and is simply living out the consequences of the parents’ behavior. It’s not an issue of abuse, unless you want to say that the parents are abusing themselves, as well. (And if you were to say that, I’d implore you to remember – it’s very rare that people even acknowledge sugar/food addiction as a legitimate addiction at all, so you’d be hard pressed to get anyone to understand that.)

Excerpted from Is Obesity A Form Of Child Abuse? | A Black Girl’s Guide To Weight Loss

And you know what? I amend that. The parent doesn’t have to be overweight at all. The parent simply has to believe that “the key to weight loss” is a matter of will power, or that you can have “everything in moderation,” or any other of the foolish marketing slogans we hear every single day. That’s enough to make a parent decide that, no, they don’t have to change the food that’s available in the house; no, there’s no problem with how they live at all. The problem is simply their child’s ability to control themselves… they’ve got no will power. If following the typical weight loss advice can leave us with a 60% obese population, surely it’d leave our children in equally dire straits.

There’s also the matter of leaving our children in the hands of our government. Suppose we did agree to this. Is there any evidence that the government knows how to feed our children? Have you looked at a school lunch program near you?

I didn’t think so.

For Ludwig to be so connected to Robert Lustig, whose work on sugar is easily a cult classic on the Internet and has been chronicled on this blog, and not know about sugar, its harmful effects and how prevalent it is in our current food supply is amazing. For him to be an expert on obesity and have, seemingly, no desire to acknowledge food addiction… is mind-boggling. To not know of these things, yet suggest something so drastic as removing children from their homes… well, it leaves me sad about the state of our country’s knowledge of food and their bodies.

As I said before,

…and really, that’s my point. Removing a child from a home that has the potential to be much healthier with a little bit of education is ludicrous. If you’re going to reach into someone’s home, let it be to offer a hand of support and resource. It’s much more likely that the whole family could use the help, so if we’re going to intervene, that’s the way to do it. If you remove a child from the home and place them in foster care, I’m assuming we’re putting them in a home that’s already been educated on how to care for the child? I’m assuming each of these homes has been taught weight maintenance procedures? Why not simply teach the child in the comfort of their own home and family on how to handle these issues?

Excerpted from Is Obesity A Form Of Child Abuse? | A Black Girl’s Guide To Weight Loss

Thoughts?

Source: Childhood Obesity: A Call For Parents To Lose Custody

Revered Obesity Expert: “Obese Children Should Be Removed From Homes” is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Half Of America Slated To Become OBESE By 2030
2. Video Vault: We’re Not Buying It – A Quick Look At Marketing Aimed At Children
3. The Effect Of Excess Sugar On Children’s Teeth

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 13 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: children, obesity

Image: Whole Foods Market in the East Village of New York, a Creative Commons Attribution (2.0) image from shankbone's photostream

You know, I spent an entire week writing about shopping at grocery stores and how to get the most bang for your buck.. but it’d be wrong of me to fail to acknowledge that access to those kinds of stores is a privilege. I mean, thinking of all the options and opportunities that I have to get what my daughter and I need.. but it wasn’t always that way.

I can remember being very young – maybe around age 5 – and going to my Grandmother’s house every day as my Mother would go to work. I cling to these memories because she passed away when I was about 10. As my Mother was always working like a dog to care for me, Grandma pretty much raised me during those years.

Grandma, quite frankly, lived in the projects during the majority of the time she spent watching me. I hated fighting the other kids (and hell, let’s be real – my other cousins and Uncles) for the TV, so I was always outside playing or reading when I wasn’t in school. I mean, I was gone, man. Didn’t really love the other kids in the neighborhood – and Grandma knew that – but she wasn’t about to let me grow up “by myself,” so to speak. I guess after raising 7 kids of her own by herself (her husband, my Grandfather, passed away too soon), she knew what she was doing.

For me, my thing was always asking my Uncles for $0.50. Two quarters was all I needed to creep across the street, grab a bag of potato chips and a Big Red pop. That’s all I wanted. In fact, if I’m not mistaken, that served as lunch some days. It wasn’t every day that I had to enjoy the …deliciousness of a Dorito, because one of the houses in the projects was devoted to offering up free lunch.

Ahh, yes. Free lunch. The equivalent of a lunchable with a carton of milk. All the kids in the projects would come running at a quarter to noon because if you were late, you were out of luck! You got your two pieces of bread, your piece of bologna, your packet of mustard, a piece of cheese, two cookies and chocolate milk. I can remember free lunch days being the only days I got chocolate milk. Grandma just… could never keep stuff like that in the house. Everyone would always beat me to it.

I can also remember spending summertime, as a child, in Selma, AL with my great Grandmother. She, who was and is still anti-processed foods, gave me these fantastic memories of playing in her garden and watching her tomatoes, squash and lettuce every day. I even remember her neighbor, Mr. Sandman, who made his own vanilla ice cream – in my mind’s tongue, I can still taste it. Whenever Aunt Sissy (for anyone unfamiliar with proper Southern diction, that “Aunt” is actually pronounced “Ain’t“) didn’t get to me first, he was always stuffing me with something fresh from his stash. A summer of squash, fried green tomatoes, corn pancakes and other dope-yet-somehow-still-not-fattening delicacies was how I… “got by.”

A whole community of folks who were pretty much used to only having each other to “get by,” and used to being reduced to only what they could get access to in order to make it. I mean, keep it real – if you can’t afford to buy a $3 carton of ice cream, you can certainly grab some ice, salt, vanilla extract and milk from your fridge and make your own, right? My Aunt Sissy, who is looking forward to her 100th birthday today… is still tending to her garden and frying the hell out of some green tomatoes, no doubt.

Why the trip down memory lane? This:

In the Seattle area, a region with an average obesity rate of about 20 percent, only about 4 percent of shoppers who filled their carts at Whole Foods Market stores were obese, compared with nearly 40 percent of shoppers at lower-priced Albertsons stores.

That’s likely because people willing to pay $6 for a pound of radicchio are more able to afford healthy diets than people stocking up on $1.88 packs of pizza rolls to feed their kids, the study’s lead author suggested.

“If people wanted a diet to be cheap, they went to one supermarket,” said Adam Drewnowski, a University of Washington epidemiology professor who studies obesity and social class. “If they wanted their diet to be healthy, they went to another supermarket and spent more.”

The findings held true for the three highest-priced grocery stores in the Seattle region, including Whole Foods, where an average market basket of food cost between $370 and $420, and obesity rates went no higher than about 12 percent.

By contrast, at the area’s three lowest-priced stores, including Albertsons, the same basket of food cost between $225 and $280, and obesity rates went no lower than about 22 percent. – [found via "Skinny People Shop At Whole Foods"]

I keep thinking of my Grandma who, on her fixed income and the money she made from sitting for children, would’ve had quite the tough time trying to feed us all on the pricier diet. Conversely, my Aunt Sissy wouldn’t have cared. Her stuff was just as good as theirs… maybe even better since it grew by her hand and with her love.

But wait – there’s more:

His research team studied 2,001 shoppers in the Seattle area between December 2008 and March 2009, tracking their choice of supermarkets and comparing it with their education, income and obesity rates. They measured obesity by asking consumers to report their height and weight, then calculating body mass index. People with a BMI higher than 30 were identified as obese.

Drewnowski was quick to note that the study focused only on Seattle, which has an obesity rate much lower than the U.S. average of about 34 percent. He doesn’t claim that the same rates would bear out in other cities.

But, he said, it’s likely that similar patterns might be found elsewhere: Wealthier people who shopped at higher-end stores would be thinner, while poorer people who shopped at cheaper stores would be fatter.

It’s not a matter of availability, Drewnowski said. All of the stores in his study stocked a wide range of nutritious food, including plenty of fruits and vegetables.

Instead, he contends it’s because healthy, low-calorie foods cost more money and take more effort to prepare than processed, high-calorie foods. In a separate study two years ago, Drewnowski estimated that a calorie-dense diet cost $3.52 a day compared with $36.32 a day for a low-calorie diet.

I just.. I don’t know. Aside from the fact that I have a few questions about some of the numbers this study offers up, this is a bitter pill to swallow. And let’s face it. Considering the locations and resources that a vast majority of the Black community has to cope with, where does that leave us as a collective? Two thirds of us overweight? Dying of wholly preventable diseases?

I look at my Mother now. Successful by her own hand. A beneficiary of her very hard work who, after sticking with that same company for several decades, has access to opportunities and options that are incomparable to what her Mother – or her Mother’s Mother, for that matter.. regardless of whether or not she would’ve made use of them – would’ve had. I imagine my Grandma would be proud of her for having resources she did not, and hope that she was taking advantage of ‘em. My Aunt Sissy, though, would probably tell her to save her money and grow her own damn tomatoes, already.

At this point, all I have are questions. Is this the bitter reality of society and, mind you, Capitalism? The more money you have, the more access you have to better opportunities? Or is it a matter of not taking advantage of the community and resources you have and making it work? Or hell.. do we even know whether or not people know they have options and resources to use? If the disparaties are caused by money, how do we make it easier? If the problem is time, how do we make it quicker? If the issue is that it’s too daunting a task, how do we fix that?

‘Cause really, at this rate… without effort, movement, education and progress? We ain’t gon’ make it.

Skinny People Shop At Whole Foods: A Poor Kid’s Perspective is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Cleaning Up The Happy Meal: Do Toys Advertise Unhealthy Foods To Kids?
2. Why Your Kids (And Probably You Too) Don’t Like Veggies
3. Study: “There Are Good Foods And Bad Foods”

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 42 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: capitalism, family, grocery shopping, obesity, poverty, studies, tradition, university of washington, whole foods

Monika Sumpter did what many women dream of — she set a goal to lose weight and dropped 50 pounds.

Despite losing all of that weight, her ratio of fat to muscle was around 25 percent, 5 percent from where she started and dangerously close to what some researchers say is an unhealthy situation.

“I was just shocked. I thought that it was a lot lower, and I thought that I was healthy,” Sumpter said.

There are others like Sumpter. As many as 30 million Americans who are considered average weight may actually have what scientists call normal weight obesity, according to a recent study by the Mayo Clinic.

The study, which followed 6,171 Americans over nine years, found 20 percent to 30 percent of people considered normal weight still have an alarmingly high percentage of body fat.

Now, when this was brought up on the FB page, it was brushed off as just being a reason for the health industry to call more people “fat.” Considering the number of weight loss drugs vying for FDA approval right now, I don’t doubt that. However, I don’t think this should be brushed off so quickly. I just think there’s more to it than that.

The article goes on:

The Mayo Clinic says that generally, women should have a body fat percentage below 30 percent, while men should have a fat to muscle ratio of less than 20 percent to 25 percent.

Sumpter, a 34-year-old mother of one, is 5 feet 8 inches tall and weighs about 140 pounds, which is in the normal weight range for her height.

However, if 42 of those pounds — or 30 percent of her weight — are made up of fat, Sumpter would actually be considered normal weight obese.

Traditionally, terms like “overweight” and “obese” and “normal” in regards to weight are applied using the body mass index (BMI), and I’ve already shared my thoughts on that. What I also said back then was that I think its useless, especially considering how the body fat percentage is a much more valuable quantifier of one’s health. A body carrying an excess of muscle functions differently than a body carrying fat, and to ignore that very real issue is to ignore the real reason we use the BMI in the first place – a means of gauging ones quality of life:

I, personally, find the body fat percentage to be far more valuable in gauging my physical wellness. The body fat percentage estimates what percentage of your body appears to be purely fat. The “average American female’s” body fat percentage is somewhere around 32%, while the typical athlete is around 22%.

The bf% is a much more valuable number because it acknowledges that those in the overweight category may simply be muscular, and those on the thinner side may still be hiding some fat that needs to be addressed. There is no cheating or hiding behind “unfairness” with the body fat percentage. A caliper or a hydrostatic test is usually used to measure bf% – I use an electrical machine at my gym – but there’s also this quick and dirty calculator that I use to keep track, and it only requires a tape measure. You’ll get two numbers – take an average between the two numbers, and you’ll have a better and much more valuable estimate. If body fat is the issue (not muscle), then getting numbers that address specifically that definitely helps. [source]

I’m not sure how to say what I’m thinking… so I’m just gonna say it. This is why the scale doesn’t matter as much as we like to make it matter. It doesn’t matter how much you weigh; if anything, it matters how much fat you are carrying. Petite women are often pedestaled as being some ideal, but… if one third of her physical makeup is pure fat, what’s ideal about that? Being cute? Not if her health is in question… and let’s be real – the lifestyle that allows one to consistently maintain 30% bodyfat is what the issue is, here, not simply the fat itself.

Speaking of which, the article goes on:

That diagnosis means a higher risk of obesity-related diseases, such diabetes, high cholesterol and heart disease, which is the No. 1 killer of women.

“Women with normal weight obesity, meaning those who have high fat and a normal weight have a two times increased risk for death or dying from heart problems or a stroke,” said Dr. Francisco Lopez Jimenez, who led the Mayo Clinic study.

A diagnosis of being “normal weight obese” means higher risk of obesity-related illnesses because…. of the lifestyle! Not the weight. Not the weight. Not the weight.

Not the weight.

A lifestyle that allows one to maintain 30% (or more) body fat means that the same lifestyle is likely to contain high sugar quantities (thus, the diabetes), too much animal products and by-products (thus, the cholesterol) and too much salt (thus, the heart disease…and many other things, I’m sure.) It is about the living, not the weight.

This is what I presumed “normal weight obese” referred to in the beginning: a person of normal weight carrying the symptoms of a lifestyle usually experienced by someone who is clinically obese. And, in many ways, I believe that’s an appropriate definition.

I’d be lying if I didn’t admit that I was curious, though. I know that there’s a slew of weight loss drugs going up for FDA approval right now, so does that have something to do with the push to have more people clinically defined as obese? I mean, more people defined as obese means more people qualifying for their insurance paying for their weight loss drugs, right?

I’m a cynic (and a businesswoman), so clearly I believe the two are thoroughly linked. I’m also someone who doesn’t want to throw the baby out with the bathwater here, either. I do think there’s a reason to have more people defined as obese, but so long as everyone isn’t being pushed to take medications they’re unsure of and instead opts to use this push to be more cognizant of their health… I can appreciate the awareness. Telling people that are 130lbs at 32%bf that they’re “all good” is just as bizarre as telling someone who’s 190lbs at 20%bf that they “need to lose.”

I also feel like this kind of awareness would make for more tolerance of the term “fat,” because apparently more of us are “fat” than we’d like to admit. I’m just sayin’. It might even stop some of that fat-bashing we see all the time. If more doctors were aware of the issue of body fat percentage over basic scale numbers, then they might be less inclined to harbor a bias against those who are “visually obese.” There might be less fat prejudice.

More from the article:

Sumpter changed her workout routine, adding more weight-bearing exercises to build lean muscle mass instead of only doing calorie-burning cardio.

“Resistance training is the key,” said Sumpter, who is now certified as a personal trainer and works at Equinox in New York. “There are three key components to a healthy lifestyle, which is healthy eating habits, resistance training to build muscle and of course cardio to burn calories and for a healthy heart, but it’s a combination of all three.”

Today she weighs 20 pounds more than her lowest weight, but her body fat percentage is down to 14 percent.

I’ve always said I’m not an advocate for “thin.” That’s not what my weight loss was/is about, and that’s not why my site is here. I’m shooting to compete in a figure competition… clearly, “thin” ain’t my thing. My goal is to figure out how to make “fit” a part of my every day life, and if I can show one more person that “fit” should be the goal, not “thin,” then I feel like this site has done some form of good. It is suspect, to me, that these opinions are gaining attention right around when all these weight loss drugs are vying for approval… but I cannot deny the fact that they have a point. Thin and fit certainly are not the same thing (the same goes for “thin” and “healthy”), and if it takes a term like “normal weight obesity” to call our attention to that fact, then I’m all for it.

What do you think? Let’s hear it!

Normal Weight Obesity: Another Medical Scam? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Identifying A Scam: Religion-Based Weight Loss Scams
2. “World’s Fattest Woman” Too Overweight For Medical Help?
3. The Side-Effects of Obesity: “Overweight Is The New Norm”

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2012. | Permalink | 6 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: big pharma, bmi, body fat percentage, body mass index, FDA, government, health care, normal weight obesity, obesity, weight loss drugs, weight loss pills

I’m not gonna lie – this is more for me than it is for you, dear reader, because I have a bad habit of running back to foods that are laden with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and usually don’t realize what I’m doing to myself until I’m halfway through the package. As if my mind says “Nooooo! Don’t look at the ingredients li– aww, damn.”

Conventional wisdom (and your brain) tells you, “if it feels good, do it.” Well, you know how sometimes, things feel a little too good? Like, so good, it’s downright sinful? Rest assured, you probably have no business doing it. My favorite piece of cheesecake? Sinful. My favorite Tira Mi Su? Sinful. The BBQ sauce I just tossed out the other day because I was clenching the bottle trying to understand why common sense wouldn’t let me put it down? Sinful! (By the way, all three of them contain HFCS.)

Having said all that, let me introduce you to HFCS. Actually, I’ll let the Corn Refiners Association do it:

Now… I laugh, only because I work in marketing. Ads like this serve one purpose: damage control. So when I see something like this, my first thought is “what happened to make the corn farmers toss money at the small screen?” They’re essentially mocking the very people they’re targeting — those who know it’s bad for them, but aren’t able to quickly express why — and still expecting to win them over. Or… is this a stealthy method of giving “comebacks” to HFCS fans to use when those hoity toity picky eaters get on their soapbox about Cheetos and Capri Suns? Who goes to those kinds of lengths when everything is ok? …when the accusations are baseless?

So… digging, I go.

First, let’s look at that ad up there. “My hair dresser says that sugar is healthier than high fructose corn syrup.” Follow that up with the witty retort of, “Wow! You get your hair done by a doctor?” [insert laughter]

You and I BOTH know that it doesn’t require an MD to be able to study and understand a pros and cons list. If I show you a list that says “fattening,” and another list that says “leaves you prone to diabetes, inflates your appetite, and apparently can be linked to high blood pressure,” you’re going to be able to easily identify which one is going to leave you worse off, right?

Do you need to explain to someone that High Fructose Corn Syrup fiddles with leptin, a hormone in the human body that aids in regulating the appetite, in a way that prevents you from being able to control your hunger? Do you need to be able to explain to someone that HFCS screws with your body’s ability to process insulin? (Just in case you’re wondering, that works like this: since HFCS is metabolized as fat quicker than regular sugar once it hits your liver, this process triggers something called non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. This process leads to insulin resistance and type II diabetes.) It isn’t enough that you know something makes you uncomfortable and you don’t want to partake in it. You have to be a doctor now to speak ill of it?

Well, let me tell y’all somethin’ – I’m no doctor, and I’ll still be damned if someone tells me that my own bad feelings aren’t enough to justify not wanting a chemistry experiment nourishing my body I was given. Period. You might get the mental judo chop for that one.

Let’s also talk about this moderation thing, here. Of course, HFCS is safe in moderation. At the same time, so are Doritos. The difference between the two is, well… do you know how many foods you eat each day contain HFCS? Let me put it to you like this: Soda? High Fructose Corn Syrup. “Processed Cheese Food?” HFCS. Jam, jelly, ketchup, BBQ sauce , “fruit juices,” Wonder bread (most breads, actually), eggos, pop tarts, cough syrup, and mayo? High Fructose Corn Syrup.Yes. Apparently, you have a better chance of escaping Doritos than you do HFCS.

I think I’ve named at least ONE thing that we all eat throughout the day. If not, then think about this: I’m sure you’ve had a McDonalds menu meal, right? The same corn that makes your HFCS feeds the cows that turn into your burgers, becomes the oil that cooks the fries and the syrup that sweetens the shakes and the sodas, and makes up 13 of the 38 ingredients in the Chicken McNuggets.  Now, think about “moderation.” How can you effectively moderate something that is everywhere and in everything? You can’t… and they know it. Your ability to gauge what “moderate use” is becomes swayed by the fact that it’s been in everything you ate that day. For those of you who use these foods regular and often, “HFCS in moderation” is pretty much… a joke.

Why is that, though? Why is it that you can’t escape this substance? In as few words as possible, here’s why.

Once upon a time, our government approved a plan that pretty much pays farmers to overproduce corn in America. Considering the basic principle of supply and demand (the more rare, the more expensive; the more common, the more cheap), that drives the price of corn down. Since they have this item in such abundance and so cheap, they come up with multiple ways to use it… hence HFCS. You, a food exec, have an extremely cheap item in your hands that makes food taste (or, at least appear to taste) better. Why not use this to your advantage? Stick some extra fat in certain foods to stretch out our supply… and when the taste is altered? Stick a little HFCS in there. Want to create a cheap juice? Find a “strawberry” flavor, some high fructose corn syrup, and water. Pow. Cost $0.50 to make, but watch me sell a giant jug of it for $2.50. I’m in there like swimwear. It’s just smart, business-wise.

Nutrition-wise, it’s doing nothing for you, the consumer. It’s empty calories. That means for all that you’re ingesting, there is no vitamin or nutritional value for any of it. At all. You should seek for all of your food to provide you a liiiiiiittle somethin’ in the end. Besides a gut, that is.

There’s one more point I want to bring up before I wrap this up… and that’s the point about rewards, gratification, and habit. HFCS tends to trigger a sort of… Pavlov’s dog syndrome, if you will.

To summarize briefly, a Russian scientist named Ivan Pavlov studied conditioned responses in dogs. In short, if you get in the habit of doing something and the SAME reward happens each time you do it, you begin to expect (or, in other words, you become conditioned) the reward before you’ve even done the action that brings the reward. In other words, if you know you love that BBQ sauce… if you see it, your body starts to experience the pleasure you get from it long before you taste it.. thus causing you to indulge. You want that good feeling again. It’s that simple.

Feels like I’m sticking you with a burden, right? That’s not my intention. I would love it if you could resolve a few things within yourself.

First, resolve that you’ll begin to phase out some of the unnecessary HFCS-filled foods in your life. If you overdo the mountain dew, consider packing it away… for good. If you love the ketchup or pancake syrups, look for something a little more natural. If you can’t afford the healthier option, shoot for a less expensive option. (In the case of the syrups, the healthier alternate that my grocery had cost an extra $4. So instead, I top my pancakes and french toast with a little confectioners sugar, $0.99, and fruit slices, $1.29. In the case of the ketchup, I simply stopped eating hot dogs… the one thing I couldn’t eat without ketchup.)

Then resolve that you’ve made the best decision for you, and no corny commercial or insulting advertisement will make you feel less comfortable with the decision you’ve made for yourself. Just like you don’t owe anyone any expanation for why you want to lose weight and eat healthier, you for damn sure don’t owe anyone any explanations for why you choose to phase High Fructose Corn Syrup out of your diet.

Lastly, like I’ve written before, resolve that this is a difficult lifestyle change — a lifetime lifestyle change and it will be bumpy at first. That’s perfectly okay. As long as you’re taking and following steps each day, you’ll be able to bet that you’re moving in the direction in which you need to go.

Be happy, be healthy!

High Fructose Corn Syrup: What’s The Big Deal? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Saturday Night Live Pokes Fun At High Fructose Corn Syrup
2. Another Reason To Ditch The High Fructose Corn Syrup
3. High Fructose Corn Syrup Wants New Name: Why You Shouldn’t Care

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2011. | Permalink | 32 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Fast Food, food labels, high fructose corn syrup, obesity, overeating, restaurants

Tanisha, who starred in "Too Fat For 15."

Tuesday, May 25th, 2011, Dr. Oz hosted an episode of The Dr. Oz Show where the topic of discussion was a round table, of sorts, asking whether or not obesity is a form of child abuse. Now, I didn’t catch it from the beginning – the DVR missed the first ten minutes or so – but considering what I caught, I have my fair share of concerns. (Besides, this blog post has a pretty good recap.) Since I missed the beginning, I don’t want to comment on the show, but I do have a few thoughts on the overall sentiment and the question in and of itself.

Apparently, this situation has happened before, already. A child went to the school nurse for a legitimate reason, and instead of the nurse calling the child’s parent… she called child protective services who then sent notices for the parent to appear in court. Since the parent had moved, she never saw the notices… and this resulted in her losing custody of her obese child.

I find it very interesting that, in a country where 70% of the population is clinically overweight – and even though “bodybuilders/marathoners/athletes are overweight too,” the fact that it’s 70% leads me to believe that more than a few of those people are not, in fact, any of those three – that there is such little compassion for the struggle of weight management that we’d genuinely try to classify “letting your child become overweight” as a form of child abuse.

Mind you, we’re not talking the typical 30-40lbs overweight, however we are still talking about something we consider to be such a serious and drastic issue that we’d remove a child from their home, cause undue stress to the child and basically tell them that the reason they can’t see Mommy anymore is because they’re too fat. Trust me – if a child would flip a divorce into being “about them,” a child will develop insane body issues once they learn the truth behind why they were pulled from their home.

I write a lot about compassion – and more on that tomorrow – because I genuinely believe it’s a key component to being able to continue on in fitness. It’s hard to keep challenging yourself only to watch you fail that day, and expect to keep on challenging yourself with the hopes that you’re one step closer to succeeding tomorrow. That’s hard, and for someone who is overweight, it’s very likely that they’re already hard on themselves. Hell, for anyone new to fitness or someone who’s afraid of embracing working out, it’s far more likely that they will expect results much quicker than they’d come – especially with strength training, because it takes a lil’ while to see any gains – and they’d consider themselves a failure instead of allowing themselves patience and support. Compassion is vital.

I remember when I went back to my old gym – yes, the one I wrote about here – last year to speak to the owner. I wanted to show him that yes, after I left, I kept going and didn’t stop. That wasn’t anywhere near as interesting as the fact that I was watching what appeared to be a girl no older than 10 be trained by him. He was going out of his way to make the entire session out to be about fitness and being more capable of participating in activity, not “being pretty” or “losing that gut” or any of the other cornball crap that trainers tell their clients when they’re trying to get ‘em to “dig deep.”

Children are fragile… and observant. If my four year old can catch Mommy flexing her muscles in the mirror, then guess what? She’ll walk around flexing her muscles, too. (And yes, she does.) If a four year old hears Mommy talking enough about “being fat,” then guess what? They’ll start paying extra attention to “fat” on any body… including their own.

I bring this up because when I think of a country where at least half of us are clinically considered overweight, apparently against their will, I think of what mssages we pass on to our children. If we’re “fat” ourselves and have no compassion for “fat” people, what do we pass on to our kids?

This was a point that I did see on Dr. Oz’s show – in a lot of cases, the kids are overweight because the parents are overweight, as well. No parent [who takes proper care of their child regardless of weight issues] intentionally wants to jeopardize their child’s livelihood. In a lot of cases, the child’s weight is a mirror of the weight of the parents, and is simply living out the consequences of the parents’ behavior. It’s not an issue of abuse, unless you want to say that the parents are abusing themselves, as well. (And if you were to say that, I’d implore you to remember – it’s very rare that people even acknowledge sugar/food addiction as a legitimate addiction at all, so you’d be hard pressed to get anyone to understand that.)

There were two girls that Dr. Oz brought out, apparently “success stories” from “Too Fat for Fifteen.” One girl’s mother appeared to be overweight right along with her daughter, and the other girl’s mother was relatively fit which made her feel less-than, further compelling her to overeat. She ran to food for that “comforting” feeling. The overweight mother admitted, openly, that she didn’t like to cook and apparently frequented her local fast food joints for dinner. The thinner mom, who obviously – at least, to me – felt some kind of way about her daughter’s weight regardless of what she said on TV, might’ve been more fit, but you have to question what’s going on in the home to compel the daughter to rush to food for comfort, instead of the people very present in her life every day.

Now, Dr. Oz’s point was that since these two girls were successful by leaving their homes and going to a “wellness camp” to learn about food and weight management, that maybe this is the answer. I disagree. Why? Because the children cannot live at the camp permanently. They eventually have to go home and return to the very same environment that caused them to gain in the first place. That girl still had to go home to a Mom who buys fast food for dinner instead of cooks. The other girl still had to go home to family she couldn’t talk to whenever she became stressed. These things don’t go away. They don’t disappear. And while an adult might develop a sense of will power quicker, I doubt whether or not a teenager or adolescent has the mental agility to do the same without reverting back to those bad habits for the duration of the time they’re in their parents’ homes. Talk to the family, let them know they need to be a judgment-free resource to their child, so that she can get her comfort in the form of hugs, not harmful junk food. Counseling, educating… these things are valuable.

…and really, that’s my point. Removing a child from a home that has the potential to be much healthier with a little bit of education is ludicrous. If you’re going to reach into someone’s home, let it be to offer a hand of support and resource. It’s much more likely that the whole family could use the help, so if we’re going to intervene, that’s the way to do it. If you remove a child from the home and place them in foster care, I’m assuming we’re putting them in a home that’s already been educated on how to care for the child? I’m assuming each of these homes has been taught weight maintenance procedures? Why not simply teach the child in the comfort of their own home and family on how to handle these issues?

I guess that really, what I’m saying is that weight is a complex, multi-layered issue where any state involvement should result in education and support, not splitting up more homes and potentially putting kids in homes (if they, in fact, actually go to a home) that know just as little about wellness as the one they were first in. So no, in my opinion obesity is not inherently child abuse, because everything from money to marketing has left us with inaccurate perceptions of what “healthier lifestyles” looks like and no one has any interest in flat out stating what that’s supposed to look like. Address that with the entire household, and watch those families thank you in the end.

Is Obesity A Form Of Child Abuse? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Do You, Or A Child You Know, Have Food Allergies?
2. Revered Obesity Expert: “Obese Children Should Be Removed From Homes”
3. The “Let’s Move” Campaign: Is Childhood Obesity Talk Going Too Far?

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2011. | Permalink | 8 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: adolescents, child abuse, children, dr oz, foster care, obesity, teenagers

Is it really possible that using a credit card can make you fat? Cornell researchers compared shoppers who used cash at checkout time versus those customers who used credit cards.

“Both groups buy the same amount of potatoes, the same amount of broccoli, the same amount of essentials, but if you’re paying with a credit card, you’re more likely to buy junk than if you’re paying cash,” said Smart Money magazine columnist Jack Hough.

Both groups paid attention to the price and nutritional value of the items they were buying. It’s just that those using cash found paying for groceries far more painful, so they didn’t give in to impulse buying, at the last minute all those goodies seductively displayed close to the cash register.

So what about debit cards? Do people use them more like cash or credit cards when buying junk food?

“People with cash buy very little junk food. People with debit cards buy more and people with credit cards by the most. So if you’re looking to cut out junk and save money, skip debit and credit cards and pay cash,” Hough said.

Those shopping around New York City on Monday said this new study could help in the battle of the bulge.

“I watch my credit card bills go up and I watch my weight go up,” Bill Taylor said.

“You’re more likely to follow impulses I guess if you’re not dependent on what’s actually in your pocket,” Benjamin Bradham added.

“People don’t think of the credit card as cash so they buy more. I don’t know. I just like to use my debit card because I feel it controls me a little better,” Stephanie Sullivan said.

Credit cards make up 40 percent of all purchases, with the average American carrying 4.4 credit cards in his or her wallet.

The study, published in the Journal of Consumer Research, found that just as cash for payment has fallen by a third in the last two decades, obesity has been on the rise among Americans. [source]

How does this fit in for you? I know that, for me, I only carried cash in the beginning. (Actually, I have a funny story about this to share one day.) I wanted to limit myself in what I could and would purchase, so I only brought cash (and no debit card) to the grocery. It felt like bringing access to additional “money” was my green light to act a fool at the grocery. I had to cut that out.

Check out the clip:

How about you? Does this ring true for you? Do you have any thoughts? Let’s hear ‘em!

Can Credit Cards Make You Fatter? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. How Does A Farmer’s Market Accept Credit, Debit or EBT Cards? Info Inside!
2. “The French Are Getting Fatter, Too.”
3. Stupid Study: Why Black Women Are Fatter, Dumber, More Manly And Less Attractive Than Others

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2011. | Permalink | 17 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: cornell university, credit cards, junk food, money, obesity, study

Meet Drew, a personal trainer with a rather insane idea: hes going to make himself obese so he can learn what its like to come down from it all. As someone who has been there, Id be lying if I didnt admit that what hes doing is terrifying to me. I know what it takes for an individual to get 70lbs overweight – as Drew currently is now, see photo above – and considering what hes risking physically as well as mentally and emotionally, I worry for him. The link is an interview of Drew, sharing a bit of his thoughts on his journey beyond obesity. Its worth the click.

There are some incredible points here that I think make for interesting note:

Hes going from having a relatively fit lifestyle to the standard American diet (ironically, referred to as SAD), and in turn his blood pressure went up. A big part of this is those unhealthy foods he mentioned as being a part of his diet: sugary cereals, granola bars, juices, white breads, white pastas, sodas, crackers, chips, frozen dinners, processed mac-n-cheese. All high-refined-carb foods loaded with salt.

His quote: [After I eat those foods,] I feel like crap later on and I get hungry again and crave those same foods. Sounds familiar.

His quote: I definitely feel addicted to these foods. In the beginning, I didnt like soda but now I cant go a day without, otherwise Ill get [withdrawals.] Ill be extremely interested in how he gets beyond this issue, because for a lot of BGG2WL readers, the withdrawals from what their bodies are used to is often the most difficult part of converting to clean eating.

Drew’s story will be blogged at Fit 2 Fat 2 Fit.

Your thoughts? I know Ill be paying close attention to this.

Personal Trainer Chooses To Gain 70+ Pounds And Go From Fit To Fat To Fit is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Biggest Loser Trainer Sued For Pushing Supplements?
2. 400 Pounds Lost? No Surgery? Stop Lying!
3. Restaurant Patron Leaves Tip: You Could Stand To Lose A Few Pounds

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2011. | Permalink | 18 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: emotional eating, fit 2 fat 2 fit, obesity, personal trainers, transformations

Your very presence is telling young girls that it’s okaaaaaaaaay to be overweight. This is not something young girls should strive for! They shouldn’t be thinking it’s okay to be fat! Men will not want you if you’re fat!

Let me back track to what caused me to begin this rant.

Gabourey Sidibe – again, with her – is rumored to be working with Bobbi Brown. Why? Because of this:

Perhaps the most surprising arrival of the night was “Precious” star Gabourey Sidibe, who said she had just finished “The Big C” for Showtime. Her connection to the party was apparently through Bobbi Brown, who had done the actress’s makeup for the Golden Globes. There was talk that Sidibe had been in the Bobbi Brown offices that day, discussing the possibility of doing a color cosmetics collection, but no one involved with the company would confirm the report. [source]

That’s reason one. Reason two?

MTV’s new twitter jockey (a position Gregg was awarded by winning the popular vote… emphasis on the popular vote part), Gabi Gregg of Young, Fat & Fabulous, has been the subject of conversations that include sentiments like “roping in the young overweight crowd,” as if she couldn’t have possibly won because she’s.. well, worthy of the position… or because the majority voted for her? (brief sidenote: Congratulations!)

There are countless more – the Lane Bryant incident where networks were refusing to play their advertisements, American Apparel employees comfortably proclaiming that the plus-sized market is “not their demographic” – but as of what I’ve seen in the past 72 hours? Um, I’ve got hairs standing up on the back of my neck. There seems to be this big issue with seeing women larger than, approximately, a size 10 in the media. Allowances tend to be made for women playing roles of elder age, but us 39-and-unders? Pfft.

Of course, now, when I ask the question of “Well, why is there such a problem with seeing plus-sized women in the media, anyway?” You know what answer I get?

“Seeing plus-sized women on TV tells people and confirms to people that it’s okay to be fat… and it’s not. People shouldn’t want to be fat, or think it’s ‘okay’ to be fat.”

So, wait. Wait, wait, wait. Can we analyze what’s wrong with this? Let me take it in three prongs.

If seeing plus-sized women on TV implies that it’s “okay to be fat,” does that mean that that would hold up “being plus-sized” as an ideal? If that’s the case, then what does seeing rail thin women (not just thin, but rail thin) on TV imply? That being rail thin is the ideal?

Now, let’s look at this for a moment. TV is paid for by advertising. TV networks can charge premiums for advertising space based on how popular a TV show is. If the general public has an attitude that says “we don’t want to see X,” the networks aren’t going to show you “X.” If you don’t want to see it, you won’t watch it, and they can’t make money from it. If TV networks learn that you don’t want to see plus-sized women on your screen… they’re not going to show them. If TV is only responding to the general public’s feelings about “overweight women,” how can TV set an ideal for anything? If TV is so controlled by financial interests (as are all companies), why would we, the general-freaking-public, allow them to set any ideals for us?

I can’t with that. I’m on to my next question.

Suppose TV does, by some odd stretch of the imagination, dictate what is and is not acceptable. What does this say to our young girls? Those girls who wanted Jennifer Aniston’s haircut (I grew up in the Friends era, sue me) or gawked at the latest issue of [insert crummy pop magazine] staring at the bare boned hips of some young girl? The thin physique of whatever performer’s hot today? It’s never – never – an athlete’s figure that young girls crave, unless they, too, are athletes and are able to appreciate the muscular features (because, again, muscle is for men.) It’s always some woman with a baby face and a petite body, and our young girls are left questioning themselves and struggling with the desire to look like their body idols.

Why isn’t this equally problematic? We expect the notion of “keeping fat girls out of the limelight” to teach our girls to not “let themselves go,” but we’re okay with the idea that “keeping TV stars exclusively thin” gives our girls body image issues? Really? Why? Because bulimia is one of those dirty little secrets you don’t see unless you hear someone puking in a bathroom?

No, really –

Black girls were 50 percent more likely than white girls to exhibit bulimic behavior, including both binging and purging. About 2.6 percent of black girls were clinically bulimic, compared to 1.7 percent of white girls. Overall, approximately 2.2 percent of the girls surveyed were clinically bulimic, close to the national average.

Black girls scored an average of 17 percentage points higher than their white counterparts on the widely used medical index gauging of the severity of the bulimia, the researchers found.

Girls from families in the lowest income bracket were significantly more likely to experience bulimia than their wealthier peers.

Bulimia affected 1.5 percent of girls in households where at least one parent had a college degree.

For girls whose parents had a high school education or less, the rate of bulimia was more than double — 3.3 percent were bulimic. [source]

Why is this okay, and the alternative not? Since we’re clearly not discussing health or maintaining a healthy body image with our young girls… since we’re clearly letting the TV do the talking… why would this invoke a complaint about what’s on TV, instead of compel us to have discussions about health and body image with our young girls?

Again, I can’t even… I can’t. I have one last question, though.

Why the hell are we so impressionable? Why are we so afraid to think? Think about this for a second. We’re afraid of the TV telling us it’s okay to be fat. If the TV tells you to sell me your house for a dollar… are you going to do it?

We’re afraid of our kids being told that it’s okay to be fat?  Why aren’t we afraid to tell our kids to stop trying to be like what’s on TV? Why are we afraid to parent? Why not tell our kids to value their humanity more than what their body looks like? Why aren’t we telling our kids to stop paying so much attention to the TV? Why the hell are our kids watching so much TV to begin with?

We’re afraid of the TV telling us that it’s okay to be overweight. Not only do I question why what’s on the TV matters to us so much, but I question why we’d rather question what’s on the TV instead of why we pay such close attention to it.

I’m frustrated that we’d rather make this an issue of external blame instead of changing our internal philosophy. We’d rather make this about what’s on the boob tube instead of simply thinking for ourselves and doing our jobs as parents and guardians of our society. I’m saddened by the fact that, again, all this focus is on looks as opposed to health… and again, the mismatching of the two has resulted in turning people off to conversations about both.

All I can do is take care of myself, and my loved ones. I couldn’t care less what’s on the TV or in the ads, and while my little one is struggling with the idea that everything on TV isn’t as cracked up to be, we struggle together to get her to learn. My daughter won’t know why being “fat” matters, and she won’t know why being “skinny” matters, either. She’ll know the importance of being fit, active, healthy and happy… and if that leaves her with a curve somewhere, we’ll both be happy with it, TV be damned.

Fat Girls In The Media: Celebrating Obesity? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Why Don’t Obesity Programs Work For Young Black Girls?
2. Celebrating Motherhood
3. For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Eating Disorders When Dieting Wasn’t Enuf

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2011. | Permalink | 12 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: anorexia, binging, bulimia, culture, fat girls, media, obesity, overweight, parenting, purging, society, tv

Adult obesity rates increased in 16 states in the past year and did not decline in any state, according to F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America‘s Future 2011, a report from the Trust for America’s Health (TFAH) and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF).  Twelve states now have obesity rates above 30 percent. Four years ago, only one state was above 30 percent.

The obesity epidemic continues to be most dramatic in the South, which includes nine of the 10 states with the highest adult obesity rates. States in the Northeast and West tend to have lower rates. Mississippi maintained the highest adult obesity rate for the seventh year in a row, and Colorado has the lowest obesity rate and is the only state with a rate under 20 percent.

This year, for the first time, the report examined how the obesity epidemic has grown over the past two decades. Twenty years ago, no state had an obesity rate above 15 percent.Today, more than two out of three states, 38 total, have obesity rates over 25 percent, and just one has a rate lower than 20 percent. Since 1995, when data was available for every state, obesity rates have doubled in seven states and increased by at least 90 percent in 10 others. O

besity rates have grown fastest in Oklahoma, Alabama, and Tennessee, and slowest in Washington, D.C., Colorado, and Connecticut.

“Today, the state with the lowest obesity rate would have had the highest rate in 1995,” said Jeff Levi, Ph.D., executive director of TFAH. “There was a clear tipping point in our national weight gain over the last twenty years, and we can’t afford to ignore the impact obesity has on our health and corresponding health care spending.”

Obesity has long been associated with other severe health problems, including diabetes and high blood pressure. New data in the report show how rates of both also have risen dramatically over the last two decades. Since 1995, diabetes rates have doubled in eight states. The

n, only four states had diabetes rates above 6 percent.  Now, 43 states have diabetes rates over 7 percent, and 32 have rates above 8 percent. Twenty years ago, 37 states had hypertension rates over 20 percent. Now, every state is over 20 percent, with nine over 30 percent.

Racial and ethnic minority adults, and those with less education or who make less money, continue to have the highest overall obesity rates:

• Adult obesity rates for Blacks topped 40 percent in 15 states, 35 percent in 35 states, and 30 percent in 42 states and D.C.
• Rates of adult obesity among Latinos were above 35 percent in four states (Mississippi, North Dakota, South Carolina, and Texas) and at least 30 percent in 23 states.
• Meanwhile, rates of adult obesity for Whites topped 30 percent in just four states (Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, and West Virginia) and no state had a rate higher than 32.1 percent.
• Nearly 33 percent of adults who did not graduate high school are obese, compared with 21.5 percent of those who graduated from college or technical college.

More than 33 percent of adults who earn less than $15,000 per year were obese, compared with 24.6 percent of those who earn at least $50,000 per year.

A few things that I noticed:

“The obesity epidemic continues to be more dramatic in the South, which includes 9-10 states with the highest adult obesity rates. States in the Northeast and West tend to have lower rates. Mississippi maintained the highest adult obesity rate for the seventh year in a row, and Colorado has the lowest obesity rate and is the only state with a rate under 20%. [...] Obesity rates have grown fastest in Oklahoma, Alabama, and Tennessee, and slowest in Washington, D.C., Colorado, and Connecticut.”

Source: CDC

I mean, D.C. is a walking city if I remember correctly, Colorado is pretty well-known for being a home of outdoorsy-types (skiing, hiking, etc.) and Connecticut is something like the third wealthiest state in the union. These don’t surprise me. I’m also not surprised by the fact that states in the northeast and west have lower rates. Again, if you follow the money, both areas tend to have lots of money (New Hampshire, New Jersey, Maryland and Connecticut for the Northeast; California, Colorado and Utah for the West.)

The South also doesn’t surprise me: Mississippi, with the highest obesity rate, also is our poorest state. In fact, looking at this article from September of 2010, 9 of the poorest states in the US are southern states.

I’m paying attention to the money aspect because – as I’ve written before – the more money an area is perceived to have, the more likely it is that they’ll have higher quality stores… thereby offering higher quality foods. All you have to do is look at the strategic placement of Whole Foods in order to see that.

And really, the infrastructure (at least, in the areas where I’ve been) and sprawl in some of these places is terrible, and there are virtually no sidewalks. Walking (and, by relation, running) isn’t much encouraged out there.

“Adult obesity rates for Blacks topped 30% in 42 states.” Who’s got suggestions for what’s going on here?

Furthermore, “Rates of adult obesity among Latinos is above 35% in FOUR states, but it is at least 30% in TWENTY-THREE states?” So, in 23 states, the obesity rate is between 30-35%? Considering the little (teeny, tiny, miniscule) bit I know about Latino food and culture, I wonder if the quality of ingredients here – in comparison to what may be available in their country – plays a difference. Might be worth digging up, here.

“More than 33 percent of adults who earn less than $15,000 per year were obese, compared with 24.6 percent of those who earn at least $50,000 per year.”

Not gonna lie – I would’ve expected those numbers to be farther apart… but the fact that there’s only about a 9% difference is pretty telling to me.

Thoughts?

Statistics: Obesity By The Numbers is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Infographic: The Skinny on Obesity in America
2. Infograph: Obesity In America
3. Infographic: “The Childhood Obesity Epidemic”

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2011. | Permalink | 10 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: CDC, obesity, statistics, trust for america's health

Two large initiatives designed to prevent African-American girls from becoming obese are not very successful at it, according to two new studies.

The two-year programs consisted of either practical advice and goals for staying fit and healthy, or regular dance classes along with an intervention to reduce the amount of time girls spent playing video games, watching TV, or on the computer.

However, over the course of two years, 8- to 10-year-old girls who were enrolled in either program were just as likely to gain weight as girls who did not participate in the interventions.

It’s not clear why the programs had so little impact, lead author of one of the studies, Dr. Robert Klesges at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center, told Reuters Health. However, “the environmental factors that promote sedentary behavior” – such as TV and video games – and preferences for high-calorie foods “probably overwhelmed” the effects of the program, he suggested.

Obesity has become an epidemic among American children, and African-American girls are particularly at risk – a recent nationwide health survey found that approximately one-quarter of black girls are obese.

Read that again: “approximately one quarter of Black girls are obese.”

For the sake of clarification… where do they get these numbers? That’s not to say that it isn’t possible, because I’m actually wondering if the number isn’t higher.

Okay… continue:

To see whether targeted programs help prevent young girls from becoming obese teens, Klesges and his colleagues followed 303 girls in the Memphis area for two years. They randomly assigned half to a program designed to prevent them from becoming obese by giving them goals for healthy eating and exercise while teaching their parents about providing healthy foods, and the other half to an alternative program that did not focus on diet and exercise, but just self-esteem in general.

They found that girls who completed the obesity program tended to consume more water and vegetables, and fewer sweet drinks, than girls in the other program. But both groups were just as likely to gain weight, and both decreased their amount of physical activity over the two years.

“For those girls who changed these eating patterns and didn’t see weight gain prevention, they probably just replaced these calories with other foods,” Klesges noted. The next step, he suggested, could be to encourage girls to reduce their overall calories, not just shift the calories they’d get from soda and fatty foods into other food types.

And younger girls appeared to benefit more from the program, Klesges noted, suggesting it is worth continuing this program in that age group. “We didn’t do a cost analysis but the intervention is definitely portable and could be implemented for very low cost,” he said in an e-mail.

In the other study, also published in the November issue of the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, researchers randomly assigned 261 black girls in Oakland, California, to either participate in an intervention to reduce their “screen” time along with regular dance classes that included African, hip-hop, and step dancing; or receive newsletters about health issues for young girls and attend occasional family health lectures.

Here, too, girls in both groups were equally likely to gain weight during the study period, but those in the dance program showed improvements in some other aspects of health, such as lower cholesterol and insulin levels and fewer symptoms of depression. “I felt really good about (those findings),” study author Dr. Thomas Robinson at Stanford University School of Medicine told Reuters Health.

He added that the program experienced a few unexpected challenges that may have affected the findings – for example, transportation for the girls fell through early in the program, which likely lowered attendance. Implementing a similar program at a school would cut down on costs considerably, Robinson added, so the only expense would be paying the dance teacher, who might be willing to volunteer. “We haven’t given up on the concept,” he noted.

Furthermore, girls who were at higher risk of weight gain – those who watched more TV overall and were being raised by unmarried adults – appeared to benefit more from the program than other girls, Robinson said. (Erika’s note: In other words, latch-key children?) “They have more room to go, and are more likely to benefit,” he suggested. “Our intervention definitely helped a lot of girls.”

The next step, Klesges suggested, is to ensure children have regular access to physical activity that they enjoy, and find ways to encourage people not to opt for fast foods. “While we have a long way to go, promoting healthy diets from the time a child is very small is needed,” he said. “If more people wanted healthy alternatives, (fast food restaurants) would sell them.” [source: Obesity programs little help for black girls]

I have a LOT of thoughts, but I’d rather search out the individual studies from the November issue of the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine before I say more.

There are a few things I’d like to point out, though.

They randomly assigned half to a program designed to prevent them from becoming obese by giving them goals for healthy eating and exercise while teaching their parents about providing healthy foods, and the other half to an alternative program that did not focus on diet and exercise, but just self-esteem in general.

They found that girls who completed the obesity program tended to consume more water and vegetables, and fewer sweet drinks, than girls in the other program. But both groups were just as likely to gain weight, and both decreased their amount of physical activity over the two years.

For starters… “teaching parents about providing healthy foods” is very different from increasing access to such. Access plus education, to me, is the only formula that will provide results.

Secondly, I wonder if this study corrected for the “liar effect.” What is “the liar effect?” Well, if you’re telling young Black girls [who are likely to be latchkey children who are excited to have an adult paying attention to them... and I say that as a latchkey child] to eat healthily, then you ask them to report what they are eating.. how likely is it that they’re telling the truth? They’re not going to want to disappoint the person who’s paying all this attention to them.

I’m not trying to be insulting or disrespectful when I say that, either. It’s a matter of fact – people who are asked to report what they are eating often lie. People who are asked to report what they eat are, also, often mistaken about how much they eat… dependent upon how large the portion size actually is (and regardless of the weight of the person reporting.) There’s an element of shame associated with reporting your food intake that people want to avoid… and young girls who already have body image issues are no different. So, if you have young Black girls who are eager to please and you ask them to report their intake… I think it is highly likely that they’ll lie.

Furthermore, girls who were at higher risk of weight gain – those who watched more TV overall and were being raised by unmarried adults – appeared to benefit more from the program than other girls, Robinson said.

Because we’re talking about young girls – not adult women who should be able to make their own conscious choices – I’m going to ask this question. What does “raised by unmarried adults” mean? Two unmarried parents in one home? Divorced with two active parents? Divorced with only one parent? Or only single parenthood? Why does the “raised by unmarried adults” aspect make such a huge difference? Is it because no one is around to further enforce the healthier choices? (Doesn’t this also lead to that point about lying on their food intake reporting?) Is it because fewer time is spent with the parent embodying the essence of healthier living for the child? (I admit that this is only my assumption, and based on my own early experiences.)

The next step, Klesges suggested, is to ensure children have regular access to physical activity that they enjoy, and find ways to encourage people not to opt for fast foods. “While we have a long way to go, promoting healthy diets from the time a child is very small is needed,” he said. “If more people wanted healthy alternatives, (fast food restaurants) would sell them.”

Y’all always think I’m playing when I say “We have more power than we think,” but I’m dead serious.. and that emboldened quote is exactly why I say it. Businesses go where the money is. If the money is in the sugary, fatty and salty… why on Earth would a business ignore that? Even the “healthiest” of fast foods succumb to using these tactics. No one is exempt. When the conscious public demands more, they’ll get it… and not a second sooner.

What do you think is going on here?

Why Don’t Obesity Programs Work For Young Black Girls? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Fat Girls In The Media: Celebrating Obesity?
2. Teen Girls, Weight Loss Surgery, Body Image and Class Distinctions
3. Moms: Your Work Schedule Makes Your Kids Fat

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2011. | Permalink | 10 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: black girls, government, obesity, programs, studies

In a continuing effort to educate New Yorkers about the potentially serious health effects of consuming sugary drinks, the Health Department today launched the latest installment – a new TV commercial and subway posters – of its “Pouring On the Pounds” health education campaign. The 30-second spot shows how a day’s worth of sugary drinks can add up. Building on a previous campaign, sugar content is measured in “packets” to illustrate how a daily routine of just a few sweetened drinks can cumulate to a whopping 93 packets of sugar by the end of the day. These excessive amounts of sugar would amount to almost 1,400 empty calories of pure sugar – that’s nearly ¾ of the daily recommended calories for most adults. The spot ends with devastating images of the serious potential health consequences of obesity and diabetes. The spot will run through February 22.

Subway posters that echo the awareness messages in the video also launch today. Like the TV commercial, the posters’ overarching message to New Yorkers is: Are you Pouring on the Pounds? The posters will span the length of a subway car with each panel picturing the number of sugar packets in different types of drinks. The ads aim to educate people about the wide range of drinks that pack a lot of sugar, including sweetened teas, sports drinks, energy drinks, and sweetened juice in addition to regular sodas. The 21 by 22 inch main ad panels of the car broadcast possible daily totals of sugar packets consumed if a person takes in drink after sugary drink.

“Too many sugar-sweetened drinks are fueling the obesity epidemic. Obesity and the serious health consequences that result are making hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers sick or disabled,” said Dr. Thomas Farley, New York City Health Commissioner. “This new campaign shows how easy it is to drink a staggering amount of sugar in one day without realizing it. We hope that this campaign will encourage people to make the simple switch to healthier alternatives such as water, seltzer or low-fat milk. If this campaign shifts habits even slightly, it could have real health benefits.”

Americans now consume an average of 200 to 300 more calories each day than they did 30 years ago – nearly half of this increase in calories comes from sugary drinks. The Health Department’s 2009 Community Health Survey found that more than 1.9 million New Yorkers drink at least one sugary beverage each day – adding as much as 250 empty calories to their diets.

More than 700,000 New Yorkers now have diabetes and more than a million have a condition called pre-diabetes. Diabetes rates, and rates of consumption of sugary drinks, have risen sharply over the past 30 years and are highest in the city’s poorest neighborhoods and amongst blacks and Latinos. Diabetes is a progressive disease that can lead to blindness, heart disease, kidney failure requiring dialysis and the need for amputations due to nerve damage and poor circulation. Adults with diabetes have heart disease death rates about 2 to 4 times higher than adults without diabetes. In NYC alone, diabetes results in more than 22,000 hospitalizations, approximately 2,800 amputations and nearly 1,700 deaths every year.

Obesity is also associated with higher rates of certain cancers, including cancers of the colon and breast.

The new video spot can be seen on major broadcast and cable TV channels in the New York City area and at the Health Department’s website. The agency is also posting it on YouTube so that people can easily share it with friends. There will also be a 15-second version and Spanish versions of the spots.

Fortunately, there are many healthier alternatives to sugar-sweetened beverages. The Health Department encourages New Yorkers to look for drinks with less than 25 calories in every 8oz. serving. Coffee and tea are naturally low in calories, even when you add small amounts of milk and sugar.

Since y’all pretty much know how I feel about sugar aaaaaand sodapop… needless to say, I’m appreciating this. A lot. I do wonder… how is this being received in NYC? Is it helping any?

I mean, either people are receptive to the message or they aren’t… and those who are genuinely willing (and don’t feel like its hopeless) will do their best to try to change. I’m all for putting education first on this matter… because a person compelled to change by knowledge can – and will – create their own way to do it.

What do you think?

Oh, and again… if you need reinforcement:

• How Soft Drinks Impact Your Health
• The Case Against Soft Drinks
• The Case Against Diet Soda (And Aspartame… And Splenda…)
• How Many Calories Are You Drinking?
• What Is Sugar Addiction?

Do YOU Drink 93 Packets Of Sugar A Day? is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. The Coffee Conundrum: To Drink Or Not To Drink?
2. Why The Food Stamp Soft Drink Ban Is BS
3. No Sugar? Then What Can I Use?

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2011. | Permalink | 7 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: commercials, new york city, nyc, nyc commercials, obesity, sugar

EllipticalTrainers.org presents us with this very well-designed infographic detailing the issues – as they see them – with obesity. (My notes come after the graphic… of course.) Check it out below:

A few notes, though:

36.8% of all Blacks are among “America’s Fattest People?” As in… 36.8% of us are obese?

“The fat get fatter: obesity rates increase faster in states that already have a high obesity percentage.” Gee, I wonder why that is.

They mention the BMI… I guess, because the BMI matters.

“Obesity is the 2nd leading cause of preventable death, just behind smoking.”

Is obesity the cause of the death, or a symptom of the TRUE cause of death? Listing “obesity as a cause of death” next to crap like “more likely to have high blood pressure/high cholesterol/type 1 OR type 2 diabetes (as if the two are interchangeable)” implies that obesity causes those things. The things that bring about THOSE ailments ALSO bring about obesity. Why do we refuse to accept that? Because we’d have to admit that the FOOD is the actual problem? C’mon, man.

“Less than 4% of adults engage in enough physical activity to improve their health, although 40% claim they do…. meanwhile, the rate of Americans undergoing weight-loss surgery has doubled in the last six years.”

So… people are undergoing surgery to lose weight, but aren’t engaging in enough physical activity to maintain it? Which implies that enough of them aren’t modifying their food intake to accommodate their decreased activity levels? Oh.

(There could also be an excessive focus on exercise, here, because this WAS created by someone who promotes and sells elliptical trainers, but… I’m sayin’.)

“Children who live in unsafe neighborhoods are 61% more likely to be obese than kids in safe neighborhoods.”

I wonder why THAT is – perhaps because unsafe neighborhoods are more likely to be neighborhoods without grocery stores… where the inhabitants are shopping out of gas stations to fill their fridges? Uh huh.

“Inactive lifestyle: We pay the price for many of our modern conveniences in physical inactivity: driving instead of walking or riding a bike and spending hours sitting at a desk, on the computer or in front of the television have all contributed to the rise of obesity.”

Hey… that’s the price we pay for convenience. Gotta be aware of the problems, so that you can go out of your way to create a solution. Right?

“Everything is in moderation. Don’t ban your favorite foods from your diet, just eat them less often and in smaller portions.”

I’d change this to say “Don’t ban your favorite foods from your diet, just cook them at home yourself.” ‘Cause goodness knows I’m neverrrrrrrrrrr giving up pizza!

Your thoughts?

Infographic: The Skinny on Obesity in America is a post from: A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss. Thanks for reading!

Related posts:

1. Infographic: “The Childhood Obesity Epidemic”
2. Infograph: Obesity In America
3. Infographic: The Secrets Of Better Sleep

The FULL list of meal plans is currently available. Check it out and get your copy today!

Get BGG2WL delivered wirelessly to your Kindle! Click here for more info!

© Erika for A Black Girl's Guide To Weight Loss, 2011. | Permalink | 14 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: infographic, obesity, overweight