Pretend we were having this debate about the health risks of cigarettes. It's the same darn thing.

That's how ridiculous and inane your arguments are.

I'm with DefyingGravity... denial is not a river in Egypt.

How is someone going to decrease their hip to waist ratio if, idk, they have naturally narrow hips?

Why can't said person just, oh I don't know, engage themselves in healthy behaviors or continue doing such if they already do so? Because that's what I've been encouraging all along, look at my posts from page 1.

But somehow that's just wrong, and pointing fingers is more useful.

Eta: I know some(not all) of us have admitted the flaws of BMI, but I think this Flickr is a really cool visual illustration. EDIT: I've decided not to post the link since even though it's not on DDN, there are still heights and weights listed. But anyone interested can Google it or PM. Anyway, these are what I would consider "normal" or "average" people. Not athletes, not bodybuilders, just average joe types. Interpret from it what you will.

What am I in denial about? I have no doubts about my health. BMI may call me fat and overweight, but when I'm picking 240lbs off the ground tomorrow morning with my bare hands, somehow I don't think I'm gonna give a flying f.

Sorry for the double-post. But it was just getting absurd with the amount of edits on the above one.

All in all, even if my arguments were complete babble and "ridiculously stupid" I liked that this thread really took off. I found the story from a bodybuilding/powerlifting forum and it didn't spark nearly as much discussion (that's sort of what you get when everyone agrees with each other ha). So even if this drifted from the original topic, it drifted in a somewhat organized manner if you look back and read past replies.

We'll all have to stay tuned for when the book comes out and jazzy reports back. Who knows, for all this fuss it could just end up being a really cute book with a misleading title/name. Or it could have it's heart in the right place and be poorly written (it is SELF-pubbed after all). Again, who knows?

Can you please link me to the powerlifting forum you got this from? I would love to see what their line of thinking is, heck I may already be a member of that community

I agree that the debate actually drifted in an organized manner, and I had a lot of fun discussing different topics.

Slice, I have already visited the link that you posted previously, and I really think that they are quite accurate in the photos+BMI. If anything, they seem to be more harsh then what I would personally rate the people. They labelled a lot of women "overweight" who I thought was normal.

Anyways, stay tuned for the actual book review that should be arriving sometime in mid October.

jazz_lover wrote:

If anything, they seem to be more harsh then what I would personally rate the people. They labelled a lot of women "overweight" who I thought was normal.

That's...kinda the point. They didnt "label" those women overweight, the BMI did. The point of that exercise was to show that the BMI isn't always reliable.

Erin.
::righteous babe::

^Thats a great point! I've gotten used to seeing so many overweight people ( and people claiming that is a "normal" body) that I started to consider overweight the "normal" standard. I guess BMI/medical ( some medical people still use BMI) standards are a lot stricter then my personal opinion.

Although the overweight people didn't look "thin" to me, I didn't think they looked overweight.

If you asked me in the 40's where "normal" was the real common look, I may have had a different opinion.

This just goes to show that we, as a society, need to embrace the whole obesity epidemic. ( Because there are probably people like me, who would consider an obese person "normal" because we have an skewed idea of what true obesity is. I thought these truly obese women looked fine to me, so it goes to show that I guess women need to be thinner then I originally thought to be, in order to be considered out of the obese category by BMI standards)

I was way more forgiving about excess fat then these people were. Maybe I need to tighten my personal standards a bit...and to think, people thought my standards were too tough!

I think that it is getting to a good start because even the First Lady, Michelle Obama feels that things need to change. President Obama launched an Childhood Obesity program, and that is a step in the right direction.

Odessa wrote:

That's...kinda the point. They didnt "label" those women overweight, the BMI did. The point of that exercise was to show that the BMI isn't always reliable.

Meh, every single one of the women who were labeled "obese" and "morbidly obese" were way heavier than they should be - do you disagree? I did had issues with a couple of the "overweight" labels (thinking they were more towards "normal"), but then I looked at the BMI and they were 25.7, 25.7, 25.0, 25.3 and 25.1 - all RIGHT on the border. *shrugs* These are average Joe and Janes (minus the body builder and the triathlete...), and the BMI seems pretty darn accurate in terms of "definitely too fat," "in the normalish category," and "sweet Jesus you're too skinny," which is it's entire point. It's not perfect in any way, but these photos provide evidence that it's a relatively good indicator of the extremes.

^ What site is this that shows the pics with the BMI?

Side note amongst the debates: what I wouldn't give for a defined waist. My waist and hip measurements are really quite close and it sucks. I'm a woman, give me my damn hips!

NB. Even when I was heavier my body shape (column/ruler) stayed the same.

^ Google "Flickr Illustrated BMI Categories." DDN doesn't allow height/weight ratios nor (I'm assuming) would appreciate direct links to height/weight ratios with pictures

DefyingGravity, I am trying to calculate the hip/waist and I am not hitting 0.7 or 0.8 . I have a 26 centimeter difference. I am wondering if I am in the "at risk" category since I'm not hitting a 0.7

As you know, I suck at computations and I was wondering if there was a website where we can just enter our measurements so it calculates the risk for us? Something that maybe nurses use for testing? This thread has inspired me to be even more careful about my health!

jazz_lover wrote:

DefyingGravity, I am trying to calculate the hip/waist and I am not hitting 0.7 or 0.8 .

Then you're doing it wrong, because I know you're a lower number than me Take your waist in inches and divide it by your hips at their widest point in inches. So 27" waist and 38" hips = 27/38 = 0.71.

I have a 26 centimeter difference. I am wondering if I am in the "at risk" category since I'm not hitting a 0.7

The "at risk" number for a female is generally considered 0.8, not 0.7. For men it's less than 1.0, preferably < 0.9.

As you know, I suck at computations and I was wondering if there was a website where we can just enter our measurements so it calculates the risk for us?

www.healthstatus.com . . .

So since we have been talking about being obese and the fact that I am I just wanted to come here and say that as of this past week I am no longer in that category.

DefyingGravity wrote:

Odessa wrote:

That's...kinda the point. They didnt "label" those women overweight, the BMI did. The point of that exercise was to show that the BMI isn't always reliable.

Meh, every single one of the women who were labeled "obese" and "morbidly obese" were way heavier than they should be - do you disagree? I did had issues with a couple of the "overweight" labels (thinking they were more towards "normal"), but then I looked at the BMI and they were 25.7, 25.7, 25.0, 25.3 and 25.1 - all RIGHT on the border. *shrugs* These are average Joe and Janes (minus the body builder and the triathlete...), and the BMI seems pretty darn accurate in terms of "definitely too fat," "in the normalish category," and "sweet Jesus you're too skinny," which is it's entire point. It's not perfect in any way, but these photos provide evidence that it's a relatively good indicator of the extremes.

I agree with this assessment... the ones that seem questionable are all 25ish. Which is correct... that's a sign of "hey, watch yourself. You're on the edge there." I really don't have a problem with any of those with BMIs above 26/under 17.

I stayed out of this as long as I could. 33% of Americans are overweight, another 34% are obese. I don't care how anyone spins it...this is not healthy. Health care costs are already out of control, but sooooo many issues are linked to the excess weight, and more importantly lack of exercise.

I know there is this whole movement of "fat acceptance." I know a ton of people say, "I am perfectly healthy." Yes you are right now. I know obese clients that don't have diabetes YET, they don't have heart problems YET, they don't have high cholesterol YET! You are at such a higher risk for these things. I understand not ALL obese people have these health issues, but there is pretty solid evidence that being overweight takes years off your life. You don't realize how much harder your heart is working or the toll it is taking on your joints. There is no great way to test those things. George Burns smoked until the day he died practically and lived to be almost 100. We know enough about tobacco and the health risks that George Burns is the exception to the rule.

Looking past BMI (which really isn't a good guideline), no doctor that I know of is going to say that being 25 plus pounds overweight is beneficial for a healthy way of life. The problem is you can't control where the pounds land. Abdominal fat is not good for a variety of reasons, and visceral fat, which infiltrates and coats your organs like candle-wax drippings, releases inflammatory fatty acids that have been linked to cancer and coronary diseases. Again...these are things your doctor doesn't have a test for.

EVERYONE agrees that exercise reduces mortality rates by 50%. Nothing ever gets worse by being "fit." I don't mean thin, I don't even mean you have to diet. Exercise helps everything no matter what size, shape, or color you are. I do have bigger clients that are in better physical shape than my thin clients. Two different problems that we are dealing with in that scenario.

imadanseur wrote:

EVERYONE agrees that exercise reduces mortality rates by 50%. Nothing ever gets worse by being "fit." I don't mean thin, I don't even mean you have to diet. Exercise helps everything no matter what size, shape, or color you are. I do have bigger clients that are in better physical shape than my thin clients. Two different problems that we are dealing with in that scenario.

Exactly!

We should be promoting moving more and eating better to the entire population. Regardless of what size you are doing both of these things is never a bad idea.

I don’t know anything about the actual “fat acceptance” movement, and I am sure that there are some who want to declare that 500 pounds (or whatever) is perfectly healthy. I don’t necessarily believe that, however, I do think that there IS a need for some kind of fat acceptance movement or whatever you want to call it. To me, it’s about ending the discrimination. Whether or not it’s a “choice” doesn’t mean that overweight and obese individuals deserve to be treated like crap by society, and let’s face it—that definitely happens. How would you like it if people presumed to know negative things about your character just by looking at you “lazy,” “no self-control” “pig” etc? I read some article a while back about employers who didn’t want to hire overweight people because they felt they were probably lazy and wouldn’t make good employees. And then there is the media. If TV shows want to make anyone unappealing a common go-to feature is that they are fat and often when there is an overweight character there are constant food jokes (Glee, I’m looking at you.) It’s still widely acceptable to make jokes about how someone is so fat and disgusting but in most places (hopefully) someone would at least think twice about saying something like that regarding someone’s skin color. (I know, I know, ending racism still has a long way to go, but at least it makes a substantial amount of people uncomfortable now.)

One argument I’ve seen frequently for the discrimination is that it’s the person’s choice to be overweight. 1) You don’t actually know that. I’m sure that people with legit medical problems are still hurt by these stereotypes and 2) So freaking what? What are you trying to do? Brow-beat them into being skinnier? Obviously that isn’t working since our society already sends a pretty strong message that fat is not OK. All this is doing is sending a message to people that they aren’t good enough and breeding an even unhealthier relationship with food. Anyway, all I see fat acceptance as is encouraging people to treat overweight people with the dignity they deserve AS PEOPLE, fat or not.

As for what we know about the book, I am completely appalled. I am ALL for teaching kids about healthier lifestyles, but doing so in the context of body size is not the way to go about it effectively. 4 to 8-year-olds should not need to be worrying about whether or not they are “fat.” As others have said, it is the parents’ job to monitor what their children are eating and push them in the right direction.

The "fat acceptance" I am talking about is people saying, "I'm fat and I like myself just the way I am." I'm not talking 25 pounds (though even that carries an elevated health risk), I am talking about obesity 100 pounds 200 pounds overweight and declaring they are "happy". I'm not denying that some people are happy at a certain weight or fitness level. I do think there is the potential to be happier, look better, feel better, and be more confident when your body is performing at a higher rate without having to work so hard.

The way to change children's eating habits and eating patterns is to educate their PARENTS. If we want to get a handle on obesity it is about encouraging families to walk, bike, go to the park, swim, etc. It is about teaching adults the hazards of fast food, processed food, not giving their kids balanced meals, or not finding alternatives and ways to help their children eat veggies (which I am completely guilty of not having enough of in my diet!!)

I haven't met any overweight client who wants to be overweight or is choosing to do so. I don't believe I have any clients that are lazy either. Some aren't disciplined, some don't believe in themselves, some just aren't willing to put in the hard work to really see big changes...but that is how they are in ALL areas of their life. They aren't willing to do whatever it takes in their relationships, jobs, or any other goals which is why they have the results they have. Yes I have had clients with medical issues that make it more challenging to lose weight. I believe that all of my clients are healthier with exercising 3 times a week and many hike, run, or bike on other days. Most are not tiny little things, but they are doing something to promote a healthier way of life. It's all about moving forward towards a goal.

It's sad...2 of my newest clients are very large and carry their weight predominately in their midsections. They have both been asked if they are pregnant. They discussed how humiliating that is, and it really made me want to reach out and hug them. They are good people, loving moms, and one doesn't have any knowledge of how to make these changes that will stick. The other has 4 kids and hasn't made the time to really take care of herself. I really really hope in the next 3 months I can get them rockin' and rollin' so they are feeling better and they have more energy for themselves and so they can be great examples for their kids!

The book has been pushed back to December 23-25. So much for reviewing the book in October.

I am not starting to wonder if the author is having second thoughts on publishing. I will let you guys know in December what happens....

I have not read the entire thread, so please forgive me if I repeat thing already written.

I have no read the book, but in think the title and the cover image do not reflect the "theme" of the book: eating healthier.

If it were up to me, I would have the title be "Maggie doesn't like her diet" and maybe a picture of her making a disgusted face at a table of unhealthy food. It would have the main character talk to a doctor who can explain why certain foods aren't as good for you. Maggie would end up feeling much better about herself, and maybe win a trophy in her chosen sport. If I had time, I might include her sports team stopping. For food on the way home, and having others follow Maggies example when Maggie decides to order a healthy and balanced meal.

The book came!

Does anyone know if I am allowed to legally write on here what the majority of the book says, or is that breaking copyright laws? Am I also allowed to take some photos of the inside of the book? You guys would love to see one of these photos...

I believe as long as you cite the references properly, do not misrepresent the intent of the quotes, and reproduce it for the purposes of reviewing the publication, it is ok.

It may be better to have a mod weigh in on this. Then again, they can remove it if I'm wrong.

Keep On Dancing*

The one "bad" thing I see in this book is that there is a picture of Maggie raiding her kitchen in the middle of the night. She raided the fridge because she was depressed from being teased during soccer practice.

The rest of the book, was quite educational. For example in the book it said "Breakfast consisted of oatmeal with yogurt and fruit" then " For lunch, a turkey sandwich with mustard, lettuce greens etc" then for dinner " there were vegetables and various proteins". She packed healthy carrots and celery sticks as snacks.
Then it talks about her being sad about missing her sugary treats but then she allowed herself once a week to eat a normal treat. She said that she had more energy by cutting down on sugar, and health foods actually tasted good.

The ending talks about how it is sad how people are judged based on how they look. We need to give people a chance and look into their hearts. They talked about the benefits of losing weight and how it helped Maggie become a better soccer player.

In the book it mentioned how she needed a new wardrobe and how non of her clothing fit. I felt that the cover was misleading because her "skinny" dress was actually bought after she lost the weight.
This book didn't put a strong emphasis of dieting just to fit into a pretty dress, or for pretty looks. It basically talked about getting healthy, dieting the correct way, how she gained muscle with the proper coaching etc.

Taking this book as a whole, I would NOT recommend it to children. I felt that a lot of the concepts in the book are way to mature for 4-10 year olds. Raiding the fridge because she was comfort eating, allowing one treat a week.

I WOULD recommend reading this as a preteen, if it wasn't a picture book. I felt that his message was better suited to preteens in a chapter lesson type of book.

I believe that the author's response to this review says it all. Third comment down.

Erin.
::righteous babe::

^ So is that the real author or someone pretending to be the author? How do you even know that is him?

^^ Wow! Just wow. I encourage everyone to read that review and the responses, especially the "auther's". Like you said, Erin. Says it all.

Lol to "guerilla arguing". My new pet phrase.

kk~