Researcher links obesity to food portions.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp.../food_portions

No chit? Really?

This is common sense!!!

The University Of Illinois actually did a study of this, God help whomever attends this school.

Who the hell paid for this study?

So let me get this straight.

If I eat a whole bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken, I'll gain more weight than if I ate one piece?

Will the madness never end?

I already know the answer.

All that is fine,

but where does my friend fit in, she eats all the time will only eat junk, never exercises, and is skinny Bitch, oh sorry the devil made me say that.

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

friends huh lol

Heheheh, Nebbie would hate me too if she met me - I'm one of those eat-what-you-want body-type people too.

But that report has a little something going for it. The problem lies in the energy-content of modern food as much as its presentation, but the presentation doesn't help. Modern marketing guys loves the spend-a-little-more-and-get-what-looks-like-a-hell-of-a-lot-more technique.

The fact is that, skinny or not, our bodies simply aren't designed to absorb the level of fat/energy that modern fast-food provides. There have been some very convincing studies that show that high-"energy" foods (burgers, chips, fatty-foods generally) distort our bodies abilities to gauge our own fat-content (i.e. levels of "leptin" in the blood stream). The result is that even three fast-food meals over a short period can throw off our bodies ability to measure the levels of fat in our bodies. As such, the more we get used to these meals, the more our bodies think we are being starved if we don't receive similar levels of energy from our food.

Now that might seem fairly benign: If you recognise that fatty-foods aren't good for you, especially if you don't exercise, then you stay away from them. But when you consider that sugar is added to many foodstuffs, noteably french-fries, and you further consider that sugar has noteable addiction-like qualities (extending to producing dependancy-signals comparable to heroin-addiction, believe it or not) - and you can see how people may have their free-will eroded by the number of "high-energy" and highly-sugared products on the market today.

Basically, would you say that all of the over-weight people across the industrialised world are stupid? Or do you think there's a possiblity that some of them have been suckered by a mixture of high-energy-portions and addictive properties contained therein?

Eh?



-this-has-been-a-golgot-ranting-and-semi-researched-announcement

__________________
Virtual Reality chatter on a movie site? Got endless amounts of it here. Reviews over here

*sigh*

I gain weight by breathing in air.

__________________
"Today, war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."

I loved the rant Golgot

But I will say that at this time people should know that processed foods are bad for them

You shouldn't need a University study for that.

It's like having a warning label on a handgun,"don't point at your own head."

I dont' really want to answer the last two questions, you did say all didn't you?

so food makes you GAIN weight?!?!?!

wow...well now i know what i've been doing wrong all these years

*note to self* stop eating

__________________
The wold is full of kings and queens
Who blind our eyes and steal our dreams
it's heaven and hell

Heheh, cheers man, but yeah, you're right. There are far too many silly studies out there - when so many decent studies need funding (like genuine research into the five core areas of health-risk concerning GM food which the biotechs still refuse to do for example )

On the last questions, well, I don't want to answer them either, just in case the 82 in Shape's name refers to waist size - nah, they were jokey questions anyway. I totally believe that some people are predisposed to weight gain in the same way that my body refuses to put on fat (sorry Slay, but look at it this way, when the ice age comes, my decendants will be ****ed ).

As it is tho, there's just too much "convenient" crap out there (often coupled with highly manipulative, kiddie-aimed, advertising). I never like seeing products with addiction-like effects that erode free-will pushed heavily in society. Fair enough that a full-time sucker deserves what they get ultimately (and as a smoker and drinker, boy do i know that ), but there's gotta be a point where society as a whole wises up and fights back against negative industries. That's how i see it is all .

Ohhhh, and i can't resist a quick dig at the FDA while I'm here. Altho they occasionally do their job, you should check out how insanely blase, industry-paid, or easily swayed they are concerning things like GM, hormone-treatment, the highly dodgy irradiation quick-"fix", and many other things. The most amusing one i read recently talked about how they accept that the meat of "stressed" animals (i.e. factory-farmed ones) does have various negative side-effects on the consumer, including reduced sexual desire in males if i recall correctly (but they decided that wasn't a bad thing per se, as they didn't have any data on whether having a low sex drive was bad for health).

We have some equally dubious pass-times occuring over here in the UK - but at least we're GM, hormone and BSE free () - leaves us more time to try and tackle the other health issues we share with you guys (and the industry-lead ineptitudes of our guys, the FSA). But if I were you, I'd put some pressure on the industries that feed you guys over there. And I'd take with a pinch of salt the argument that the BSE/mad-cow case was an isolated canada-sourced one-off. You're doing all the things wrong that we used to (feeding cow's blood/left-overs to calves etc etc), so it's odds on that it's fairly widespread, and merely under-reported due to your fairly scant safety proceedure (only 30,000 cows checked a year i believe, a tiny number for such a big country. And I heard tell that the requirement for cows to be able to walk into their place of slaughter has only just been put in place. May not be true, can't be bothered to check right now, but i reckon some bigger changes are well over-due.)

I could go into how chains like mcdonalds have negatively affected the US meat-industry, but hell, i think I've re-ranted far too much already

Support "organic" and "free-range" my sun-dappled friends. (and I won't even start in on Gm - gah, thought I'd finsihed... )

We just had a case of mad-cow here in Washington state.

I read the cow came from Alberta, Canada.

Sun-dappled? I live in the Seattle area my friend from across the big pond.

Here's are weather report. -1 to -4C Tonight: Partly cloudy skies early followed by periods of snow showers late. Cold. Low 24F. Winds ENE at 5 to 10 mph. Chance of snow 50%.

It's suppose to be 10C in London, I'll trade.

Thanks for your input.

Heheheh, i just believe in the american dream is all - everywhere's like California isn't it? - Nah, i know you guys get far worse weather in some areas than my drizzley little isle can compete with. But snow! You lucky buggers. Global warming might have done for that bit of winter-fun over here. My mates that run a skiing chalet in switzerland are livid.

Yeah, i had a quick look into the cow thing. I know it came from Canada, but rearing practices are pretty equivilant in both countries from what i can see. Although the farm in question (in the US) does seem to have been run well, and couldn't be to blame for the cow's state. Still, chances are that there are plenty more cases around that just don't get reported, in both the US and Canada. Feeding cows cannibalistically is just foolish i'm afraid, as we learnt over here to our peril. (guess things are just easier to spot on a smaller scale. The accusations i've read of detection negligence in the US centre on the small proportion of cows that are checked. I'm gonna look into this claim that the requirement for cows to be able to walk to their own slaughter has only just been introduced. I heard it yesterday from a friend. If it's true it's another sign of bad practice it seems)

EDIT: I've since learned that cannibalistic cow-feeding did stop in 97 - altho this cow in question was born before then. However, there are still no steps in place to stop inappropriate feeding of pigs and sheep, and European experiences tell us that tackling the cow-feed alone is not enough. I've also learned that the must-be-able-to-walk-to-slaughter thing has indeed only just been inacted, and that another measure which experts are calling for - i.e. a large increase in the percentage of cows checked - is not being pursued very vigorously. I'm sure they will get round to it tho - it's the only sensible thing to do.

Good to know you're one of the many in the US who care about the state of the food

LordyLord,
here is one way i have found to eat choclate and exercise,
first cut the chocolate into bite size pieces,
leave in Kitchen,
go to lounge room sit with laptop on knee,
post at MoFo,
put laptop down,
walk to kitchen,
take one piece of chocolate,
return to laptop,
repeat as many times as needed.

The study seems pretty legitimate to Kong, although the title is silly.

The study isn't an attempt to confirm the fact that more of any given food will make you gain more weight than less of that same given food, but rather to study eating behaviors and the increasing portion sizes of meals (which has really ballooned in the past few decades).

Edit: After browsing over some of the other studies by that lab Kong feels that they aren't only not silly, but very interesting and quite important.

Kong suggests not bothering to read the Yahoo news report of the study, and to simply visit the lab's webpage and take a look for yourselves. www.consumerpsychology.com

__________________
Kong's Reviews:
Stuck On You
Bad Santa

Supporting "free-range" food products in the U.S. is totally pointless since there are no federal rules or guidelines on labeling products with that phrase. "Organic" products on the other hand can only recieve that label after meeting some fairly strict requirements.

Oh, ok, support better labelling then

Damn, that's a shame. Coz Organics is only good for fruit and veg. To get good quality animal products (in whatever quantity they're served ), having some sort of free-range policy is pretty vital, from what i can tell (and i've done a whole ton of research for my long-over-due short based around the meat industry). Maybe some pressure groups could use this BSE-worry doing the rounds to push for some regulation in this area? Free-range is one of the most productive and strong "ethical-purchasing" trends in britland, and I'm glad the distinction exists.

Still, cheers for investigating Kongster. I'll check them out (at some time when i should be awake, as opposed to now )

oh thanks everybody! i have to write a paper on this in P.E. this is what i love, the irony of huge chains like McDonalds and TacoBell have in advertising. Heres my example. Ever see that one commercial for Carls. Jr., with the super skinny chick riding on a bull looking very sexy indeed while eating a triple cheesburger. Now what do you suppose does this type of message send out to the unbeknowest public? Several.

1) Oh hey teenage girls whose self esteem is at an all time low, this is what soceity expects out of you, that cute guy in your english class won't pay attention to you unless you are as skinny as this or as pretty.

2) Oh and everybody else, yes thats right you can eat our very fattening burgers and still be this thin. (what they don't mention is all the digital retouching and crap that happens behind the scenes in that ad)