News Article for AandF6969…The Obese Feel More Discrimination

[Renesis]

Hmm Shall I have the Whopper or grilled chicken with whole grain pasta? CHOICE!

[gixxerboy1]

Hmm Shall I have the Whopper or grilled chicken with whole grain pasta? CHOICE!

All 3

[bigt10]

Hmm Shall I have the Whopper or grilled chicken with whole grain pasta? CHOICE!

can i CHOOSE for the SUPERSIZE whopper please

does that come with fries haha

[_CrossroadS_]

....

[D-Unit 39]

Check out this cartoon I just saw.... explains the evolution of obesity and technology.

[Amorphic]

Check out this cartoon I just saw.... explains the evolution of obesity and technology.

haha, ive seen that before, so true

[Fat Guy]

Obesity...by choice

(May 30, 2002) Bethesda, Md. – Scientists have long believed that in all animals (including humans), innate physiological ability exists to seek out sources of nutrients (minerals) deficient in the major food source available to them. Their beliefs originate from a series of studies in which test animals were allowed to choose from one container of each nutrient – leading to the identification of "nutritional wisdom.” These tests proved that there is a natural disposition to select a balanced diet with all necessary nutrients and suitable for the respective environment.

Unfortunately, the nation’s soaring obesity rate offers evidence that in the animal kingdom, humans are flunking in their “nutritional wisdom.” Where nature fails to reduce weight, human ingenuity (and marketing) takes over – with a billion dollar industry advancing programs that entreat Americans to modify their habits and regain their “nutritional wisdom” and return to their “normal” and slimmer weight.

This may not be so easy and overweight Americans may be throwing their money away. New study findings suggest that “nutritional wisdom” goes out the window when unhealthy food choices are more available than healthier nutrients. Tests with rodents found that the number of containers of each nutrient provided markedly influenced consumption rates. Most rats given a choice from separate sources of protein, carbohydrate, and fat thrived if given one cup of each but half failed to thrive if given one cup of each and three extra cups of carbohydrate or fat. Rats given five bottles of sucrose solution and one bottle of water became fatter than rats given five bottles of water and one of sucrose.

These studies in rats may point to a model for human obesity, in which the availability of the wrong food can override physiological controls of ingestion. The author of "Obesity by choice: the powerful influence of nutrient availability on nutrient intake," is Michael G. Tordoff, Monell Chemical Senses Center, Philadelphia, PA. His findings appear in the current edition of The American Journal of Physiology -- Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology.

Methodology and Findings This study consisted of two distinct experiments.

(1) Influence of macronutrient choice on macronutrient selection: Thirty rats were given a choice between separate sources of solid carbohydrate (CHOW), fat, and protein, but in addition to these standard choices of nutrients, some rats received three “extra” cups of each. The experiment was terminated after eight days because four of seven rats given extra cups of carbohydrates and three of the seven given additional fat ate so little protein that they failed to survive. Providing rats with extra cups of carbohydrates or fat led to life-threatening protein malnutrition, even though the protein was freely available in the cages.

Twenty-two rats used to consuming appropriate portions of protein were reassigned to three groups: one group had a balanced selection of nutrients, another had additional carbohydrates, and the third group was provided additional fat. After 20 days, the researchers found that the test animals consumed more of the additional nutrients made available, at a cost of a balanced diet.

(2) Influence of sucrose solution choice on energy intake and obesity. This experiment attempt to influence the body weight of female rats through manipulating their access to a sucrose solution. Over a 35-day period, rats were either given just one bottle of water, or five bottles of water and one bottle of 32 percent sucrose solution, and the third group received one bottle of water and five bottles of the sucrose solution.

The researchers found that the rats with five sucrose bottles drank significantly more sucrose and consumed more energy than did those with one bottle of sucrose. The rats with the most available sucrose decreased their food intake of other nutrients yet gained more weight as a result of their additional sugar intake. After 33 days, the control group (no sucrose) gained the least amount of fat; for the two other groups, fat increase responded to the corresponding availability of sucrose.

Conclusions
The results reveal that the more sources of a nutrient a rat has, the more it chooses to eat. The effect of nutrient availability is so powerful it overrides the healthy physiological controls of food intake. This study requires that the concept of “nutritional wisdom” be re-examined because previous studies do not consider when multiple choices of each nutrient are available.

The researchers believe that this availability-based compensation is related to the “variety effect” associated with a previous study where rats given foods of different flavors or textures overconsume relative to those provided food of one type. However, other studies have found that the variety effect may only have a transient effect and not lead to obesity. This study presents an argument that simply providing multiple sources of food stimulates intake and thus may contribute to, and in some cases account for, the variety effect.

The findings in this study have long-term and significant relevance for animal husbandry, wildlife management, and the supermarket shopping habits for millions of Americans. In the last decade, the focus on controlling obesity has been on the physiological causes for this disorder – all possibility attributed to genetic makeup, hormonal differences, and neurotransmitters involved in ingestion and body weight. These findings suggest that this may be the wrong direction for addressing obesity. Availability of food, and not the physiological actions of the body, is the culprit of “obesity by choice.”


Source: American Journal of Physiology -- Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, May 2002.

Nark,
I always enjoy reading your replies or post because usually they are intelligent and insightful. Once again thanks for this response and this was another insight to the obesity problem. As you stated in another reply that this thread was meant to “stir the pot” and once again you are absolutely correct… My intention was to generate a better understanding of obesity and the reasons/ causes behind it. Some members in there replies to this thread have accused me of promoting an obesity agenda of acceptance for this problem. However, my intention is to generate a thought provoking discussion to a societal problem and maybe we can attain a better understanding of the issue. It is my belief that having a strong understanding to an issue/ societal problem results in strong progress to solving it.

This thread is a response to a previous thread that in reading the initial post and all the following responses just really offered no real ideas to the obesity crisis but to bash and flame the people who suffer from it. I do not want this thread to go down that route and that is why I have been diligent in reporting flaming of the bashing of individuals. No matter how unacceptable people believe an individual’s problem is that individual deserves to be treated with dignity and respect.

What I would like this thread to do is to get people thinking about the core issues of obesity, discrimination and what it means, and to draw intelligent conclusions to this problem. What ever the conclusion my be (addiction, choice, strong will vs. weak will, more or less dopamine receptors in the brain creating cravings, societal influence… media, marketing, big business etc., cultural influences, biological / genetic predispositions, too much variety in a species diet… and the list goes on) but it has to be better that just empty bigoted statements oversimplifying a major and soon to be a pandemic of an issue. This thread is just a small attempt to address the obesity issue and develop any intelligent conclusions/ ideas and to do that we have to hold it to a higher stander than the typical meaningless “fat bastards” comments.

I appreciate you study and once again I am grateful for you contribution. Thanks

[Fat Guy]

I am making an official challenge to any member who is reading this tread to bring thoughtful insights and research articles to disprove the addiction to food argument I have made in my earlier postings… If you dare!

[bigt10]

How come we don't see whopperwhores like we do with crack? Anyone else see the humor in a big chick outside of burger king willing to please you for a dollar to get a burger?

thats gross. can you imagine some fat hill billy in a cowboy's hat outside burger king.

10 $ or 2 double cheeseburgers. haha

[gixxerboy1]

I am making an official challenge to any member who is reading this tread to bring thoughtful insights and research articles to disprove the addiction to food argument I have made in my earlier postings… If you dare!

Even if its an addicition its still a choice. Maybe a harder choice but in all still a choice.

[_CrossroadS_]

Even if its an addicition its still a choice. Maybe a harder choice but in all still a choice.

Agreed. That is the difference between humans and animals. Animals are hardwired to do things. If a dog develops a chemical dependency to alchohol, it doesn't have the brain capacity to understand the consequences. It just drinks alchohol until it dies. Humans can form rational thoughts, well some of them. Choice is the key word. No matter how hard it is, no one is forcing you to do it.

[Narkissos]

Nark,
I always enjoy reading your replies or post because usually they are intelligent and insightful. Once again thanks for this response and this was another insight to the obesity problem.

No problem.

As you stated in another reply that this thread was meant to “stir the pot” and once again you are absolutely correct…

That much was clear.. At least, it was for me.

My intention was to generate a better understanding of obesity and the reasons/ causes behind it. Some members in there replies to this thread have accused me of promoting an obesity agenda of acceptance for this problem. However, my intention is to generate a thought provoking discussion to a societal problem and maybe we can attain a better understanding of the issue. It is my belief that having a strong understanding to an issue/ societal problem results in strong progress to solving it.

Agreed...

This thread is a response to a previous thread that in reading the initial post and all the following responses just really offered no real ideas to the obesity crisis but to bash and flame the people who suffer from it. I do not want this thread to go down that route and that is why I have been diligent in reporting flaming of the bashing of individuals. No matter how unacceptable people believe an individual’s problem is that individual deserves to be treated with dignity and respect.

Agreed...

What I would like this thread to do is to get people thinking about the core issues of obesity, discrimination and what it means, and to draw intelligent conclusions to this problem. What ever the conclusion my be (addiction, choice, strong will vs. weak will, more or less dopamine receptors in the brain creating cravings, societal influence… media, marketing, big business etc., cultural influences, biological / genetic predispositions, too much variety in a species diet… and the list goes on) but it has to be better that just empty bigoted statements oversimplifying a major and soon to be a pandemic of an issue. This thread is just a small attempt to address the obesity issue and develop any intelligent conclusions/ ideas and to do that we have to hold it to a higher stander than the typical meaningless “fat bastards” comments.

I appreciate you study and once again I am grateful for you contribution. Thanks

I'm glad i was able to contribute to your discussion.

I must however end my contribution on this thread at this point.

I received a suspension earlier today for my contribution on this thread...despite the civility of the discourse, and the clear representation of data on my part.

I was able to have the suspension reviewed and reversed after citing my flame-free posts and your intentions to 'stir the pot' as alluded to in my post.

It is clear to me that avoiding discussions such as these is fundamental to my remaining part of this community.

I will not contribute to the underlying hard-on some posters seem to have for my removal.

It's been great discourse Fatguy

Should you desire further studies or discourse.. hit me up

-Narkissos