It has been a whirlwind lately. A week of 12-hour days with a racing yacht trip in the middle. A week in
Currently I am sitting on the biggest pontoon boat I have ever seen. It is called the Queen Vittoria and it is taking me to Hingham Shipyard. They serve beer but I have no cash. What a freaking pity. We’ll fix that next time. My muscles from the waist up are screaming in pain from being dragged behind a boat for hours 2 days in a row. As dramatic as it sounds, it did involve skis and inner tubes. It also involved bouncing around and knocking heads with my cousins. So I have a few bruises… and nylon burns.
I’m not sure if some of you coastal people are aware of this, but the pounds per capita ratio in the Midwest is MUCH higher than that of the coasts. There are more overweight people and I’m sure what constitutes “fat” is way bigger than it is here. The people are HUGE. Why do we think this is? Is it environmental? As in, there’s not the threat of a beach, so they just don’t worry? Is it just too freaking muggy? Is it cultural? Being heavier is considered more attractive? Is it socio-economic? Do they not have money for healthy food and gym memberships? Combination of cultural/socio-economic? Being fat means you’re wealthier because you have more food?
The last argument is the one I would use for the obesity in West Africa considering the severe lack of food in many families, and from my experience, the richer people are fatter—unless they are slightly more progressive and have taken a more Western approach to what is healthy. I do not think this argument works here, however. Maybe it once did, but now it’s just disgusting. People don’t just have nice juicy butts, they have nice juicy everything. Many look like they’re barely able to walk. The boat I’m on has about 30 people in the room where I’m sitting. One or two might qualify for overweight, and none for obese. I can guarantee that the statistic in the
This brings me to my next subject: The Cincinnati airport. It was so funny, I was in a terminal that had about 8 foot ceilings and ground-level doors. All planes were boarded from the tarmac. On the ride to
Have you all seen the cartoon that has Bush in front of the “
Coming back to obesity: I think it’s the cars. Yep, the only reason I exercise is because I have to in order to get anywhere. I’m sure the fact that people can drive through their McDonalds (and now Starbucks) rather than walk to it has something to do with the obesity problem in the less densely populated cities which constitutes most of the
P.S. Almost all of my people are back in the
4 comments:
Chrystina, I would come and live with you, I really would. Except for the fact that I have no job (nor prospects) and you are living in one the most expensive cities in the U.S.
And it's true. I will concur that the reason why people in the midwest are fatter is because we live so dang far apart that we have to drive everywhere. And we have Super Walmarts, Sam's Clubs, and plenty of Chinese Buffets.
You neglected to mentioned that the cincinatti airport is in kentucky. Not that that explains anything...
I'm beginning to be more and more convinced that obesity has a lot more to do with genetics than previously thought, for starters:
http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/07/issue/feature_wired.asp?p=1
Not that other things don't matter also...
i love your thoughts on obesity. I love your page it is most awesome. *JOY*
Let me start by saying "I love JonW".
This article has two (professional) opinions:
1. People are slaves to their genes and cannot change the way in which they gain weight. Obesity is a disease. Even when/if they do exercise, they will not lose weight. They may be healthier, but they will not be slimmer.
2. People are somewhat predestined by genetics to eat a certain way, but weight can be controlled by diet and exercise provided that the person has a strong will to change and/or has societal constructs to help them, such as the church groups that serve local food that is generally lower in fat and healthier than the canned western food.
It is hard to argue that genes don't play a role, so I won’t. I have worked with the ‘thrifty gene’ theory before in anthropology and it is basically the science behind my statement about obesity in West Africa. However, my reasoning in the original post I think still stands, and is simply strengthened by these arguments—especially the second one. The first one also concludes that drugs that control the hunger mechanism are the only way to solve this problem (if they can be developed). It makes me suspicious of the holder of that opinion since he could stand to make some money from that. If shows like “The Biggest Loser” can work, then I’m not sure he’s right. Don’t worry; I didn’t watch it much, just here and there.
Environment still has an effect on people’s motivation. If it’s too hot, people won’t exercise.
Cultural norms such as how big a person should be still have an effect on a person’s motivation.
Socio-economic constraints such as having time/money to exercise.
Community groups focused on promoting health such as religious affiliations, clubs, etc. have an effect on motivation as well. This also addresses the socio-economic issue, because if you can socialize and exercise at once (for example, participating on a club team), that solves some time issues. Or if you can go to church and eat healthy food and be influenced by other people’s habits, that helps too. For example, the church I sometimes attend serves fair trade coffee. I think that is a catalyst for other people to do the same. Religion carries a lot of power (obviously, see: London).
I also think that diseases can be treated in a number of ways, not just with drugs, but since I really have no evidence to back that up considering my very amateur understanding, I will not attempt to argue that point.
Post a Comment