9 ms·
Over 73% of U.S. Adults Overweight or Obese
- iab 6y agoSeems like conditional distribution over obesity given place is more informative, rather than just the marginal
- germinalphrase 6y agoIsn’t BMI an intrinsically flawed measure? Edit: the change in population argument makes sense. I’ve always thought it was flawed as a good friend of mine is short, very stocky, and fit - but is technically “obese”. Edit 2: I was curious how this trend looks going back further than the 80’s. “The evolution of BMI values of US adults: 1882-1986” https://voxeu.org/article/100-years-us-obesity https://voxeu.org/article/100-years-us-obesity
- mjbeswick 6y agoBMI is pretty accurate for most people. Having said that you don't need a measurement to see if someone is fat!
- chrisseaton 6y ago> BMI is pretty accurate What is 'accurate' in this context? Accurate against what? What are you comparing it against to get a measure of accuracy? It indicates against 'normal weight' - but if the population's weight changes then the 'normal weight' changes with it doesn't it?
- mjbeswick 6y agoAdmittedly accurate is the wrong term, but it is a reasonable inductor of health, as the heavier someone is for a given weight, the shorter their expected lifespan will be. The normal weight may change, but the ideal healthy weight doesn't. The idea of a healthy weight is misleading, as there is more of a healthy body fat percentage. Even that's is an oversimplification, as visceral fat has far more health implications that subcutaneous fat.
- minikites 6y agoIt is for individuals but it's reasonable to use as a population measure. Waist-to-height and waist-to-hip ratios are also good measures for population-level health and those work a little better for individuals.
- taeric 6y agoUnderlining this point. As imprecise as it may be for an individual, it is remarkably good directionally. More, for many individuals, it is more accurate than folks give credit.
- ixacto 6y agoThis chart from the CDC shows obesity prevalence from 1999 to 2018. It's a very good indication of where we are going as a nation bmi-wise. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/images/databriefs/351-400/db360-fig4.png https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/images/databriefs/351-400/db360-fig...
- hndudette2 6y agoIt's especially reasonable when we're talking about changes in BMI instead of levels regarding a population. That can only be driven by the population getting fatter.
- TheCoelacanth 6y agoNot really. It's inaccurate for some very athletic people, but it is accurate for a vast majority of the population.
- kevin_thibedeau 6y agoIt's accurate when measuring populations, where the missing variables average out. It isn't meant to be applied to individuals but is good enough for expedient's sake.
- torstenvl 6y agoThat is untrue. There's no research to support the idea that BMI is a particularly useful tool (compared to, say, neck vs waist circumference) or that the thresholds it sets are meaningful (e.g., that an increase from 24.7 to 24.9 is a lesser or greater increase of risk than an increase from 24.8 to 25.0).
- chrisseaton 6y agoHow do we measure how accurate it is or not? It's not like there is some underlying ground truth on what 'overweight' is, is there?
- Tepix 6y agoIt's not like most of those Americans with high BMIs are bodybuilders… or is it? Only 15% of Americans belong to a gym.
- chrisseaton 6y agoNot everyone into fitness belongs to a gym.
- netizen-9748 6y agoThis comment makes it sound like while Americans don't belong to gyms, tons of them are into fitness. This is absolutely not the case and seems rather disingenuous to suggest.
- closetnerd 6y agoMeasured overtime for a population - it seems to be very good given how easy it is to measure. I'd love it if there was technology at some point accessible to everyone that would allow for more informative measurements (w/ privacy considerations).
- o_p 6y agoMaybe, but negativity towards BMI is a very good predictor for BMI :-)
- Arnt 6y agoBMI is as flawed as people's x/y varies, where x is e.g. shoulder width and y is height. That isn't very much, really. Some people are far from the norm, but generally the broad-shouldered people aren't the short ones.
- ip26 6y agoAs a benchmark, 5'6" and 185lbs is considered obese. Is your friend built like a running back? https://www.gssiweb.org/sports-science-exchange/article/sse-145-football-player-body-composition-importance-of-monitoring-for-performance-and-health#:~:text=In%20a%20study%20of%20the,34.9)%20and%20the%20wide%20receiver%2F https://www.gssiweb.org/sports-science-exchange/article/sse-...
- germinalphrase 6y agoNo - I guess he would be “overweight” not obese.
- wayanon 6y agoOne of the weird things in photos from the 60s or 70s is how slim everyone looks.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ixacto 6y agoThere are a few things that are going on here which could be supporting raising obesity rates: -The Farm Bill and USA Sugar Program, which is a bipartisan issue but which shouldn't exist in the first place https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Sugar_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Sugar_Program -Increasing use of social media and sedentary lifestyles. When you are just inside on your phone all the time this is NOT healthy. -This obesity problem is probably going to kill more people than COVID and the opioid epidemic, but noone wants to talk about it as it directly threatens various established interests.
- buckminster 6y ago> This obesity problem is probably going to kill more people than COVID and the opioid epidemic This is already the case. More people are killed by their unhealthy lifestyles than by anything else.
- LittlePeter 6y ago> but noone wants to talk about it as it directly threatens various established interests. There are many people talking about it. Adhering to healthy life style is difficult for many people. Most obese know perfectly well why they are obese an what it takes to be healthy.
- dingaling 6y agoAnd if you look like that today you get called 'skinny' instead of 'normal' or 'healthy'
- SlipperySlope 6y agoLook at beach photos from the 1920's and 1930's. Back then, processed food was a loaf of bread or a glass of orange juice.
- Der_Einzige 6y agoThis is most likely connected to increasingly radical sexual politics - e.g. incel culture. Lmao 2 downvotes in 30 seconds. Folks don't want to admit that the average attractiveness of americans has simply gone far down overtime as a result of this.
- eganist 6y agoAlright, I'm gonna say it just so you're aware of why. I'm your third downvote as of this edit. There is literally zero reason to invoke a flamebait topic such as incel culture in this thread. It contributes nothing of value and detracts from otherwise meaningful conversation. My comment doesn't contribute anything of value either; I'm only saying it so you're not in the dark as to why you're being downvoted. More likely than not, it's because invoking political hot-button topics in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with such is a recipe for disaster.
- admiralspoo 6y agoI'm not so sure about that. I'll counter and say that Americans have never been aesthetically pleasing (regardless of weight) because selection has been historically low in that regard. In mass migrations of the past, the most privileged and attractive (those likely to find a mate early in their life) did not emigrate from their respective countries.
- o_p 6y agoSeriously, just stop eating, America.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- DoreenMichele 6y agoMost Americans used to be farm workers. It's only in the past thirty years that most Americans stopped living/working in rural/agrarian settings and began living in cities. We have more sedentary work, so that's a factor. I also wonder a lot about other things that have changed and how that impacts our bodies, including weight. There are a lot of things that have changed which don't get questioned in terms of "How does that impact health?" and which I hesitate to specify because I'm pretty sure it will get dismissed as crazy talk to wonder about the connection between such things.
- arbitrage 6y agoIt's sugar. All of our foods have way too much sugar.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- slg 6y ago>Most Americans used to be farm workers. It's only in the past thirty years that most Americans stopped living/working in rural/agrarian settings and began living in cities. What? Is there a typo here? 30 years ago was 1991. Are you saying that most Americans were living in agrarian settings in 1991?
- DoreenMichele 6y agoThis is the stat I was really thinking of: The UN estimates 2007 was the year when, for the first time, more people in the world lived in urban than in rural areas. https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization#number-of-people-living-in-urban-areas https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization#number-of-people-liv... Here is some data on the US: http://www.theusaonline.com/people/urbanization.htm http://www.theusaonline.com/people/urbanization.htm Sorry for the sloppiness. I think the thrust of my point is accurate: We used to have more physical jobs and the world on the whole became citified relatively recently. But I'm probably running a fever and mashed a few things together in my brain inaccurately.
- roflc0ptic 6y agoThis is off color, and may also be totally off base, but it just occurred to me that this could be causally related with the general decline in people having sex. Here’s wondering if people’s sexual activity is predicted by their BMI - an idle question for google scholar (and/or the hive mind here).
- boxmonster 6y agoIn one sense the fact that America is a well fed nation could be advantageous in case of climate change induced famine.
- greatgirl 6y agoBeing obese doesn't allow you to outlast starvation longer than a skinny person by more than maybe a few days.
- boxmonster 6y agoIt took me seconds to find credible information arguing against your assertion: "Using the model, we found that fatter individuals would indeed survive longer and, at a given body weight, females would survive longer than males, when totally starved" A mathematical model of weight loss under total starvation: evidence against the thrifty-gene hypothesis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3529354/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3529354/
- mytailorisrich 6y agoWell, considering that converting food into fat is a way to store and 'save' for later, that's not surprising, indeed. Arguably, if that made no difference to survival our body would have evolved away from even storing fat long before modern times.
- greatgirl 6y agoThis isn't even arguing with what I said. I said at the point of starvation, being obese is only going to let you live for a few more days longer than a skinny person assuming you dont get any more food until death. This paper is arguing that they are more likely to survive in general, which is obvious.
- doggosphere 6y agoSugar addiction. I'm guessing a sugar tax is the quickest/easiest way to get those numbers down.
- bilegeek 6y agoI'm not anti-tax, but a better way would be to stop subsidizing sugar production so much. Less subsidies would drive up prices, making a tax redundant. However, since that's only federally, it's less attractive. States would probably prefer a tax on a per-state basis, since it would be a source of revenue for them, unlike the savings from federal subsidy cuts.
- nullsense 6y agoKnowing me I'd still buy it no matter the cost and just end up poorer. I'd prefer unlabelled products and no advertising etc to a tax. I dunno. It seems healthy living and the current food industry are perhaps fundamentally incompatible. I would support some form of regulation aimed at improving public health outcomes, but struggle to see a tax as the answer for me personally, though it may work for some.
- Daho0n 6y agoSome countries have this. Denmark's tax: Chocolate and confectionery (added sugar above 0,5 g pr. 100 g.), 3,76 USD per kilogram Chocolate and confectionery (added sukker maximum 0,5 g pr. 100 g.), 3,32 USD per kilogram ...etc.
- username90 6y agoGiving poor people food stamps largely increase share of sugar bought from super markets compared to those who don't get it but are otherwise equally poor, so currently USA subsidizes unhealthy food habits via tax dollars.
- glitchc 6y agoGood food is expensive and many Americans can’t afford it. Part of the reality is that fresh food is not easily available, expensive and requires a modicum of skill to prepare into a meal. More Americans are dependent on processed food than ever. Except that processed food has declined in quality and nutritional value over the past few decades, primarily to keep costs under control. There are confounding factors but this is a key driver. As the world’s reserve currency, the USD does not experience inflation in the same manner as most other countries. Rather than food prices skyrocketing, quality and optionally portions are reduced to compensate for declining purchasing power.
- mjbeswick 6y agoThat's not really true. Most diets are bad because of the crap they include, not because of expensive for that a person cannot afford. Most people's diets can be improved by simply removing sugar and alcohol!
- closetnerd 6y agoWhat's the data around "many"? How much of this is about accessibility? How much of this is about education? How much is making affordable going to solve the problem enough? I ask sincerely - but in transparency it does come from a sense that its not as much to do w/ cost as it seems to be from my perspective.
- netizen-9748 6y agoI'm aware there is research on what are referred to as "food deserts" where people who may not have reliable transportation are stuck with corner stores and fast food in their neighborhood. Unfortunately I can't point you toward any studies in particular but the research is out there.
- nattaylor 6y agoDo you have a good source for good food is expensive? I've heard this before, but it seems like plenty of "good" food is inexpensive like rice, beans, lentils, eggs, root veges, yogurt, oats and spinach.
- mytailorisrich 6y ago3 of the 5 people who died during the storming of the Capitol, died of "medical emergencies", with at least one stroke and one heart attack, iirc. When I read that I could not help but make a connection with the diet/way of life of many middle aged Americans...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bedhead 6y agoIt blows me away that John Mackey, the founder of Whole Foods, frequently says that people need to eat healthier, and the twitterverse absolutely excoriates him. It's seriously disturbing. COVID is of course helping expose that we have run out of "real" problems and unlike any other time in history, people now have the option available to literally become fat, dumb, and lazy. I realize it's a touchy subject, but I think it's a mistake to not stigmatize obesity (not overweight but obese) the way we do smoking. Incentives matter...this might sound cruel, but have insurance stop covering health problems related to obesity and watch how quickly people stop eating McDonald's four times a week. Clearly I prefer a tough love approach on this issue.
- slg 6y ago>I realize it's a touchy subject, but I think it's a mistake to not stigmatize obesity (not overweight but obese) the way we do smoking I won't get a heart attack from your second hand obesity. There are a lot of other unsafe behaviors that have more severe negative externalities than obesity.
- bedhead 6y agoWhat about their children? Or do they not count? Does the cycle that creates count for nothing?
- slg 6y agoObesity isn't contagious and doesn't pose a direct threat to anyone but the obese person. This isn't true of numerous other harmful behaviors that have greater negative externalities. If you want to work to stigmatize bad parenting, be my guest. Obesity of a parent isn't a symptom of bad parenting.
- nullsense 6y agoI think the cycle will be devastatingly hard to break once an entire country is fat.
- netizen-9748 6y ago
- daxfohl 6y agoFwiw I've been doing 100% Huel Black and a keto dinner for the last two months, and never felt better. It takes the decision fatigue of "does this fit in my diet" out of it all, and makes eating right so much easier. I honestly feel like my brain is functioning better now too, just one less thing gnawing away at it. And I like Huel Black because it's kind of gross, so no urge to overconsume, which I've run into with other products. Plus, it feels somewhat nice in that it's probably one of the more environmentally friendly ways to eat. I never would have thought I'd be able to keep up with it (love sugar too much) but actually it's been not so hard once I set my mind to it. I gave up alcohol a few years ago and this has been easier than that. We'll see how long it lasts. It seems weird to think about doing it forever, but who knows. For now I see no reason to stop, and lots of reasons to keep going.
- istorical 6y agoflavor fatigue often eventually kicks in with meal replacements, but buying a variety of brands, flavors, and even now some of the savory alternatives helps with that. but yes if school lunches had a meal shake option many kids would prefer its flavor over the existing options. and its miles healthier.
- moneytide1 6y agoJapanese "metabo law" [1] financially pressures citizens to adapt to physical standards established by the state as a precautionary measure to prevent future medical labor demand absorbed by the gluttonous, idle citizen. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_tax