"Survival Of The Fattest": It's A Fat, Fat World After All

Tyler Durden's picture

Back in March, we first presented a rather stunning finding: by 2020 75% of Americans will be obese or overweight. This was promptly followed up with a post showing just how it is transpired that America became the fattest nation in the world in less than 20 years. What however may not be known, is that America's fatness epidemic is not localized to the country that gave the world the McDonalds burger (and the McMansion): it really is a fat, fat world, after all. 

Behold - survival of the fattest:

It is hardly surprising in this light, then, that the estimate for number of people living with diabetes has been increased, to 371 million - an increase of 11% over 2011.

So with the sensitive issue of what one stuffs in their mouth becoming of paramount importance, primarily due to the avalanche in social costs as a result of escalating morbid obesity, here is a primer on the key facts and figures relating to obesity, domestic as well as foreign, and impacting not just the developed world but also emerging economies, from GS' Mick Ready and Keyur Parekh.

Obesity is a unique phenomenon affecting almost all countries. It is defined as excessively high amount of body fat in relation to lean tissue, and individuals are generally considered overweight if their BMI is over 25, and clinically obese if their body mass index (BMI) is greater than 30.

The 1980s saw a sharp acceleration in BMI in OECD countries. Before 1980, global obesity rates were generally below 10% but today, in almost half of OECD countries, 50% of the population is overweight. Interestingly, data suggests that obesity is a pandemic that is now impacting not just the developed western countries, but also the emerging economies. In BRIC economies, obesity rates are somewhat lower than in their OECD counterparts, but urbanisation and lifestyle changes are driving a significant increase in average BMI. In China, the proportion of the population considered overweight increased from 13.5% in 1991 to 26.7% in 2006; in Brazil between 1975 and 2003, the obesity rate tripled in men and doubled in women; and in Russia 25% of women and 10% of men are now considered obese.

  • Data suggest that at levels of GDP below US$5,000 per capita there is a linear relationship between GDP and mean BMI, and that the only pre-condition for developing an obese population is the ability to afford food.
  • In low income countries, obese individuals are typically middle-aged women from wealthy, urban settings.
  • In countries with GDP of more than US$5,000 per capita pa, obesity is not characterized by gender, or age, but disadvantaged groups typically are at greater risk of becoming obese;
    • 33% of US adults earning over US$15,000 pa are obese, compared with 25% of those earning over US$50,000 pa.
    • 33% of adults who did not graduate high school were obese, compared with 21.5% who graduated from college.

What’s causing this increase?

Obesity is a complex problem, with multiple factors influencing its development within a population. These factors include systemic and environmental drivers, which provide an infrastructure to promote high growth, consumption of transport and recreational factors, which limit the physical activity within a population, and behavioral patterns, where individuals consume high-energy foods and lead sedentary lifestyles.

For an individual, obesity is caused by an energy imbalance: simply put, obese individuals consume more energy than they use. Energy intake is a clear factor in the rise of obesity, and dietary intake is strongly influenced by the kinds of food we eat. Changes in the food system to more mass-produced, processed foods with added salt, fats and sugars, coupled with more effective marketing of these products, especially targeting young children has changed the kind of food we eat which contributes to this energy imbalance.

To summarize, changes in the global food system, which produces readily available, inexpensive, highly processed and well marketed foods, coupled with changes in working patterns, has created an energy imbalance resulting in increased levels of obesity.

Sugary drinks: The choice of a heavy generation

There are multiple factors which are linked to the development of obesity globally, but sugar-sweetened drinks have attracted particular attention in the US. Sugar intake from sugar-sweetened drinks is thought to be the largest single caloric food source in the US, approaching 15% of the daily calorific intake in several population groups.

High-sugar drinks are effectively marketed to children and young adults, and their consumption is often linked to fast food, which is likely to exacerbate the obesity problem. Many sugar-sweetened drinks contain high-fructose corn syrup, and there is evidence to suggest a link between high-fructose corn syrup and the development of insulin resistance (think diabetes). Multiple studies have shown that replacing a sugar-containing drink with a sugar-free equivalent significantly reduced weight gain and fat accumulation in normal weight children, prompting calls from the American Heart Association, the Institute of Medicine, and the Obesity society to reduce consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages.

The consequences of being obese: Shorter, less healthy lives The life expectancy of a person with a BMI of 40-45 is reduced by around 8-10 years, which is similar to the reduction in life expectancy suffered by smokers. An  overweight person of average height increases their risk of death by around 30% for every 15kg of weight. Obesity is a key risk factor in the development of multiple diseases, including diabetes, heart disease, osteoarthritis and

The most direct and obvious impact of obesity is on incidence of diabetes - a severely obese person is around 60 times more likely to develop diabetes than someone with normal weight. High blood pressure and high cholesterol levels are also linked to high BMI.

These combined risk factors make an obese individual more likely to die from heart disease or stroke.

But perhaps a less intuitive link is the one between obesity, physical inactivity and cancer. Obesity and physical inactivity are also a key risk factor in the development of certain cancers; around 9% of colorectal cancers, and 11% of postmenopausal breast cancer in women is linked to obesity. An additional 5kg/m2 in BMI is thought to increase the risk of colorectal cancer by 24% in males, and to increase the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer in women by 12%.

Obesity and cancer – the not so obvious link

According to the American Cancer Society, one-third of cancer deaths are linked to obesity and/or lack of physical activity.

Improvements in cancer diagnosis, treatment and prevention has seen an improvement in death rates for cancer in the US over recent years, but the obesity epidemic within the US puts this trend at risk. Obesity is a known risk factor for multiple different tumour types, including oesophageal, colorectal, endometrial, kidney and certain breast cancers. In addition to increasing the risk of developing certain cancers, obese individuals are less likely to survive their cancer diagnosis; individuals with a BMI above 40 had death rates 52% higher for men and 62% higher for  women when compared to people of normal weigh.

Obese men are at significantly higher risk of developing colorectal cancer; the distribution of body fat appears to be an important fact, with abdominal obesity measured by waist circumference demonstrating a strong correlation with colon cancer risk. Obesity also modestly increases the risk of women developing postmenopausal breast cancer.

The costs of an obese population – direct, but also indirect Obese populations place greater stress upon healthcare systems already struggling to cope with rising expectation on what healthcare systems can deliver, more expensive medical interventions and an increasingly elderly population. The chronic nature of the condition means that obese people consume a greater share of healthcare resources, over a longer period of time.

Medical costs for obese individuals are as much as 30% to 40% higher than those with normal weight. An obese individual will on average visit a physician 27% more frequently than someone with a normal weight, and the annual extra medical costs of obesity in the US were estimated to be US$75 bn in 2003 (BMJ Wang). If current demographic trends continue, obesity-related costs are set to double every ten years, and could account for 16%-18% of US Healthcare expenditure by 2030. In the UK, data point to a similar trend, with £650 mn increased annual costs by 2020, and £2 bn higher costs by 2030 (Wang).

In addition to the direct medical costs for treating obesity, there are indirect costs to society and economies, which include early retirement and lost or lower productivity. US data suggest a direct correlation between obesity and missed work days in men, with males with a BMI above 40 taking almost six additional sick days each year. Swedish data suggest obese individuals are 1.5-1.9 times more likely to take sick leave than their peers with normal weight.

Who provides the solutions?

Before we get to the investing implication of this pandemic, we believe it’s worth spending a minute on the impact that reversal of current trends might have, and the role that various parties have played thus far to resolve this. Perhaps slightly depressingly, we believe that pharma companies alone are unlikely to be able to resolve this. Indeed we believe that a majority of this change message needs to come from government policy and social change (as we saw in the 1970s-80s with smoking).

What are the benefits if trends reverse?

Modest changes can have a dramatic impact on both an individual’s risk profile and society as a whole. A 1% reduction in BMI (approximately losing 1kg of body weight) is estimated to reduce cases of diabetes by around 2 million, and cases of cancer by around 100. However, implementation of these changes will require behavioural changes through health promotion campaigns and policy interventions to address healthy public sector food service policies. But policy and behavioural changes are not easy to implement and take time to take effect.

Pharma industry response – encouraging, but not adequate

Despite numerous attempts, the pharmaceutical industry has had limited success in addressing the primary cause of obesity (energy imbalance). Current treatments combat the consequences of obesity, e.g., through the management of hypertension, or diabetes. [ZH: perhaps the profit potential is far greater in perpetuating the underlying cause and merely treating the symptoms which have a duration that expires with the expiration of the patient?] A large number of companies have tried to develop pharmaceuticals to target energy imbalance, but the vast majority have failed owing to serious toxic effects. For example, Sanofi’s Accomplia was abandoned for suicidal ideation, Fen-Phen was withdrawn for serious cardiovascular concerns, and sibutramine was recently withdrawn following cardiovascular safety concerns.

2012 has seen the FDA approval of two new treatments for obesity, when used in conjunction with reduced calorie diets. Both Belviq (Arena Pharmaceuticals) and Qsymia (Vivus) reduce appetite and in some people can induce a negative energy balance. Both products have demonstrated safety signals which are a cause for concern, and patients receiving these products will require careful monitoring by clinicians. But, the FDA’s willingness to approve agents with clear safety signals illustrates the need for effective intervention for obesity.

One of the more serious efforts to this end was recently demonstrated by the Australian government, which evaluated several measures aimed at combating this epidemic (see exhibit below). Not surprisingly,  nonpharmacological options were found to be more cost-effective in the long term, but are obviously more difficult to implement at a society level.

* * *

Another, even more dramatic health-related recent intervention was that on behalf of Mike Bloomberg and the city of New York banning sugary drinks in 16 oz containers or more.

The problem with government intervention in individual and social level consumption, is that it never works without a proper incentive system. If instead of using negative reinforcement, the government were to use positive reinforcement techniques, and for example offer each American $100/year for every pound kept below the overweight threshold every year, the results would be far more encouraging, and the costs saved in the long run would more than offset initial outlays.

Of course, this being the government, it is absolutely certain that corruption and "unintended side-effects" will intervene, that incentives will be perverted by special interests and lobby groups, and the final outcome would be a far worse one than the base case.

Which is why, sadly, the obesity epidemic will not be "fixed" in any conventional sense, but like so many other aspects of the current unsustainable socio-economic system, will merely go away on its own once the "weakest links" are eliminated by the various forces of natural (and man-made) selection in play today.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
EscapingProgress's picture

You don't have to outrun the drones. You just have to outrun the fattest camper.

nasa's picture

Drone operators will be trained to shoot the thin ones first...

Ginsengbull's picture

They're so much harder to hit.

Cosimo de Medici's picture

Like the inflation-deflation debate, this will never be solved.  Every time there's a new answer, there comes with it a new problem.  High cholesterol is associated with increased risk of heart disease.  Low cholesterol is associated with increased risk of cancer.  High carb diet is associated with increased insulin production, while a low carb diet is associated with increased risk of depression and bipolar disorder (seratonin related).  Lack of exercise is associated with weight gain;  too much exercise associated with joint and connective tissue problems.  Perhaps moderation in all things is the right answer.  Keep the demons and the angels at each other's throats.

That being said, nobody went to bed one night at a svelte 175 and awoke the next morning at 315, so the vast majority of the blame has to be placed on the individual.

And one last thing:  choose your parents wisely. CdM lives off pizza, pasta, bread, cheese, olive oil, red wine, chillis and blueberries, hasn't had a cold or any other illness in more than twenty years, has 10% body fat, 105/60 BP with a resting pulse of 48-52, regular body temp of 97 degrees, never takes meds or vitamins, never goes a day without exercise...and has two robust parents.  Accident of birth.  The Universe isn't fair.

"If I'd have known I was going to live this long, I would have taken better care of myself"  Eubie Blake on his 100th birthday

TBT or not TBT's picture

High cholesterol is associated with increased risk of heart disease.     FALSE:  VERY WEAK CORRELATION and only at extreme values of cholesterol

Low cholesterol is associated with increased risk of cancer.     AGAIN, OUTLIERS HERE.     Anyone still saying minimizing cholesterol (total cholesterol) for everyone is wrong to begin with.

High carb diet is associated with increased insulin production,  EXACTLY RIGHT, until and when the pancreas gives up entirely, as happens sometimes.   And "high" carb is the standard american diet, the food pyramid, with "healthy whole grains" at the base, glucose bombs basically.

while a low carb diet is associated with increased risk of depression and bipolar disorder (seratonin related).    OUTLIERS, again.

Lack of exercise is associated with weight gain;   FALSE.  READ Gary Taubes.   Over and over again researchers find, in their actual data, no support or marginal support for this widespread hypothesis, and yet conclude in the blah blah part of the paper that more study is needed.    More study isn't needed.     Increased excercise causes increased appetite.      We eat more to compensate for the increased energy output.    The great majority of us do.

too much exercise associated with joint and connective tissue problems. tonin related).   INFLAMMATION is the key here.   Caused by chronically high insulin, overconsumption of modern vegetable oils that extremely high in omega 6 fatty acids, and accumulation of advanced glycation end products in low circulation tissues.   Surprise surprise, carbo loading may help performance on your 10k and marathons etc, but it is killing your joints, long term, and killing your organs across the board(inflammation at the root of cancer and degenerative disease).   

SERIOUSLY.    As the miraculously healthy guy, I didn't read where he/she ate a lot of modern vegetable oils.   You cut those out, you knock out the second wham, if you will, of the double whammy that is high carb consumption WITH high omega 6 fatty acid consumption.     Insulin upregulates the conversion of omega-6 fatty acid precursors into a toxic fatty acid that is the precursor to inflammatory signalling compounds.    Also, the example person given is probably descended from a long line of people, civilisations (necessarily) dependent on wheat consumption.    He doesn't have a lot of ancestry with sensitivities to glutens because anyone born in those enviroments with gluten senstivities would have had poor health and worse outcomes, hampering their possibilities to spread their genes.    Note that a whole lot of peoples on this planet do not descend entirely from civilisations that depended on wheat.   They should avoid it like the plague, particularly modern wheat.   Others should avoid it becuase it is a blood glucose bomb, with a higher glycemic index even than table sugar.   Yeah.

GreatUncle's picture

Pharma industry response???

Lol way to go drop the magic pill and hey presto no more obeseity.

Cheaper and much more effective, just consume less.

Ginsengbull's picture

Two pills, one an intentional tape worm, another that kills tapeworms when the desired weight loss is achieved.

Derezzed's picture

I see an interesting correlation between bad quality of food and obesity.


And those food competitions ? Plain stupid and totally useless ...

nimrod's picture

Here we go again. the answer to being fat is the same for all animals that hibernate: FRUCTOSE is the FAT Switch. search on the "fat switch" the new book explains the latest data within the last year or so. basically animals going into hibernation in the end of summer eat lots of fruit (Fructose), this turns on their cell fat storage and turns off their leptin, which would indicate that they are full. So they no longer feel full and store fat, a great way to fatten up prior to hibernation.

Cut out the frustose and sugar, white carbs, etc, and the switch is turned off. To turn it off completely you need to eliminate the white carbs as well because your body will synthesize its own fructose in the major organs (kidneys, liver) even from the starches. Another backup for hibernating animals!

Thanks to the FDA, most of the HFCS is of the GMO variety, so it also contains the poison of GMO and maybe extra roundup as well. If you look at the latest French GMO rat feeding study, they developed huge tumors and lived about 80% as long as rats not fed GMO , roundup or the combination. So thanks to our FDA and food companies, we should expect tremendous obesity, early death and numerous cancers. The only way to stop this madness is to tell the markets , walmarts, etc that you will no longer be purchasing foods that contain GMO or HFCS and they will stop selling them, it is that simple. Also, making them label their products with GMO, should help. So look at the labels, avoid everything with HFCS and ask for organic. do not eat anything with non-organic unlabeled corn, soy, canola oil, etc.


Good luck and stay healthy, it's the only thing you can control, what you put in your mouth.


Ginsengbull's picture

You trust their labels?


Only way to be sure is to follow food from field to table.


FDA doesn't have the people to do that, and they're fat overpaid whores for the food lobby anyhow.

BraveSirRobin's picture

USA - Number "1" in obesity and number "1' in debt.

We're Number 1, We're number 1!

lamont cranston's picture

Several months ago, I heard someone talking about "Honey Boo Boo", and the initial reaction was , "Oh - another  cartoon character". Upon further easedropping, found out this was a real person from Arky-sawr.

Intrigued, I made an effort to watch one night. They were preparing some dish for dinner called, "sketty" by Miss Boo Boo. We know it as spaghetti. The sauce consisted of the following:

WalMart Ketchup & Shedd's Country Crock Oleo Margarine. Heat & mix well, pour over "sketty". 

It was her "favorite". Several days later, I heard that this fine litle fat pig was supporting Obama for president. 

HFCS - The Offical State Food of Arky-sawr. 

Ginsengbull's picture

South Park did an entire episode about honey-boo-boo.


You can catch up on comedycentral.com.

unirealist's picture

"unirealist, that's wrong. it's Archer Daniels Midland and the midwest farm corn lobby keeping the s american sugar out...." nasdaq99

Au contraire...  The midwest corn lobby has nothing to do with it at all.  It is all about the fact that Cuba can and does produce sugar at prices far below what US sugar companies do.  In fact, for over a century Cuba's exports of sugar to the US were limited by tariffs and quotas to prevent total collapse of the US growers of sugar cane.

When Castro took power in 1960, the US stopped all imports of sugar from Cuba.  Since then the US has continued to punish Cuba in every possible way, including shutting out their sugar exports (just about the only export Cuba has).

US sugar today now sells for about four times the price it should--and would, if we allowed Cuban imports of it.

The sugar producers in Florida have a powerful lobby in Congress.  Coupling their own profit motive to the strong anti-Castro feeling in Florida (due to bitter Cuban emigres), they prevent Congress from bringing sugar prices down to what the rest of the world pays for sugar.

Hence the prevalence of high fructose corn syrup in the US.  It is marginally cheaper than cane sugar, and the multinationals like Coke and Pepsi just don't give a damn that they are fattening the nation.  If rat poison were sweet and cheap, they would use that in their sodas.

Anyway, there is a long, long history to the high price of sugar in the US, and it's all about anti-Communism and fatcat Florida sugar plantation owners.

Not about the Midwest corn lobby.


Monedas's picture

Unibomber ?  That would be a better handle for you ?  Bitter Cuban refugees ? 

Ginsengbull's picture

Sugar didn't work, so they fattened us up with not a commodity, but a recipe.


The cuban sandwich.


Sneaky bastards. Now I'm hungry.

Monedas's picture

Survival of the "fattest" .... I spelled it "fatest" back on the Walmart phone riot thread on Black Friday .... oh well ?  We're both wrong .... even Darwin .... shouldn't it be "Survival of the fitter" or in my case "Survival of the fatter" ?

User 3461's picture

I cannot explain obesity in Africa, except to blame the kind of food they have access to.

But as for kicking things in line here, observe that there's no negative-feedback loop in a person's conduct (actually, there's a positive feedback loop).

Almost none of us care to sniff at the actual medical bills (that the insurance co will pay). And a lot of us just look at it as the crows do: 1, 2, 3, many; it's all so costly and just up there. Further, the welfare state insulates people from these bills. If most of our bills were paid directly by us, I bet we'd have more interest in the causes.

Like the rest of the PC rap, you can't even notice if somebody's a big fat ass pig (or a welfare junky, or a tattooed freak...). It's not shuned.

The damned airplanes are more accommodating to the fat than the normal customers. I'm sick of blobs of fat tissue encroaching on my [already] limited personal space.

Monedas's picture

All passengers and their baggage should be weighed together at the check in scale and tickets sold on a price per pound basis .... just like "pay the fucking freight" .... stop fat subsidies in public transportation .... real fat people should be charged for both seats .... one for each "cheek" ?    Monedas     1929     Comedy Fatwas Issued While You Wait

Monedas's picture

Obese people commit less violent crime .... what's the problem .... they're self medicating .... leave 'em alone !  Poor things .... they're more inclined to get stuck in ventilator shafts when they commit property crimes, too !    Monedas    1929      Comedy Jihad World Tour

Monedas's picture

High sugar tariffs led to creative uses of corn as a sweetner .... even too much honey is bad for you ! I personally prefer cane sugar and cane alcohol .... and I have access to them and use them .... but I have no problem with corn sweetners .... WTP (what's da problemo) ?

Ginsengbull's picture

Grain alcohol tastes better than Cane alcohol, IMHO.

Monedas's picture

It's the difference between vodka and rum ! I like them both .... there's about a RCH of difference .... but cane has a whiff of the cane and mixes better with fruit juices for tropical drinks !  Here's a caveat emptor for you .... grain alcohol is CORN alcohol .... so many vodkas are really distilled from the pig's mash so to speak .... not as elegant as fresh nigger cut cane from the carribean ?

Monedas's picture

Passengers have a right to know the "Take Off Weight" (Pun: ON/off) of the aircraft !

Monedas's picture

"Last meal request of condemned New Yorker for a Big Gulp was denied by prison authorities !" .... Brave New World Of Monedas    Sometimes I make shit up  ....  you decide !

Monedas's picture

No welfare work requirement + SNAP cards = Fat Self Medicating Negroes

falak pema's picture

I am not long on fat people, nor on ethnic minorities, nor on libertarian ideas. 

Have I left anything out?

Maybe Bankstas and their impending day on the island of Jews, as in Paris 1314 under the iron gaze of the king.

Monedas's picture

In WWI .... the Kaiser's Generals observed that soldiers fought more energetically if they had a good bowell movement in the morning .... before going "over the top" of the trenches .... so, the Kaiser said: "Grease 'em up the night before !" .... dinner consisted of delicious fatty sausages and other dietary lubricants !      Monedas     1929     Comedy Fatwas Fat Is As Fat Does World Tour

Monedas's picture

Warning:  Falak Attack !      What do you think of fat, black, libertarian, Zionist Jews who adopt new names from the Old Testament  ?

falak pema's picture

comedy jihad in inversion if you can tell that from reversion!.


Reflections on inversion and reversion

Nigel D Haig

Received 10 March 1992, in revised form 7 December 1992

Abstract. A paper published recently in Perception has drawn attention to a question that appears to mystify psychologists, yet yields simply to the well-known law of reflection. The question of why a mirror reverses left and right, but not up and down, is explained in this paper, in terms of physical optics. The question of how mirror-reflected objects are perceived remains, of course, a psychological one....


Now I know that your brilliant, libertarian white IQ can digress on that!  GO for it! 



Monedas's picture

Label the sides of the mirror .... then turn it 90 degrees !  Good morning ! ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ !

falak pema's picture

your mirror image  will still look just as gruesome and it ain't a question of philosophy. Can't put the genie back in the bottle once its out! 

Monedas's picture

If your image passes through a pin hole camera lens .... it is reversed left to right and up to down !  In a mirror .... nothing is reversed !

Ginsengbull's picture

Easier to turn my head 90 degrees.


I have a really big mirror.

Monedas's picture

Just lay down on your side in front of your floor to ceiling mirror ? IMAO (in my arrogant opinion) !  

Monedas's picture

I'm going back to bed .... no cheap shotzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz !

JMT's picture

This has helped me keep weight off or I can eat what I want, the key is exercise at least 1 hour 5 - 7 days a week. 

I take Adderall (Amphetamine Salts) usually around 6 of the blue pills each day along with Prozac.  This is the best stuff but for some reason generic Amphetamine is still considered a controlled substance. Prozac is a joke, the generic is $4.00 at Walmart or Target. 

Perdogg's picture

BMI is not a good indicator. I got into an argument with my doctor after she labeled me as Obese and I go to the gym 6 times a week.

Ginsengbull's picture

So they have a really nice buffet at the gym?

janchup's picture

It's sugar all the way. With no sugar, America would have no health care issue, no crisis, no ObamaCare. Sure, people would grow old, get sick and die but not the way it happens today.

marcusfenix's picture

ever read the ingredient label on these "reduced fat/ fat free" foods? more synthetic chemicals then an everlasting twinkie. buy a bottle of fat free ranch dressing, open it up and just let it sit on the counter for a few days, a week, a month, hell let it sit out for a year, the shit never goes bad...ever. and the FDA claims it's safe to eat that stuff?

with all the gmo's, bht, bgh, fluoride, saccharin, and countless other man made chemical poisons we ingest every day it's a miracle if all you come out of it is being fat. there are plenty of studies out there linking this shit to everything from cancer, autism and ADHD to heart disease, strokes and infertility. 

and that doesn't even begin to cover the damage done by the prescription medications (also synthetic) that well over half the country is strung out on. and that flue shot that's supposed to protect you? it's got mercury in it among other things, in fact flue shots have been cited in many cases as the cause of TBI in children after the chemicals in them caused a sudden swelling on the brain.

fatty foods are not the problem, natural sugar is not the problem. the problem is we are ingesting far to much poison that is being packaged as not only perfectly safe and healthy, but beneficial and even necessary by those who benefit from the "soft kill" of America.        


Translator's picture

"Dimme dat fill it MIG non LaKeisha"

northerngirl's picture

Why is it when the government gets involved and people start looking for others, (Insurance Companies), for managing costs that costs increase at an accelerated rate?  For many years people were more than happy to pay insurance prem's without looking at the cost of service.  It is only now that cost of services has sky rocketed to the point that health care is becoming unaffordable that the issue of cost open for discussion? 

Yes, people that make poor live style decisions do increase the costs, but really we all a part of the problem.  Increased government involvement, along with HMO's, the cost of the services were never in question as long as someone else was paying for it.  The, "Spread the Wealth", con comes in many forms.  I can blame my fat neighbor all I want, but that will not solve the problem because the problem is with me. 

Next time you go to the doctor, tell them you are paying in cash, I am doing this now and my health care costs have dropped as much as 50% for some services.  The funny part is my fat neighbor is still fat.  We have to decide are we going to be, "Looters", or not?  We can't have it both ways we either start paying for what we consume, or we become part of pool, (Insurance), and therefore pay more because we have decided to spread the risk with those in the pool. 

Translator's picture

Those  among us that are so ill equipped to purchase healthy nutritious foods with  their free food stamps are the very same ones who elected Obama to be our leader.



Thanks alot, Ron Paul voting idiots., and stupid white working women.

Wear wood Tyvellious an Lakeisha bee wifout U?

cheetahbaby's picture

It is altogether too easy to correlate income and obesity, which is not entirely correct; educational level (controlling for income) positively correlates with health, a concept that includes obesity as a factor. So, it is not just those individuals who are poor who are overweight or obese, it is also the population of people who may have a reasonable or even decent income but do not have the knowlege or understanding of healthy habits, eating, exercise and otherwise. 

Many people really have no idea of what it means to eat healthy food, and they lack the ability, curiosity, motivation or something that might lead them to seek out such information. The sheeple believe all they are told, ask no questions and are told plenty of lies--Wonderbread, builds strong bodies how any ways--damn, check out those flip flapping flopping strong bodies all across America. 

Doctors, being educated and members of the elite do not understand the depths of the ignorance that lies below. My former MIL, an ignorant woman on a good day, was told to reduce her husband's fat intake. So what does she do? She takes the skin of the chicken she cooked and serves the now skinless chicken swimming in a sea of melted margarine along with canned green beans cooked so long they were mush, white bread and more margarine, and iceberg lettuce doused with bottled dressing, not the low fat kind. She literally did not know how to reduce fat, but worse, lacked the ability to find out how because no one told her. If the sheeple aren't told the sheeple can't act. 

The educated elite learn not only through their own curiosity and work, but from one another, reinforcing the class divide, skinnies at the top, fatties at the bottom. Maybe that is as it should be, a nice big cushion at the bottom of the pile.

americanspirit's picture

Obesity and whole body inflammation are two completely different conditions but to the observer they both appear the same. Ewwww - gross.

Both are 100% connected with diet, but in completely different ways. Obesity is excess fat; inflammation is excess fluids. Then of course there are fat people who also suffer from whole body inflammation - truely pathetic.

The only strategy that works to control/reverse obesity - reduction of caloric intake - is completely different from the only strategy that works for controlling/reversing whole body inflammation - elimination of inflammatory foods.

css1971's picture

Fast on a Friday.

Water only.

Cut food consumption & calories by 15%

Easy to do & cheap. You can start this week. No complex diets which fail 97% of the time anyway. No drugs. No time required to go to the gym or whatever. No equipment to purchase.