"As you might expect" ??

This is so offensively written, I hardly know where to start.

I'll just ask one question: Did it ever occur to you that "America's obesity problem" may have something to do with race and poverty?

Put that in your "fatso rankings" and shove it.

Oh please - just because these are the FACTS and the truth, doesn't make them or the article offensive. If poverty has a connection to obesity, then POOR people should be eatting less, driving less, drinking less and smoking less- because they can't afford it!! In VERY few cases is obesity health related (the famous it is glandular excuse) or a condition of disease!

I'm having trouble finding the "offensively written" part of this post, other than the use of the term "fatso rankings" for which I hereby apologize. I was, I thought, just reporting the results of a study -- in fewer than 180 words or less I might add.

That being said, these responses got me thinking about my own, and Boulderites', attitudes toward, ahh, 'body image,' the role of race and class and region (Blant, is that you?), and so on. Please stay tuned for a further, hopefully less offensive, post on these topics.

And thanks for reading,

RM

Jay: I don't have time for people like you.

Richard: "America's obesity problem" offends me for several reasons, one of which is that the word "obesity" translates as fat=disease, which I (and many health experts and other human beings) don't buy. Correlation is not causation, etc. Look up "fat acceptance movement" on Wikipedia if you want to get educated.

I also recommend the following books: "Big Fat Lies" by Glenn Gaesser, "The Obesity Myth" by Paul Campos and "FAT!SO?" by Marilyn Wann.

Your first sentence assumes that lean people are fit, which is not necessarily true. Google "skinny fat people."

"As you might expect" sounds like good old-fashioned regional prejudice to me, and "fatso rankings" speaks for itself. The superiority implicit in this article is readable between every line. "We westerners are healthy and fit, unlike you lazy, slovenly southerners."

Now, before all the hate-spewing comments (reference Jay, above) come cascading in, I need to say that I'm done. My time and patience for these sorts of conversations is limited. If I've persuaded you to open your mind and exercise a little compassion and critical thinking, great. If not, have a nice day anyway.

Hummm.... Richard what cook'n? Fat is a sensitive subject I do like to cut it off my steak..but to give-up de Chicharrones an tortillas nope..
de Colonel an many people living n poverty must eat happy!!

I sort of wondered if flat land produces heavier people and land with lots of ups and downs has fewer heavy people just because of the needed exercise you get walking from place to place. You go to SF or Seattle, and you don't see a lot of heavy locals in the downtown areas where the hills are. Humping your butt up and down the local landscape is probably a good deal. A huge lack of places to park a car adds to the walking. There is probably no scientific validity to my observation, but as an all too sedentary fat boy, living in a flat town, I do notice the difference when I go to those places with lots of ups and downs.

Patia doesn't have time to rebut Jay, so I'll try to do it for her.

Here is a theory about how poverty might relate to weight. It's not mine but it's generally accepted among local foodies like me. Healthy foods (those that are low in calories and fat and/or high in vitamins, minerals, and fiber) like fresh veggies and fruits; lean meat; and whole grain bread are more expensive than less healthy, highly processed grain based products like boxed macaroni and cheese, top ramen, low fiber sugary cereals; meats that are high in fat; and white bread. So, if you are trying to feed yourself enough so that you are not hungry but you only have a limited amount (or not enough) of cash and/or food stamps, you are more likely, out of necessity, to purchase unhealthy, fattening products than you are to purchase healthy food.

Of course, I know there are a lot of poor people who are not overweight and a lot of wealthy people that are. But, this theory might explain why, as a group, poor people are heavier than wealthy. Since, there are more poor people in places like Mississippi, it would make sense to me that there would be more overweight people.

Of course, there may be other factors influencing the rate of obesity in the South vs. the West. Westerners have the opportunity to take advantage of more abundant open space and public lands making it easier, less expensive, and (arguably) more fun to excercise.

I don't necessarily find this artica offensive. But it would have been easier to swallow if Mr. Martin would have explained why we would expect higher rates of obesity in the South. Its quite possible he would have if he had more than 180 words to do it in.

The fact that Colorado is the least fat state has mostly to do with the fact that those of us in the west know how to keep ourselves active and not spend all day overeating on the couch. I know that some obesity problems are due to a legitimate medical condition but many people who are overweight use a "glandular problem" as the excuse when if they were to become active and eat right they would have no problem loosing weight. People need to take some responsibility for their own actions and choices and stop expecting others to accept them as having a disease.