Schools need bigger furnitire--so that they can accommodate obese students

Started by CMdeux, February 15, 2012, 03:32:44 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Arkadia

hmmm...I know there is a formula for surface area to air volume to maximize the SMACK of a dodgeball. We used to let just enough air out of them. You pick the dented ones to get a good grip.
just tell me: "Hey, a***ole, you hurt my feelings!"


kouturekat

QuoteThat even if you manage to do it, if you have to struggle to maintain it, it's probably not going to last.

Not to confuse struggle with work.  Trying to eat right in a world filled with junk food via media, schools, etc., IS a struggle.  And it IS work.  It is most certainly a struggle to say no to junk food in schools when it's being shared with everyone.  I wish school principals were adamant about serving water only, fruit, fat-free/low fat plain yogurt and veggies in vending machines.  Our FBLA is currently selling candy bars.  They sell out like hotcakes.  All the kids buy them. 

Not only are our cupcake queens damning the kids, the school's are doing it, too, by what they sell via fundraisers, in vending machines, spineless administrators, very poorly executed wellness programs, etc.  Parents contribute to the problem as well with food choices.

Schools need bigger furniture?  There's a bigger problem here, no pun intended.  Sadly, school's will probably take the easy way out.  They will buy the furniture.  Tackling childhood obesity will be a struggle and it IS work.   Unfortunately, too few are rising to the challenge to tackle it head on.  Long term, it's a ticking time bomb.  As in healthcare costs.  Another thread altogether.
Formerly RM, ryansmom,

"I'm well aware I'm not everyone's cup of tea...I'd rather be someone's shot of tequila anyway."

CMdeux

If the number of fat cells is predetermined during adolescence, isn't it imperative that we tackle the issue of childhood obesity as early as possible?



Yes, yes, yes.


And something that Ark mentioned resonates within the context of this particular point, as well--



why are we making is so darned HARD to eat healthily-- as a culture, I mean??


If we were truly serious about this entire issue, we'd start limiting where/when food is used.  I cannot BELIEVE that nobody but us (well, and a few odd ducks out there among other parents who apparently have their eyes open) sees the sheer saturation environment that our kids are living in.

THAT is where genetics plays a huge role.  Is it "willpower?"  Well, only sort of.  Some of us really are programmed to store fat efficiently from available food stores.  This has always been an evolutionary advantage, at least until now.  The MAJORITY of human beings on this planet are evolutionarily adapted to survive periodic famine-- not endless smorgasbord.    Dieticians are just plain STUPID not to pay any attention to this basic fact of biochemistry and biology.  We are not MEANT to 'resist' food when it is provided.  Our every biological drive is to eat what is placed in front of us-- either until we can't eat any more or until it is gone.   Gluttony may be a sin in moral terms, but it's a biological drive that allowed human beings to survive their first few hundred millennia.  "Thin" genes, frankly, are probably the anomoly, since until recently that was a serious disadvantage to survival.

The only way to win that one is to quit having it placed in front of us in such quantities, or so frequently.   :-[
Resistance isn't futile.  It's voltage divided by current. 


Western U.S.

Carefulmom

I have to keep this short.  The bulk of the childhood obesity problem is at home.  Parents are modeling atrocious eating habits.  They are in denial about their obese kids and say they are merely "big boned".  They refuse to hear from their pediatrician that their child is on the road to type to type 2 diabetes and a short life span.  When I tell them to throw away the soda and chips, they look at me like I am from another planet.  The parents are eating the soda and chips, too.  They won`t put the kids on a "diet" (i.e. throw away the junk food), because then the parents would have to do follow the same healthy eating habits, and they don`t want to do that.  Studies on adopted kids as adults have shown repeatedly that heredity can make you 10 pounds overweight or 10 pounds underweight, but that is all.  It can`t make you obese.  That is due to eating habits.  (There are a few very specific hereditary diseases that would be an exception to this.)  However, lack of teaching kids nutritious eating in childhood almost always gives them huge obstacles in maintaining a normal weight in adulthood.  It may also give them increased fat cells.  That has been debated, but I personally believe it. 

I cannot even count the number of times that I have heard a parent say that their child eats almost nothing while the child is sitting there eating a bag of fast food right in front of me.  Um, yeah, he won`t eat his dinner, because an hour and a half before dinner he downed a double cheeseburger, fries, and a chocolate shake.

I think Michelle Obama as a role model for healthy eating is a joke.  She is overweight herself, so IMO not a role model.

CMdeux

The only difference between my daughter and her friends-- a couple of whom already are overweight-- is that she doesn't eat a lot of junk and NOTHING in a school environment. 

Does she eat fast food?

Sure, occasionally.  VERY occasionally.

Does she eat "junk" food?  Yes, again-- cookies, candy, chips, crackers.  She has a tendency to binge, I might add, so we don't bring a lot of it home in the first place, since Dad also has this 'bingeing' trait.

What she does NOT do is live in a school environment that pushes food-food-food at her all day long.  She does NOT eat and eat at every single youth activity she attends. 

I think that is the secret to her slim physique, honestly.  It's the secret that has most FA kids staying slim even if their peer cohort isn't.  They have built in "willpower" that their peers do not.   
Resistance isn't futile.  It's voltage divided by current. 


Western U.S.

Arkadia

Ive always said life threatening  food allergies come with the fringe benefit of a healthier lifestyle.  for the family unit, even. ironic, huh?
just tell me: "Hey, a***ole, you hurt my feelings!"

CMdeux

Makes me very sad for what we're doing (as a culture, I mean) with the rest of our children, though.   :-[

Kids with LTFA now are living the kind of 'food' lifestyle that people a generation or more ago did.

Now that is an interesting epidemiology study... wonder how kids with LTFA (to soy, milk, or egg-- none of which INHERENTLY compromise nutrition, but which do make most spontaneous eating off limits) compare to their age cohort with no allergies...

I'll bet that LTFA kiddos look more like their parents' generation in terms of BMI and blood chemistry.

Resistance isn't futile.  It's voltage divided by current. 


Western U.S.

kouturekat

Yes, and Ark mentioned something about a struggle.  If weight loss is such a struggle, then maybe it just can't be maintained.  I'm looking at the angle of limiting certain foods.

Our FA children live that every day.  Children with multiple food allergies certainly have a struggle.  `Avoidance is imperative.  It's a life or death situation.  And they just do it.  Day in, day out. 
Formerly RM, ryansmom,

"I'm well aware I'm not everyone's cup of tea...I'd rather be someone's shot of tequila anyway."

kouturekat

Carefulmom, I agree with everything you have posted.  Except for Michelle Obama ;) .  At least she's talking about it.
Formerly RM, ryansmom,

"I'm well aware I'm not everyone's cup of tea...I'd rather be someone's shot of tequila anyway."

kouturekat

CM, I'm going to guess that part of the problem is our taste buds have been conditioned like junky foods. 

Lack of time too.  It's quicker to open a bag of chips than to peel an orange.  Or cut up broccoli and serve with some low-fat ranch dressing.

Good, healthful eating takes a bit of time and effort.  Ditto with measuring and controlling portions. 

What about eating out?  We rarely eat out due to Ryan's food allergy.  So it's a rare day that we have those 1500-2000 calorie+ meals at one sitting.   I know people that eat out 2 or 3X/week. 

Everything is about convenience.  Quickness of preparation.  Is it a matter of willpower?  To a certain degree.  But good, healthy food does taste really good.  If people would only give their taste buds a chance.  It's not about deprivation.  For example, I made up a batch of 16 blueberry "cookies" last night.  These are the go-to snacks for DH, myself, and DD#2.  Highly nutritious, protein packed, fiber rich, antioxidant boosting, no sugar, 150 calories large snack cookies.   Our mini meal between meals.  And every time I make them my boys want one too!

Good, nutritious, portion-sized food can be delicious.  It just takes time and some effort.   And unfortunately, that's where I think things fall apart.  We want everything down to the food we eat to be quick and easy. 

Formerly RM, ryansmom,

"I'm well aware I'm not everyone's cup of tea...I'd rather be someone's shot of tequila anyway."

kouturekat

Quote from: Arkadia on February 20, 2012, 12:21:25 PM
Ive always said life threatening  food allergies come with the fringe benefit of a healthier lifestyle.  for the family unit, even. ironic, huh?

Yes, a silver lining to the dark FA cloud!
Formerly RM, ryansmom,

"I'm well aware I'm not everyone's cup of tea...I'd rather be someone's shot of tequila anyway."

Arkadia

But kk, fitnees isnt measured in how someone looks in a size four vs a size six.  trimming every last quarter inch, yk?  at that point youre really setting your body up for a starvation setpoint. its going to fight back.  if people worried more about a lifestyle instead of a twelve week diet and what they cant have and more abiut daily heakthy routines and choices. less focus on looks and deprivation. more on the benefits.  i think becca does that wonderfully. splurges are okay. i mean real nitty gritty ones. it lets your bod know the end of the world isnt here yet.  i truthfully dont want my daughters joy in life to stem from a cumulative loss of one inch. Theres a reason too skinny women often cease to have menses...
just tell me: "Hey, a***ole, you hurt my feelings!"

kouturekat

Quote from: Arkadia on February 20, 2012, 01:52:49 PM
But kk, fitnees isnt measured in how someone looks in a size four vs a size six.  trimming every last quarter inch, yk?  at that point youre really setting your body up for a starvation setpoint. its going to fight back.  if people worried more about a lifestyle instead of a twelve week diet and what they cant have and more abiut daily heakthy routines and choices. less focus on looks and deprivation. more on the benefits.  i think becca does that wonderfully. splurges are okay. i mean real nitty gritty ones. it lets your bod know the end of the world isnt here yet.  i truthfully dont want my daughters joy in life to stem from a cumulative loss of one inch. Theres a reason too skinny women often cease to have menses...

That's what I've always been saying.  I've never talked about a size.  Or a weight for that matter.  Heck, I weigh myself about once every year?  Healthy, clean eating and proper portions sizes will drop weight if one is carrying an excess.  I've always advocated a good lifestyle like that. Getting back to my own 12-week plan, it is not a diet.  What I'm doing is retraining my body to accept 6 small meals/day and retrain my taste buds getting away from flour and sugar.  What I've been doing for decades isn't cutting it in life after 40.  I'm developing a new plan based on Tosa Reno's Eat Clean principles.  The 12-week plan is a challenge.  I'm challenging my body to accept a new, higher number of meals with a cleaner philosophy.   After 12 weeks, it is adapting to the plan. 

Is is something I can maintain long term?  Absolutely.  Fitness is different.  Fitness is exercise.  A person can be thin and not fit.  Not my aim at all. 

Eating has to be a lifestyle.  I don't do diets.  What I'm doing is retraining my taste buds to avoid flour and sugar and adapting to a different meal system.  The 12-week challenge is merely a kick start to an up-to-date plan.  BTW, it is working splendidly :) .
Formerly RM, ryansmom,

"I'm well aware I'm not everyone's cup of tea...I'd rather be someone's shot of tequila anyway."

kouturekat

Interesting read in our local paper today:

Rob McKenzie
Rounding Some Corners

February 20, 2012

Because it tastes so good, you greet the morning with it, you allow it stalk you all day and it's right there at the end of the day.

You can't escape it unless you aggressively go out of your way to eliminate it.

But you should, because sugar is really bad for you and it's in almost everything you eat and drink.

The late cardiologist Robert Atkins, creator of the Atkins low-carbohydrate diet, said the most important thing parents can do is keep their children away from sugar.

He was right on.

Excessive sugar — especially processed sugar with the minerals, proteins and vitamins removed — is poisonous because the body tries to break down these empty carbohydrates by releasing already-stored minerals and vitamins.

The draining of these essentials from our bodies puts stress on the nervous and respiratory systems and vital organs.

Sugar also blunts the taste buds to the savory qualities of natural sugars. If you eat a doughnut and then an orange, the orange tastes sour.

But if you eat the orange first, it's sweet. So when we eat a lot of processed sugar, we don't crave foods with natural sugars that keep us healthy.

The more we eat foods with natural sugars, the better they taste and the more we want them. The more we eat foods with processed sugar, the more we want them instead.

Sugar also makes us hyperactive. Eating or drinking a lot of it makes it hard to sit still or concentrate.

And, of course, sugar gives us a nice layer of flab.

Unfortunately, it's damn near impossible to avoid sugar all day long.

Breakfast time. Want some cereal or a muffin? Take your pick: Either way you're taking in mouthfuls of sugar.

Later your thirst leads you to grab a soda. A 12-ounce can of Coke contains the equivalent of 20 cubes of sugar. And if you drink a can of Coke every day, you're drinking 32 pounds of sugar a year.

Lunch time. How about a sandwich? The bread has sugar, and so do many kinds of chips as well as the ham and coleslaw or potato salad or pickles.

Later in the afternoon you fill in the lull with gum, candies or other sweets.

Sugar city.

Dinner time. Pasta with red sauce? Lots of sugar. A green salad covered with dressing? Basically sugar soup with vegetables.

Ready for dessert? Let's not even talk about it.

Researchers from the University of California at San Francisco want sugar regulated like alcohol and tobacco because the effects are so harmful, yet the consumption of sugar has tripled in the last 50 years.

It sure is a sweet life we have. Too bad it's not the healthy life we need.

But at least at the end of the day we can make the last thing we put in our mouths something without sugar: toothpaste.

What?! Oh no"¦

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And that's the typical day of an adult.  Wonder what he'd think of all the crummy food in schools and the cupcake queens who are hellbent on serving their little goodies to our impressionable youth.
Formerly RM, ryansmom,

"I'm well aware I'm not everyone's cup of tea...I'd rather be someone's shot of tequila anyway."

Quick Reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 365 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name:
Email:
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
Three blonde, blue-eyed siblings are named Suzy, Jack and Bill.  What color hair does the sister have?:
Please spell spammer backwards:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview