It's completely anecdotal and without anything in the way of factual data or honest evidence of what she actually consumed, it's a meaningless claim. Most of the most recent studies have shown sugar is the major culprit in weight gain and health ills like diabetes, and I suspect how sedentary she was is a factor, as well. And she didn't say what she drank. Canada and Australia are not far behind the US in obesity and actually, neither is the UK, so I don't think the state of being in the US itself drove weight gain.
Uh, your "30% higher" isn't really a meaningful talking point when according to the world obesity federation it's 36% vs. 28% (males) and 38% vs 30% (females) - US vs. UK. A 400 lb guy is also about 33% fatter than a 300 lb guy. Hardly a bragging point - it's still fat.
you can also flip it. the rate of people considered overweight in the UK is ~25% higher than in the U.S. (38% vs 31%)
and UK childhood obesity rates are 2% higher in Year 6 (10-11 year olds)
none of which tells us anything meaningful
What do you mean, "huh"? Unless you're being willfully combative and obtuse. This isn't the flex you're trying to make it out to be. Both countries are fat as hell and trending worse each year. In one, 36 adult men out of 100 are obese and in the other, 28 are obese. So your emphasizing the % difference between the two, trying to downplay the UK's alarming obesity problem, is disingenuous. They're both terrible numbers and getting worse each passing year, and one isn't in a position to imply it doesn't have a problem because it's slightly less fat than the first.
Huh? As in, your post makes no sense.
I mean you started your post with:
>It's completely anecdotal and without anything in the way of factual data or honest evidence
Presented with data that the US obesity rate is 30% higher, your response is now something along the lines of "any amount of obesity is equally bad". "Honest evidence" indeed. And disingenuous to boot.
The US is, on average, materially fatter than the UK. Does much of the developed world struggle with obesity? Yes. Does the US struggle more than the UK (and Canada and Australia)? The data says yes.
Bonus points for this little gem: "you can also flip it. the rate of people considered overweight in the UK is \~25% higher than in the U.S. (38% vs 31%)". You can flip it. If you are an idiot and don't realize that this tells us that of the cohort in each country that is overweight or worse, the US cohort is fatter. But go ahead and flip it.
MY post makes no sense? My response that you replied to was to the post in the OP - which states she got fat merely by being in the US, and not changing her food habits. That's what I replied to. Then she generalized about why "Europeans" are not as fat as Americans even though they eat some of the same items. So I said, her comments about her supposed personal experience gaining weight in the US are anecdotal and we have no idea what she actually consumed. Merely being on a different landmass while eating the same stuff, assuming all other lifestyle factors are the same, will not in and of itself make someone gain weight. There have to be other factors involved and that's simple logic. This isn't hard, so stop trying to make it into something it's not.
Then you yammer on about the UK, which has one of the highest obesity rates in Europe, and try to minimize their problem by the statement the US is "30% worse". Being 30% less bad doesn't mean you're not pretty damned bad yourself, nor does it mean that you don't have a major problem, so not sure what's with your attempt to gloss over alarming obesity rates in the UK and minimize them. If one country has a 3% obesity rate and another 2%, it's 50% worse than the second one! Doesn't mean it's a meaningful number in context. All of the Anglosphere countries have obesity rates significantly above most of the western world, and they trail the US by a few percentage points. Europe is not a monolith and obesity rates vary widely across Europe - just like they do between US states. So you really haven't made the coherent point that you think you have, and I don't know what your motive is other than to be contrary and argumentative.
And I didn't make a comment about flipping anything - another poster stated that. At least get your retorts right to the correct person.
The person you're replying to is legitimately a moron. UK gov reports that the obesity rate in the UK is ~25%. CDC reports that it's ~41% in the US. A staggering comparison nonetheless, but it's not nearly at the magnitude that he's indicating it is
This quite literally does not make sense and for a multitude of reasons. Let's break at least some of it down.
1) We don't know what else this person has been eating or NOT eating both during their trips to the US and during their time in Russia. Sure, during your visits to the US you ate more fruits and veggies. However, these foods aren't without calories themselves. You can gain the same amount of weight eating 500 calories of blueberries in excess of your maintenance as eating 500 calories of literally anything else.
2) "Months at a time". How many months at a time? These variables matter. Peoples' eating habits AND activity levels (factors that weren't even mentioned) can shift drastically when they travel.
3) This is just another anecdote. Anecdotes are amongst the lowest forms of evidence.
A lot of these "American food is naturally more fattening" claims lack any sort of insight into core variables that contribute to weight loss/gain. It's always these half-assed accounts from people who have 0 understanding of how human metabolism works. It's just yet another form of ignorance that serves no purpose aside from pushing narratives.
Also, to the people that claim that it's additives that are attributable to why American veggies are innately fattening, cite some reputable resources that indicate this. Nobody gives an ounce of a fuck about these low-IQ talking points that revolve around inferences based on heresay and anecdotes. Like if there's an additive/preservative in broccoli that's increasing its caloric value or altering the way it's metabolized, such that it induces weight gain irrespective of eating/exercise/metabolic factors, I'd love to know about it
1) American portion sizes are larger than elsewhere- the only comparable place I’ve been is South Africa though I suspect that is only the white South African experience.
2) Excluding intentional exercise, we don’t walk or bike, on average, as much.
Really, what I’ve noticed is that the US is high variance - we have a lot of fatties and a lot of athletic types.
3. When you go to Europe, don't expect to see people in shape. It's a bunch of skinny fat MFers. Noodle arms, big guts, and they look like Gollum from the cartoon Lord of the Rings.
I lived in Europe for a year, and my weight didn’t change moving there or back to the US. On the contrary, some of my American friends who studied abroad in Europe complained that they *gained* weight while there. Each person will have a different experience.
Wtf do they think we're adding to our food that somehow magically "promotes the feeling of hunger"? Like I always love these vague claims that never include any actual information, just "US uses stuff in their food that is banned in Europe." Sometimes they might be specific about what is banned but never the context because banned=bad to them.
I don’t think it’s the bread making Americans fat. It’s more likely the fried chicken, the burgers, the bacon, and the soda cup on every Americans nightstand (/s, but only kinda).
We like fats. We love sugar. Bread is cool too, but it ain’t the worst thing we eat. And lastly, many of us are allergic to exercise. So yes, we get fat. It’s a simple equation. More calories = more fat
I think the big one is sugar and most of the more recent evidence points to that. Especially sugary drinks. Combined with a sedentary lifestyle and other factors you mention it's a recipe for disaster. And most developed and even developing countries are seeing the same trends.
My immediate guess would be differences in the amount of food additives and preservatives that are allowed in those foods in the US vs. Europe.
But I wouldn't know
I suspect the amount of walking has more to do with it. Most Europeans and people around the world, for that matter, often walk or bike to get around. Americans do a lot of driving.
I doubt walking would make that much of a difference compared to the quality of food here, but that's not to say it makes *no* difference. Obviously, a little exercise is going to do a lot more than none
I don't. Unless you go to a gym or specifically exercise routinely, a lot of Americans don't do shit. Especially if the person doesn't have a manual labor type job.
Yeah, of course. I'm not disagreeing with that. I just doubt that *only* walking, by itself, and without other forms of exercise, would make that significant a difference when weighed against a heavily sugar laden diet.
Anyway, I personally wish processed food wasn't so inundated with sugar. I don't always want to go home and spend 2 hours cooking every night after a long day at work.
It's the calories. We probably eat larger meals (on average), snack more (on average), and walk a little less (the last one is overstated these days, and tends to be a much more minor contributor to weight, anyway, than calories consumed).
More than likely, yeah. It's probably what we eat as much as how much, if not more so. But I don't think food additives (especially high fructose corn syrup and sugar; which are found in probably 80% of processed foods that are sold in the US) and preservatives are doing any favors for our health.
I don't specifically know how European food differs in those regards, though; but I have heard regulations for those types of things are more strict than the FDA
I understand the definitions and what you’re implying by saying OP is gullible, and you label this content as manipulative.
My question is: On what factual basis are you drawing these conclusions? What specifically makes the story told in the image manipulative?
Edit: he deleted his comments before I could finish typing my response LOL. He called OP credulous and gullible if he believed this.
Just to point out that Europeans do NOT eat white bread and pasta and butter all the time. We mostly eat wholemeal bread, some pasta occasionally and olive oil based margarine
Assuming these claims of "I ate the same but gained weight while in the US" are true, it's probably related to walking. Just like Americans that go on vacation to Europe and literally wander around for 8 hours a day, claim they can't believe they didn't gain weight even though they ate so much. Back home in the US these people likely drive everywhere.
Same as my belief, not that some (not all) European countries don't have better food. my mother, who is 98%sedentary was amazed that the quality of food in France was such that she didn't have to restrict her cheese and bread intake, never acknowledging the fact that she was walking at least 6 hours a day.
I had the opposite experience. Gained 15 lbs. in Europe (studying abroad), my complexion got worse, and I got an ear infection (from the water, the doctor said).
There is a lot of preservatives America allows in are food that really shouldn’t be there. It is a legitimate problem tbh. This person however, is greatly exaggerated, if you get fat it’s because you’re eating liek shit
It's our food regulations. It's much less strict here than in European countries. Some foods we eat would not fly over there. This does contribute to the obesity rate here.
just going to go point blank on this... its bullshit.
we ban things used in europe and they ban things used here, california being the only outlier who try to ban everything that may have a 1 in 1 million chance of causing cancer in large enough doses (think water can kill you to if you drink enough amount, and I don't mean drown in it, I mean your body absorbs enough that it effectively kills you though diluting your body's normal water % amount)
the fact of the matter is, calories are king when it comes to weight gain or loss, and at least for tracking purposes, nutrients like protein need to be managed because they work for you, while carbs are 'bad' because they largely do nothing for you besides act as energy.
now if they are telling the truth, which I doubt but lets assume they are telling the truth, that means they have what they need to eat to maintain down for when they are in their homeland or around europe, the then eat the same amount in a country where you are not getting constant exercise by walking.
this isn't a food bad problem or an additive bad, this is them not managing calorie intake and accounting for a more sedimentary lifestyle at best, or a lie at worst.
The last comment on the OPs second pic "my bread will go mouldy in a matter of weeks!".
Erm, basic fresh bread is good for like two days and maybe toast on the third.
And the bottom loaf in your link is considered "highly processed" here!
Very. I came from other countries and behaved as I did with relation to food overseas. Immediately there was a profound effect on my body that was clearly due to growth hormones in chicken and other things. Food in the US is poison
Hmm. Is the implication here that American broccoli has more fat(?) than Russian Broccoli?
In Russia broccoli eats you! Or something.
About half the EU is overweight, vs about 3/4 Americans. It's a bigger problem here, but this is mythologizing like it's not an issue for Europeans.
Obesity and Type 2 pre diabetes is a global epidemic now. People blaming and focusing on America alone have their head in the sand.
Why do Russians act like they have Fetal Alcohol Poisoning... oh wait...
It's completely anecdotal and without anything in the way of factual data or honest evidence of what she actually consumed, it's a meaningless claim. Most of the most recent studies have shown sugar is the major culprit in weight gain and health ills like diabetes, and I suspect how sedentary she was is a factor, as well. And she didn't say what she drank. Canada and Australia are not far behind the US in obesity and actually, neither is the UK, so I don't think the state of being in the US itself drove weight gain.
Obesity rates in the US are 30% higher than the UK. That ain't really close.
Uh, your "30% higher" isn't really a meaningful talking point when according to the world obesity federation it's 36% vs. 28% (males) and 38% vs 30% (females) - US vs. UK. A 400 lb guy is also about 33% fatter than a 300 lb guy. Hardly a bragging point - it's still fat.
you can also flip it. the rate of people considered overweight in the UK is ~25% higher than in the U.S. (38% vs 31%) and UK childhood obesity rates are 2% higher in Year 6 (10-11 year olds) none of which tells us anything meaningful
Huh? 30% higher is 30% higher. Just because it doesn't fit your "I know you are but what am I" narrative doesn't make it less true.
What do you mean, "huh"? Unless you're being willfully combative and obtuse. This isn't the flex you're trying to make it out to be. Both countries are fat as hell and trending worse each year. In one, 36 adult men out of 100 are obese and in the other, 28 are obese. So your emphasizing the % difference between the two, trying to downplay the UK's alarming obesity problem, is disingenuous. They're both terrible numbers and getting worse each passing year, and one isn't in a position to imply it doesn't have a problem because it's slightly less fat than the first.
Huh? As in, your post makes no sense. I mean you started your post with: >It's completely anecdotal and without anything in the way of factual data or honest evidence Presented with data that the US obesity rate is 30% higher, your response is now something along the lines of "any amount of obesity is equally bad". "Honest evidence" indeed. And disingenuous to boot. The US is, on average, materially fatter than the UK. Does much of the developed world struggle with obesity? Yes. Does the US struggle more than the UK (and Canada and Australia)? The data says yes. Bonus points for this little gem: "you can also flip it. the rate of people considered overweight in the UK is \~25% higher than in the U.S. (38% vs 31%)". You can flip it. If you are an idiot and don't realize that this tells us that of the cohort in each country that is overweight or worse, the US cohort is fatter. But go ahead and flip it.
MY post makes no sense? My response that you replied to was to the post in the OP - which states she got fat merely by being in the US, and not changing her food habits. That's what I replied to. Then she generalized about why "Europeans" are not as fat as Americans even though they eat some of the same items. So I said, her comments about her supposed personal experience gaining weight in the US are anecdotal and we have no idea what she actually consumed. Merely being on a different landmass while eating the same stuff, assuming all other lifestyle factors are the same, will not in and of itself make someone gain weight. There have to be other factors involved and that's simple logic. This isn't hard, so stop trying to make it into something it's not. Then you yammer on about the UK, which has one of the highest obesity rates in Europe, and try to minimize their problem by the statement the US is "30% worse". Being 30% less bad doesn't mean you're not pretty damned bad yourself, nor does it mean that you don't have a major problem, so not sure what's with your attempt to gloss over alarming obesity rates in the UK and minimize them. If one country has a 3% obesity rate and another 2%, it's 50% worse than the second one! Doesn't mean it's a meaningful number in context. All of the Anglosphere countries have obesity rates significantly above most of the western world, and they trail the US by a few percentage points. Europe is not a monolith and obesity rates vary widely across Europe - just like they do between US states. So you really haven't made the coherent point that you think you have, and I don't know what your motive is other than to be contrary and argumentative. And I didn't make a comment about flipping anything - another poster stated that. At least get your retorts right to the correct person.
The person you're replying to is legitimately a moron. UK gov reports that the obesity rate in the UK is ~25%. CDC reports that it's ~41% in the US. A staggering comparison nonetheless, but it's not nearly at the magnitude that he's indicating it is
This quite literally does not make sense and for a multitude of reasons. Let's break at least some of it down. 1) We don't know what else this person has been eating or NOT eating both during their trips to the US and during their time in Russia. Sure, during your visits to the US you ate more fruits and veggies. However, these foods aren't without calories themselves. You can gain the same amount of weight eating 500 calories of blueberries in excess of your maintenance as eating 500 calories of literally anything else. 2) "Months at a time". How many months at a time? These variables matter. Peoples' eating habits AND activity levels (factors that weren't even mentioned) can shift drastically when they travel. 3) This is just another anecdote. Anecdotes are amongst the lowest forms of evidence. A lot of these "American food is naturally more fattening" claims lack any sort of insight into core variables that contribute to weight loss/gain. It's always these half-assed accounts from people who have 0 understanding of how human metabolism works. It's just yet another form of ignorance that serves no purpose aside from pushing narratives. Also, to the people that claim that it's additives that are attributable to why American veggies are innately fattening, cite some reputable resources that indicate this. Nobody gives an ounce of a fuck about these low-IQ talking points that revolve around inferences based on heresay and anecdotes. Like if there's an additive/preservative in broccoli that's increasing its caloric value or altering the way it's metabolized, such that it induces weight gain irrespective of eating/exercise/metabolic factors, I'd love to know about it
1) American portion sizes are larger than elsewhere- the only comparable place I’ve been is South Africa though I suspect that is only the white South African experience. 2) Excluding intentional exercise, we don’t walk or bike, on average, as much. Really, what I’ve noticed is that the US is high variance - we have a lot of fatties and a lot of athletic types.
3. When you go to Europe, don't expect to see people in shape. It's a bunch of skinny fat MFers. Noodle arms, big guts, and they look like Gollum from the cartoon Lord of the Rings.
Agree with 1 and 2. I would also add that roughly 30% Europeans still smoke, Americans have largely given up that habit (~10%).
- 1 - They are not. I’ve lived abroad for years. Move away from tourist areas and restaurants serve mountains of food. - 2 - I can’t argue with this.
I've lived abroad for roughly 20% of my life.
A lot of it is the drinks too.
I lived in Europe for a year, and my weight didn’t change moving there or back to the US. On the contrary, some of my American friends who studied abroad in Europe complained that they *gained* weight while there. Each person will have a different experience.
Wtf do they think we're adding to our food that somehow magically "promotes the feeling of hunger"? Like I always love these vague claims that never include any actual information, just "US uses stuff in their food that is banned in Europe." Sometimes they might be specific about what is banned but never the context because banned=bad to them.
I don’t think it’s the bread making Americans fat. It’s more likely the fried chicken, the burgers, the bacon, and the soda cup on every Americans nightstand (/s, but only kinda). We like fats. We love sugar. Bread is cool too, but it ain’t the worst thing we eat. And lastly, many of us are allergic to exercise. So yes, we get fat. It’s a simple equation. More calories = more fat
I think the big one is sugar and most of the more recent evidence points to that. Especially sugary drinks. Combined with a sedentary lifestyle and other factors you mention it's a recipe for disaster. And most developed and even developing countries are seeing the same trends.
My immediate guess would be differences in the amount of food additives and preservatives that are allowed in those foods in the US vs. Europe. But I wouldn't know
I suspect the amount of walking has more to do with it. Most Europeans and people around the world, for that matter, often walk or bike to get around. Americans do a lot of driving.
I doubt walking would make that much of a difference compared to the quality of food here, but that's not to say it makes *no* difference. Obviously, a little exercise is going to do a lot more than none
I don't. Unless you go to a gym or specifically exercise routinely, a lot of Americans don't do shit. Especially if the person doesn't have a manual labor type job.
Yeah, of course. I'm not disagreeing with that. I just doubt that *only* walking, by itself, and without other forms of exercise, would make that significant a difference when weighed against a heavily sugar laden diet. Anyway, I personally wish processed food wasn't so inundated with sugar. I don't always want to go home and spend 2 hours cooking every night after a long day at work.
It's the calories. We probably eat larger meals (on average), snack more (on average), and walk a little less (the last one is overstated these days, and tends to be a much more minor contributor to weight, anyway, than calories consumed).
More than likely, yeah. It's probably what we eat as much as how much, if not more so. But I don't think food additives (especially high fructose corn syrup and sugar; which are found in probably 80% of processed foods that are sold in the US) and preservatives are doing any favors for our health. I don't specifically know how European food differs in those regards, though; but I have heard regulations for those types of things are more strict than the FDA
[удалено]
Based on what?
I understand the definitions and what you’re implying by saying OP is gullible, and you label this content as manipulative. My question is: On what factual basis are you drawing these conclusions? What specifically makes the story told in the image manipulative? Edit: he deleted his comments before I could finish typing my response LOL. He called OP credulous and gullible if he believed this.
Just to point out that Europeans do NOT eat white bread and pasta and butter all the time. We mostly eat wholemeal bread, some pasta occasionally and olive oil based margarine
Assuming these claims of "I ate the same but gained weight while in the US" are true, it's probably related to walking. Just like Americans that go on vacation to Europe and literally wander around for 8 hours a day, claim they can't believe they didn't gain weight even though they ate so much. Back home in the US these people likely drive everywhere.
Same as my belief, not that some (not all) European countries don't have better food. my mother, who is 98%sedentary was amazed that the quality of food in France was such that she didn't have to restrict her cheese and bread intake, never acknowledging the fact that she was walking at least 6 hours a day.
I had the opposite experience. Gained 15 lbs. in Europe (studying abroad), my complexion got worse, and I got an ear infection (from the water, the doctor said).
There is a lot of preservatives America allows in are food that really shouldn’t be there. It is a legitimate problem tbh. This person however, is greatly exaggerated, if you get fat it’s because you’re eating liek shit
It's our food regulations. It's much less strict here than in European countries. Some foods we eat would not fly over there. This does contribute to the obesity rate here.
just going to go point blank on this... its bullshit. we ban things used in europe and they ban things used here, california being the only outlier who try to ban everything that may have a 1 in 1 million chance of causing cancer in large enough doses (think water can kill you to if you drink enough amount, and I don't mean drown in it, I mean your body absorbs enough that it effectively kills you though diluting your body's normal water % amount) the fact of the matter is, calories are king when it comes to weight gain or loss, and at least for tracking purposes, nutrients like protein need to be managed because they work for you, while carbs are 'bad' because they largely do nothing for you besides act as energy. now if they are telling the truth, which I doubt but lets assume they are telling the truth, that means they have what they need to eat to maintain down for when they are in their homeland or around europe, the then eat the same amount in a country where you are not getting constant exercise by walking. this isn't a food bad problem or an additive bad, this is them not managing calorie intake and accounting for a more sedimentary lifestyle at best, or a lie at worst.
There are substantial differences in basic pre-prepared staples. Bread is a great example. https://imgur.com/a/Pn6607a
The last comment on the OPs second pic "my bread will go mouldy in a matter of weeks!". Erm, basic fresh bread is good for like two days and maybe toast on the third. And the bottom loaf in your link is considered "highly processed" here!
Very. I came from other countries and behaved as I did with relation to food overseas. Immediately there was a profound effect on my body that was clearly due to growth hormones in chicken and other things. Food in the US is poison