Matthew Yglesias has a graph showing percent of the population with a Body-Mass Indices >30% for 30 countries. (And, yes, I know that some NFL running back with 2.5% body fat would often show up as fat on this BMI index, but most people aren't NFL running backs, so it's a good enough measure for my purpose.)
The fattest country of the 30 is, of course, America. What's interesting is the second fattest country. We are constantly lectured that it is America's moral imperative to take in the hungry masses of Mexico, yet Mexico turns out to be the second fattest country out of the 30! In the U.S., Hispanics have fatter BMIs than whites, according to the federal government's NHANES study, so immigration from Mexico to the U.S. just makes them even fatter on average.
Posts
132 comments:
So, are we #1, instead of just a pathetic 4th or 5th, say, because of all the Mexicans here?
Hey, they were right all along! Diversity IS Strength!
Minus the large black and hispanic rates, we'd probably about even with Great Britain. Which still is pretty bad.
I am surprised to find Canada in 9th position: I would have thought we were at least in 2d place.
Paleo diet FTW!
different races store adipose tissue differently, some are better at it than others.
Calculate Your Body Mass Index
http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/
At a weight of 235 lbs and a height of 6 ft 0 in., I have a BMI of 32. I have been losing weight on a low carb, high fat, moderate protein diet. IMO, it is too many carbs that trigger excess eating.
Canada would probably make #2, if it were not for two factors : French-speaking Quebec women, who have a European flair and look quite different from their fatter counterparts in the rest of Canada. Also, we do not have the same proportion of blacks and Latinos than the US which makes a huge (pun intended) difference.
Anybody ever tried to establish a link between BMI and IQ ? Ok, I'm nasty and prejudiced, so I'll say that fat & stupid often go together. Hence, the high incidence of obesity amongst blacks and latinos
The USA isn't the fattest country in the world. Any antipodean HBDer would know that a Polynesian country would hold that honor and not by a small margin!
I remember hearing Nauru had the highest BMIs of any country.
Also, some countries use self reported heights and weights to calculate BMI. I believe Canada does, or used to, which would explain a lot of the variation in this graph.
When it comes to obesity, the US and Mexico really are the whole enchilada.
Steve,
We have a government that pushes a diet that encourages overeating. You have got to read Gary Taubes, "Good Calories, Bad Calories".
http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Controversial-Science/dp/1400033462
What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?
By Gary Taubes
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html
Richard, there's something wrong with that BMI calculator.
For the longest time, 20+ years, I would have had a BMI of 22.8 (6' 1 1/2", 175 lbs), but in all that time I had a body fat content of 2%, and my mother was always trying to fatten me up. Yet, 22.8 is considered normal according to that calc. Yet now, that my mother thinks I'm healthy looking (225 lbs), I'm supposedly overweight.
Reminds me of a beggar I saw recently, standing by the interstate onramp. His sign said "Desperate. Starving. Please help." His belly said otherwise. It was a healthy beer belly.
Mexicans add to our obesity epidemic indirectly, as well. All the physical jobs they do used to be done by high school and college age young adults. Now those kids sit at home playing World of Warcraft, eating up all the nachos, and paying their tuition with loans.
I suspect there are a lot of stats that mass immigration is affecting, mostly for the worse - obesity, poverty, income disparity, literacy rates, teen birthrates, out-of-wedlock birthrates, high school graduation rates, commute times, health coverage, crime, ad infinitum. Funny that the same liberals who obsess CONSTANTLY about those stats fail to see one quick and easy way to improve all of them.
At a weight of 235 lbs and a height of 6 ft 0 in., I have a BMI of 32. I have been losing weight on a low carb, high fat, moderate protein diet. IMO, it is too many carbs that trigger excess eating.
Instapundit had something on this recently - that the fedril gummint has been telling us for decades to cut out protein and eat more carbs, only now to discover that high carb diets aren't all that great, especially since most people get carbs in mono- or disaccharide form.
People digest simple carbs more rapidly than proteins. It's not the Big Macs - it's the fries and the extra large Coke.
Minus the large black and hispanic rates, we'd probably about even with Great Britain. Which still is pretty bad.
I'd like to see the rates broken out by state. How do Vermont and Idaho do compared to New Mexico and Mississippi?
We've got the fattest poor people in the world. Just stand outside any welfare office and watch the parade of fatties going in. We're the envy of the world; no wonder they're all breaking their necks to get here.
The Left would probably tell you that Mexicans are fat because of poverty and that we need to give them some organic whole foods. The Left wants to group obesity and starvation (code word is "hunger") into the same category. The root source of both is lack of money to buy nutritious food. I heard this NPR story and just about had to scream at the radio:
"The story profiles the Williamson family in Pennsylvania. The first part of the story talks about the daily struggle to find food on a limited budget. The second part of the story talks about the difficulty in getting nutritious food – particularly to children – and how easy it is to buy non-nutritious food which is cheap."
The truth is that the poor are fat for the same reason that anyone is poor: bad choices in food and exercise. There are really cheap and nutritious foods: beans, canned vegetables and rice. Cheap exercises like walking and running are quite available to all. But the Left wants to hold the poor blameless for their problems and pass some Child Nutrition bill, i.e. money for the poor to buy better food.
Hmmm Asian countries have the lowest BMIs, countries with large number of NAMs the highest. Not a surprising trend. Also the Anglosphere and eastern European countries are slightly fatter, on average.
But why are certain NAM groups so athletic if their BMIs are through the roof? Higher bone density or something?
In defense of fat Mexicans, they likely owe most of their propensity for obesity to genetics.
It is really, really tough to lose weight. Studies have shown that people don't lose weight with exercise. All diets work initially, but within a year the long-term weight loss is trivial.
Even if you lose significant weight on a diet, to maintain your new-found slim figure you have to go on a starvation diet for the rest of your life. I think the figure is something like 1400 Calories a day, compared to the usual 2000+ ingested by American adults.
There is always the alternative of surgery (which does work long-term), but it has own set of major complications.
Anyways,there is no evidence that "pleasantly plumb" people suffer more medical problems than the ideally-weighted. Might as well carry a moderate paunch and enjoy the steaks pastas and wines.
"Paleo diet FTW!"
I do find myself defending evolutionary theory at cocktail parties to the supposed science-minded bien pensant. Sexual selection, isolated populations, collective gene expression, etc. on the one hand and the fact that sugar, grain and vegetable oil aren't "food-products" that the human animal thrive on.
Paleo conservatism and paleo diet: acknowledging our hard-wire.
They're called "BMWs."
Big Mexican Women.
They helped Afghan nationals escape in San Antonio.
BTW, is there such a thing as a skinny Mexican?
I wonder how that would track against smoking. Japan and Korea, where smoking still is common, have the lowest BMI. And BMI has gone up in the USA as smoking declined. Smoking always has been low in Mexico.
Paleo conservatism and paleo diet: acknowledging our hard-wire.
EXACTLY! There's an inherent coherency between accepting HBD and rejecting the saturated fat = bad ethos of mainstream nutrition establishment.
I've actually become very impassioned about the paleo diet. It underpins almost all of modern disease, yet all we get from the media and the government is low-fat, high-starch, meat is bad advice.
Any wonder the same people think we can raise test scores despite failing for the last 50 years?
As it has often been said, latina chicks are hyper cute in their teens, but alas the flower of their youth is short lived.
- They pile on weight prodigiously as the enter matron-hood and soon become veritable squashed featured chubsters.
Mexico is NOT a poor country.
Right, Nauru is probably the fattest place on Earth.
If (pick a conservative) Ann Coulter proposed a moritorium on new fast food restaurant construction in black and Hispanic neighborhoods in LA, there would be a deafening outcry. When the idea comes from condescending liberals, the consensus is "at least they're doing something."
Eat less junk and get more exercise. It's not rocket science. Unless, of course, you're part of the 1.5% of the population that actually has medical reason for being overweight.
They're being force fed junk carbs by Americans (or poverty or corporations), the poor lambs.
If they stuck to their naturally health diverse people's diet then they wouldn't have these problems!
"EXACTLY! There's an inherent coherency between accepting HBD and rejecting the saturated fat = bad ethos of mainstream nutrition establishment."
Are you guys into being PUAs too? They seem to believe both.
So how is the diet different in Quebec from the ROC? I wonder if they smoke more, which seems to keep weight down. The debate over carbs is interesting, but I note that Asians eat a lot of rice but still manage to stay thin.
The numbers should be matched with smoking. Are the Japanese thin because they smoke instead of eat? Also, how if size related with fertility. The lower the fertility, the lower the obesity.
Our diet, which is basically:
1)Salted wheat: (Pastas like Lasagna, Pizzas, Breads, Crackers, Chips)
2)Sugared wheat: (Cookies, Cakes, Donuts)
3)Sugar-milk: (Ice Cream, Shakes, Candy bars, chocolates)
4)Salt-milk: (Cheeses and butter....put on everything)
5)Sugar and Salted Corn: (Nacho chips, Fajita wraps, High Fructose Corn Syrup-sweetener)
....is going to be very hard on Mexicans trying to keep their weight down. Those sweet and salty flavorings make things taste terrific, but the less-nutritious foods they flavor get someone to eat more than they ever would otherwise.
Colas are probably the biggest single reason for the obesity epidemic. Every can of coke one drinks contains 12 spoonfulls of sugar (high fructose corn syrup). If not burned off in excercise, that sugar gets turned into fat.
Personal story: One of the new cleaning gals where I work is a young Mexican girl, who probably has one or two kids. From the neck up she's quite cute. Good skin genetically, large eyes, round cheeks, very pretty coppery-highlighted dark brown hair, bronze skin.
From the neck down she is pretty much rotund. I mean rolls of fat. That pretty face, all ruined. I mean she has a bigger protruding "beer gut" than about any middle-aged good ol' boy that you'd see. She probably isn't 25 years old.
I have empathy for many of the overweight. They are addicted to the chemical highs derived from these sugared and salted foodstuffs. How much sugar do you think someone could get in 1600? Probably not much. Weve made something naturally good too abundant, and people are addicted to it, and put it on everything.
That sweet&sour sauce that you can put on chicken and steak is basically HFCS (a sugar). It can make anything taste better. Frankly, I wonder if these noveau (in evolutionary terms) foods elicit an epigenetic response not only in us, but pregnant mothers in whose wombs babies are forming. What genes are we upregulating and downregulating with our diets? We know sugar affects behavior. Give a child a cola and watch him over the next hour. Then give him caffeine. "Phood" for thought.
From what I've heard, those macho latino gangbangers prefer 'a broad with a bit of meat on her' - apparently a cultural preference with very deep historic roots as attested by early 'venus' fertility figurines.
- This preference is also found amongst afro-americans hence the general tendency to chubbiness that has been bred by millenia of sexual selection.
EXACTLY! There's an inherent coherency between accepting HBD and rejecting the saturated fat = bad ethos of mainstream nutrition establishment.
What a simpleton. "Mainstream nutrition establishment." You have to turn everything into masculine/natural/conservative vs. feminine/artificial/liberal. FemX is right. You don't have the mental tools to think in any other way.
The BMI index is retarded.
Some argue that the error in the BMI[16] is significant and so pervasive that it is not generally useful in evaluation of health.[17][18] University of Chicago political science professor Eric Oliver says BMI is a convenient but inaccurate measure of weight, forced onto the populace, and should be revised.[19]
The medical establishment has generally acknowledged some shortcomings of BMI.[20] Because the BMI is dependent only upon weight and height, it makes simplistic assumptions about distribution of muscle and bone mass, and thus may overestimate adiposity on those with more lean body mass (e.g. athletes) while underestimating adiposity on those with less lean body mass (e.g. the elderly).
In other words, it makes no distinctions in how much muscle a person is supposed to have by individual, race, sex or age.
It doesn't just give you an inaccurate reading for athletes. Anyone who is above or below average in muscle mass, through training or nature, will find BMI an awful tool.
The better way to know if you're obese is to look in the mirror.
Re: smoking, I think this is a myth.
Japan has a high smoking rate for men but not women:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_in_Japan
13% of adult women smoke. Yet they are trim.
Norway and the US have about the same smoking rates, about 20% of adult pop:
(Norway:http://www.ssb.no/royk_en/main)
But look at the difference between their obesity rates and ours.
Red herring. (Are herrings allowed on the Paleo diet?)
BTW, is there such a thing as a skinny Mexican?
Hahaha yes tons, I'm one and there is a genetic skinny offshoot that runs wild in my family line. Sucks being a hard-gainer/ectomorph type. I'm 45, so I can't attribute this to youth. Sometimes I wish I had inherited some of that Mexican "thickness" you see and which explains much of the national BMI occurrence cited here.
I'd rather see a national measure of body fat than of BMI. Not that this would let Mexicans off the hook, but body fat is a more nuanced and comprehensible measure of body type whereas BMI is just rudimentary and one-dimensional bullshit. The Mexican frame is definitely "thicker" in general. Stocky, stout, you name it.
despite them being short, fat, slow, and weak, i have yet to hear any negative athletic stereotypes about mexicans.
i used to feel that familiarity was a prerequisite for derision. guess not in this case.
Beans said..."The truth is that the poor are fat for the same reason that anyone is poor: bad choices in food and exercise. There are really cheap and nutritious foods: beans, canned vegetables and rice. Cheap exercises like walking and running are quite available to all."
True, although I think you meant the poor are fat for the same reason that anyone is fat, not poor. Yes? But your typo (if that's what it was) is also true. The poor are poor--in our country, anyway--largely due to bad choices.
You can come home exhausted from a hard day's work and have a decent dinner of nourishing rice ready in under half a hour (as I did for years). Make a big enough batch and you don't even have to cook every day, if you have electricity, a fridge and a microwave.
Having lived in a poorish neighborhood, I saw that the biggest obstacle to improving the lot of the poor is the poor themselves (I mean, besides the left not wanting them to have to do anything for themselves). Generally speaking, the poor don't for plan ahead, use self-restraint or connect choices with consequences. And less intelligent they may be but they've all learned to look to the government to take care of their every need--and want. Indeed, living in a college town with a generous social safety net, I marveled at how similar in underlying attitudes the poor were to the young white affluent college kids, both groups with a huge sense of entitlement, who expected others to pay for their play.
There seems to be a correlation with temperature -- the cold countries (Scandinavia) have relatively low obesity rates, but the hot countries (USA and Mexico) have high rates.
Perhaps it has something to do with pathogen load?
"BTW, is there such a thing as a skinny Mexican?"
I have a skinny Mexican friend, but he's a quarter or so Chinese. Most of his family looks stereotypically Mexican.
There's not too many truly Obese people here in Seattle for whatever reason. It makes the fat tourists stand out even more. Walking by airline gates at seatac I can guess the destination by the percentage of fatties. Atlanta is the worst.
Mexico is NOT a poor country.
Well, it's certainly not a CALORIE poor country, if that's what you mean.
lol
"Mexico is NOT a poor country."
But it is "poor" relative the USA. That is what matters.
Minus the large black and hispanic rates, we'd probably about even with Great Britain.
Probably not.
It's plain to see when you travel outside America that Americans are by far the fattest white people in the world.
BMI statistics broken down by state and ethnicity:
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html
Curvy said...
So, are we #1, instead of just a pathetic 4th or 5th, say, because of all the Mexicans here?
Curvaceous, Wyoming seems to be doing pretty badly on their own without the input of NAMS. I'm guessing that you aren't, er, helping to keep your state's weight figures down.
The stats say that weight is highly heritable - a little less than height and a little more than IQ.
I know in my bones that this is true.
My cousin Willie and I were raised together. We are the sons, born three months apart, of identical twins who got married and divorced in sync and moved in together. We ate at the same table and went to the same schools.
My father was 6'4" and weighed 317 pounds. He went to college on a football scholarship (interior lineman).
Willie's father was 6'0" and weighed about 150.
When we grew up I became 6'4" and weigh now about 290. Willie grew to be 6'1" but weighed only 135 for most of his adult life.
I'd like to weigh less. I'm looking for a Willie diet.
Albertosaurus
"BMI statistics broken down by state and ethnicity:
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html"
Interesting that hispanics are fattest in Tennessee, and whites fattest in West Virginia. I'm also pretty surprised to see that where I grew up is one of the only supposedly non-fat counties in the state. I always saw plenty of fat people around...
It's plain to see when you travel outside America that Americans are by far the fattest white people in the world.
USA! USA!! USA!!!
Truth, please cite.
I doubt a right winger is in charge of moderating this wikipedia post:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_Mexico
"Obesity, whilst once a mark of wealth, can now be a sign of poverty in the inner cities of transitional economies such as Mexico."
To all of the commenters that seem to believe that obesity is a simple matter of will - you ought to read Gary Taubes.
Sugars (especially high fructose corn syrup) have an extraordinary stimulative effect on appetite. This inevitably results in insulin resistance and an obesity spiral.
Secondarily the lectins and gluten in (unfermented) grain "products" and the high inflammatory Omega 6 content of industrial seed oils ("vegetable" oil) reek havoc on the gut, especially in terms of vitamin/mineral absorption.
The obesity epidemic, as well as increases in coronary heart disease, diabetes, Alzheimer's, ALS, Parkinson's, etc all track precisely with the increased consumption of sugar, grain and vegetable oil.
YET, from the 1960s forward we've been sold the whole "Low Fat, Whole Grain" non-sense. A literal recipe for obesity and disease. (Just one more thing the boomers got completely backwards)
Eat animals.
Eat plants.
(DON'T eat sugar, grain or vegetable oil.)
Get some sun.
Walk lots.
Sleep well.
Do push-ups, pull-ups and deep knee bends a couple times a week.
That's it!
Poor people make poor choices. FTW.
The Quebeckers I saw ate a lot of fruit (plenty of "fruiteries" in Montreal and Quebec City)and lighter fare in general, which I guess offsets the fries and gravy I saw offered at a lot of places (couldn't tell if older people eat that more than the young or not). And I will admit-their chicks look great.
Antiobesity statements jsut amount to discrimination against fat people
The BMI is useless for what it's used for ( developed by a 19th-century astronomer).
Most obesity research is done by scientists working for pharmaceutical companies that make diet drugs.
Exercise- not weight - is the key to good health.
A person's weight is hard wired at birth -like personality or IQ
You may as well say being bald, or short or ugly are bad for your health
Truth said...
You people should get out more, Mexicans in Mexico are not fat. Neither are black people in Ghana.
Do you even read posts before you babble? Mexicans in Mexico are fat. They are slightly less fat than the Mexicans who live in the US.
No Tonga? No Samoa?
"A person's weight is hard wired at birth -like personality or IQ"
You're mistaken, weight is a function of both hereditary and environmental factors. You're not one of those fat apologists are you?
"A person's weight is hard wired at birth -like personality or IQ."
This is true only for a very small percentage of the population. Most of us (myself included) fall into the category where if you let yourself go, you gain weight, and if you exercise/eat right, you lost weight. Its that simple. The number of natural ectomorphs and natural endomorphs is pretty small. Most fat people just need to make better choices.
"Do you even read posts before you babble?"
There is no source given for the veracity of this chart.
No Attribution.
No breakdown of methodology
No mention of how many people were tested.
No mention of time frame.
etc., etc.
I'm not familiar with any worldwide initiative to BMI test hundreds of millions of people. I'm not saying that it didn't happen, I'm saying that I am not aware of it. I have, however, been to Mexico, and I have never seen one of the 400 pounders you see walking through Wal-Mart every day here.
You commies read something out of Pravda and you accept it as fact; unless there's a black person involved, then it's a lie. Rather sad, really.
"You people should get out more, Mexicans in Mexico are not fat."
With all due respect to your anecdotal experience sometime, somewhere in Mexico, a quick google search shows that obesity in Mexico has been a huge issue since at least 99.
Thanks as always for your valuable contributions.
-you people
This presents a serious quandry for contemporary liberals/right-thinkging-people:
It's wrong to say anything bad about 'brown' people
VS
Fat people are the only ones left to make fun of
My guess is that fear of being racist will shut them up against laughing at fat Mexicans. (Plus a lot of their self-righteous brethren are fatties too....)
"BTW, is there such a thing as a skinny Mexican?"
I've seen plenty, so yeah.
Fact that America is #1 in fatness should shock noone but geez, it's not rocket science. Americans have lots of access to fried fatty food plus a increasingly sedentary culture. This equates to big overweight people.. especially in the south where fried is king and theres butter and cream in pratically everything. In the old days they ate lard because it was just the simplest cheap source of calories but they had lots of manual labor where they burned it off over the course of a day. Now you still have increased access to same fatty foods plus you sit on your butt all day, well duh what else is going to happen?
I have, however, been to Mexico, and I have never seen one of the 400 pounders you see walking through Wal-Mart every day here.
No - just thousands and thousands of 250 pounders.
One big problem is that so many people let themselves get hungry, then stuff themselves on the first thing they see. I've see-sawed between my ideal weight and slightly over, and find that I get back to ideal weight most easily when I fill up on low-calorie vegetables first. Then I have no desire to eat high calorie junk food, or eat only a little.
Same goes with drinking water instead of soda.
Poor choices make poor people.
Hooray for us Aussies. Next to no Latinos or African-Americans in our midst, but we still clock in at #5 in the world obesity stakes.
Possibly, in part, as a result of ordinary exercise (i.e. lots of long walks rather than gym-junkie stuff) having almost died out in the age of computer games and plasma TVs. Junk food hasn't helped the situation either, although I would say that non-junk food is easier and less expensive to obtain in Australia than in most other countries.
But of course we mustn't breathe a word of criticism against those who are willfully obese layabouts (especially female ones), for fear it might damage their "self-esteem".
How much obesity in affluent Western countries is the result of a recent phenomenon which nobody has mentioned so far - millions of people being hopped to the eyeballs on prescription drugs like Prozac? Antidepressants are notorious for inducing weight gain unless the user exercises properly.
"Right, Nauru is probably the fattest place on Earth."
The fattest are Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and other Gulf countries.
"I'm guessing that you aren't, er, helping to keep your state's weight figures down.'
I'm 5' 8" and 132 pounds.
In the old days, the cowboys stayed skinny sitting astride their horses freezing their arses off. Shivering all day burns lots of calories.
Blame the Carhartts and pickup trucks with heaters.
I second Richard A.'s enthusiasm for Taubes' "Good Calories, Bad Calories." It's a real paradigm-shifter, as well as a GREAT account of how science and politics can go bad.
There is definitely some kind of connection between paleo-libertarianism and the Paleo eating-and-exercise thang. Lew Rockwell has been featuring Mark Sisson a lot recently.
Sisson's great; his book is great too. Lots of people have had good luck with his version of the Paleo approach.
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/
One of the godfathers of the Paleo health thing has been Arthur De Vany, otherwise an interesting economist. I think he's a really fascinating and original guy who deserves to be widely known. His approach to health and fitness is pretty mind-blowing. Think chaos theory, genetics, and Taosim.
http://www.arthurdevany.com/
Practically speaking, it works for a lot of people.
There are some interviews on the web with De Vany that'll fill you in on his approach pretty quickly. He has a book coming out in a few months too:
http://www.amazon.com/New-Evolution-Diet-Paleolithic-Ancestors/dp/1605291838/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1283747689&sr=8-1
Highly recommended! Forget "calories in, calories out"; forget grinding out mile upon mile of grueling cardio. Lose weight, have fun, and feel good instead.
BMIs for East Asian people do not reflect their fitness accurately; East Asians are more likely to be fine-boned, and can be obviously overweight at BMIs that are considered acceptable for white or black people. They also seem more likely to start having problems with chronic diseases such as Type II diabetes at lower weights as well. So take those country-comparing BMI charts with a big grain of your favorite detrimental complex carbohydrate.
I wrote a post on this a while back. Noting the Library of Congress photos (you can search them here and key in "los angeles" to get a sense of street scenes and how fat/skinny people were in the 1930's and 1940's. The photos are from the Office of War Information and the Farm Service Administration, which sponsored photographers from 1935-1945.
Look at this one here, even the older folks are not that fat, because they walk almost everywhere, and there are few labor saving devices. Here's another one of the City Desk at the New York Times Newspaper.
Just browsing around, you can see a shockingly different America. Much Whiter, much poorer, much more formally dressed, and much thinner.
"Minus the large black and hispanic rates, we'd probably about even with Great Britain."
Probably not.
It's plain to see when you travel outside America that Americans are by far the fattest white people in the world.
Yeah but those Brits are not too far behind, I gotta tell you. Have you ever been to England? I don't mean London, I mean provincial England. Yikes.
I'm kinda surprised Brits come in third. They don't exactly each big servings by American standards. Has anyone here seen the size of a British potato chip packet? it's about a quarter the size of its North American counterpart.
In the British case it must be lack of exercise, especially weight-bearing exercise. A lot of British guys are really flabby and Brits don't play much sport other than football.
I'm surprised us Kiwis can in so low down, with out love of milk products and our big-boned Polynesian contingent.
East Asians are more likely to be fine-boned, and can be obviously overweight at BMIs that are considered acceptable for white or black people.
Maybe they need to lay off the Chinese food.
Did people look older back then too? That's my impression from extras in Capra movies. Besides being worn down, I think people tried to look older and wiser, too. That ended with the 1960s.
My father, however, who was born in 1917, has always looked about 10-15 years younger than his age for as long as I can remember.
Steve Sailer said...
Did people look older back then too? That's my impression from extras in Capra movies. Besides being worn down, I think people tried to look older and wiser, too. That ended with the 1960s.
My mother's parents were middle class folk. Both were born in the 1910s. They would dress up any time they left the house. He'd even put on a tie, and she would check her lipstick, if they were just going grocery shopping. Nowadays middle age people go to church (when they go to church) wearing shorts and t-shirts. It's like the whole country's become a bunch of rebellious teens.
you're a protectionist.
enough said.
you have no pricniples.
And just in case you didn't know, weight is another protected characteristic in Michigan. So you can't discriminate in employment based on weight there. Even in a context like Hooters where it obviously makes sense:
http://www.examiner.com/eating-disorder-in-philadelphia/hooters-plight-sheds-light-on-weight-discrimination
There is actually a movement to bring weight discrimination legislation to a state near you. But that's America: if you are being discriminated against because you are fat, don't spend your efforts trying to lose weight, spend you efforts lobbying and suing.
"Generally speaking, the poor don't for plan ahead, use self-restraint or connect choices with consequences."
In a sane culture, these habits are taught through harsh discipline in grammar schools. That is what they do in China. I don't think it would work quite as well on NAM's, but it would be better than training them to be entertained and entitled.
I am a single guy and I look at it from another perspective.
I think in the AG "female ugliness index", the countries are switched - Mexico is number 1, USA number 2.
USA's white ladies are usually of the German and/or Scotch Irish ancestry, and they have very pronounced jaws, very unfeminine, very masculine mannerisms, behaviours and body types.
That most ladies in the USA are over 300 lbs here in the Midwest does not help.
I could not believe that the influx of Latinas into this country would make things worse, but alas, Mexican ladies are basically small teddy bears with moustaches.
Alas, the illegal Eastern European women pretty much left the country (speaking from personal experience here - the hot clubs are full of chunky Mexicanas and American chicks and NOT, say, Poles) leaving me with... ugh.
I am not saying that I would marry an American lady, because, lets face it, the male features, the unfeminine look and mannerisms, the general unattractivness is not helped by the divorce rate of 50% and the rather big chance of a divorce with me paying 50% of my livelihood and possibility of never seeing my kids again.
It is getting to the point that, although I think this is the best country in the world, I am seriously considering leaving it, marrying a European woman that looks, behaves and acts like a woman and not a 300 lbs monster with psychotic issues, and perhaps staying there.
Sigh...
Noting the Library of Congress photos (you can search them here and key in "los angeles" to get a sense of street scenes and how fat/skinny people were in the 1930's and 1940's.
When you do a search for "Los Angeles" one of the first photos is captioned "Mexican quarter of Los Angeles. Average rent is eight dollars. Some houses have plumbing."
Peter
Truth:
You people should get out more, Mexicans in Mexico are not fat.
Right, that's why they're number 2 on the list.
"Did people look older back then too? "
They certainly dressed better. My step great grandfather was famous for never going out of the house without a coat (or jacket) and hat. Scanning in some old family photos from the 1920s recently, I noticed that people in parks, etc. in the background, are almost uniformly nicely dressed. A picture in the LA times recently of Anaheim Stadium in the late 1960s shows that virtually all the men wore collared shirts to the ball game.
I just seems that people took more care back then. And I am with Virginia Postrel on this one thing, aesthetics matter , not only as a symptom (an ugly society economically is likely ugly on the surface), but probably , through negative feedback, a cause (ugliness /slovenliness encourages more of same).
Down with high-fructose corn syrup!!
"They would dress up any time they left the house. He'd even put on a tie, and she would check her lipstick, if they were just going grocery shopping."
They even wore suits to picnics!
"only now to discover that high carb diets aren't all that great, especially since most people get carbs in mono- or disaccharide form."
I have a question for all the low-carbers here.
I read the Taubes book, and I thought he made a devastating case against carbs (for a variety of reasons, not just obesity).
He began his book with the example of the Pima Indians, who now have the highest obesity and diabetes rates in the world. Tragic.
However, he states that the Pima's traditional diet was...beans. In other words, carbs.
China and Japan have low obesity rates, we all agree. But their diet is....rice. Carbs.
I have tried to puzzle out this apparent contradiction in low-carb terms, and I can't.
I have read Michael Eades' forums (Protein Power) on the subject, and the only answer they come up with is denial. They actually deny that Japanese and Chinese eat a lot of carbs.
This is sheer dishonesty. I have read in books and articles that all statistics verify that the traditional Chinese/Japanese diet is 80% carbs. In Japan in recent years it's gone down to about 65% (and their BMI has gone up, not that correlation is causation, but just saying.)
I wrote to Taubes for an explanation of this contradiction. He answered with finesse.
So what you all think is the answer?
My own feeling is that there are "Good Carbs and Bad Carbs" - the bad carbs are sugar and HFCS. These derange your metabolism and get you fat.
Once you are fat, you probably have to cut down on ALL carbs to lose fat.
But a normal person who isn't fat and isn't hooked on sugar and HFSC can eat "good carbs" such as the Japanese, Chinese and traditional Pima Indians do and stay a normal weight.
Steve Sailer said..."Did people look older back then too? That's my impression from extras in Capra movies. Besides being worn down, I think people tried to look older and wiser, too. That ended with the 1960s."
Yes, I think so. With ordinary people, it was a combination of hard work, bad diet, lack of dental care, undiagnosed medical conditions and wanting to look older because maturity, not youth, was the time of privilege and deference.
But even Hollywood actors, as you point out, looked older than their modern-day counterparts do. In the case of the women, I think it's due to clothing and hair styles. Most fabrics were heavier, the cut of clothing didn't allow for movement, except for swing skirts, and hair styles were generally more stiff and "set", Veronica Lake's "peek-a-boo" style being the sexy and dangerous exception. Respectability (a word I heard often when young and never now) was important back then. Flyaway hair and loose clothing weren't considered respectable if seen in public.
Here's a still of Myrna Loy (b.1905) and Frederic March (b. 1897) from The Best Years of Our Lives (released 1946). They would have been 40 and 48 when it was taken. To me, even though they were both considered very good-looking, they look 10 years older than they were, despite the lack of deep facial lines, sagging chins, heavy jowls, etc. They're trim and middle-aged verging on old. To put it in perspective, Myrna was then about Jennifer Aniston's age now.
Myrna Loy and Frederic March.
Most white populations that have a tendency to pack on a few pounds will be muscle bound badasses when things get all Max-Max. So treat them kindly now. You'll want them on your side.
you're a protectionist.
enough said.
you have no pricniples.
Isn't protectionism a principle?
Whiskey - thanks for that photo link, some great pictures there. Just been looking at the railway section, railroad to you American chaps.
My experience is that different diets work (or don't work) for different people and you just have to try various diets on yourself to see what works for you.
"It is getting to the point that, although I think this is the best country in the world, I am seriously considering leaving it, marrying a European woman that looks, behaves and acts like a woman and not a 300 lbs monster with psychotic issues, and perhaps staying there."
Move to Argentina where your purchasing power is greater and the women are mostly Italian. P.S. You aren't getting laid not because they are unattractive. Try to work on your personality.
The carbs question is an interesting one. A researcher health-blogger who's very interesting is Stephen Guyenet. Sympathetic to the low-carb and Paleo worlds, but also fascinated by the various cultures that seem to thrive on high-carb diets.
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/
His hunch, in a nutshell, is that wheat and sugar can indeed get you in trouble; that the genetics of the population (and the individual) in question matter; otherwise, traditional foods of a "natural" sort, traditionally prepared, tend to be a safe bet.
He's a terrific blogger -- very smart, very independent, and writes well.
"My experience is that different diets work (or don't work) for different people and you just have to try various diets on yourself to see what works for you."
Sure, but we are talking about the obesity epidemic here - what causes it??
Lots of people on these HBD sites come up with the low-carb "Taubes is right" mantra. While I'm sympathetic I can't help but ask, what about China? What about Japan? What about Norway (they eat lots of bread...)
The one thing they all seem to have in common is low sugar consumption.
But even Hollywood actors, as you point out, looked older than their modern-day counterparts do. In the case of the women, I think it's due to clothing and hair styles.
Let's not forget that people under 25 are the main target for all mass media and entertainment now. They want to see younger faces.
In the 50's and 60's younger people didn't have the same amount of disposable money as kids of today.
Most of what makes it to the big screen or silver screen today is based on whether or not it will play with teen girls, who are much more easily separated from their money and have more predictable spending habits than discriminating adults. That's why today's stars are youngish effeminates like Zac Efron or Leonard DiCaprio, rather than true manly men like Cary Grant or Errol Flynn.
Do Mexicans even get tall enough to reach 400 lbs? Wouldn't they explode first?
"USA's white ladies are usually of the German and/or Scotch Irish ancestry, and they have very pronounced jaws, very unfeminine, very masculine mannerisms, behaviours and body types. That most ladies in the USA are over 300 lbs here in the Midwest does not help." - American Goy
You live in the Midwest, or the Twilight Zone?
I live in Flyover America, too, and I can't go through an average day without getting turned on by 30 or 40 women, a large fraction of them of British/Irish descent.
I have known people to say that the women in Scotland are fugly, but those women are either from a different strain entirely or made ugly by culture/environment - massive drinking, lack of sunlight, eating haggis, whatever. Or maybe they just need an, ahem, injection of genetic diversity.
Nowadays middle age people go to church (when they go to church) wearing shorts and t-shirts. It's like the whole country's become a bunch of rebellious teens.
Not the whole country. I was born and raised in the southeast. My parents started moving around the country for work when I was about 18. We were shocked at Marylanders and how common it was for them to go grocery shopping in sweats and such.
It ain't normal where I come from.
~Svigor
My own feeling is that there are "Good Carbs and Bad Carbs" - the bad carbs are sugar and HFCS. These derange your metabolism and get you fat.
Didn't Adkins go off on processed grains in particular? I know one of those diet gurus did some years back. You know, it's not grains per se, but the refined sugars and starches and flour?
~Svigor
Sailer said, "My experience is that different diets work (or don't work) for different people and you just have to try various diets on yourself to see what works for you."
Not being fat isn't necessarily an indication that one is healthy. Being fat is unhealthy for sure but not being fat isn't necessarily an indication of genetic potential.
Diet should be about vitality and longevity. Fitness will follow.
Steve how come you're not on the Paleo bandwagon? Seems to me those paleo/primal folks are ripe for the HBD message.
you're a protectionist.
enough said.
you have no pricniples.
Isn't protectionism a principle?
Don't try to reason with him. He's constantly trying to "gotcha" Steve because Steve doesn't want to see the country flooded with Third Worlders (ie, he thinks it is a "contradiction" to be pro-free market but be anti-open borders/anti-immigration, which is bollocks but he can't grasp this). In his eyes, you either are a Globalist/Free Trader/Open Borders/pro-race replacement kind of guy, or you're evil and have "no principles" because, well, you think having an actual country to live in and call your own is a good thing. He hasn't grasped the concept that other people can have principles that differ from his.
"This is sheer dishonesty. I have read in books and articles that all statistics verify that the traditional Chinese/Japanese diet is 80% carbs. In Japan in recent years it's gone down to about 65% (and their BMI has gone up, not that correlation is causation, but just saying.)"
A lot of the carb eating in the Japan/China and the Third World is fermented.
"USA's white ladies are usually of the German and/or Scotch Irish ancestry, and they have very pronounced jaws, very unfeminine, very masculine mannerisms, behaviours and body types."
Haha....what?
Ok you don't like modern feminist-influenced mannerisms, fine. I don't either, though most white women in the USA don't actually have "very masculine mannerisms, behaviours". You either need to get out more or change your social setting.
But "very pronounced jaws....very masculine....body types"??? Are you insane? Or have you been hanging out in the local tranny/cross-dresser bar and didn't realize it?
Here's a hint: if "she" is wearing a man's size 12 shoe, it's probably a guy, not a gal.
"He began his book with the example of the Pima Indians, who now have the highest obesity and diabetes rates in the world. Tragic.
However, he states that the Pima's traditional diet was...beans. In other words, carbs.
China and Japan have low obesity rates, we all agree. But their diet is....rice. Carbs.
I have tried to puzzle out this apparent contradiction in low-carb terms, and I can't"
There is no contradiction. Complex carbs aren't bad: simple carbs are. Beans, brown rice, vegetables and fruits: complex carbs for the most part. Sugar, high fructose corn syrup, white bread, white rice, alcohol: simple carbs, quickly digested causing a spike in blood sugar: bad.
The Pima Indians are a classic example of what happens when you go from a complex carb to a simple carb diet. They didn't have any problems on their tradiontal complex carb diet. The problem came when they switched to the modern fast food diet with lots of heavily processed foods with refined sugar and simple carbs. Their genetics set them up to react badly to this diet, and many Mexicans share this genetic heritage.
"The USA isn't the fattest country in the world. Any antipodean HBDer would know that a Polynesian country would hold that honor and not by a small margin!
I remember hearing Nauru had the highest BMIs of any country."
Polynesians may be prone to fat but they do produce a lot of good rugby players.
"Eat animals.
Eat plants.
(DON'T eat sugar, grain or vegetable oil.)
Get some sun.
Walk lots.
Sleep well.
Do push-ups, pull-ups and deep knee bends a couple times a week.
That's it!
"
As a kid I was skinny,but ate a lot of meat,pizza,junk food. I started to gain weight when I started eating a lot of pasta.
I think you're right about meat. Bacon and eggs are better than pancakes or pasta.
ironrailsironweights said..."When you do a search for 'Los Angeles' one of the first photos is captioned 'Mexican quarter of Los Angeles. Average rent is eight dollars. Some houses have plumbing.'"
No surprise there. People forget how much the standard of living improved in the post-WWII era.
From a great social history website, Lisa's Nostalgia Cafe, discussing evolving conditions in the 1930's American home:
"A modern bathroom contains a sink, flush toilet and fully-connected bathtub. Most importantly, these fixtures are all located in a room designed especially for their use. In the 1930s, an increasing number of homes had these features, but there was still a large gap between the classes.
Nearly all upper class homes had complete bathrooms with flush toilets and connected bathtubs. Between 70 and 90 percent of middle class homes also had complete bathrooms.
For poor and rural homes, change was slow in coming. 20 percent of these homes had running water, 25 percent had a flush toilet, and a lucky 7 percent had a complete bathroom with a sink, toilet and tub all located in the same room."
The 1930's Home.
I was born and raised in the southeast. My parents started moving around the country for work when I was about 18. We were shocked at Marylanders and how common it was for them to go grocery shopping in sweats and such.
It ain't normal where I come from.
~Svigor
True. Not everyone's gone completely slob. You won't find a 'folk' or guitar service (or a lesbian minister) at a Southern Baptist church.
It is surprising that, against scientific evidence, people (including those posting here) continue to believe that long-term weight loss for adults can be achieved with exercise and diet.
Exercise (at least for the slackers only exercising vigorously one hour every day) does *not* produce weight loss. Period. There are health benefits to regular exercise, but weight loss is not one of them.
Every diet plan - low-carb, high-carb, grapefruit, whatever - will work for 6 months. After that dieters regain their weight. A couple of years ago, NEJM published a large study showing that 18 months or so after starting their diets, the subjects lost an average of 1 inch from their (considerable) waistlines.
As I posted earlier, others studies have shown that you can maintain significant weight drop after the initial loss - but only if you are willing to starve for the rest of your lives. I remember hearing this data at a medical course and rising to ask how grumpy are these folks in their daily lives. The moderator and audience laughed but had no answer.
If you want to see for yourself how fat or big Americans are today versus those in the 1940s, just take a tour of a B-17 or B-24 when one comes to your local airport.
I went on both types when they visited. I could not believe how small one must be to fit into the turrets, especially the nose turret on the B-24. I was wearing shorts and a T-shirt and could barely fit. I weigh about 178 lbs. Keep in mind the guys in WW2 were wearing parachutes. My guess is most of those guys came in around 125-140 pounds.
Camlost said..."Let's not forget that people under 25 are the main target for all mass media and entertainment now. They want to see younger faces."
True. But they wanted to see young faces--at least on the actresses--back then, too. A lot of the biggest stars of silents and Hollywood's Golden Age (Garbo, Loy, Harlow, Stanwyck, Davis, Crawford) started out young, in their teens and early 20's. Garbo's popularity was slipping (partly due to cultural factors) by the time she was in her early 30's. Ditto Crawford and others.
Hollwood didn't have much more use for women in their 30's and 40's then than they do now. There were lots of undeniably old character actresses, though (Jane Darwell, Beulah Bondi, Margaret Wicherly, Spring Byington, Lucille Watson) as well as older character actors.
Judging by the movies in current release, the real difference between then and now is that no one who goes to or rents a movie today wants to see an old person.
And: "Most of what makes it to the big screen or silver screen today is based on whether or not it will play with teen girls... That's why today's stars are youngish effeminates like Zac Efron or Leonard DiCaprio, rather than true manly men like Cary Grant or Errol Flynn."
Agreed but I think there's more going on there. The effeminates look less manly, less capable of being in charge or taking charge. It's a shift in the balance of power between the sexes as much as it is a sign of how age is perceived.
Thanks for your comment.
By the way, I really do know how to spell Fredric March's name.
"I think you're right about meat. Bacon and eggs are better than pancakes or pasta."
Hmmm - the selection process for several thousand years winnowed out those who did not benefit from grains. Those who remain mostly won't suffer from whole grains.
"Polynesians may be prone to fat but they do produce a lot of good rugby players."
They're football crazy, too - as much into football as blacks are into basketball.
"My experience is that different diets work (or don't work) for different people and you just have to try various diets on yourself to see what works for you."
True, yet some principles are pretty much universal: avoid sweets and soda, eat plenty of fruits and, especially, vegetables. The "paleo" diet includes the "gathering" part as much as the "hunting" part. If people were more inclined to begin their meals with water and vegetables (which are easier to eat when you're hungry, anyway) then far fewer people would be obese. They both fill you up. You don't need Weight Watchers or Jenny Craig.
Hmmm - the selection process for several thousand years winnowed out those who did not benefit from grains. Those who remain mostly won't suffer from whole grains.
1) Selection is only concerned with reproduction not necessarily longevity 2) traditional pre-modern preparations ferment the grain (bacteria pre-digest gluten/lectins) and 3) the wheat pre-modern people ate was genetically different than the stuff our government subsidizes (i.e. einkorn ).
It's more important to exercise than to follow any particular diet. That's why nothing Americans do diet-wise has much effect and people in the rest of the world stay thin. Balancing nutrients is something for competitive athletes to worry about. Spend an hour a day doing strenuous exercise and you can eat what you want within reason and you will be happier, healthier and more attractive than you will from starving yourself or eating animal feed.
Strenuous exercise means you are sweating and breathing hard.
ATBOTL said...
"It's more important to exercise than to follow any particular diet."
<>Spend an hour a day doing strenuous exercise and you can eat what you want within reason..."
Totally wrong. I have posted this twice already, but old wives' tales die hard. You do *not* lose weight with 1 hour of exercise a day. Proven.
This information was interesting re: US Civil war height/weight:
http://www.civilwarhome.com/themen.htm
For Union troops:
Avg height = 5 ft 8 1/4 inches
Avg weight = 143 1/4 lbs
That's a BMI of 21.6
"No way in hell. Many white Americans in the South and Midwest are huge, like sea mammals. You will not see people in Europe that big except on rare occasions. "Average" people are thinner and fitter in every European country I've ever been to than in most of the US."
It's true. I should have moved out West years ago. There are many Americans who can barely walk because their legs rub against each other,
I spent a few years in the mid-Atlantic/midWest, where most women were grotesquely swollen and poorly dressed by age 35. Then I moved to California (not the coastal regions either), and found that 35-50 year old women can be slim, attractive, and sexy. I was in my mid 30's, looked 25, and needless to say, had the time of my life.
I just spent a week in San Diego. The eye-candy there is astonishing - slim, toned, tanned, vivacious. The women are even better.
I can't explain it. Why are people in Cleveland and Iowa so fat? Do the slim and pretty just move to Santa Monica and La Jolla? Even in San Francsico (my closest big city) with its geeks and uglies, people are thin.
"Totally wrong. I have posted this twice already, but old wives' tales die hard. You do *not* lose weight with 1 hour of exercise a day. Proven."
You're silly.
If you run for an hour and burn say 600 calories (six 10 minutes miles @ 100 kcal per mile) and the burning of those 600 calories puts you at a deficit for the day, well then.
The problem is most dummies go and eat those 600 calories right back and nullify the deficit.
I have posted this twice already, but old wives' tales die hard. You do *not* lose weight with 1 hour of exercise a day. Proven.
Depends on the exercise and on how much you're eating. It certainly CAN result in weight loss, especially if you're lifting weights and not screwing around with aerobic exercise.
Aerobics have a place, but not really in a weight loss program.
Gary Taubes takes questions:
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/cardiovascular-disease/gary-taubes-responds/
Taubes thinks that exercise can have many benefits, but for most people it isn't going to help them lose weight.
burp said...
Why are people in Cleveland and Iowa so fat?
Cold winters and hot, humid summers. Midwesterners spend most of their time indoors in heated, airconditioned comfort. I suspect airconditioning has done a lot to encourage obesity in the South and Midwest: You can be fat and comfortable in summer.
Depends on what you mean by exercise. Piddly-ass exercise in a gym won't help you lose weight.
Cutting sugar cane will: it burns 7,000 kcal per day. Hard to make that up with food when you are in the middle of nowhere in Brazil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8MXWKXtu-A
Sucks being a hard-gainer/ectomorph type. I'm 45, so I can't attribute this to youth.
No, you're an undereater. There is no such thing as a "hardgainer" - there are only undereaters.
As I posted earlier, others studies have shown that you can maintain significant weight drop after the initial loss - but only if you are willing to starve for the rest of your lives.
You have to add muscle to increase your metabolism. This means lifting weights, and not pink dumbells.
Also, you don't "starve" eating a maintenance level of calories. Whatever you were eating to get the weight off is what you need, minus a couple hundred calories per day.
People have all these excuses why they can't do this or that and excuses are like, well, you know.
Ray,
Thanks for that website, I'll check it out.
Svigor,
"Didn't Adkins go off on processed grains in particular?"
No, all carbs.
Since no one asked, I'll tell you all the secret of obesity.
Sugar, esp. when mixed with wheat and fat, is delicious, and makes a significant portion of the population binge.
Folks don't want to admit this and they regularly lie about it.
This makes them insulin resistant, and fat.
East Asians eat rice, but they don't binge on it. They eat it. They eat very little sugar traditonally. Now their diet is becoming as sugary as ours is, and they will become fat. Trust me.
They might even become fatter than Westerners.
"Why are people in Cleveland and Iowa so fat? "
Yes, climate plays a role. It also plays a role in the Southeast, where the summers, of course, are hot and humid but the winters aren't necessarily as mild as you'd think.
I suspect what also plays a role is race & class. Basically in flyover country the whites are a broad mix of upper, middle and lower-class, while on the coasts you have mostly upper and upper-middle class whites, with the lower class roles being filled by minorities. Upper and upper-middle class whites anywhere are in better shape than other whites. The whites on the coasts are also more likely to be "on the market" and less likely to have children.
I suspect those people stating that people in San Diego, etc. are all thin aren't paying much attention to the Hispanics. They're the invisible men here.
"No way in hell. Many white Americans in the South and Midwest are huge, like sea mammals. You will not see people in Europe that big except on rare occasions. "Average" people are thinner and fitter in every European country I've ever been to than in most of the US."
The poor ones you see on People of Wal-mart are huge, yes. But they still are not the majority of the population. Most older people are moderately overweight but not at the sea mammal level. Go to any southern major university however and most males and females are quite thin.
Being thin is simply a SWPL status marker- no different then the flapper era in the '20s.
This is wonderfully detailed in Fat Politics by ERic Oliver
My own experience:
I started gaining weight when I hit 30. I went to weight watchers and dropped 40 lbs through a combination of diet and exercise.
I feel much better not because I'm thinner but I'm healthier (exercise!!!).
Interestingly before I lost the weight, the most likely to mention it were :
men who were ugly or short
and women who were ugly or old.
Wheni
Ted wrote:
Nauru has the highest BMI of any country.
Obesity rates (BMI over 30)
Nauru 78.5%
Tonga 56.0%
Saudi Arabia 35.6%
United Arab Emirates 33.7%
United States 32.2%
Bahrain 28.9%
Kuwait 28.8%
Seychelles 25.1%
United Kingdom 24.2%
source
Pima Indians in AZ, ~80%
source
...more obesity rates:
Native-Hawaiians 44.1%
Whites in Hawaii 21.3%
source
Post a Comment