Recently in Obesity Category

I was looking online for information about adolescent girls and self-esteem, when I stumbled across some information about depression in adolescent girls.  Although I have looked into this information, I still find the statistics shocking.  A statistic I cannot get over is that almost 1 in 6 adolescents are diagnosed with major depression, girls being diagnosed twice as much as boys.  Not only is that depressing, but also almost 1-4% of teenage girls have been diagnosed with an eating disorder.  Adolescent boys and girls are at the greatest vulnerability for the onset of eating disorders and depression.  I found these statistics from a journal article by Boes, McCormick, Coryell, & Nopoulos, 2008.

Adolescent kids are struggling with their changing body and raging hormones and are trying to discover themselves.  They want to be accepted by their peers and want to fit into society.  Adolescents have a high need for relatedness and autonomy in their lives.  According to Reeve, "behaviors, emotions, and ways of thinking originate not only within the self but also within the social context and society" (Reeve, pg. 283, 2009).  Teenagers want to have some control within their lives but also seek approval from their peers and society.  When adolescents do not feel good about themselves, they may withdrawal from their surroundings and suffer in silence. 

Especially in American society, where we are surrounded by beautiful, thin people.  It is sad to admit that we are engrained to think only tall and thin people can be considered beautiful.  We need to continue to emphasize in schools and at home that we must embrace our differences.  However, this view will not be accepted until our society changes the requirements for models, actors/actresses, and so on. 

Do you think classes talking about the negative side effects of eating disorders in classes and/or the importance for accepting yourself would improve these statistics or cause adolescents to hide their insecurities even more?  Would a requirement of being involved in a program outside of school help decrease insecurities?  These programs could involve art, sports, theater, whatever students are interested in.

I recently read an article that discussed women's inbuilt fear of getting fat.  It discusses how women, more than men, react negatively when they see other obese women.  They do not react negatively against these other women, but instead react in a way that their brain focuses attention on their own self image.  When they see other women who are over-weight they process their own identity and self reflection, therefore solidifying their need to remain thin.  This can be the first stage of eating disorders, but this reaction is seen in many women, even those that externally would say that they were not worried about their image.  

This article talked about a new program they have developed which allowed kids to get involved with the school and stay active for about 90 minutes after school.  The program involved children playing sports like soccer and basketball and even dance.  Two years later they compared how much the children weighed before and after.  They found that girls that were obese lost weight more than the boys that were obese.  I found this studies results quite obvious, but I decided to write on it because I'm surprised more schools don't require this or offer this.  I know many schools especially Middle School and High School have sports you can get involved with but these are optional and usually too late.  By this I mean a number of kids are already obese or overweight.  Do you know any schools that provide this opportunity or require kids to get the needed exercise in their life?  How much of a benefit do you think this would provide children or don't you think it would help much? What else do you think we could do as a society to put the obesity problem to a stop? 

How can it be that plus size women want to idealize themselves as perfect, when perfect is different to many people? Culturally as a nation we see "perfect" now a day's as being skinny, because you can be a beautiful plus size model, but still be overlooked by a skinner version. So how can we evaluate perfect? But this article only makes sense on two levels to me.

 http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/beauty/do-plus-size-models-make-women-feel-bad-about-themselves-1173186/#poll-BD54121832B011DFBA43F0FC7608A6B2

First off, right now our country is on a skinny health trip, which means, if you look skinny you are perceived healthier than those of a heavy weight or size. Which can change soon with the new focus on being actively healthy because of "skinny fat".

Secondly, plus size women only have lower self-esteem because they are constantly told that they are not as pretty as thinner women. Society creates this self-esteem issue, because look at some of the really dangerously thin women and ask them why they don't shop or enjoy the way they look. Plus, if they made clothing that was pretty for plus size women things could be different as well.

What do you think, can plus size models hinder you from buying clothing, shoes, watches or anything? Do you think that seeing plus size models make it more diverse when it comes to adds, because not everyone can be this size 0-4 frame?

 

I recently read an article about Gabourey Sidibe, the plus sized actress that was nomited for an Oscar after her emotional performance in Precious. I wondered, like i'm sure many other people do too, will there be a place for her in Hollywood after this film? The facts are that she is an obese woman, and while she is obvisouly very talented, will there be parts for her and will directors want to cast her in a movie? It's sad that a persons talent can be overlooked or disregarded because of your physical features, but in a way it makes sense. The article I read made a good point in saying that her roles will be severely limited because "no one in the executive world looks like her." Sidibe moved audiences by portraying an abused girl and people were able to feel her pain and suffering through her acting, but is this one role enough to motivate directors and casting agents to cast her in more movies? What would be there motivation for casting her instead of someone more physically attractive? Our culture is so caught up on weight and hollywood that I for one think it will be very difficult for her to continue her career without losing weight. One important factor will be if having her star in a movie will motivate people to go to the theaters and watch a movie she is in. Ticket sales of her upcoming films will really motivate other directors to either keep using her, or to move on to the next actress. Hopefully people can look past her physical size and see her talent, so that she might still have a career next year!

Here is the article I read about her.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/03/10/gabourey.sidibe.career/index.html

Main Article:  

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Depression/feel-eat/story?id=4387456

 

          One reason I found this article very interesting is because I believe that each of us, including myself, do not often think about the effect that our diet has on our emotions and mood. The researchers in this study came to the conclusion that "Food really does have a lot of power." By properly maintaining a well-balanced diet we can significantly improve our mood. This article analyzes several different foods and provides the possible effects each one can have on a person's health.

 

     An important point here is that mood can affect your eating choices, and what you have eaten can subsequently affect your mood. In some ways, this can be a cyclical process. People who eat harmful foods may sometimes feel bad as a result of their nutritional effects and continue consuming the harmful food to (temporarily) get rid of the negative feelings. In psychological terms, there is negative reinforcement.

 

    This is a very important topic today, and I think each of us should take time to consider this study. As these researchers report, " the average consumer isn't eating a healthy enough diet, let alone a diet that will put them in a good mood." As of today, over a third of adults are obese - not just overweight, but obese. As they say in the article, "Though no studies show that mood disorders and increased obesity are directly related, many agree that there is some correlation."

      As I mentioned in my last article, the prevalence of fast food should be of great concern to us, and I say this for a few reasons. Fast food restaurants, such as McDonalds, often use addictive ingredients within their products that may taste very good and increase short-term feelings of happiness, but these artificial chemicals increase the motivation to eat more through grossly unnatural means. When I suggest that we may need to have higher standards on our food (fast food, grocery store products, etc.), I realize some of the criticisms that may arise. Some people would say that consumers could just make these foods in their own home, or people would just find ways around the standards. There are many European restaurants, however, that do have higher standards on fast food than we do. The food may not taste as good in the moment it is consumed, but it is much healthier for one's physical and mental health over the long term.

      There are a few psychological concepts at play here. To avoid the tastier, yet unhealthier foods a person must possess effective gratification delay strategies. Another important point here is that many people are not at a "natural" homeostasis level as determined by their DNA and genetic predisposition. I believe the problem here is largely cultural. Also, this is not just an obesity problem or mood problem - there are many factors at work here, and it may take a bit of critical thinking to get a grasp on what is actually going on. As these researchers reported, "(The) rising rates of depression and other mood disorders (parallel) the rise of obesity in the U.S... It is hard to establish cause and effect, but it's not by chance that stress has been going up and depression has been going up and obesity is going up." There is a very big difference between psychological disorders that require medication and mild mood impairments, but the effects of dietary behavior are a critical part of the equation. Some individuals with anxiety problems have shown significant improvement by simply eating a healthier diet. The effects of this problem are very widespread, long lasting, and have proven devastating to the lives of many people.  

      I would also like to focus on a few of the findings of this study as they relate to happiness in terms of neurotransmitters and overall mood. It mentions all of these foods in depth on the website, but I will try to summarize their information here. 

   Fast Food is known to be a "mood downer." These are the main points about them the article mentions...

 

- Unequivocally, fast foods are mood downers. While it may be cheap, fast, or just easy to reach for a donut, a bag of chips, or a hamburger, eventually, your mood will pay the price.

 

- The immediate effects of a high-fat or sugary snack can be misleading. Often, they give a quick burst of energy and may reduce tension. But these effects run in reverse rapidly. They shift to increase tension and reduce energy.

 

- Fast food and junk food are usually the most processed foods, where the nutrients are refined to the point where they are absorbed immediately or not at all, leaving no long-term sustenance for the body to feed off of. It is addictive to eat that sort of lipid-laden diet.

 

- Besides the poor nutrient content, fast food often contains many additives and preservatives that can affect mood negatively. Food colorings and preservatives, like benzoate, and added flavorings like monosodium glutamate (MSG), can cause anxiety, according to Scott.

 

-  Studies have shown that the omega-6 fatty acids often found in these foods, can compete with omega-3 fatty acids and an imbalance between the two can lead to obesity and depression. Since Americans often don't get enough omega-3s in their diets, consuming too many fast food items puts them at risk for mood problems.

 

   Luckily, we have a great variety of other choices, which include...

 

Salmon -  Salmon is rich in omega-3 fatty acids, which help to improve one's mood, one's heart, and possibly even one's mind. Omega-3 fatty acids are used for building neurotransmitters like serotonin in the brain, and some studies have shown that eating plenty of these fats has depression-preventing qualities. Other foods with these acids include flaxseeds and walnuts.

In fact, countries where oily fish are a part of the diet, such as Japan, have lower rates of depression than other countries. These countries often have a healthier diet and lifestyle overall, but their omega-3 intake is higher as well.

 

Milk

- rich in calcium and the amino acid tryptophan

- bone-building properties

- calcium is known to calm nerves when feeling stressed or anxious

-  tryptophan is important for producing serotonin, which elevates mood.

 

Chocolate

- rich in a variety of mood-lifting ingredients (most concentrated in dark chocolate)

- dark chocolate is high in polyphenols, which are shown to improve cognitive function

- chocolate also contains phenylethylamines, a neurotransmitter that, in low levels, is associated with depression and in high levels can be associated with schizophrenia

- phenylethylamines work by releasing endorphins in the brain and promote feelings of attraction and giddiness.

- "Both sex and dark chocolate activate the same parts of the brain"

 

(additional foods are analyzed in the main article)

The last time I wrote a post, I did the BMI requirement for graduation, and not to my surprise I got some commentary. None the less everyone has an opinion about weight and how being "overweight" is a disease and in our country a huge "NO NO!" Not saying that is what people commented about, but how just in general people view this BMI requirement.  Somehow this is the new standard of feeling fit and being healthy. But what are the requirements of being healthy? Is it fitting into this BMI calculation? Or eating healthy with moderate exercise? How about those who are not in this range, who eat the rights foods and exercise daily, but are over the normal height/weight configuration, do they count as being unhealthy?

You see we slap the wrist of those who do not fit into this whole category that everyone thinks is healthy.  Even those who fit into this category, slap the wrist of those that they feel are unhealthier than they are.  Society has placed a great deal of pressure to "fit in" and be a part of this majority. Because those who are in the majority have the power. This power can affect our social needs, which we will talk about in chapter 7, and this in turns affects our motivation in how we live our lives. You see, they control everything from who is unhealthy, to who is socially accepted, what we wear, what size we wear, what we should look like, and in this case how the BMI is calculated. If you look at the weight from recent years to now you will understand that the weight keeps decreasing.

There is an epidemic that is arising with America's weight obsession with and their BMI. This obsession is something to worry about, because it places the emphases on weight, diet and societal expectations, which leads the idealization of what is considered perfect. This has shown up in recent studies that there are a few trends. These trends show a decrease in the normal weight, clothing size and increase the number of dieting programs.

  I did some research because for one even at my smallest weight and size which was 140lbs and a 5, I was still considered overweight, by the calculations of the BMI ( I was a 31), and now that I am no longer a 5, I am morbidly obese. I also, have some friends who have looked at their BMI and realized that they do not fit into this normal range that this calculator has for them. For some, this motivated them and they were like "oh my, it's time to return to the Gym". This friend is 5'4, 145lbs and wears a size 6. In looking at her you wouldn't guess at all that she is not in the normal range. Potentially a problem, maybe, maybe not.

Here are some websites that I found that have talked about the BMI and how it is outright wrong and the feministe has a picture gallery, which is interesting in itself, because you can see in pictures who is not normal, and who is considered overweight.  Some of them are athletics, who would have thought that they are overweight?

http://jezebel.com/306096/somethings-wrong-with-the-body-mass-index

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/10/01/the-obesity-epidemic-in-pictures/

http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/-   The BMI calculator

So my questions to you are. Do you fit in this normal range? If you don't are you okay with your current weight and size? And if you do, the same question, are you okay with your weight and size? My last question is would you let this calculation define you? In answering this last question myself, I must say I do not, because I am much happier now and do healthier activities now that I not a size 5.

While working out the other day, I was reading Star magazine and I came across an article called, "The Biggest Loser's Dirty Little Secret.  This article discussed the secrets behind the weight loss for the participants.  The show wants big, dramatic results and unfortunately the participants are at risk.  The contestants participate in extremely intense workouts and are on restricted diets.  Along with exercising and dieting, participants intentionally dehydrate themselves before weigh-ins to have a better outcome.  According to contestants, the morning of weigh-ins was the most intense. 

They would go to the gym and the heat would be cranked up to over 100 degrees F, they would wear layers of clothing, and work out for 2-3 hours without consuming water.  There is also nothing safe about having 500-lb contestants working out to that extent.  According to Star magazine, all participants signed a contract realizing the life-threatening reality of the show.  Those over 400-lbs also had to feel they were "in excellent physical, emotional, psychological, and mental health."

Another problem with the show was they claimed to provide a psychologist for support for the participants mental and physical breakdowns; however, contestants stated they never knew where to find him.  A woman contestant, Kai, who appeared on the show in 2006, says she began developing an eating disorder, her hair was falling out, and her body was covered in bruises.  According to the article, her trainer would not let her see a counselor and forced her to continue working out.  Kai also stated, producers would create drama and untrustworthiness on the show by deliberatly saying their friends were possibly saying horrible things behind their back.

This article was shocking to me.  I realize that the Biggest Loser is a show and wants to create dramatic effect; however, putting people's physical and mental well-being in danger is not safe.  I feel each contestant should have had their own counselor to continually talk to them and support them through this process. 

What does everyone else think about this article?  Is anyone else surprised by this article?  Should the participants be allowed access to a solid support system?  Should contestants to be deliberatly placed in a hot room without AC and no water in order to lose the most weight possible? 

Here's the link to the website.  It's not the whole article but you can get the main point of it!http://www.starmagazine.com/news/16415