Skip to main content

View Diary: News Anchor Talks About Bullying from A Personal Perspective; Receives Huge Outpouring of Support! (195 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I am glad she spoke out. People think it is ok (33+ / 0-)

    to make fun of overweight people and always label them as "lazy".  It is wrong to make fun of people and it is silly to judge someone else because of their size.

    Way to go Jennifer and thank you hungrycoyote for writing this.

    Good to see!

    •  Sounds like some of the "welfare" stereotyping (22+ / 0-)

      that the GOP has been pushing, doesn't it?

      “Mitt Romney is the only person in America who looked at the way this Congress is behaving and said, ‘I want the brains behind THAT operation.’ ” — Tom Perriello

      by hungrycoyote on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 05:10:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't think the label is lazy. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hungrycoyote, slowbutsure

      I think the stereotype is that fat people are jolly. That's the main one I've heard.

    •  It also has to do (16+ / 0-)

      with the way the media covers obesity as our naton's worst health crisis.  Ever notice the faces of people in these stories, or just their bellies and asses?

      This segment not only showed a beautiful face, but a complete person who insisted on being seen as a complete person, and as someone who can show both courage and compassion.

      Bravo Jennifer.

      Republicans want to make government small enough to fit in your vagina..

      by ramara on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 05:22:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You can't expect them to (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Voter123

        film their faces and then roll the film with the narrator talking about a health crisis. That would be pretty bad. So they hide their identity by lowering the camera.

      •  I am curious (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hungrycoyote

        are you then saying that obesity is not one of the nation's worts health crisises?

        •  The real health crisis (12+ / 0-)

          is the added sugar (esp HFCS) in things that don't need it and didn't used to have it PLUS the effects of weight cycling from dieting, including the blood sugar effects of going into starvation mode regularly. Speaking as someone who knows Type 2 diabetics, the thing stressed now in diabetes care isn't so much the actual sugar number on the meter so long as it's within health bounds but trying to keep that number stable.

          The wonky stuff dieting at below calorie needs does to the human body is a real issue - and since one of the side effects over time is an increased set weight, the effect everyone sees is higher body weight.

          Telling someone ten pounds overweight by the chart but the weight her body naturally wants to maintain to diet off the pounds is an easy way to end up with someone fifty pounds overweight whose body will fight like hell to maintain every pound of it.

          Obesity ain't the crisis. The factors leading to some of it and the societal response that leads to WORSE health outcomes is.

          Prayers and best wishes to those in Japan.

          by Cassandra Waites on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 06:46:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I agree and disagree (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Voter123, hungrycoyote

            sure the sugar in things that don't need it or in the case of soda the sheer over sugary nature are indeed problems.

            But ultimately that's about choice and as the information has become more readily available to people in general personally I a less forgiving about that. Mostly because as I said it's about choice (largely there are as always exceptions)

            In the end though the nation does have an obesity problem  and that has nothing to do with body types.

            •  I never said it had anything to do with body types (8+ / 0-)

              Although a great deal DOES - hell, did you know women's BMI charts do not allow for differences in breast size, so that for some women the difference between average weight and overweight is literally a cup size, genetically coded and unavoidable? Seriously. A cup size.

              Congratulations, if your family naturally packs DDs or higher and you have breasts, you will face YEARS of being told your BMI is off unless you have the waist of a supermodel. Possibly even then, because NUMBERS.

              And how is there choice when the HFCS is in everything? It's in the ketchup. It's in the bread. The cheaper something is, the more likely it is to have it in it and oh look, schools have to produce school lunches as cheaply as they can. Look at what items WIC can be used for.

              The information it's an issue IS growing in availability, but the option to act on that information is still as controlled as ever.

              And for all the news about weight-cycling is spreading in some circles, the push for Calories In Calories Out based dieting is as strong as ever. Even when it ends in higher weights and health consequences.

              Prayers and best wishes to those in Japan.

              by Cassandra Waites on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 07:23:30 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I thought the part where you said (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Voter123, hungrycoyote
                Telling someone ten pounds overweight by the chart but the weight her body naturally wants to maintain to diet off the pounds is an easy way to end up with someone fifty pounds overweight whose body will fight like hell to maintain every pound of it.
                was about body type

                and let's be clear, in theory you literally could eat anything so long as you are active enough. For most Americans the most activity they do is the work to and from the car for work and to and from the kitchen. Sure HFCSs are an issue but most Americans don't exercise enough either and I don't know about acting. All I can say is I eat fairly healthy (I am not perfect but then I'm not trying to maintain an athlete level type of body)

                •  Being overweight by the chart can mean something (6+ / 0-)

                  as simple as having too much muscle.

                  There are a lot of triatheletes who are technically obese by BMI because of developing too many muscle groups too well. You'd never know it by looking at them, and you'd consider them the pinnacle of health, but by BMI they are obese.

                  I've heard of at least one person anecdotally with no more body fat available to safely lose being threatened with automatic termination from a police force over the BMI he got from becoming the guy capable of chasing people down on foot and overpowering them physically once he got there. Too bad he was physically fit because of his job, he needed to lose muscle mass and become a less capable policeman to keep that job.

                  I have to go by body fat percentage to keep track of my own health because my BMI trends higher than it should because of muscle mass. Not that it puts me in the overweight categories, but because it keeps me out of the underweight category even when I'm actually in physical risk of health consequences in the other direction.

                  Prayers and best wishes to those in Japan.

                  by Cassandra Waites on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 07:46:00 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I always go by body fat (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    hungrycoyote

                    simply because as you said BMI can be misleading but we're not just talking about people that may or may not be on the edge of being 'overweight' we're also talking about people that are completely and clearly overweight. People that can't walk up a flight of stairs without running out of breath.

              •  Calories In Calories Out is big here on DKos (4+ / 0-)

                Especially among younger men who were formerly overweight but who found it ever so easy to lose weight, who then berate middle-aged or older women who need to lose weight and are talking about this culture's prevalent anti-fat people bias.

                Guys. You think it's easy to lose weight? Go through menopause, then tell women how easy it is.

                Organ donors save lives! A donor's kidney gave me my life back on 02/18/11; he lives on in me. Please talk with your family about your wish to donate.

                Why are war casualty counts "American troops" and "others" but never "human beings"?

                by Kitsap River on Wed Oct 03, 2012 at 02:48:20 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Is it? (9+ / 0-)

              Healthy, unprocessed foods without added HFCS are very expensive. If you are eating on a budget, it is very hard to eat healthy. In fact, it's pretty much impossible unless all you want to eat is beans.

              •  I eat fairly healthy (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Voter123

                and it's hardly that expensive

                •  FAT has psychological & emotional (6+ / 0-)

                  components too. Are you aware of that? Some people are hiding behind their fat; others use food to self-sooth an undiagnosed psychological problem or other unresolved traumata (not infrequently, sexual abuse). Others still just like being bigger. (And some people expressly like bigger people!)

                  But FAT is not a willpower issue, for crissake. That's an obsolete approach. Fat is a multivalent, complex phenomenon, involving the whole person. So you have no trouble with your own weight. That's wonderful, that's great: your issues are elsewhere. We've all got our things. Try a little compassion on for size, sheesh.

                  God bless our tinfoil hearts

                  by aitchdee on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 08:34:43 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  we all have issues (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    hungrycoyote

                    I have struggled with depression, suicide and self worth issues for the last ten years.

                    There are still days that part of me is convinced it would be better to just end it all then get up and move forward another inch.

                    Sure it's not just about willpower but at the end of the day, there's you, yourself and I that's all you have. Friends are good and they certainly can help but we're not going to agree here because to me it is about willpower and the drive to change yourself.

                    That's not to say that some people don't have metabolism issues or other such things but this tend to be rare cases.

                    •  We all have issues - that's just what I said (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Donkey Hotey, hungrycoyote

                      Everyone struggles with something or other. We all have our demons. The pace of progress--of change--(not to mention its visible manifestations) is as varied as there are individual people. You say yourself you're not struggle-free with respect to your own mental health. So ... I'm confused. What's your repeated judgment about willpower got to do with, well, the rest of what you said? We are all doing what we can do with what we've got at the moment. Right? Progressing--moving forward another inch--bit by bit, day by blessed day.

                      Are you saying that--unlike you-- some people just lack sufficient force of will? Some folks just don't progress as fast as others manage to do, therefore you feel free to look down your nose at them? Or you look down your nose because - what? they're not as advanced as you psychologically? They just can't seem to get their shit together and change quickly enough for your standards? Hmm. Surely there are better, more healthful ways for you to derive self-esteem than that, my dear fellow traveler. I promise not to be too impatient while you try to find a more psychologically sophisticated alternative.

                      God bless our tinfoil hearts

                      by aitchdee on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 09:25:28 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  my thoughts on the topic (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        hungrycoyote

                        are fairly sophisticated and I'll even be patient and reexplain them.

                        The fact is that in the end I'm very Nietzschean in my outlook on life, meine Wille über alles (my will above all). And thus you're right at the end of the day I think it's up to the individual.

                        That is not to say though that simply because you don't succeed doesn't mean you tried. However in terms of basic fitness and obesity almost nothing is as important as that drive to keep going. Thus in this particular instance outside of medical conditions there is much more emphasis put on the individual's will and willpower.

                        In no way shape or form does that mean I look down on them though. People have different amounts of mental stamina/willpower. But just because one person has less and another has more doesn't make either better or worse.

                        It's what you make of life and nothing else. Frankly you seem very touchy on this and I am sorry if I personally offended you but I do not apologize for my stance on this. I am unapologetic in that regard because even eating halfway healthy and exercise would do much to dramatically impact obesity rates in America

                        I don't know if that's helpful or not, the fact is I'm not the best person to phrase things in a tactful or pc manner. I saw what I mean to say and leave it to others to decide what they choose to make of it.

                •  Of course (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Avilyn, aitchdee, hungrycoyote

                  Your personal experience with food budgeting, and how your body responds to different food types is the same for everyone.  How nice that its not hard for you.  Surely all us fat people would be less fat if we just were able to grasp how to buy the right foods which are so easily accessible to all of us, just like you have.

                  Ever hear of food deserts?  Note, that's not desserts.  I'm talking about places where buying fresh foods is next to impossible because of a lack of real grocery stores, public transportation, simple access to fresh foods.

                  •  given your response elsewhere (0+ / 0-)

                    I am 99% certain that it is not possible to have a meaningful exchange with you, therefore I will not respond to this or further posts by you on this topic.

                    I will point out though I never said anything was easy and if you reread carefully you'll see that in all my comments I only ever used the term 'fat' once and even then under protest because it's a subjective word. I've actually been using the word obese which has specific definition.

                    Have a pleasant day.

            •  There's "choice," and there's choice (8+ / 0-)

              Your food budget often determines just how much (or how little) choice you have. It's no secret that cheap and plentiful "comfort foods" are high-carb and corn or starch-based, and come with a higher-than-average amount of fats.

              It's starting to penetrate just how little actual food is in "cheap food", but people still have that hard decision to make when it comes to the checkout line--can I get 6 bags of frozen dinners made of "stuff" or 3 bags of fresh fruits and vegetables and butcher meats, and what do I do with it when I get it home, and is 9 PM too late for dinner.

              How does the Republican Congress sit down with all the butthurt over taxing the wealthy?

              by athenap on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 07:47:50 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  At the local grocery - (9+ / 0-)

                90 cents to a buck for the cheap bread. This is the bread with the WIC sticker on it.

                Nearly two bucks for the whole wheat with no HFCS, because that chain makes it in store brand. If you get there when they have a few loaves marked down it's the same price as the cheap bread - but WIC won't pay and you can't count on finding it every week.

                If you shop at other groceries or don't know that part of the store-brand line is HFCS-free, you're looking at artisan-type brands with no preservatives and thus no shelf-life. At about 4-5 bucks a loaf with half the slices of the other two options.

                Ketchup. Hunts is HFCS-free in this market now. Heinz has a similar line, at higher cost than their HFCS products. WIC covers the HFCS store brand. The store brand is also half the price. The non-HFCS other than Hunts is never on sale and oh look there are never coupons here for the HFCS-free Heinz products.

                And twice or more food for an equal price here in Appalachian coal country is something not many people can afford to pass up even if WIC isn't helping to pay the grocery bill.

                Prayers and best wishes to those in Japan.

                by Cassandra Waites on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 07:58:45 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  true but there are immediate choices that (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                hungrycoyote

                could be made that would dramatically impact both health and sugar intact.

                As I orginially mentioned when I worked food service I had regulars that would have 50+ ozs of soda in a given day and that was just the average.

                I am not saying that every solution is simple or easy but there are many that are. Especially for those that are not just on the edge of what the BMI or body fat chart says but for those that are clearly into the obese territory.

                Exercise is another major thing, you don't even need to train hard or long even 2 trips to the gym or working out at home a week can really help.

                •  It's perception (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  hungrycoyote

                  And as Cassandra above said, it's perception of value. I remember when I pinched pennies in college that a 32 oz soda cost 39 cents. If you got one with no ice, you could take it home and get three people a drink with it, versus a bottle of fruit juice that was 1.29 that would only serve one. Granted, we were college students at the time, but even now, you go to the burger joint and bottled water is 1.75 while sodas are 1.29 with free refills, and it's a small wonder why people are loading up on the corn-fillers.

                  Most people are in the default perception that all food is more or less the same in terms of actual food--that a frozen dinner with meat and vegetables is about the same nutritive value as a freshly-made one, maybe a little less because it's frozen, but not demonstrably different. When that's just not the case because of all the sodium and preservatives and processing done.

                  How does the Republican Congress sit down with all the butthurt over taxing the wealthy?

                  by athenap on Wed Oct 03, 2012 at 03:21:34 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I just graduated from college (0+ / 0-)

                    so you don't need to explain pinching pennies but there's also a balance there. If you're buying crap that ultimalte hurts you where really is the savings?

                    It's why i won't buy those 99 cent loaves, they're crap mostly air and the rest is questionable. You're better off paying a dollar maybe 2 more for actual bread.

                    And don't buy into the bottle water bullshit that's a huge racket.

                    As I said it's about choices and one of those choices is being willing/able to make hard decesions. To not buy crap to say I really don't need soda today or even this week. Or to say you know I have a spare hour I'm going to go for a walk.

            •  You're kidding, right? (4+ / 0-)

              Do you have any idea how many billions of dollars the food industry spends on research to develop foods that are quite literally addictive, that cause and reinforce cravings, and then billions more spent in lobbying and advertising to convince people these foods are healthy and safe? Ye gods, they've practically bought the FDA. You want to know the leading cause of the diabetes epidemic in the USA? It's the food industry. Plain and simple.

              I am not saying this absolves people of personal responsibility. I am saying almost every packaged food you can buy in America, from spaghetti noodles to Lean Cuisine and Healthy Choice dinners, is unhealthy for you -- and somebody (okay, many, many somebodies) have spent billions of dollars to keep that knowledge from you.

              In other words, the deck is stacked and blaming people for not knowing something -- not even thinking to question something -- that they've been told over and over and over is true is pretty harsh.

              •  extraordinary claims (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                hungrycoyote

                require extraordinary proof

                if you are going to claim that food in America is made to be addictive you'd better be able to prove that

                •  Can you provide extraordinary proof (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  hungrycoyote

                  That the food industry isn't doing this?  

                  Didn't think so.

                •  Here's a few links (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Avilyn, duhban

                  Article including comments and a book by former FDA commissioner on the subject

                  Article in US News

                  Reuters article on food industry lobbying

                  A short response to HBO's "Weight of the Nation" (money quote: "As I wrote in my book, focusing on obesity is problematic for many reasons. One, it ensures the focus stays on the individual, instead of the food industry. What do you think when you see a fat person? That it's their fault, they just need to eat better and exercise more.")

                  More on Kessler's book

                  CBS News 60 Minutes report video

                  A few quick common-sense observations:

                  Animals are only as nutritious as the food they're fed

                  Grains and vegetables are only as full of nutrients as the ground they're grown on

                  The more you process foods, the more nutrients they lose -- however many they may have had to begin with

                  If you take most of the nutrients out of a food and add a handful back in, it's criminally negligent to call it "enriched"

                  •  first thank you (0+ / 0-)

                    for an actual response and not a 'well you prove it's not' response I got from mamabigdog

                    second this is just a quick response I have to go argue with my cable company, I've opened the links  though and I'll go though them when time permits if I can do that within the next 24 hours I'll respond here again if not  I'll send you a private message if needed

                    again thank you

                    •  If you think about it, (0+ / 0-)

                      it's really not an "extraordinary" claim at all. Imagine this headline:

                      "BREAKING! Major US Industry Spends Billions to Maximize Profits, 'Guarantee' Customers!"

                      Really? What a shock :p

                      The problem is that their products (much like the tobacco industry's) directly, massively, and daily affect the health of their customers -- and let's face it, their customers' health doesn't add to their bottom line. So what they're doing is simply good business practice, just as for the tobacco industries, hiding and obfuscating the deadly effects of tobacco was, business-wise, a smart move.

                      And similarly, smoking is about "individual choice". Hey, I'm a smoker -- well, I was, now I'm a vaper -- so I can appreciate that from the inside out, while at the same time acknowledging that the product I'm consuming is inherently addictive, designed by its manufacturers to be more so, and my "free choice" isn't really all that free -- it's a chemical addiction that is very hard to break (in fact I didn't break it -- I switched sources), was hidden from the public for decades, and the sale, marketing and advertising of which is, once again, backed by billions of dollars in lobbying efforts, campaign contributions, and millions of dollars in research into how to make the product's addictive qualities even stronger.

            •  The nation has a problem (0+ / 0-)

              with the health results of obesity, and so do those of us who are obese.

              On the other hand, blaming people who are obese for the country's health costs is not the way to fix it.  Nor is shaming us - do you have any idea how much shaming we have dealt with in our lives?  Showing asses and bellies instead of people perpetuates this.  It is further shaming.

              Further, there are often medical causes for obesity and these are not our fault.  Nor is the cost of medical care in this country.  We are being scapegoated.  And we are still subsidizing corn crops so we have to include corn syrup in more and more food.

              And do you really think a parent who works two jobs has time to make many choices, let alone money, let alone time for exercise?

              The problem of obesity is part of our greater problem of wealth distribution, corporate power, inequality of education, etc.  It becomes a convenient distraction.

              Republicans want to make government small enough to fit in your vagina..

              by ramara on Wed Oct 03, 2012 at 03:18:08 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I think that (0+ / 0-)

                it is what you make of it, my mom raised 4 kids on the bluest of blue collar incomces. My dad's a cop and my mom never finished collage and between them they migth have made a little more then 100K a year towards the end (never mind that in the begining  when all 4 of us were young she started out at min wage and worked long hours in various menial jobs).

                Despite that she put a premium on eating healthy, on exercise and while her ability to exercise fluxuated she managed to semi keep up with it.

                That's my experience.

                Now I've already said that obvious medical issues are generally beyond anyone's control and frankly I am getting tired of repeating myself on this.

                As to shame, sure I don't think shame is helpful and that's why I have been very careful to speak about this without assigning blame indiscriminately but the evidence does show that actual obesity much like smoking is putting a strain on the nation's healthcare. You can call that scapegoating if you want, I call it just being rationally objective about it.

                And something obviously needs to be done about and in my opinion a good chunk of that will involve those that are obese. Because at the end of the day outside of a medical condition it is up to the individual what they eat and what they choose to do.

          •  Got some references? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Voter123, Donkey Hotey, hungrycoyote

            I've become very sensitive to my sugar levels over the past few months, and I do my best to not buy foods with HFCS in them.

            I'm starting to research eliminating certain foods to see if that nudges the scale off the plateau. Would love some links about dieting below calories if you got 'em.

            How does the Republican Congress sit down with all the butthurt over taxing the wealthy?

            by athenap on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 07:31:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site