You’re Not Broken – The System Is

Here is a quote from a national Canadian newspaper article today: “We know that within the past 30 years, the prevalence of obesity doubled among those ages 40 to 69 and tripled among those 20 to 39,”

You're not Broken (as some fitness marketers would have you believe)

Can you see what the obvious implication of this quote is?

It’s that there is nothing wrong with you or your metabolism but rather our lifestyles, society and food supply/access has changed.

We haven’t undergone any evolutionary change in the past 30 years…but our food supply has.

Our daily activity levels have also dropped in this time. And stress levels in general are on the rise. So it’s pretty obvious where the root of our overeating problems come from.

But supplement/diet/fitness marketers will always try to sell you a story of how YOU are broken and their magical cure can fix you. Don’t believe it.

Eat less and you’ll lose weight.

John

Posted by johnbarban in Fat Loss, Weight Loss
Tags: diabetes, Fat Loss, Nutrition, obesity, overweight, Weight Loss |9 Comments

9 Responses to “You’re Not Broken – The System Is”

  1. anthony Ramos Says:
    April 1st, 2010 at 1:21 pm

    John, the change was economic:

    Cheap calories and efficient distribution systems, as well as move to service-economy office jobs.

  2. johnbarban Says:
    April 1st, 2010 at 1:43 pm

    Anthony,

    Yes it’s hard to argue your point. I’d also add that it’s partly an erosion of personal freedoms and any real satisfaction and excitement people are getting out of their lives.

    Living in an increasingly smaller and controlled box might also be contributing to the problem. If your day consists of getting up and driving to a thankless job and then driving home with no real expectation of progress…it stands to reason that one of the only sources of pleasure in your day might just be a few tasty morsels of food.

    It’s almost as if we’ve re-created the Malthusian trap but from a fulfillment standpoint and not a subsistence standpoint.

    And you didn’t answer me before. Pilon Howard and I are probably coming to gainesville for the Kentucky football game sept 25th. You gonna join us for a few beers?

    JB

  3. JoshB Says:
    April 1st, 2010 at 1:53 pm

    I believe John covered that with the statement ‘our lifestyles, society and food supply/access has changed’.

  4. anthony Ramos Says:
    April 1st, 2010 at 2:07 pm

    Nice on the emotional eating. I think you’re right. Yeah dude, course on the game. Message me up on Facebook

  5. Jordan Says:
    April 1st, 2010 at 3:29 pm

    Well, I don’t know how much satisfaction and excitement people got 50 or 100 or 200 years ago, when people were much thinner. I don’t know if those grueling factory and farm jobs were really all that fulfilling. Black people are the most overweight group in America, and they were systematically and brutally oppressed since the 1970′s. I doubt if their lives were very satisfying back then. They didn’t have “personal freedom.” They lived in the smallest and most “controlled box” imaginable. But they were certainly thinner than they are now. Freedom hasn’t kept their waistlines small.

    I do agree that food can be one of the few sources of pleasure for many people, but I think that could be true in a lot of different eras and societies, including when people were slaves, indentured servants, sharecroppers, factory workers, farmers, second class citizens, etc. Was I a little bored when I was overeating? Yeah, probably. But that’s no excuse. I either eat, or I don’t. It’s my choice. And if I’m bored, I have plenty of distractions and diversions at my disposal in this modern society. If I’m not happy, I have to address that and make a change.

    Cheap food, farm bill subsidies, sedentary occupations, marketing (esp. to children,) etc., all make sense as contributing factors. They create the overall “obesogenic environment.” But I think we all can agree that the main factor is a lack of self-control. No one can force us to put too much food in our mouths.

  6. Josh Eflin Says:
    April 1st, 2010 at 10:33 pm

    I love your blog, and i think you make excellent points. I usually don’t post replies because I feel like its kind of pointless to just agree with you all the time, but I found this particularly interesting.

    A Few years ago I was reading a book called “The Program for Better Vision” and they used the same argument for bad eyesight as you do for obesity. They say that 100 years ago only 5% on people wore glasses (quote some research) and then point out that now over 50% of people wear glasses. There is no way it could be entirely thats a 10,000% increase!

    Anyway, I wonder how much the quality of human life has been/ will be effected by the direction society is moving in…

    Wall-E (the Disney Pixar film) deals with these issues.

  7. johnbarban Says:
    April 1st, 2010 at 10:55 pm

    Josh,

    Wall-E was a fantastic commentary on the human condition. The best part was the graphic showing how humans got fatter and fatter and their bones deteriorated to the point where they couldn’t stand up…although it seemed humorous in the movie it’s not too far off from what is happening to at least a small portion of the population already.

    JB

  8. manny Says:
    April 1st, 2010 at 11:14 pm

    hey john, I’m sorry to go off topic a bit but i started thinking after watching recent fight event. you believe that fat loss is more of a sprint than a marathon so here’s a question for you. suppose there is a mixed martial art fighter who plans to fight at 115 pounds. He currently weighs 142ish pounds and has exactly one month before the weigh ins. He figures that his bmr is arounds 1700 {1700 cal*6 day=10,200(total caloric deficit)/3500(1 pound of fat)=2.91 pounds) …so fasting 6 days a week would translate into 3 pounds over the next 4 weeks equal 12 pounds+/-. that would bring him to 130 pounds(142-12=130pounds. before the fight he’s confident he can sweat out the rest of the weight. My question would be: in this extreme situation, would he lose more muscles than fat? Is it dangerous for him to do that? Also…What would be his normal weight after he properly rehydrate and goes back to eating normally again, I figure those 15 pounds of sweat would come back so would he weight be 130ish.

  9. anthony Ramos Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 10:07 am

    John, I don’t think it’s government intervention but industrialization which has made us all sedentary. I mean, the gov’t didn’t make IBM or Microsoft but I promise you that their employees sit most of the day.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>