by Kcurly on February 9, 2010
Let’s zoom in on my hypothetical family for awhile.
Mom and Dad are obese. They have two kids, both thin as rails. They have a dog, he’s also overweight. Let’s make him a Chihuahua just because I think that would be funny.
January hits and Mom still can’t fit into those clothes from last year that she bought in anticipation of being skinny this year. Time for a diet! Dad doesn’t care to diet. Besides, men look better overweight with a little weight on them. Dad’s weight is close to 300, but bigger is better, right?
Mom goes grocery shopping and buys her “diet” food along with some “diet” dog food. She also buys her usual junk for the kids.
Mom does this every year, so the few weeks that this is going on, the kids continue to eat junk because they are already thin and don’t need to lose weight. Once Mom settles back in her old ways, her children observe her cycle and, when they finally do start to gain weight, they too follow this pattern.
I have several queries.
- Why doesn’t Mom think that the kids can’t get fat?
- Why doesn’t Mom change everyone’s food instead of just her own?
- Why doesn’t Dad hop on board? And why does he think “fat” is more acceptable for a man?
- Why in the name of Pete is the dog fat?
Yes, this is a hypothetical family, but I see it more and more. Even if kids are thin,they don’t need to be fed a bunch of garbage.
by Kcurly on February 4, 2010
Whatever your political affiliations, we can all agree that the nation is getting fat. And it’s starting from the crib these days. Here are the facts (source):
- The number of obese or overweight children has tripled since 1980.
- Over the past three decades the childhood obesity rate has more than doubled for preschool children aged 2-5 years and adolescents aged 12-19 years, and it has more than tripled for children aged 6-11 years
- Obesity-associated annual hospital costs for children and youth more than tripled over two decades, rising from $35 million in 1979-1981 to $127 million in 1997-1999.
- For children born in the United States in 2000, the lifetime risk of being diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes at some point in their lives is estimated to be about 30 percent for boys and 40 percent for girls
- In a population-based sample, approximately 60 percent of obese children aged 5 to 10 years had at least one cardiovascular disease risk factor, such as elevated total cholesterol, triglycerides, insulin or blood pressure, and 25 percent had two or more risk factors.
- Among boys, the highest prevalence of obesity is observed in Hispanics. Among girls, the highest prevalence is observed in African Americans.
This has gone way beyond a “problem” to a full blown crisis. The future of this nation may have a lot of threats, but this is going to the front of the line swiftly.
So, when I see the First Lady announce that their family doctor has told them that something is “out of balance” with her kids and she’s changing their eating habits, you would think this would be a good thing. President Obama also said that Malia had been getting “chubby”. (This blogger was not happy about that).
I agree that maybe chubby was not the right word to use for your daughter in front of the whole world, but let’s face it: The Obama kids live their lives in front of the world just as the First family always has. At least they are catching it now before it gets out of hand. More importantly, the First family is supposed to lead by example. Perhaps her openness about this issue will inspire other parents to examine their children’s lifestyles.
A lot of people are upset about Michelle Obama speaking so openly about her children’s weight. From this article:
While innocuous to some, this comment has set off both valid and not-so-valid criticism in the blogosphere—everything from calling the first lady well-intentioned-but-misguided to hinting that she could be tipping off her daughters’ future eating disorders. Even with one-third of American children classified as overweight or obese, several critics are far more concerned with Michelle Obama’s anecdotal use of her daughters.
Jeanne Sager, a writer for Strollerderby who admits to reading “everything through eating-disorder glasses” says she feels worried for the girls because their mother has “taken an extremely touchy subject out into the open.”
In a post that delineates the difference between what is accepted in “the eating disorder world” vs. “the outside world,” Laura Collins Lyster-Mensh of the Huffington Post writes, “I am sucker-punched to read that our First Family put their daughters on a ‘diet’ because they feared ‘obesity’ and no doubt will be lauded for it…This is not an eating disorder issue, however, and it should not be only us who know this and speak out about it. These are medical, social, and ultimately self-defeating errors in thinking that do harm to all children and all of us. I am very sad today.”
Ok, so for those of you wondering, here is the “diet”:
The first lady said that over the next few months she made some small changes that got her daughters back on track. No more weekday TV. More attention to portion sizes. Low-fat milk. Water bottles in the lunch boxes. Grapes on the breakfast table. Apple slices at lunch. Colorful vegetables on the dinner table.
OH…MY…GOSH…Has someone called Child Welfare? It’s just so obvious that these kids are being abused and starved!
Guess what, ya’ll? We are all on a diet. Some of us have a diet of cheeseburgers and ho-hos and some of us eating low cal and low fat. What I see is not starvation or the start of an eating disorder, but changes that will help those girls live healthier lives.
If the people who are so very concerned about any resulting eating disorders want to do something helpful, they could put the same anger and criticism they are channeling towards the Obamas to the media images that give young girls unrealistic body images. That is where the problem of eating disorders stem from…not a healthy diet and less television.
The First lady will be launching a childhood obesity campaign in a few weeks. I can only pray that it helps.
