General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Obesity

Page 1 + 1 of 2

  1. «
  2. 1
  3. 2
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

MrDaff

MrDaff Report 12 Jan 2013 23:20

I can't speak about this from the female point of view, obviously, but concerning BMI I can address that at least.
According to 'the charts' .... my BMI places me on the border of 'overweight' and 'beware entering the Red Zone' :-S
I'm 6' 2"" and 78Kgs .... well, you know where you can stick THAT chart, to start with!

However ((there is always is an 'However' :-) ) on the 'outside looking in', and having been the purchaser of such items as well, your ladies sizings are a mystery and, imoh, vary from shop to shop based on commercial greed - they want the customers who 'want to be smaller', so reflect it in their stock.

'Obese' is a word that really, really gets under my skin applied as it is today.
Why? Because it's become a generic term used when the GP's etc know they just don't have the time, or perhaps inclination, to address the underlying cause of someone perhaps being overweight.
If you are 5' and 30 stone, then yes, the 'nasty O' probably apples, or you are really ill!!

For some people, it may be that they need to badger their GP for a FBC test, particularly if there is no apparent reason for the increase in weight.

A lot is, I think, down to the historic change in our lifestyles - as referred to above, an overweight child in the 60's early 70's was unusual. I can agree with that. An indication that 'all was not right medically', perhaps!

Today, it is rare not to see overweight children ... what does that say?

Some form of regular (note - regular) physical exercise always helps. It may not be much, depending on what you do/can do, but it's better than nothing.

As for that ridiculous 'stand up at your computers' comment; obviously made by someone who sits in a big, soft chair, dictating to an overworked (underweight) secretary whilst (probably) he dips fats fingers into a bowl of cashew nuts balanced on his 64" waist .... :-P

supercrutch

supercrutch Report 12 Jan 2013 23:48

Mine after first baby was 19, just done my 3 kids and they are all 21, their heights range between 5.2 and 6.4 and have diets which range from very healthy to very unhealthy. Must be a genetic link. I did youngest's before current pregnancy. They were all skinny kids as was oh and I.

Agree that very fat children have to be helped NOW. Seen too many TV progs where parents buy junk food 24/7. It's much more expensive and is condemning the children to serious health problems and an early death.

Sorry a bit OT but this trend means size 24 will be marketed as 16 soon. That of course means I'll be a size 10 again.

John I would give right arm to be able to resume sports can't see it anytime soon

:-(

grannyfranny

grannyfranny Report 13 Jan 2013 19:37

I'm not convinced about how they measure obesity. OH had to see the nurse at the GP's for some check up. She did his weight and height, and declared him overweight. He's 5' 7" and has a 31" waist and no belly at all.

I prefer the womens guide which says the waist should be no more than 34". That's more like it.