My Observation Today About What Americans Weigh

Nemo2 said:
Dogs are similar......a neighbor in B.C. with two Labs said that if a 50lb bag of dog food burst open they'd eat until they 'exploded' (other people with Labs have said virtually the same thing) - whereas, on numerous occasions, I saw my Border Collie walk away from his bowl with one or two or more pieces left in it....he'd had enough, and he knew he had enough.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The dogs in my life fell into two categories: some finished in two snaps and would eat the bowl if they'd figured out how to ingest it, others simply weren't food motivated. They only ate when hungry and left what they didn't want.
 

debodun said:
I've heard of a study in which soup was served to normal weight and overweight people. Unknown to them, the bowls were constructed so they could be continuously filled from the bottom so the level remained constant. The normal weight people stopped eating when they had has enough. The overweight people continued to eat as long as there was something in the bowl.
Click to expand...
Surely the people in the study would have realized the bowl was refilling after eating for a few minutes, but I get your point. Wonder if a lot of them came from "clean your plate or else" families.
 
StarSong said:
Agreed. The dogs in my life fell into two categories: some finished in two snaps and would eat the bowl if they'd figured out how to ingest it, others simply weren't food motivated. They only ate when hungry and left what they didn't want.
Click to expand...
Not that I've really given it a great deal of thought, but........Labs are bred for their disposition, and perhaps the gluttony is an unwanted but unstoppable 'ride along'?

Borders have always been working dogs....and in the early days, apparently, fed scraps by their less than prosperous owner/handlers.

Could it be that their appetite restraint is a combo of generations being accustomed to smaller rations combined with the knowledge that they'll have to get back to work soon and they don't want to be running around chasing sheep on a full stomach?
 

Same province, also two black labs. Just like their owners, they were laid back and the food sat in the bowl until they wanted it. Maybe it’s more about the style of the owners.
 
Jules said:
Same province, also two black labs. Just like their owners, they were laid back and the food sat in the bowl until they wanted it. Maybe it’s more about the style of the owners.
Click to expand...
You could be right, (the Lab owner on Salt Spring was active......had a kayak that he practiced rollovers in, etc, etc), and I extrapolated his comments with my own observations....as I noted I hadn't given it a great deal of thought.
 
When someone enlists into the Marines, they have physical qualifications, including weight to height ratio. Before my retirement, enlistment papers would come across my desk. Normally, I only checked numbers to see if our enlistment centers were making their numbers. Besides our enlistees being rejected for having issues unknown to them, like Diabetes, Heart Disease, etc., Obesity was usually among the top 3 reasons why candidates were rejected. However, if they are within range of being in the standard category, they may be given a waiver and allowed to stay, if they get their weight in the standard category by the time basic training is over.

If someone is in excellent condition, but later allows themself to gain too much weight and is not acceptable to the standards, that Marine will be “volunteered” to join a program to get the person’s weight back under control. You should never see a fat NCO.
 
In today's politically correct world, can you still deny someone employment based on physical characteristics? In the past, someone could be denied certain fields of employment because they wore glasses, or they were too short or not strong enough - it may not have been 'fair', but there were good reasons for those requirements.
 
perChance said:
In today's politically correct world, can you still deny someone employment based on physical characteristics? In the past, someone could be denied certain fields of employment because they wore glasses, or they were too short or not strong enough - it may not have been 'fair', but there were good reasons for those requirements.
Click to expand...
Not unless those physical characteristics prevent them from fulfilling the job.

I had a flight attendant friend back in the 70s who was obsessive about her weight because she could be grounded (or fired) if she gained a few pounds, got married or (heaven forbid) became pregnant. Until the late 60s, stewardesses were unable to continue flying after they hit the ripe old age of 32 because that was supposedly when they began losing their sex appeal.

Not kidding.
 
StarSong said:
Not unless those physical characteristics prevent them from fulfilling the job.

I had a flight attendant friend back in the 70s who was obsessive about her weight because she could be grounded (or fired) if she gained a few pounds, got married or (heaven forbid) became pregnant. Until the late 60s, stewardesses were unable to continue flying after they hit the ripe old age of 32 because that was supposedly when they began losing their sex appeal.

Not kidding.
Click to expand...
I agree, some of the requirements were not valid, but some were, and are still valid today.
 
Pepper said:
Or a fat cop, but I always do. Can't be easy to chase someone. I've always been shocked that is allowed. Not safe.
Click to expand...
In the military, once you become an Officer, usually above a Colonel, it’s more important to keep their BMI in line. If you want an example, look at General Miley. He’s a big man and probably a bit overweight, but I can see his BMI being within range. His height works to his advantage. Looking at this picture, I have to wonder if he could button that jacket.

976D4FF0-FBCF-461D-8FBE-F9C9F89F275F.jpeg
 
StarSong said:
Not unless those physical characteristics prevent them from fulfilling the job.

I had a flight attendant friend back in the 70s who was obsessive about her weight because she could be grounded (or fired) if she gained a few pounds, got married or (heaven forbid) became pregnant. Until the late 60s, stewardesses were unable to continue flying after they hit the ripe old age of 32 because that was supposedly when they began losing their sex appeal.

Not kidding.
Click to expand...
Reminded me: long ago, a relative's friend wanted to become a State Trooper.. there were both weight and height requirements.. while it took some doing for him to gain enough weight, he obviously couldn't do anything about the fact that he was a couple of inches shorter than the height requirement.
He was one of the taller fellows in the area, so I wonder what the height requirement could have been.

(As he was set on a law enforcement career, he joined a police department, rose up through the ranks, did quite well.)
 
I Googled how tall is General Milley and the answer is 5 ft. 8 ins. That’s b.s. I have been around this man and also stood near enough to him to compare my height with his. He goes about 5 ft 10 ins to 5 ft. 11 ins.
 
A few years ago where there was an ice storm and power was out all over, I went to the community center where an emergency shelter that had been arranged. They had a table of food and I saw a little girl fill her plate to heaping, then she ate about two mouthfuls and lost interest. Her mother didn't force her eat the rest as my mom would have done. The leftover food was tossed. WHAT A WASTE! It appears moden moms don't force their kids to eat everything on their plates , The ARMY has a sign in their mess halls - "Take all you want but eat all you take."
 
debodun said:
A few years ago where there was an ice storm and power was out all over, I went to the community center where an emergency shelter that had been arranged. They had a table of food and I saw a little girl fill her plate to heaping, then she ate about two mouthfuls and lost interest. Her mother didn't force her eat the rest as my mom would have done. The leftover food was tossed. WHAT A WASTE! It appears moden moms don't force their kids to eat everything on their plates , The ARMY has a sign in their mess halls - "Take all you want but eat all you take."
Click to expand...
Given all the eating disorders and overweight children and adults in this country, I salute that mother for not forcing her child to eat everything on her plate. The child may not have liked the food, or she might have been so stressed by the emergency that her appetite wasn't what she thought it was.

I never forced my kids to eat everything on their plates. However, I did oversee what they took when they were small.
 
When my children lived at home, I always let them serve themselves and proceed to the table. The rule: they had to eat what they take and can have 2nd's. None are overweight as this "serving themselves" taught them to guage the amount of food they can consume.
 
Kaila said:
This reminded me of the extreme low quality and poor choices, I saw many years ago, in school lunches, which are harmful in themselves, and also gets the children used to those poor food choices. I wonder if they have improved them generally at all, or if they have only improved in very few schools.
Click to expand...
I think the home is still the strongest influence. If a mother serves healthy meals, it is something that children accept as the norm. Obesity is a recent problem...a sign of the change in society.
 
debodun said:
A few years ago where there was an ice storm and power was out all over, I went to the community center where an emergency shelter that had been arranged. They had a table of food and I saw a little girl fill her plate to heaping, then she ate about two mouthfuls and lost interest. Her mother didn't force her eat the rest as my mom would have done. The leftover food was tossed. WHAT A WASTE! It appears moden moms don't force their kids to eat everything on their plates , The ARMY has a sign in their mess halls - "Take all you want but eat all you take."
Click to expand...
Wow. The parent should not have let the child take so much food at once like that. That was wasteful, but not because the mother didn't force her to eat it, but because she got more than she needed. Even forcing a kid to eat what's on her plate is still wasting the food, just wasting it in her body instead of in the trash. No, kids should not be forced to eat when not hungry.
Overeating is wasting food too, because it's eating what you don't need and it just becomes harmful fat in the body. That's wasting food. Every time someone eats when not hungry, that's wasting food. Your body just stores it as fat and it becomes a health issue later.
 
StarSong said:
Given all the eating disorders and overweight children and adults in this country, I salute that mother for not forcing her child to eat everything on her plate. The child may not have liked the food, or she might have been so stressed by the emergency that her appetite wasn't what she thought it was.

I never forced my kids to eat everything on their plates. However, I did oversee what they took when they were small.
Click to expand...
I totally agree. Making the kids overeat is not fixing the food waste problem, it's still wasting food and potentially causing eating disorders in the future. Just because you eat it doesn't mean it wasn't wasted.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top