The case against obesity

You have got to be kidding me! This whole "green topic" is out of control. Is your argument that fat people use more fuel in their vehicles getting to and from the store? And what about healthy people driving Suburbans? When was the last time you saw somebody walking down the street with a week's worth of groceries? Unless you live on Beacon Hill then the answer is never. The logical ends to which you're willing to take this argument is absurd.

Give me a break!!!! I'm all for conserving energy but c'mon? Go hug a tree!

Excuse me, but I beg to differ!! There are plenty of obese people, myself included, who walk to work, rarely drive, recycle as much as possible, minimize my use of resources, etc!!! I probably have less of a carbon footprint than MOST skinny people and I don't think I'm the exception. What frustrates me are such generalizations. What matters is the efforts of the individual. There are millions of skinny people out there who are driving the same cars, flying on the same plans, throwing out the same trash, if not more, than obese people! Pointing the finger at obese people is not going to solve the Earth's problems!! Food shortages are not related to obese people either! Our climate change, global warming, pollution, huge corporations, those are the ones who we should be pointing the finger at. Ultimately, we should all take responsiblity!

I am overweight by 60 pounds (!!) (yes, I'm working on it), but I walk everywhere I can, take public transportation where I can't.

I suspect this article will garner much fat-bashing. Kindly remember that many overweight people are that way via poverty - starches are simply less costly than healthier food. I *do* eat a lot of fruits and veggies, and no red meat (nor pork), and that is 50 percent of my grocery bill.

Not all of us have space for gardens. Not all of us live in communities that offer Victory Gardens (as does, say, Boston). I, for one, can grow herbs indoors (and do), but my condo building has no green space.

Other than the link to the London study, Mr. Beard's article offered nothing new. We chubsters know we take up too much space on the subway, add to fuel useage in airplanes.

You have got to be kidding me! Let's give another reason for people to be insensitive and treat the obese poorly. Now they are ruining the planet. I'm not defending the over weight but come on you know there are the less than critical thinkers out there who will use this as an opportunity to bash.

I think obese people should be directed to eat overbearing judgemental green people to solve both problems simultaneously

Keep raising food prices. Obese people will not have access to the large quantities of food they now have. Credits on your health care policy if you stay at a healthy weight. Free public exercise opportunities.

Rising gas prices help too as obese people need bigger cars and more gas to get around to all of their fast food haunts.

Establish more groups to help, support and overeaters. Establish overeaters 24 hour help lines.

Public announcements on local t.v. stations will influence the younger generation. we should swamp t.v. will ads directly aimed at the younger family members.

They are able to get the message to their parents in a way that is taken seriously by the family.

As always, blame the Americans. Let's not forget that we are the ones that grow all the corn for our snacks and sodas laden with High Fructose Corn Syrup. Growing corn takes carbon out the air. Let's also not forget all of the energy that is used to keep the gyms running so that people can loose weight and stay in shape. Lets take all of the factors into account.
Hey, lets put the fat people on treadmills hooked up to generators so that we can make use of all of their extra energy. It'll be just like the Matrix.

Public Service announcements really do work.
They are the root of obesity in the first place.
Remember the "This is your brain on drugs" campaign?
Made me want an egg mcmuffin

I knew we'd get at least one clueless person (I'm being euphemistic here) chiming in.

Every time I see someone get out of their humongous honking SUV with their carbon footprint-heavy families of three or more spawn, with all their stuff that caused who knows how much pollution to manufacture and ship to stores, it's always a thin person. Very likely self-righteous and judgmental too.

What I found funny too, was the idea that the obese need more calories to sustain their BMR ... excuse me? BMR is based on your lean weight, in other words, what muscle mass you have. Fat does not require energy from foods to exist.

Has anyone thought about the actual real need for calories? Muscle. Often, the obese are fat becaise they do not eat enough. Sounds nutty eh? But the fact is that when the body gets too little food for the BMR, it will shut down on some functions, slow others, and store what it can as fat, getting its needed energy from its own muscle tissue!

Who cares here, that a bodybuilder will eat upwards of 3000 calories/day? No, not everyone at the local gym eats that much, but I'm trying to put it into proportion here. The BMI does not automatically mean someone is overweight (same bodybuilder with very little bodyfat will get 32 on the BMI scale because it's only based on total weight).

I walk or bike where I can (don't have a car anyway) but busses and trains? There are none close to where we live, nor do they go where my husband needs to go, so he drives to work and back. Period. Vacations we spend at home, no excess burning og too-expensive gaz.

And no, we're neither obese nor bodybuilders, but lean individuals who stay away from fast-food, processed food and other junk, and have lightened the grocery bill as a result! I don't see that fresh produce and lean cuts of meat, eggs, natural oats and whole wheat pasta makes the bill any larger at the cash. If I were to add some pre-cooked meals, canned goods and what-not then yes, double the price of my cart, easily. We do not, however, go with organic, although we'd love to. That's too expensive (still?).

Not sure why this is so unexpected or controversial. The more weight being transported the more energy is needed to propel it. Simple physics. People that are overweight tend to have higher caloric intakes and excercise less than individuals that maintain a healthy weight. It appears that the researches were equating total number of calories w/ transportation and processing energy requirements. I'm not sure that's a safe blanket assumption. Often times high calorie foods are low weight and density. Distance of transportation is a little more difficult to project. They also appear to be assuming that some portion of the excercise healthy range individuals perform is also some form of transportation rather than strictly recreational. If one individual watches tv on the couch and one watches tv on an electric treadmill the excerciser is using more energy. Ultimately I think that weight is a factor in projecting a carbon footprint and the researchers pose an interesting question. PC Police notwithstanding, their results are probably on the right track.