"America's Epidemic of Youth Obesity"--NYT article
- Great article in today's New York Times on the editorial/op-ed page.
To access the article, you'll have to register, but it's free.
Don't miss the paragraph about how less time is spent at play or physical exertion these days than in front of the TV or computer screen; also, how dual income families tend to eat at fast-food restaurants more often. And of course, we certainly identify with the scarcity of fresh, high quality produce in many neighborhoods--as contrasted with the readily available fried food practically everywhere.
Perhaps there's no stronger argument for embracing the bicycle and feet as means of daily transportation. Afterall, we all agree that health is one of our most important assets.
Sure, if you stop taking the car for everything, your life will slow down. But in light of the fact that many of us feel overworked and overstressed for much of the time, could it be a bad thing to slow down a bit?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- --- In CarFree@y..., "John O. Andersen" <editor@u...> wrote:
>down. But in light of the fact that many of us feel overworked andI agree but how one slows down varies from person to person. My way of
>overstressed for much of the time, could it be a bad thing to slow
>down a bit?
slowing down is to cancel external appointments and sit at home and
read. Certainly a carfee method, certainly a slowing down, but not a
very exercise method. Indeed, in my rushed world, where exercise gets
pushed aside for the need of sleep, it is more of a rushed meal
combined with economics, carrying my world on my back, and few windows
for drinking alcohol that limit my weight more than anything else.
Point: we can't point to one grand picture and say it will work for
everyone. What I just alluded to above is the scenario that leads to a
lot of obesity but not in me? Why? Because there are little items in
play that change the course.
I abhor fast food, it turns me off. But I run off of flat breads,
peanut butter, dehydrated goods, fruit with a decent portion of that
coming from modern technology. It is better to go to bed hungry, in my
book, and do a rapid meal on wake up than the opposite. Rapid meals
aren't good we are taught, but what other choice is there where one
lives on the internal reserves? And if you are really doing that,
operating from internal reserves, then one shouldn't go to bed hungry.
Ie, a section from a 70's manual on desert warfare: ".....probably
more important to the soldier to eat C rations and grab what sleep
they can than being rousted to unload the fresh stores truck at
midnight." I eat to do the missions at hand. If I'm running or doing
heavy scuba the next day, it's pasta. If it's work in the sun and
field, it's steak. If I'm going in for a test, I at least try to grab
a power bar before hand. Don't come up on energy short. Alcohol is
nice but between work, car, class, scuba, guns, and whatever else,
there are so few 8 hour windows, so it is limited. So what little item
do we have there? Discipline.
Point: we can't just point to one thing to say such caused the break
down of society (if we could apply that to society overall in the
first place). Sure, what I described above in part is physically
active, so should that be excluded from the discussion if the
population is sedatary? Not necessarily for I also described mental
work and eating so one isn't low on blood sugar.
What the population is depends on so many little factors.
("How can you make proper decisions with low blood sugar?"--Justice
Ruth Loomis, (wtte), "First Monday in October")