What if the opposite is true and the correlation exists? For example what if decreased self esteem is the cause and not the result?

What if low self esteem is what makes obesity irrelevant to the obese woman? And taking control by losing weight is feared by the obese woman because she is used to being obese and not having to worry about what people think because she thinks she already knows? Your thoughts?

Yes i do accept but many of the women are worrying about their obesity , to face the surroundings . Why this obesity has became a great problem to women to face the surroundings

I agree that women do tend to worry about their weight and how they present to societies, especially in societies where thin equates to beauty. The challenge for me is to figure which came first overall; the weight or the self esteem issues. Is this your topic or are simply interested? And are you published? I'm just wondering

there may be other reasons than those related to self-esteem ... Obesity is strangely prevalent in societies that have experienced a time of colonization ... In all these societies there is a correlation between the context (post colonial society) obesity and diabetes prevalence. Can we see a phenomenon of compensation? or is it related to the fact that in some societies, strangely again, the rate of sugar in soft drinks, yoghurt ... is higher than elsewhere (as is the case for example in Creole societies of the Indian Ocean ...)

Hi, I can´t agree with Laurence.

Socyetal issues are fundamental but is much more on the level of internal issues that the low level of self esteem and the capacity to look for support for themeselves that we can look for further understanding of what heppens.

My experience says me that when we get a good therapeutic aliance and they get more and more involved with themeselves they reach good results (loneliness or loveless....???)

fernando

I would have to agree that the obesity epidemic is a social issue that is produced by our society. It is the inward response of what our society considers perfect, that woman can't help but get caught up in. Social media has a great deal to do with perpetuating this "ideal". I believe that if a woman has low self esteem issues, she most likely has had them long before they become a problem. The problem is only exentuated by a variety of external environmental issues which bring the problem to the surface. These could be social media, stores targeting clothing for the thinner women, magazines displaying young, skinny models, All women really know deep in their hearts that these are not "real" women's bodies. The issue of obesity I think is more problematic when discussing the problem among our youth. They are the adults of tomorrow, but how long will their lifespans be if they become a generation of chronic on acute illnesses that the current and future medical and social institutions cannot afford to handle? Will we be forced to consider allocation of scarce resources due to the sheer numbers? Questions to ponder...

Could thinness be an illusion produced by economic and social development?

For centuries the drama of being fat or thin has been an issue for women. In some countries, larger bodies equate to larger finances due to the view that extra weight shows that a person can afford to eat; however, the same is not true in America. Many Americans tend to be fixated on stars of all kinds; with this comes the desire to compare the outside self to these media stars. Thinness is glamorized (in females) from early ages-think of any variety of shows on Nickelodeon-; however a solid foundation that creates an environment of belief in self can decrease the internal pressures that a person puts on themselves to fit the media norm. Overall the importance is in creating an atmosphere of health and wellness that includes internal and external motivators for success. Now as to the question...which came first-the esteem issue, the health issues, or the weight issue- most likely this is greatly dependent on individual and community views coupled with ambiguous views if what is pretty-the breast or the brain.

Great answer ,

As you’ve pointed out above, thinness and thickness for women seem to come and go. It differs from time period to time period and from culture to culture. It would be nice to blame the media, but I don’t’ think they’re the culprit, merely the reporters of the time. The need to “fit” the current idea of female beauty comes from our basic instinct to attract a mate, keep that mate long enough to be impregnated and in some cases bear and raises that offspring. I believe instinct is played down in our modern society as something that animals do, forgetting that we are animals too, just sentient. Instincts govern our lives and our personal happiness more than we realize. So, how do we conclude what is "beauty"...ask the man next to you. What ever is admired will be our ideal. I live in the southern US. The Black culture here idealizes large behinds. Young black girls will try and gain weight so they will have this ideal. A total turn around from the white culture who believes slim behinds are beautiful. Whats the difference? What ever males are finding attractive. Brains are attractive as well, but only when packaged inside an acceptable form. But, no matter what fad is current, congruence and symmetry is always preferred.

That was not blaming the media and I apologize if that is how it came off. The word media was used to enable me to refer to a group that encompasses what people choose to view. It is my belief that the focus of many people is on the people that they see regardless of where they see them. Maybe I should have used the word public forum but felt that was even broader...

Obesity is the most visible sign that something is dreadfully wrong with the World's food supply. In certain respects, however, obesity is not a reliable measure of health status or even caloric intake. Due to variations in biochemical and physiological make up, two individuals can consume the same number calories and same quality of food and one will become fat and the other remain slim. Fat or slim, the quality of the food determines whether or not a person is healthy.

So I say it's a mistake to focus on obesity. Better to pay attention to inflammation which is generally caused by excessive omega-6 industrial seed oil consumption, high fructose intake, and unbalanced and/or inadequate protein and vitamin/mineral intake. An industrialized food system coupled with consumer ignorance as to what constitutes healthy eating is what's driving the global epidemic of obesity, diabetes, non communicable disease, and yes, depression which causes some to overeat to relieve psychological pain. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolutionary-psychiatry/201103/your-brain-omega-3 also http://drsukol.teachmed.com/2011/10/16/the-term-healthy-fats-gets-under-my-skin.aspx?view=linear

Remember the billowy women portrayed in the Rennaisance paintings? Women have a greater struggle with weight gain becoming out of control, when there are hormonal issues to consider.I know speaking from experience, I was a chubby girl at youth, then, slimmed down in college with exercise and lack of food! Then, after childbirth multiple times, years over 45, hormonal changes and hypothyroid disease without constant consciousness of what I am consuming and vigorous consistent exercise, I gain body fat rapidly! As you women age we have to adjust our life style also to accomodate for these hormonal changes! I also, believe in the baby fat cell theory, familial body size! I believe it because I see it in our family...even aunts, uncles, cousins. There is not one 'skinny' person in our entire living and deceased ancestry! I ALSO believe the media shoves skinny, shapely women down men's and women's throats and into our minds thinking if we don't look like the models we are ugly. Not the case! When I see a heavy lady walking, going to gym, or swimming I say in my mind "Good for her" ! We must look beyond the fat and into the person. A women can be so skinny that she cannot even bear children! Again hormone correlation! Balance is the key to Healthy living and longevity. Also, constant vigilence to controlling slow weight gain over the years is vital.

Yes i do accept , because ah healthier body is the main tool for a women for her self esteem and self actualization . But also there are many women's who are lack in their confidence because of obesity i read a book called ambitious in that the author said that for an women or a girl wants to lead a success health is the main factor so obesity should not be an great factor to their success . And their confidence why these problems caused to an women it is the main question to me each and every day i am asking to me itself ..........

The people of India are especially vulnerable to heart disease due to their genetic make up. Omega-6 industrial seed oils and added sugars seem to be especially deadly for them. Here's comment from page 82 of "Nutrition Against Disease" by Roger J. Williams, PhD.

That cardiovascular disease is not associated with high fat diets is also shown by comparison study of matched groups of twenty-eight railwaymen from North India and twenty-eight from Southern India.(53) The consumption of fats, mostly of animal origin, was ten times higher among the North Indians than the South Indians, but there were no significant differences between their lipid and cholesterol levels. Among the South Indian population, the incidence of heart disease is said to be fifteen times as high as among the North Indians where the fat content of the diet is ten times higher. Dietary factors are doubtless very important in connection with the incidence of heart disease, but fat is only one factor, and other dietary factors are considerably more important.

53. http://www.ajcn.org/content/20/5/462

Shorter chain fatty acids seem to provide protection from heart disease independent of stress level.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-01-07/food-reviews/30474131_1_ghee-high-cholesterol-acids

Quoting Sudah, "What would be nice is to understand: before 1990s when the economic changes began to occur, the diabetes and CV disease rate were very low. While there is some change in nutrition and perhaps even the quality of nutrition, the changes are not dramatic enough to explain the rapid increase."

I'll try to explain. The changes started long before the rapid rise in the incidence of diabetes and CV disease. Bare in mind that while obesity can have a rapid onset (from simply overeating or dieting to lose weight) there's an incubation period for diabetes, and CV disease. Moreover, because of biochemical individuality, it's not just overweight people that are at risk for diabetes and CV disease. Here's an excerpt from the Introduction to "Food for Nought" (1971) by Ross Hume Hall, PhD:

"Nourishment of the American populace has undergone a startling transformation since World War II. A highly individual system of growing and marketing food has been transformed into a gigantic, highly integrated service system in which the object is not to nourish or even to feed, but to force an ever-increasing consumption of fabricated products. This phenomenon is not peculiar to the American scene and occurs in every industrialized country. The United States, however, has progressed furthest in the transformation. Man can never be more than what he eats, and one would expect that a phenomenon with such profound effects on health and well being as a radically changed system of supplying nourishment would be thoroughly documented and assessed by the scientific community. Such is not the case. The transformation has gone unmarked by government agencies and learned bodies. Government agencies, recipients of the public trust, charged with protecting and improving the public's food, operate as if the technology of food fabrication rested in pre-World War II days. Scientific bodies, supported by public funds and charged with assessing and improving the public's health, ignore completely the results of contemporary methods of marketing food...Failure to monitor and to appreciate the results of rapidly moving technology produces a brutal effect that forms the central theme of this book. Technology founded on mechanistic laws clashes head on with the processes of a natural world which adheres to very different laws. Modern industry, ignoring these biologic laws, molds and manipulates natural processes to suit and to promote its own mechanistic and economic goals."

I recently read two books about obesity published in 2009 - "The World is Fat" by Barry Popkin, PhD and "Stuffed" by Hank Cardello, a former food/beverage industry CEO. While both authors acknowledge that excessive added sugars consumption plays major role in the global decline in the public health, neither author is aware of the saturated fat mistake or the magnitude of the omega-6 hazard. In fact, Dr. Popkin, who is arguably THE global obesity expert, made a glaring mistake in this excerpt from pages 165-166. Lets see if you can identify it.

"Many other foods are certainly linked with poor health, perhaps none more directly than saturated fat. While trans fats are the most pernicious of the saturated fats, all saturated fat is linked with adverse health effects..."

The idea that saturated fats are a health hazard has wrought all kinds of mischief, mainly because it has distracted health experts from the truth about omega-6. For example, Dr. Popkin has noted the global proliferation of omega-6 industrial seed oils but ignores the implications because consensus of opinion blames saturated fat. Here are some excerpts from an article Popkin wrote in 2003. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2003-09-28/news/0309270148_1_overweight-or-obese-women-were-overweight-south-africa

"If you lived in a village or urban-slum area in China or Mexico or Egypt 25 years ago, you were unlikely to have electricity or pumped water. You certainly did not know what television was; you walked to work or rode a cart linked to an animal; and your work was physically very strenuous. Your diet was monotonous and was based on rice or wheat products with possibly a few vegetables and/or beans, and few condiments and no cooking oil. If you go back to those same villages or slum areas today, people have electricity and television, their transportation is often via a bus or gas-powered vehicle, and their work utilizes some type of gas-powered engine. And their diet includes a lot of vegetable oil and some processed-food products that contain added sugar. Some animal-source foods -- be they chicken, beef, pork, goat or fish products -- are consumed, as well."

Note Popkins remark, "And their diet includes a lot of vegetable oil..." In the remainder of the article, note remarks about vegetable oil:

"Healthful fruits and vegetables are not increasing much in people's diets, while they are more likely to consume sugared water in some soft drinks or fruit drinks and add a lot of vegetable oil to their dishes. And they consume more meat...Rice and flour intake is down, and animal-source foods such as pork and poultry and fish are way up, and the steepest increase is in the use of edible vegetable oils for cooking... People are eating more diverse and tasty meals; in fact, edible oil is a most-important ingredient in enhancing the texture and taste of dishes. The same is true for added sugar. The question is how much...There has been a most systematic sweetening of the world's diet. While my research shows that sweetened beverages account for over half of the U.S. sweetener increase during the past decade, in other countries, often it is sugar placed in baked and processed foods that lead the sugar increase. The edible-oil increase is found throughout Asia and Africa and the Middle East as a major source of change."

So in his book, published 6 years later, Popkins mentions vegetable oils but blames saturated fats. This typifies the bias that persists due to 60 years of saturated fat-bashing activity by academia, government, and the edible oils industry. http://www.prweb.com/releases/david_brown/omega-6/prweb8933501.htm

I hope this helps.

There are different causes of obesity for different people, different countries and cultures within those countries. But, it obviously comes back to diet. The idea of calories in, calories out is not as correct as we once thought. If that were true, someone who burns only a few hundred calories in one exercise session wouldn't ever lose weight. There has to be something else in the equation that we're missing. I believe, like David Brown, that it's the foods that we're consumng and food combinations that's making us sick. Omega 6 is one culprit, grains and fructose are just two others. When you think what we've added to our diet in the last 100 years and not only that, what we're taken away (ie. saturated fat), I think the idea of low carb and paleo lifestye begin to make sense.

below is a link that you may enjoy that I've found very informative and explains the idea far better than myself. Please enjoy

http://chriskresser.com/the-top-3-dietary-causes-of-obesity-diabetes

Thanks for the link, Jan. Chris Kresser's explanations are about as good as it gets.

Genetics, exercise, and Endocrine Disease should also be included. Genetics especially, in my opinion plays a huge factor in physical make up (sizes and amount of fat cells). Birth weight studies through school age becomes an area of interesting observation. As well as, the mother's nutritional status and or whether or not she breast feeds the baby. Comparison of babies nourished with Breast milk vs. Formula becomes an interesting contrast. In America, compare our physical size to people living in America in 1700s to early 1900s! Compare Americans height and weight to many Europeans (especially older Europeans). We have more giants in USA!

Marsha, you bring up an interesting point. I too believe that the mom's role in overweight families is central. Not only are the genetics in place (the thrifty gene hypothesis), but her concern for her family plays a part as well. If she's accustomed to a high carb low fat diet, she's hungry often. Being a caring mom, she also feeds her children when she herself feels hungry. If her insulin levels are out of wack, this could be many many times a day. There's been a lot of negative attention on the role of "mom" in families who are obese with all kinds of negative hypothesis as if she's pushing her own personal psychosis off on her kids. But I think its possibly the opposite. She's caring for her family, she's hungry and assumes they "must" be hungry also. Get the mom burning fat for energy instead of carbs on a low carb diet, she stops being hungry 24/7, everyone will lose weight. Any thoughts?

Respected friends...i think obesity in females is more due to their distinct and unique hormonal as well as physiological makeup... Instead purely of faulty food habits... Well i m not outrightly rejecting all the reasons you cite in this discussion...nor i m the right person for this... But as far as i read and observed in female obese patients... There is surely a loose point in their hormonal profile... That is hormonal imbalance...well other reasons of course are genetic, food habits, financial status, stress etc...what you think??

I don't think women are hormonally or physiologically defective in some way that promotes excess fat storage. The fact that a higher percentage of women, in every corner of the globe where the modern foods and beverages of commerce are now available, are over weight or obese is directly related to the quality of food intake. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2003-09-28/news/0309270148_1_overweight-or-obese-women-were-overweight-south-africa

Aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/171/11/1203.full

Dear d.brown plz see this link....its a 9 year study to prove my point...

Aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/171/11/1203.full

Aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/171/11/1203.full

From the study:

In conclusion, these longitudinal data suggest that higher androgens, lower SHBG, surgical menopause, and early hormone therapy use predict incident obesity and/or severe obesity in a multiracial cohort of women transitioning to menopause. A strategy to prevent obesity must focus on the premenopausal years and include physical activity.

Hormones, indeed affect fat storage. But what causes the hormone imbalance in the first place? A poor quality diet. Scientists need to delve deeper to identify the cause of the cause. I say omega-6 seed oils are a determining factor because they have so many adverse effects. http://www.susanallport.com/newsletter728511.htm and http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolutionary-psychiatry/201103/your-brain-omega-3 and http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007%2810%2900391-6/abstract

Okk...dear david brown...now atlast we both converge to same point...ya at this point i agry with you and of course there are few herbs and foods rich in phytohormones...we can utilize them in these disorders in future...actually there is a lot of scope in obesity regarding diet pattern....a true diet can do wonders while a defective diet do the worst...thanks mr. Brown

Hello

Just saw tv program in belgium regarding health, and they stated the fat around the waist to be the most dangerous ....???

Because toxins are still close to vital organs ....???? Maybe we need this fat as a storage tank for all the toxin's our body is unable to get rid of because our leaning system is faling...???? Could be solution of the body to get rid of these toxins in a more or less safe way...???

Human physiologie nicely explains how our body is cleansed from toxins....!!!! Water is needed ..... Each person with overweight is chronically dehydrated up to a level that flushing out toxins no longer functions.

Maybe explains why no dieet in the world gives long term result after stopping the diet ??? No diet is meant to rehydrate the person.... the moment you are properly hydrated you can eat anything you like ..... you will not gain 1 gr in weigth..!!!

Measured more then 750 people ..... nobody with 65% Total Body Water had more then 12% body fat mass. !!!!!

Each and every person with less then proper hydration level had more and more fat ..... even in mathematical order.

Each 1% decrease in hydration results in increase of fat mass by 1.3%

Well...though difference in opinions...but aim is same and discussions are fruitful....thanks all....

But that doesnt mean end of story...

Its in continued mode....

Hello guys,

Please, Yves Van Assche!

do you have any paper with this information?

I'm trying to relate the articles of body composition, but can not any information on the level below 65% of total body water and fat mass.

Unfortunately, women are more affected socioeconomically and also by low level of education both factors are strong related to body weight status or body gain by aging.

I am in agreement with the Belgium studies. Would like more information on the papers for that study. I agree with Mr. Van Assche's statements, water is extremely beneficial and for all cellular health, including Brain Health. Unfortunately, many of us do not take the time to be regimented in our water intake. Something we all need to make a good habit of drinking H2O...more.

I think many children are spending too much time for leisure activities in sedentary activities like watching TV or using the computer. This article (http://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797%2808%2900870-2/abstract) Hardly, 2009, makes an analysis of the cardiorespiratory fitness of children and compares with the "SMALL SCREEN RECREATION". He concludes that these children are spending too much time in sedentary activities. Other Brazilian studies confirm this theory. Still other studies are related dietary habits and socioeconomic status influence body composition, and the poorest people consume more calories and fatty foods. So I think the big problem is the lack of information and public policies to control these variables since the early ages. I'll post later a study by Dr. Reynaldo Martorell which shows the influence of healthy habits in the first 1000 days of a child, considering nine months of pregnancy and the first 2 years of life.

Excerpt from article by Barry Popkin:

What is happening to the diets of the world?

Again, imagine how bland and healthful the diets of Mexicans might have been. When at their best, rice, beans, tortillas and a little citrus juice produce a well-balanced diet that is low in oil and sugar and high in fiber and many critical nutrients. But the modern food-processing industry and added consumer income, urbanization, improved transportation, TV, food advertising and other changes have led to diets that are much higher in fat and added sugar. Healthful fruits and vegetables are not increasing much in people's diets, while they are more likely to consume sugared water in some soft drinks or fruit drinks and add a lot of vegetable oil to their dishes. And they consume more meat. A revolution has occurred. For instance, in the early 1980s, no adults in China consumed what we call a high-fat diet with more than 30 percent of their calories from fat. Today, over half of Chinese adults consume such a diet. In China, dietary shifts are very quickly occurring. Rice and flour intake is down, and animal-source foods such as pork and poultry and fish are way up, and the steepest increase is in the use of edible vegetable oils for cooking.

Notice this comment: "...the steepest increase is in the use of vegetable oils for cooking." Circumstantially, no other food component correlates as closely with the decline in the public health as vegetable oils. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2003-09-28/news/0309270148_1_overweight-or-obese-women-were-overweight-south-africa

Philippe Farnell , Marsha Senior

The study is my own, was a three year project of measuring people of all ages approx 750 with a total of 5000 measurements by Bioelectric impedance analysis showing person Body composition ( lean mass, intra cellular water, extra cellular water, total body water, body fat mass, and muscle mass)

When I put all these measurements in an exel file and arranged by total body water I noticed a correlation with Body fat mass.!! Nobody with a healthy hydration level ( 64%) had more then 12% body fat mass... very healthy lean body.

I did a six week trial with a professional rugby team from UK and found athletes with TBW from 64% and 12% body fat mass which is very lean and the lowest to be 52% TBW and 28% body fat mass. These athletes all eat the same food and all train minimum of 5 hours a day. Why are some lean and other severe overweight?? Only difference was their hydration level, eat the same food as it is prepared by club.

In my group of regular people I found hydration levels of 34% and that correspond with 68% body fat mass extreme obesity..!!!!

Might be more usefull to measure someones hydration level in stead of putting them on a scale ....then at least people see how much they are suffer from chronic dehydration.

yves

Obesity is the biprodect of lifestyle. Dr.Hameed Riyasudheen.K.V[PT]

When I asked people to drink up to one and a half gallon of ionized alkaline water a day, and this for six months i could only find a 0,1% increase in total body water ????? So there is a major problem with the water that is available...

Took me three more years to find the cause and solution for it.

So lifestyle can be minor part in this chronic dehydration...and not being solved by drinking water.

We are now able to rehydrate people up to 30% body fat mass in 20 days

up to 40% body fat mass in 40 days

up to 50% body fat mass in 60 days

up to 60% body fat mass in 80 days

As long as hydration level remains normal ... body weight and body fat mass stay totally normal

yves

Dr Hameed Riyasudheen we open our first center for weight control in Bangalore .... scheduled end may beginning june

May be a type of lifestyle disorder ,one reason may be lack of physical activity and nature of job in urban areas

http://www.drlenkravitz.com/Media/WeightWEB3.pdf

you can go through this link

Weight gain in women is different from men. This is based on hormones, metabolism and genetic make up.the type of food you eat is again dependent on your willingness to maintain a good figure.one hand they eat pizzas, chocolates, sweets, and believe me they love to eat. Look at the present gen females. A lot of them are found hanging out in macdonalds, and dominos or pizza huts. Zero size is what they love, but at the cost of extreme dieting. Let women come forward for a full discussion rather than argument

True want to know from your clinic if it is possible to find how many have menstrual irregularity

There is a link to polycystic ovary and the diet you eat. Find out more, hormones particularly thyroid are affected.

Obesity in women.

Azarbad L, Gonder-Frederick L.

Source

Department of Behavioral Sciences, Rush University Medical Center, 1653 West Congress Parkway, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.

Abstract

Obesity carries a unique disease burden on women and is influenced by a variety of biological, hormonal, environmental, and cultural factors. Reproductive transitions, such as pregnancy and menopause, increase the risk for obesity. Psychologically, obese women experience greater weight-related stigma and discrimination and are at increased risk for depression than obese men. Women are also particularly susceptible to psychological stress, sleep debt, and lack of physical activity, all of which are risk factors for the development of excess weight. Obesity risk is increased among women with psychiatric disorders and those who use certain psychotropic medications. Obesity treatment should take into consideration degree of obesity, health risks, past weight loss attempts, and individual differences in motivation and readiness for treatment.

Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

this article will giv you some insight

Depression is bigger in women, inwillingness -> fatige -> sedentary, food reward, no muscle use, fatige... It is a vicius circle worse in women.

Any way specific way to identify depression in adolescent individuals

So, what we health professionals or anyone can do to reverse this situation? Where the interventions should be made? We must perform surgery to reduce stomach or improve the practice of physical activity? We carry out policies of diet or hormonal control with use of drugs? I believe, as a physical educator, the answers are in routine operation since the early ages, in schools and communities. That would be a long term intervention but also immediate interventions should be made.

DM II yes. Pancreatic wear by abuse of high-glycemic carbohydrates.

All this is very good, but few have mentioned the food industry and how they have created obesity with increasing shifts to fats and high fructose corn syrup. The cheapest food that the less affluent buy is by and large crap-candy.

The main thing wrong with the viewpoints is failure to think systemically, to include the profit motives of the food industry. Hormones, etc., are fine, but the single focus opinions add nothing to our understanding.

Right you are, John. The food industry is indeed a large part of the problem. Here's a quote from "The Modern Nutritional Diseases: and How to Prevent Them" by Fred and Alice Ottoboni.

"The current relentless pressure to convert the entire population to a low-fat, high carbohydrate dietary regime seems to be driven by a curious set of circumstances. It began with an idea aimed at inducing the public to buy and eat foods that are profitable to the agricultural and food industries as opposed to foods that man was designed to eat. With judicious use of public relations, advertising, pseudo science, and political prowess, this idea has grown into a sophisticated and powerful movement that is changing eating habits throughout the world. Concurrently, the national priority aimed at the treatment of the modern nutritional diseases, rather than their prevention, has focused medical research on patentable new drugs rather than on preventive methods...The consequences are sobering. Older adults suffer premature disabilities and shortened life spans; younger adults, and even children, are increasingly affected by early signs of atherosclerosis, obesity, and type-2 diabetes. Enormous prescription drug and medical care costs have nearly reached the point of overwhelming the national budget. And tragically, a growing body of evidence suggests that the bizarre and increasingly common behavioral problems among young children and teen-agers are related to the combined effects of high sugar intakes and the virtual absence of omega-3 essential fatty acids in the American diet." http://books.google.com/books?id=wPrfdvM5V4gC&pg=PA199&lpg=PA199&dq=#v=onepage&q&f=false

Science does not easily correct itself when the interests of commerce are threatened. And now the American style agribusiness/ industrial food system threatens to compromise the public health in practically every nation on Earth. Quote:

"The West is exporting diabetes and heart disease to poor countries, along with the processed foods that line the shelves of global supermarkets warns UN advisor Olivier De Schutter. While obesity is firmly embedded in countries like the US, UK and Europe with as much as 40 per cent of the population classified as obese, the rates are set to rise in poorer countries previously unaffected by the obesity epidemic. In these countries, traditional healthy diets, made up of grains, beans, vegetables, fresh fruit and animal products are being replaced by more processed and junk foods high in saturated fats, salt and sugar."

Tragically, United Nations authorities still believe that saturated fats are a big part of the problem. Actually, the major changes in fat intake involve omega-6 industrial seed oils. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2003-09-28/news/0309270148_1_overweight-or-obese-women-were-overweight-south-africa A few scientists are beginning to realize that the saturated fat research findings have been systematically misinterpreted. http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007%2811%2900314-5/abstract

In response to John Adam's remarks....

You're correct, there was many different reasons for our dilemma, some political, some issues of egocentric researchers, etc that created the mess we're in now. If you've not read Gary Taube's " What if its all a Big Fat Lie" written in 2002 for the New York Times, I would suggest that you do. He traces the beginnings of the "low fat, high carb" movement in the US. It's an interesting read and outlines a sort of domino effect. Understanding this is all well and good, and interesting. But a plan to change things is truly what we need. I can cite paper and research and results and there are still people who don't. won't believe that saturated fat is not the foe but that sugar and high glycemic carbs are. There are too many doctors not willing to take the time to read the research and make recommendations. We have to remember that Dr. Atkins had to defend his diet in front of congress. Not many wish to take the professional "chance".

If you have a plan that will systematically change the minds of thousands of health professionals across the US, I'm all ears. It's unfortunate, but the lives of the next generation is at stake. I will teach my kids better, and they will teach their kids better, but there are mom's I know at this moment who have no idea what to feed their kids. A week ago, I spoke to a mom who told me her underweight 9 year old son sometimes would only eat a bowl of cereal all day long. (as I gasped in horror) she assured me that his doctor said it would be okay, as long as he drank the milk. Unfortunately, its this doctor who we need to take a refresher in nutrition and take the time to teach. Got a plan for this??? I"m on board!

Modern Medicine is nothing but "Downstream" Medicine

I have concluded that modern medicine is nothing more than "medicine to alleviate downstream pollution while leaving upstream pollution alone."

Let me explain the basis of this argument.

When we digest the food we take in by mouth in our stomach and intestines, these

digested nutrients are absorbed through the intestinal walls. The nutrients absorbed through the intestinal walls pass through the portal veins and are carried to the

liver in that order. The nutrients that are carried to the liver undergo various

metabolic processes, after which they pass through the hepatic vein into vena cava

inferior and carried to the organs all over the body by general circulation.

That is to say, they are transported in this order: liver → hepatic vein → vena cava inferior → general circulation → organs all over the body. As a whole, the order

is: digestive system → portal vein → liver → organs all over the body.

If we think of the liver as a kind of "checkpoint station", the parts of the process

that occur before reaching the liver can be referred to as "upstream", and the parts

that take place after leaving the liver as "dowmnstream."

As shown in Illustration 2, the portion from the mouth to the liver can be called

as "upstream" ( Lake Ontario : checkpoint before liver) while the organs that come

after the liver can be as called as "downstream" (River Saint Lawrence : checkpoint after liver).

Looking at metabolism this way, we see that when the "upstream" is polluted,the

"downstream" will become polluted as well. Thus, the disease-causing substances

of upstream will cause diseases of downstream.

Now I think you understand my statement that "Modern Medicine is medicine to

alleviate downstream pollution while leaving upstream pollution alone."

What, then, does "upstream pollution " mean ?

It means "production of offensive feces" by "abnormal gastrointestinal fermentation." Because the substances that cause offensive feces are substances that result from the putrefaction of protein (eggs, fish or meat),they are called "putrefied metabolites." In short, it is as if people who always excrete offensive feces were eating rotten eggs, fish and meat everyday. The difference is that if they were eating rotten food, they would get sick immediately, while in this case the food rots after they eat it, so it takes more time for them to get sick. Therefore, it is important to lead a lifestyle which does not produce offensive feces. But now we have what can change offensive feces into clean feces as if by magic, that is Hydrogen Rich Water

HAYASHI,Hidemitsu.M.D.

The flippant answers would be wine, chocolate, and laziness. That's only part of the issue--and nobody honestly believes that chocolate is at fault (or wine). However, I think that a couple of things may play into the obesity issue particularly in women. As we have changed our roles from being "primarily home-makers" (mothers and wives) to being workers (outside the home)--professional, career-oriented women--we often find that the demands on our time leave us feeling drained and tired and, frankly, not wanting to cook dinner. This is by no means unique to women. However, it has been considered traditional for the woman to cook or provide dinner. In modern societies, this tends to mean increased reliance on processed foods, heat-and-serve items, and fast food. It's not that we don't know better--we're just too tired to care many nights! These processed foods tend to be unbalanced meals--high in refined sugars and carbohydrates, sodium, and fat--and therefore taste good. In the U.S., processed foods tend to be less expensive than fresh meats and produce. The chocolate and wine may be valid points--as our lifestyles have changed, our stress levels have increased--driving up cortisol levels and the desire to self-medicate: "I had a hard day, I really deserve a little reward!" This quickly becomes an ingrained pattern and habit and portion sizes tend to increase rapidly as the brain drives us for ever larger rewards/payoffs. When we do try to confront the issue, we are often faced with seemingly contradictory information: Eggs are good! No, eggs are high in cholesterol! For many people lacking university education, these conflicts drive people to avoid the whole problem--and eat something else instead. Our efforts to provide guidance tend to get exaggerated and taken to extremes: if a lowfat diet is good, surely a nonfat diet must be even better! Lean protein? Great! I'll look for the highest-protein foods I can find! It's myopic. Despite this, I truly believe that most of us have a good grasp of what foods are healthy and what foods are not--but knowing and DOING are two different things when you're tired and your feet hurt!

jee. Muy bueno!

Without wine and chocolate, more depression...je

More it is life style diseases can partly be controlled in specific group of individuals if detected early

Zero size to full size. The transition is simply too fast.

Junk foods are consumed most by women and hormonal changes are too significant to be ignored. The fat metabolism is diferent in males and females.

Well, I say upping saturated fat intake can help with both weight control and appetite regulation. Watch this video and note how the dietitian says the authorities are all in agreement and couldn't possibly be mistaken about saturated fat. http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/is-saturated-fat-good-for-you/x4goj61

Is there a way to track fat metabolism

http://scholar.google.co.in/scholar_url?hl=en&q=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC296998/&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm2Oql7oslSnmddu6bagaCZzE5DmTg&oi=scholarr&ei=m9d7T5TwJseViQeYupGdCQ&ved=0CBwQgAMoADAA this is a study about tracking fat metabolism.

http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&ved=0CJsBEBYwCQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.who.int%2Fmediacentre%2Ffactsheets%2Ffs311%2Fen%2F&ei=VNp7T5b_M6iOiAfatOyhCQ&usg=AFQjCNFGC7GjyG1PORGZxDb1PSD6xnDxGA&sig2=oRpIExqBefyeGeuBaf-jPg. this is an interesting article of WHO about global epidemic of obesity

http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CEoQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonlinelibrary.wiley.com%2Fdoi%2F10.1576%2Ftoag.8.1.026.27205%2Fpdf&ei=nNt7T9SIOKmViQfB9NiQCQ&usg=AFQjCNGtX-ilu7Ui8-4TMd8ZJKl3UYWZsA&sig2=ehubTHlRaHKHFynFq4LaaA the study of female hormone and obesity

Somebody should sponsor otherwise an academic institute it is not possible

Although women tend to display a higher prevalence of obesity than men throughout the world, one of the only groups to be able to reduce their prevalence over time is high socioeconomic status women. How successful they are at it depends on the level of economic development of a country, however, women with higher levels of education tend to drop their prevalence pretty soon in the process of economic development, and in the face of the changing food environment. This may be a result of a higher health literacy and their empowerment in advocating for better health for themselves, as well as cognitive advantages in self-regulation, and possibly the use of thinness as a form of social distinction.

Of note, the rapidly evolving food environment, where energy-dense but nutrient-poor foods become increasingly available while traditional standards of beauty and a concern with high fertility for women (i.e. having a large number of children is the main social role, rather than education and having a career), obesity may of course be a greater risk, as women are better able to conform with these social expectations thanks to the greater calorie availability.

In women specially aged women(perimenopausal and menopausal women) due to change in the level of estrogen and progesteron water retention occure and sedentary lifestyle leads to obesity.Obesity(high BMI and WHR) leads to various problems.Obesity also decreases confidence level because physical fittness imroves the personalty .

Controled food,proper and regular exercises,healthy mentelstatus can prevent obesity.

sudah yehuda kovesh shaheb,

Would be good idea to look at what changes go hand in hand with increase in obbesity rates in Middle East observations.... Does our hypotalamus take a new reference point every 21 days, whenever a situation is consistant for 21 days it becomes a new reference point .... (ramadan ... acute dehydration because not allowed to drink during day time .. a large part may become chronic when not corrected in time)

Last decades the use of microwave cooking skyrocketed .... loss of even more hydrogen stored in food...

Compare to new scientific research on effect of complementing intake of hydrogen on obesity and diabetes type II

Kamimura et al. Molecular hydrogen improves obesity and diabetes by inducing

hepatic FGF21 and stimulating energy metabolism in db/db mice. Obesity 19(7):13961403

(2011).

It may be that a decrease in molecular hydrogen stored in food has contributed to the obesity epidemic. Relatively speaking, however, it would seem the switch from sucrose to high fructose corn syrup has had a greater impact on obesity, especially in countries where microwave cooking is not yet an option. https://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/

Molecular hydrogen and microwave cooking is all over in most parts and obesity is seen in affluent countries than poorer countries. I think its technology that adds fire to obesity rather than microwaves. Fresh food is bettter than caned food

Several of the answers refer to increased fructose intake as a causal factor and there certainly is a strong correlation between fructose intake and obesity, metabolic syndrome,hypertension, non-alcohol related liver disease and renal disease. It seems almost too simple a solution but one that could be readily implemented without great cost or inconvenience.

Research has shown that after the age of 20 women get more obese. The reasons are, I think:

1. Less aerobic physical activity (but the diet stays at the same level),

2. the level of stress increases,

3. women who were nutritionally deprived as children are significantly more likely to be obese,

4. higher adult socioeconomic status.

When the women getting richer they prefer to buy manifactured products, they lose physical activity and getting fatter. so if they return to natural feeding again it will be okay. They must cook their food by own, by themselves. the other thing they must stop to take glucose and fructose

Generally obesity is a result of positive energy balance. However, it is a daunting task to get people to go on negative energy balance and back to weight fulcrum. It is normal to have weight fluctuation of say 3-5 kilograms over a period of 10-15 years. We have carried out our obesity clinic since 1984 and still ongoing. We found that only about a quarter of those women who loss weight the last 15 years are able to maintian their weight fluctuation within 1-3 kg. For your information our approach is healthy lifestyle, healthy eating and physical activity only, no drug or pharmacological management is involved.

In addition to numerous answers, i will say women tend to be obese either due to stress and child bearing.

It is to a certain level. That is why background/upbringing or let me say enviromental factor also contribute.

Generally obesity is a result of positive energy balance. However, it is a daunting task to get people to go on negative energy balance and back to weight fulcrum. Almost the times.... They think that to to make exercise , but just think.......They dont burn the calories enough to lost weight.

Part of the reason people can't achieve negative energy balance is because the modern food supply is diluted in terms of vitamin and mineral content. Interestingly, livestock grazing on high quality forage consume less than animals eating poor quality forage(1).

Another factor affecting appetite is omega-6. Too much of it deranges the appetite control mechanism(2). Omega-6 seed oils are now ubiquitous(3). Yet there's little interest in researching the matter(4,5).

References

1. http://www.articlesbase.com/environment-articles/why-higher-brix-readings-in-forage-makes-animal-raising-more-profitable-1116237.html

2. http://sciencenordic.com/vegetable-oils-promote-obesity

3. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2003-09-28/news/0309270148_1_overweight-or-obese-women-were-overweight-south-africa?pagewanted=all

4. http://www.asbmb.org/asbmbtoday/asbmbtoday_article.aspx?id=18365

5. http://evilcyber.com/nutrition/disrobing-dogma-polyunsaturated-fat-and-health/

Obesity is not more common in females, it is more common in males. See the ABS website.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/by+Subject/4125.0~Jan+2012~Main+Features~Overweight+and+obesity~3330

Obecity is a common in females because less activity and she have more fatty tissues.....so an..

It has been observed that, women having similar dietary pattern and activity level does not necesarily become obese as the other. so propably obesity is not just about these two factors only, but other cumulative factors like stress level, hormonal changes and genetics may be having a greater role than currently understood.

It has also been observed that some women who try to tackle the obesity problem based on the present theory of increased activity levels and reduced calories and sugar intake ; unfortunately find the problem persisting . And this leads to the lack of confidence and depression- an inability to tackle the problem (obesity) - The problem becomes more than self .

So in my opinion a greater understanding of the problem is required than the present blanket rule wherein

OBESITY = INCREASED CALORIE INTAKE + REDUCED ACTIVITY .