LOL, don't sweat 54, youngster. Look at it this way; if you were an oak tree, you'd be a young one.
And I'll agree that one should try not to hurt any individual's feelings unnecessarily, by mocking a given person. But to me, that's not the same as saying, in general, that being fat is unhealthy. I mean, I can like and respect a person, and still have the right to think that obesity, in general, is unhealthy, unnatural, and unattractive, and that it's a choice to be fat or not.
We males are hardwired by evolution to look for a certain build and features in potential mates, as a marker of fitness for reproduction, child bearing, and child rearing, hence we have a certain "template" for judging attractiveness. By hardwired, I mean that males who wanted those attributes carried on their genes more successfully, and those "wants" were passed on, in the bargain. I don't apologize for what is a natural and commonly prevailing preference.
I'm not judging worth as a person; I'm just saying that if I can't see facial bones, I don't feel the urge to mate. That doesn't mean I wouldn't be glad to have her as a friend.
In one sense, we ALL have the "fat gene" to some extent, otherwise our genes wouldn't have survived tens of thousands of years of intermittent famines, so I really don't buy the genetic excuse.
It comes down to what you eat, and if you don't care about how you look, you'll just eat the crap that passes for food in modern America, and won't take the trouble to learn anything about proper nutrition. And one MUST make that effort; a good part of what the government advises is bs; they get their info, or even marching orders, in large part from the same companies that grow and manufacture the crap, whether it be pasteurized, homogenized milk, or high fructose corn syrup.
A good example would be the gov't push, in the last 30 years or better, to eat more carbs and less saturated animal fat. That time period coincides with the fattening of America.
A lot of it is TV advertising, to which I'm fairly immune. I don't own a TV; I read, and one thing that really interests me is nutrition.
Sugar is hidden, often with different names, in so many things that it changes your metabolism, to the point of craving it. Ya gotta be a fairly educated label reader, and it takes a little work to educate yourself. Some breakfast cereals are more than half sugar, in one form or another. I look at the kids, particularly, and I'm appalled and very sad.
"It is hard to comprehend me massive increase in sugar use in our society. In 1815, the average resident of Great Britain consumed about 15 pounds of sugar per year. When Cleave's book was published in England in 1974, this had risen to about 120 pounds per year.
A Nation of Sugar Junkies
to the US today, sugar consumption is now around 150 pounds per year for every man, woman and child. Imagine if people had to buy their year's supply of sugar all at one time. A typical American family of four would have to fill the back of a station wagon with 12 fifty-pound sacks of sugar!
The average American consumes about 20 teaspoons (almost one-half cup) of sugar per day, which accounts for 16 percent of our daily intake of calories. For teenagers, sugar consumption accounts for a full 20 percent of calories per day. In 1977 sugar accounted for "only" 11 percent of our caloric intake.
Cleave's book doesn't even mention corn syrup, but this sweetener has become a significant source of our sugar intake in recent years. US consumption of corn symp increased 400 percent between 1900 and 1980. One explanation for this dramatic increase is the similarly explosive rise m the consumption of soft drinks sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup.
Between 1960 and 1980, US soft drink consumption increased 300 percent, m 1997, the soft drink industry produced 14 billion gallons of soft drinks, twice as much as in 1974, and Americans shelled out over $54 billion on this "liquid candy." Today, the average American consumes 38 gallons of soft drinks per year. Irseasy to see why one-fifth of our sugar intake is accounted for by soft drinks.
1 remember as a kid having to get a written permission slip from my mother to drink a bottle of soda in camp. Today, there are no restraints. The average teenage boy now gets 15 teaspoons per day of sugar from soft drinks. Twenty years ago, teenage boys consumed twice as much milk as soda pop; today they consume twice as much soda pop as milk. Nutritionists warn that soda consumption may be contributing to osteoporosis since many girls and young women drink soda instead of milk, which is rich in calcium.
Older readers will remember that in the 1950s, Coca-Cola came only in a 6 1/2-ounce bottle. That soon grew into the 12-ounce can. Today, 20-ounce bottles are readily available from vending machines, and a 64-ounce 600-calorie Double Gulp is as near as your local 7-Eleven. It always shocks me to see the wall of soft drinks at Wal-Mart's checkout, with two-liter bottles available for as little as 88 cents. For a lot of people, sugar is a cheap "high" that comes in a brightly colored bottle. Mixed with caffeine (in cola) it is an especially potent mixture.
Believe it or not, even toddlers are being primed for a lifetime of sugar addiction. According to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), major manufacturers "encourage feeding soft drinks to toddlers by licensing their logos to a maker of baby bottles, Munchkin Bottling, Inc. Infants and toddlers are four times likelier to be fed soda pop out of those bottles than out of regular baby bottles." We have not yet spoken about the link between sugar and cancer. However, the affinity of cancerous tissue for sugar (glucose) is well known. The Nobel laureate Otto Warburg believed that cancers ferment sugar rather man respire in the normal way. This fact is the basis of the high-tech diagnostic tool known as positron emission tomography (PET). PET scans are x-rays that reveal areas of heightened glucose metabolism in the body, which may indicate the presence of cancer.
It certainly is suspicious that, like the other diseases I have mentioned, the incidence of cancer increased tremendously at the same time as sugar consumption went sky-high. There are some studies showing that decreasing one's exposure to refined carbohydrates could diminish your risk of getting colorectal cancer.
My strong advice is to avoid sugar whenever possible. In these dog days of summer, water with a twist of lemon is an extremely refreshing drink. If you are hooked on carbonated beverages, try soda water that is flavored with fruit essences (cranberry, lemon, lime, etc.) but that contains no sweeteners. You will quickly come to like the taste and will never regret having given up cloying sweeteners. http://www.cancerdecisions.com/sybscr.htinl