'not that you have much weight'

ShoppingTelly

Help Support ShoppingTelly:

If Marjolein had said anything to me, I might have retorted to mentioning her bunion feet - like the Ace of Spades, they are! Anyway, there is nothing wrong with my weight - 70KG / 1.84m.
 
We are constantly told that being large and obese is the cause of many cancers - and undoubtedly this is true. However, I have lost many friends over the years to the dreaded C in its many forms - breast being the big one; BUT not one of these people has been overweight at all, and have been more on the slim side. Lots of celebs who have suffered have been on the lean side as well - l'm thinking Kylie, Carole Giffin, Jennifer Saunders, Victoria Derbyshire - older stars like Audrey Hepburn and Vera Ellen, and the list goes on - not of course forgetting the 2 lovely models we lost on Q, and Ali Keenan herself. None of whom could be considered even the slightest bit overweight.

So, I wish we had a more balanced view of weight, rather than the sweeping statements we now get.
 
QuiteVacuousChat said:
All this stuff about "looks too thin" is just about vanity and appearance, not health. All the evidence points to those who want a relatively disease-free and long healthy life need to be lean and active. I don't just mean averagely slim - the average Briton or American these days is way over their true healthy weight and BMI scores have been adjusted to fit the fat reality. The science is there and has been for ages. Obviously you trade your looks (in a conventional sense) for being super lean and efficient - that's no doubt why Marjolein's face looks aged - but I bet her scores on all disease and life expectancy indicators are a darn sight better than one of the models. It's just a matter of what's important to people.
Click to expand...

I think the key word is active. Being lean in itself is no indicator of a healthy lifestyle. It is entirely possible for a more overweight person to actually have a healthier lifestyle and body than a slim person. The key is the distribution in the body. If the fat is distributed evenly and with little of the fat around the viscera (our vital organs) that is always better. Unfortunately some maintain a slim physique by eating dreadfully - it's all sugary caffeinated drinks, fast food and other empty calories in small quantities. They are more at risk of high levels of visceral body fat which are the big dangers. This is one of the reasons why there are strong proponents of using the relative dimensions of waist vs hips rather than BMI for identifying high-risk people, rather than simply saying if you have a BMI of over 30 you are at the highest risk... let's face it BMI has been somewhat undermined by the fact that strictly applying it, many elite sports people - particularly where they are shorter but heavily muscled - can be labelled as obese.

Eating well and moving as much as you can are good lifestyle choices to make, but it's not always so easy for people to do that.
 
maymorganlondon said:
I think the key word is active. Being lean in itself is no indicator of a healthy lifestyle. It is entirely possible for a more overweight person to actually have a healthier lifestyle and body than a slim person. The key is the distribution in the body. If the fat is distributed evenly and with little of the fat around the viscera (our vital organs) that is always better. Unfortunately some maintain a slim physique by eating dreadfully - it's all sugary caffeinated drinks, fast food and other empty calories in small quantities. They are more at risk of high levels of visceral body fat which are the big dangers. This is one of the reasons why there are strong proponents of using the relative dimensions of waist vs hips rather than BMI for identifying high-risk people, rather than simply saying if you have a BMI of over 30 you are at the highest risk... let's face it BMI has been somewhat undermined by the fact that strictly applying it, many elite sports people - particularly where they are shorter but heavily muscled - can be labelled as obese.

Eating well and moving as much as you can are good lifestyle choices to make, but it's not always so easy for people to do that.
Click to expand...

The key thing is to be lean, eat a wholefood plant-based diet and be active. Anything else compromises health and longevity. It's a choice we each make. I'm happy for anyone to choose otherwise but we each need to take responsibility for those choices. The sadness is that so many people are told to run their exercise and diet programmes past their local doctor when doctors don't even cover nutrition in any substantive way during all their years of training. Fortunately, the Internet has some wonderful resources (among the dross and misinformation). I particularly like http://www.nutritionfacts.org which has the data behind each of its reports. All the references can be checked rather than just believed blindly.

And, no, it isn't easy. Personally, I believe it is worth it. Others' mileage may vary....
 
We had a similar thread a while ago about what larger ladies (and men) like to be called. I remember saying I found dear Lennie Feinberg's phrase 'fuller figured gals' a good one. Personally I would not mind being called skinny but I can understand (and know from friends) that this and similar comments can be unwelcome for those who struggle to put weight on. Maybe it is about how it is said? Would 'a slender figure' be a good description?
 
Hippygirl said:
We had a similar thread a while ago about what larger ladies (and men) like to be called. I remember saying I found dear Lennie Feinberg's phrase 'fuller figured gals' a good one. Personally I would not mind being called skinny but I can understand (and know from friends) that this and similar comments can be unwelcome for those who struggle to put weight on. Maybe it is about how it is said? Would 'a slender figure' be a good description?
Click to expand...

How about "butternut squash," "slender aubergine," "pumpkin," "conference pear," "William pear," "kohlrabi" and "Ugli fruit?"
 
Well, in my younger years (a hundred years ago), boyfriends would always say they loved 'having something to get hold of ' ........ um, not saying anymore (!) (incidentally, butternut squash had never been heard of)
 
I was always too skinny as a teenager, whereas all my friends were pleasantly curvy. Try as I might, I couldn't put weight on. And I was called skinny, not slender, skinny. Ah, well. Those were the days...
 
They certainly were ! and I think the largest any girl got, was a size 16 - any larger and there was nothing fashion wise ! except the Outsize shop that most middle aged women shopped in. Chelsea Girl, Etam and other 'high' fashion shops in the 60's stopped at a size 16 so no fashion conscious girl dared be any larger, unlike today where the world is their oyster - even shopping on Q !
 
I think that obesity ups the chance more of cancers from what I understand. Also heart attacks, diabetes, ....slim people can get all of these of course but I think obesity ups the chances so much more . Ovarian cancer is the one that worries me as it has not real symtoms ..its called the silent killer. I wish people could be motivated by this ...it should not be about making wonderful selfies but to keep ourselves alive fit and healthy for our loved ones ...IMHO.
 
I think it just isn't that simple. Slim = good, fat = bad. We all come at weight and health with a different dip in the gene pool.

I have a health issue which gives me a 50/50 chance of developing diabetes by the time I hit 40. It also make me more susceptible to cholesterol and blood pressure problems. I'm 53 and I don't have diabetes. I have low cholesterol but I do have a slightly raised blood pressure but that's been under control and stable for the last 8 years. I'm an 18/20. I have a friend with same health issue as me. She's a year or two younger than me and a fit and active size 12. She has diabetes, high blood pressure that isn't under control and high cholesterol. The odds are the same for both of us genetically and higher for me because I'm overweight and yet I'm beating the odds.

I'm not advocating being overweight. But it isn't a guarantee of ill health.
 
Tinkerbelle said:
I think it just isn't that simple. Slim = good, fat = bad. We all come at weight and health with a different dip in the gene pool.

I have a health issue which gives me a 50/50 chance of developing diabetes by the time I hit 40. It also make me more susceptible to cholesterol and blood pressure problems. I'm 53 and I don't have diabetes. I have low cholesterol but I do have a slightly raised blood pressure but that's been under control and stable for the last 8 years. I'm an 18/20. I have a friend with same health issue as me. She's a year or two younger than me and a fit and active size 12. She has diabetes, high blood pressure that isn't under control and high cholesterol. The odds are the same for both of us genetically and higher for me because I'm overweight and yet I'm beating the odds.

I'm not advocating being overweight. But it isn't a guarantee of ill health.
Click to expand...

Even though some people are genetically prone to particular conditions many (but not all) genetic 'predispositions' can be turned on or off through lifestyle factors. The most important of which is what we choose to eat. When the health of immigrants is tracked from one country to another they start to get the diseases of the culture they move to rather than those that were previously deemed hereditary. This is well documented. It's largely down to diet.

The safest bet is a wholefood plant-based diet. Meat and dairy are both known to act as triggers for particular forms of cancer in those who are susceptible. Conditions like Type 2 diabetes can be reversed in as little as a month.

I find it really empowering that so much information is now available and that we can choose to use it ourselves. Taking responsibility feels good.

Not saying it's for everyone, but the option is there for most people.
 
Some people smoke all their lives and never get lung cancer ...but the chances are they will ....I smoked as a youngster and gave up after 3 years of taking in cancer sticks as I call them ....I totally regret smoking and wish I could take those years back ...they contain rat poison, arsenic and the list goes on ...I suppose thinking about some food being poisonous should be enough motivation, but like nicotine ..sugar and fat is very addictive ...( even though our chemistry class had posters of tar being poured into a Petri dish ..it did not affect me u till my brother who also smoked had a very bad asthma attack in front of me ...he gave up smoking and didn't touch another again and so this motivated me. I hate the things ....but I would not preach to others ...I know how the addiction takes hold ..it can be done ..I'm proof of it ...but I know how hard it is too.
 

Similar threads

M
Am I boring you?
2
Replies
34
Views
3,419
stratobuddy
stratobuddy
M
Have you ever left a show in the interval?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3,893
Grizelda
Grizelda
A
Disney merchandise
2
Replies
31
Views
6,423
shopperholic
S
M
Can I have a rant please Bob?
Replies
8
Views
721
merryone
M
loveallthingsitalian
What was the quirkiest item you have bought from Q?
Replies
8
Views
2,022
thatu
T

Latest posts

Back
Top