Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America’s Future 2013
Trust for America's Health ^ | August 2013 | NA

Posted on 09/19/2013 12:37:13 AM PDT by neverdem

After three decades of increases, adult obesity rates remained level in every state except for one, Arkansas, in the past year, according to F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future 2013, a report from the Trust for America's Health (TFAH) and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). The full report is available here. Visit http://www.FasinFat.org/ for interactives, graphs, charts and obesity rates for the states and nation going back decades.

Thirteen states now have adult obesity rates above 30 percent, 41 states have rates of at least 25 percent, and every state is above 20 percent, according to the report. In 1980, no state was above 15 percent; in 1991, no state was above 20 percent; in 2000, no state was above 25 percent; in 2007, only Mississippi was above 30 percent.*

Since 2005, there has been some evidence that the rate of increase has been slowing. In 2005, every state but one experienced an increase in obesity rates; in 2008, rates increased in 37 states; in 2010, rates increased in 28 states; and in 2011, rates increased in 16 states.*

“While stable rates of adult obesity may signal prevention efforts are starting to yield some results, the rates remain extremely high,” said Jeffrey Levi, PhD, executive director of TFAH. “Even if the nation holds steady at the current rates, Baby Boomers—who are aging into obesity-related illnesses—and the rapidly rising numbers of extremely obese Americans are already translating into a cost crisis for the healthcare system and Medicare.”

Levi added, “In order to decrease obesity and related costs, we must ensure that policies at every level support healthy choices, and we must focus investments on prevention.”

(Excerpt) Read more at healthyamericans.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: healthifyingamerika; obesity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last

1 posted on 09/19/2013 12:37:13 AM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I wish I knew the answer. But it seems to me the more you tell someone not to do something, the more they want to do it. Plus, the food networks sure figure in there somehow, I think.


2 posted on 09/19/2013 12:40:09 AM PDT by hulagirl (Mother Theresa was right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Idiot Boomers


3 posted on 09/19/2013 12:57:04 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I’m ANG, I’m 41, I’m 68” and 190 lb. I recently scored a 98% on my latest PT test running a 7:15 / mile.
According to the BMI I’m not just overweight, I’m obese. Yet, it’s nearly impossible for someone my age to score better on their eval. So to say the data is skewed in a veey misleading way is a understatement in my opinion.
It’s like saying everyone who makes less than $90,000 a year is in poverty.


4 posted on 09/19/2013 12:57:28 AM PDT by McCloud-Strife ( USA 1776-2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hulagirl

> I wish I knew the answer.

Perhaps the coming economic crash will do at least these people some good. When EBT runs dry, they will have to get up off the couch and do something or starve. That should slim some of them them down a bit, I imagine. Call it govmint weight loss program. ‘It’s for the children.’ Or maybe I just don’t care about their fatness. I must be heartless, but my kids eat right, and that’s all I do care about.


5 posted on 09/19/2013 1:27:42 AM PDT by ri4dc (Cut your cable. You'll need the extra dough later on. 'This war is lost!' The worst is yet to come.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

Apologies to the good ones, few that you are.


6 posted on 09/19/2013 2:04:14 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

7 posted on 09/19/2013 2:04:36 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

End welfare,food stamps and extended unemployment checks would significantly help. This would eliminate lard ass syndrome which using Rep Hank Johnson’s Guam may tip over theory, the US would weigh less, the land mass would rise significantly lowering sea levels which would prove once in for all sea level rise is man made.


8 posted on 09/19/2013 2:07:31 AM PDT by maddog55 (America Rising.... Civil War II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The obvious solution is to have the government quit paying for health care. After all, money is fungible, and if you don't have to pay for health care, you can afford to eat.
9 posted on 09/19/2013 2:11:04 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
The obvious solution is to have the government quit paying for health care.

The powers to tax and control are to government as heroin and cocaine to drug addicts.

10 posted on 09/19/2013 2:16:00 AM PDT by Standing Wolf (No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; All

I do know:

1. Stop with the hormonization of the food supply. You think those hormones used to fatten the beef disappear magically at hoof or the udder?

2. Use cane sugar for sweetening and not ethanol. Corn syrup is not an acceptable substitute.

3. CANOLA not good for the human body either.


11 posted on 09/19/2013 2:18:48 AM PDT by j.argese (Not anymore!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Standing Wolf
The powers to tax and control are to government as heroin and cocaine to drug addicts.

Unfortunately for both (and the rest of us), as resistance is developed, they go on to seek stronger highs, either from larger doses or more and different ways to satiate their addictions. Sooner or later, they overdo it.

12 posted on 09/19/2013 2:20:49 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: hulagirl
I can say with absolute authority that if you have a passion for food, for understanding it and preparing it, you are much less likely to be obese than the person who thoughtlessly goes into a restaurant and digs into the enormous portions that are provided.

I love food, I love the raw ingredients, and I have made it my business to understand them. I reject a lot of dogma, and am a believer in enjoying food with passion and portion control.

Prepare a meal, sample as you cook, and you won't go to the table in a mindlessly ravenous state. And your family will learn good things, too.

I believe that the problem is not the food show, that are showing people how to enjoy food by preparing it. It is not PC attitudes. The problem is a lack of *enjoyment*--of real, authentic pleasure in food.

13 posted on 09/19/2013 2:37:27 AM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: j.argese

I completely agree and have altered my family’s diet as uch. We don’t eat anything labeled as health food, meaning anything labeled lw-fat, fat-free, low-cal, sugar-free, etc.

I must stipulate though that this is a personal choice and should remain so. Just like I ignore Big Gov’s food pyramid scheme that Mooch pushes, I don’t think that my plan should be pushed either. Then again if I’m paying for the gibsmedats knee replacements and diabetes meds maybe I should . . .


14 posted on 09/19/2013 2:53:05 AM PDT by goodwithagun (My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

What is the pro-Democrat purpose of this article? Set us up for medical rationing based on weight ... food rationing ... could be other points.


15 posted on 09/19/2013 3:14:58 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Think of Christ's suffering.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Obama is a bigger threat than an extra Cheeseburger.


16 posted on 09/19/2013 3:40:07 AM PDT by Venturer ( cowardice posturing as tolerance =political correctness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

So what may I ask is the generation you represent!!


17 posted on 09/19/2013 3:54:21 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I am having trouble reading through the first paragraph/incredibly long run-on sentence! ;) Just shaking my head that someone thought they should just keep adding commas and clauses. GI am glad that I am not reading it out loud! (I’d like to add, my first grammar grumble in 12 years of freeping, so don’t all pile on, please!)


18 posted on 09/19/2013 4:13:48 AM PDT by Rutabega (If you don't want me in your personal affairs, don't stick your hand out for my help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

This is the kind of article that sucks people into the elitist mindset. Ah yes, the collective is fat and we must take measures to thin the collective. Since when is my weight the government’s business? How much taxpayer money was wasted to collect this data? I believe the purpose of articles like this is to create de facto acceptance of the premise that since government is paying for your health care, it has a responsibility to stick its nose any where it sees fit. Obesity now becomes the “problem” we are supposed to “solve” in the spirit of Michael Bloomberg. We must all become little Bloombergs and throw our two cents worth into the discussion.

Genuine public health threats like homosexually transmitted HIV we are not supposed to talk about, but wringing our hands over our neighbors weight, now that’s where it’s at. The left is insidious and this an example of how they work.


19 posted on 09/19/2013 4:14:40 AM PDT by trubolotta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Government approaches the cost issue as if it can be solved by a series of rules. The correct approach is the free market. When fat people pay more for health care, they’ll have an incentive to drop the weight. Right now they’re free riders for the most part.

The cost aspect of healthcare is scarcity. The market always cures scarcity. It is the government that causes shortages.

Nearly all of America’s problems can be solved via the Commerce Clause. States, counties and localities cannot impede interstate trade which is to be absolutely free within America’s borders. Break these mercantilists and you liberate 300 million people.


20 posted on 09/19/2013 4:31:16 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
When fat people pay more for health care, they’ll have an incentive to drop the weight. Right now they’re free riders for the most part.

Bingo! That is the most sensible answer yet. It doesn't require "Fat Police" or government studies. My doctor and my premiums will tell me if I have a problem and everyone else can go about minding their own business.

21 posted on 09/19/2013 4:37:05 AM PDT by trubolotta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: trubolotta

Minding your own business, FRiend that’s a novel idea. If only the nation would put it into practice!


22 posted on 09/19/2013 4:40:43 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: hulagirl
But it seems to me the more you tell someone not to do something, the more they want to do it.

That's where Oprah and her all-star lineup on the O network come in...

23 posted on 09/19/2013 4:47:46 AM PDT by Dixie Yooper (Ephesians 6:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: trubolotta

“When fat people pay more for health care, they’ll have an incentive to drop the weight....”

Well okie dokie...but what about the gay’s — I would prefer to have 10 fat people than 10 gay’s with HIV/AIDS...which group is more harmful to society “The fat guy or the gay guy.”

Will premiums go up for the gay community — Much like smokers. I think that they should have to declare that they are gay so insurance companies know that they are in a higher risk group and can charge them accordingly. Until we address and treat the gay’s like we do smokers then I would suggest we leave fatty alone.


24 posted on 09/19/2013 5:11:15 AM PDT by areukiddingme1 (areukiddingme1 is a synonym for a Retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer and tired of liberal BS.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

Americans are too cowardly to allow themselves the freedom and responsibility needed to fix these problems. I’m serious. Go find your typical soccer mom and tell her that tomorrow the AMA will no longer be allowed to control licensing of doctors or have any say in the number of medical schools or how many seats are available at them. Tell her that half or more of the drugs and devices that are now prescription only will be over the counter and people can buy them from any country they like. Tell them that 40 year old men who have had vasectomies will not be required to pay for insurance covering maternity and breast cancer. Tell her she might have to do a little hands on parenting and make sure her ADHD spawn aren’t drinking cough medicine because it might have codeine in it. She’ll geek on you. Nothing short of collapse is going to fix this.


25 posted on 09/19/2013 5:19:41 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

I’m with you on that because that is a free market solution where there is an overlapping interest in public health. HIV/AIDs is communicable; obesity is not.


26 posted on 09/19/2013 5:20:49 AM PDT by trubolotta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ontap

I am part of the generation that immediately followed “Turn on, tune in, drop out”, so I know the idiots well.


27 posted on 09/19/2013 5:34:13 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

So do you include mommy and daddy in with us idiots??


28 posted on 09/19/2013 5:39:41 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ontap

You are now busy proving my point, that’s for sure.

As it so happens, my mommy and daddy immigrated from Europe.


29 posted on 09/19/2013 5:44:36 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

You are correct. They’ve been indoctrinated by government schools to believe in government. Though their faith is misplaced, it is real. So what do you do?

Incrementally reetablish liberty. That’s why we need to control the Congress for a generation. We can start by dismantling the two DOEs and sending the money to the states as per capita grants while retaining the good things via legislation.

Secondly, we need to aggressively weild the Commmerce Clause to break up government monopolies. It’s easy, if you use the Constitution. Liberals needed nearly a century to put their plans in place. If we hold veto proof majorities for a generation we can do it in 10 years.


30 posted on 09/19/2013 5:45:04 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

So what is your point?


31 posted on 09/19/2013 5:47:51 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ontap

Read the article that mentions yet another poor standard of the baby boomers. My point is - it was not likely something good would become of them.


32 posted on 09/19/2013 5:52:59 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

What the hell are you talking about? What poor standards?


33 posted on 09/19/2013 5:55:48 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ontap
“Even if the nation holds steady at the current rates, Baby Boomers—who are aging into obesity-related illnesses

34 posted on 09/19/2013 5:57:56 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

Baby boomers are causing problems because there are more of us. I guess you choose to ignore the fact that your generation and the next generation are using drugs at an higher rate and are presently on welfare at a higher rate and by the way your generation and the younger generation are the ones who got Barack Obama elected!


35 posted on 09/19/2013 6:04:21 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ontap

Oh sure if you say so LoL!
You have a serious bad case of denial.
But then again, you didn’t even have a clue of what this article mentioned.
BTW - thanks for Clinton and all the Weiners and Filthy Filners that followed his sick example.

There are a few good baby boomers. A few.


36 posted on 09/19/2013 6:13:10 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper
As it so happens, my mommy and daddy immigrated from Europe.

My condolences.

37 posted on 09/19/2013 6:16:56 AM PDT by Stentor ("Liberalism seeks out the eccentric to justify control over the normal." nathanbedford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Stentor

Born in the thirties, immigrated in the late 50’s, the last Mohicans you will ever hear of that came to America to work hard and contribute in return for a chance at the American Dream.

Condolences are for you.


38 posted on 09/19/2013 6:19:58 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper
As far as the election of Barack Obama you don't have to take my word for it go here http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/how_groups_voted/voted_12.html The other stats are just a Google away.

BTW - thanks for Clinton and all the Weiners and Filthy Filners that followed his sick example.

You really are an easy mark...Wiener and Filner are your generation my friend!!! You are the textbook example of not seeing the forest for the trees....It's LIBERALS stupid!!!

39 posted on 09/19/2013 6:21:59 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ontap

My age (48) voted Romney. Your link is not scaled correctly to the topic we are having. And if you want to keep hiding behind the cheap excuse you have problems only because “there are more of us”, then shame on baby boomers for not getting to the polls to stop Obama.

Like I said, creepy baby boomers like Clinton set a bad standard, for all the rest following. That’s been the sad legacy of the baby boomers.

Now the boomers are leading the way on obesity in old age. Great just great.


40 posted on 09/19/2013 6:37:26 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

If you’re going to blame us for Clinton then you are to blame for Obama. You really believe the nations problems are because baby boomers ate to much.


41 posted on 09/19/2013 6:45:41 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper
then shame on baby boomers for not getting to the polls to stop Obama.

Once again my generation are the only ones who were more than 50% for Romney!!!

42 posted on 09/19/2013 6:47:45 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

Not sure who the “we” is that need to have majorities, but if it involves gop, forget it. They had the white, bith houses of congress and the supreme court and all that got us was medicare part D, the biggest government expansion into health care (at that time) since LBJ. They also did everything they could to stop drug reimportation. You don’t need majorities in that fever swamp...you need a tactical nuke or a sizeable meteor to hit during the state of the union. When the whole system is currupt, changing the people just gets you more corrupted people.


43 posted on 09/19/2013 7:03:00 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle

So the food channels are not “food porn”??


44 posted on 09/19/2013 10:07:45 AM PDT by hulagirl (Mother Theresa was right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It is disturbing to compare a grade school photo from the 1950’s to today’s.


45 posted on 09/19/2013 10:39:44 AM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; Mase; El Gato; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Robert A. Cook, PE; lepton; LadyDoc; jb6; tiamat; ...
What is the pro-Democrat purpose of this article? Set us up for medical rationing based on weight ... food rationing ... could be other points.

No Tax-chick, the purpose of posting the article was some good news, right there in the first sentence!

"After three decades of increases, adult obesity rates remained level in every state except for one, Arkansas, in the past year..."

I certainly didn't see or hear anything about obesity not increasing in 49 states. Here's an interesting correlation.

Americans cut back on Soda - Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Dr. Pepper Snapple Group see continued sales declines.

Even though it's from July, I think the story about the virtual halt in obesity is good news, even if the rest of the story was a bunch of nanny statism.

46 posted on 09/20/2013 1:14:49 PM PDT by neverdem (Register pressure cookers! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: hulagirl

The obesity epidemic started at exactly the same time that government decided to get into the business of telling us what to eat.


47 posted on 09/20/2013 1:16:20 PM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Mrs. Hussein’s fascist food campaign has to be shown as something other than a blast of hot air.


48 posted on 09/20/2013 1:18:00 PM PDT by Jack Hammer (American)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
.... the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF).

If this outfit is involved, it is immediately suspect. They don't get involved in anything that doesn't have a benefit to the bottom line of Johnson & Johnson pharmaceuticals because the vast majority of the RWJF funding comes from their portfolio of J&J stock.

49 posted on 09/20/2013 1:20:26 PM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen

Hilarious!


50 posted on 09/20/2013 1:23:42 PM PDT by glock rocks (No comment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson