Couple set for repossession - BBC

GracieP

LillyJ wrote: »

I am afraid fat people just use it as an excuse to remain fat and blame it on their "bones".

BMI is an excellent rule of thumb, and the risk of things like diabetes go up hugely when you get over 25.

By the way no one has zero percent fat. Do you know what your body fat percentage is? I bet you would be surprised!

BMI isn't a hard and fast rule, and some people are healthy with a BMI of 26, and some with a BMI of 18, but if your BMI is high you are increasing your risk of all sorts of illnesses.

The thing is though, that a bmi index runs on the mean. But very few people are actually average. According to the index I have a BMI of 27, which suggests I'm overweight. But I'm a size 8-10, with a 27" waist, so even though I'm only 5'1" nobody could describe me as overweight.

I do however have 32FF breasts, which distorts my index.

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

GracieP wrote: »

The thing is though, that a bmi index runs on the mean. But very few people are actually average. According to the index I have a BMI of 27, which suggests I'm overweight. But I'm a size 8-10, with a 27" waist, so even though I'm only 5'1" nobody could describe me as overweight.

I do however have 32FF breasts, which distorts my index.

What are you doing on Saturday night? :cool: :rotfl:

neverdespairgirl

fc123 wrote: »

I have just upped our size grades (again) for our clothing so that 12 is the average. Having dealt in vintage clothing years ago, I can verify that a modern day 12 (M + S) is equivalent to a 1960's size 18 at least.

So if you wear a size 12 now, you'd have been in a size 18 to 20 in the 60s? Is that really true?

fc123

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

So if you wear a size 12 now, you'd have been in a size 18 to 20 in the 60s? Is that really true?

Size 18 BUT the clothes were for shorter people. As you are 5' 7" and 10 stone (plus you excercise ...you mentioned swimming once, so you will have more muscle which is heavier) I guess you are a standard 12 (M+ S grade) but in a size 18 1960's M + S dress, the waistline would probably be just under your bust. Proportions have changed too.
A 1950's jacket would be too shallow over your shoulders and too short on the arm length.

BTW you sound a perfect, normal weight...;)

moanymoany

I do not accept that hormones/genes etc are responsible for the massive people from toddlers to adults we see round here.

I was a child through the 50's and 60's and there are many striking differences between our lives and now.

Few families had cars and we walked much more.

You were lucky to have a vacuum cleaner, no washing machine, modern labour saving gadgets and fabrics were non-existant for most people. The washing machines as they became more widespread were not automatic and rinsing was done by hand, followed by putting stuff through the wringer.

The only take-away was the fish and chip meal which were expensive for a family. In other areas there were others, but this was ours.

There was little/no money for sweets/crisps/fizzy drinks. These really were treats.

Meals were potatoes, veg and a small amount of meat. We would have half a pound of stewing meat between four. One sausage each. Plenty of potatoes to fill us up.

Breakfast was usually porridge, made with water and served with milk.

Cake was a treat, mostly we had pastry based stuff like jam tarts. Snacks were bread and jam.

My year at junior school in 1960 had 140 children and not one was overweight. This was all down to what we ate and what we did. There is a huge change in lifestyle between then and now.

Food is so much cheaper, especially the processed stuff. Biscuits and cakes are much cheaper - I would think that the families on benefits today have more food spending power that my family did with a mother working and a grandmother's pension. Few mothers worked full time and most were at home.

The amount of calories we used up just doing ordinary daily things was more than today. On the 1940's Family said that in 1940 women had the need for 3,500 calories a day. Today it is 2,000.

Timmne

RecoveringAlcoholic wrote: »

What an interesting thread.

.... I was just wondering where BMI and reality TV fits into the original post!

moanymoany

Timmne wrote: »

.... I was just wondering where BMI and reality TV fits into the original post!

It fits in with the original post because it gives some sort of explanation for why this couple are in this situation and what lies behind that. The answes are of interest to everyone else and it has caused discussion of our own lives and habits.

I've seen people interviewed because they have been hit by fuel rises - single parents who are saying they will have to live on 'own' brands rather than 'branded' foods. There is a lot of expectation and belief that people have the 'right' to buy a house, to eat expensive food and to buy expensive items.

In fact, the reality of life is that you can have what you can afford to buy. I cannot afford as much as some people I know and I can afford more than others.

The reason so many are in danger of re-possession is that they haven't learnt the lesson - want more, earn more. I wonder how many would be able to pay the extra mortgage if they didn't have large payments on their credit cards and loans. If their goal really had been a house of their own, why the other debts? A person posting on another board has a large debt, + the £30k loan given on top of the 100% mortgage which is about to go onto SVR and they are in trouble. I was interested enough to look at their other posts - planned 'pre-Christmas' breaks, expensive days out at theme parks! They haven't yet learned that it doesn't all add up.

Self-discipline - clearly missing in many people's lives whether eating or organising their financial affairs.

Pobby

Fantastic posts moanymoany !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Guess we are about the same age. It`s so true what you are saying here. My Dad worked and Mum stayed at home which was the norm where we lived. When I changed schools and had school diners, which I recall were really good, Mum took a part time job. Dad wasn`t too happy about it but by the 60`s things were changing and the wives often had some form of employment.

It was pretty standard that many people grew a lot of their own food. Loverly it was.

You didn`t replace stuff just because the ``latest`` was out. I know a number of people chucking really good stuff out because it`s not the latest model.

All this waste and reckless spending is now coming home to roost.

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

A neighbour threw out 2 perfectly good TVs over Christmas because they weren't Plasma. There were good modern TVs and they couldn't even be bothered to put them on Ebay or Freecycle.

Total waste.

When I was a kid I had 3 paper rounds. Morning, evening and Sunday. I was the richest kid on the street and I can remember when the 20p came out and I used to save up every one I got, sad I know, but I soon had enough money to buy anything I wanted whenever I wanted it and that was as a 12/13 year old kid!

As for growing our own food (though my mum would always say we could grow potatoes in my ears 'cos o' the muck), well we couldn't grow much as we only had a front yard and a back garden the size of a transit van, but I grew my own Strawberrys, peas, carrots and potatoes in my Grandads garden and they were just about the only fruit and veg I ever ate, not that there was much. It was the satisfaction of gowing it my self.

I've just taken on a half share in an Allotment to give me something to do at the weekends more than anything else, but I am looking forward to seeing the fruits of my labour, oh, and losing some weight:o

lostinrates

!!!!!!? wrote: »

Yep - any time spent in Europe (not the British holidaymaker areas) and taking a look at the people on the streets will confirm that Europeans are in general in much better shape than the average UK bod.

.

What I notice elsewhere in Europe is that more people are in normal ranges...fewer seriously obese, fewer looking underweight equally. Fasion student cousin felt very uncomfortable on her UK stint as she kept being told she was a bit portly for her age to be in the fashion industry. (about 5'3", a size 6-8).