Cost of Food & Obesity Amongst Poorer People

Saturnalia

The very poorest people in this country are most likely to be the young, jobless, childless, single people. That is a lot to be lacking in one life if it isn't through choice. They are not only short of money but also without a purpose in life. It can be very depressing, empty and isolating (I know from experience).

I wonder how many have borderline eating disorders (it's said EDs often arise out of lack of control over your own life and controlling food takes its place), eating out of boredom or for comfort? Or nibbling all day and not having an appetite for a proper meal? Or if they have symptoms of depression where making and eating a proper meal feels like hard work? And again, comfort eating can be a symptom, and people generally overeat the sugary/starchy/salty junk foods rather than healthier alternatives when doing this. Lacking the motivation to go out and take exercise is another symptom of depression, despite the fact that exercise, fresh air, sunlight and just getting out of the house for a bit can help ease it a bit.

Again, I know from experience. Trying to live a healthy lifestyle when you're feeling absolutely carp about life in general is a big effort.

Saturnalia

A._Badger wrote: »

The modern diet is, clearly, implicated. But which parts of it? Atkins might have had a clue and was hounded by the nutritional establishment. But one thing is sure: despite all the tinkering with our diets, all the advice, all the health programmes, we go on getting heavier. And, whatever they like to pretend, no one really knows why.

I know there has been a lot said about the obesity epidemic starting at the same point as the low-fat craze really took off. The low-fat versions usually contain a lot of sugar instead, going back to what I said earlier about blood sugar spikes causing weight gain.

Some nutritionists are now thinking that full-fat-low-sugar versions of foods are less fattening that the low-fat kinds.

I can certainly believe that, going by my own experiences and experiments with my own diet. The NHS still promotes a very high carb diet for diabetic people and I'm not the only one to find that it doesn't work for me. (The prescribed diet seems totally illogical to me - when my body can't process carbohydrate properly, why use that as the primary fuel???)

Sapphire

Saturnalia wrote: »

The very poorest people in this country are most likely to be the young, jobless, childless, single people. That is a lot to be lacking in one life if it isn't through choice. They are not only short of money but also without a purpose in life. It can be very depressing, empty and isolating (I know from experience).

I wonder how many have borderline eating disorders (it's said EDs often arise out of lack of control over your own life and controlling food takes its place), eating out of boredom or for comfort? Or nibbling all day and not having an appetite for a proper meal? Or if they have symptoms of depression where making and eating a proper meal feels like hard work? And again, comfort eating can be a symptom, and people generally overeat the sugary/starchy/salty junk foods rather than healthier alternatives when doing this. Lacking the motivation to go out and take exercise is another symptom of depression, despite the fact that exercise, fresh air, sunlight and just getting out of the house for a bit can help ease it a bit.

Again, I know from experience. Trying to live a healthy lifestyle when you're feeling absolutely carp about life in general is a big effort.

I think that is all very true. Primates (including human beings) are built to be active and to have a purpose in life – whether it is foraging for food in a forest and competing with other individuals, or having a career of some sort in modern human society.

I also think that perhaps we, in the 'developed' world, now require different food than our more active ancestors did (even up to the sixties and seventies, when there were many more jobs that required hard graft than there are now). Jobs that involved hard work probably required people to have a higher intake of fat, for example, for strength, endurance and warmth – though other primates do not seem to consume as many foods containing fat, like meat, as we do. They seem more reliant on vegetation despite their active and stressful lives. Perhaps they are overall less active than humans who work in an industrial environment or as farm labourers, for example? They also have much shorter lifespans than humans, though they don't suffer from obesity!

ILW

Eat less calories than you burn and you will lose weight. Why do so many find that difficult to grasp.

sheffield_lad

Another reason might well be the richer in society are the better more generally educated and most driven (I am talking about self made people here btw), to be successful some may have had to work long hours, have an extended education via Uni and just be more active in life. In other words they choose better food to eat, and burn it via work.

breadlinebetty

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

That's actually a minimum requirement, you really should be eating 9+ a day of mostly vegetables of all colours. Eating too much fruit is bad for you, it contains high levels of sugar and can contribute to developing diabetes.

The food industry also includes all manner of spurious foods that count as one of your 5 a day when you look at the labels! People are being grossly misled!

A lot of vegetables have sugar in them too : potatoes, parsnips, carrots, peas, squash etc......

breadlinebetty

adouglasmhor wrote: »

No such advice from the medical council, the advice is 5 portions of fruit or vegetables a day, http://www.nhs.uk/LiveWell/5ADAY/Pages/5ADAYhome.aspx. Obviously those who are not very bright may get confused by this, I remember all the women in my old office diligently bringing in a bag every day with 5 bits of fruit in it like it was a chore.
A portion may be more or less than a single fruit, i.e. a slice of melon or 14 cherries both count as a portion.

The 5 portions should be a mixture of fruit and veg, as they differ in vitamins and fibre. And let's not forget how the 'not very bright ones' may well confuse their fruit with veg : like tomatoes, peppers, avocados etc......:A

chewmylegoff

i doubt richer people are generally more active at work - i expect a large majority of higher earners spend much of their time sat behind a desk, and without a doubt they work longer hours too.

i think it all boils down to diet personally, and in particular (i) the consumption of large amounts of processed junk food / freezer meals etc; and (ii) the meme that unless it contains a helping of complex starchy carbohydrate it isn't a real meal.

~Chameleon~

breadlinebetty wrote: »

A lot of vegetables have sugar in them too : potatoes, parsnips, carrots, peas, squash etc......

Starch not fructose, different sugar compound.

breadlinebetty

PasturesNew wrote: »

I stare at a swede and think "OK, that's huge.... and I'd have to peel it and stuff... and then what'll it go with...? And that'll take (peeling/boiling/waiting) about an hour.

I then spot a pizza, "12 minutes in the oven".

Good to go....

Swedes aren't particularly huge! And you don't normally stuff them (are you thinking of marrows?)

A swede takes 2 minutes to peel and chop, and just 15 minutes to boil (less in a pressure cooker) Mix it with cooked carrot and a little butter and pepper, and it tastes heavenly......:) Packed with vitamins and very filling too.