[baronWastelan]

Originally Posted by CWMV

The only part about that that is unrealistic is the food prep time.
In an earlier time yes, when one person could support a middle class family and the wife could stay home sure, but now you've got two people working all day-no time to make bread...
Or if your a bachelor. Christ I could do whatever I wanted then!

So you've been swinging hammers all day and pick up your kids from daycare/family on your way home. You have to feed them, its late, and you have very little money/time. Wife has just left for her 8 hour night shift. Makes McD's seem like a good alternative.

Course I agree that its no one responsibility but your own, but next time you go to the grocery store try finding a loaf of bread that doesn't have enriched flower or corn products in it. We've only found one brand in our area that has none of this garbage and its about $5 a loaf. Compare that to $.98 for Wonderbread.

Then look at the food that can be bought with food stamps/Wic. Its loaded with fat, sugar, and all the other crap that you should be watching. But if its that or don't eat...

But I'm with you on the exercise thing. I'm very lucky in that I get a good deal of it at work (Walk 10 or more miles a day) and lift in my spare time.
You know whats really scary is that we have a generation that has NEVER been in shape now raising their own children. They don't even know that they are disgusting fat bodies, its just the norm to them. And now they pass that on to their children.

Here's a question though, perhaps we have some medical professionals here?
Do our weight standards reflect reality?
As an example Ill use myself. Currently I am 5'9 (10 on a good day) and weigh 230lbs. This puts me squarely in the Obese range I believe.
BUT-I only have about ~12 percent body fat (been a while since last measurement so may have changed), I work out regularly and get plenty of cardio.
But every time I go to the Doc they give me the standard fat guy lecture.
So should we really go by this standard, or is a revision in order?

It's simple:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12481427

we should assess risk based on waist-to-height ratio (WHtR); saying that "Your waist circumference should not be more than half your height (WHtR 0.5)".

This is the point at which some action to decrease your waistline should be considered.

My colleagues and I recently published a review of 78 studies in 14 different countries, including Caucasian, Asian and Central American subjects, which has confirmed that WHtR is a better predictor of cardiometabolic risk than BMI and that WHtR 0.5 is a suitable boundary value.

How to measure your waist.
http://www.webmd.com/diet/calculatin...ircumference__

A high-risk waist circumference is:

A man with waist measurement over 40 inches (102 cm).
A woman with waist measurement over 35 inches (88 cm).

To measure your waist circumference, use a tape measure. Start at the top of the hip bone, then bring it all the way around -- level with your navel. Make sure it's not too tight and that it is parallel with the floor. Don't hold your breath while measuring it!