Why do the majority of the great British public...

kittenkat wrote (see)

Colin McLaughlin wrote (see)

It's easy to overeat. It's easy not to exercise. Becoming a fat slob is the default position unless a person develops a strategy to produce some other outcome for themselves.

But it's not easy to overeat unless you've trained your body to overeat.

But people have been doing exactly that for years! Show the average British person how big (small?) one portion of pasta or meat is supposed to be and watch their jaws drop in disbelief.

I'm not sure about these government health slogans - look at the way 5 a day has been appropriated by food manufacturers. There are so many products emblazened with stickers announcing they contain "1 of your 5 a day" (baked beans, cheese and tomato pizza, flapjacks, carbonated fruit flavoured drinks) that I wouldn't be surprised if some people thought they were getting their 5 a day without ever going near a piece of fresh fruit or vegetable!

...because towelling jogging bottoms and tracksuits are so comfy.. ?

But, look around properly - it's becoming the norm now.  The 'Great British Public' are bigger than they were, and it's only the extreme examples that are now subject to comment.

kittenkat wrote (see)

Colin McLaughlin wrote (see)

It's easy to overeat. It's easy not to exercise. Becoming a fat slob is the default position unless a person develops a strategy to produce some other outcome for themselves.

But it's not easy to overeat unless you've trained your body to overeat.

It's really, really not hard - a second helping here, a couple more roast potatoes there, pudding after dinner, a few Pringles while you watch the tv.  Another Stella

It soon adds up, and the weight goes on, and on.

Portion size is interesting. I know a few folk who when measuring out pasta or rice have way more than I'd ever use even when carb loading.

In fact many have questioned how I can train for marathons on so little food, as they assume due to the portion sizes they eat that you need to consume tons of food to be able to run for that long. In fact I'd say a classic new runners mistake is often over fuelling. I know I did when I first started running.

I say that as someone who is really greedy and a food lover too. I do love to stuff my face, but I do think that running helped me understand what I need to eat to fuel myself rather than what I thought I needed.

I'd also say government information on food is appalling. The five a day campaign is a joke. There is no science behind it and even worse if that five is all fruit the sugar levels would be through the roof. Just look at people having "healthy" smoothies. They may want to check the sugar content of that "healthy" drink. Sure it's got vitamins, but it makes full fat coke look like the diet option.

So a pear, an apple an orange, a grapefruit and a tomato a day would lead to massive weight gain?

No, but drinking a litre carton of fruit smoothie every day (250ml is good for you, so of course 1000ml must be four times better for you) and then thinking that because you've been so healthy with your smoothie so you can treat yourself to a donut mid-afternoon will lead to weight gain. I sit opposite someone who does exactly that every day!

Smoothies are a different matter, but Eggyh73 seemed to say that eating 5 pieces of fruit a day would be incredibly bad for you.

Smoothies are very high in sugar content, so if you're aim is to lose weight they are a bad option. Eating lots of fruit, which I do enjoy myself is good for vitamin intake but most fruits are naturally high in sugar.

The five a day thing falls over as there is no scientific logic that can be applied to it. It's really just marketing. For instance an average sized orange contains more calories and sugar than a two finger kitkat. Is an orange healthier? Well yes, as it provides vitamins that the body needs. Will eating an orange rather than a kitkat aid weight loss? No, it wouldn't. Also look at the marketing hype on many store products that have massive "low fat" labels. Low in fat sure, but for many then go compare the sugar content versus the full fat version. Pretty much without fail the full fat version is lower in sugar.

No wonder people get confused when they are bombarded with "healthy" and by healthy they really mean weight loss aiding products that aren't actually going to aid weight loss.

EDIT: I'm not saying fruit is bad for you. What I'm saying if your goal is weight loss then many popular fruits aren't the best option. There would be far less calories and sugar in pretty much any vegetable than there would be in fruit. The point I'm making is we are selling a flawed concept with this five a day, which companies have picked with and now brand their products with such as smoothies.

Can we start on revolting manufactured 'diet' foods now

I'm in the mood for a good rant

It is easy to overeat, KK. That's the problem. 2000/2500 calories doesn't go far if you're spreading it over three meals in a day. Unless a person is being careful, they will overeat.

Colin McLaughlin wrote (see)

It is easy to overeat, KK. That's the problem. 2000/2500 calories doesn't go far if you're spreading it over three meals in a day. Unless a person is being careful, they will overeat.

But isn't it a viscous cycle, if you learn to overeat you will overeat. People have lost connection with their natural appetites.

Are they a little more substantial than a vicious cycle?

Eggyh73 wrote (see)

I'd also say government information on food is appalling. The five a day campaign is a joke. There is no science behind it 

Actually, there's significant evidence that increasing fruit and vegetable consumption is beneficial to health. The five-a-day campaign is based on the science behind fruit and veg consumption, and also on dietary patterns of the population. Ideally, you'd eat at least 12 a day - of fruit and veg. But considering that the public, on average, only ate 2 portions of f&v a day, then the figure of five was used as an achieveable goal. Better to increase somewhat then set a target that many would see as unachievable and not even bother to attempt. 

kittenkat wrote (see)

But isn't it a viscous cycle, if you learn to overeat you will overeat. People have lost connection with their natural appetites.

Appetite and hunger are actually quite different things. The problem is that people have developed an appetite for energy dense, high fat, high salt, highly palatable, easily accessed 'food'. And they've lost touch with experiencing hunger. If you're interested in the subject, Brian Wansink has written widely on 'Mindless Eating'. It makes for very interesting reading

Also you can't really knock the official 5-a-day campaign for misinformation.  Any time I've actually read official information about it, nowhere does it state you can stay in perfect health by drinking five glasses of orange juice per day.  I presume there are standards applied to which products are allowed to state "contains one of your 5-a-day"?  I don't think it's the responsibility of each manufacturer to label their processed foods with information like "actually, put this down and buy a cabbage instead."

kittenkat wrote (see)

 

But isn't it a viscous cycle, if you learn to overeat you will overeat. People have lost connection with their natural appetites.

I dunno, I think I've got a pretty healthy diet and I'm currently the leanest I've ever been (mainly thanks to a shit load of exercise) but if I ate according to my appetite and for the pleasure I get from eating food, no expense spared, and it wasn't bad for me, I'm pretty sure I would end up eating at least twice the amount I do at the moment.  Maybe other people find it easier to eat according to their appetite and this keeps them at a healthy weight according to their current lifestyle.  Bully for them! 

kittenkat wrote (see)

, it can be as simple as taking the stairs, not the lift in work. I'm not talking about huge amounts of exercise I'm talking about wanting to be more active.

.... or not driving to the nearest space to the door at the supermarket? People are lazy by default... that's why they're fat and unfit.

PhilPub wrote (see)

Also you can't really knock the official 5-a-day campaign for misinformation.  Any time I've actually read official information about it, nowhere does it state you can stay in perfect health by drinking five glasses of orange juice per day.  I presume there are standards applied to which products are allowed to state "contains one of your 5-a-day"?  I don't think it's the responsibility of each manufacturer to label their processed foods with information like "actually, put this down and buy a cabbage instead."

kittenkat wrote (see)

 

But isn't it a viscous cycle, if you learn to overeat you will overeat. People have lost connection with their natural appetites.

I dunno, I think I've got a pretty healthy diet and I'm currently the leanest I've ever been (mainly thanks to a shit load of exercise) but if I ate according to my appetite and for the pleasure I get from eating food, no expense spared, and it wasn't bad for me, I'm pretty sure I would end up eating at least twice the amount I do at the moment.  Maybe other people find it easier to eat according to their appetite and this keeps them at a healthy weight according to their current lifestyle.  Bully for them! 

By appetite I don't mean emotional appetite but real appetite, stopping eating when the full signal hits brain.

PhilPub wrote (see)

Also you can't really knock the official 5-a-day campaign for misinformation.  Any time I've actually read official information about it, nowhere does it state you can stay in perfect health by drinking five glasses of orange juice per day.  I presume there are standards applied to which products are allowed to state "contains one of your 5-a-day"?  I don't think it's the responsibility of each manufacturer to label their processed foods with information like "actually, put this down and buy a cabbage instead."

The five-a-day campaign specifically states that juice only counts as one portion, and it advises to eat a variety of fruit and veg. It's a pretty good campaign on all accounts. 

As for food manufacturers - they have highjacked the five-a-day message somewhat in their labelling. The refer to it as the 'health halo'. Label a product as containing one of your five f&v portions, and people believe it to be a healthy option. The fact that the portion is from a few raisins in a fat and sugar laden flapjack is another matter... And it's not regulated at all. 

OK, ignore the word pleasure.  I very, very rarely stop eating because I feel full. I stop eating because there is no food left on the plate.

Buffets at parties are very dangerous territory for me. 

  And I take your point on food labelling, the (mis)information conveyed can be very cheeky.  Not sure what the answer is other than better educating people about the basics, that "low fat" can often mean high sugar content etc., as people have already commented on.