Why do people around here decide to be fat?

[Roadhawg]

OKC is the first city I've lived in that doesn't have sidewalks. I was born and raised around Lincoln, Ne and they have many bike and walking paths around the city as well as bike lanes on the streets.

[BoulderSooner]

Because we have to drink twice as much beer to get the same affect as everyone else? I blame the baptists...

only 20% more ...

we have to drink 5 beer to equal 4 from texas ..

[progressiveboy]

Those are good points JTF but there are lots of cities that have sidewalks in neighborhoods that were built after WWII.


A lot of this can be placed at the feet of OKC leaders, especially in City Hall. And of course, a citizenry that didn't care enough to do anything about it.

I have to agree. OKC has not been blessed with "true" visionary leaders. I find "generally" that the citizens of OKC are very complacent and do not place a "high" priority on quality of life issues such as demanding sidewalks! OKC residents need to believe and want change. Yes, MAPS was a start but OKC is just now catching up with their peer cities and has a long road ahead of them to truly being a city where outsiders and it's residents have a positive image of OKC.

[Skyline]

Okies aren't just fat either. Oklahoma ranks poorly in nearly every health related category that there is. (diabetes, smoking, drug abuse, teen pregnancy, obesity, malnutrition, dental hygiene, and more). Sure these are all national problems, but Oklahoma is leading the way and that is not a good thing.

[OSUPeterson]

Im too lazy to read the article so Ill through this out there and hope it applies.

If they are calculating "obese" off of BMI, then it can be really off. Technically, I am obese (5'9 - 200lbs) but Im not fat. I compete in triathlons and running events regulary and workout almost every day of the week. What we define as obese is far different than what we think of as fat.

I will say this city sucks on being athletic. I cannot wait to live in a city where there are trails and sidewalks and outdoor events. Oklahoma is getting better yes, but I would love to be able to get from downtown to near lake draper where I work by bike, but there is not a way I can without braving some very sketchy roads with awful drivers on them. Hopefully oklahoma continues to improve, and starts hosting more running events and cycling events and installing more trail systems.

[BBatesokc]

Im too lazy to read the article so Ill through this out there and hope it applies.

If they are calculating "obese" off of BMI, then it can be really off. Technically, I am obese (5'9 - 200lbs) but Im not fat. I compete in triathlons and running events regulary and workout almost every day of the week. What we define as obese is far different than what we think of as fat.

I will say this city sucks on being athletic. I cannot wait to live in a city where there are trails and sidewalks and outdoor events. Oklahoma is getting better yes, but I would love to be able to get from downtown to near lake draper where I work by bike, but there is not a way I can without braving some very sketchy roads with awful drivers on them. Hopefully oklahoma continues to improve, and starts hosting more running events and cycling events and installing more trail systems.

Common sense has to be applied. The BMI chart is not designed for people who are very athletic or weightlifters. However, people often disregard the BMI charts because they've heard others incorrectly proclaim them as inaccurate in all circumstances.

Most people think they know what 'obese' looks like, but they don't. It was when my doctor showed me where I scored on both the BMI chart and with calipers that reality set in. I'm 5'11" and was around 230lbs and by every measure 'obese.' This, even though most people would have described me as simply overweight or 'chubby' (myself included).

I'm 175lbs now and have to workout at least 5 times a week to maintain that.

Once you become aware of your own weight/health then you really notice the numbers of extremely out of shape people in this city.

As discouraging as a trip to WalMart can be, I am always encouraged when I go to places like the downtown YMCA. This morning the place was packed at 5:30am - the cycling, Body Pump and step classes are consistently full. So, fortunately some do really care about their health.

[Bostonfan]

I don't know, I see what many of you are saying about needing more trails, etc... but come on, is that really the reason? I mean, are the majority of fat people going to all of a sudden get off their butts and start running when all these trails are built? Are they all of a sudden going to put the donuts down?

I run in the neighborhood at least 5 times a week, and within the last month, I have seen one other person running. There are a few more that walk, but even walkers are far and few between. When it's all said and done, it comes down to excuses. Really and truly all one has to do is put on his/her tennis shoes and walk out the door. Start walking/jogging until their body is used to it and gradually work up to a run. It really is that simple. No need for gyms, trails, treadmills, etc..........

[Pete]

Bostonfan, it's not about the trails and sidewalks, it's about mentality and culture.

The more facilities there are, the more people use them and that just feeds upon itself.

We all know darn well that the culture in OKC is to sit around, go eat, sit around some more, snack, watch TV, eat again, etc.

I never realized it until I moved to California and then would come back to visit.


One contributing factor is the low cost of housing. Almost everyone not only has homes, but pretty big ones by the national standards. So, there is plenty of space to spread out, be comfortable in your cocoon, have people over, etc. I can assure you that in California, there are way more small apartments and condos and most homes are quite small. So, people go OUT and even when I do go to someone's home, we are outside, not on the couch in front of the TV.

[BBatesokc]

I don't know, I see what many of you are saying about needing more trails, etc... but come on, is that really the reason? I mean, are the majority of fat people going to all of a sudden get off their butts and start running when all these trails are built? Are they all of a sudden going to put the donuts down?

I run in the neighborhood at least 5 times a week, and within the last month, I have seen one other person running. There are a few more that walk, but even walkers are far and few between. When it's all said and done, it comes down to excuses. Really and truly all one has to do is put on his/her tennis shoes and walk out the door. Start walking/jogging until their body is used to it and gradually work up to a run. It really is that simple. No need for gyms, trails, treadmills, etc..........

I think the parks and sidewalks, etc. are necessary. Its about convenience. I think many people tend to get fat because the fatty foods and fatty lifestyle is much more convenient than say getting up and driving to a gym, making freshly prepared foods, ordering less satisfying meals, buying more expensive fresh ingredients, etc.

If the trials and sidewalks add convenience and make some people more attractive and remove more of the excuses, then I say 'do it.'

My wife and I would walk to the store more if we had sidewalks. I also see lots of people using the jogging trails that intersect with S. Rob and Grand. And this is an area you never used to see (non-hookers) walking.

[Just the facts]

Those are good points JTF but there are lots of cities that have sidewalks in neighborhoods that were built after WWII.

...and nobody walking on them because where ever they are going, it is too far to walk. The city was scaled for the automobile, not the human on foot. Your car doesn't care what you weigh, it has an engine that can lug you around. Your feet on the other hand care a lot (see women who yell at their husbands for not parking by the front door).

[Pete]

There are plenty of walkable neighborhoods in other cities built after WWII.

Yes, cities changed with the advent of the suburbs, car and interstates but the point is that most other places are still infinitely more walkable than OKC. I haven't been to many cities that simply don't have sidewalks, which is pretty much the case in Central Oklahoma.

I grew up in the 60's and 70's near 63rd & Meridian and every time someone came to visit from elsewhere they would comment on the lack of sidewalks.

Oklahoma City is way, way behind other comparable cities and it's going to take a huge effort just to get up to an average level.

[OKCTalker]

By almost any measure, Oklahomans are overweight, and would make the worst 20th percentile regardless of metric. Compared with other Americans, we live in virtually the same types of neighborhoods, have access to the same foods, and are genetically the same, so it has to be something else. I'd say it's cultural, and its a conscious decision - Oklahomans generally don't place as high a value on being fit and looking good as those in other states.

You can blame it on lack of sidewalks, or a surplus of fast food restaurants, or the heat, or that we live far from beaches and mountains. Or we can blame it on the man in the mirror.

[SoonerDave]

Oklahomans generally don't place as high a value on being fit and looking good as those in other states.

I think you're almost on the right track.

This society places an immutable value on good looks. We make fun of people who don't "look good." We use posters of people who are "ugly" to discourage them from smoking. We have entire websites devoted to unattractive people so we can ridicule them (see PeopleofWalMart for starters). We see heavy, we judge that they're fat, lazy slobs who just can't stop shoveling the fried twinkies in their cheeks, right?

People have tied this preoccupation with looks to a decision that says, "you know what, I'll never be as good looking as XXX, so I'll enjoy life on my own terms and be happy with who I am." So the very same self-esteem gods to which we bow on the one hand to rationalize all manner of prohibitions on corrective behavior creates a perverse dichotomy in society of people who don't care if they're not attractive, and weight gets thrown into the mix as part of the appearance package. Pleas for people to stop eating food X or food Y are just seen as an extension of the implicit "you're not beautiful enough" morality, and thus ignored, even if the suggestion might be beneficial. And then we label foods as bad, yet we refuse to suggest that moderation in anything is the real key. A couple of slices of your favorite pizza aren't going to make you gain 100 lbs if you only treat yourself once in a while, but if it becomes part of a daily diet, that's a problem. We vilify the food, which is wrong. Look at how Paula Deen from Food Network is being treated publicly for her admission of having diabetes - she was crushed publicly - and do you think anyone cares that she emerged from near-homelessness by starting her own food business when her husband left her? Or that she would be the subject of such pointless judgment and scrutiny? She never held herself out to be a health maven. She just cooked food she and her family liked. Extend that to a broader region, and you have a whole cultural mindset of people who have taken their food and emotionally split themselves from the rest of society, especially when they hear that their food "choices" are stupid/uneducated or driven by lazy character.

The "eat healthier food" crowd has to determine a way to completely reinvent their message to eliminate the condescension and arrogance that comes with every implicit notion of stupidity that is cast every time someone is told to make "better" choices. We've got to stop blaming sprawl, cars, streets, whatever, and start figuring out how we go about undoing a socially engrained hatred of "unattractive" people that now operates under the guise of living a "healthier" lifestyle, thus rationalizing the hatred and meanness prevalent in the industry.

Physical unattractiveness, from whatever source, is the last socially sanctioned form of bigotry in our country. Figuring out a way to overcome that issue alone is the 800 lb gorilla in solving the broader issues of health and diet in our country. We should be offering a hand up, not a hand-slap in the face.

[OKCisOK4me]

I have a bike that I can ride outdoors or prop up on an indoor stand and ride stationary. I walk past it everyday. I think, "I need to ride that thing and I want to ride that thing" but thinking and doing are two completely separate things. Luckily, I have a job where I'm not sitting on my butt all day so I hide what little fat I have under my clothes, lol.

[onthestrip]

I think we may be overthinking the reasons a bit. First reason is most people overeat, and they overeat many of the wrong foods. Secondly, Oklahomas weather for the better half of the year is not very conducive to outdoor activities. Not many people will be on sidewalks or biking trails when it is 105 or 28 degrees. There are reasons places like Colorado and Oregon are some of the fittest states. However that shouldnt be an excuse to being obese. People here need to eat in more moderation and somehow, someway get off their butts and do something every now and then.

[jmpokc1957]

Well, I live in the Portland, Oregon , area which is one of the most bike friendly places in the world, home to vegan this and eco that, innumerable farmers markets and, guess what, we have plenty of overweight people around.

Buying and eating unhealthy foods as well as driving everywhere has been made very easy. Why take the time to prepare food when you can go out and buy it and not even leave your car? You can even have it delivered to your home? Pizza or drive-thru at 2am!

Why buy your water in a plastic bottle when our city water comes direct from the mountains and is minimally treated? You couldn't buy better tasting and cleaner water than what comes out of my tap, yet plenty of people buy those plastic bottles.

What I'm saying is we live in a society where you have to make a choice and fight for it. Society isn't going to make it easy to buck the system as factory produced "food" makes big money for big corporations. So does buying the drugs that are a result of eating processed foods.

Make a choice; you can bring your lunch rather than go out and buy it. Save money as well as eat better food. It works, but it takes some effort.

May get one of our rare 100 degree days this week.

[Skyline]

What if Oklahoma churches (and I don't mean the chicken), were to get more involved in the overall health of the community?

Then again I'm not sure that people would like to be preached to about their health, especially the lack of exercise and nutrition.

[OKCTalker]

The conversation is starting to lean towards personal responsibility. Three more posts and our friends from the Politics section will pick up the scent!

Mayor Bloomberg was right - ban Big Gulps!
No he's not - I want the right to choose!

[mcca7596]

I think you're almost on the right track.

This society places an immutable value on good looks. We make fun of people who don't "look good." We use posters of people who are "ugly" to discourage them from smoking. We have entire websites devoted to unattractive people so we can ridicule them (see PeopleofWalMart for starters). We see heavy, we judge that they're fat, lazy slobs who just can't stop shoveling the fried twinkies in their cheeks, right?

People have tied this preoccupation with looks to a decision that says, "you know what, I'll never be as good looking as XXX, so I'll enjoy life on my own terms and be happy with who I am." So the very same self-esteem gods to which we bow on the one hand to rationalize all manner of prohibitions on corrective behavior creates a perverse dichotomy in society of people who don't care if they're not attractive, and weight gets thrown into the mix as part of the appearance package. Pleas for people to stop eating food X or food Y are just seen as an extension of the implicit "you're not beautiful enough" morality, and thus ignored, even if the suggestion might be beneficial. And then we label foods as bad, yet we refuse to suggest that moderation in anything is the real key. A couple of slices of your favorite pizza aren't going to make you gain 100 lbs if you only treat yourself once in a while, but if it becomes part of a daily diet, that's a problem. We vilify the food, which is wrong. Look at how Paula Deen from Food Network is being treated publicly for her admission of having diabetes - she was crushed publicly - and do you think anyone cares that she emerged from near-homelessness by starting her own food business when her husband left her? Or that she would be the subject of such pointless judgment and scrutiny? She never held herself out to be a health maven. She just cooked food she and her family liked. Extend that to a broader region, and you have a whole cultural mindset of people who have taken their food and emotionally split themselves from the rest of society, especially when they hear that their food "choices" are stupid/uneducated or driven by lazy character.

The "eat healthier food" crowd has to determine a way to completely reinvent their message to eliminate the condescension and arrogance that comes with every implicit notion of stupidity that is cast every time someone is told to make "better" choices. We've got to stop blaming sprawl, cars, streets, whatever, and start figuring out how we go about undoing a socially engrained hatred of "unattractive" people that now operates under the guise of living a "healthier" lifestyle, thus rationalizing the hatred and meanness prevalent in the industry.

Physical unattractiveness, from whatever source, is the last socially sanctioned form of bigotry in our country. Figuring out a way to overcome that issue alone is the 800 lb gorilla in solving the broader issues of health and diet in our country. We should be offering a hand up, not a hand-slap in the face.

+1

[bandnerd]

Portion sizes, the amount of genetically-modified/hormone-injected/high-fructose-corn-syrup/crap-containing food that is out there, suburban sprawl, a lean toward people spending more time on the computer and less time outside moving around; you could change all of this and there would still be overweight people.

I also didn't realize that there were so many perfectly thin, in-shape, healthy people on this board. My goodness. I'm not going to lie, I'm overweight. I know why I'm overweight. I'm still healthy, I move a lot at my job, and I know what a healthy plate of food looks like. But, here I am. I overwork, over-stress and overeat. Am I blaming anyone but myself? No. I'm a workaholic who eats and drinks too many calories. Simple as that. I am still a happy, healthy, productive member of society, though I evidently "choose" to be overweight.

[Bostonfan]

I think the parks and sidewalks, etc. are necessary. Its about convenience. I think many people tend to get fat because the fatty foods and fatty lifestyle is much more convenient than say getting up and driving to a gym, making freshly prepared foods, ordering less satisfying meals, buying more expensive fresh ingredients, etc.

If the trials and sidewalks add convenience and make some people more attractive and remove more of the excuses, then I say 'do it.'

My wife and I would walk to the store more if we had sidewalks. I also see lots of people using the jogging trails that intersect with S. Rob and Grand. And this is an area you never used to see (non-hookers) walking.

Totally agree about sidewalks and parks being necessary, but at the same time I wonder how effective they would be. It's not like there is a big demand for such a thing. Again, it's more about having excuses than anything. I just don't get how something so simple can be so difficult to understand. Obviously there are many people who simply don't give a damn.

[Bostonfan]

Portion sizes, the amount of genetically-modified/hormone-injected/high-fructose-corn-syrup/crap-containing food that is out there, suburban sprawl, a lean toward people spending more time on the computer and less time outside moving around; you could change all of this and there would still be overweight people.

I also didn't realize that there were so many perfectly thin, in-shape, healthy people on this board. My goodness. I'm not going to lie, I'm overweight. I know why I'm overweight. I'm still healthy, I move a lot at my job, and I know what a healthy plate of food looks like. But, here I am. I overwork, over-stress and overeat. Am I blaming anyone but myself? No. I'm a workaholic who eats and drinks too many calories. Simple as that. I am still a happy, healthy, productive member of society, though I evidently "choose" to be overweight.

I seriously doubt you are. And even by the slim chance you are, you won't be for long. But hey, work is more important than your health, right?

[CuatrodeMayo]

Wow.

[bandnerd]

I seriously doubt you are. And even by the slim chance you are, you won't be for long. But hey, work is more important than your health, right?

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. I'm sure my doctor would love to talk to you about your expert opinion sometime.

[bandnerd]

There are many factors to health, weight is just one of them. We all know the thin person who drops dead of a heart attack while out running or who has scarily high cholesterol and the smoker who lives forever. There are a lot of things at play. However, people who are fat are "unattractive," as SoonerDave put it, and so they are easily vilified and made to be the scapegoat for all of society's ills. It's easy to point out an obese person, it's harder to point out the seemingly "healthy" attractive person who actually has a lot of health problems.

But, whatever, I'm obviously going to die soon because I have a fat butt.

Some light reading: Overweight People Live Longer

Healthy obese people may live as long as thin folks

Read the two middle paragraphs: Nice people live longer, and being fat isn't always bad for your heart

Perhaps we should all be a little nicer, and a little less judgmental. Seems like an easy way to squeeze out a couple of more years.