Noticing very chunky young kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two kids, one has always been slim despite eating a ton (and she’s a girl), and the other (a boy) packed on a ton of weight between ages 9-12 and finally is slimming down by 14. Both kids eat healthy foods, not picky, we don’t drink soda or eat out a lot. His metabolism is just more like mine (sorry, son).

Some of his friends pound soda and spend all their money eating junk at the snack bar all summer and after school and are stick thin. He’s my kid who happily snacks on cucumbers after school.

You can judge all you want, but you have zero clue how everyone is actually eating.

No, we don't know how everyone is eating. We do know there is no obesity in POW camps, so it definitely is linked to eating, no matter what you believe about genetics.

It’s obviously calories in calories out, because of physics, but how many calories actually go out is incredibly complicated because the metabolism is not an engine. And how many calories go in depends on large powder on how hungry the kid is, which owes a great deal to hormones, not just activity level. All of these things can be influenced by genetics (though they’re definitely not entirely heritable — one reason physical activity is healthy is because it can alter those hormone levels even if it doesn’t burn a lot of calories.)

Its obviously part of the equation but its not a 1+1=2 when insulin resistance and other factors come into play. What lowers one persons response to glucose wont reduce anothers. Some people respond best to weights others to walking. I have to track my sugars and walking for 20min after every meal has insignificant reduction but weight training for 20-30 min 1x causes a 16-18-hour reduction across the board when compared to the same meals in a previous day where I didnt weight train.

But I would have never known that if I didnt have to track and record and look at data.

And obese children are already on the path of an impaired metabolism and glucose response. Which is why it's a concern, rather than "fat-shaming".

Youre still shaming children commenting about something out of their control. They dont control their food or the chemicals they ingest or the lack of education and research on placenta/pregnancy. Thats society.

The problem is our food and chemicals etc etc. But please continue to share your "concern" about the overweight kids. Its much easier than having corporations held responsible and our government having any teeth whatsoever when it comes to population-level health.

No, we are actually shaming the parents. But that isn’t “allowed” either because the parents will just give all sorts of excuses why it isn’t their fault .

Yes ALL of the parents of obese and overweight children are at fault and all the skinny kid parents are perfect. Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two kids, one has always been slim despite eating a ton (and she’s a girl), and the other (a boy) packed on a ton of weight between ages 9-12 and finally is slimming down by 14. Both kids eat healthy foods, not picky, we don’t drink soda or eat out a lot. His metabolism is just more like mine (sorry, son).

Some of his friends pound soda and spend all their money eating junk at the snack bar all summer and after school and are stick thin. He’s my kid who happily snacks on cucumbers after school.

You can judge all you want, but you have zero clue how everyone is actually eating.

No, we don't know how everyone is eating. We do know there is no obesity in POW camps, so it definitely is linked to eating, no matter what you believe about genetics.

It’s obviously calories in calories out, because of physics, but how many calories actually go out is incredibly complicated because the metabolism is not an engine. And how many calories go in depends on large powder on how hungry the kid is, which owes a great deal to hormones, not just activity level. All of these things can be influenced by genetics (though they’re definitely not entirely heritable — one reason physical activity is healthy is because it can alter those hormone levels even if it doesn’t burn a lot of calories.)

Its obviously part of the equation but its not a 1+1=2 when insulin resistance and other factors come into play. What lowers one persons response to glucose wont reduce anothers. Some people respond best to weights others to walking. I have to track my sugars and walking for 20min after every meal has insignificant reduction but weight training for 20-30 min 1x causes a 16-18-hour reduction across the board when compared to the same meals in a previous day where I didnt weight train.

But I would have never known that if I didnt have to track and record and look at data.

And obese children are already on the path of an impaired metabolism and glucose response. Which is why it's a concern, rather than "fat-shaming".

Youre still shaming children commenting about something out of their control. They dont control their food or the chemicals they ingest or the lack of education and research on placenta/pregnancy. Thats society.

The problem is our food and chemicals etc etc. But please continue to share your "concern" about the overweight kids. Its much easier than having corporations held responsible and our government having any teeth whatsoever when it comes to population-level health.

No, we are actually shaming the parents. But that isn’t “allowed” either because the parents will just give all sorts of excuses why it isn’t their fault .

Also the title of post doesnt mention parents anywhere....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see some kids at the pool a little bit chubby but within normal range for kids. Have not seen any kids that are overweight to the point it is unhealthy.

Sorry but this is self-limiting. Obese kids won’t have a pool membership and or will refuse to go to the pool.

WHAT?!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's also car culture and not letting kids run around. I've talked to adults who won't want to walk half a mile.

I disagree. You can’t outrun a bad diet.

It takes a LOT of running or exercise to burn 500 calories but less than a couple minutes to consume 500+ calories with the readily available, high carb, high sugar, low nutrient dense foods we have everywhere. It’s much easier to fix the diet. We need to stop feeding children low fat high sugar high carb foods leaving them hungry all day. They fill up on junk and are hungry again 30 mins later because the food they eat is not filling. Like why do schools give children skim or 1% milk? Whole milk is maybe 30 extra calories per serving but it has more fat to satiate you. I’m not sure how many calories a typical school lunch has these days but I’d be willing to bet it’s pretty high with very few healthy sources of fat/protein.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS/Fairfax County Health Dept has a very quiet ongoing study re: BMI of kindergartners. BMI listed on kindergarten physical (entry) form is entered and compiled.

It’s alarming to see obese, breathless kindergarteners and very young children. They also sit out at recess, refuse to participate in P.E. and are sweaty just walking to classes.

I teach kindergarten in a different district. I work with small groups of students so after I pick up my groups, we go upstairs to my room. It's a total of 30 steps or so with a landing after the first 20. I've learned to stop for a rest break on the landing since so many kids are breathless by that point. Plus I've got the kids who still don't alternate feet on the stairs so I have to stop for them too. If I'm the fittest person out of six people, that's shocking to me. I'm no spring chicken (I'm 62 yrs old). My brothers and I would play a game running up and down the stairs when we were kids. It's sad to see these young kids in such terrible shape.

Wow. This is very sad. Everything is designed to let us take fewer steps these days. Moving sidewalks, escalators, curbside pickup. E-bikes as well, and I love my e-bike. I see people drive from one side of strip mall to the other to avoid walking, wait for 5 min at an elevator to go down one floor, entire families using those vehicles at the airport to get from gate to gate. Accessibility has increased for people who need accommodations, but it has also let the able bodied adults and children avoid walking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two kids, one has always been slim despite eating a ton (and she’s a girl), and the other (a boy) packed on a ton of weight between ages 9-12 and finally is slimming down by 14. Both kids eat healthy foods, not picky, we don’t drink soda or eat out a lot. His metabolism is just more like mine (sorry, son).

Some of his friends pound soda and spend all their money eating junk at the snack bar all summer and after school and are stick thin. He’s my kid who happily snacks on cucumbers after school.

You can judge all you want, but you have zero clue how everyone is actually eating.

No, we don't know how everyone is eating. We do know there is no obesity in POW camps, so it definitely is linked to eating, no matter what you believe about genetics.

It’s obviously calories in calories out, because of physics, but how many calories actually go out is incredibly complicated because the metabolism is not an engine. And how many calories go in depends on large powder on how hungry the kid is, which owes a great deal to hormones, not just activity level. All of these things can be influenced by genetics (though they’re definitely not entirely heritable — one reason physical activity is healthy is because it can alter those hormone levels even if it doesn’t burn a lot of calories.)

Its obviously part of the equation but its not a 1+1=2 when insulin resistance and other factors come into play. What lowers one persons response to glucose wont reduce anothers. Some people respond best to weights others to walking. I have to track my sugars and walking for 20min after every meal has insignificant reduction but weight training for 20-30 min 1x causes a 16-18-hour reduction across the board when compared to the same meals in a previous day where I didnt weight train.

But I would have never known that if I didnt have to track and record and look at data.

And obese children are already on the path of an impaired metabolism and glucose response. Which is why it's a concern, rather than "fat-shaming".

Youre still shaming children commenting about something out of their control. They dont control their food or the chemicals they ingest or the lack of education and research on placenta/pregnancy. Thats society.

The problem is our food and chemicals etc etc. But please continue to share your "concern" about the overweight kids. Its much easier than having corporations held responsible and our government having any teeth whatsoever when it comes to population-level health.

No, we are actually shaming the parents. But that isn’t “allowed” either because the parents will just give all sorts of excuses why it isn’t their fault .

Yes ALL of the parents of obese and overweight children are at fault and all the skinny kid parents are perfect. Right?

If you regularly buy your kid Cava, Chipotle, Starbucks, Panera, etc. and don’t ever eat food from home (I know lots of families like this and they are plenty of income) and your kids are chunky - then yes it’s your fault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's also car culture and not letting kids run around. I've talked to adults who won't want to walk half a mile.

I disagree. You can’t outrun a bad diet.

It takes a LOT of running or exercise to burn 500 calories but less than a couple minutes to consume 500+ calories with the readily available, high carb, high sugar, low nutrient dense foods we have everywhere. It’s much easier to fix the diet. We need to stop feeding children low fat high sugar high carb foods leaving them hungry all day. They fill up on junk and are hungry again 30 mins later because the food they eat is not filling. Like why do schools give children skim or 1% milk? Whole milk is maybe 30 extra calories per serving but it has more fat to satiate you. I’m not sure how many calories a typical school lunch has these days but I’d be willing to bet it’s pretty high with very few healthy sources of fat/protein.

Kids also don’t know the difference between hungry vs. dehydrated or just bored. And the parents don’t teach them - they just hand them a packaged snack.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see every obese child qualify for pediatric physical therapy. We did PT for one child (who happened to be obese) and it coincidentally solved his obesity problem. Signing up for sports never did it, because he was not moving his body properly. Once he could move easily he became enthusiastic in PE and recess, and the pounds shed away naturally. I guess extra weight puts a load on the joints of children just like it does with adults.

Absolutely not. The wait times are already obscene. If all the obese kids qualified, the kids who really, really need it wouldn’t be able to access services. Those delays would fall on the public schools. I can’t nope this idea enough.

-special education parent

[Anonymous]

Is this a public pool or something? I almost never see fat kids at the pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach in a high poverty school and by 5th-6th grade, nearly every student is overweight. It's sad. Some of them stayed overweight as they grew but some of them were a normal weight and then just packed on the pounds.

Schools are a huge part of the problem. Our high poverty school has free breakfast and lunch for all. It’s all garbage food. Considering the high obesity rate-kids aren’t starving, they are overfed. Schools need to keep it simple, have a couple heathy options and that is it. White milk, apples, peanut butter/cold cut sandwich. And no chips/candy as prizes and incentives for everything

You just made it clear you don't actually understand what food insecurity is like. It is not wasting away into thinness. It is the inability to afford healthy food. That can come with a lack of TIME as well. Shopping, cooking and food prep takes time, which many struggling families don't have. Have you ever thought about what the food in your house would look like if you have to take public transportation to collect it?

It is not simply "lazy poor parents feed their kids chips and soda all the time". It's much more complicated than that. But it gets you all off the hook to vote for people who might actually HELP these children if you can just blame their lazy, fat parents.

No, sorry, that is BS. Basics are cheap. Eggs, milk, oatmeal, beans are cheap. Immigrants and poor people in less developed countries manage to cook basic simple food on a tight budget. But American poor people can’t manage this. Easier to hit up the drive thru. It’s easy to eat a lot of junk when using the government money and free school food

I don’t know. I remember around 2008 when the housing crisis hit and my husband lost his company and left with some big debt. I could no longer go to the store and just buy groceries without looking at the prices. One time, and I’ll never forget it, I had $18 and some change to get two or three days worth of food. The generic whole wheat bread was twice as expensive as the generic white bread so I got the cheap white bread. I had to think of food that fills a stomach not quality food. Basic pasta with cheap tomato sauce, they had buy one hot dog pack get one free. No snacks or deserts. No fresh vegetables.

This lasted about three months of a very limited budget. I can’t imagine a lifetime. I suppose there are smart cooks out there who can take the basics and make something appetizing out of it but I couldn’t.

Poor quality low nutrient food can absolutely negatively impact your health in the long term. It will NOT, however, make you obese. Unless you eat TOO MUCH of it. Unless you think that a slice of white bread contains substantially more calories than wheat bread? (Hint: it doesn’t- maybe 10-20 calories per slice depending on the brand.)

No duh. But eating a fresh, minimally processed, high fiber diet (that is linked to being fuller more easily) requires money, access, and education. You cannot possibly think that a person who can afford whatever they want at Whole Foods 2X/week who is getting fresh high quality food at every meal, is just “better at not overeating.” The body will keep being hungry until it’s nutritional needs are met. So, after eating 2000 calories of inferior food, *you will still be very hungry.* Whereas most people are not left as hungry following a day of balanced eating with fresh foods. Store bought wheat bread is also leaded with crap, by the way!

Holy excuses Batman!!

Also love how it’s always Whole Foods vs 7-11 with your type. You can get perfectly good, healthy food at Giant, Safeways, Aldi’s, etc.

Sigh. Of course you can. Change “Whole Foods” to the name of any grocery store of your choosing. The remainder of the post stands.

[Anonymous]

I notice that parents who tend to poke fun at other people's kids for certain traits have their kids end up doing the same thing years later. Karma is real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach in a high poverty school and by 5th-6th grade, nearly every student is overweight. It's sad. Some of them stayed overweight as they grew but some of them were a normal weight and then just packed on the pounds.

Schools are a huge part of the problem. Our high poverty school has free breakfast and lunch for all. It’s all garbage food. Considering the high obesity rate-kids aren’t starving, they are overfed. Schools need to keep it simple, have a couple heathy options and that is it. White milk, apples, peanut butter/cold cut sandwich. And no chips/candy as prizes and incentives for everything

You just made it clear you don't actually understand what food insecurity is like. It is not wasting away into thinness. It is the inability to afford healthy food. That can come with a lack of TIME as well. Shopping, cooking and food prep takes time, which many struggling families don't have. Have you ever thought about what the food in your house would look like if you have to take public transportation to collect it?

It is not simply "lazy poor parents feed their kids chips and soda all the time". It's much more complicated than that. But it gets you all off the hook to vote for people who might actually HELP these children if you can just blame their lazy, fat parents.

No, sorry, that is BS. Basics are cheap. Eggs, milk, oatmeal, beans are cheap. Immigrants and poor people in less developed countries manage to cook basic simple food on a tight budget. But American poor people can’t manage this. Easier to hit up the drive thru. It’s easy to eat a lot of junk when using the government money and free school food

I don’t know. I remember around 2008 when the housing crisis hit and my husband lost his company and left with some big debt. I could no longer go to the store and just buy groceries without looking at the prices. One time, and I’ll never forget it, I had $18 and some change to get two or three days worth of food. The generic whole wheat bread was twice as expensive as the generic white bread so I got the cheap white bread. I had to think of food that fills a stomach not quality food. Basic pasta with cheap tomato sauce, they had buy one hot dog pack get one free. No snacks or deserts. No fresh vegetables.

This lasted about three months of a very limited budget. I can’t imagine a lifetime. I suppose there are smart cooks out there who can take the basics and make something appetizing out of it but I couldn’t.

Poor quality low nutrient food can absolutely negatively impact your health in the long term. It will NOT, however, make you obese. Unless you eat TOO MUCH of it. Unless you think that a slice of white bread contains substantially more calories than wheat bread? (Hint: it doesn’t- maybe 10-20 calories per slice depending on the brand.)

No duh. But eating a fresh, minimally processed, high fiber diet (that is linked to being fuller more easily) requires money, access, and education. You cannot possibly think that a person who can afford whatever they want at Whole Foods 2X/week who is getting fresh high quality food at every meal, is just “better at not overeating.” The body will keep being hungry until it’s nutritional needs are met. So, after eating 2000 calories of inferior food, *you will still be very hungry.* Whereas most people are not left as hungry following a day of balanced eating with fresh foods. Store bought wheat bread is also leaded with crap, by the way!

I grew up lower middle class without college educated parents and we had to very strictly budget. My mom added up her grocery cart in her head each week because she knew she couldn’t go over budget. We minimized junk food and takeout because it was BOTH expensive and unhealthy. We ate a lot of old school “meat and potatoes” type rules because mom was southern. No weight issues in our house.

That’s great. It serves the point that “real” food is more filling and less likely to be overeaten.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach in a high poverty school and by 5th-6th grade, nearly every student is overweight. It's sad. Some of them stayed overweight as they grew but some of them were a normal weight and then just packed on the pounds.

Schools are a huge part of the problem. Our high poverty school has free breakfast and lunch for all. It’s all garbage food. Considering the high obesity rate-kids aren’t starving, they are overfed. Schools need to keep it simple, have a couple heathy options and that is it. White milk, apples, peanut butter/cold cut sandwich. And no chips/candy as prizes and incentives for everything

You just made it clear you don't actually understand what food insecurity is like. It is not wasting away into thinness. It is the inability to afford healthy food. That can come with a lack of TIME as well. Shopping, cooking and food prep takes time, which many struggling families don't have. Have you ever thought about what the food in your house would look like if you have to take public transportation to collect it?

It is not simply "lazy poor parents feed their kids chips and soda all the time". It's much more complicated than that. But it gets you all off the hook to vote for people who might actually HELP these children if you can just blame their lazy, fat parents.

DP. I didn't read PP as blaming the parents. The government chooses what it will subsidize in school breakfasts and lunches. For example, large corporate food producers got the government to count pizza as a vegetable in school lunches. It's all politics and it's all about the money. Even if you take the parents out of the equation and the school is providing 2 of 3 meals, the kids aren't always getting healthy food.

On another note, there are food scientists who are PAID to make food as addictive as possible. And it's not the healthy stuff.

This country will never get healthy until food producers are held to better standards. And that's never going to happen.

It can happen. But you have to vote for it. Do you do that? Do you vote for the party that reels in corporations with regulations or the one who enables them to make us sick while they get rich? (I will not pretend either party is perfect at this, but one is certainly better than the other)

Neither party cares about this. It's free market capitalism. Michelle Obama, to her credit, tried her best.

+1. You are dreaming if you think politicians will fix this by holding corporations accountable for our food supply issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach in a high poverty school and by 5th-6th grade, nearly every student is overweight. It's sad. Some of them stayed overweight as they grew but some of them were a normal weight and then just packed on the pounds.

Schools are a huge part of the problem. Our high poverty school has free breakfast and lunch for all. It’s all garbage food. Considering the high obesity rate-kids aren’t starving, they are overfed. Schools need to keep it simple, have a couple heathy options and that is it. White milk, apples, peanut butter/cold cut sandwich. And no chips/candy as prizes and incentives for everything

You just made it clear you don't actually understand what food insecurity is like. It is not wasting away into thinness. It is the inability to afford healthy food. That can come with a lack of TIME as well. Shopping, cooking and food prep takes time, which many struggling families don't have. Have you ever thought about what the food in your house would look like if you have to take public transportation to collect it?

It is not simply "lazy poor parents feed their kids chips and soda all the time". It's much more complicated than that. But it gets you all off the hook to vote for people who might actually HELP these children if you can just blame their lazy, fat parents.

No, sorry, that is BS. Basics are cheap. Eggs, milk, oatmeal, beans are cheap. Immigrants and poor people in less developed countries manage to cook basic simple food on a tight budget. But American poor people can’t manage this. Easier to hit up the drive thru. It’s easy to eat a lot of junk when using the government money and free school food

I don’t know. I remember around 2008 when the housing crisis hit and my husband lost his company and left with some big debt. I could no longer go to the store and just buy groceries without looking at the prices. One time, and I’ll never forget it, I had $18 and some change to get two or three days worth of food. The generic whole wheat bread was twice as expensive as the generic white bread so I got the cheap white bread. I had to think of food that fills a stomach not quality food. Basic pasta with cheap tomato sauce, they had buy one hot dog pack get one free. No snacks or deserts. No fresh vegetables.

This lasted about three months of a very limited budget. I can’t imagine a lifetime. I suppose there are smart cooks out there who can take the basics and make something appetizing out of it but I couldn’t.

Poor quality low nutrient food can absolutely negatively impact your health in the long term. It will NOT, however, make you obese. Unless you eat TOO MUCH of it. Unless you think that a slice of white bread contains substantially more calories than wheat bread? (Hint: it doesn’t- maybe 10-20 calories per slice depending on the brand.)

No duh. But eating a fresh, minimally processed, high fiber diet (that is linked to being fuller more easily) requires money, access, and education. You cannot possibly think that a person who can afford whatever they want at Whole Foods 2X/week who is getting fresh high quality food at every meal, is just “better at not overeating.” The body will keep being hungry until it’s nutritional needs are met. So, after eating 2000 calories of inferior food, *you will still be very hungry.* Whereas most people are not left as hungry following a day of balanced eating with fresh foods. Store bought wheat bread is also leaded with crap, by the way!

Holy excuses Batman!!

Also love how it’s always Whole Foods vs 7-11 with your type. You can get perfectly good, healthy food at Giant, Safeways, Aldi’s, etc.

Sigh. Of course you can. Change “Whole Foods” to the name of any grocery store of your choosing. The remainder of the post stands.

It absolutely does not stand. If it did you wouldn’t have gone straight to Whole Foods in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach in a high poverty school and by 5th-6th grade, nearly every student is overweight. It's sad. Some of them stayed overweight as they grew but some of them were a normal weight and then just packed on the pounds.

Schools are a huge part of the problem. Our high poverty school has free breakfast and lunch for all. It’s all garbage food. Considering the high obesity rate-kids aren’t starving, they are overfed. Schools need to keep it simple, have a couple heathy options and that is it. White milk, apples, peanut butter/cold cut sandwich. And no chips/candy as prizes and incentives for everything

You just made it clear you don't actually understand what food insecurity is like. It is not wasting away into thinness. It is the inability to afford healthy food. That can come with a lack of TIME as well. Shopping, cooking and food prep takes time, which many struggling families don't have. Have you ever thought about what the food in your house would look like if you have to take public transportation to collect it?

It is not simply "lazy poor parents feed their kids chips and soda all the time". It's much more complicated than that. But it gets you all off the hook to vote for people who might actually HELP these children if you can just blame their lazy, fat parents.

No, sorry, that is BS. Basics are cheap. Eggs, milk, oatmeal, beans are cheap. Immigrants and poor people in less developed countries manage to cook basic simple food on a tight budget. But American poor people can’t manage this. Easier to hit up the drive thru. It’s easy to eat a lot of junk when using the government money and free school food

I don’t know. I remember around 2008 when the housing crisis hit and my husband lost his company and left with some big debt. I could no longer go to the store and just buy groceries without looking at the prices. One time, and I’ll never forget it, I had $18 and some change to get two or three days worth of food. The generic whole wheat bread was twice as expensive as the generic white bread so I got the cheap white bread. I had to think of food that fills a stomach not quality food. Basic pasta with cheap tomato sauce, they had buy one hot dog pack get one free. No snacks or deserts. No fresh vegetables.

This lasted about three months of a very limited budget. I can’t imagine a lifetime. I suppose there are smart cooks out there who can take the basics and make something appetizing out of it but I couldn’t.

Poor quality low nutrient food can absolutely negatively impact your health in the long term. It will NOT, however, make you obese. Unless you eat TOO MUCH of it. Unless you think that a slice of white bread contains substantially more calories than wheat bread? (Hint: it doesn’t- maybe 10-20 calories per slice depending on the brand.)

There are foods that low income people count on that have a high caloric count. My small example was about poor quality food not excessive calories but I can see how that could happen over a long period of time. I know quite a few families from South America who are living in this country, some illegally, some not. They are all in good shape, not overweight. It’s more of an American problem not a genetic one.

You’ve never seen a fat Mexican ?

I don’t know anyone from Mexico. I’m not saying South Americans are all thin (Mexicans don’t come from South America). I’m just saying that low income doesn't always equal overweight.