WTF is up with all the obese kids in DC?

[Anonymous]

I am serious, I was just there visiting a friend for a week, and I couldn't help but notice all the little chubbys everywhere. Don't get me wrong, I think fat kids are super cute, but I was starting to wonder if there is something lacking in your P.E. curriculum there. I live on the west coast, and it is rare to see an obese child, and when you do you also notice that the parents are chubby too. In DC I saw perfect model looking women and fit men with tubby little kids. Very strange indeed.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, those are probably tourists. The tourists in DC are much heavier than the natives. (damn, did I just feed a troll???)

[Anonymous]

OP, are you totally ignorant or just trolling? Childhood obesity is a major problem everywhere. "PE Curriculum" ? Please. As if that makes a difference. I teach Pre-K and when I see parents bringing their kids to school in the morning with bags of Cheetos and Cokes, it makes me want to scream. I'm sure they are plenty of fat children in California too.

[Anonymous]

Troll

[Anonymous]

Suck on this- http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/dc-adults-dump-fat-kids-still-plump

[Anonymous]

My friend's been living in Europe for over 20 years now. When she visited a few years ago, that's one of the first things she mentioned.

According to my friend, who's a pediatrician, it's an epidemic. Most the kids she sees (many on medical assistance) are obese.

just another way to widen the gap btw. the haves and have nots

These kids, many poor, don't have a chance in hell of succeeding - if they even make it into their 30s with their health issues.

[Anonymous]

I don't think the OP is a troll and it's definitely an issue worth addressing. I don't think it's just 'poor kids' that are obese. It's across racial/socioeconomic lines that kids are fatter today.

Plus there are certain differences between states. I was just reading an article that Colorado has the lowest rates of obesity? Why is that? Or NYC? Why do people there tend to be less overweight? They must be doing something right that maybe other areas can learn from.

[Anonymous]

OP, It is because of POVERTY. SOMEHOW when you are POOR you get too much food, if they had MORE money, they would be able to shop at Whole Foods and buy LESS food and eat less. Also, they would magically not choose to buy the potato chips at WF, just the Gala apples.

[Anonymous]

I have actually noticed that lots of the white teen girls I see at Tysons are actually quite chunky these days and they don't seem to mind. They are wearing skin tight clothes and short shorts in the summer so I was thinking that the mind shift had started to change and amongst kids there was more "chubby acceptance"

[Anonymous]

OP, It is because of POVERTY. SOMEHOW when you are POOR you get too much food, if they had MORE money, they would be able to shop at Whole Foods and buy LESS food and eat less. Also, they would magically not choose to buy the potato chips at WF, just the Gala apples.

Or is it ??????????

Article in today's NYTimes makes the opposite case.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/25/opinion/sunday/is-junk-food-really-cheaper.html?_r=1

Is Junk Food Really Cheaper?
By MARK BITTMAN
Published: September 24, 2011

THE “fact” that junk food is cheaper than real food has become a reflexive part of how we explain why so many Americans are overweight, particularly those with lower incomes. I frequently read confident statements like, “when a bag of chips is cheaper than a head of broccoli ...” or “it’s more affordable to feed a family of four at McDonald’s than to cook a healthy meal for them at home.”

This is just plain wrong. In fact it isn’t cheaper to eat highly processed food: a typical order for a family of four — for example, two Big Macs, a cheeseburger, six chicken McNuggets, two medium and two small fries, and two medium and two small sodas — costs, at the McDonald’s a hundred steps from where I write, about $28. (Judicious ordering of “Happy Meals” can reduce that to about $23 — and you get a few apple slices in addition to the fries!)

In general, despite extensive government subsidies, hyperprocessed food remains more expensive than food cooked at home. You can serve a roasted chicken with vegetables along with a simple salad and milk for about $14, and feed four or even six people.

[Anonymous]

God, it's like these little fat fucks thing they are humans or something.

[Anonymous]

"I think fat kids are super cute." Really? That may win for most idiotic comment. There are lots of obese children here, but not nearly as many as in the deep south. Some of it is cultural - many of the lower-income Latino families I work with have children who are quite overweight and there seems to be no stigma or effort to change it. Lunchtime at our school is a parade of crap - fast food, processed stuff, bad juice, etc. And despite my best efforts of modeling good eating and exercise habits, I can't say my kids have picked up on them yet. However, while not stick figures, they're not obese.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:God, it's like these little fat fucks thing they are humans or something.

This is obviously a troll and the grammar you are displaying makes me think you are a child also. If not either one, I think this is a pretty rude comment to make about children. This thread needs to be deleted.

[Anonymous]

I haven't read the entire article, but I'll address the last line based on my experience.

Most of these obese children do indeed live in poverty. My students are on free and reduced meals. That means they eat breakfast, lunch and sometimes an early dinner at school. What will a kid pick? a salad or tater tots?

Furthermore, it takes TIME to prepare a healthy meal, even if it is cheaper. There's no one home to cook for these kids b/c their parents are working more than one job and working all sorts of odd hours.

So the Times reporter can do all the food comparison price shopping he wants. WHO has the time to actually shop - let alone cook these meals? Try shopping at 11 pm.

Anonymous wrote:

OP, It is because of POVERTY. SOMEHOW when you are POOR you get too much food, if they had MORE money, they would be able to shop at Whole Foods and buy LESS food and eat less. Also, they would magically not choose to buy the potato chips at WF, just the Gala apples.

Or is it ??????????

Article in today's NYTimes makes the opposite case.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/25/opinion/sunday/is-junk-food-really-cheaper.html?_r=1

Is Junk Food Really Cheaper?
By MARK BITTMAN
Published: September 24, 2011

THE “fact” that junk food is cheaper than real food has become a reflexive part of how we explain why so many Americans are overweight, particularly those with lower incomes. I frequently read confident statements like, “when a bag of chips is cheaper than a head of broccoli ...” or “it’s more affordable to feed a family of four at McDonald’s than to cook a healthy meal for them at home.”

This is just plain wrong. In fact it isn’t cheaper to eat highly processed food: a typical order for a family of four — for example, two Big Macs, a cheeseburger, six chicken McNuggets, two medium and two small fries, and two medium and two small sodas — costs, at the McDonald’s a hundred steps from where I write, about $28. (Judicious ordering of “Happy Meals” can reduce that to about $23 — and you get a few apple slices in addition to the fries!)

In general, despite extensive government subsidies, hyperprocessed food remains more expensive than food cooked at home. [b]You can serve a roasted chicken with vegetables along with a simple salad and milk for about $14, and feed four or even six people.[/b]

[Anonymous]

Simple -- we are rich.