Noticing very chunky young kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is off the rails. It was answered early on that we have many environmental factors disrupting our endocrine systems nowadays. People are more interested in touting their virtue and ability to cook wholesome meals at any budget.

Yeah, the environmental factors are Golden Corral, McDs, and muffins the size of your face

Dismiss all you want. Thin does not =/= safe from these harmful chemicals, many of which cause cancer and other diseases. Thin does not =/= safe from autoimmune issues caused by our food and environment. Thin people should also be asking why we are treated like a nation of lab rats

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand these posters who are not listening to people who have a thin child and a husky child who are fed the same and are equally active; especially the ones who think the answer is to give even less nutrition to the husky child as if food intake is the problem. Read up people; your luck in life is not all to your merit.

Husky is not necessarily obese - but it could be. Parents have gotten the message that they must feed their children without limit. Ellen Satter says so. If it's healthy, then a third serving is fine, amirite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand these posters who are not listening to people who have a thin child and a husky child who are fed the same and are equally active; especially the ones who think the answer is to give even less nutrition to the husky child as if food intake is the problem. Read up people; your luck in life is not all to your merit.

Husky is not necessarily obese - but it could be. Parents have gotten the message that they must feed their children without limit. Ellen Satter says so. If it's healthy, then a third serving is fine, amirite?

No. I'm saying kids are husky even when they are just having the correct proportioned healthy meals, and no seconds, thirds, and desserts. If people keep denying this, we will never get to the core of what is happening here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I offer my kids the same meals. One is very hungry and wants a lot. One is not very hungry and does not want very much. They have similar activity levels. I’m serious — you guys thinks I should say “no you can’t have another bowl of soup, Larlo”?

Yes! And follow it up with "we feed our bodies enough that they take care of us, then we stop."

And then all of us here at DCUM can look for mom’s post when kid starts sneaking out of bed at night to raid the fridge.

Awesome that you have all the answers, though.

So you haven’t even tried it and you’re already making up ridiculous scenarios as to the inevitable, catastrophic results.

I’m not the PP. But I’ve read enough to know that your hypothetical isn’t going to end well.

FWIW, I’m thin and so are my kids. But I’m also humble enough to know that it’s mostly due to lucky genes and resources, so I don’t feel compelled to cast blame on those who didn’t win the same lottery.

So 2/3 of American adults are just unlucky in the genes and resources department? That’s 66% if it makes it more clear to you how massive (no pun intended) this problem is.

I know how massive the problem is because I used to work in food policy! Which is why I know it's a heck of a lot more complex than the CICO some posters on this thread are spewing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is off the rails. It was answered early on that we have many environmental factors disrupting our endocrine systems nowadays. People are more interested in touting their virtue and ability to cook wholesome meals at any budget.

This is where we need more research: the gut and the entire endocrine system. When four people split an apple and their bodies do four different things with it -- the problem isn't the apple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand these posters who are not listening to people who have a thin child and a husky child who are fed the same and are equally active; especially the ones who think the answer is to give even less nutrition to the husky child as if food intake is the problem. Read up people; your luck in life is not all to your merit.

Husky is not necessarily obese - but it could be. Parents have gotten the message that they must feed their children without limit. Ellen Satter says so. If it's healthy, then a third serving is fine, amirite?

No. I'm saying kids are husky even when they are just having the correct proportioned healthy meals, and no seconds, thirds, and desserts. If people keep denying this, we will never get to the core of what is happening here.

JFC. If a kid is obese (or whatever adorable euphemism you want to use instead) then that kid is NOT being served “correct proportioned healthy meals” - even if the exact same meal IS the “correct proportioned healthy meal” for obese kid’s sibling. They are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Why are so many of you having such a difficult time with this? Do you also find it confusing that the typical wife can’t eat the same amount of food as the typical husband without getting fat?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand these posters who are not listening to people who have a thin child and a husky child who are fed the same and are equally active; especially the ones who think the answer is to give even less nutrition to the husky child as if food intake is the problem. Read up people; your luck in life is not all to your merit.

Husky is not necessarily obese - but it could be. Parents have gotten the message that they must feed their children without limit. Ellen Satter says so. If it's healthy, then a third serving is fine, amirite?

No. I'm saying kids are husky even when they are just having the correct proportioned healthy meals, and no seconds, thirds, and desserts. If people keep denying this, we will never get to the core of what is happening here.

JFC. If a kid is obese (or whatever adorable euphemism you want to use instead) then that kid is NOT being served “correct proportioned healthy meals” - even if the exact same meal IS the “correct proportioned healthy meal” for obese kid’s sibling. They are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Why are so many of you having such a difficult time with this? Do you also find it confusing that the typical wife can’t eat the same amount of food as the typical husband without getting fat?

Ok, I call troll, but A+ for effort 🤣

And on the off chance you're not a troll, I’m beyond thankful you’re not my husband.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand these posters who are not listening to people who have a thin child and a husky child who are fed the same and are equally active; especially the ones who think the answer is to give even less nutrition to the husky child as if food intake is the problem. Read up people; your luck in life is not all to your merit.

Husky is not necessarily obese - but it could be. Parents have gotten the message that they must feed their children without limit. Ellen Satter says so. If it's healthy, then a third serving is fine, amirite?

No. I'm saying kids are husky even when they are just having the correct proportioned healthy meals, and no seconds, thirds, and desserts. If people keep denying this, we will never get to the core of what is happening here.

JFC. If a kid is obese (or whatever adorable euphemism you want to use instead) then that kid is NOT being served “correct proportioned healthy meals” - even if the exact same meal IS the “correct proportioned healthy meal” for obese kid’s sibling. They are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Why are so many of you having such a difficult time with this? Do you also find it confusing that the typical wife can’t eat the same amount of food as the typical husband without getting fat?

Ok, I call troll, but A+ for effort 🤣

And on the off chance you're not a troll, I’m beyond thankful you’re not my husband.

Not a troll. Woman. Who does not eat the same amount of food as my husband. Because of course I don’t, I don’t have the same caloric needs.

I don’t understand your confusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you ever watched My 600 Lb Life, a lot of people experience serious abuse as children and it leads them to start over eating as kids. And then they stay obese throughout their teen and adult years too. There’s a lot of physical and sexual abuse of kids going on these days. People, even kids, overeat to cope.

.+1, and don’t forget verbal abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand these posters who are not listening to people who have a thin child and a husky child who are fed the same and are equally active; especially the ones who think the answer is to give even less nutrition to the husky child as if food intake is the problem. Read up people; your luck in life is not all to your merit.

Husky is not necessarily obese - but it could be. Parents have gotten the message that they must feed their children without limit. Ellen Satter says so. If it's healthy, then a third serving is fine, amirite?

No. I'm saying kids are husky even when they are just having the correct proportioned healthy meals, and no seconds, thirds, and desserts. If people keep denying this, we will never get to the core of what is happening here.

JFC. If a kid is obese (or whatever adorable euphemism you want to use instead) then that kid is NOT being served “correct proportioned healthy meals” - even if the exact same meal IS the “correct proportioned healthy meal” for obese kid’s sibling. They are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Why are so many of you having such a difficult time with this? Do you also find it confusing that the typical wife can’t eat the same amount of food as the typical husband without getting fat?

Ok, I call troll, but A+ for effort 🤣

And on the off chance you're not a troll, I’m beyond thankful you’re not my husband.

Not a troll. Woman. Who does not eat the same amount of food as my husband. Because of course I don’t, I don’t have the same caloric needs.

I don’t understand your confusion.

+1. I also don't eat the same amount that I myself ate in my 20's when my metabolism was completely different. Or when I was pregnant and nursing. Calling it a non specific "metabolic issue" is just a cop out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand these posters who are not listening to people who have a thin child and a husky child who are fed the same and are equally active; especially the ones who think the answer is to give even less nutrition to the husky child as if food intake is the problem. Read up people; your luck in life is not all to your merit.

Husky is not necessarily obese - but it could be. Parents have gotten the message that they must feed their children without limit. Ellen Satter says so. If it's healthy, then a third serving is fine, amirite?

No. I'm saying kids are husky even when they are just having the correct proportioned healthy meals, and no seconds, thirds, and desserts. If people keep denying this, we will never get to the core of what is happening here.

JFC. If a kid is obese (or whatever adorable euphemism you want to use instead) then that kid is NOT being served “correct proportioned healthy meals” - even if the exact same meal IS the “correct proportioned healthy meal” for obese kid’s sibling. They are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Why are so many of you having such a difficult time with this? Do you also find it confusing that the typical wife can’t eat the same amount of food as the typical husband without getting fat?

Why are you having such a difficult time understanding that serving one child standard portions while serving their sibling a fraction of the same things might not be feasible?

[Anonymous]

Looking squarely at food outreach/little free pantry and backpack feeding programs. I’ve worked in this area for decades and my smaller scale, hyper-local program provides only shelf stable food, toiletries, diapers, cleaning products (nothing fresh, no perishables, no refrigeration). We have shelves of Spam, canned tuna, pasta, dry cereals, rice, canned and bagged beans, canned soup and stews. Also juice boxes, cookies, chips, the occasional sodas, candy, granola bars.

Backpack weekend foods are even worse and junkier - typically contains Oreos, juice boxes, squish applesauce, choc milk boxes, microwaveable Mac/cheese, peanut butter crackers. The idea was to provide only that child - emergency food to get thru the weekend and require as little prep as possible, assuming the child is unattended. No condensed soup that would require using a stove and a pan.

I am stridently against the backpack program. My charity could and would provide a voucher or possibly even some fresh fruit/veg/bread etc. and or plenty of extra so as to avoid the backpack supplementation. The backpack program causes more problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand these posters who are not listening to people who have a thin child and a husky child who are fed the same and are equally active; especially the ones who think the answer is to give even less nutrition to the husky child as if food intake is the problem. Read up people; your luck in life is not all to your merit.

Husky is not necessarily obese - but it could be. Parents have gotten the message that they must feed their children without limit. Ellen Satter says so. If it's healthy, then a third serving is fine, amirite?

No. I'm saying kids are husky even when they are just having the correct proportioned healthy meals, and no seconds, thirds, and desserts. If people keep denying this, we will never get to the core of what is happening here.

JFC. If a kid is obese (or whatever adorable euphemism you want to use instead) then that kid is NOT being served “correct proportioned healthy meals” - even if the exact same meal IS the “correct proportioned healthy meal” for obese kid’s sibling. They are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Why are so many of you having such a difficult time with this? Do you also find it confusing that the typical wife can’t eat the same amount of food as the typical husband without getting fat?

I find it so interesting (and depressing) how many older women can only see food/nutrition issues through the lens of their own diets and cannot zoom out to any degree and think through issues critically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looking squarely at food outreach/little free pantry and backpack feeding programs. I’ve worked in this area for decades and my smaller scale, hyper-local program provides only shelf stable food, toiletries, diapers, cleaning products (nothing fresh, no perishables, no refrigeration). We have shelves of Spam, canned tuna, pasta, dry cereals, rice, canned and bagged beans, canned soup and stews. Also juice boxes, cookies, chips, the occasional sodas, candy, granola bars.

Backpack weekend foods are even worse and junkier - typically contains Oreos, juice boxes, squish applesauce, choc milk boxes, microwaveable Mac/cheese, peanut butter crackers. The idea was to provide only that child - emergency food to get thru the weekend and require as little prep as possible, assuming the child is unattended. No condensed soup that would require using a stove and a pan.

I am stridently against the backpack program. My charity could and would provide a voucher or possibly even some fresh fruit/veg/bread etc. and or plenty of extra so as to avoid the backpack supplementation. The backpack program causes more problems.

PP and my point is backpack food goes straight to the student with the assumption that there isn’t enough food to last the weekend. This thinking undermines parental responsibility; we the charity want to know if you don’t have enough to get thru the weekend and want to help you plan. I dont like that this removes parental responsibility and think it cultivates a lackadaisical attitude. Typically our clients don’t participate in backpack programs because they don’t need to - we are more comprehensive. Kind of undermines our support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand these posters who are not listening to people who have a thin child and a husky child who are fed the same and are equally active; especially the ones who think the answer is to give even less nutrition to the husky child as if food intake is the problem. Read up people; your luck in life is not all to your merit.

Husky is not necessarily obese - but it could be. Parents have gotten the message that they must feed their children without limit. Ellen Satter says so. If it's healthy, then a third serving is fine, amirite?

No. I'm saying kids are husky even when they are just having the correct proportioned healthy meals, and no seconds, thirds, and desserts. If people keep denying this, we will never get to the core of what is happening here.

JFC. If a kid is obese (or whatever adorable euphemism you want to use instead) then that kid is NOT being served “correct proportioned healthy meals” - even if the exact same meal IS the “correct proportioned healthy meal” for obese kid’s sibling. They are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Why are so many of you having such a difficult time with this? Do you also find it confusing that the typical wife can’t eat the same amount of food as the typical husband without getting fat?

Why are you having such a difficult time understanding that serving one child standard portions while serving their sibling a fraction of the same things might not be feasible?

It’s not just infeasible, it’s against current research and creates unhealthy eating patterns.