geekhack

geekhack Community => Off Topic => Topic started by: berserkfan on Thu, 18 December 2014, 10:32:59

Title: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: berserkfan on Thu, 18 December 2014, 10:32:59
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-30529791

The human rights folks have won again! In future you will be seeing more 300kg soldiers, rescue workers, professional athletes and supermodels... all protected from being sacked by disability legislation.

That's right folks, fatties must be protected from discrimination. It's official. I can't imagine how it is going to be in future long distant economy class flights, but I suppose since overweight people are already the majority in many developed countries, non-overweight people should also be able to claim protection as discriminated minorities.

Certainly it is very oppressive to be stuck between two fatsos on a trans-Pacific flight. Having flown beside religious Muslims, black Africans wearing traditional clothes, Shiv Sena supporters and more, I don't have a problem with them. But between 2 fatties... HELP! I will really die!!!!!
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: inanis on Thu, 18 December 2014, 10:42:32
Yikes!

While I don't think being obese should be considered a disability, it probably doesn't help to go around calling obese people "fatties" either, even if they are substantially overweight. In some cases obesity can be a side effect of a real disability that you may not outwardly see or notice. I don't know...I try not to be super judgmental of others when I'm not familiar with the circumstances.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: iri on Thu, 18 December 2014, 10:53:08
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-30529791

The human rights folks have won again! In future you will be seeing more 300kg soldiers, rescue workers, professional athletes and supermodels... all protected from being sacked by disability legislation.
are you sure that Denmark's disability legislation protects people from being dismissed if they can't do their work?

overweight people are already the majority in many developed countries
wat.

Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: IvanIvanovich on Thu, 18 December 2014, 11:06:12
(http://www.weirdlittleworlds.com/wp-uploads/2013/06/funny-fat-people-running-bear.jpg)
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: MOZ on Thu, 18 December 2014, 11:07:35
I'm fat :)
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: iri on Thu, 18 December 2014, 11:08:33
I'm fat :)
pics or didn't happen.

i'm a lardass.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Photekq on Thu, 18 December 2014, 11:08:53
Yay for the EU yet again!
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Thu, 18 December 2014, 11:15:35
While I can somewhat agree with the idea behind the legislation, I really don't agree with it in one aspect.  If you can't preform the duties of your job due to being overweight, you should be canned.  If you are military you should definitely  be canned.  It is just a job preformance/ability issue.  Besides if employers can legally not hire someone based on if they smoke I don't see why they shouldn't be able to not hire someone based on their weight.  The reason that some employers (typically hospitals) won't hire smokers is due to the fact that it has been proven that smokers take more sick days and cost insurance companies more money due to long term treatments for something they choose to do.  Granted obesity can have much deeper causes than just choosing to overeat/sedentary lifestyle, if you are obese, you should not be in the military or a first responder.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: dante on Thu, 18 December 2014, 11:43:43
I'm fat and I'm finally figuring out how for me to stay compliant on a diet.

The nutrition world is sending out all sorts of mixed signals:

Paleo: Grassfed beef/butter, non farm seafood, organic coconut oil/vegetables - if you can't do this you suck.
Frutarianism: Raw fruits only, maybe limited lettuce, maybe LITTLE avocado.  All organic or off the farm - if you can't do this you suck.
"Starchavore": via Dr. John McDougall - starch lots of potatoes / rice, no fat/oils - if you can't do this you suck.

"Fat makes you fat" - "yes it does!" "no it doesn't!"

"You MUST eat Organic vegetables - if you eat non organic vegetables you will get cancer!" - "yes it does!" "no it doesn't!"

"Eating fat will give you a heart attack!"  - "yes it does!" "no it doesn't!"

AHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

Is it any surprise people screw up their bodies/metabolisms by every camp having a bunch of 'experts' who have science to back it up?
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Lurch on Thu, 18 December 2014, 11:50:43
 :blank:
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Thu, 18 December 2014, 11:59:10
I'm fat and I'm finally figuring out how for me to stay compliant on a diet.

The nutrition world is sending out all sorts of mixed signals:

Paleo: Grassfed beef/butter, non farm seafood, organic coconut oil/vegetables - if you can't do this you suck.
Frutarianism: Raw fruits only, maybe limited lettuce, maybe LITTLE avocado.  All organic or off the farm - if you can't do this you suck.
"Starchavore": via Dr. John McDougall - starch lots of potatoes / rice, no fat/oils - if you can't do this you suck.

"Fat makes you fat" - "yes it does!" "no it doesn't!"

"You MUST eat Organic vegetables - if you eat non organic vegetables you will get cancer!" - "yes it does!" "no it doesn't!"

"Eating fat will give you a heart attack!"  - "yes it does!" "no it doesn't!"

AHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

Is it any surprise people screw up their bodies/metabolisms by every camp having a bunch of 'experts' who have science to back it up?

Just eat a well balanced diet of everything.  You need fats, oil, sugars, all the "bad stuff".  Just less of it.  And try and minimize processed **** like velveta and cheese slices.  Go for the blocks of the real stuff.   That kind of thing.  Also, don't lead a sedantary life style.  Just get up, get outside and do stuff.  Not trying to preach or **** down your throat, I am just a very blunt person.  Some people it can be very difficult if genetics are playing a factor, which I believe it can and does in some people.

I would say 99% of those diet quacks don't have science, they have psuedoscience.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: pichu23 on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:07:05
Yay for the EU yet again!

 ;D i guess 1 thing is you guys take too much sugary stuff.
not everyone but like my uni mate, he puts like 5 packets of sugar in 1 cup of tea.  :-X
another dude takes like 2 bottles of dr peppers within a few hours.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: dante on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:08:54
Also, don't lead a sedantary life style.  Just get up, get outside and do stuff.  Not trying to preach or **** down your throat, I am just a very blunt person.  Some people it can be very difficult if genetics are playing a factor, which I believe it can and does in some people.

I'm going to keep it real: Some people are sedentary and LIKE it. You are not going to change these people - and they are not going to be compliant at whatever the mainstream throws at them.

Basically someone with some STRONG nutritional and science background needs to come out and say: OK you are going to sit on your fat ass?  FINE.  Let's develop some sort of nutritional plan that will A) Keep you satisfied B) reduce the calories to a point that the scales needle will move while doing nothing.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:15:18
Also, don't lead a sedantary life style.  Just get up, get outside and do stuff.  Not trying to preach or **** down your throat, I am just a very blunt person.  Some people it can be very difficult if genetics are playing a factor, which I believe it can and does in some people.

I'm going to keep it real: Some people are sedentary and LIKE it. You are not going to change these people - and they are not going to be compliant at whatever the mainstream throws at them.

Basically someone with some STRONG nutritional and science background needs to come out and say: OK you are going to sit on your fat ass?  FINE.  Let's develop some sort of nutritional plan that will A) Keep you satisfied B) reduce the calories to a point that the scales needle will move while doing nothing.

I have seen that done on discovery shows but that was for very extreme cases.  We are talking over 500 pounds to lose.  Their diet was very carefully monitored by doctors and nutrition experts.  They were consuming in the realm of only 500 calories a day.  Eating that few calories isn't the main issue.  Though willpower to not eat more than that is difficult.  The biggest issue is getting the proper nutrition at that few of calories.  Or you could just get up and move.

I do feel bad for people that are legitimatly trying to lose weight but it is proving difficult for what ever reason if it is an honest legitimate attempt.  But for those that the only thing for exercise walking to the car, to the office from the car and a return trip home, I don't have much sympathy for them.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:17:32
Well the  " Input-Output " camp is the safest camp if your goal is to tame the "Fatness"..


As far as Organic, BPA-Free, vegan,  That's all highly subjective stuff...



Now, Low Carb.. . this has to do with the psychological component of "Food-addiction"  rather than an energy source argument..

Because refined carbs are typically delicious, it offers immense "satiation, a neurochemical high", it is easy to Overeat..

But that's not the fault of carbs,  that's a failure of our reward circuitry to cope with the abundance of 21st century life..

(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/full-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862505)

Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: dante on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:22:17
No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:24:17
No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.

I believe it has to do with the body going into starvation mode and then using muscle for energy instead of fat and storing as many of the calories as fat for emergency reserves.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: dante on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:26:24
No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.

I believe it has to do with the body going into starvation mode and then using muscle for energy instead of fat and storing as many of the calories as fat for emergency reserves.


Yes - I heard about losing muscle, but so what?  As long as one moves around you should retain the muscle you must have.  And once the weight is off you could always add it back in.  In the case of sedentary person they may not need very much muscle at all.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: dante on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:28:30
Just found a couple videos of someone who might be dead soon:

If the videos don't appear, links:




Thoughts?
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:28:49
No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.

I believe it has to do with the body going into starvation mode and then using muscle for energy instead of fat and storing as many of the calories as fat for emergency reserves.


Yes - I heard about losing muscle, but so what?  As long as one moves around you should retain the muscle you must have.  And once the weight is off you could always add it back in.  In the case of sedentary person they may not need very much muscle at all.

The problem is then you don't have the energy to even move enough to retain muscle mass.  It also affects mental stability and alertness.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: inanis on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:37:04
No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.
I think they are coaxed into using it, but that is a very, very hard thing to do. I have a person who is very close to me that was extremely overweight - like 200lbs overweight. They had to have surgery at one point and couldn't until some of the weight was lost because of the risk of going under anesthesia. So far they lost about 100lbs with the help of a nutritionist, and it has been challenging - the surgery was also a success, it just took a while to get it done.

The trouble is (at least in my example) that they thought about food constantly. You have to train yourself to not eat. That is extraordinarily difficult. To go from eating pretty much anything, and pretty much all the time, to a 1400 calorie a day "healthy" diet is not an easy thing to do.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:44:12
No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.



Fat is not ONLY an energy store..  it's also the lubrication for your joints, it's also insulation for your body..

The reason the body is not wired to just BURN IT OFF, is because during our evolution in the great-outdoors,   It was RARELY if ever possible to reach Obesity levels of Biggnness..


Our body is designed to manage total activity level (calories out), power requirement (rate of spontaneous output), and Storage (glycogen store for fast energy, and latent fat)

So you see it's a much more complex management system then simply.. let's use the-FAT..

THe body is tasked to HOLD ON to as much as possible not the other way around... again, a relic from our evolution during ages of sparse calories..


The body is also HIGHLY adept at power consumption..  It will also enter starvation mode at the drop of a hat, because  THAT's how it happens in nature.. you get a good week of eats,  then suddenly, OH-**** half your tribe dies..

In starvation mode, your behavior changes, you become lethargic, physically and mentally.. this greatly reduces activity level.. thus greatly reducing your energy use.. 

and because you're NOT MOVING,  your body will then decide, I don't need these muscles.. they're useless..   

Without activity stimulation, your muscle decides, I need to cut my expenditure..



So you see..  What's missing from all of these diets is emphasis on ACTIVITY level..



The modern conundrum is that activity level has change so drastically from 5-8 hours a day of HARD labor to.. sit on a wheely chair moving your thumbs..

Your body was designed for running and jumping,  but what do we do most of the time..







 
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Computer-Lab in Basement on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:45:31
Solution:

Send all the obese people to a deserted island in the middle of the Pacific, and make them survive on nothing but the native fruit and wildlife for 6 months.

Then go retrieve them from said island, and they'll be less fat.

By obese, I mean 200+lbs overweight... normal fat people are just fat.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Findecanor on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:45:39
The reason that some employers (typically hospitals) won't hire smokers is due to the fact that it has been proven that smokers take more sick days and cost insurance companies more money due to long term treatments for something they choose to do.
I won't believe that is the only reason. Hospitals are very special places when it comes to smoking. Hospitals have to care for patients who are hyper-sensitive to cigarette smoke, even that which is stuck in smokers clothes and lungs. A nurse that takes several short smoking breaks during the day can therefore not tend those patients.

Also, smoking can make surgery and recovery more difficult - and having hospital staff smoking would set a bad example for those who are trying to abstain.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: dante on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:46:42
You see the problem..   Your body was designed for running and jumping,  but what do we do most of the time..

Surfing the web for food porn and keyboards?

Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 18 December 2014, 12:47:03
Solution:

Send all the obese people to a deserted island in the middle of the Pacific, and make them survive on nothing but the native fruit and wildlife for 6 months.

Then go retrieve them from said island, and they'll be less fat.

No, most of them would be dead.  I guess that does count as less fat.. but, it's not the solution .
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Computer-Lab in Basement on Thu, 18 December 2014, 13:14:58
Solution:

Send all the obese people to a deserted island in the middle of the Pacific, and make them survive on nothing but the native fruit and wildlife for 6 months.

Then go retrieve them from said island, and they'll be less fat.

No, most of them would be dead.  I guess that does count as less fat.. but, it's not the solution .

Amended solution: make it 30 days instead of 6 months.

Increases the chance of survival.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 18 December 2014, 13:20:49
Solution:

Send all the obese people to a deserted island in the middle of the Pacific, and make them survive on nothing but the native fruit and wildlife for 6 months.

Then go retrieve them from said island, and they'll be less fat.

No, most of them would be dead.  I guess that does count as less fat.. but, it's not the solution .

Amended solution: make it 30 days instead of 6 months.

Increases the chance of survival.

even 30 days would be a stretch..  I guess if we give them the water they need it may be possible..


But seriously.. the Professional Fat Camps for the rich people, do the lettuce thing..

You can drink as much water and eat as much lettuce as you want..


I think people should just do that.. if they have a fervent enough desire to drop weight..
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: berserkfan on Thu, 18 December 2014, 13:40:47
Just found a couple videos of someone who might be dead soon:

If the videos don't appear, links:




Thoughts?


I hear echoes of the Marlboro Man in this Butter Bob Briggs.

I strongly suspect he is funded by the US Dairy industry.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 18 December 2014, 13:45:00
This guy wants you to eat 70%  fat ?

so.. yea..  I've tried eating a stick of butter.. Tp4 crazy  like that..  and it's good going down..

but... the 3rd bite.. is kinda hard.. and  if you eat 1.5-2 sticks.. it makes you dizzy. I felt like I was being poisoned. Which scientifically is my liver is going, Ffff you, what are you doing...
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: berserkfan on Thu, 18 December 2014, 13:51:24
No, most of them would be dead.  I guess that does count as less fat.. but, it's not the solution .

Amended solution: make it 30 days instead of 6 months.

Increases the chance of survival.
[/quote]

Nonsense, these guys aren't going to be dead.

They've got like 200-600lbs of fat and water stored in their bodies. Should be enough to survive for months with minimal rainwater and just a bit of sugar (from fruits) to start the calories burning.

After they've lost that weight they will be light enough to do things like climb trees and pluck fruits.

Anyway one less fat guy is one less person taking up too much space on a 16 hour trans Pacific flight. As mean and nasty as that sounds, it is a good thing. And those people who don't think it a good thing, I'm more than happy to change seats with you on that 16 hour trans Pacific flight. Put your politically correct ass where your politically correct mouth is, and see if you still want to argue for fat being a disability and to defend fat rights.
 :p
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: katushkin on Thu, 18 December 2014, 13:56:16
You won't have fat soldiers, rescue workers or athletes.

All of these people need to be fit for their "job", and being a soldier is not your usual job. All of the standards that apply to regular jobs do not apply to working in the military. If you don't pass bi-annual fitness assesments in the army, you have 3 months to pass them, otherwise you get kicked out. Plain and simple.

What this is saying is that you can't be fired for being fat. Just like you can't be fired for being disabled in any way, or being gay or trans or w-e. You can still be fired for being unable to do your job. Not being able to carry someone out of a burning building because you get out of breath getting out of the truck will mean you get moved to an office or laid off.

TL;DR - Can't do your job? You're fired.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: HoffmanMyster on Thu, 18 December 2014, 13:57:27
Also, don't lead a sedantary life style.  Just get up, get outside and do stuff.  Not trying to preach or **** down your throat, I am just a very blunt person.  Some people it can be very difficult if genetics are playing a factor, which I believe it can and does in some people.

I'm going to keep it real: Some people are sedentary and LIKE it. You are not going to change these people

Then those people will likely have a much harder time losing weight and getting healthy.  I like to eat foods that are really unhealthy.  But if I'm trying to lose weight?  Yeah, I'm gonna cut back.  Because that's what I need to do.  Why should getting up and moving be any different?  If it were easy, people wouldn't be overweight.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 18 December 2014, 13:58:21
No, most of them would be dead.  I guess that does count as less fat.. but, it's not the solution .


Amended solution: make it 30 days instead of 6 months.

Increases the chance of survival.

Nonsense, these guys aren't going to be dead.

They've got like 200-600lbs of fat and water stored in their bodies. Should be enough to survive for months with minimal rainwater and just a bit of sugar (from fruits) to start the calories burning.

After they've lost that weight they will be light enough to do things like climb trees and pluck fruits.

Anyway one less fat guy is one less person taking up too much space on a 16 hour trans Pacific flight. As mean and nasty as that sounds, it is a good thing. And those people who don't think it a good thing, I'm more than happy to change seats with you on that 16 hour trans Pacific flight. Put your politically correct ass where your politically correct mouth is, and see if you still want to argue for fat being a disability and to defend fat rights.
 :p

um... I'm pretty sure that if we're talking about Really big people..  rapid weightloss through "starvation" will cause necrosis of their remaining skin tissue and lead to infection.. and  yea, they're probably gonna die..
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 18 December 2014, 14:00:41
Also, don't lead a sedantary life style.  Just get up, get outside and do stuff.  Not trying to preach or **** down your throat, I am just a very blunt person.  Some people it can be very difficult if genetics are playing a factor, which I believe it can and does in some people.

I'm going to keep it real: Some people are sedentary and LIKE it. You are not going to change these people

Then those people will likely have a much harder time losing weight and getting healthy.  I like to eat foods that are really unhealthy.  But if I'm trying to lose weight?  Yeah, I'm gonna cut back.  Because that's what I need to do.  Why should getting up and moving be any different?  If it were easy, people wouldn't be overweight.

If I got out of my computer chair.. WTF would I do.. seriously.. WAHT... tell me..........(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/payup-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862514)
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: inanis on Thu, 18 December 2014, 14:06:34
This guy wants you to eat 70%  fat ?

so.. yea..  I've tried eating a stick of butter.. Tp4 crazy  like that..  and it's good going down..

but... the 3rd bite.. is kinda hard.. and  if you eat 1.5-2 sticks.. it makes you dizzy. I felt like I was being poisoned. Which scientifically is my liver is going, Ffff you, what are you doing...
Who the hell eats two sticks of butter! You are crazy, man!
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Thu, 18 December 2014, 14:10:44
Also, don't lead a sedantary life style.  Just get up, get outside and do stuff.  Not trying to preach or **** down your throat, I am just a very blunt person.  Some people it can be very difficult if genetics are playing a factor, which I believe it can and does in some people.

I'm going to keep it real: Some people are sedentary and LIKE it. You are not going to change these people

Then those people will likely have a much harder time losing weight and getting healthy.  I like to eat foods that are really unhealthy.  But if I'm trying to lose weight?  Yeah, I'm gonna cut back.  Because that's what I need to do.  Why should getting up and moving be any different?  If it were easy, people wouldn't be overweight.

If I got out of my computer chair.. WTF would I do.. seriously.. WAHT... tell me..........
Show Image
(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/payup-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862514)


I keep hearing the resolution and frame rates outside are insane.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 18 December 2014, 14:19:48
Also, don't lead a sedantary life style.  Just get up, get outside and do stuff.  Not trying to preach or **** down your throat, I am just a very blunt person.  Some people it can be very difficult if genetics are playing a factor, which I believe it can and does in some people.

I'm going to keep it real: Some people are sedentary and LIKE it. You are not going to change these people

Then those people will likely have a much harder time losing weight and getting healthy.  I like to eat foods that are really unhealthy.  But if I'm trying to lose weight?  Yeah, I'm gonna cut back.  Because that's what I need to do.  Why should getting up and moving be any different?  If it were easy, people wouldn't be overweight.

If I got out of my computer chair.. WTF would I do.. seriously.. WAHT... tell me..........
Show Image
(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/payup-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862514)


I keep hearing the resolution and frame rates outside are insane.

(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/uhuhuh-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862523)

Yea, but I don't have cheat code to get BFG, and all the NPCs have invincibility..
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 18 December 2014, 14:20:32
This guy wants you to eat 70%  fat ?

so.. yea..  I've tried eating a stick of butter.. Tp4 crazy  like that..  and it's good going down..

but... the 3rd bite.. is kinda hard.. and  if you eat 1.5-2 sticks.. it makes you dizzy. I felt like I was being poisoned. Which scientifically is my liver is going, Ffff you, what are you doing...
Who the hell eats two sticks of butter! You are crazy, man!

I do lots of things for science. .you're welcome.. (http://s4.postimage.org/1gcnakles/th_46.gif)
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: berserkfan on Thu, 18 December 2014, 14:27:30
This guy wants you to eat 70%  fat ?

so.. yea..  I've tried eating a stick of butter.. Tp4 crazy  like that..  and it's good going down..

but... the 3rd bite.. is kinda hard.. and  if you eat 1.5-2 sticks.. it makes you dizzy. I felt like I was being poisoned. Which scientifically is my liver is going, Ffff you, what are you doing...
Who the hell eats two sticks of butter! You are crazy, man!

That is why I am sure that guy was funded by the dairy industry.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tjcaustin on Thu, 18 December 2014, 15:07:41
Congrats for becoming number one gh troll na.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: katushkin on Thu, 18 December 2014, 15:15:32
Congrats for becoming number one gh troll na.

Woah woah woah.

Joint first.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: jacobolus on Thu, 18 December 2014, 15:33:23
berserkfan: do you really hate everyone, or are you just a (kinda boring) troll?

(as compared to e.g. MS Windows, who is a highly entertaining troll)
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: IPT on Thu, 18 December 2014, 15:33:47
Congrats for becoming number one gh troll na.

psh, that's like becoming Grand Master in SEA.
Talk to me when you're number one KR.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: rowdy on Thu, 18 December 2014, 16:06:18
Anyone read Incompetence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incompetence_(novel))?

Also ...

[attachimg=1]
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: iri on Fri, 19 December 2014, 03:18:00
Amended solution: make it 30 days instead of 6 months.

Increases the chance of survival.

Nonsense, these guys aren't going to be dead.

They've got like 200-600lbs of fat and water stored in their bodies. Should be enough to survive for months with minimal rainwater and just a bit of sugar (from fruits) to start the calories burning.

After they've lost that weight they will be light enough to do things like climb trees and pluck fruits.

Anyway one less fat guy is one less person taking up too much space on a 16 hour trans Pacific flight. As mean and nasty as that sounds, it is a good thing. And those people who don't think it a good thing, I'm more than happy to change seats with you on that 16 hour trans Pacific flight. Put your politically correct ass where your politically correct mouth is, and see if you still want to argue for fat being a disability and to defend fat rights.
 :p
Not enough "lah" in this post.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: noisyturtle on Fri, 19 December 2014, 03:38:51
No, most of them would be dead.  I guess that does count as less fat.. but, it's not the solution .

Amended solution: make it 30 days instead of 6 months.

Increases the chance of survival.

Nonsense, these guys aren't going to be dead.

They've got like 200-600lbs of fat and water stored in their bodies. Should be enough to survive for months with minimal rainwater and just a bit of sugar (from fruits) to start the calories burning.

After they've lost that weight they will be light enough to do things like climb trees and pluck fruits.

Anyway one less fat guy is one less person taking up too much space on a 16 hour trans Pacific flight. As mean and nasty as that sounds, it is a good thing. And those people who don't think it a good thing, I'm more than happy to change seats with you on that 16 hour trans Pacific flight. Put your politically correct ass where your politically correct mouth is, and see if you still want to argue for fat being a disability and to defend fat rights.
 :p
Not enough "lah" in this post.
[/quote]

There was a study where an obese man lived off his body mass for something like 9 months.
Title: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: YoungMichael88 on Fri, 19 December 2014, 04:17:20
No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.
Well, here's a real life testimonial. 5 months ago I changed the way I eat completely and I log everything into myfitnesspal. I was fat. Still am. But I'm down 70 pounds so far.
You asked why calories matter if you hit your nutritional needs like carbs/fat/protein. Well, those three categories are the most important and they work based on percentages for each meal. For me it's 50% carbs, 30% fat and 20% protein. This is what having a "balanced diet" is. You can eat all day every day and consume massive amounts of calories and still hit the proper percentages for a "balanced diet". But you'll gain a ton of weight if you do that.
So you still need to know how many calories your body will burn at rest. This is called the basal metabolic rate. Any calories burned from cardio or other exercise need to be added to this BMR number and then you have to eat less than that to lose weight. But not too much less or your body kind of panics thinking its starving and begins to store fat it thinks it needs and eats away your muscle. It's your bodies way of prioritizing I guess. So even tho there is a bunch of stored energy as fat, the body looks at that as kind of a supplementary source rather than a primary source for those days where you don't eat quite enough.
My suggested calorie consumption before any exercise is 1700 a day to maintain a 2 pound per week weight loss. That 1700 will get lower and lower as I get lighter (I started at something like 2500 calories a day). On the flip side, if I don't eat more than 1200 a day, I get a warning that my body might shift into the dreaded "starvation mode".

Hopefully this answers your question.

Also if anyone is interested in knowing what foods I cut out, here it is. Cutting all this stuff out is not necessary in most cases but I do it anyway. It's very hard and it works very well (for me).

-No dairy
-No bread, pasta, or grains
-No caffeine
-No added salt
-No processed foods of any kind
-No sugar that isn't natural in fruits etc. So no junk food, period.
-And only eat red meat on occasion.

I get my calcium and other vitamins in other ways.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: berserkfan on Fri, 19 December 2014, 05:31:33
Well, here's a real life testimonial. 5 months ago I changed the way I eat completely and I log everything into myfitnesspal. I was fat. Still am. But I'm down 70 pounds so far.
You asked why calories matter if you hit your nutritional needs like carbs/fat/protein. Well, those three categories are the most important and they work based on percentages for each meal. For me it's 50% carbs, 30% fat and 20% protein. This is what having a "balanced diet" is. You can eat all day every day and consume massive amounts of calories and still hit the proper percentages for a "balanced diet". But you'll gain a ton of weight if you do that.
So you still need to know how many calories your body will burn at rest. This is called the basal metabolic rate. Any calories burned from cardio or other exercise need to be added to this BMR number and then you have to eat less than that to lose weight.
My suggested calorie consumption before any exercise is 1700 a day to maintain a 2 pound per week weight loss. That 1700 will get lower and lower as I get lighter (I started at something like 2500 calories a day).

Hopefully this answers your question.

Also if anyone is interested in knowing what foods I cut out, here it is. Cutting all this stuff out is not necessary in most cases but I do it anyway. It's very hard and it works very well (for me).

-No dairy
-No bread, pasta, or grains
-No caffeine
-No added salt
-No processed foods of any kind
-No sugar that isn't natural in fruits etc. So no junk food, period.
-And only eat red meat on occasion.

I get my calcium and other vitamins in other ways.
[/quote]

Big applause for discipline. And if you're ok after losing 70 lbs and still call yourself fat (which I presume you have done the necessary research on) then you probably started out pretty bad and had a really tough uphill climb on to lose weight.

I suppose the biggest reason why fatties everywhere are disrespected, is really because they often place an unfair burden on limited resources (eg social services, take up space, crowd others out, etc) while the signs of their indulgence are obvious to all.

I mean, who wouldn't like to feast all day? If I had infinite food at no financial cost, and no consequences eg ability to make all excess calories vanish into a black hole, I too would be eating nonstop.
Title: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: YoungMichael88 on Fri, 19 December 2014, 05:36:49


Big applause for discipline. And if you're ok after losing 70 lbs and still call yourself fat (which I presume you have done the necessary research on) then you probably started out pretty bad and had a really tough uphill climb on to lose weight.

I suppose the biggest reason why fatties everywhere are disrespected, is really because they often place an unfair burden on limited resources (eg social services, take up space, crowd others out, etc) while the signs of their indulgence are obvious to all.

I mean, who wouldn't like to feast all day? If I had infinite food at no financial cost, and no consequences eg ability to make all excess calories vanish into a black hole, I too would be eating nonstop.
Yea. I used to hate stepping on a scale because I didn't want to see the number even myself. But now I'm pretty comfortable letting that old number out and embracing my new one. I was 6 foot 2 inches and 314 pounds. I'm now 244 pounds and plan on dropping another 30-40 pounds.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: dante on Fri, 19 December 2014, 08:27:34
No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.
Well, here's a real life testimonial. 5 months ago I changed the way I eat completely and I log everything into myfitnesspal. I was fat. Still am. But I'm down 70 pounds so far.
You asked why calories matter if you hit your nutritional needs like carbs/fat/protein. Well, those three categories are the most important and they work based on percentages for each meal. For me it's 50% carbs, 30% fat and 20% protein. This is what having a "balanced diet" is. You can eat all day every day and consume massive amounts of calories and still hit the proper percentages for a "balanced diet". But you'll gain a ton of weight if you do that.
So you still need to know how many calories your body will burn at rest. This is called the basal metabolic rate. Any calories burned from cardio or other exercise need to be added to this BMR number and then you have to eat less than that to lose weight. But not too much less or your body kind of panics thinking its starving and begins to store fat it thinks it needs and eats away your muscle. It's your bodies way of prioritizing I guess. So even tho there is a bunch of stored energy as fat, the body looks at that as kind of a supplementary source rather than a primary source for those days where you don't eat quite enough.
My suggested calorie consumption before any exercise is 1700 a day to maintain a 2 pound per week weight loss. That 1700 will get lower and lower as I get lighter (I started at something like 2500 calories a day). On the flip side, if I don't eat more than 1200 a day, I get a warning that my body might shift into the dreaded "starvation mode".

Hopefully this answers your question.

Also if anyone is interested in knowing what foods I cut out, here it is. Cutting all this stuff out is not necessary in most cases but I do it anyway. It's very hard and it works very well (for me).

-No dairy
-No bread, pasta, or grains
-No caffeine
-No added salt
-No processed foods of any kind
-No sugar that isn't natural in fruits etc. So no junk food, period.
-And only eat red meat on occasion.

I get my calcium and other vitamins in other ways.

Can you give some ideas of what specifically you eat during the day and how much?
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: noisyturtle on Fri, 19 December 2014, 08:30:53
I am fat because I cannot afford healthier food. If you need an explanation for this reasoning, you have obviously never lived at or below the poverty line and are talking out of your ass.

Anyone who hasn't lived off of $1< meals on a daily basis for months/years at a time has no stake in this conversation because they don't a lick about what they speak.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Fri, 19 December 2014, 08:41:02
No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.
Well, here's a real life testimonial. 5 months ago I changed the way I eat completely and I log everything into myfitnesspal. I was fat. Still am. But I'm down 70 pounds so far.
You asked why calories matter if you hit your nutritional needs like carbs/fat/protein. Well, those three categories are the most important and they work based on percentages for each meal. For me it's 50% carbs, 30% fat and 20% protein. This is what having a "balanced diet" is. You can eat all day every day and consume massive amounts of calories and still hit the proper percentages for a "balanced diet". But you'll gain a ton of weight if you do that.
So you still need to know how many calories your body will burn at rest. This is called the basal metabolic rate. Any calories burned from cardio or other exercise need to be added to this BMR number and then you have to eat less than that to lose weight. But not too much less or your body kind of panics thinking its starving and begins to store fat it thinks it needs and eats away your muscle. It's your bodies way of prioritizing I guess. So even tho there is a bunch of stored energy as fat, the body looks at that as kind of a supplementary source rather than a primary source for those days where you don't eat quite enough.
My suggested calorie consumption before any exercise is 1700 a day to maintain a 2 pound per week weight loss. That 1700 will get lower and lower as I get lighter (I started at something like 2500 calories a day). On the flip side, if I don't eat more than 1200 a day, I get a warning that my body might shift into the dreaded "starvation mode".

Hopefully this answers your question.

Also if anyone is interested in knowing what foods I cut out, here it is. Cutting all this stuff out is not necessary in most cases but I do it anyway. It's very hard and it works very well (for me).

-No dairy
-No bread, pasta, or grains
-No caffeine
-No added salt
-No processed foods of any kind
-No sugar that isn't natural in fruits etc. So no junk food, period.
-And only eat red meat on occasion.

I get my calcium and other vitamins in other ways.

Congrats on you success with getting ahead of it.  If it works for you and you are able to maintain the diet I applaud you.  I personally couldn't cut the dairy (my house goes through almost a gallon of milk a day and a 2 pound block of cheddar, real not the processed fake crap a week), bread, pasta, grains, or cut myself back that much on red meat.  I grew up eating grilled hamburgers, steaks, and a lot a hamburger helper.  The hamburger helper is pretty cheap cheaper yet when you can buy half a cow at a shot and essentially get bulk pricing.

I do try and stay away from the processed crap as much as possible and the only junk food I really eat on a regular basis is Mountain dew.  I drink the regular stuff and not the diet.  I can taste a massive difference with the artificial super sweeteners and I can't stand it.

I have not personally ever had a weight problem but I can imagine that for the willpower involved it ranks up there with quitting smoking.  That was a very long and hard trail to follow until I got on the e-cigg.  I started with one on a Friday and was done with cigarettes by Monday.  It still wasn't easy but I had finally found a tool that worked for me.  I have since dropped the nicotine level in the juice from 1.8% when I started and my next juice purchase I will be going down to 0.3%, and I have only been on it for 3 months or so.

I am fat because I cannot afford healthier food. If you need an explanation for this reasoning, you have obviously never lived at or below the poverty line and are talking out of your ass.

Anyone who hasn't lived off of $1< meals on a daily basis for months/years at a time has no stake in this conversation because they don't a lick about what they speak.

I beg to differ with you here noisyturtle.  It does take much more effort but it can actually be cheaper to eat healthy than not.  It might not taste as good but it can be done.  I personally grew up below the poverty line due to my mom working as a custodian and my dad not working for about 6 or 7 years due to a broken neck (same break as Christopher Reeves).  It did involve eating a lot of wild game such as deer, fish, ducks, and that sort.  But we always had food on the table and was a fairly balanced diet.  May not have always been the best tasting my I am still very proud of my parents for being able to keep the lights on and food on our table during that time.

There was times where we did eat roadkill.  That is totally free meat.  The couple times we did my dad watched the deer get hit so he just pulled off the road and cleaned it where it lay, and salvaged what meat was still good.  All tasted the same on the table as well.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: noisyturtle on Fri, 19 December 2014, 08:50:24

I beg to differ with you here noisyturtle.  It does take much more effort but it can actually be cheaper to eat healthy than not.  It might not taste as good but it can be done.  I personally grew up below the poverty line due to my mom working as a custodian and my dad not working for about 6 or 7 years due to a broken neck (same break as Christopher Reeves).  It did involve eating a lot of wild game such as deer, fish, ducks, and that sort.  But we always had food on the table and was a fairly balanced diet.  May not have always been the best tasting my I am still very proud of my parents for being able to keep the lights on and food on our table during that time.

There was times where we did eat roadkill.  That is totally free meat.  The couple times we did my dad watched the deer get hit so he just pulled off the road and cleaned it where it lay, and salvaged what meat was still good.  All tasted the same on the table as well.

I can buy 30 meals for $30 from my grocer's frozen food section. You tell me a way to prepare 30 meals for $30 from scratch that doesn't involve a frozen TV dinner or 75% rice and I'll suck your sister's clit... or whatever the equivalent of that is.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: berserkfan on Fri, 19 December 2014, 09:03:00
I am fat because I cannot afford healthier food. If you need an explanation for this reasoning, you have obviously never lived at or below the poverty line and are talking out of your ass.

Anyone who hasn't lived off of $1< meals on a daily basis for months/years at a time has no stake in this conversation because they don't a lick about what they speak.
/

When I was in the US, my food budget was $100-150 a month (including the weekly meal outside) and I ate quite well in the urban US for several years. I treated friends and guests too on that very modest budget.

I don't think you actually know what you are talking about noisyturtle. I am quite aware of how much raw food materials cost in the urban US in the late 1990s. The mandatory carbos are/ were actually very cheap, if you chose ordinary rice in sacks (not instant-heat boxes like how white people like their rice) and Mexican/ South American beans in the bags rather than Green Giant's canned garbanzos. Chinese noodles (the dried kind) were also quite cheap; under $2 you could get enough for six or eight meals. Seaweed, also ultra cheap. I loved seaweed.

The vegetables were even cheaper.  Since most Americans don't eat fresh veggies without spending extra money on fatty mayo, I won't go into this further. There is a big cognition gap - more than one American has shouted/ exclaimed at me for eating veggies without some garnish.

The spices I bought from the Indian grocer lasted a long time. The dhal - I could never finish it. $2.50 for 5 lbs lasts you over a year.

For fruits, I liked to buy from the Mexican or Asian grocers. They tend to have connections with other Mexicans and Asian farmers and are cheap and fresh. I avoided the expensive fruits like avocados and bought grapes only when in season, because grape prices vary a lot.

Tomatoes could be uber expensive or uber cheap depending on whether you chose to do to Harris Teeter or buy from Jose. You can get one big bag from Jose, a few somewhat bruised, for the price of ONE tomato from Harris Teeter. I'm sure most white liberals buy from HT or Whole Foods and imagine that the prices reflect reality.

Meat, buy minced meats rather than top class steak and choice cuts. In my time in the USA I don't remember eating any steak apart from salisbury steak, and even then I bought only when on discount (there are always discounts). I did not eat meat everyday. Fish, maybe twice a week depending on what was on discount.

Pizza, ice cream, and other processed foods? Didn't eat them much. Too expensive and too unhealthy. I bought tofu whenever possible, and one tray could last me three days. And no pop/ soda. Don't even mention alcoholic substances. I never purchased any.

Most of the human race lives off $1 meals. I live now in an island of prosperity surrounded by an archipelago of poverty - and nearly everyone is skinny in Indonesia/ Philippines. Most people would prefer to eat more meat - but as things are now, they are not exactly suffering hunger pangs at night or some major forms of malnutrition. Billions of people do fine on $1 meals.

Most of the human race talks out of their asses except you, it seems.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: noisyturtle on Fri, 19 December 2014, 09:08:06
I am fat because I cannot afford healthier food. If you need an explanation for this reasoning, you have obviously never lived at or below the poverty line and are talking out of your ass.

Anyone who hasn't lived off of $1< meals on a daily basis for months/years at a time has no stake in this conversation because they don't a lick about what they speak.
/

When I was in the US, my food budget was $100-150 a month (including the weekly meal outside) and I ate quite well in the urban US for several years. I treated friends and guests too on that very modest budget.

I don't think you actually know what you are talking about noisyturtle. I am quite aware of how much raw food materials cost in the urban US in the late 1990s. The mandatory carbos are/ were actually very cheap, if you chose ordinary rice in sacks (not instant-heat boxes like how white people like their rice) and Mexican/ South American beans in the bags rather than Green Giant's canned garbanzos. Chinese noodles (the dried kind) were also quite cheap; under $2 you could get enough for six or eight meals. Seaweed, also ultra cheap. I loved seaweed.

The vegetables were even cheaper.  Since most Americans don't eat fresh veggies without spending extra money on fatty mayo, I won't go into this further. There is a big cognition gap - more than one American has shouted/ exclaimed at me for eating veggies without some garnish.

The spices I bought from the Indian grocer lasted a long time. The dhal - I could never finish it. $2.50 for 5 lbs lasts you over a year.

For fruits, I liked to buy from the Mexican or Asian grocers. They tend to have connections with other Mexicans and Asian farmers and are cheap and fresh. I avoided the expensive fruits like avocados and bought grapes only when in season, because grape prices vary a lot.

Tomatoes could be uber expensive or uber cheap depending on whether you chose to do to Harris Teeter or buy from Jose. You can get one big bag from Jose, a few somewhat bruised, for the price of ONE tomato from Harris Teeter. I'm sure most white liberals buy from HT or Whole Foods and imagine that the prices reflect reality.

Meat, buy minced meats rather than top class steak and choice cuts. In my time in the USA I don't remember eating any steak apart from salisbury steak, and even then I bought only when on discount (there are always discounts). I did not eat meat everyday. Fish, maybe twice a week depending on what was on discount.

Pizza, ice cream, and other processed foods? Didn't eat them much. Too expensive and too unhealthy. I bought tofu whenever possible, and one tray could last me three days. And no pop/ soda. Don't even mention alcoholic substances. I never purchased any.

Most of the human race lives off $1 meals. I live now in an island of prosperity surrounded by an archipelago of poverty - and nearly everyone is skinny in Indonesia/ Philippines. Most people would prefer to eat more meat - but as things are now, they are not exactly suffering hunger pangs at night or some major forms of malnutrition. Billions of people do fine on $1 meals.

Most of the human race talks out of their asses except you, it seems.

The difference between $100 and $150 is HUGE! Even the difference between something like a $60 and $80 budget can make all the difference in your quality of life. The amount of better quality food only $20 a week can make to someone on a wire-thin budget would astound you. It's the difference between straight carb staple foods, and something with substance.

Live on $40 a week for a few months(or years)and get back to me about a boot strap food budget.

This is the kind of stuff that really makes me mad when people do not comprehend the drastic difference only $10-20 extra a week can make to someone who is living paycheck to payheck and can barely put food on the table while keeping a roof over their head. They talk like they know how to shop smart or parse food out for a week, but they have no clue until they are actually at that bottom.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Grim Fandango on Fri, 19 December 2014, 09:08:35
If you are physically not capable of doing the tasks to which you are assigned, then it makes sense that your employer is not interested in keeping you around. I do not think you can fault them for that.

But should fat people need disability protection? Intuitively I would say it is a person's own responsibility to keep their body in a state that they can do their work. Excluded should be all cases where the person in question can not do anything about his or her disability. This is not about whether or not it is their own fault, it is about whether during a person's employment, they do what is necessary to enable them to do their job. If someone does not manage to do that, I think you should be able to fire him or her.

In my case for example, I am expected to be both presentable and informed. Should I fail to do either of those things, then I am guaranteed to lose my job. Do I think that is fair? Yes, I do.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: fohat.digs on Fri, 19 December 2014, 09:10:42

The nutrition world is sending out all sorts of mixed signals:

Is it any surprise people screw up their bodies/metabolisms by every camp having a bunch of 'experts' who have science to back it up?


Much of what all the experts say is true.

But it is not "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth"

The whole truth is that every body and every metabolism is different.

Perhaps the most important example is a documented fact that about 15% of the population does not metabolize refined carbohydrates in a "normal" and healthy way, and for those people, refined carbohydrates could be considered as the equivalent of an addictive drug.

For the rest of us, refined carbohydrates are simply a cheap and low-grade, nutrition-empty energy source.

The most important factor in health is meaningful exercise, and after that, cut out the refined junk.

Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: iri on Fri, 19 December 2014, 09:20:15
In the beginning of 2010 my food budget was $0.30 a day. Russian cost of living FTW!
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: IPT on Fri, 19 December 2014, 10:18:23
i feel anyone crying poverty on GH to the point of unable to pay for food needs a reality check.
And $40.00 a week if you're buying fresh food isn't that hard.
I dunno where you go to shop, but buy vegetables that are under $2.00/lb.  Get a bag of rice.  Get some Chicken Breast or ground beef or something.
There's no reason the budget won't accept this
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: YoungMichael88 on Fri, 19 December 2014, 12:36:14

No one could ever answer the following to my satisfaction:

If you are fat, and I mean - someone who has over 50lbs to lose: if you cover all your minimum vitamin/mineral/fat/carb/fiber/protein requirements - why do calories matter?  Sure you may need 500-750 cals a day for immediate energy, but you have all this FAT! :)  In that scenario your body should be coaxed into using it.  That's the whole point of fat in the first place.

But I agree no sympathy - and definitely jacked up insurance rates + higher food taxes for those who don't want to change and become a burden on society.
Well, here's a real life testimonial. 5 months ago I changed the way I eat completely and I log everything into myfitnesspal. I was fat. Still am. But I'm down 70 pounds so far.
You asked why calories matter if you hit your nutritional needs like carbs/fat/protein. Well, those three categories are the most important and they work based on percentages for each meal. For me it's 50% carbs, 30% fat and 20% protein. This is what having a "balanced diet" is. You can eat all day every day and consume massive amounts of calories and still hit the proper percentages for a "balanced diet". But you'll gain a ton of weight if you do that.
So you still need to know how many calories your body will burn at rest. This is called the basal metabolic rate. Any calories burned from cardio or other exercise need to be added to this BMR number and then you have to eat less than that to lose weight. But not too much less or your body kind of panics thinking its starving and begins to store fat it thinks it needs and eats away your muscle. It's your bodies way of prioritizing I guess. So even tho there is a bunch of stored energy as fat, the body looks at that as kind of a supplementary source rather than a primary source for those days where you don't eat quite enough.
My suggested calorie consumption before any exercise is 1700 a day to maintain a 2 pound per week weight loss. That 1700 will get lower and lower as I get lighter (I started at something like 2500 calories a day). On the flip side, if I don't eat more than 1200 a day, I get a warning that my body might shift into the dreaded "starvation mode".

Hopefully this answers your question.

Also if anyone is interested in knowing what foods I cut out, here it is. Cutting all this stuff out is not necessary in most cases but I do it anyway. It's very hard and it works very well (for me).

-No dairy
-No bread, pasta, or grains
-No caffeine
-No added salt
-No processed foods of any kind
-No sugar that isn't natural in fruits etc. So no junk food, period.
-And only eat red meat on occasion.

I get my calcium and other vitamins in other ways.

Can you give some ideas of what specifically you eat during the day and how much?
Heres a typical day for me.


Total calories from food: 1827
Subtract 138 calories from 25 mins of cardio from walking at a leisurely pace. (Not nearly enough exercise)
Total: 1689 calories

Breakfast: (518 calories)
-2 eggs (with yolk)
-About 1/2" slice of Ham
-Fried onions, mushrooms, bell peppers (in maybe a teaspoon of extra Virginia coconut oil)
-1 cup Silk coconut milk
-Vitamins
-1Tbsp Metamucil (add to the fried onions and mushrooms while cooking)

Lunch: (238 calories)
- 4oz Salmon fillet
- Steamed broccoli
- Cherry Tomatoes
- Raw bell pepper pieces

Snack #1: Smoothie (364 calories)
- kiwi
- banana
- coconut milk
- mixed berries

Dinner: (265 calories)
- boneless skinless chicken breast (baked various ways)
- Spaghetti Squash w/ fried mushroom and peppers (coconut oil)
- portobello with marinara sauce (no sugar kind)

Snack #2: (455 calories)
- 1/2 cup Harvest Trail Mix
- Banana

Exercise: (burn ~138 calories)
- 25 mins of walking at a leisurely pace

Nutritional breakdown for this day: 51% carbs, 24% fat, 25%carbs (this is close enough to my target. Extra protein is better than extra carbs or fat)


NOTE: I eat all of these things A LOT!! It can get very boring unless you get creative with how you prepare all these meals. Also, I will switch up the vegetables and type of fish as often as I can and prepare the chicken in different ways.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: HoffmanMyster on Fri, 19 December 2014, 12:43:48
I need to make more smoothies.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: jacobolus on Fri, 19 December 2014, 15:20:16
I don’t understand why Americans take the skin off chicken (and likewise avoid eating cartilage, tendons, fat, organ meat, bone marrow, etc.); the non-muscle parts of animals have all kinds of stuff in them that the human body will put to good use, which it’s hard to make up from just vegetable sources. Most places in the world people eat tripe, pigs feet, fish heads, cow brain, blood sausage, etc. etc., but many Americans won’t eat anything but boneless skinless chicken breasts and steaks with the fat cut out. (Or they eat all the other animal parts, but only when they’ve been turned into hot dogs.)

Anyhow, chicken skin is delicious and perfectly healthy to eat: much better than filling up on bread, noodles, rice, mashed potatoes, &c. or (the more common alternative) cookies, chips, and sugarwater.

I’d recommend everyone (especially if cooking for 2+ people) learn to process a whole plucked chicken. It’s pretty easy, there are all kinds of tasty bits on there, and whole chickens sell for much cheaper than the ones that have already been broken down into parts.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: IPT on Fri, 19 December 2014, 15:39:33
I don�t understand why Americans take the skin off chicken (and likewise avoid eating cartilage, tendons, fat, organ meat, bone marrow, etc.); the non-muscle parts of animals have all kinds of stuff in them that the human body will put to good use, which it�s hard to make up from just vegetable sources. Most places in the world people eat tripe, pigs feet, fish heads, cow brain, blood sausage, etc. etc., but many Americans won�t eat anything but boneless skinless chicken breasts and steaks with the fat cut out. (Or they eat all the other animal parts, but only when they�ve been turned into hot dogs.)

Anyhow, chicken skin is delicious and perfectly healthy to eat: much better than filling up on bread, noodles, rice, mashed potatoes, &c. or (the more common alternative) cookies, chips, and sugarwater.

I�d recommend everyone (especially if cooking for 2+ people) learn to process a whole plucked chicken. It�s pretty easy, there are all kinds of tasty bits on there, and whole chickens sell for much cheaper than the ones that have already been broken down into parts.

this is very true
and if you really don't wanna deal with the whole chicken plucking and what not, you can even "shortcut it" by just buying a rottissere chicken from your supermarket
shave off the meat, package it up and 1 chicken should be all the meat you need for a week.  Take the bones and throw it into a pot and throw some veggies in.  You got chicken soup.  add some rice or noodles if you choose.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tjcaustin on Fri, 19 December 2014, 15:59:10
(http://www.nicolegrotepas.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Screen-Shot-2014-04-30-at-9.09.19-PM.png)

But it's the same reason why commercial quality pork is so lean, dry and gross.  The populace has been sold on animal fats and non-premium meat cuts being bad for you.

Though, I can't handle the stink of organ meat/offal, so that's most of why I avoid it. 
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: drewba on Fri, 19 December 2014, 16:01:43
Well, here's a real life testimonial. 5 months ago I changed the way I eat completely and I log everything into myfitnesspal. I was fat. Still am. But I'm down 70 pounds so far.

Hey man, huge congrats on losing 70! Feel free to add me on MFP if you're looking for friends. Username = drewba13

That offer stands for anyone on Myfitnesspal!
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: jacobolus on Fri, 19 December 2014, 16:07:15
I’m not a huge fan of some organs, and tend to let someone who prefers them have them. But it seems crazy that people (for instance) refuse to even try the tripe/tendons/etc. in Vietnamese phở, or are horrified to eat chicken or pig feet. Few of my American friends will even take a bite of a brain taco (by the way, a couple brain tacos are delicious, but I recommend against getting a whole brain burrito, it’s just too rich), and you can forget about getting people to try fried insects (though headless shrimp and lobsters are just fine apparently; by the way, throw those shrimp heads in a stir fry or soup; even if you don’t want to eat the shrimp heads, they add great flavor to whatever they’re cooked with).
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: drewba on Fri, 19 December 2014, 16:15:12
I’m not a huge fan of some organs, and tend to let someone who prefers them have them. But it seems crazy that people (for instance) refuse to even try the tripe/tendons/etc. in Vietnamese phở, or are horrified to eat chicken or pig feet. Few of my American friends will even take a bite of a brain taco (by the way, a couple brain tacos are delicious, but I recommend against getting a whole brain burrito, it’s just too rich), and you can forget about getting people to try fried insects (but shrimp and lobsters are just fine apparently).

I agree on most of your points. Brain is decent, but tongue is where it's at when it comes to tacos  :p
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: fanpeople on Fri, 19 December 2014, 16:22:32
This guy wants you to eat 70%  fat ?

so.. yea..  I've tried eating a stick of butter.. Tp4 crazy  like that..  and it's good going down..

but... the 3rd bite.. is kinda hard.. and  if you eat 1.5-2 sticks.. it makes you dizzy. I felt like I was being poisoned. Which scientifically is my liver is going, Ffff you, what are you doing...

I watched a friend drink 2L of canola oil once, such lubricated projectile vomit. Twas ae beautiful sitee twu see.

moral of these stories.... don't use condiments/utility foods as meals on their own.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: HoffmanMyster on Fri, 19 December 2014, 17:18:42
I’m not a huge fan of some organs, and tend to let someone who prefers them have them. But it seems crazy that people (for instance) refuse to even try the tripe/tendons/etc. in Vietnamese phở, or are horrified to eat chicken or pig feet. Few of my American friends will even take a bite of a brain taco (by the way, a couple brain tacos are delicious, but I recommend against getting a whole brain burrito, it’s just too rich), and you can forget about getting people to try fried insects (though headless shrimp and lobsters are just fine apparently; by the way, throw those shrimp heads in a stir fry or soup; even if you don’t want to eat the shrimp heads, they add great flavor to whatever they’re cooked with).

I had a turkey gizzard for the first time a few weeks ago, and it tasted just like regular turkey.  We freak out about where the food comes from for some reason.  It's a bit silly to me, since I assume most of it tastes just fine.  But oh well.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: YoungMichael88 on Fri, 19 December 2014, 17:31:16

I’m not a huge fan of some organs, and tend to let someone who prefers them have them. But it seems crazy that people (for instance) refuse to even try the tripe/tendons/etc. in Vietnamese phở, or are horrified to eat chicken or pig feet. Few of my American friends will even take a bite of a brain taco (by the way, a couple brain tacos are delicious, but I recommend against getting a whole brain burrito, it’s just too rich), and you can forget about getting people to try fried insects (though headless shrimp and lobsters are just fine apparently; by the way, throw those shrimp heads in a stir fry or soup; even if you don’t want to eat the shrimp heads, they add great flavor to whatever they’re cooked with).

I had a turkey gizzard for the first time a few weeks ago, and it tasted just like regular turkey.  We freak out about where the food comes from for some reason.  It's a bit silly to me, since I assume most of it tastes just fine.  But oh well.
Our culture associates anything gross looking as being gross. And it's only "gross looking" because we were told that growing up and our parents also. I'm victim to it. It's too bad too cuz I'm sure most of it is delicious. I just can't stomach it because of these instilled believes. My mind is more powerful than my taste buds and stomach apparently. And I don't see that changing for me.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: HoffmanMyster on Fri, 19 December 2014, 17:37:41

I’m not a huge fan of some organs, and tend to let someone who prefers them have them. But it seems crazy that people (for instance) refuse to even try the tripe/tendons/etc. in Vietnamese phở, or are horrified to eat chicken or pig feet. Few of my American friends will even take a bite of a brain taco (by the way, a couple brain tacos are delicious, but I recommend against getting a whole brain burrito, it’s just too rich), and you can forget about getting people to try fried insects (though headless shrimp and lobsters are just fine apparently; by the way, throw those shrimp heads in a stir fry or soup; even if you don’t want to eat the shrimp heads, they add great flavor to whatever they’re cooked with).

I had a turkey gizzard for the first time a few weeks ago, and it tasted just like regular turkey.  We freak out about where the food comes from for some reason.  It's a bit silly to me, since I assume most of it tastes just fine.  But oh well.
Our culture associates anything gross looking as being gross. And it's only "gross looking" because we were told that growing up and our parents also. I'm victim to it. It's too bad too cuz I'm sure most of it is delicious. I just can't stomach it because of these instilled believes. My mind is more powerful than my taste buds and stomach apparently. And I don't see that changing for me.

Oh, I'm completely the same way, I didn't mean to come off as not suffering from that.  But after trying a few things recently that I didn't like *purely because of looks* (guacamole, for starters), I've realized that it's dumb and have taken a completely different approach.  Mind over matter, YM!
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Fri, 19 December 2014, 18:10:55

I’m not a huge fan of some organs, and tend to let someone who prefers them have them. But it seems crazy that people (for instance) refuse to even try the tripe/tendons/etc. in Vietnamese phở, or are horrified to eat chicken or pig feet. Few of my American friends will even take a bite of a brain taco (by the way, a couple brain tacos are delicious, but I recommend against getting a whole brain burrito, it’s just too rich), and you can forget about getting people to try fried insects (though headless shrimp and lobsters are just fine apparently; by the way, throw those shrimp heads in a stir fry or soup; even if you don’t want to eat the shrimp heads, they add great flavor to whatever they’re cooked with).

I had a turkey gizzard for the first time a few weeks ago, and it tasted just like regular turkey.  We freak out about where the food comes from for some reason.  It's a bit silly to me, since I assume most of it tastes just fine.  But oh well.
Our culture associates anything gross looking as being gross. And it's only "gross looking" because we were told that growing up and our parents also. I'm victim to it. It's too bad too cuz I'm sure most of it is delicious. I just can't stomach it because of these instilled believes. My mind is more powerful than my taste buds and stomach apparently. And I don't see that changing for me.

Oh, I'm completely the same way, I didn't mean to come off as not suffering from that.  But after trying a few things recently that I didn't like *purely because of looks* (guacamole, for starters), I've realized that it's dumb and have taken a completely different approach.  Mind over matter, YM!

While I have tried my share of different meats such as beaver, duck, goose, deer, bison, racoon, moose, and pheasent along with others, most I just don't care for the taste of.  Now smoked turkey and chicken gizzards and hearts are amazing.  I really don't like liver though.  Just can't stand the taste along with the texture.  I have had foods where the taste was great but the texture almost made me puke.  I mean hit my gag reflex and ad to hold back dry heaves.  The worst one here was they type of sushi with raw fish/shrimp sitting on top a ball of sticky rice.  The flavor was amazing but the sticky rice almost make me puke.  Swordfish is awesome eating as well.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: jacobolus on Fri, 19 December 2014, 18:16:02
I have had foods where the taste was great but the texture almost made me puke.  I mean hit my gag reflex and ad to hold back dry heaves.  The worst one here was they type of sushi with raw fish/shrimp sitting on top a ball of sticky rice.  The flavor was amazing but the sticky rice almost make me puke.  Swordfish is awesome eating as well.
That’s what “sushi” is: raw fish sitting on a blob of vinegar rice. The part you couldn’t handle was the rice part, or the fish? The rice in sushi doesn’t seem particularly unusual to me, so it’s kinda surprising that it would elicit a gag reflex. Perhaps you’d prefer sashimi, which is just the sliced raw fish by itself.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: SavvyBird on Fri, 19 December 2014, 18:18:16
testing my duck avatar don't mind me  :p

edit: he isn't transparent  :'(

edit2: now it worked sorry for invading thread
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: HoffmanMyster on Fri, 19 December 2014, 18:35:11
While I have tried my share of different meats such as beaver, duck, goose, deer, bison, racoon, moose, and pheasent along with others, most I just don't care for the taste of.  Now smoked turkey and chicken gizzards and hearts are amazing.  I really don't like liver though.  Just can't stand the taste along with the texture.  I have had foods where the taste was great but the texture almost made me puke.  I mean hit my gag reflex and ad to hold back dry heaves.  The worst one here was they type of sushi with raw fish/shrimp sitting on top a ball of sticky rice.  The flavor was amazing but the sticky rice almost make me puke.  Swordfish is awesome eating as well.

Texture and taste are still huge factors that we can't ignore.  I was referring to not liking something because it just sounds weird.  And echoing jacobolus' comment, it's odd that you had texture issues with the sushi rice.  It's always felt more or less very similar to regular rice to me.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: fohat.digs on Fri, 19 December 2014, 22:29:14
I am OK with a lot of the non-muscle meats, but tripe (aka chitterlings aka chit'lin's - I am from the South) has a texture that really does stimulate my gag reflex. And I don't get the kidneys thing either - they always taste of urine to me.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: dante on Fri, 19 December 2014, 22:30:34
I am OK with a lot of the non-muscle meats, but tripe (aka chitterlings aka chit'lin's - I am from the South) has a texture that really does stimulate my gag reflex. And I don't get the kidneys thing either - they always taste of urine to me.


LOVE tripe - in tacos EXTRA crispy - tastes like bacon :)

Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: IPT on Fri, 19 December 2014, 22:33:43
I am OK with a lot of the non-muscle meats, but tripe (aka chitterlings aka chit'lin's - I am from the South) has a texture that really does stimulate my gag reflex. And I don't get the kidneys thing either - they always taste of urine to me.


LOVE tripe - in tacos EXTRA crispy - tastes like bacon :)



i love beef tripe, had some tonight in my Hot Pot.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: jacobolus on Fri, 19 December 2014, 22:43:54
I am OK with a lot of the non-muscle meats, but tripe (aka chitterlings aka chit'lin's - I am from the South) has a texture that really does stimulate my gag reflex.
I hear you. I can eat a medium sized bowl of menudo (beef tripe soup), no problem, but if I try to eat a large bowl of menudo, about 2/3 of the way through I’ve definitely had enough.

However, there are many ways to prepare tripe, and in Vietnamese noodle soup, or in tacos, the texture is totally different. Or try deep frying tripe sometime.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Sat, 20 December 2014, 00:11:11
I have had foods where the taste was great but the texture almost made me puke.  I mean hit my gag reflex and ad to hold back dry heaves.  The worst one here was they type of sushi with raw fish/shrimp sitting on top a ball of sticky rice.  The flavor was amazing but the sticky rice almost make me puke.  Swordfish is awesome eating as well.
That’s what “sushi” is: raw fish sitting on a blob of vinegar rice. The part you couldn’t handle was the rice part, or the fish? The rice in sushi doesn’t seem particularly unusual to me, so it’s kinda surprising that it would elicit a gag reflex. Perhaps you’d prefer sashimi, which is just the sliced raw fish by itself.

Thank you for the clarification on the difference.  It was the rice that got me.  The stuff I had was extremely stickey.  It is hard to describe but it all stuck together and was very starchy.  The flavor of the fish was excellent though.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: jacobolus on Sat, 20 December 2014, 00:57:59
I guess to be technical, there are a few types of sushi, including those little fried tofu pouches full of rice, and rice + fish wrapped in seaweed rolls, etc. But if you go to a good sushi restaurant and order a “sushi dinner” (or whatever similar thing), you’ll mostly be getting a bunch of blobs of rice with fish on top (“nigiri”), and possibly also a couple of rolls.

Sushi quality has a pretty enormous variance from one restaurant to another, more even than most foods, IMO. The most obvious difference between good and mediocre sushi is how good and how fresh the fish is. But there can also be a pretty big difference in the texture/flavor/temperature of the rice. I’ve never felt any kind of gag reflex from eating rice, but I’ve definitely had sushi before where the rice seemed badly prepared and wasn’t too appetizing. It is supposed to be sticky though, so it’s also possible it’s just not your thing.

I recommend at least once sometime, when you’re in a city near the ocean with a big Japanese population, going to a great sushi restaurant and trying it again. Sometimes the prices get pretty steep, but really good sushi is an amazing experience.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tbc on Sat, 20 December 2014, 01:53:18
I have had foods where the taste was great but the texture almost made me puke.  I mean hit my gag reflex and ad to hold back dry heaves.  The worst one here was they type of sushi with raw fish/shrimp sitting on top a ball of sticky rice.  The flavor was amazing but the sticky rice almost make me puke.  Swordfish is awesome eating as well.
That’s what “sushi” is: raw fish sitting on a blob of vinegar rice. The part you couldn’t handle was the rice part, or the fish? The rice in sushi doesn’t seem particularly unusual to me, so it’s kinda surprising that it would elicit a gag reflex. Perhaps you’d prefer sashimi, which is just the sliced raw fish by itself.

Thank you for the clarification on the difference.  It was the rice that got me.  The stuff I had was extremely stickey.  It is hard to describe but it all stuck together and was very starchy.  The flavor of the fish was excellent though.


jeebus.

you're ridiculously far inland to be eating sushi.  if you've never had sushi in a pacific coastal city with a large asian population, you've essentially been eating dogfood.  i am not surprised if you just had subpar rice.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: iri on Sat, 20 December 2014, 08:04:32
awww, shrimp brains are one of the tastiest things on the planet.
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: tp4tissue on Sat, 20 December 2014, 11:15:38
I never make the sushi..

I just buy a few packs of different sushi fish, tuna, salmon, eel..

Then I make the rice.. crush up some seaweed and salt and sugar and vinegar into it..

Then go to town..

DONE...

(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/full-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862505)
Title: Re: Yay for fatsos!
Post by: Melvang on Sat, 20 December 2014, 11:25:50
I have had foods where the taste was great but the texture almost made me puke.  I mean hit my gag reflex and ad to hold back dry heaves.  The worst one here was they type of sushi with raw fish/shrimp sitting on top a ball of sticky rice.  The flavor was amazing but the sticky rice almost make me puke.  Swordfish is awesome eating as well.
That’s what “sushi” is: raw fish sitting on a blob of vinegar rice. The part you couldn’t handle was the rice part, or the fish? The rice in sushi doesn’t seem particularly unusual to me, so it’s kinda surprising that it would elicit a gag reflex. Perhaps you’d prefer sashimi, which is just the sliced raw fish by itself.

Thank you for the clarification on the difference.  It was the rice that got me.  The stuff I had was extremely stickey.  It is hard to describe but it all stuck together and was very starchy.  The flavor of the fish was excellent though.


jeebus.

you're ridiculously far inland to be eating sushi.  if you've never had sushi in a pacific coastal city with a large asian population, you've essentially been eating dogfood.  i am not surprised if you just had subpar rice.

I had that when I was stationed in Jacksonville, FL.  Though we do have a sushi bar here in town that is supposedly pretty good, but the wife doesn't like it.  Just not a big fan of fish to begin with.