Leave A Comment

Barry   (7 months ago)

Just to clarify a couple of points, Patrick: when I say your figures are ludicrous, I am referring, for one thing, to the fact that China is in your list of the five fattest nations, but no Pacific Island nations are anywhere to be seen. China may be the world's biggest nation in total, but the smallest nation, Nauru, dwarfs it on a per capita basis. I refer you to an article titled "Epidemiology of obesity" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_obesity), which features maps showing world obesity prevalence among males and females. These maps clearly show that the regions of lowest obesity are Asia, Africa and South America, whereas at the top is Polynesia, followed by USA and Saudi Arabia. I quote "Overall rates of obesity are below 5% in China as a whole but are greater than 20% in some cities." (Why would there be a difference? The genetics are the same, after all.) "Many of the island nations of the South Pacific have very high rates of obesity. Nauru has the highest rates of obesity in the world (80%)." Another clarification: I said that I perhaps should not be surprised that a doctor should peddle such nonsense about the cause of obesity. Let me ask you, did you study for your degree in a New Zealand university? If so, then how many hours of Human Nutrition were you required to study? Given that I have a fair idea of the answer to that question, does it not seem astonishing that a subject so important to the health of our nation receives so little attention?

Barry   (7 months ago)

No, Patrick, I am not from "the land of the free" (a misnomer if ever there was one). I presume you refer to my spelling of the word "armor" but that is part of a direct quote, hence it would be wrong for me to alter the spelling. I must say, I find the figures you have given utterly ludicrous. China is fourth, and Japan fifth fattest? Out of how many countries? Five? If you would be kind enough to direct me to an online source for your information, then that might lend it some weight (as I did for the statistics I quoted). However, this is really a side issue. I raised it simply to point to the correlation between geographic location and obesity as a result of differing diets among our world's populations. My point still stands and if you cannot see it, then I can only refer you again to the wisdom of Laurence J. Peter. You try to deny it and argue that obesity is worlwide. But of course obesity is spreading across the world. The reason obviously, is that people are consuming more energy (calories) as they become richer. Anyone who cannot see this has his or her head in the sand. The point you are clearly avoiding is that this is a modern phenomenon. A few hundred years ago obesity was virtually unkown in the world except in a infinitesimally thin stratum of the world's wealthy nations. Ask yourself: what has changed since then? The answer is plain and simple: people are eating more, and more energy-dense, food, and living less physically active lives. To maintain that obesity is a genetic disorder beggars belief. Frankly, I am surprised (although perhaps I shoud not be) that someone in the medical profession would propound such preposterous nonsense. If obesity were genetic, then, as I said below, it would not increase over time, but remain confined to a small proportion of the population as per haemophilia or Huntington's disease.

Barry   (7 months ago)

Thank you very much, Anonymous. Do you not feel that sarcasm is unfairly maligned as the lowest form of wit? Indeed, I wish that I were gifted, but least I take some consolation from knowing that I am not afflicted by political correctness. What euphemism would you recommend? How about people with weight control problems? Or portly persons, perhaps? Chubby chums? Rubenesque individuals? Big boned citizens? Corpulent cousins? Or is gravitationally challenged people more to your taste? Really, if you are so ultra-sensitive and thin-skinned as to be offended by the truth, then tough. I will continue to be frank and call a spade a spade. The word "fattie" is not pejorative or inherently offensive. It is an informal noun form of "fat", which is neutral and factually descriptive. If you criticise the word as inelegant, then I would not waste my time taking issue with you, nor would I argue that blue is superior to red. Aesthetics are by definition subjective. Elegance is not a quality for which I aim in writing. I harbour no pretensions to poetry. I will always take direct language that confronts me with the blunt truth rather than weasel words and mincing genteelisms that skirt around it for fear of causing offence. I appreciate tour concern about my compassion for the world's unfortunates. I can assure you that I have deep compassion for people or other sentient creatures who, or which as the case may be, suffer genuine misfortune, such as survivors of the earthquake in Port O'Prince, or live kittens that were recently fed to a pitbull dog. These beings had no control over their fate. This is true misfortune. Alcoholics, on the other hand, who exercise their free will by continuing to drink, or fatties who choose to stuff their faces with rich food, are not victims of misfortune. As I said earlier, it is a matter of personal responsibility. Furthermore, the belief that obesity, and according to Patrick, alcholism, are genetic disorders is self-delusion, and that is also a matter of personal choice.

View All 15 Comments