ACT’s Weight Action Plan is to not get worse

Barcham 5 December 2013 48
Thingy

Towards Zero Growth is ACT’s new inspirational health slogan.

“Let’s work towards not getting worse!”

I can see the t-shirts now.

Have a read of the Healthy Weight Action Plan here if you’d like to see what the Government’s plans are to make things exactly the same as they are right now.

The most interesting/distressing part are the stats Katy drops in her foreword.

Apparently 63.6% of adults are overweight or obese, up from 22.9% in 1995.

Time to break out the trainers ladies and gentlemen.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
48 Responses to ACT’s Weight Action Plan is to not get worse
Filter
Order
Ozi Ozi 1:32 am 18 Dec 13

LSWCHP said :

And as for the BMI…I’m 6 foot 4 and weigh about 200 pounds (193cm and 90kg) according to my calculator. I come from a long line of tall, skinny blokes, so my genetic inheritance means that I have virtually no body fat, but I do have a bit of muscle. If you looked at me you’d probably think I had an average build, or even on the skinny side. But my BMI is over 24, which according to that measure means that I’m on the verge of being overweight!

So yeah, it might be great for national averages, but for me the BMI is ridiculous.

True that, but to be fair you are comfortably above average height and the BMI is only a very rough guide. The majority of people (the vast majority) who are found to be obese by BMI are definitely fatties.

Ozi Ozi 1:29 am 18 Dec 13

SO many excellent comments on hear. Give yourself a clap, RiotACT.

Basically use more energy than you eat to loose excess fat.

Eat more energy than you use to GET fat.

Eat more energy whilst doing a heap of exercise to get FIT.

Eat more energy whilst hitting the gym heaps to get BIG.

Any fad diet wont work. Any gett fit “easy” with this tacky ab roller / rocker/ rotated / vibrator plan will not work.

Normal weight = normal exercise and diet

Crazy ripped dudette/dude in the tacky TV advert = very careful eating plan, lots of cardio, lots of gym, good underlying genetics.

There is no “magic” path to fitness.

LSWCHP LSWCHP 11:11 pm 17 Dec 13

tommo said :

BMI is flawed in many aspects and the medical community generally acknowledges this.

…lots of very sensible stuff deleted…

Spot on Tommo. Fad diets…wild gym sessions…all that extreme stuff is rubbish.

Eat moderate amounts of good food. Get moderate amounts of moderate exercise. Get more sleep than you currently do…whatever amount you’re getting now, you’ll fell better if you sleep more.

Just be sensible. Obviously, as Poetix explained earlier, this is easier said than done, but it’s easier to start this way, rather than losing a heap of weight on some mad diet, and then regaining it all a month later. I know a woman who was very obese, and lost a huge amount of weight via WeightWatchers, and then put it all back on again as soon as she left the program. That sort of extreme behaviour just doesn’t work.

And as for the BMI…I’m 6 foot 4 and weigh about 200 pounds (193cm and 90kg) according to my calculator. I come from a long line of tall, skinny blokes, so my genetic inheritance means that I have virtually no body fat, but I do have a bit of muscle. If you looked at me you’d probably think I had an average build, or even on the skinny side. But my BMI is over 24, which according to that measure means that I’m on the verge of being overweight!

So yeah, it might be great for national averages, but for me the BMI is ridiculous.

tommo tommo 10:29 pm 17 Dec 13

BMI is flawed in many aspects and the medical community generally acknowledges this. Its widespread use is because it is a simple calculation giving a nice number for politicians to point at. Calorie counting goes in the same basket. Calories are a single aspect of the food we eat and focusing on this one aspect is silly. Our body breaks down different foods in different ways regardless of the calories. By focusing on calories one also tends to neglect other the other aspects of our foods, vitamins as an example. Variety is also important, one can not live off protein shakes with vitamins added despite what they would like you to think.
As far as diets are concerned, high carb, low fat, low sugar, whatever, they generally don’t work in the long term. Some studies have shown any diet, even ridiculous ones, work in the short term but none are particularly effective in the long term. Diet foods are also mostly about packaging/marketing. They often suggest in various ways that it is ‘healthy’ but in reality many are no better than a chocolate bar. Working out is also not a solution for all, it requires great commitment at 5+hrs a week every week at the gym to have appreciable results. Studies have also shown that many who ‘work out’ remain sedentary for prolonged periods (generally afterwards as you might imagine) such that the overall activity is not that much different from someone who didn’t work out but maintained low levels of activity throughout the day.
At the end of the day the focus is on completely the wrong thing. Instead of weight, we should be concerned with general fitness and healthy eating (diets are not healthy!). It is a combination of these two things that makes a real difference. Unfortunately our governments and the industries built around obesity (gyms, ‘diet’ foods etc.) continue to push the wrong message and as such it only gets worse.

poetix poetix 4:45 pm 17 Dec 13

zorro29 said :

The figures probably are correct (albeit frightening)…the issue is exercise. Get of yo a**es and exercise! I am always distrubed by how many fat children there are too – it’s a disgrace. Some kids in Year 6 weigh more than I do (a 31 y/o 5’7″ woman!!).

Really if you don’t start good habits when you’re young (eating in moderation and exercise), you’ll likely never be thin. Sedentary bodies stay that way.

Just sick of the apologist society we have around this…like we have to feel sorry for people because they won’t work hard. Get up early, exercise…go to work…come home and exercise! There is no excuse for being hugely fat….none.

The tone of this sort of comment probably alienates the very people who need help the most. I have lost a lot of weight and it was, and it remains, hard to restrict my diet so much, and to go to the gym as often as I need to. Fortunately, though, I have become fixated with lifting bits of metal into the air.

I think that the idea of small steps is more useful than calling people lazy. For example; substituting fruit for sweets or cakes or cheese. Walking a few hundred metres each day, and gradually extending the distance. We don’t all have to jog with a kelpie; a short daily walk with a Labrador is better than nothing! Bikes are great too.

I am very lucky in that I was never so fat that exercise was a total impossibility. People in that category need professional help, not abuse. Saying that if you were raised a certain way, it is very unlikely that you will ever be thin (I would prefer to say a healthy weight) is a cruel message to give to people.

Although I must admit that I am motivated by the obese people I see as much as the fittest people at the gym. Fear is at least as motivating as admiration. It keeps me bench pressing!

It also means that when you have a breakout, you really appreciate the food. There is a very large cheese in the fridge, waiting for the knife at Christmas.

davo101 davo101 4:43 pm 17 Dec 13

neanderthalsis said :

I am saying that there are a reasonable number of >30 BMI folk who are perfectly healthy and very fit and that there are a hell of a lot of <30 people who are unhealthy and very unfit.

That’s what you are saying now. Previously what you said was:

neanderthalsis said :

They persist in using the BMI as the key indicator of obesity. This means that anyone with a reasonable amount of muscle development falls into the overweight category.

Note how you’ve quietly moved the goal posts by changing from obesity to fit and healthy. Yes you can have a BMI over 30 and be healthy…for now; in 10 years from now it’s a different matter.

neanderthalsis neanderthalsis 12:35 pm 17 Dec 13

That should say: I’m not claiming that having a >30 BMI doesn’t put you at greater risk of any one of a variety of nasty health problems

neanderthalsis neanderthalsis 12:23 pm 17 Dec 13

davo101 said :

banco said :

neanderthalsis said :

LSWCHP said :

Shhh….neanderthalsis is in denial. If you have a BMI over 30 for men it is 95% likely that you are actually obese and 99% if you are a woman. The problem with BMI is that 64% of obese men and 51% of obese women have a BMI less than 30.

So you say that I am wrong, then support my claim the the BMI is a highly inaccurate measure of weight related health. I’m not claiming that having a >30 BMI puts you at greater risk of any one of a variety of nasty health problems, I am saying that there are a reasonable number of >30 BMI folk who are perfectly healthy and very fit and that there are a hell of a lot of <30 people who are unhealthy and very unfit.

As I said in the second para of my original post, there is no other simple measure for statistical reporting of obesity other than getting the entire population (or a representative sample) to line up for a body composition analysis that gives total percentages of body fat and gives an accurate read of the amount of visceral fat, the really nasty stuff.

An interesting aside, research published in the August 19th 2006 Lancet, which analyzed 40 studies involving 250,000 people, showed that those with a low BMI had a higher risk of heart attack than those with higher BMI:

Patients with a low body-mass index (BMI) (ie, <20) had an increased relative risk (RR) for total mortality (RR=1·37 [95% CI 1·32—1·43), and cardiovascular mortality (1·45 [1·16—1·81]), overweight (BMI 25—29.9) had the lowest risk for total mortality (0·87 [0·81—0·94]) and cardiovascular mortality (0·88 [0·75—1·02]) compared with those for people with a normal BMI. Obese patients (BMI 30—35) had no increased risk for total mortality (0·93 [0·85—1·03]) or cardiovascular mortality (0·97 [0·82—1·15]). Patients with severe obesity (?35) did not have increased total mortality (1·10 [0·87—1·41]) but they had the highest risk for cardiovascular mortality (1·88 [1·05—3·34]).

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2806%2969251-9/fulltext#article_upsell

zorro29 zorro29 10:18 am 17 Dec 13

The figures probably are correct (albeit frightening)…the issue is exercise. Get of yo a**es and exercise! I am always distrubed by how many fat children there are too – it’s a disgrace. Some kids in Year 6 weigh more than I do (a 31 y/o 5’7″ woman!!).

Really if you don’t start good habits when you’re young (eating in moderation and exercise), you’ll likely never be thin. Sedentary bodies stay that way.

Just sick of the apologist society we have around this…like we have to feel sorry for people because they won’t work hard. Get up early, exercise…go to work…come home and exercise! There is no excuse for being hugely fat….none.

rigseismic67 rigseismic67 8:48 am 17 Dec 13

I was fat once, its simple really- eat less crap food and exercise more- it worked for me

davo101 davo101 4:43 pm 09 Dec 13

banco said :

neanderthalsis said :

LSWCHP said :

I know I see lots of fatty-boomstix waddling and shaking around the place these days, but 63.6%? Two thirds of adults are overweight or obese?

Somehow that doesn’t seem right to me.

They persist in using the BMI as the key indicator of obesity. This means that anyone with a reasonable amount of muscle development falls into the overweight category.

People always bring up the muscle mass issue but how many people do you see walking around Canberra who are carrying much muscle? A small % of under 30 guys for the most part. I can’t imagine they’d skew the results.

Shhh….neanderthalsis is in denial. If you have a BMI over 30 for men it is 95% likely that you are actually obese and 99% if you are a woman. The problem with BMI is that 64% of obese men and 51% of obese women have a BMI less than 30.

I think there is a quite large mistake in the report. According to this ABS report the percentage of over weight and obese people in 1995 was more like 66% men and 49% women. I have no idea how they could have come up with a figure of 23%. An increase of 66 to 70% for men and 49 to 55% for women sounds much more plausible.

Masquara Masquara 11:30 am 08 Dec 13

BimboGeek said :

Take a look at photos of the people who advocate high fat for weight loss. Then look at photos of fruitarians and people advocating high carb weight loss.

I don’t even like the 30 bananas people but they are definitely skinny. Dr. Atkins was not.

Fruitarian and high-carb diets are very different. You simply couldn’t get through enough fruit to get fat on it – humans thrive on variety. The reason any one-type-of-food diet works is through boredom. And diets that ban you from combining fat and carbohydrate tend to work because fat on its own gets too much. High carbs on their own should work on the face of it, but unfortunately it’s the high-carb option that slows your metabolism. So you end up not losing weight on a stringently calorie-limited high-carb diet.

Deref Deref 9:35 am 08 Dec 13

BimboGeek said :

LOL at the numpty that blamed sugar at 4 cals/g while totally encouraging fat at 9 cals/g.

The healthiest weight loss diet on the market is vegan at 80% of cals from carbohydrate. See The China Study, 80-10-10 etc.

Vegans don’t live longer, it just seems like it.

BimboGeek BimboGeek 8:13 am 08 Dec 13

Take a look at photos of the people who advocate high fat for weight loss. Then look at photos of fruitarians and people advocating high carb weight loss.

I don’t even like the 30 bananas people but they are definitely skinny. Dr. Atkins was not.

gooterz gooterz 10:03 pm 07 Dec 13

Blathnat said :

BimboGeek said :

LOL at the numpty that blamed sugar at 4 cals/g while totally encouraging fat at 9 cals/g.

The healthiest weight loss diet on the market is vegan at 80% of cals from carbohydrate. See The China Study, 80-10-10 etc.

Actually I’ve had great success switching from my old poor diet to one that is higher in fat (lots of meat etc) but is extremely low in carbs, the only sugar I have is 2 spoons in my coffee of a morning. Obviously it’s not going to work for everyone, but I would feel confident enough to say that a high-fat low-carb diet would be much better than a low-fat diet with higher carb intake.

A casual stroll though the mall will show you most people are doing something wrong 🙂

Half of being healthy is being energetic enough to exercise and full enough you stop eating!

I’m guessing that your going to need a lot of fruit to make you feel full. Yet your going to eat many times the sugar.
A cow will just eat grass and get huge.

If you eat half as much your better off. If it has fat in it you don’t feel hungry after.

I’m large because I can cook for myself and really enjoy my cooking and I’m always going for the larger size because its much more cost effective.

Part of the issue is that you can get a half size for $6 or a full size for $8. What is everyone going to get? Just look at subway!

Blathnat Blathnat 6:55 pm 07 Dec 13

BimboGeek said :

LOL at the numpty that blamed sugar at 4 cals/g while totally encouraging fat at 9 cals/g.

The healthiest weight loss diet on the market is vegan at 80% of cals from carbohydrate. See The China Study, 80-10-10 etc.

Actually I’ve had great success switching from my old poor diet to one that is higher in fat (lots of meat etc) but is extremely low in carbs, the only sugar I have is 2 spoons in my coffee of a morning. Obviously it’s not going to work for everyone, but I would feel confident enough to say that a high-fat low-carb diet would be much better than a low-fat diet with higher carb intake.

poetix poetix 6:21 pm 07 Dec 13

Deref said :

poetix said :

miz said :

Nothing will work until the Heart Foundation dumps its erroneous high carb/low fat dietary recommendations.
http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/sweden-becomes-first-western-nation-to-reject-low-fat-diet-dogma-in-favor-of-low-carb-high-fat-nutrition/

That site seems to carry numerous articles about the perceived medical wonders of coconut oil. (There is a section called ‘Coconut Health’.)

It also carries anti-vaccination, anti-prescription medicine and anti-evolution articles.

The Swedish thing seems to be a committee report, not actually adopted, as far as I can tell.

Well-spotted, Poetix.

Top quoting from you, too!

You somehow quoted my unedited comment.

Scary… 🙂

Deref Deref 5:29 pm 07 Dec 13

poetix said :

miz said :

Nothing will work until the Heart Foundation dumps its erroneous high carb/low fat dietary recommendations.
http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/sweden-becomes-first-western-nation-to-reject-low-fat-diet-dogma-in-favor-of-low-carb-high-fat-nutrition/

That site seems to carry numerous articles about the perceived medical wonders of coconut oil. (There is a section called ‘Coconut Health’.)

It also carries anti-vaccination, anti-prescription medicine and anti-evolution articles.

The Swedish thing seems to be a committee report, not actually adopted, as far as I can tell.

Well-spotted, Poetix.

poetix poetix 5:25 pm 07 Dec 13

miz said :

Nothing will work until the Heart Foundation dumps its erroneous high carb/low fat dietary recommendations.
http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/sweden-becomes-first-western-nation-to-reject-low-fat-diet-dogma-in-favor-of-low-carb-high-fat-nutrition/

That site seems to carry numerous articles about the perceived medical wonders of coconut oil. (There is a section called ‘Coconut Health’.)

It also publishes/links to anti-vaccination, anti-prescription medicine and anti-evolution articles.

switch switch 5:23 pm 07 Dec 13

BimboGeek said :

LOL at the numpty that blamed sugar at 4 cals/g while totally encouraging fat at 9 cals/g.[/quote/

It’s the calories you extract after expending energy breaking the food down in your gut that counts. A bucket of coal has a very high calorific value, but I doubt it would do you any good if you ate it. Sugar is nearly pure energy for us, fat much less so.

The healthiest weight loss diet on the market is vegan at 80% of cals from carbohydrate. See The China Study, 80-10-10 etc.

Yeah, but it’s so boring.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

 Top
Region Group Pty Ltd

Search across the site