Fitness and Health - John F. Kennedy Got it Right! We Are in Trouble.
Imagine a president,or for that matter, any politician or media celebrity making the same comment that President Kennedy made in the 1960s. The uproar from the "I'm offended" crowd would be deafening. Was it then? No. Obesity was rather rare in the US population in the 1960s. What changed and who benefits from this public health crisis?
First of all, I am not for mocking obese people. Then again, is it right to mock smokers? Thing is, our bodies have mechanisms built into them that reward certain behaviors. Cigarettes contain stimulants that reward the smoker at the biological level at the moment of use. Trouble is, prolonged use can kill the smoker. Seems unfair, huh, the body rewards use of a dangerous substance, even if the mind knows death may very well result. Fair or not, it's biology. Now look at food. Humans are blessed, yes blessed, with a higher composition of fat cells than most other mammals. This is a survival mechanism. Our ancestors survived because they ate when food was available because it might not be the next day. The fat stored that energy and people rarely became obese. Now we have refrigeration, 24-hour markets and the like that can enable us to satisfy our body's cravings. And yes, those cravings can kick in even when you try to lose weight. Your fat cells, when put to use, do not know the difference between the mind wanting to get in shape and a famine. So yes, it takes a lot of motivation to get in shape as you are fighting your body's reward systems that in days past enabled survival.
Check out and subscribe to my YouTube channel:
So how about today? We live in a consumer culture in which food manufacturers capitalize on our body chemistry. Sure, this has been true ever since street food eateries discovered how smell and color could entice one to buy. Yet today is different. Our foods are loaded with artificial ingredients, flavor enhancers, corn syrup and enough other substances to supply a university chemistry department years of research opportunities. And if that isn't enough, a media that seduces the senses every where you turn, and with the help of marketing psychology, they even tap into our sub-conscious to enhance our desires to consume their products.
And on top of that, we have big pharma there to help treat the dozens and dozens of negative health effects of consuming items from the grocery store. Okay, fine, it's people's choice, yet where are the counter measures to get people to exercise and choose better options? JFK spearheaded drives to get people to stay healthy, but what has changed? Why are younger boomers and older Gen X far healthier, with males having more testosterone, than their children and grand-children? No more JFKs. Instead we have Biden even saying that his Corona policies are more effective than promoting healthy lifestyles to combat the virus, even though obesity magnifies the danger of the infection. Nope, take a injection and wear a mask. Oh, and close down gyms and punish people out on walks or jogging.
As for schools, many of us remember the dreaded PE coach screaming at us to run faster or do more push-ups. We may have hated this person then, but they did get people off their proverbial rear-ends and develop self-discipline. Then came the feel-good ethic. As these coaches retired, they were replaced with people who felt it was damaging to self-esteem to grade people on performance. This is where grades switched to how the students felt about their PE experience. This is where participation trophies took over...and where childhood obesity started to rise.
And today we see a very damaging trend of "any size can be healthy" promoted in media. I mean, why try to exercise and watch your diet? You are healthy because you say so, and so does a media that, coincidently, is very often connected to a massive corporate network that benefits from over-consumption. Who is more valuable to the corporations, a person who eats right and exercises or one that eats based on desires and lets life just happen?
Ironically, obesity causes more demand on agriculture as well as fuel to propel cars and airplanes. You would think the environmental movement would be out there urging less consumption and more exercise (i.e. ride your bikes to work, etc.). Yet they really aren't making efforts at that. Is it tied to the idea that unhealthy habits lead to less fertility in males and females, thus pushing down the birth rate as well as lowering life expectancy, which again, lowers the population? Not sure, what would you speculate on that? I mean, the prime directive, so to speak, in the environmentalist movement is to reduce the number of humans, right?
Overall, we will not save the world, not even the nation, with truth. We don't have that kind of potential reach and influence. What we can do is strive to stay, or get, in shape and promote healthy lifestyles within our families and our circles of influence. If we can avoid the longevity-reducing trends in society we can serve our families, our churches, and our beliefs much better and longer. If we can stay healthy we will a greater chance of retaining our fertility while the rest of the population, especially males, march to infertiity.
Ultimately, the choice is ours, the benefits are ours, and the future we develop now will be ours.
Source of opening picture: File:More than 60% of Australian adults are obese and almost 10% are severely obese in 2017.jpg - Wikimedia Commons
Comments
Post a Comment