Adventure Ausrama Blog

"Yeah, I have lose a few pounds." dog fat weight gut paws eyes   Hahaha Quatruped Shots Adventure Australia Funny Weird Things Articles News Reviews ● Vista Computer Solutions Blog ✤ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   . . . . . . . . . . raccoon branch holding hanging ears eyes

Young women are becoming shorter. This not just from the weight pulling one down and stooping, i.e., bending over at the shoulder. It is because girls have a poor diet and are overweight. They do not grow to their full potential height. Women in the 18 to 24 are 1.1cm shorter on average than their mothers. Oddly, young men have "shrunk" by only 0.2xm when compared to their fathers. The reason for this discrepancy is not yet known. Today this age group of women is 27 per cent fatter than the same age group in 1995. This is a larger gain than people of all other groups. The main problem is that young women do not eat foods that contain calcium - thus the spine bends and compresses. They eat "on the run", consuming just about anything that is tasty and fills them up. Preparing meals is not something young women do. Furthermore, fad diets are notoriously lacking in essential vitamins and minerals. It is older women who are doing the exercise. The

Surveys have changed the basis of testing behavior. Television in itself is not the main criterion. Because of tablets and smart phones screen time is the main target. People can use tablets while still being partially active, but it is assumed to be a passive activity. A group of 144 children was observed. Body mass index was higher for those spending most time in front of a screen. Their level of physical activity was lower. However, it was not significantly less. Something else was at work. The sedentary side of being glued to a screen overrides all other factors. Parents are being encouraged to get their children involved in sport by enrolling them in local sporting teams. Though physical activity is the main trade off for more screen time, parents must understand that reducing screen time per se is most important. http://www.adventure--australia.blogspot.com/ http://www.tysaustralia.blogspot.com/ http://adventure--australia.blogspot.com/atom.xml http://

Capitalism is a good thing - or so we believe. The world is getting more obese. Large international companies that produce high-sugar, high-fat products are buying out local distribution firms in developing countries to dominate the market. More than a Quarter of China's population is obese. Twenty years ago each Chinese person consumed only two teaspoons of sugar a day. Currently, China keeps a sugar bank, The government is terrified that a sugar shortage will lead to social unrest. Mexico is becoming fatter than any other nation on Earth. Coca Cola practises price segmentation. In cities where income is higher, coke costs more than average. Poor rural regions get coca cola at a much cheaper price. Young children suffer from malnutrition while their parents are overweight. Sugar and fat consumed regularly is a killer. Diabetes is increasing at a rapid rate. In developing countries medical care is poor, so diabetes goes untreated and people die. There can only be one

For many years it was believed that pork was fatty and if eaten regularly would lead to weight gain. A new study has shown the opposite to be true. Overweight people were split into two groups. One group was given 1050g of lean pork each week. The other group was provided with 750g a week. Even with this little difference in pork intake, after six months there was a noticeable change in the high-intake group. Those eating more pork actually lost fat from their abdomens. Waists were narrower. Body composition improved over the whole body. So weight can be lost without dieting if you eat more pork. A further benefit from eating more pork is the high thiamine level. Many overweight people have type 2 diabetes which can lead to thiamine deficiency. Tests are now being done with chicken and beef to compare with pork. It could be that the high-protein diet due to eating the pork was beneficial. Maybe similar results in regard to weight loss will eventuate from eating more chicken

While I agree with Dr Jennifer O'Dea's view that a tax on take away food is useless in reducing obesity, I strongly disagree that obesity is exaggerated. Look around; there are overweight children and adults at every turn. She admits that children from low income families have twice the rate of obesity of those from middle and upper income families. The reason why this is so should be ascertained. It is hard to believe that small income families spend more on junk food in real and proportional terms. Dr O'Dea says we should not become emotional about the issue because that is unscientific. Perhaps we do need to be more emotional. The scientific approach is not doing much good. It is true that the problem should be tackled from the top - down. It is parents who can impress upon their children to eat better. Today, high sugar food is so readily available. In the 1960s and before many families didn't have a refrigerator. When children wanted a sugar fix they had