Training and Overweight Clients

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by *MC*

On a lot of those shows, the overweight contestant is closely monitored by doctors and medics during the entire time. It is extreme and I think it serves twp purposes:

1. It pushes them past where they never thought they could go to show them how tough they are and how much tougher they will need to be.

2. It gets a quick scale reduction result, which is likely to reinforce motivation.

I agree that it look INSANE.

You're overthinking it. People want to watch TV shows where fat people are about to faint. That's it.

No one wants to see a fat person make small daily changes and create better habits, establishing trends that lead to long term weight loss.

Get on the treadmill, tubby, and entertain me!

[J_Byrd]

Originally Posted by glwanabe

Your FAT and you must be made to suffer for this!

This would not hurt so bad if you were not FAT!

the end of the season it's, now don't you feel better not being FAT!


America is FAT! At least thats what the propaganda machine wants the masses to believe. Have you checked you BMI lately?

Your fat!

hahaha

[Abaddon]

I'm in a rush, so didn't read everything posted.

Let's not confuse the issue here: the primary concern of reality TV shows like 'The Biggest Loser' is NOT to assist their overweight 'contestants'.

These programs are structured no differently from a soulless, market-driven capitalist economy: the contestants are forced to forge alliances when strength in numbers will aid their survival, and later must break those alliances and compete one-on-one with their former team mates, when the game show switches to a 'last man standing' finale.

If the health of the contestants was in any way a concern, then they would be encouraged to work together SINCERELY, in a supportive (but still demanding) environment designed to help them reach their shared goal; to lose that weight.

Shows like this disgust me.

[glwanabe]

Originally Posted by Abaddon

I'm in a rush, so didn't read everything posted.

Let's not confuse the issue here: the primary concern of reality TV shows like 'The Biggest Loser' is NOT to assist their overweight 'stars'.

These programs are structured no differently from a soulless, market-driven capitalist economy: the contestants are forced to forge alliances when strength in numbers will aid their survival, and later must break those alliances and compete one-on-one with their former team mates, when the game show switches to a 'last man standing' finale.

If the health of the contestants was in any way a concern, then they would be encouraged to work together SINCERELY, in a supportive (but still demanding) environment designed to help them reach their shared goal; to lose that weight.
Shows like this disgust me.

That sounds more like Communism.

[Chillen]

With people "supposedly" educated in their field, I often wonder, what happened to good ole' common sense.

Does it make sense to interview the severely overweight person and learn some individual particulars? And, dependent on what is learned during the entry interview, would depend on what exercise and nutritional properties are applied, no?

For example, would it make ordinary sense, to set up a program (like BTB exampled in his topic), to a person who has been sedentary for years, approximately 100 pounds over weight, tends to emotionally eat when upset, coupled with high blood pressure complications?

Notwithstanding, the complete nausea in believing people do this, this also sets up the individual to dislike exercise right from the start. WHY? Because if you set up a rigorous program for one that has not exercised in YEARS, the person just may not get out of bed the next day because the person is too sore to even move (emphasis added here), and they begin to question their personal motivation and desire--on average; and they begin their fat loss with a twisted message right from the start.

Some trainers can be complete Bozo's, and should where the suite, cause it fits.

[Abaddon]

Originally Posted by glwanabe

That sounds more like Communism.

Am I wrong in thinking that people who have been brought together because they all share the same problem should work together to solve that problem?

Let's not mistake a political agenda for a sociological fact, GL: humans live in communities because humans are social creatures, and historically we have achieved more this way.

When humans split off on their own it's to die, go crazy in the woods or take mushrooms and write Revelations.

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by Abaddon

These programs are structured no differently from a soulless, market-driven capitalist economy

This is a severe oversimplification used just to prop up a belief system. It is also an ad hominem.

Using this logic and style of debate I could then say...You are an soulless socialist, therefore all your opinions are inherently misguided.

If the health of the contestants was in any way a concern, then they would be encouraged to work together SINCERELY, in a supportive (but still demanding) environment designed to help them reach their shared goal; to lose that weight.

These people entered the game because of free will. Most leave this game equipped with a better understanding of nutrition, exercise and with an ability to see possibilities not seen before.

You are oversimplifying things here based on your bias and aren't willing to take a complete look at what is actually occurring.

The Biggest Loser is supportive but demanding. I've watched every season and most of the people are extremely supportive of one another, and the trainers are supportive of them.

You can take away the profit and capitalism, but you can't take away the nature of man. Even in an encouraging environment, in many ways like a forum, folks will still choose to bully, name call, demean, push dogma and exhibit all kinds of other sociopathic behavior.

I wish we could just gather all people together and sing kumbaya, smile, hug, encourage and have everything turn out like a pretty picture. But it never happens. It still always boils down to people looking in the mirror and having a willingness to fix themselves first. Many peopleWe are flawed, and require incentives to improve behavior and effort.

You create a system of sharing and the lazy and sociopathic 30% will ruin it for the others who are pulling their own weight. these people, just like lazy kids, need a kick in the pants or they will fail in life.

And I'll tell you want...the 30%...if you try to have leadership tell them what to do, they don't like it and attack the system...whatever that system is. They always place themselves above the system.

[kitarpyar]

Originally Posted by glwanabe

America is FAT! At least thats what the propaganda machine wants the masses to believe. [/SIZE]

Propaganda machine? Are you saying that the general population isnt growing more obese these days, as compared to, say 1950s?

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by kitarpyar

Propaganda machine? Are you saying that the general population isnt growing more obese these days, as compared to, say 1950s?

They have changed the standards several times.

I can't speak for average weightes because I do not have the statistics at hand, but I do know that the standards have changed several times making more people appear obese.

Off topic...

When I was in health care a few years back they changes the high blood pressure standards, lowering them by 10 points. More people were referred to their doctors about possible medications.

[BendtheBar]

Here is an article by Tom Naughton, Fat Head documentarian.

Fat Head » The Obesity Epidemic … And The Real Epidemic

One of the more controversial claims I made in Fat Head is that the obesity epidemic has been overblown — mostly by people with a vested interest, such as the CDC and the weight-loss industry.

A recent Gallup poll supports my claim. I’m not suggesting (and didn’t suggest in Fat Head, despite what some reviewers think) that we don’t see more huge people walking around in public than we did 30 years ago. Anyone with eyes knows a minority of the population has gotten very fat.

But that’s a minority. The statistics say the average American is only about 8 to 12 pounds heavier than a generation ago. Let’s split the difference and call it 10 pounds — and remember, we’re also about 10 years older on average than we were in 1970. As Dr. Eric Oliver pointed out in the film, when the Body Mass Index classifications of overweight and obese were adopted, they put millions of people right on the edge of being overweight. It only took a few extra pounds to push those people into the “overweight” category … and then we gained those pounds.

The main thrust of the article about the Gallup poll is that while most Americans are overweight (using the BMI scale, anyway), fewer than half are currently trying to lose weight. Well, duh … millions of people have tried the “eat less and move more” method promoted by doctors and nutritionists and failed. It’s no wonder they’ve given up.

But what I found most interesting was the data on who’s “overweight” and by how much. Here are the numbers:

More than 50 pounds overweight: 6%
21-50 pounds overweight: 17%
11-20 pounds overweight: 15%
1-10 pounds overweight: 24%
At ideal weight: 18%
1-10 pounds underweight: 7%
11-20 pounds underweight: 3%
More than 20 pounds underweight: 1%
Undesignated: 9%

We’re looking at BMI figures here, not a measurement of who’s actually fat and who isn’t. As I’ve said many times, the BMI scale is ridiculous. It labels almost anyone with decent muscles as overweight or obese. Tim Tebow, the star quarterback of the Florida Gators, is a lean, mean, running machine. He’s also 6’3″ and weighs 245, which puts his BMI at 30.6 — in other words, obese. To be considered normal weight, he’d have to lose 45 pounds. Short of amputating a leg, that’s not going to happen.

But of course, not many people are as muscular as Tim Tebow, so let’s take an example closer to home — me. When I graduated from high school, I was 5’8″ and weighed 155 pounds, giving me a BMI of 23.6 … normal weight. But I only had a 36-inch chest, not much in the way of muscles, a big belly and “boy boobs.” When we played shirts vs. skins in gym-class competitions, I prayed to end up on the shirts team.

Today I’m 5’11″ and weigh 195 pounds, giving me a BMI of 27.2 … overweight. I also have a 44-inch chest, with much thicker arms and legs. My belly is smaller and the boy boobs are gone. But to be considered just barely at “normal” weight, I’d have to lose 20 pounds. To reach my high-school BMI of 23.6, I’d have to lose 26 pounds. That’s how screwy the BMI measurement is.

The article continues on at length...