Haggis wrote:So Aurora is really Kate Moss?
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Moderator: Peak Moderation
What has my misguided ideas at the age of 14 got to do with anything?!Aurora wrote:By her own admission in previous posts, screamifyouwanttogofaster has painted a picture of her outlook on food and exercise:
my idea as a teenager that I could eat 3 bars of chocolate a day and lose weight since it would only be 800 calories- health concerns seemed meaningless then, I just wanted to find the easiest way to be socially acceptable ie thinAnd yet in the next sentence, she is capable of contradicting herself:How many other "treatments" do doctors recommend that have a 5% success rate! We give up and say "sod it" and eat crap. We start an exercise program, to lose weight and tone up. When we haven't lost enough lbs and don't look like a supermodel after 3 weeks we give up and turn on the TV.
Health? Nutrition? Exercise? Activity?Instead of constantly going on about obesity, they should be talking about health, instead of diets and deprivation, nutrition and instead of exercise, activity. Yes like cycling or walking places.... oh such a radical idea, I mean why do that when you can go by car and then go to the gym later (or not).
Great! I'd also recommend staying healthy by eating non-processed, nutritious food and by actively exercising on a regular basis.
I don't eat processed food. I don't eat ready meals, fast food or anything else similar.Aurora wrote:
THERE WERE NO OVERWEIGHT OR OBESE PEOPLE BECAUSE CHEAP, PROCESSED FOOD WASN'T AVAILABLE AND PEOPLE EXERCISED REGULARLY.
No computer games, no TV, no ready meals, no McDonald's, no KFC, no Burger King or any of the other purveyors of shite now commonly found on the high street.
That you are a doctor? A nutritionist? Dietitian? That you bring some professional expertise to this discussion?Aurora wrote:If any of you think I'm wrong about the need for a healthy diet and regular exercise, then please consider the following thought.
No, it's because any unfit, including but not exclusively overweight, animal is not able to escape predators or catch prey. Your argument is a red herring.Aurora wrote:When was the last time you saw, personally or on film, an overweight animal in the wild? Never, with the possible exception of an old or lame creature.
Why? Because they only eat what they require and burn off any excess in the course of their short lives.
Yes, and also because they are living in their natural habitat and eating their natural diet, and having to work hard just to stay alive.foodimista wrote: No, it's because any unfit, including but not exclusively overweight, animal is not able to escape predators or catch prey. Your argument is a red herring.
As far as I'm aware, theres evidence to both sides of this.When was the last time you saw, personally or on film, an overweight animal in the wild? Never, with the possible exception of an old or lame creature.
Why? Because they only eat what they require and burn off any excess in the course of their short lives.
No, it's because any unfit, including but not exclusively overweight, animal is not able to escape predators or catch prey. Your argument is a red herring.
Um, I don't know if you've actually read the previous posts, but no one has said that.Aurora wrote:If any of you think I'm wrong about the need for a healthy diet and regular exercise
Thin, then possibly dead, depending on how badly you starved me? lolDominicJ wrote:
If we semi starved scream, would she get thin or get dead?
Sorry, to expand on my prior point.Thin, then possibly dead, depending on how badly you starved me? lol