Why doesn't the club cater to large fans!

[Stig 0]

Indy, I commend you on your efforts and that is exactly what I''m saying more overweight people should do. If the club did offer a shirt in your size, I''m suggesting that the motivation to lose some weight would be lost. If dangerously obese people could do everything in life that everyone else could do, they would see no reason to get healthy and not even attempt to.

My use of slob, lazy, wart and other kinds of adjectives was probably out of line - but I just have a level of conviction in my head on this matter. As I''ve said, a majority of overweight people are that way because they don''t have the mental fortitude to take away that extra packet of crisps in their day or that cheeky biscuit or three. The original topic was the blame being laid at the doorstep of the club for not going out of their way to help obese people fit into their shirts - which is just wrong and symbolizes, again, the lack of mental fortitude to hold ones self for that extra packet of crisps. 

[Stig 0]

I would just like to take this opportunity to distance myself from Stan and his posts, I am in no way on the same wavelength as him.

[BOO 0]

Indy, there is a outbreak of obesity in this and many other countries, but certain parts of the UK are some of the worst areas in the world.

You have a look at old films and pictures of maybe only even 30 years ago, you will not see all the obesety that you do now because people ate more healthily and took more exercise. It is not a condion of modern man that he shall be lardy, in almost all cases it is lifestyle related.

It''s all about choices my friend, some people make the wrong choices more often than the right ones and obesity is the result

[STAN 29]

like I''ve said my best mate is fat, he''s fine with that, he can laugh at fat jokes about him, he can laugh at jokes about other people, he loves his food, he''s comfortable in himself.

Again there''s nothing worse than a sensitive fat person crying about being fat whilst sitting on his arse demolishing a 4 pack of chocolate eclairs..

[STAN 29]

I would just like this opportunity to confirm stig is my double account..

[......and Smith must score. 1,336]

Shirts don''t fit ? Want to show your colours ? Not worried about street cred ?Why pay a fortune for an inferior garment knocked up for pennies in some Far Eastern sweatshop ? Buy a scarf instead.Sure, it''s probably made to the same shoddy standard but it''s a lot cheaper, there''s less wear and tear and one size fits all ( unless you''re King Kong )Simples ! [;)]

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Vanwink"]It''s all about choices my friend, some people make the wrong choices more often than the right ones and obesity is the result[/quote]I absolutely agree (again taking into consideration those with medical conditions), but what most don''t realise (or are unwilling to accept) is that the margins are MUCH smaller than they realise between maintaining a healthy weight and putting it on.A can of coke can be 140 calories, a packet of ''light'' crisps 100 calories, so even a simple ''snack'' or two can push someone over the guidelines if they do it regularly.I accept that this is THEIR choice, no-one forces them to do it, but the perception that every fat person eats incessantly and in amounts that would fill an olympic sized pool daily, is just horrible, incorrect stereotyping in the vast majority of cases, and at times represents nothing more than bullying or the worst form.

[STAN 29]

sorry but it''s cr@p, i''ve got a gut, this is down to a "few extra snacks"

If you cant fit into a 3XL shirt, your snacking goes well beyond an extra bag of crisps mate..

[BOO 0]

That argument does work both ways though Indy, if the margins are quite fine as you say, it should not take too much of a reduction in consumption of fattening foods to reduce the weight.

[ncfcstar 287]

This thread is rather ironic, is it not?

[STAN 29]

They need to start catering a bit less haha!

[TIL 1010 4,722]

If this bickering had been going on for page after page after page between what is often referred to as  '' the usual suspects '' or '' the Innner Circle '' there would have been calls for SDP to step in. Pot,kettle and black i say to the hypocrites on here. [;)][:P][:D]

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Vanwink"]That argument does work both ways though Indy, if the margins are quite fine as you say, it should not take too much of a reduction in consumption of fattening foods to reduce the weight.[/quote]If only it was that simple VW.To quote Dr David Lugwig (director of the “Optimal Weight for Life” program at Children’s Hospital Boston):[quote]"Our bodies don’t gain or lose weight indefinitely. Eventually, a

cascade of biological changes kicks in to help the body maintain a new

weight. A person who eats an extra cookie a day will gain some weight,

but over time, an increasing proportion of the cookie’s calories also

goes to taking care of the extra body weight. Similar factors come into

play when you skip the extra cookie. You may lose a little weight at

first, but soon the body adjusts to the new weight and requires fewer

calories. Regrettably, however, the body is more resistant to weight

loss than weight gain."[/quote]It is actually harder to lose the weight than it is to put in on, but a dedicated and motivated individual will manage it, but it is tough when you do a three hour workout to be told you''ve only just burnt off a Mars bar...

[Stig 0]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]If this bickering had been going on for page after page after page between what is often referred to as  '' the usual suspects '' or '' the Innner Circle '' there would have been calls for SDP to step in. Pot,kettle and black i say to the hypocrites on here. [;)][:P][:D][/quote]

No Tilly, because this thread is actually about something. Not just mindless bickering about who is or isn''t popular on the forum at the moment.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

At the end of the day, it doesn''t affect me if the club does or doesn''t make a 8XL shirt for the larger people in our society, but I''m just baffled by the fact that some believe it to be the clubs fault. They would have to have done nothing short of staple the pounds onto your originally healthy body for it to be their fault and then denied you the clothing to fit. If the margins are so small, like I said - taking the mental backbone to realise that extra can of coke and packet of crisps during the afternoon really isn''t that big of a step and can be removed altogether in place of a delicious smoothie and a bit of fruit.

All mental problems aside - you are fat because your hand brought the food up to your mouth and you chose to swallow it. No one else. You. Whether you ate just a small amount more for years on end or whether you put it on all in one go is irrelevant.

[Stig 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="Vanwink"]That argument does work both ways though Indy, if the margins are quite fine as you say, it should not take too much of a reduction in consumption of fattening foods to reduce the weight.[/quote]If only it was that simple VW.To quote Dr David Lugwig (director of the “Optimal Weight for Life” program at Children’s Hospital Boston):[quote]"Our bodies don’t gain or lose weight indefinitely. Eventually, a

cascade of biological changes kicks in to help the body maintain a new

weight. A person who eats an extra cookie a day will gain some weight,

but over time, an increasing proportion of the cookie’s calories also

goes to taking care of the extra body weight. Similar factors come into

play when you skip the extra cookie. You may lose a little weight at

first, but soon the body adjusts to the new weight and requires fewer

calories. Regrettably, however, the body is more resistant to weight

loss than weight gain."[/quote]It is actually harder to lose the weight than it is to put in on, but a dedicated and motivated individual will manage it, but it is tough when you do a three hour workout to be told you''ve only just burnt off a Mars bar...[/quote]

Remove the Mars bar from the diet, that''s one less Mars bar you''ve got to burn off in a three hour workout [Y]

[ncfcstar 287]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]It is actually harder to lose the weight than it is to put in on, but a dedicated and motivated individual will manage it, but it is tough when you do a three hour workout to be told you''ve only just burnt off a Mars bar...[/quote]I don''t want to get involved in this debate, and I feel you were using a bit of poetic licence here Indy; but if you''re working out for 3 hours you''re going to have burnt off a lot more than one Mars bar.  A 3 hour workout will burn at least 1500 calories, if not more.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Stig"]If the margins are so small, like I said - taking the mental backbone to realise that extra can of coke and packet of crisps during the afternoon really isn''t that big of a step and can be removed altogether in place of a delicious smoothie and a bit of fruit.[/quote]Even they will cause the problem if it''s over your daily average though Stig.This is what can be tough for some to grasp (not aiming that at you btw). You could eat NOTHING but ''healthy'' food, and if the total calories per day is consistently above what your body needs to maintain it''s weight - you''ll get fatter!Doesn''t matter if it''s endless salads that push you over each day or a single Mars Bar.

[quote]Whether you ate just a small amount more for years on end or whether you put it on all in one go is irrelevant.[/quote]In the overall scheme of things you''re absolutely right, but when people are chucking out abuse based on claims that all overweight people eat dumptrucks full of Haribo and Lard each day to get there it''s not irrelevant.The abuse is often based on incorrect assumptions rather than the overall picture, and the answer to the phrase "Who ate all the pies" may not be the fat guy it''s being aimed at, but the skinny bloke next to him instead!

[STAN 29]

like i''ve said fatties in denial, If you cant fit in a 3XL shirt and you only eat a packet of crisp more than me each day, I gather you never leave your bed?

[STAN 29]

But the moral of the story is.. spend less time in greggs and you can treat yourself to a nice new yellow shirt, happy days.

[Mr Jenkins 0]

If it is not to your taste TIL 1010 then don''t bother to read it!

I have you on my list of Lardyboys now!

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="ncfcstar"]I don''t want to get involved in this debate, and I feel you were using a bit of poetic licence here Indy; but if you''re working out for 3 hours you''re going to have burnt off a lot more than one Mars bar.  A 3 hour workout will burn at least 1500 calories, if not more.[/quote]I also don''t want to get into an overly involved debate about exercise and what burns what, but you have to realise that for example I, cannot do three hours worth of running on a treadmill, or incessant cycling during that time. There will be periods when I will do aerobic exercise, weights, resistance training or even simply resting and having a drink of water.And whilst I agree that I may have underplayed the normal amount of calories burnt, the basic example was there - It takes a lot of work to burn off even a single Mars Bar, and even walking sedately non-stop, you''d be looking about maybe 2 hours of walking (with the odd rest) to get rid of it!

[STAN 29]

and perhaps indy''s 3 hour workout was based around getting downstairs to the fridge..

it''s worth it for a mars bar.

[morty 0]

Its down to simple mathematics.

If you consume less than you burn, you will put weight on.

Fat people are fat because they consume more calories than they burn in activity or excercise.

And the proportion of people who are overweight due to actual medical conditions is tiny, all this big boned and metabolism talk is invariably an excuse.

 

[TIL 1010 4,722]

[quote user="canarygirl"]If it is not to your taste TIL 1010 then don''t bother to read it! [/quote]

Maybe the same should apply to '' usual suspects '' and Inner Circle '' threads and posts then ?

[TIL 1010 4,722]

[quote user="Stig"][quote user="TIL 1010"]If this bickering had been going on for page after page after page between what is often referred to as  '' the usual suspects '' or '' the Innner Circle '' there would have been calls for SDP to step in. Pot,kettle and black i say to the hypocrites on here. [;)][:P][:D][/quote]

No Tilly, because this thread is actually about something. Not just mindless bickering about who is or isn''t popular on the forum at the moment.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

At the end of the day, it doesn''t affect me if the club does or doesn''t make a 8XL shirt for the larger people in our society, but I''m just baffled by the fact that some believe it to be the clubs fault. They would have to have done nothing short of staple the pounds onto your originally healthy body for it to be their fault and then denied you the clothing to fit. If the margins are so small, like I said - taking the mental backbone to realise that extra can of coke and packet of crisps during the afternoon really isn''t that big of a step and can be removed altogether in place of a delicious smoothie and a bit of fruit.

All mental problems aside - you are fat because your hand brought the food up to your mouth and you chose to swallow it. No one else. You. Whether you ate just a small amount more for years on end or whether you put it on all in one go is irrelevant.

[/quote]

This is not mindless bickering then ?.......yeah righto,whatever.

[Indy_Bones 441]

Sorry Tilly, but if you sort through some of the bickering you''ll actually find some fair and well presented points in this thread.Whereas it''s often difficult to find anything but a backwards and forwards,     slanging match on some of the threads referred to by Stig...

[Number 9 0]

Take it easy on the smoothies, Tilly, lots of sugar and stuff hidden in there.

[can u sit down please 0]

Ive stayed clear of this post until now. Now i cant stop laughing.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Number 9"]Take it easy on the smoothies, Tilly, lots of sugar and stuff hidden in there.[/quote]139 calories in a standard 330ml can of coke, whereas there''d be approx 175 calories in a similar sized bottle of Innocent Strawberry and Banana Smoothie...

[Monty13 2,229]

"Its down to simple mathematics.

If you consume less than you burn, you will put weight on."

This is nail on the head.

All this just by drinking a glass of wine or a packet of crisps a day above your calorie allowance will mean you will put on weight can''t be news to anybody surely?

2500 calories is a guide, bigger (taller/broader) men can eat more and burn it off, smaller (shorter/slighter) men should actually eat less.

But your body is essentially an engine, if you consume more fuel than you need and don''t burn it off you will put on weight, again why is this a defence for putting on weight? I''m overweight and I know this is the reason, I''ve consumed more than I was ever going to burn off. It''s the reason arctic explorers consume 4000 calories a day but lose weight because their body is working hard.

People are getting fatter in this country and have been for years for two simple reasons, our lives are more sedentary and we do less exercise (just walking to places for a start) and we consume richer foods and more often than we did in the past.

I understand there are medical reasons why some people put on weight, people have a sedentary lifestyle forced upon them sometimes (if you''re forced into a wheelchair for instance). But there is not some massive anti-overweight person conspiracy going on.

The majority of people who are overweight are so purely because of their own actions and if they can''t face up to that, then they probably always will be. Losing weight is more difficult because you must essentially starve yourself or burn more fuel than you''re taking in through exercise. Eating more than you require to put on weight is easy to achieve.

There are some posters being blunt and rude about it in their posts, but it doesn''t change the facts. I think you''d struggle to find a doctor or dietician that disagrees. I''m not trying to be antagonistic or offensive, I''m purely putting the almost unilaterally held view across.