General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumshlthe2b
(102,378 posts)where they fail to show a meal that would readily equate to the full amount of calories for the day--or even two days. That combined with all the sugar, fat, and salt-filled processed food we eat....
Is it any wonder why our obesity rates are sky high?
Silent3
(15,278 posts)Even if that's for an average adult that's scary. If it's for an average person, covering also what children and infants consume, that's even scarier.
I'm wondering if "consumption" in these graphs might mean "consumed" in an economic sense -- "resources used" -- so that wasted food is counted into the statistics, food that isn't necessarily ingested.
I personally do consume just around that much -- 3400-3600 calories/day -- but I'm a 6' tall male who typically does 1000 calories or more of exercise each day, 6 days per week. Today I burned around 2400 calories on a long mountain hike.
Nearly anyone, especially smaller than me, consuming that many calories per day is going to get fat. Really FAT, really fast. If I only worked out half as much as I do, which would still be a lot more than the average American works out, I'd be gaining half a pound per week eating 3641 calories/day, tapering off until I plateaued somewhere above 250 lbs. (I weigh 178 now.)
We obviously have plenty of obesity in this country, but something still doesn't seem to add up here unless food wastage or some other factor is taken into account.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)portions of the food groups didn't change much, but calorie consumption went up a whole lot and at the same time activity has gone way down. You can eat like a farmer if you work like a farmer and not get fat. But, if you eat like a farmer and work like a banker...