PeterDavid.net

I wish I knew what I could say to make it easier to bear, Peter. I just know - for the moment - that it feels more as if you and Mr. Goldman are right on this point.

Well said, Peter.

Not to pour salt into a wound, but isn't it a double tragedy because FNSM has been axed by the powers that be in favor of multiple titles of the more commercial "Amazing" title? Personally I always found FNSM to be a good contrast (especially humor wise) to the more grim goings on of the other Spidey titles.

Our society is so brainwashed into believing there's some sort of direct correlation between weight and health that it's usually a shock when an apparently physically-fit person succumbs. I didn't know I had a family history of heart problems (completely unrelated to weight) until I landed in the hospital a couple years ago and my parents blithely mentioned "oh yes, we both have the same thing you do and we're on medication for it." I cannot stress enough the importance of communicating to your family about genetic health history!!

Yeah, I have to say this one was a difficult one for me... I still wind up going by that blog (like I did for several years). It really was amazing how sudden it was and so very sad. I imagine though it’s just a reminder of how precious the moments are and that even though we rarely confront it, we live a very finite existence.

"Our society is so brainwashed into believing there's some sort of direct correlation between weight and health that it's usually a shock when an apparently physically-fit person succumbs."

Elayne, I hate to be indelicate, but if you believe there *isn't* a direct correlation, then you've brainwashed yourself.

I mean, yes, there are fat people who never develop health-related issues, just as there are slender people who drop dead of heart disease. And there are lifelong smokers who never develop lung cancer; doesn't invalidate the findings that link the two, no matter how much the tobacco industry would have you believe otherwise.

My health was deteriorating. I was heading toward diabetes, my blood pressure was through the roof, and I couldn't walk without pain in my right knee. I lost a hundred pounds: My BP is now rock solid normal, my blood sugars are normal, and I can run miles without ill effect.

A guy came up to me at a convention who weighed around four hundred pounds. He told me he was losing his sight...he had diabetes...he couldn't walk without a cane...and he was developing heart problems. I asked what he was doing to lose weight. He shrugged and said "Nothing." Do we applaud him for refusing to be "brainwashed?" I sure don't. I feel sorry for him.

Maybe I'm simply possessed of the zealousness that offer seizes someone who has embraced a new way of life, but the simple fact is that being fat was killing me. And now it's not. And if you don't think you're jacking up the odds of health risks by carrying extra weight, then you're quite simply kidding yourself. It caught up with me, and I ditched the weight, and now I feel great. And more...I inwardly wince now when I see people who are, to use the clinical term, morbidly obese, since now I know how easy it really is to lose weight: Eat less and exercise. That's it. That's all. No magic formula. No elaborate South Beach or Weight Watcher programs required. With rare exceptions, if you burn more calories than you take in, the weight burns off. Simple as that. And I wish more people would heed that. I see so many fans and friends walking around with great rolls of fat hanging off them, and it saddens me, because I want them to stay around as long as possible. And they're lessening the odds of that with every Coke or order of cheese fries they toss back.

PAD

Peter--well, well said.

I'm glad you're feeling so much better.

It doesn't even need that much exercising. I just started eating a bit slower and replaced some of the more calory-heavy foods with less calory-heavy ones (I could keep eating more!). Dropped twenty kilos in a year, and I didn't exercise more than I had when I gained the weight.

Oh, and I have noticed myself looking down on people who have too much weight, because it was easy for me. I know people who have been trying to drop weight for years without any success. It isn't as easy for everyone as it was for me or you. One should try to remember that.

I think that as America has gotten fatter, we developed more and more excuses for why being fat is Okay.

I'm a pretty thin guy, and I think about my weight. I do that because doing a few little things now to stay thin is much easier than waiting until I'm fat and then trying to take the pounds off. But more than a few times I've mentioned something about not wanting to eat fatty foods or having had too much sugar for the day and people have laughed. "Where would you *put* the weight?!" seems to be the typical response.

There seems to be a lot of people who think that weight isn't something you should worry about until you're overweight. That's a pretty horrible mindset.

Well said, Peter. We always can be healthier and in better shape, and I think too many people forget that.

And some people forget -- or ignore -- that to the point where the death of someone who's tried to be healthier is seen as disproving that we need to be healthier! I've heard people dismiss the health speakings of Jim Fixx (and his support of jogging) and Linda McCartney (and her support of vegetarianism) because they died young -- coveniently forgettin that Fixx had a family history of heart trouble that helped to bring on his artery blockage and heart attack, and McCartney died of breast cancer. (The actual quote about McCartney: "Well her being a vegetarian didn't seem to help her there, did it?" Way to be sensitive, dude.)

Stay healthy, Peter. Running after that almost-5-year-old helps that, right?

Thanks to the wonders of Zyprexa, I gained about 30 pounds. Getting off the antidepressants got rid of a lot of it, but the rest of it came off with the simple method of fewer calories and more activity. (I also picked up Peter's trick of weighing myself daily, which has been a big help in keeping me on track.)

My friend Jane lost enough weight for an entire other human being--over 200 pounds. She showed me her 'fat pants' that she kept to remind her how far she'd come. I didn't realize pants even came in that size, and I could barely grasp the notion that Jane used to fit into them. And she didn't do anything drastic--she just ate less, switched from soda to water (a habit she maintained when we'd eat out) and started exercising. I don't know how long it took her, since she was down to 140 or so when we met, but I know that it's possible.

Wow. The sheer obnoxiousness of these comments is off the charts on this one. Why do you care if other people are overweight? How is it your business? Yes, Jason, being fat IS okay. How about accepting people as they are instead of looking your nose down on them as lesser beings?

This started as a nice remembrance of Mike Weiringo and has degenerated into slamming people. You people should be ashamed of yourselves.

No, being fat is *not* okay.

Being fat doesn't make you a bad person. It doesn't mean you don't have plenty of other good qualities. It doesn't mean you don't contribute many wonderful things to the world.

But it isn't Okay. It's a bad idea, just like smoking and excessive drinking are bad ideas.

People aren't "looking your nose down on them as lesser beings" for saying that it's a bad habit.

Maria, my wife, told me she felt odd bringing some of her Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man's for you to sign for her, particularly when she realized Mike had signed all he had done prior to this year's Heroes Con, except for the last three. She mistakenly left them at home, later telling me she hopes to see him next time in Charlotte.

His passing hit us both hard.

Like you, she asked me about bringing them to Dragon Con to have you sign them. I told her she should since she had Mike sign them and liked the book you BOTH worked on.

She also felt odd about it, but wanted to let you know how much she liked the title - which is why she agreed with me about bringing them.

thanks.

from both of us.

"No one ever said life is fair. It's just fairer than death, that's all."

Thanks for the quote. I love that book and movie, but that's a particularly nice quote. I'm still surprised how Mikes death has affected me. I never met him. I knew his work, read his blog every week, and loved his style. He was my favourite artist, and still is. But I never met him. Yet turning the page in the newest Amazing Spider-Man to find a full page tribute to him just broke me. On the spot.

I've never missed someone that I knew so little so much.

Yes, Jason, it *is* okay, and I'll tell you why. Because it doesn't affect you. Why some people feel the need to tell others how to live their lives, I can't tell you. But it is also a "bad habit". As Ann Landers would have put it, MYOB.

I have to go with Jason on this (whose previous post didn't seem anywhere near as inflammatory as you make it out to be, Tom). Being fat is not okay, and it has nothing to do with a person's intelligence, personality or their ability to name all 50 states alphabetically. It's a health issue. I'm trying to drop a few pounds myself because I've seen my dad (who just turned 77 last week) having recent problems with blood pressure, cholesterol and adult-onset diabetes. I've seen photos of Dad as a former athlete and he was the fittest guy I ever saw, but as a good Italian boy, he never met a bowl of pasta he didn't like, and I'm heading towards my fifth decade, it doesn't take a genius to realize that I could easily find myself in that same situation a few years down the road. And as I was at the gym yesterday, frankly there were a hundred places I would rather be.

Peter, I remember your post of many months ago when you started to go to the gym, and I'm really happy that you were able to follow it through. Now that you're reaping the rewards for all that work, I'm sure you're happy too.

"Yes, Jason, it *is* okay, and I'll tell you why. Because it doesn't affect you. Why some people feel the need to tell others how to live their lives, I can't tell you."

I can't speak for Jason, but...yeah. It does affect me. It upsets me because I see people younger than I am carrying far too much weight, and I know what the future very likely holds for them...because I was that future. I want to say to them, "Those knee pains you're feeling...that stabbing sensation in your lower back...that inability to climb a flight of stairs without huffing and puffing...it's only going to get worse. And it's so easy to fix. It doesn't have to be that way."

Look...if a friend of yours had easily curable skin cancer, and you said, "When are you going to start treatment?" and your friend replied, "Y'know what? I'm not going to do anything about it. Whatever happens, happens," would you say, "Well, okay, the only thing that matters is that you feel good about yourself? Or would you say, "What're you, NUTS? Don't you care about what happens to you? Don't you want to live, to seize life with both hands and enjoy every possible sunrise?"

Whatever you think this thread "started out" as, you're wrong. It started out as my pondering why I got to keep living even though I was so overweight while poor Mike was cut down and he was in good shape. So discussing the lethal effects that fat can have on people is perfectly consistent with the first post.

I'm not telling people how to live their lives, Tom. I'm telling them that if they don't get their eating under control, the chances are they won't have lives TO live. You seem to believe I'm doing so because I want them to feel bad. That's not my aim, and besides, I can assure you that as time passes, the transient hurt generated by words will pale in comparison to the real and lasting pain their abused bodies will inflict upon them. And I would just like to see them avoid that, that's all.

PAD

PAD

Peter, I agree with just about everything you just said, with the exception of the notion of being fat is 'okay,' although your point seems to support the fact that it's not. That being said, we may be debating in Clintonian fashion the meaning of the word 'is' here, but I would never dream of being rude enough to tell an overweight person they have to lose weight. Nor would I tell a smoker they have to quit; if somebody is smoking, I just make sure I'm elsewhere. But whether or not I say anything does not change the fact that they are very likely creating all manner of health problems for themselves.

"Peter, I agree with just about everything you just said, with the exception of the notion of being fat is 'okay,' although your point seems to support the fact that it's not."

Reread the comment, Joe. I was quoting Tom's saying it was "okay" and then responding to it. I didn't contradict myself at all.

PAD

Peter, apologies for not reading more carefully. I'm sure that virtually everybody on this site, while we mourn the loss of a very talented person who died far too early, we're also very glad that we're going to have you around for many years.

Elayne's post seems to be consistent with the notion that you aren't safe just because you aren't heavy, and she's right. I know of skinny diabetics, and my mother is tiny and her cholesterol is 250 without medication. Being skinny will not help you if you still eat the wrong things.

If you find the doctors featured on Oprah credible, foods you should take any opportunity to include in your diet are spinach, red peppers, mushrooms, green tea, and salmon, although fire-retardant plastics tend to build up in salmon. Remember to eat the least nutritious foods on an empty stomach, because foods on an empty stomach pass through faster, and they'll also slow down your metabolism for anything more nutritious that follows it.

Funnily enough, PAD, I was just looking at the pictures Keith R.A. DeCandido posted of you and he, and, once I got past the shock of looking at you without hair or 'stache, I was impressed to see how much thinner you looked. Good on you for getting fitter; we want to have you around a good long time.

As for fat ... though thinness does not necessarily save you from health problems, carrying too much weight puts stress on joints and such, and puts you at a much greater risk for a great many problems.

Laura Martin recently reminded me and others on a forum we frequent that it's often the fat you DON'T see which can get you--the fat held in a girdle UNDER the abs, which fools us into thinking: "Well, I may have a belly, but it's hard, so that's just muscle." Especially when it's on otherwise-slender or -average-bodied folk, this is the unhealthiest place to store fat, because it's right around all your major organs.

The best thing to do is exercise, I feel, if only to help your heart and muscles work better. The fact that you'll look better because of it is just a bonus.

I wonder if comics and sf fans can take something good from the horrible waste that is Ringo's passing, and pay more attention to our genetic health markers and doing something about them.
I fear, however, that it may do the opposite, making us think things like, "Well, look what a health freak HE was, and it didn't help," and cause us to go the other way ...

It's OK for PAD to tell us his opinion about being fat, but in the end it's us who must decide what we do with our lives. So don't mess with him as if he's forcing to act as he thinks, he's just giving some advice.

And I agree with him, even though too much exercise, too much forcing our body to be in shape and too little eating can a problem as important as obesity.

(I mean, people who never exercise and suddenly one day runs for an hour: obviously the body is not prepared to stand it, I know some cases like that, ending up with heart problems beacuse they force their body and push it too far.)

"Elayne's post seems to be consistent with the notion that you aren't safe just because you aren't heavy, and she's right."

Well, yeah, that part can't be argued with, but first she said that the belief that there was a correlation between obesity and health risk was something that society had been "brainwashed" into, i.e., it was a myth. And I was saying that, based on personal experience if nothing else, that wasn't a defensible position.

PAD

It just amazes me that, for all the billions spent on diets and nutrition, we still have so little solid info on what is best. It may just be that individual metabolisms are so varied that it's hard to make generalizations.

From an evolutionary point of view there's little doubt that PAD is spot-on when emphasizing exercise. The sedentary life of the average westerner is wildly at odds with the lifestyle our ancestors had right up to the present time. Even just 100 years ago our great grandparents most likely led lives that would seem cruelly backbreaking to most of us. If I had to put money on it I'd guess that this, even more than the admitted crap that we often shovel into our mouths, is responsible for much of the problem. (Look at the Inuit; a diet of almost pure protein and lots of animal fat didn't seem to affect them the way a similar diet would affect me. Eating whale blubber may not be so bad when you actually have to spend the time going out and killing the whale.)

Now if only the exercise equipment was more fun to use...like the Wii. I'd be in the gym all day if it was like Metroid Prime 3.

"If I had to put money on it I'd guess that this, even more than the admitted crap that we often shovel into our mouths, is responsible for much of the problem."

I'm not sure. During my last two visits to the US I found it difficult to finish meals in restaurants because the portions were bigger than I was used to.

"It just amazes me that, for all the billions spent on diets and nutrition, we still have so little solid info on what is best."

I don't agree with it. More or less, everybody knows what is good and what not. Even though every metabolysm is different, the basics are the same for everybody and are well known.

...but first she said that the belief that there was a correlation between obesity and health risk was something that society had been "brainwashed" into, i.e., it was a myth.

Maybe weight is now like the class in America, where a middle class is disappearing, but between a guy at what's considered his optimal weight who fits in a McDonald's value-meal every day, and a guy 40 pounds overweight who only eats dog food and metamucil, I don't see how the smart bet isn't on the second guy outlasting the first.

For at least a decade it's been demonstrated that foods fried in trans fats are worse for you than foods fried in lard, and that corn syrup is worse for you than cane sugar. It's even come out recently that for an equal amount of cane sugar, corn syrup may increase your likelihood of getting diabetes by 10x. And as far as I know, they still haven't made a margarine a turkey will eat. Trans fats and corn syrup don't exist in nature, they are more expensive to make available, and they do more damage than the cheaper alternatives -- they seem to be sustained entirely by myth, whether it's the notion weight-loss will make you safe or that we must make ourselves completely independent from imported sugar.

At least in the case of trans fats, it seems products marketed to our desire to keep our weight down have killed more people than they've saved. When you hear about an athletic nutrition freak dying as he's entering middle age, maybe he's left behind a refrigerator stocked with margarine.

(...Eating whale blubber may not be so bad when you actually have to spend the time going out and killing the whale.)

I remember that the pattern seems to be that fats from sea animals are very good for you, even if they're mammals.

Everything in moderation folks.
After 15 years in an ER I have seen some pretty weird stuff.
Over-weight non-compliant diabetics with no toes and these god awful sores all over their bodies but their hearts are fine.
On the other side, seemingly heathy individuals living the good life doing everthing by the book but that nasty family history gives them an MI at 35 years old.
You cant change your race, genetics or sex but you can slow those factors by keeping the factors you can control weight, lifestyle and such under control and hope for the best.
Then again your body might decide to develope a big ol' blood clot and send it along to your heart (or brain) and you are gone before you hit the ground.
Life is precious and I dont think we are fully aware of how fragile it is until we see someone such as Mr. Wieringo who most certainly died way before his time.

Tom Keller -
Wow. The sheer obnoxiousness of these comments is off the charts on this one.

Wow. Your ability to be #1 Asshole on the Internet was certainly revealed by your post.

Why do you care if other people are overweight?

By all means, give me your address so my insurance company can start collecting my premiums from you.

Never mind the fact that I'd rather not see friends and family keel over because of being overweight.

Never mind how it reflects on American society and culture as a whole.

It's just too damn early in the morning to waste any more time dealing with your stupidity.

Craig, if you have something coherent to say, please say it. And if I'm the #1 asshole on the internet, merely for saying that people should be left alone, so be it.

PAD, I realize that you're trying to help people. I can't argue with that. And I'm not arguing with that. Should people be healthier? Of course! But if they are not, it's no skin off my nose. You seem to be a more empathic person than myself, but I can say that I'm not upset when I see overweight people, not as upset as you seem to be anyhow. My position is that they got that way by their behavior, corrective action is available on a wide scale, but if they choose not to take it, that's their business. Not mine.

Your analogy is false, by the way. For one thing, you compare "easily curable skin cancer" to weight loss, when for most people it is not easy at all. For another, you're talking about a friend versus all overweight people. Surely I would tell a friend that they should try to get healthier, but I don't think advising a whole group of people is my place.

PAD: I talked to you about your weight loss at this year's Heroes Con. You said you only drank water. I used to drink soda heavily, but I haven't for most of the past year. I tried some a few weeks ago at a ball game and couldn't drink it all. It was just too sweet.

I only met Ringo once, during that same Heroes Con. I had at least one FNSM that you signed, but I didn't bring it with me that day. I only had him sign a Superman, something which I'd read later, he didn't enjoy working on as much as his later Marvel stuff. If that's true, I'd wish I had him sign something he enjoyed more.

I hope people don't use Mike's untimely death as an excuse to live it up and gourge yourself on whatever you want. Having both parents die from smoking has made me appreciate how individual choices can affect others. I was robbed of at least 20 years of their love and support due to their choices. Don't ever say your health is none of my business, because it is. I pay higher taxes and health insurance rates in caring for other people's lack of care to their bodies. If you don't get healthy for your self, do it for your friends/family, and society at large (pardon the pun).

Finally, please look up the current issue of Scientific American. The entire issue is devoted to food. Lots of great articles dealing with things we talked about here, plus things I didn't think about, like developing countries dealing with both starvation and obesity.

"I don't agree with it. More or less, everybody knows what is good and what not. Even though every metabolysm is different, the basics are the same for everybody and are well known."

We've been doing a lot of research into various things because of our kids...6 and 22.5 months so far. What we've learned is that...both our educations have done precious little to tell us what's good and what's bad for us. Sure, we have the food pyramid or whatever they're using to teach kids about nutrition and servings and portions these days. But even the simple things...number of servings of fruits and veggies, for example...don't go on to teach about the pestidices used in the growing and shipping of those foods. I haven't been able to eat most apples and related fruits for years because I get a reaction in my throat nearly every time. And it's not just from the skin, it's in the meat, so no amount of washing helps.

I recently saw something that talked about humans' instinctual capacity...we practically have none. What we do have is a nearly unlimited capacity for learned things. We understand that basics of how and why our bodies work, but we spend almost not time learning how to make them work well. Truthfully, if most people understood the consequences of eating bad food, McDonald's would be out of business tomorrow.

What might appear to some as self-righteousness in PAD's comments is really common sense. Yes, tragedy and disease do strike those who take good care of their health, but the risk factors are very clear, and they must not be dismissed. Those of us who have been successful in losing weight (70# between 2005 and 2006 in my case, and some large number in PAD's) can be as mystified as anyone else at others' inability to do the same. I might be speaking from ignorance, but it just makes no sense to me that a person would be unable to drop below 400 or 500 pounds: Moving all of that meat requires fuel, so reduced intake should cause reduction, one would think. If the weight still won't come off, medical attention is needed and available. I won't claim it's easy to lose weight, but severely obese people must not be told it's impossible or unnecessary.

"But if they are not, it's no skin off my nose. You seem to be a more empathic person than myself, but I can say that I'm not upset when I see overweight people, not as upset as you seem to be anyhow. My position is that they got that way by their behavior, corrective action is available on a wide scale, but if they choose not to take it, that's their business. Not mine."

I think, Tom, the best response to the concept of such things being "their business" was expressed b Marley's ghost:

"Business!" cried the Ghost, wringing its hands again. "Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"

And if Dickens doesn't do it for you, how about John Donne:

"No man is an island, entire of itself...any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."

I'm trying to toll a bell. You go on to say--

"For one thing, you compare "easily curable skin cancer" to weight loss, when for most people it is not easy at all."

Yeah, that's kind of the point: It is easy. The reason I know it's easy because I'm nothing special. I'm really not. I'm not holding myself up as a paragon of self-control or iron will power. I'm not pretending I'm better than anyone else. In fact, I know I'm not, and the fact that I'm not means--to me--that anyone really CAN get in shape because if I can do it, anyone can. All it takes is the realization of a simple philosophy:

You can eat anything. You just can't eat everything.

Once you realize that, and once you say seven words to yourself and mean it--"I don't have to live like this"--it really, really is easy.

"For another, you're talking about a friend versus all overweight people. Surely I would tell a friend that they should try to get healthier, but I don't think advising a whole group of people is my place."

Why not? What's wrong with trying to get people to change the way they think? If even one person heeds my words and improves the quality of his or her life because of it, am I supposed to believe that it wasn't my place to provide that insight?

One last quote, this time from Margaret Mead: "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." My world, the world of comics and SF fans, is filled with people who are shortening their life spans through overeating. If I can change that world through thought and commitment, then you can bet I will.

PAD

"You can eat anything. You just can't eat everything."

Thanks, Peter. I'm trying (and succeeding, for the most part) to lose weight (with Weight Watchers -- I like a support group of strangers so I don't have to bore my loved ones with it too much), but I've never heard this idea expressed so succintly. I'll keep it in mind the next time I need it.

Rob

About five weeks ago, I went to a pool party hosted by some friends. Late in the evening, I went inside to change out of my trunks and found myself standing before a brand-new digital scale.

I don't have a scale in my house. My bathroom is small enough that having one in there would noticeably reduce the amount of floor space. As a result, I never really know how much I weigh. I look in the mirror, I notice which clothes fit and how well, and that's about it. I'd been feeling heavier lately and figured the scale would show 210, maybe 215. I'm 6'2".

Wrong! 232. Gah! Now, admittedly, this was late in the evening after a cookout with the usual fare, but I still knew I hadn't eaten enough to add ten or fifteen pounds that day.

As it happens, I was about out of junk food at home. When I went grocery shopping the next day, I bought no chips and no candy. I ran out of both by Monday, August 6. Haven't bought any of either since--my chocolate consumption is down to a couple (literally, two to four) Hershey's Kisses a day and I've eaten fewer chips in the last month than I used to eat while in a day or two. I now buy one of those pre-made bagged salads a week and that's the side dish with dinner for three nights. Fruit is where I'm getting my jones for sweet stuff satisfied now.
I haven't had occasion to weigh myself again, but I can tell you this: Cutting out the junk food, by itself, has made enough of a difference that my clothes feel looser and pants I couldn't zip a month ago now absolutely require a belt to stay up.
I may never get back to my 1985 weight of 175, but I will by God get back below 200.

I keep my scale in the bedroom, actually. Convenient since I weigh myself in the morning before I get dressed and in the evening right before I go to bed.

PAD

Tom, you didn't say people should be left alone, you said:

"Why do you care if other people are overweight?"

which seems to imply that you don't give two shits about anybody but yourself. By all means, prove me wrong.

I'm plenty coherent, you just don't seem to get it.

Paul, I think you've really got the right idea. It sounds like you've made several little changes to improve your diet. I think the biggest thing we do wrong in this country is to ignore problems until they are so bad they need drastic solutions.

An old roommate of mine was your height, but much heavier. He'd go on a diet by eating nothing but a small handful of baby carrots from the time he got home until the time he went to bed. After a week of that he'd be starving so much that he'd revert back to his usual nightly snack: a serving bowl of ice cream. Not a normal bowl, a serving bowl.

Paul, keep up with the little changes. I think that's a great way to do it.

"If I had to put money on it I'd guess that this, even more than the admitted crap that we often shovel into our mouths, is responsible for much of the problem."

I'm not sure. During my last two visits to the US I found it difficult to finish meals in restaurants because the portions were bigger than I was used to.

No denying that but if you are working like the average farmer once did--and that would be the level of backbreaking labor that most of our ancestors routinely did not so long ago--you'd NEED to have big meals just to keep going. I've seen pro wrestlers put away obscene amounts of food and keep a far leaner body than I could hope for. What's their secret? Well, body pressing equally behemoth sized co-workers on a regular basis probably helps. Me, the only ass I throw around on a regular basis is my own and not all that impressively.

More or less, everybody knows what is good and what not. Even though every metabolysm is different, the basics are the same for everybody and are well known.

Well, maybe. But for a while everything was low fat this, low fat that, then I hear that the low fat stuff is high in carbs which are bad and those who do a Adkins type high protein high fat low carb diet do well. Eggs are bad, eggs are good, butter is bad, no margarine is the silent killer...

And there's the fact that for all our horrible horrible eating habits we are living for a long time. So there's that.

Don't ever say your health is none of my business, because it is. I pay higher taxes and health insurance rates in caring for other people's lack of care to their bodies. If you don't get healthy for your self, do it for your friends/family, and society at large (pardon the pun).

I agree...but I'm getting a little nervous of where that might lead. One argument against the government getting too involved in health care is that it could easily lead to a situation where, with the very best of intentions of course, we end up with a situation where our rights are severely restricted in the name of health and health taxes.

I know you are not advocating a get healthy whether you want to or not approach but I can't say that mindset would never occur to the whiz kids in DC.

Yes, tragedy and disease do strike those who take good care of their health, but the risk factors are very clear, and they must not be dismissed.

Absolutely. I mean, there are times when a person dies because they are trapped in a burning car by a seat belt but is there anyone who thinks that would justify not wearing seat belts? But they'll look at some guy who lives a healthy lifestyle and dies early and go "See? See? Gimme some more chocolate covered deep fried suet balls, ma!".

First, I'm still shocked by the loss of Ringo. Last week I picked up the new Tellos hardcover and just flipped through it missing him more and more. We've lost an incredible talent.

Second, the weight loss thing...

I have some smart and well-read friends who are overweight who will argue with anyone for hours on end that the weight standards set by the medical industry are bogus and that the weight-loss culture is a bigger problem than people who carry around extra fat. I, on the other hand, lost 30 pounds last year and was amazed at how much healthier I felt and how much more stamina I had.

To anyone who is carrying around excess weight, all I have to say is try these six things for six weeks... 1) eat smaller portions of healty food, 2) cut out the junk food and soda, 3) weigh yourself each morning, 4) keep a written record of what you eat, 5) when you feel hungy, wait 10 minutes before eating anything (to see if it's real hunger or just the emotional desire for food), and 6) get up and move around some each day. If after a month and a half of that you don't feel like a healthier person, than do whatever the hell you want to yourself, it's no skin off my back.

Losing weight isn't that hard, it just takes a couple of decisions to treat your body better and when you do it, you'll find that your body is a better place to be.

For one thing, you compare "easily curable skin cancer" to weight loss, when for most people it is not easy at all.

Yeah, that's kind of the point: It is easy.

The skin cancer positive may not be a good analogy because it assumes you've been informed by a doctor who can set you up for surgery, as opposed to diagnosing yourself.

One of the benefits of socialized healthcare is lower rates of obesity among the beneficiaries, because more people hear they're fat from doctors, rather than just hearing their fat from people shouting at them from cars as they drive by. Sicko even spent time on the English system of subsidizing transport costs to and from the hospital.

I've seen pro wrestlers put away obscene amounts of food and keep a far leaner body than I could hope for. What's their secret?

Steroids.

I'll try to be the voice of moderation here (certainly a first). I feel the same way PAD does about morbid obesity: It's an easily identified, not so easily remedied, health risk, and I think negatively about those who don't attempt to save their own lives. On the other hand, those people who feel that other people's conduct is none of their business, or that it doesn't impact themselves, are entitled to their opinions, and that doesn't seem to affect me very much. There shouldn't be anything controversial about PAD's initial post regarding weight loss, because we should all know he would not stop opposing positions from being expressed. It's that old free speech thing: I consider myself strongly pro-free speech, but PAD has been more rigorous about it than I, and probably almost everybody here.

"It's an easily identified, not so easily remedied, health risk, and I think negatively about those who don't attempt to save their own lives"

I appreciate the attempt at moderation, but that's not really an accurate summary of my position. My point is that it IS easily remedied. I was in fact amazed at just how easy it was. All it required was the decision to do it. The DECISION is hard. It took me years to reach it. But once I made the decision, the actual weight loss...the remedy...that was a snap.

Nor do I feel negatively about those not making the attempt. It implies that I'm critical of them or consider them lesser beings somehow. I feel badly FOR them, since I know from personal experience what they're already enduring and what's going to happen to them as they get older. And I feel they likely have unresolved personal issues that are contributing to their individual predicaments, which is one of the reasons that the one-program-fits-all mentality of dieting typically doesn't work. It treats the symptom but not the cause, and as long as the cause is intact, the symptoms will recur.

But I don't sit in judgment on them. I don't have to. Their own bodies are doing that.

PAD

"Steroids."

So far as I know, steroids don't burn fat...they build muscle. Or they help muscle repair/heal faster. But they don't burn fat. What keeps most prefessional athletes...or any highly active person...lean is the calories they burn compared to their caloric intake.

I entered law school fat. I blame the 2 for $2 Big Mac and 1/4 pounders. And probably Sunday night's pizza deal. Anyway, I decided to not be fat any more, so I did 2 things. I stopped drinking soda, replacing it with water. I cut back on a lot of juice, too, reducing my sugar intake. And I watched what I ate, cutting my fat intake to about 30g a day. On top of that, I started exercising. Lots of bike riding, hitting the gym, and eventually playing basketball for about an hour a day, 3-5 days a week. I left law school in the best shape of my life.

Today, I'm carrying a belly I'd like to lose, but with a full time job and 2 kids, I no longer have the time to exercise the amount that I'd like and need to in order to burn enough calories. Portions are big, so I eat less and have leftovers. I still don't drink a lot of soda or juice, and I don't eat a lot of beef, but not as much salad as I should. I've stopped gaining weight, but I'm having a hard time dropping any, too. And I know the reason why...I'm not trying hard enough. I know I could do better, but I know I'm choosing not to.

Some folks are addicted to food, and maybe they need some outside help kicking that addiction. BUt for everyone else, losing weight really is a simple matter. Like PAD said, making the decision is hard, but once you do, it's laughably simple to actually do it.

Your inferring the burning of fat from my reply is like my inferring the burning of fat from "What keeps most [professional] athletes...or any highly active person...lean is the calories they burn." You didn't imply the burning of fat was taking place, and neither did I.

I'll try to be the voice of moderation here (certainly a first). ...I think negatively about those who don't attempt to save their own lives.

Does that include working single-mothers who would have to sacrifice that much more sleep if they want to stay out of the McDonald's drive-thru? Maybe your ire of moderation will encourage them to dip into their trust funds and hire maids to cook dinner from scratch. I guess this is what they mean when they say you have to be cruel to be kind.

Absolutely. I mean, there are times when a person dies because they are trapped in a burning car by a seat belt but is there anyone who thinks that would justify not wearing seat belts?

Sadly, yes (or, worse, who take the toddler-like attitude of "I'm not going to do it because you told me to and you can't make me!"). I won't post the link because odds are it would get eaten by the spam filter, but search on "seatbelt" at snopes.com. (Especially the second link, "Anti-seat belt law advocate is killed in automobile accident.")

"But I don't sit in judgment on them. I don't have to. Their own bodies are doing that."

Ouch! Very well written and explained, but with this last paragraph, you've lost it.

How did he lose it? Judgment, here is used to reflect that an unhealthy body let one know that it is unhealthy through physical symptoms? No moral judgment inolved at all.

"5) when you feel hungy, wait 10 minutes before eating anything (to see if it's real hunger or just the emotional desire for food),.."

The rest of what you said is common sense, but I wouldn't subscribe to this one because basically you're suggesting that someone sit around and try not to think about food...which is like trying not to think about pink elephants. If you feel hungry but there's no mealtime-related reason for it, it may not be emotional desire for food: It may well be that you're thirsty. The brain's signals for hunger and thirst are remarkably similar. The problem is that people associate thirst with parched lips or dry throat, and so don't realize that hunger pangs may actually the body announcing that it needs liquid. I've found that if I'm hungry for no discernible reason, a glass of water is a far more effective remedy than "don't think of food."

"But I don't sit in judgment on them. I don't have to. Their own bodies are doing that."

Ouch! Very well written and explained, but with this last paragraph, you've lost it."

And you've lost me, or at least my understanding of what you're talking about. Again, there's no moral issues here. Yes, there is the occasional metabolic exception. I know at least one person whose body is so out of whack due to unbalanced hormone secretion that he could limit his diet to eight hundred calories a day and still gain weight. But for the most part, the first, best indicator of one's dietary habits is the reaction of one's own body. It's hard to hide a hundred excess pounds. Everyone who sees you knows you're eating too much, no matter what they tactfully refuse to say to you. I mean, everyone who sees me now says, "You look great!" The flip side of that is, a hundred pounds ago, I looked terrible, but no one wanted to say so.

And when your knees are going, your back is going, your very blood is turning against your, your eyesight is diminishing, your arteries are getting clogged...that's your body rendering its final judgment.

PAD

This topic could be an interesting history for a comic: one character, for example one of the Madrox has weight problems, etc. and so this way you expose to a greater audience the problems that overweight brings.

Not joking, though I've never been to the US, I've read that one of the problems is the high percentage of morbidly obese people and the lack of concern about the problems that "too much donuts" causes.

(But if you do domething alike, prepare for the critics and for the people mocking and having fun at your expense).

But I don't sit in judgment on them. I don't have to. Their own bodies are doing that.

Wasn't it Orson Welles who said "Gluttony is not a secret vice"?

PAD: I find it ironic you work in a profession that celebrates the idealized body image (for men and women) even more than Hollywood. Except for Amanda Waller, I can't think of any rotund comic characters whose girth isn't the butt of a joke or source of power.

I'm not passing judgement on you or the comics industry. This IS fantasy after all. I'm also not asking you to create a new overweight super-team who battle weight loss instead of villians (large bald men = Weight Watchers, get it? hello?). I just thought it was an interesting observation.

BTW, I know someone at work who loses a pound a week by eating 5-6 small meals a day and exercising regularly. He's lost at least 60 so far.

"...which is like trying not to think about pink elephants."

When I hear "pink elephants," I always think of the gray Hulk using them in a similar analogy, back in Incredible Hulk #33...2?... when he pried gamma technology knowledge from Bruce Banner's memory :)

Come to think of it, why would most super heroes have good muscle tone? If you can bend steel in your bare hands it would be pretty tough to not get flabby--I get at least a little exercise shlepping my carcass around campus but guys who can lift buildings without effort would have a tough time working up a sweat. Superman could spend weeks on the Flexmaster Pro and it shouldn't do anything for him. So where did those washboard abs come from?

"Come to think of it, why would most super heroes have good muscle tone?"

Isometric yoga exercises and having to carry the weight of so many cliché ridden, heavy handed plots all the time. The weight of the last few years worth of mega crossover series would kill the average character. Hell, they've almost been fatal to the readers.

You are correct, sir.

Come to think of it, why would most super heroes have good muscle tone? If you can bend steel in your bare hands it would be pretty tough to not get flabby...

You start out by pulling one train-car, and you work your way up to juggling one with your feet, like in the Impossibles.

PAD said: "I think, Tom, the best response to the concept of such things being "their business" was expressed b Marley's ghost:

"Business!" cried the Ghost, wringing its hands again. "Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"

And if Dickens doesn't do it for you, how about John Donne:

"No man is an island, entire of itself...any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."

I'm trying to toll a bell."

Ah, I see. What this boils down to seems to be a fundamental difference in philosophy. I disagree with both Marley's ghost and John Donne. That's cool.

"Ah, I see. What this boils down to seems to be a fundamental difference in philosophy. I disagree with both Marley's ghost and John Donne. That's cool."

Enjoy the chains you'll be hauling for eternity.

PAD

I hear one of the reforms Scrooge implemented after embracing humanitarianism was to replace the pâté served in the orphanages with gruel.

PAD - If you read my comment as a summary of your own position, you are correct that it is not very accurate. I meant it as my own take on the issue, but that may not have been written clearly. I do disagree with you somewhat on the subject of how easy it is to lose weight: You and I were both lucky that our systems responded very positively to improved diet and increased exercise. I don't really understand why reduced intake and increased fuel-burning does not give some other people such results, but it seems to be the case. Some metabolisms and body chemistries make weight loss much more difficult than either of us found it. 6'2", 190# seems acceptable to me, although further reduction as I get older and less active would probably be a good idea. I'm only about three years younger than you, so there's no generational distinction to speak of. I'm glad it worked out for you, but it does come much harder for some.

I don't think "Their own bodies are doing that" is at all out-of-bounds. When you have been insensitive, and perhaps sometimes else, I have always felt free to criticize you - but this statement doesn't seem like anything but common sense. I am quite sympathetic to those unable to help themselves, but not at all so to those unwilling to.

Looking at my post which occasioned PAD's correction, I see that he could not have read it other than the way he did. I did state that he and I agreed on something we did not. His take on the ease of weight loss is not the same as mine, although I agree entirely about its necessity.

"Enjoy the chains you'll be hauling for eternity.

PAD"

Well, seeing as I don't believe in any kind of afterlife, I'm not too worried. ;)

"Well, seeing as I don't believe in any kind of afterlife, I'm not too worried. ;)"

I suspect that was Marley's philosophy as well.

PAD

Not to mention, Tom, that "oh, there's no afterlife so I'm not worried" feeds into the misperception that atheists lack morals. As an atheist who considers himself moral, I'd like to ask you to cut it out. :-)

TWL

TWL, I meant that I'm not worried about dragging chains around for eternity, not that I think it's okay to do anything I feel like doing. I consider myself very moral.

No worries, Tom. I didn't mean to say that I thought *you* meant it that way -- it's more a concern that I'd rather not give the "atheists are immoral" crowd any extra ammo.

TWL

it's more a concern that I'd rather not give the "atheists are immoral" crowd any extra ammo.

You should have thought of that at the Faculty Christmas party last year, pal. Tsk, tsk.

Dammit, Mulligan -- you assured me that those pictures would never see the light of day! (And I swear that the sheep was 18...)

Yeah, but was it a female sheep?

Let's just say it had a wide staaaaaaance.

See, I would have just gone with "Of course it was a female sheep, what am I, some kind of weirdo?"

But there's a lot to be said for originality.

That said, I apologize for derailing the thread into humor, when the subject is anything but funny. Ringo was a great guy and a great talent, in world that needs a lot more of both.

I almost went with your response first, but decided to head off into a different direction.

And no apologies needed so far as I'm concerned, at least -- I think we could all use a lot more humor these days. (I know I could.)

I'll say in seriousness that while Ringo's art was never one of my major favorites, he clearly had a chunk o' talent -- and even more importantly, based on all the stories he was a tremendous guy. I'm very sorry for his passing and his family's loss.

(And as to all the discussion about weight loss, it's certainly gotten me more inspired to drop some poundage myself. I've never been morbidly obese, fortunately, so I'm hoping that some relatively moderate diet and exercise changes will take care of it.)

TWL

The sheep had Tim when it flashed him its hoof in the next stall.

I wish there was something I could say that would provide comfort to those who knew Mike Wieringo, but I'm coming up empty. He was incredibly talented and by all accounts a generous, kind, and amiable man. He is gone and people are hurting. They have my condolences, which is the best I can offer.

I weigh 270 lbs, which is about 70 lbs too much, and I most certainly do not take offense at what Peter has written about the dangers of overeating and lack of exercise. Instead, I consider it good advice and have been thinking about it a lot. I need to remember that my current habits will almost certainly lead to diabetes, heart disease, and/or other ailments. Even if it doesn't shorten my life, this excess weight will certainly reduce my quality-of-life.

I was 200 lbs when I was in my early 20s. I can get back there again.

If I were sitting next to Peter eating a hamburger and he were poking me in the belly while repeatedly chanting "you're a fat fatty fat-ass" I'd be pissed and might possibly punch him. But he is spreading his message in a forum where I have a choice about whether or not to pay attention. I can't see anything wrong with that.

Last but not least, I go away to Oakland for three days only to come back and discover that Tim Lynch is doing the nasty with sheep. That can't possibly be good for you, Tim. Nor for the sheep.

Tim Lynch, I sincerely looked up to you as one of the best and brightest among the posters here. But I have learned that the sheep are now part of The Great Squirrel Conspiracy and therefore you by extension must be as well. The squirrels and their allies are the greatest threat this world has ever known and I will fight them in the fields, I will fight them in the cities, and yes, I will fight them in their trees. I will ask for, nor give, any quarter in this Great War, sir. You have been advised.

"If I were sitting next to Peter eating a hamburger and he were poking me in the belly while repeatedly chanting "you're a fat fatty fat-ass" I'd be pissed and might possibly punch him. But he is spreading his message in a forum where I have a choice about whether or not to pay attention. I can't see anything wrong with that."

And besides, I wouldn't know what else you'd done during the day.

For instance, last night I was in the neighborhood of Holstens, the diner which my parents took me to any number of times while I was growing up in Bloomfield, NJ...and which gained national attention when the last scene of "The Sopranos" was filmed there.

And I splurged, because how the hell often do I get to Holstens?

So I had a cheeseburger platter and a brownie sundae.

Except, planning ahead, I had a very light breakfast, a very light lunch, I hit the gym in the morning, went power bowling in the evening when I came back (five games in forty minutes) and, by the way, left half the french fries and only ate half the sundae.

Net result: weighed myself this morning and I'd dropped a pound from the previous morning.

Even the rare splurge can be managed if you're just smart about it.

PAD

If you google milk and diabetes, you'll find reports of conflicting studies of their relationship. I mostly remember the BBC reporting this year a pint a day cutting the risk of diabetes, but there are also reports of milk above moderate quantities increasing the risk. I moved to skim and don't miss even 1%, but more than 2 servings a day should probably be considered neutralizing whatever benefit a moderate amount provides.

But I have learned that the sheep are now part of The Great Squirrel Conspiracy and therefore you by extension must be as well.

Ah, but that's only true of ordinary sheep, good sir. Not dangerously clever sheep like Harold. Harold got wind of the conspiracy early and managed a successful escape.

Don't prejudge. Don't assume that all sheep will follow blindly like ... like ... okay, I'll concede that point.

Even the rare splurge can be managed if you're just smart about it.

It's obtaining that smartness that's the difficulty, I think. I'm impressed with your ability to plan that well for the Big Holsten's Splurge (a splurge I understand, having been there myself a few times many years back).

I'll also be honest and say that you probably have it slightly easier in terms of planning exercise, because you've got a job where you can set your own flexible hours. Teaching doesn't lend itself quite as well to that. I still try to get lots of exercise-bike time in, but it's more difficult now than it was during the summer, even more so when I'm recovering from respiratory ick that my lovely daughter gave to me before getting over it herself.

Doesn't mean I can't do it -- it just makes it tougher logistically.

(Your statement about leaving half the sundae/etc. is very well taken, though. One big change I made at the start of the summer was to work on taking 1/3 to 1/2 of any meal home when I eat out. Doesn't mean I don't have those fries eventually, but it's over two days rather than in one go.)

TWL

Harold is holding out against republican pressure to give up his senate seat. His wife is humiliated. He has a family-values-bestiality voting-record. It's all a simple misunderstanding.