PDA

View Full Version : Fat Kids


elsid13
07-03-2006, 11:10 AM
Came across this article and thought it deserved a poll- Should we tell the truth or suger coat the fact that we getting FAT as a nation. It really is a bigger problem then smoking the days.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060703/ap_on_he_me/diet_obese_or_not


Experts debate labeling children obese By LINDSEY TANNER, AP Medical Writer
Mon Jul 3, 12:19 AM ET



Is it OK for doctors and parents to tell children and teens they're fat? That seems to be at the heart of a debate over whether to replace the fuzzy language favored by the U.S. government with the painful truth — telling kids if they're obese or overweight.

Labeling a child obese might "run the risk of making them angry, making the family angry," but it addresses a serious issue head-on, said Dr. Reginald Washington, a Denver pediatrician and co-chair of an American Academy of Pediatrics obesity task force.

"If that same person came into your office and had cancer, or was anemic, or had an ear infection, would we be having the same conversation? There are a thousand reasons why this obesity epidemic is so out of control, and one of them is no one wants to talk about it."

The diplomatic approach adopted by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and used by many doctors avoids the word "obese" because of the stigma. The CDC also calls overweight kids "at risk of overweight."

Those favoring a change say the current terms encourage denial of a problem affecting increasing numbers of U.S. youngsters.

Under a proposal studied by a committee of the American Medical Association, the CDC and others, fat children would get the same labels as adults — overweight or obese.

The change "would certainly make sense. It would bring the U.S. in line with the rest of the world," said Tim Cole, a professor of medical statistics at the University College London's Institute of Child Health.

The existing categories are convoluted and "rather ironic, since the U.S. leads the world in terms of obesity," Cole said. "There must be an element of political correctness."

The debate illustrates just how touchy the nation is about its weight problem.

Obese "sounds mean. It doesn't sound good," said Trisha Leu, 17, who thinks the proposed change is a bad idea.

The Wheeling, Ill., teen has lost 60 pounds since March as part of an adolescent obesity surgery study at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

"When you're young, you don't understand what obese means," Leu said. "I still don't understand it."

The CDC adopted the current terms in 1998, using weight-to-height ratios and growth charts from a generation of children much slimmer than today's.

Children are said to be "at risk for overweight" if their body-mass index is between the 85th and 94th percentiles. They're "overweight" if their body-mass index is in the 95th percentile or higher — or greater than at least 95 percent of youngsters the same age and gender.

Many pediatricians understand the first category to mean "overweight" and the second one to mean "obese," said the CDC's Dr. William Dietz. He said the word "obese" was purposely avoided because of negative connotations but conceded that many pediatricians find the current language confusing.

Adding to the confusion is the fact that about 17 percent of U.S. children are in the highest category, and that almost 34 percent are in the second-highest category. That sounds like a mathematical impossibility, but it's because the percentiles are based on growth charts from the 1960s and 1970s, when far fewer kids were too fat.

In children, determining excess weight is tricky, partly because of rapid growth — especially in adolescence — that can sometimes temporarily result in a high body-mass index.

For children in at least the 95th percentile, high BMI "is almost invariably excess fat," Dietz said. But there's less certainty about those in the second-highest category. So to avoid mislabeling and "traumatizing" kids, the CDC chose to be diplomatic, Dietz said.

The committee, set up by the American Medical Association, involves obesity experts from 14 professional organizations including the American Academy of Pediatrics. Their mission is to update recommendations for prevention, diagnosis and management of obesity in children.

Final recommendations are expected in September, and the participating groups will decide individually whether to adopt them.

Dr. Ronald Davis, the AMA's president-elect, said it's unclear whether the expert committee can develop a consensus on the obesity terms.

"There are seemingly legitimate arguments on both sides," said Davis, a preventive medicine specialist with Henry Ford Health System in Detroit.

Maria Bailey of Pompano Beach, Fla., whose 12-year-old daughter, Madison, is self-consciously overweight, opposes the proposed change. She said their pediatrician has told her daughter to exercise more and see a nutritionist, but "hasn't told her that she's in a (weight) category."

"We're already raising a generation of teenagers who have eating disorders," Bailey said. "I think it would just perpetuate that."

Paola Fernandez Rana of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., has a 9-year old daughter who at 40 pounds overweight is considered obese. Rana said doctors "refer to it as the 'o-word' " in front of her daughter "in an effort not to upset her."

"They very clearly told me she was obese," Rana said. But she said she agreed with the term and thinks that at some point it should be used with her daughter, too.

"Obviously I don't want my daughter to be overweight, but ... in order to change the situation, she is ultimately going to need to hear it," Rana said.

Dr. Michael Wasserman, a pediatrician with the Ochsner Clinic in Metairie, La., agreed. Using the term "at risk for overweight" is misleading, creating the perception "that I'm only at risk for it now, so I don't have to deal with it now," said Wasserman, who is not on the committee.

"There's a tremendous amount of denial by parents and children," he said.

Chicago pediatrician Rebecca Unger, also not a committee member, said she likes using the term "at risk for overweight" because it gives patients hope that "we can do something about it."

___

On the Net:

CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/bmi/childrens_BMI/about_childrens_BMI.htm

Smiling Assassin27
07-03-2006, 11:29 AM
Since when does lying to our kids do anything more than teach them that lying is right? We've already, in many cases, lied to them that we care about their health and well-being by letting them get obese in the first place.

Sassy
07-03-2006, 11:30 AM
The kid/kids already know.

Garcia Bronco
07-03-2006, 11:30 AM
Tell them the truth...if they cry....that means it has an effect on them.

elsid13
07-03-2006, 11:41 AM
I think that one biggest problem we had in education is the cut back in the physical education classes due to budgetary reasons. Small saving in the short term but will cost in the long term

Midnight Blue
07-03-2006, 11:43 AM
The kid/kids already know.

No doubt whatsoever about this... "we" don't have to tell them; if they're overweight, their peers will make that painfully obvious (impossible to ignore). That's why it's not all that uncommon to see 8-year-old girls with eating disorders.

Garcia Bronco
07-03-2006, 11:46 AM
I think that one biggest problem we had in education is the cut back in the physical education classes due to budgetary reasons. Small saving in the short term but will cost in the long term


I feel sorry for today's kids. First off...the methods we are using to teach our children are severly out-dated. Second...they get more homework than I've ever seen because the teaching methods are so poor. Lastly....parent raise their kids on fast food..and TV because they have to work 2 jobs to afford crap they don't need..I think all these factors lead to fat kids...poor education...poor parenting...and poor physical stimulation

elsid13
07-03-2006, 11:56 AM
I feel sorry for today's kids. First off...the methods we are using to teach our children are severly out-dated. Second...they get more homework than I've ever seen because the teaching methods are so poor. Lastly....parent raise their kids on fast food..and TV because they have to work 2 jobs to afford crap they don't need..


I'm going to have to disagree with you somewhat. The teaching methods have evolved a great bit, but I will state there is serve lack of technology in the class room, mainly due to money.

The problem every time school system try to install the new technique you get a number of vocal parents that clamor why are school changing, it worked for the parent when they were in school it should work for thier children. The homework- way to much in my opinion too- is a result of parents demands and standardized test that have become to common.

The whole concept of education needs to be updated for 21 century- which means year round schools, longer days, more physical activities, less rote memory skills, and changing starting time to fit with children body schedules.

Garcia Bronco
07-03-2006, 12:09 PM
I'm going to have to disagree with you somewhat. The teaching methods have evolved a great bit, but I will state there is serve lack of technology in the class room, mainly due to money.

The problem every time school system try to install the new technique you get a number of vocal parents that clamor why are school changing, it worked for the parent when they were in school it should work for thier children. The homework- way to much in my opinion too- is a result of parents demands and standardized test that have become to common.

The whole concept of education needs to be updated for 21 century- which means year round schools, longer days, more physical activities, less rote memory skills, and changing starting time to fit with children body schedules.


The way most school(esp elementary) operate is on Piagetian principles which are very old....but you are right...3 months off in the summer is way to much. It would also be nice to see more kids get into the work force while still in school...and I'm not talking about being a line cook somewhere.

enjolras
07-03-2006, 02:21 PM
The whole concept of education needs to be updated for 21 century- which means year round schools, longer days, more physical activities, less rote memory skills, and changing starting time to fit with children body schedules.

I don't think 'more' is the answer. There are already a number of studies floating about that suggest that the school day is to LONG as it is already. In many countries that 'outperform' us their school days are 4 hours (or so) long, with similiar homework loads (this is quite common in Europe primarily).

I think starting later (see link below) in the day, moving to a shorter overall day, but going to a longer number of overall days is a great idea. Instead of 3 months of vacation, lets take it down to the more standard 6 weeks.

This link http://www.educationworld.com/a_issues/issues/issues056.shtml has a pretty good run-down on what has worked and how well.

elsid13
07-03-2006, 02:28 PM
When I said longer days, I was referring to HS age students. Adding more physical activities/after school activities for them. It does two things - get them healthier, removes them from founding trouble. I am strong supporter of letting younger children play vs doing homework.