Is Obesity Really That Big a Deal?

I stumbled upon an interesting article/forum/debate this morning in the Freakonomics blog. For those of you who don't know, Freakonomics is a very popular book, written by Steven D. Levitt (Economist) and Stephen J. Dubner (Journalist), which most notably argues that the enactment of Roe v. Wade in the 70s--the act that legalized abortion in the United States--had the effect of reducing the crime rate during the 90s. The blog post involved the debate about the obesity "epidemic," and contained several "expert" views of how we, as Americans, should be looking at the problem, analyzing it, and solving it.

Now, let me start out by stating one fact that everyone who has had the pleasure of meeting me would most likely already know: I am a fat-ist. I have been ever since I was a little kid and I saw my first fat person. He was very mean to me, which as a child can scar you for life. Hence, today I tend psychologically associate fatness with meanness.

That being said, I do indeed acknowledge that the Americans are larger today than they have been in, say, thirty years. I also acknowledge that the rest of the world considers the United States to be the "fattest" country in the world, occupied by lazy, gluttonous idiots who indulge every whim and eat until their heart's content (or discontent, har har). You need not have traveled abroad for an entire two weeks like I did to realize this fact. You no doubt have heard this argument before: Americans like their beer and hamburgers.

However, I have a little problem with the fact that the obesity "problem" is now referred to, even by epidemiologists, as an "epidemic." Really? REALLY? An EPIDEMIC? Yes, I understand that obesity satisfies the definition of an epidemic in terms of it being a condition that affects now an exceedingly larger number of the population than expected. Yes, this can lead to such chronic conditions as heart disease, diabetes, unattractiveness (no doubt the major one), etc. But, my problem is that obesity is being less thought of as correlated with these diseases and more as the disease itself. Obesity does not necessarily imply unhealthiness, and what is further is that the definition is what precisely is obese has become a bit wishy washy. That is why, I particularly enjoy J. Eric Oliver's comments on the aforementioned blog. Of course, even still, Oliver seems to believe that obesity should be entirely ignored, when it should not be.

The one commentator who I had a major problem with was Dr. Lisa Hark, who wrote:

Unfortunately, we have become a society obsessed with TV, and kids are learning this at a very young age. Experts now agree that screen time of all types needs to be limited for children and teenagers to less than two hours per day. I believe the less TV our kids watch, the healthier they will be. Studies show that the more children are exposed to TV ads for junk food and sweetened drinks, the more likely they are to consume large amounts of unhealthy food. We need to avoid putting TVs in our children’s bedrooms and start monitoring how much and what they are watching. This also includes computer and video game time. Children spend most of the school day sitting, so get them outside for some play time after school, and use weekends for active family bonding outings.

This offends me on a personal level. I'm so tired of TV bashing; we all get it! Super Clinton-esque Democrat-Liberals want to censor video games and have our children watching less television in an absurd effort to make them more "intellectual" and possibly eat better.
Absurd. I, for one, am an avid TV enthusiast and I have been all my life. I am not obese by any stretch of the imagination (or who knows, I might be by this country's current standards), and I certainly have not let television affect my diet and exercise. How come no one blames books? When you're reading Shakespeare, you're also not out there running ten miles, playing basketball and lifting weights. Everything has an opportunity cost. EVERYTHING!

Furthermore, who are these "experts" and where are these "studies?" Experts apparently agree (unanimously it seems) that children's screen time needs to be diminished to two hours a day or less. Experts also agree that I am 70 % more attractive than Brad Pitt.

I do happen to agree that the advertisements on television make children more susceptible to want to snack down on some junk food. And Dr. Hark was right in saying that it is the parents' responsibility to ensure that their children make the right choices and stay clear of the road towards unhealthiness. But let's not get carried away when we say that television is the primary source of obesity in America. It isn't.

What do all of you loyal readers think about this? Let's see if we can get our own forum started up in the comments section.