Rating: 
Summary: Good intentions, good writing,some very bad info.
Review: [text 852 words]
With the talent for writing that gets him published in USA Today, Harper's Magazine, and the Los Angeles Times, Critser has produced an easy-to-read, well-edited, and highly entertaining expose of American fattening. A number of unsurprising trends are highlighted and their origins uncovered, such as increasing portion sizes at fast food chains and in soft drinks; the pollution of school cafeterias by
big junk food corporations; and the use of high-fructose corn syrup to sweeten and thicken almost everything. TV and other food ads aimed at children come in for their fair share of blame as well. One of the more glaring blunders, even if by omission, shared by The American Diabetes Association, which is cited, is that simple sugars do all the damage leading to type 2 diabetes and obesity. The notion of glycemic index (GI), now >80 years old, never entered Critser's mind. One of the things that creates high (bad) insulin levels is high blood glucose levels. Since all the common complex carbohydrates (starches) in foods are polymers of glucose, and some of them are metabolized very rapidly, and we eat more of them by weight, the contribution of wheat, corn, potato and other forms of high-GI starches to poor health is greater than that of the simple sugars. The so-called low-carb diets must be low GI diets to be effective, and they really are for weight loss, and the prevention of type 2 diabetes (Bernstein 1997, Ottoboni 2002). This relates to the next blunder claiming that the Atkins, Sears, Eades diets do damage because of the false representation that unlimited calories are recommended or allowed. This was accompanied by the blunder that all carbohydrates were eliminated, including the ones with very low GI from fruits and vegetables. As it happens, clinical trials have shown that low GI diets are the only ones most people can maintain. The usual sensible recommendation is for 40% calories from low-GI carbohydrates, 30% from fats, and 30% from proteins (Eades 2000, McGee 2001, Ottoboni 2002). On the same plane in blunderland, Critser actually succumbed to the biggest fraud in the history of medicine: that eating saturated fat and cholesterol causes obesity or clogged arteries or heart disease (p15,140). This nonsense originated with a campaign by the American Heart Association (AHA) begun in 1961, and its anti-cholesterol, pro-polyunsaturated fat campaign peaked in the 1980s. Nothing in the Framingham, MRFIT, or any other honest study actually supports this anti-fat stand, despite the politically correct summaries of many of the studies. (Moore 1989, Smith 1991, Fehily 1993, Fraser 1997, Tunstall-Pedoe 1997, Eades 2000, Enig 2000, Kauffman 2000, Kauffman 2001, McCully 2000, McGee 2001, Ottoboni 2002, Ravnskov 2000). The occasional success of people on the Pritikin and Ornish diets may be due to lower total calories or avoidance of bad fat. Fat makes the stomach empty more slowly, thus keeping the blood glucose concentrations lower (Enigh 2000). Speaking of bad fat, Critser's dump on palm oil (p13-19) is totally unfounded based on actual cohort studies (Wood 1993, Enig 2000). To "compound the felony" Critser failed to warn about the really bad fats, namely the omega-6 fatty acids among the polyunsaturated fats such as soybean, corn, safflower and sunflower oil (Wood 1993, Enig 2000, Vos 2003), nor was there much on eating the good omega-3 fats (Vos 2003). Not a word about avoiding trans fats, as though this were still in doubt (Willett 1993, Oomen 2001). Even the AHA began to warn about trans fats in 2002. Among the saturated fats, the medium-chain ones are lower in calories than the unsaturated ones (9 kcal/g), and the 18-carbon stearic acid in cocoa butter and tallow are so indigestible that these fats provide only 5.5 and 7.5 kcal/g. "When new immigrants were asked whether rest was more important or better for health than exercise, a large portion 'always says yes'. The attitude was doubly corrosive..." (p70-71). Critser seems not to be able to imagine that most new immigrants do hard manual labor for employment, and they are correct to choose rest. Critser's unquenchable recommendations for exercise have some merit (Bernstein 1997), but the only prospective, randomized study of exercise after heart attack found no effect of exercise on all-cause death and a slight benefit of exercise on cardio-vascular mortality for the first few years, disappearing at 5 years (Dorn 1999). While Critser was correct to pick on Reuben Andres, MD, for certain reasons, Critser fell for the nonsense that being leaner is better and leads to longer life. Granted there was confounding, but one of the best studies found that in both men and women the relation between weight or body mass index (BMI) and heart deaths or all-cause deaths was U-shaped, not inverse; that is, those of middle weight and middle BMI lasted the longest (Tunstall-Pedoe 1997). And so it was also with energy intake (Fehily 1993, Tunstall-Pedoe 1997). Smoking was indeed very bad for lifespan. If the reforms Critser recommends (see above) were implemented, my guess is that about 1/3 of the obesity problem in the US would disappear, thus 2 stars. For accurate diet information see <...>. For complete references cited e-mail me at .... Joel M. Kauffman, 23 Jan 03
Rating: 
Summary: A Wake-Call, Could Have Better
Review: How Americans Became the Fattest People on Earth is the sub-title of Greg Critser's book Fat Land and the author's analysis of this particular issue of origins is the book's strength. The book becomes a little less focused on the issues of how to deal with this problem. The first few chapters are both fascinating and horrifying as it looks at the ways both government, through both action and inaction, and corporations, through truly aggressive action, have helped to create a country where the amount of calories being consumed keeps rising. The book is small and the coverage is slighter when it should be deeper on many of these initial inquiries. The issue of class is relevant and important but gets a little muddled in the final chapters although it is good that it is raised at all. This book is a wake-up call and will hopefully lead to stronger, sounder examinations of the problem.
Rating: 
Summary: A Great Read
Review: Fat Land is everything a good piece of non-fiction should be: Thoroughly researched, tightly written, pointed yet compassionate and-here's the bonus-executed with a wonderful sense of humor. Even those not interested in America's fat epidemic will not be able to put this book down. As one friend observed, "You'll lose ten pounds just by reading it!"
Rating:
Summary: This book is PHAT!
Review: When I first picked up the book, I had no idea what to expect. I was doing research for a film and stumbled upon it by heppen chance in the library. I had already read "Fast Food Nation" and was intrigued by what the title already suggested. What I found inside was an ivaluable research tool. It's a great book! The stories that it details: from the birth of Jumbo Sizes in movie theaters to fast food companies upping the ante on your plate, are really fantastic. It does a nice job of making the facts, people and places accessible without seeming "Holier than Thou." (And one should never take any book as the "end all be all" solution to uncovering problems - especially one as large as the current obesity epidemic.) I recommend "Fat Land" whole-heartedly to anyone who wants to expand their views when it comes to the way live, eat and think as Americans - something many of us need to do. Greg Critser has hit a home run with this one ... AND he can run around the bases without fainting or wheezing!
Rating:
Summary: A completely entertaining and informative read
Review: The best book about the fat epidemic. Critser goes beyond diet criticism and into the realm of nutritional politics. He's done his research, and he presents it in sharp and witty fashion. Everyone who has to eat in this country should read this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Bizzare
Review: The New York Times writes of this book: "Such bizarre notions, combined with a perfunctory assessment of the ways in which America can combat obesity, distract attention from the very real and alarming problem." Among the bizzare notions put forward in this simplistic and poorly researched assessment of the country's growing struggle with overweight is that we are fat because there is not enough embarassment invovled in being obese. The author--who says he lost weight by taking a diet drug (he gave a nice plug for this drug in his writing for business magazines)-- actually suggests that we reintroduce the notion of shame in this country to combat the obesity epidemic. He also blames the obesity epidemic on high fructose corn syrup, saying that we "metabolise fructose differently" from sugar. I don't know if this guy ever took high school chemistry, but high fructose is about half fructose, while sucrose--or table sugar--is a disaccharide that is also half fructose and half glucose so what he's saying makes no sense at all. There are so many mistakes like this in the book that you really can't take it seriously. Sure, the United States is fat, but the rest of the developed world is getting fat along with us--even in India, the middle class is getting more obese by the day. So calling this a problem of American agriculture is just dumb. The problem is much bigger than that, and much more complicated, and it deserves a much more thoughtful treatment.
Rating:
Summary: Prejudiced, one-sided and utterly lacking in compassion
Review: Lo and behold, when I sat down to write this, I looked up and saw Mr. Critser on tv being interviewed for the Today show! Strange coincidence. However, it served to remind me that Mr. Critser's "epiphany" occured when, as a sedentary middled aged white guy, a rude bystander called him "fatso." He was humiliated, and this spurred him to diet...the kind of simple low-carb, no-beer-and-snacks diet that works very well for most MEN (but not women) producing a quick weight loss that returned the author to a normal weight. Like the typical fanatical convert, he is now empowered to criticize and look down on ALL overweight people no matter what their circumstances, and judge them as lazy and gluttonous. (He pays scant lip service to the idea that genetics might somehow and in some way be involved.) He jumps on the popular current bandwagon that most American obesity can be traced to supersized meals at McDonald's --- as if everybody ate there all the time! His very valuable information on the inclusion of Palm Oil and High Fructose Corn syrup in the American diet starting in the early 70s and poor government policy regarding corn production get buried under the tons of jibes against ordinary people who happen to have a weight problem. Mr. Critser apparently believes that the overweight don't even deserve to have clothing that fits, because they should be in a maximum state of embarassment and humilation at all times until they lose weight (after all, Mr. Critser didn't lose weight until HE was humiliated). Much blame is laid at the feet of the self esteem movement. Obviously all overweight people should be called names, embarassed in public places and discriminated against...it will get them motivated to diet! Bullies, are you listening? It's open season to call fat people names and insult them PLUS you can feel good about yourself because you are only encouraging them to diet! THe reality is that bariatic science (the real medical research into obesity) is still so new that scientists and doctors don't even know how normal-weight individuals maintain their size, let alone why some people get fat and others stay slender. Clearly genes AND environment play a role, but it is very unclear what that role is. Nobody needs to reinforce how utterly miserable the obese are. The biggest point that I take with Mr. Critser is that he seems to feel that obese people LIKE being heavy and want to continue this way if only they aren't picked on. WRONG WRONG WRONG! I have never known an overweight individual who wasn't terribly unhappy being fat. The social stigmatism...lack of opportunities for dating and romantic relationships...discrimination at jobs etc. Despite what Mr. Critser seems to see, no fat woman really has the choice to either BUY or WEAR really attractive, fashionable clothing (although the situation is improved since the grim old days -- that he wants to return to -- where a fat woman was pretty much forced to sew all her own clothing.) Along with the large fast food portions, we also live in a culture which constantly shows us extremely thin, anorexic models and actresses and holds them up as a role model. This has also changed since the 70s. Just look at a re-run of any common TV show from the 60s on Nickelodeon. The "good looking" women featured are positively PLUMP by today's standards! Today they could never even get an audition! The present standard for extreme thinness makes even normal-sized women feel fat and inadequate and sends them on crackpot diets. HOw much does this failure to measure up to an artifically thin standard of beauty contribute to many women descending into a cycle of extreme dieting and binge eating? with the end result a weight problem? not to mention self-hatred? This is a selfish and self-serving book, mostly written to make Mr. Critser feel better about his own weight loss and freeing him to ridicule those that can't lose weight the way he did. You won't understand the obesity problem any better after having read this and there is a serious risk that those already lacking in compassion will be encouraged to be more prejudiced, to ridicule more, to call names and feel Ok about their mean spirited behavior. Shame on you, Greg Critser!!!
Rating:
Summary: With the Fat Went Our Memory
Review: Well, the future of journalism is here. The author walks in to take a bow for having figured out a puzzle he made for himself. What he doesn't mention, and most of us are so unconscious, we don't know, is that there is nothing new here. Author's guide: find someone to blame, and make lists, short ones. Oh supersizing is an important contributor? You're kidding! I have read at least 10 articles about that in everything from Nutrition Action to searing journalistic tracts like Self. What is done here, that wasn't done in those pieces, is the story has been reduced to cartoon, complete with a villain (Earl Butz). And as the New York Times review points out: the irony is that after playing the conspiracy card, the ending makes a plea for a simple solution: the fat people need to eat less. Wonder if the publishers got to the author or if the need to conclude just elicited this saccharin bromide.
Rating:
Summary: Skinny on Fat America
Review: In a slim, well-researched and entertaining volume Greg Critser has done us a great public service. He's found the roots of our sudden and terrible slide into obesity. Like Silent Spring, Critser has pinpointed a grave public issue. Millions of obese children, and an epidemic of diabetes are problems that must be confronted by Congress, heath professionals, educators and the public. That Critser has managed to highlight the factors at play in a compelling, brief volume will make this far more than just a timely book. Fat Land may actually make a dent in our bulging national belly.
Rating: 
Summary: We Are What We Can Afford to Be
Review: For those who have given little (if any) thought to obesity in the United States, Critser provides a wealth of information in this volume. I am impressed by the nature and extent of his research, less impressed by a few of his conclusions based on that research. He notes that 61% of Americans "are overweight enough to begin experiencing health problems as a direct result of that weight." Moreover, that "25% of those under 19 are overweight or obese." Critser offers a biological explanation for such alarming statistics (e.g. metabolic problems caused by increased consumption of fructose) during the emergence of what he calls a "new boundary-free culture" of self-gratification. Only in an affluent society such as ours could people afford to eat out (on average) three of every five meals when not munching on sugar- and fat-rich snack foods. Only in an affluent society such as ours could so many people afford to join and then remain a member of a fitness center. Critser has done an excellent job of gathering, in a single source, so much information about these and other issues. Moderation is generally the best policy for most human activities. Perhaps after reading this book, those in urgent need of more physical exercise and/or healthier nutrition will take appropriate action. In most instances, it won't be easy. I have heard many people ask "Why is that everything that's so bad for me to eat tastes so good?" Good question. Critser is well-prepared to answer it. Even then, I suspect, the population of Fat Land will -- like most waist lines -- increase.
|
