Bodyfat and Wealth
Evidence Points To A Possible Connection Between Obesity and Poverty
The bigger your waistline, the smaller your wallet.
Sounds crazy, right?
Yep. But apparently it’s true.
Kate Pickett et. al. from the University of York in the United Kingdom produced a fascinating study on obesity and poverty in developed countries.
Important: these are not third-world nations we’re talking about. The poverty and nutrition connection is obvious in that situation.
Pickett’s et. al. study concluded this:
“Obesity, diabetes mortality, and calorie consumption were associated with income inequality in developed countries.”
In other words, the greater your bodyfat, the less you tend to have in the bank.
This was true for men and women. The study also demonstrated that more calories meant less money.
Why is this true?
One might reason that the calorie factor is the key. More calories means more money spent on food, therefore less money in the bank.
The problem with that theory is that the study looked at “income”, not bank accounts.
(I just used “in the bank” to get my point across. Creative liberties… ; )
So in theory a person could spend more money on food and make enough to offset it.
But this isn’t happening. The more people eat, the fatter they are getting, and the poorer they’re becoming.
Let’s focus on that second part: being poor.
We know the more we eat the more bodyfat we’ll gain. But why does “just” bodyfat make you earn less money?
The researchers’ theory:
“Increased nutritional problems may be a consequence of the psychosocial impact of living in a more hierarchical society.”
Blah blah blah. I don’t buy it.
MY THEORY:
The more bodyfat you have the less energy you have. Less energy = less drive. Less drive = less money.
ALSO:
We live in a very superficial world. People want to do business with those who look and act vibrant and healthy.
AND:
Our DNA pushes us toward powerful, attractive people…like it or not.”
There you go. There’s my theory on why obese people statistically earn less than fit people.
This is not to say that an obese man or woman cannot be wealthy or successful. Quite the contrary. I know many people who have more money than health.
But eventually they DIE. And that my friend is the real hidden statistic in all of this: mortality.
Obviously obesity and mortality are well- documented and connected. Bodyfat will shorten your life.
This shortens the time you ‘can’ earn a nice paycheck, not to mention the fact that a lot of your money may be going to medical bills.
Also, success requires energy.
Name a truly successful person who has virtually no energy. Now name me an obese or even over-weight person with boundless energy.
I’m sure there are exceptions, but I can personally vouch for the fact that when I was obese my energy was in the toilet.
If you have not read my story of going from obese to a fit and vibrant guy at the age of 40, go here —
This is more than my autobiography. Frankly, that would make for a rather boring book unless you’re my mom.
This is the story of 52 people (and me) who all found their own “fountain of youth”. It’s located in the gym, at home, at the dinner table, and in the mindset of ageless living.
Even if you don’t earn an extra dime, being fit is the most valuable gift you can give yourself.
Your body is the vehicle in which your heart and soul reside. Treat it with all the respect you would a Ferrari.
It’s worth infinitely more.
And now you have one more reason to make fitness a lifestyle you love — statistically you’ll tend to earn a better living.
P.S. I believe there’s one more reason why people who are obese earn less than people who are not:
Time.
I did a study in college that compared the time it took for a person 50lbs or more over-weight to walk 20-30 yards with groceries at the grocery store.
This was compared to a fit person doing the same task.
We’re talking going to the grocery store here, not running a marathon. This is just day-to-day life.
The fit people averaged 1/3 less time. The time difference was about two minutes greater for the over-weight man or woman to complete the task.
Just two measly minutes.
Big deal, right?
Given the fact the average person shops twice a week at the grocery store, and our subjects were all 40 or under, check this —
In 30 years, this adds up to about eight days.
Do you want to toss eight days of life out the window? If you say “big deal”, I bet you change your tune when you have eight minutes left.
At that point you’d give a king’s ransom for eight days.
I know I would.
Now, consider this: our little study only looked a going to the store. What about the post office? The daily errands? Housecleaning? The time and energy it takes to manage your life? I will guarantee you that 50lbs will COST YOU 50 MONTHS in time alone.
We’re not talking quality here — just quantity.
The quality cannot even be measured. The quality of life when you’re fit is miles above that when you’re not.
If you’re ready, let me help —
If my book doesn’t help you, then email me and I’ll send your pay-ment right back.
Fit Over 40 has made a massive difference in the lives of thousands and thousands in over 100 countries.
I’d like to add your name to the list.
[jB]
Archived in Fit Over 40.









Comments (7)
Lee said:
Which comes first - the chicken or the egg? Low income or obesity? Probably a lot of people assume that since they “can’t afford” high quality food, it’s better to keep their family nourished with filling carbohydrates, which tend to also be quicker to prepare.
It’s our challenge to reach people who could benefit from learning how to use the money they do earn to best nourish themselves, leading to higher energy and in the long run lower health care costs.
Posted on Apr 13, 2007 04:35 AM
Shawn Draisey said:
Hi All,
In response to this chicken and egg concept I keep in mind Dr. Covey and how he explains production capability and production.
PC is the ability to earn income-work have a career
P-is the cash that comes from income, etc.
The ability to have any type of production capability requires functional if not optimal health.
Therefore, PC is directly tied to health and fitness to compete physically and socially.
Even in our politically correct world social darwinism still operates to some degree.
If we follow the teachings from the current film “The Secret” we 100% accountable for our level of fitness and well-being. Nothing gathers more speed and spirals downward faster than a bad attitude and a negative outlook on life.
Posted on Apr 13, 2007 07:53 AM
Jon Benson said:
Good question Lee. The argument here is based on lower income folks not being able to ‘afford’ healthy food. The problem with that argument is that veggies, canned tuna, and even bulk protein foods are no more expensive than Hamburger Helper.
At most, ideal foods would increase the food budget by 15% or so….certainly less than the same group spends on recreational foods.
I do believe there’s a sociological pattern there, for sure. This is where education is crucial. It’s not a lack of brains — it’s a lack of knowledge.
There’s a lot of factors in this equation, but I still believe (and have witnessed myself) that becoming more fit increases your “ability” and power to earn, simply through feeling better about yourself and increasing your energy output if nothing else!
Posted on Apr 13, 2007 10:09 AM
Jon Benson said:
Excellent feedback, Shawn.
Bad health that’s self-induced and poor self-image will usually manifest itself in negativity, which begins the downward spiral.
You cannot escape social darwinism; our DNA mandates some laws of the “other” attraction. However, this is not a beauty contest — it’s an issue of choosing to attract the greatest energy and the most empowering life while on this planet.
And you’re right — it’s a choice. It’s our responsibility. We’re also here to help one another in these choices….and that’s what separates us from the animals.
Well…I say that. I’ve seen video of animals acting “selflessly”…but it’s still nothing compared with the gift of sentience the human race has been given.
Let’s us it fully.
Posted on Apr 13, 2007 10:19 AM
Shileen said:
I’ve heard others talk about this subject. As I am processing this conversation, my mind has drifted to a paticularly store in our area … one of the big super chain stores with cheaper prices that we all know. This particularly store is located in a neighboring small, lower income town from where I live. When I go there (not often) I often feel sad because I see a lot of very over weight sick people … more so than other places I shop. It can be a real downer, at least for me, to be there.
I don’t know, Jon, about a 15% increase. I would say to eat “ideal” would be higher than 15% … at least based on my own shopping. Regardless, for some people that increase is out of the question. However, cutting back on the “recreational” food as you call it would for sure free up money to buy at least some healthier choices.
Posted on Apr 14, 2007 07:35 AM
Jon Benson said:
Shileen;
I’ve taken people who had budgets of $25 a week for groceries — hardly anything — and helped them eat healthy.
Now granted, it isn’t easy. Your choices are limited to tuna, some fruit, lots of veggies, and four chicken breasts. Olive oil for the fat. But this adds up to under $25. And it’s more filling than the junk they were eating.
And it worked. They shed fat like crazy.
The bottom line is this: a person can do it if they want to do it. But assuming you “cannot” do anything ensure that as the truth.
Thanks for the feedback!
Posted on Apr 14, 2007 08:21 AM
Shileen said:
***The bottom line is this: a person can do it if they want to do it. But assuming you “cannot” do anything ensure that as the truth.****
That is very true. Key phrase…”if they want to do it”. Believe you me… I have friends and family who won’t even try even though they complain about their weight and/or not feeling well. And?…. use money as an excuse. We all know that we can do anything we set our mind too, right?!… money or no money!
Hmmm… maybe I ought to have you go shopping with me! :) ……
….. just kidding!
Posted on Apr 14, 2007 09:08 AM