True. But we aren't talking about "fit" hikers. We're talking "fat" hikers like me. Desk jockeys and the like.Originally Posted by jeffmeh
Wow.
The question I always have when I see someone like him is: Who is enabling him? Who is doing the things for him he should be doing for himself? Who is buying his food? And if they love him, why don't they stop?
I hope he becomes increasingly able to pull himself out of the well.
Last edited by Marta; 10-29-2013 at 09:00.
If not NOW, then WHEN?
ME>GA 2006
http://www.trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=3277
Instagram hiking photos: five.leafed.clover
This is my experience. I hiked the PCT before I hiked the AT. I was surprised at the percentage of overweight thru hike attempters on the AT, compared to the PCT. Out of the hundreds of hikers at the ADZPCTKO (PCT kick-off party), I can recall exactly one obese hiker. And he didn't make it past day two.
On all hikes I've been on, I see an indirect correlation between enjoyment of the hike and body weight. I saw much suffering on the AT.
An AT thru hike attempt for most is a large investment in time, money, career, family and travel. I trained all winter for that hike and hit the ground running and had fun from day one. Why one would start in abominable shape is just beyond me. But HYOH, I guess. There are at least as many reasons to hike the AT as there are hikers, possibly more.
"Throw a loaf of bread and a pound of tea in an old sack and jump over the back fence." John Muir on expedition planning
Are you kidding me with this sexist bs statement?
I can't believe no one else called this guy out on the sexism he managed to slip into his judgmental crap about overweight people!
To everyone carrying some extra body weight: good for you for getting out there anyway! It's hard these days to stay fit, keep on keeping on! Whether you lose weight on the trail or not, you will definitely get happier and isn't that the whole point?
To my fellow female hikers: let's not let dudes get away with this kind of crap!
to Firesign: you are super judgemental and sexist. Let it go and you will probably enjoy life more.
I have a friend who is maybe 25 pounds over weight. Whenever she says she needs to lose a few pounds her friends who are 50 pounds over weight tell her she's fine and doesn't need to lose anything. I always look at those comments as "If you lose weight then I have no excuse so I will discourage you from doing so."
The OP asked a simple question: Why obsess over pack weight and largely ignore your own weight? At 6' 3" 200 lbs seems to be my upper "in shape" limit. If I'm over 200 I can tell and if I start a hike over that weight it's not as enjoyable. Removing 10 lbs of belly fat > reducing 1 lb from the pack.
My father in law used to say "If it's the most important thing in your life you'll do it."
Pain is a by-product of a good time.
I dont think that folks realize how part of the issue, is that perception gets skewed. It was over a period of many years that I got fat, and yet I was active enough, that I thought I had enough physical activity. You look at yourself everyday, and you really dont pick up on the changes. Your perception is that you are normal.
Over the last year and a half, it really hit home for me how much our perception of food, physical activity and health gets skewed.
When I got back into backpacking after years away, doing other things, and getting fat, I struggled alot. It didn't dawn on me right away that I was fat and out of shape -- hell I walked everywhere at home -- I immediately blamed my pack weight.
igne et ferrum est potentas
"In the beginning, all America was Virginia." -William Byrd
I guess I should quit smoking before I buy light weight gear...
this thread also made me wonder ... Wouldn't it be a good idea to start 10-15 pounds overweight? Not that I would even consider that overweight. If you started alittle heavy you wouldn't have to eat as many calories starting out. The extra weight would also help to keep the miles lower at the beginning. You won't believe all of the "In shape hikers" that start out doing big miles with a light pack that ended up getting hurt and having to go home. hmmm
No its not. People just make excuses to protect their egos. Just like you did right here.
What I think you mean, is that its hard for people to resist eating high calorie carbohydrate foods, and overeating them at that.
Thats the problem, not "staying in shape". One can be in good cardiovascular shape, and still be fairly fat. They wont perform as well as a lighter person, but being heavy alone doesnt have to mean poor shape. How poor of shape are football linemen in?
Yep. People compare themselves to others around them and think they are normal.
Walking thru walmart makes me want scream. We have become a nation of lard-asses who dont care. No one needs to be a fashion model, but seriously, obesity is the biggest major health risk for EVERYTHING. Cancer, diabetes, heart disease, etc. Im not depressed by a single obese person, its the collective numbers are frightening.
When I was a kid people made fun of fat people because the stood out. Not anymore.
Last edited by MuddyWaters; 10-30-2013 at 19:09.
I think we have to admit that some sources of weight are more painful than others.
It would be much, much less painful for most any hiker to carry an extra 8 pounds of belly fat than a gallon of orange juice.
Sane people leave the OJ home.
But the big lie is that so far as it matters to your heart, knees, legs, and all those parts that you need to have a successful long trip, the "comfortable feeling weight" matters just as much as that which drags on you.
That was what those of us who bought Terraplanes forgot. And my God, my extra large one is comfortable!
Have you ever been to a an ATC Conference?
I find your comment reference "fellow female hikers" to be offensive and sexist. Are you implying that Firesign's comments are only offensive to women? I find your comment sexist, divisive and offensive to men.
I also find the term "dude" to be highly offensive to men. I also find the fact that you immediately jumped to the conclusion the Firesign is "super judgmental and sexist" without any further dialog to be highly offensive.
......I jest...just teasing and I think you get my point...actually your advice of letting it go is ironically appropriate.
Now back to the topic of why folks with a BMI over 15% shouldn't be allowed, by law, to hike.
Best way to lose weight is by hiking, so don't wait until you lose weight to go hiking.
If you are overweight, going light but safe on clothing/gear/food is even more important.
p.s You should not hiking under 15% BMI either. You should be EXACTLY 15%.
lol.... too many of us worry about pack weight before personal weight!
You have a great point!!!
What part of my thread do people not understand?It is really very very simple:
What it is about?
A discussion about counting the ounces in the pack, whilst possibly ignoring the pounds of body fat that we may be carrying.
What is not about?
Overweight people hiking?
I am however learning a lot about losing weight. In particular: denial, BS excuses, lack of will power and what appears to be an accectance of normality for being overweight from those around them. These are all the reasons why people are sadly unable to lose weight. Lets face it folks, being overweight is not healthy. Doctors and health consultants cannot be wrong.
It was never my intention to offend anyone.
At least no one has tried to convince me to start using a hammock!
Hi Lala,
Women are generally more sensitive about their body weight and size than men. This is a fact supported by your response.
Have you heard the one about the man who is getting ready to go out for the evening with his wife, and he turns to her and says: "Does my bum look big in these"? Neither has anyone else.
I believe that the best man for the job is a woman. I disagree completely with patriarchy. I also believe that the world would be a lot less messed up, if women were running the show. So not the person that you thought I was.
Take your frustration, and write to your Mayors, Governers and Senators and ask them why women are so mis-respresented (and they are). This would be a start.
Women have perceptions of men that are different from the perceptions of their own gender. That's why women are more sensitive than men, because they are.
I will leave you with a joke to illustrate my point on gender perceptions:
A store that sells new husbands has opened in New York, where a woman may go to choose a husband. Among the instructions at the entrance is a description of how the store operates:
You may visit this store ONLY ONCE! There are six floors and the value of the products increase as the shopper ascends the stairs. The shopper may choose any item from a particular floor, or may choose to go up to the next floor, but you cannot go back down except to exit the building!
So, a woman goes to the Husband Store to find a husband. On the first floor the sign on the door reads:
Floor 1 - These men Have Jobs
She is intrigued, but continues to the second floor, where the sign reads:
Floor 2 - These men Have Jobs and Love Kids.
'That's nice,' she thinks, 'but I want more.'
So she continues upward. The third floor sign reads:
Floor 3 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, and are Extremely Good Looking.
'Wow,' she thinks, but feels compelled to keep going.
She goes to the fourth floor and the sign reads:
Floor 4 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Good Looking and Help With Housework...
'Oh, mercy me!' she exclaims, 'I can hardly stand it!'
Still, she goes to the fifth floor and the sign reads:
Floor 5 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Gorgeous, Help with Housework, and Have a Strong Romantic Streak.
She is so tempted to stay, but she goes to the sixth floor, where the sign reads:
Floor 6 - You are visitor 31,456,012 to this floor. There are no men on this floor. This floor exists solely as proof that women are impossible to please. Thank you for shopping at the Husband Store.
PLEASE NOTE:
To avoid gender bias charges, the store's owner opened a New Wives store just across the street with the same rules.
The first floor has wives that love sex.
The second floor has wives that love sex and have money and like beer
The third, fourth, fifth and sixth floors have never been visited.
At some point this possibility will need to be demonstrated for the discussion to have practical value. It appears you are not ignoring your own weight. I am in the perfect range for my height according to my doctor, so I am not ignoring mine. It appears all the responders who do have weight issues are not ignoring it and we cannot know whether a gram counter is ignoring his/her own weight issues without them explicitly expressing it. So I question whether the "possibility" exists in a sufficient reality to even warrant the discussion.What part of my thread do people not understand?
What it is about?
A discussion about counting the ounces in the pack, whilst possibly ignoring the pounds of body fat that we may be carrying.
The discussions speaks to the reason why counting gear weight is important. Seems there are a number of reasons:
1). Makes walking more comfortable
2). Reduces stress on joints, heart, and body thereby decreases risk of trip ending injury
3). Allows one to carry more food and thereby and stay in woods longer
There are probably others. The OPs question is just one way to suggest that hikers might be better off on focusing on these objectives, than strictly on one means of achieving them.
I agree with why counting gear weight is important. However I disagree with your interpretation of the OP's focus. It appears to me, he is dismissing those who focus on the objectives met by counting gear weight because some people maybe overweight and he is assuming they are ignoring their body weight. My point was the OP's assumption that gear gram counters are ignoring their body weight has yet to be validated.
Who really knows where anyone is coming from?
When I read the original post, I didn't think of any personal challenges with body weight or the agony of carrying 11 days food over Katahdin. Rather I thought of the guys my freshman year in college who were obsessed with getting the perfect 100 watt stereo and expensive stylus for their record players, who would play nothing but Foreigner and Styx. And how getting ever better "stuff" so often misses the point.
If I struggled with body weight more, I am sure my mind would have gone in another direction, and I might think the OP was an ass. But I just don't see that and think he make perfect sense. Although reading the above he might now want to rethink everything ;-).
Agreed. We really don't know.
I get what you are saying. Though being from Rochester I must take offense to the jab at Foreigner.
I also do not struggle with body weight. At first I didn't think the OP was being an ass, I just though he was projecting his own thoughts onto others. When they replied to the contrary, IMO he became an ass.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
