Reader comments suggest the author is out on a limb. As the parent of one teenager who is overweight, hopefully not obese (he's still growing) I know how difficult it is to overcome body image self esteem. Maybe that is all the author's approach offers, a sense of proportion to a big debate. I would wish the Federal Government would tackle the junk food advertisiers a bit more where it hurts as I believe they are morally culpable. At the same time it always irks me that it is Diabetes Australia that each year comes out with awesome figures on who has the disease and how half of them don't know it. This self serving exercise should be exposed for what it is - self promotion. An independent review would be helpful

Given that according to body-mass index charts most members of elite Rugby teams are 'obese' it is no wonder that this author has some questions to ask.

It is also generally acknowledged that BMI charts do not take into account the facts that a person may have a BMI in the 'obese' category but have a low body fat index and excellent cardiovascular fitness. BMI charts do not take into account a personal musculature, the idea of 'heavy bones' nor anything but a restricted idea of body morphology.

So, where do we go from here? How about 'obesity' being defined not by BMI but by things like body-fat index - harder to measure, but more accurate, by taking a person's resting heart rate and blood pressure, or by doing something that Dr Kenneth Cooper suggested 30 years ago - have people do a calculated amount of exercise and see what the result is: back in the late 1970s he stated that he had come across men with a 'paunch' who were fitter than their skinnier fellows.

I would agree with the BMI being used in two contexts though - that models with a very low BMI should not be allowed on fashion catwalks. The other is that people with 'morbid obesity' BMI levels should be encouraged to get down to 'obesity' rates in BMI, and have their overall health investigated.

As a nutritionist, dietiitan I have yet to change my position on the relationship of maintaining a healthy diet with acheiving good health. I have always, since my training in college, perceived that eating "right" had only marginal benefits to overall health.

I have counseled many skinny people for cardiac rehab after a heart attack. Furthermore I know many overweight people who have no health issues at all.

The correlation between the food gestapo and the global warming crowd are spot on the money. Recently I read 1984 by George Orwell and throuout the book references to the "Party" and the creation of war for power sounded exactly like the so called obesity experts who create pseudo epidemics today.

The obesity epidemic perpetuated by the experts appears only to be an example of power lust. Many other diseases have been erradicated or brought under control so their power base has slipped away. I am sure they give thanks at the altar of the almighty dollar every day for fat people!

Very funny Cornflower, I watched Monty Python too and I hope I don't sound like "that" generation. My parents telling me they walked to school in bare feet and lived on bread and dripping throught the great depression and never complained.

I really don't think I had it "tough" at all, and I apoligise if it sounds like that "one up-manship" game in victim politics. That is not what I was saying. I was simply saying I was self sufficient.

Like the Irish joke about the workers complaining about their sandwiches, I admit I usually made my own sandwiches too.

I deliberately only made one even then, I never wanted to get fat. None of us did, it was uncool.

I chose to go to a selective school on the other side of town, even with more of a walk. Infact it was my defiance against my parents who accused me of "elitism" for choosing not going to a local government school. We all knew that walking is good for chewing off the fat.

It hit me today noticing the kids on the North Shore Line with their heavy musical instruments and their huge bags of homework and strict uniforms. They just got off the train at Central, assuming they were changing trains for their home run. I can't remember one obese one of them. They didn't look unhappy at all. If only the kids in the state schools were that self sufficient and well behaved.

As a teacher, I am so glad they finally got the red fizzy drinks away from the ADHD kids and many fizzy drinks and other rubbish from the school tuck shops. It really does make a difference. I know that the kids get depressed and the eating can be part of depression and worst of all, they know its bad for them. They still do it. Then they feel worse.

Parents don't help when they either ignore kids' welfare or overprotect their kids in their own insecurity.

Time to lighten up, in more ways than one.

I don't know where the comment came about the behaviour of state school kids compared to private school kids comes into it Saintfletcher, but that is a matter of opinion. I have personally experienced private school children spitting on public school kids, punching them, swearing, loud and disruptive behaviour on trains and on the streets.

If however, your comment was meant to suggest that people from lower socio-economic areas are more likely to be overweight or obese than those from higher socio-economic ones, you may have a point. This is something that has not been addressed in government policy.

50 years ago obesity was rare in people who had manual labour jobs compared with more affluent groups. Mechanisation and technology has changed this. Aborigines are particularly at risk due to their more urbanised lifestyle. As hunter-gatherers there was no obesity.

Junk food is cheap compared with "healthy" food (just imagine the cost of giving 6 children a banana, apple and orange each a day as my mother used to). Low fat milk is more expensive than full cream. It is cheaper to buy Coke than fruit juice. People from affluent areas can afford to go to the gym and eat trendy diet food whereas poorer people can't.

Another significant trouble is that the solution promoted is the simplistic one of educating people that eating less and exercising more will solve the obesity crisis. This then will save the community. This attitude is one of ethics and does not take into account personal choice. This is no way to treat an epidemic which is world wide.

We live in a very different world now, and it is very easy to eat more and exercise less than in the past. Fear, both parents working with less supervision of what children are eating, less physical work, labour saving devices, excess cheap food, inadequate government policy etc, etc all add up to a very complex problem.

What on earth is this writer trying to say? I'm really puzzled. Is the writew trying to say fat is healthy?

It's not, it's a product of overeating in most cases. There are of course metabolisms that do create obesity but really the problem is what people eat, and how much, and how often. It's not healthy and restricts any real lifestyle to walking slowly, breathing hard and struggling for breath in between take aways.

Really vague item author. Less please, of everything.