The Fat of the Land: The Obesity Epidemic and How Overweight Americans Can Help Themselves (Hardcover)

~ (Author)

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

Despite a $39 billion diet industry and the proliferation of "fat free, sugar-free, guilt-free" foods, Americans are fatter than ever and fatter than anyone else in the world. Fumento, a medical journalist and author of the controversial The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS (LJ 11/15/89), blames a variety of factors, from nutritional fads to the cult of victimization to the merchandising of oversized food portions. His basic premise, however, is that we must accept the fact that the more calories we ingest and the fewer we burn off, the fatter we get. True self-esteem, he notes, comes from taking control of our lives and responsibility for our actions. He indicts the myriad weight-loss "miracle" gimmicks and reiterates the unpopular but proven remedy: Eat less and exercise more. Highly recommended.?Susan B. Hagloch, Tuscarawas Cty. P.L., New Philadelphia
Copyright 1997 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Kirkus Reviews

``The very act of living in the United States puts you at great risk for obesity,'' warns science writer Fumento in this harangue with a clear message: The fault, dear fatties, lies in overconsumption and underexertion. The formerly fat but now happily and proudly trim Fumento (Science Under Siege, 1992; The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, 1990) charges that the current craze for low-fat but not-so-low-calorie processed foods is giving consumers bigger waistlines while making megabucks for the food industry. The other profit-makers he pillories, with words like ``huckster'' and ``sham,'' are the writers (and publishers) of diet books, such as Susan Powter for Stop the Insanity and Cliff Sheats for Lean Bodies. He has some strong words for the tactics of Nutri/System and Jenny Craig, too, but it is the National Association for the Advancement of Fat Acceptance that really ticks him off. It is time for an attitude adjustment, he argues, calling for society to return to the values of moderation and setting limits. He'd like to see an anti-obesity campaign along the lines of the anti-smoking campaign that made puffing on cigarettes appear gauche, and he urges activists to enlist the food companies in a campaign against overeating just as they engaged beer makers in campaigns against underage drinking and, further, to pressure fast-food restaurants to reduce the size of their fat-laden portions. Having advised society of its duties, Fumento, whose attempts at humor do little to lighten this lecture, instructs individuals to eat the right foods, i.e., high in fiber and low in caloric density; eat only when hungry; and get a reasonable amount of exercise. A sermon on gluttony and sloth and a jeremiad against those who aid, abet, and profit from these sins. (Author tour) -- Copyright ©1997, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 384 pages
• Publisher: Viking Adult; 1 edition (September 1, 1997)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0670870595
• ISBN-13: 978-0670870592
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 5.8 x 1.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (43 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,605,750 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

40 of 46 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A Fine Debunking of Weight Loss Con Artists, July 2, 2000

By	cgabriel223 (USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Fat of the Land: The Obesity Epidemic and How Overweight Americans Can Help Themselves (Paperback)

Fumento has an admirable willingness to write books that go against popular wisdom and political correctness. (Unfortunately, though, he seems to have an aversion to using his impressive critical thinking skills against right wing and corporate targets.) In this book, he takes on diet hucksters, fat activists, and overweight Americans themselves.

Fumento has clearly done his homework. Unlike the overwhelming majority of high-selling diet books, this book is heavily footnoted and based solidly on a great number of published research findings in medical and scientific journals. I find him to be a credible author and I find his medical claims to be plausible. In spite of its heavy reliance on scholarly research, the book is written in a very readable, non-technical style. Fumento includes a lot of anecdotal autobiographical material about his own-ultimately successful-struggles to lose weight. He makes frequent use of humor along the way. (Actually, I thought his quips missed more often than not, but I appreciate the effort.)

Fumento arrives at the common sense conclusion that losing weight requires developing the self-discipline to consume fewer calories and/or to be more physically active and thus use more calories. (This is over-simplifying his findings slightly, since he does, for instance, claim that some weight-loss drugs appear to have some limited effectiveness.) The countless fad diets and such that seem to fly in the face of this and seem to have found some way around the need to eat less and exercise more fall into one of two categories: Either a) they just plain don't work, or b) insofar as they work at all, it is precisely because in some indirect way they do indeed result in the person consuming significantly fewer calories.

One thing Fumento discovered in his research which came as a mild surprise to me is that it is a myth that differences in metabolism have a significant impact on weight. The anecdotal evidence I had observed had led me to agree with the popular notion that many people (you and I, for instance) unfairly gain weight without being gluttons, while other lucky bastards can eat whatever they want without gaining an ounce. According to Fumento, though, such differences in metabolism tend to be quite minimal and have little impact on weight.

No, with very rare exceptions, you are fat if and only if you eat like a pig and get little or no exercise. You avoid being fat if and only if you consume fewer calories and get a significant amount of exercise.

In general, Fumento's medical conclusions--and his lambasting of the people who get filthy rich exploiting those who are ignorant of same-is convincing and valuable. On the other hand, he is, in my opinion, on shakier ground with some of his ethical, social, and political claims.

In Fumento's opinion, a depressingly high percentage of Americans are living lifestyles that are horribly unhealthy in terms both of decreasing their life span and diminishing their quality of life. Furthermore, "fat activists" and other such misguided folks are making this problem worse. Instead of working to change the self-destructive habits of fat people, they are treating them as a victimized minority in need of boosted self-esteem that will enable them to accept and like their obese selves the way they are, and of protection against discrimination at the hands of those who are less politically enlightened. But, according to Fumento, to favor the healthy-looking person over the fat person when choosing a spouse, sex partner, even employee in some cases, is not unjust discrimination, but is an entirely natural and mostly beneficial social practice.

In short, in Fumento's view, we do fat people no favor by telling them "There's nothing wrong with being fat, and even if there is, it's not your fault." Actually, there are many things wrong with being fat, and yes, as a matter of fact, it is your fault.

I find his views to be interesting, thought-provoking, of at least some merit, and worth airing, and I enjoy his frankness, but I can't go all the way with him here. Fat people (women even more than men) in our society are routinely insulted, gawked at, ostracized, and treated in ways ranging from mildly rude to outright cruel. Their dating market value, career market value, etc., all else being equal, tend to be low. And it seems pretty clear to me that the discriminatory way they are treated is not--neither in intent nor in results--"for their own good."

Whether it is somehow more "natural" to discriminate against women who aren't built like Ally McBeal than it was in ancient China to discriminate against women who hadn't had their feet bound is both doubtful and irrelevant. Not everything that is natural in that sense is worth affirming.

In the end, we all have to make choices as to what risks to take, what benefits to forego, what costs to absorb. As a rule of thumb, the fatter you are, the more you are making lifestyle choices that are unhealthy. But you are also presumably doing things you enjoy (e.g., eating foods you like) and avoiding things you don't enjoy (e.g., working out). On the one hand, you can relax on the sofa with another banana split and accept the various risks that that entails to your health and longevity. On the other hand, you can deny yourself the pleasures of the banana split and force yourself to go for a jog instead. Both choices have costs and both choices have benefits, and it's up to you to decide which you prefer on balance. I believe in helping people to make more informed, autonomous choices (and this book is quite valuable in that respect), but I'm wary of using social pressure and punishment to shame people into making the "right" choices.

35 of 43 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Science medium, tone appalling, June 17, 1999

By A Customer

It's true, as you will have gathered from all the reviews that precede this one, that Fumento and Manson make a good argument for eating a high-fiber diet and exercising, and for identifying obesity as disease. That Americans are known for self-indulgence in all fields, not just food, is a fair critique (though I'm tempted to wonder what kind of vehicle Fumento drives, and whether for him, as for so many of us, every indulgence except that of food is a sign of status rather than of weakness.) Many of us can benefit physically and emotionally by eating more fiber and fewer calories, and by exercising more.

However, the (very) mixed reviews the books received testify to the fact that the *tone* of this "scientific" text goes far beyond what's appropriate for medical journalism, which, the last time I checked, was supposed to employ a neutral tone and strive for objectivity. One reviewer praises Fumento for giving "not just his opinions", but his opinions form at least as much of the book as does his research. His own loathing for flesh and contempt for the overweight, his presumption that if he can lose 25 pounds, anyone can lose any amount, his equation of anyone overweight with compulsive eaters, his denial of any study which doesn't suit his thesis, his reference to overweight people as "fatties"--what are these, if not opinions? They are, fortunately for him, opinions which many thin Americans share, since so many of us are taught that fat is a moral issue. Fumento claims to be treating it as a medical one (I almost expected him to launch into "love the sinner, hate the sin"), but medical issues, even alcoholism, rarely merit the sense of outrage, contempt, and disgust which permeates Fumento's writing.

His treatment of his sources reflects this loathing of flesh even more strongly; he takes out of context quotations by authors of whom he doesn't approve; one example is cardiologist Dean Ornish, who despite Fumento's strictures never said anywhere that a diet of white bread and sweet tarts was acceptable, or that one of the major benefits of reducing fat intake wasn't concommitant reduction of calories. And I wonder if it's a coincidence that many of the authors whom he stigmatizes as obese and as propagating obesity seem to be women. As other reviews have noted, he refers to perfectly normal-sized women as chubby, fat, and obese, and the only woman he seems to find worthy of interest is the unfortunate Rosemary Green, the author of *Diary of a Fat Housewife*. Green treats her weight as a sin and a crime, and feels that she deserves no self-esteem, pleasure, or respect until she weighs 125 pounds; her major goal in life is to diet, lose weight, and become once again as "beautiful" as she was as an eighteen year old winner in a minor regional beauty pageant. Fumento seems to see no problem with this dedication of a life to weight loss and sexual desirability; Green is acceptable because she is a repentant sinner, rather than one of those uppity women who dares to enjoy herself and her life even at (gasp) 150, 175, 200, 250 pounds.

In short, Fumento might easily have made his points that many of us would help ourselves by eating less and exercising more, and that America is largely an overweight country, without reinforcing, and certainly without celebrating, our culture's constant obsession with thinness and disdain for flesh. To treat the problems of the overweight with compassion, and to assert everyone's right to respect no matter what their medical problems, wouldn't undercut these points or encourage everyone to run to the fast food window for six burgers. One reviewer cited the "honesty" of Fumento's book as a sure sign that it woudn't sell (thanks for the vote of confidence in readers everywhere, friend--and for the assumption that if someone's cruel, he must also be honest), but as we can see in retrospect, it sold very well, since it upheld every thin person's right to feel accomplishment (whether thinness took work or not) and to feel superior to anyone over whatever the "safe" weight is this week. Books perpetuating stereotypes which maintain a dominant ideology never seem to have a problem selling, and books which tell half the world to feel immediately and inherently superior to the other half tend to do even better.

9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars it's not what you say, but how you say it, June 4, 1999

By A Customer

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: The Fat of the Land: The Obesity Epidemic and How Overweight Americans Can Help Themselves (Paperback)

This book has an extremely important message. Unfortunately, the tone is hysterical, patronizing, and highly insulting, guaranteeing that the message will not get across. The mixture of a much-needed message with a disparaging tone means that people are going to confuse style and substance, which is extremely unfortunate.

I think the author should have known better. Common sense dictates that one cannot insult one's audience and expect them to listen to you. That is what happened with this book. Anyone who disagrees with the author is libeled as promoting "fat acceptance". In the case of Laura Fraser, at least, this is untrue. She is not fat, only slightly overweight, and she argued for compassion and moderation, which made her a prime target for this irresponsible, melodramatic, hysterical author.

You think I'm exaggerating? Here is a quote:

"Still, can a book that tells the truth about losing weight compete with hundreds of books that tell readers what they want to hear but leave them as fat or fatter than ever?" (p. xx).

Sounds reasonable, until you remember that, like, duh, everyone already knows that eating more fruits and vegetables and exercising will help you lose weight. It is the hallmark of a melodramatic author that he or she, dramatically, pretends to be a "lone voice crying in the wilderness" when in fact his or her message is all around us.

A particularly distasteful aspect of this book is the negative commentary on Dean Ornish. He criticizes Ornish for promoting the message that you can eat low-fat and be OK, but in fact he quotes Ornish as recognizing that low-fat, high sugar is unacceptable. This raised my suspicion that in fact Ornish is right and this author mischaracterizes him to make it look like he's the only smart one around.

In the end, though, an author does not effect change by insulting people. This is basic psychology 101 and this author's disregard of that frankly suggests emotional lack-of-intelligence, in my view. Where have all the good editors gone? Someone should have pointed this out to the author before the book got published.