The math of obesity is extremely simple. The psychology is not

[jpgray]

The math is very simple for any sort of addiction or bad habit, no? Some have extra hurdles in the form of genetics, or other disorders, but there is no escaping the fact that if you take in fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. Those who say the science is "against" this are mostly linking to articles and information that confirm instances of the aforementioned hurdles--what essentially boils down to a slower metabolism and/or social/genetic incentives to eat and store more calories.

What of all the people who say "diet and exercise don't work; I've tried it?" It's my belief that such statements aren't strictly true. For those already saying "bullshit, what a douche," please hear me out for a moment: those who say the above have either not followed a sensible program for long enough, have not followed it honestly, or are a truly extreme and rare case. The proof of this is simple--among any group of people whose caloric intake is universally limited, whose daily life requires a good deal of physical exertion, -you will not find any obese people-. Find me an obese Bushman. Find me an obese subsistence farmer. You can't, in any significant numbers. If genetics ruled all, such exceptions would be easy to discover and trace back to an uncontrollable cause. However, they are -not- discoverable, certainly not at anything resembling the rate obese folks are found in industrialized society.

It's not laziness, it's not being dishonest, it's simple human nature. In this country we have the opportunity of eating rich foods in abundance and expending very little energy to do so. Given our heritage as hunter-gatherers, we are disposed to exploit such a situation, and once we get a taste of it, the urge to repeat the experience can be almost irresistible. After some time spent going down a path of indulgence and indolence, as we are often encouraged to do, the inertia of habit, the pressure to continue the behavior, often completely trumps any will to change. This is compounded by the simple fact that, the more you go down that path, the more hurdles and obstacles are set against you.

No one can make any pretense of superiority simply because he or she is thin--we all engage in similar behaviors, similar habits and addictions. The mathematical harm of smoking, for example, is as simple as the act of quitting would seem to be. There are extreme empirical risks in the behavior and stopping is as simple as never picking up a cigarette again. Problem solved! If only it were that simple.

The undue piling on of shame is what cements the problem--you are seen as a failure in this society if you are fat. Simple as that. It's a disgusting and totally unhelpful prejudice that utterly belies how widespread obesity has become. Because of the great shame in store for anyone who "simply" can't change habits, who "lacks the will" to severely restrict calories and regularly exercise, the demand for excuses, for irreparable causes to point to that are outside our control, is huge. Being fat in a fat society that paradoxically shames fat people at every opportunity is horrible enough--why submit to the extra shame of admitting that it is your own behavior that leads to your obesity? Who could blame anyone for resisting that extra piling-on of shame? I certainly couldn't.

So is it any surprise that obese folks react with hurt anger when some smug asshole wades in and says "it's all just math, just cut your calories and walk more?" As with someone who says "just quit buying cigarettes" or "just stop drinking," that smug tone represents not only a total ignorance of the psychological barriers to a strictly mathematical solution, but an ignorance of his or her own awful habitual behaviors and the psychological inertia that perpetuates them. Some people -do- have near-insurmountable obstacles to beat beyond simple habit, yes. That doesn't mean the mathematical solution is false, it just means that the straight math doesn't represent an answer to the problem. Not at all.

So how about no more shaming people with glib "math" answers? How about recognizing the math, but realizing that it doesn't represent anything close to an answer?

[flvegan]

1. It's also that folks that do try the "diet and exercise thing" have no idea what they're doing.

Well, some folks anyway.

Let's face it, many people just don't get "diet" in a proper sense. That's just a simple fact. Starvation won't work long term, fad diets don't work in the majority, etc etc.

Secondly, I can't tell you how often I see folks in the gym doing an exercise that not only has no benefit or is in such poor form that injury is likely guaranteed. This isn't just one or two folks, it's a good 25% of them.

Additionally, while I'm on a gym rant, I blame many of the "personal trainers" that folks hire. Usually gym employed trainers, that beat a newbie until they decide that after a week or two, they won't come back.

Even math doesn't work if the student isn't taught the subject material.

Good post, btw.

[we can do it]

25. I Notice 2 Bad Types of Trainers Arrogant Asses Who Push Beginners Too Far &

others who don't do enough to ever have an effect.....the trainers who actually are sensible are usually over shadowed by the show-off types who demoralize and embarrass beginners - you would not believe some things this obnoxious little man at my gym does to middle age people......

[pink-o]

140. The personal trainers at my gym (24 Hr Fitness) are like pharmaceutical salesmen!

If you hire one, they'll push supplements on you, along with a diet and exercise plan. I told them I wanted to take my workout to the next level, but I refused to spend a crapload on stuff that probably wasn't even vegetarian (that "taurine" stuff in Red Bull and other supplements is a beef extract you find in cat food!)Anyways, needless to say, I said thanx but no thanx.

I'm afraid the answer to obesity really is that simple: you eat as much fresh food as possible, eat sparingly of processed and deep-fried food, and you work off more calories than you take in. You will lose weight. Sorry that isn't sexy or quick, but it's the only way.

The problem is, the System in this country doesn't want a healthy, fit populous. There's too much money to be made by keeping us sick and unable to physically get out of our cars or take the stairs. Notice the total lack of nutritional education--shouldn't that be a basic skill we learn in elementary school? But instead, kids chow down on huge burgers, 2 litre bottles of coke, and whatever else has no nutritional value. As teenagers, they might starve themselves and buy a bunch of fashion magazines (where the models themselves have confessed that they don't really look like that). Then, as adults, they might go to Jenny or Weight Watchers--businesses who if they were ever successful would find themselves closing down!

But my favorite: once you're my age (mid fifties) after decades of living on crap food, Big Pharma is gonna PWN your ass! Three-quarters of your income will be going to drugs for high blood pressure, cholesterol, heart, diabetes or some other ailment that could have been prevented with a little education.

But it's economically viable to keep us ignorant. One thing to remember: Corporations are NOT our friends, they don't have our best interests in mind, so approach with caution when they promise you the magic bullet. Question everything: and remember, human needs haven't changed in thousands of years--we need protein, fat, and carbohydrates. You can find all those things in natural form--doesn't matter if you're Vegan, Vegetarian or Omnivorous.

And everyone has at least one vice! I have 2--as a vegetarian, I'm really happy that coffee and wine come from botanical substances!!

[we can do it]

150. You See It Too- Its So Simple People Don't Believe It

Most doctors would rather push pills which cause more problems, and keep you sick and coming in, than ever help some one with preventive measures. I eat very little meat, try to eat as much fresh food as possible, keep fit and I rarely even catch a cold. I have 2 autoimmune disorders I think came from exposures while I was a firefighter (hashimoto's thyroiditis and alopecia areata) other than that I am very fit and happy. I keep after my friends because I don't want them to suffer, they get sick, tired achy....and most of them are younger than me.

[flvegan]

158. Most doctors don't know shit about nutrition.

I'm often baffled that they don't get nutrition rammed down their throats in medical school. Pretty sad, really. It's all about moving 'scripts.

I do applaud those medical professionals that seek the additional training in what is the body's fuel.

[pink-o]

176. The simple answer takes work--and as Americans we believe

There's gotta be an easier way than work! My eyes just roll up into my head watching them tout another pill that makes mice skinny, or some supplement that blocks fat or carbs. (both essential nutrients to every human.)

But I don't blame people--they're trying to find their way in the dark, with Big Pharma and Fast Food trying to keep the light away from them. Everything I know about nutrition I had to learn with no help--sometimes with not-so-fun consequences. It amazes me how hard it is to find real nutritional info that isn't put out by someone with an agenda for profit.

Case in point: those cereal commericals for Lucky Charms or Coco Sugar Bombs or whatever. They show a table set with a bowl of the cereal, a glass of milk, an egg and some fruit, and the tag line goes: "Lucky Charms is part of this healthy breakfast."

Yeah--just not the HEALTHY part! They must think we're reeeeeelly stoopid!

[we can do it]

187. Exactly - Being Well Takes Work and Responsibility for One's Own Body

There are lots of things beyond our control, but participating in your own physical well being isn't one of them. Yes things do happen to people, but instead of crying poor me- its everyone else's fault (even if it is), use that energy to help yourself....get up move around (or sit and move what you can until you can get up) eat real food. Pay attention to what your body is saying - and do something about it yourself.

[tomp]

198. you guys have pretty much nailed it. nt

[Matariki]

165. I've found that a kitchen scale and measuring cups are indespensible when trying to lose weight

It's always surprising to see how small a serving of pasta or rice is :(

[Mollis]

262. I agree

I have to use measuring devices to keep track of my intake. I love pasta...lots of it...but I have to use that stuff so I don't go on overload.

[K8-EEE]

273. Or even easier -- smaller dishes!

The Big Gulp/Super Size thing is easy to carry over to your home meals -- the typical oversized cereal bowl holds 3 portions. Likewise the giant "bistro style" plates.

Great tip from "The Sonoma Diet" -- use 2 cup bowls (that hold 2 cups filled to the top) and 10 inch plates, no seconds! And no giant "goblet" wine glasses either (my favorite!) Just those little changes really help.

Of course, there's such a thing as food addiction, comfort eating and all the rest of it, but for some people just awareness of proper sizes vs. the godzilla "grand slam" portions we are taught are "value" in chain restaurants and the teevee can make a big difference.

[we can do it]

302. Veggies All You Can Eat! Never Go Hungry

:9

[ecstatic]

246. The best workout hands down is jogging/running

Everything else is almost a waste of time!

And as far as eating goes, any reduction of sugar and complex carbs is going to have a slimming effect!

[flvegan]

251. Wrong and wrong.

The best workout hands down is the one that effectively raises the resting heart rate without causing injury that the practitioner will do as often as possible. While I don't put jogging/running down, as it is an excellent exercise, it's irresponsible to say that "everything else is almost a waste of time".

I don't even know where to begin with that second statement.

[Le Taz Hot]

268. And when one can't jog or run?

I've got asthma. But let's just ignore that because it's MUCH funner to accuse those of us with respiratory or other illnesses of being lazy. It's puts the "fun" in self-righteous.

[AlCzervik]

2. The problem is that people want to apply "calories in vs. calories out" to everyone

every body is different and for some like me it was calories in vs. calories out but for my sister, she has a thyroid issue.

[sam sarrha]

9. check links post..#4 ..my wife has thyroid damage, works in textile industery..we went to bariatric

seminars, doctors said that once a persons BMI reaches a certain number the person can "never" lose the weight. as an old biologist this set off a lot of bells... all ringing environmental causes.

also High Fructose Corn Syrup is definitely a factor in weight problems..it causes the Fructose it contains to be turned directly into fat.

there are multiple overlapping causes in this condition.. virus, HFCS, fire retardant chemicals, plastic food containers,plus the usual stress, inactivity, poor diet..some social some economic, many environmental

[we can do it]

19. I Also Have a Thyroid Issue, Exercise A LOT Watch What I Eat & Maintain Weight

She needs an better endocrinologist (preferably female -because men seem to think that all women normally gain weight as they age) she is probably in need of more Armour or synthoid...my doctor told me that a while back docs were taught a strict baseline number for hypothyroidism, not to look at whether you are symptomatic or not......starving yourself only makes things worse, a good healthy diet -NOT DIETING; and regular physical activity will make a difference.

edit for puctuation

[AlCzervik]

24. she's not dieting or watching what she eats.

[we can do it]

31. That's a Problem. What You Put Into Your Body Is Very Important

Prevention is way better than a cure - people are not often taught by their doctors how to take care of themselves (there's no profit if you're healthy).....she needs a good attitude, and conscientious competent help. She also needs to commit to her own health, if she doesn't no one will do it for her.

[AlCzervik]

35. She has to get there on her own, I can support her but I cannot

Motivate her.

[we can do it]

91. Don't GIve Up On Her - She May Find Something That Changes Her Mindset

[AlCzervik]

133. i hit my rock bottom on my own, i'm she hits hers soon but i can't talk to her about it

so i'm not going to force the issue, she gets defensive and upset.

[we can do it]

138. She'll Need To See the Light On Her Own

hang in there, for yourself and her.

[Maru Kitteh]

200. there's no profit if you're healthy

Wow. You do realize that the VAST majority of doctors DO want their patients to be healthy and happy, don't you? I think one of the problems is that most doctors do not receive enough nutritional and preventative care education. The education of a physician settles mostly around recognizing what's gone wrong and how to fix it, which is still their primary and most important function/skill. It would be nice to see physicians encouraged to refer their patients more often to see nutritional/lifestyle health counselors, who would probably be more helpful in such matters.

I get upset when I see blanket statements ascribing malicious intentions to physicians. There are a few bad apples in any bunch, and I'm all for throwing the bad ones out and punishing them, but please realize that 95+% of the physicians out there are caring and concerned people who want the best for their patients. TRUST me, if profit were the motive, there are MUCH easier ways of going about that than the rigorous, intense, and extremely demanding education, experience and expense one must go through to obtain an M.D.

[sandnsea]

32. Until you get there, you'll be fat though

And if you've been sick for years and not known it, you'll also be fat. That will also lead to insulin resistance, making the weight loss even more difficult once you do discover your thyroid, or other issue.

It doesn't make you any healthier to deny the reality for other people.

[we can do it]

36. Who Is Denying Reality? Eating Right and Being Active Helps Everyone

Denying that you have responsibility for your health helps no one. More things can be helped by avoiding the poisons pushed by fast"food" places and getting even getting out for a brisk walk every day can make a huge difference.

[sandnsea]

39. If you're sick - you can't take that walk

If you have certain types of metabolic disorders - you will be fat and not know why. There's no "fast food" about it. It does not help people to get healthy by saying they are avoiding repsonsibility when they're SICK.

[we can do it]

43. My Mom Who Avoided Exercise Whenever Possible Most of Her Life

Found that she felt better getting some exercise daily WHILE SHE WAS DYING (kidney failure and cancer, is that sick enough?) PT's at hospitals have rooms full of frail little people who they are helping through physical activity. Who is feeding you and what are they feeding you that is making you fat? I am not trying to be mean, just to understand. I want you to take control back from those who have let you down.

[sandnsea]

46. Oh for chrissake, if you have thyroid disorder

YOU CANNOT FUCKING WALK more than a block and you won't lose weight when you do. If you don't get the disease treated, you will DIE. You don't know what the hell you're talking about and neither do the people who haven't had these kinds of disorders. YOU are the ones being mean and refusing to understand.

[we can do it]

49. Calm the Fuck Down - I Am Hypothyroid

You can FUCKING walk, if you only add one step a day some day it will be a mile - But when you say you can't do something - You are right, you've given up without trying.

[sandnsea]

56. You KNOW you're sick

I'm talking about the people who don't know and are told to exercise and diet for YEARS by people who refuse to understand that there is often a medical reason for the weight problem, including doctors.

[we can do it]

74. A Lot of Doctors Make the Problem Much Worse, Telling People To Diet

They don't give them nutrional education and how to change their image of themselves. How to bring positive change themselves. Also many missed/under diagnosed thyroid victims. We are all beautiful, not just skinny people, (which I definately am not, but I've become strong and healthy I feel when I started questioning how the medical industry treats those who trust it). A friend of mine's mom was pactically starved by her dr. who kept giving her "diets" and telling her she was over weight. He didn't teach her about nutrition and changing how she viewed food, and never suggested even going out for a walk. He did push diet pills, though.

[we can do it]

83. I Knew I Worked My Butt Off To Mostly Keep Weight the Same

but didn't find out until I was 40 that I have hypothyroidism, until my hair was falling out with alopcia areata (both auto-immune disorders) when I got a great new doctor (she is totally into preventive medicine)...My family history is bad diabetes, thyroid, cancer, heart and blood pressure problems.

[sandnsea]

99. So you were sick and still say it's all diet & exercise?

Even though the real problem all those years was that you were sick??

[we can do it]

100. I Am Saying Diet and Exercise Helps, and It Made a Difference Before I Knew

there was a problem. I should say healthy eating as oppose to diet - to often that's misconstrued into a short term shock to the system as opposed to actually changing how you view and use food. I do not go hungry- I do pay close attention to what I eat.

[sandnsea]

103. If you could exercise more than 3 minutes

you weren't the kind of sick I'm talking about.

[we can do it]

107. Take That 3 Minutes and Add a Couple Seconds A Day

My mom was desperately DYING, Puking chemo-induced week, and the little she could do allowed her to do a little more until we could go to the library so she could enjoy her last few days - you are still here, so I don't think you are as sick as she was. I am trying to help- but you keep giving me a tude.

[sandnsea]

109. Oh jesus christ you CAN'T

Are you thick in the head? YOU CAN'T WHEN YOUR THYROID ISN'T RIGHT. And more important, YOU SHOULDN'T. You'll DIE. You need to get medicine before you worry about exercise and diet if you have thyroid disorders. Why is that so hard for you to get through your damn head.

[dustbunnie]

112. This thread isn't about you - so why get upset?

Obviously you have a medical condition. The OP appears to be speaking of healthy individuals who may have gained weight for a myriad of reasons that may include sedentary lifestyle, aging, etc...

[sandnsea]

115. That's the assumption, everybody's healthy

when it just isn't true.

Why so upset? Because people always want to assume the worst of others, instead of the usual reality that there are other problems involved in any given situation.

[dustbunnie]

126. It isn't the usual reality though.

There are of course people who have weight gain caused by medical disorders, and the medications they have to take to combat their illnesses or what have you, but for the most part, the majority of people are overweight because of their eating habits and lack of exercise.

Not all people assume the worst of others, and it is possible to contribute to a thread where people exchange thoughts about health, weight and exercise without being thought of as insulting or insensitive to others by the mere mention of diet and exercise.

Btw, none of my business, but 1200 cals a day is not at all a normal intake for a woman. It's very low and eating that way for any extended length of time would put a body into starvation mode, hanging on to every shred of fat.

[sandnsea]

137. How in the hell do you know?

Who the fuck are you to say what is or isn't the "usual reality" for any given individual. The doctors don't even know and they're discovering more every day.

And you'd turn right around and tell another woman that she shouldn't be surprised she is gaining weight on a 1500 calorie diet. I know the hypocritical types. No problem saying the exact opposite thing depending on who you're talking to.

[dustbunnie]

147. I'm part owner of a health club.

I see a lot. And I'll leave it at that.

I would never tell a woman that 1500 cals is too much, I find that low as well. I myself eat approx. 1800 - 2100 cals a day at 5'6" and am not overweight. Perhaps you don't know as much as you think you do if you believe you can divine hypocrisy from my few posts on this thread.

[sandnsea]

151. I hope you don't kill someone with thyroid disease n/t

[dustbunnie]

155. Come on now sandnsea!

:) I have yet to kill anyone, and actually enjoy helping people.

I was just passing on some info. It's quite true that people on diets eat too little, sometimes in the quest for quick weight loss, but that only fucks up the body. Very slow, gradual weight loss, eating in moderation is the best way to go. Most doctors agree on that.

My mother had hypothyroidism so am a little familiar with the symptoms.

[sam sarrha]

152. the OP is infering... there are 10 million undiagnosed cases of hypo-thyroidism.. i would include

many of those in the catagory of ...damn, how do you call such horrably ill people "normal".. without being a bigot.?

[we can do it]

114. If You Are That Sick Get To the ER

Sorry I tried to encourage you- you want to throw a hissy.

[sandnsea]

119. How would somebody know?

How would you know your thyroid is bad? Huh genius? You damn right I throw a hissy when people act like fucking know-it-alls which could put someone else's life at risk.

How would someone know they've got a metabolic disorder? Ever been 50 years old and menopausal? How would you know the difference between that and thyroid disease?

You don't know the meaning of the word "encourage".

[tangent90]

124. Anybody who has stopped eating and is gaining weight is a prime candidate for the E.R.

(not to mention some serious scientific inquiry on how the laws of thermodynamics managed to get ignored)
:shrug:

[sandnsea]

134. But were it that easy, it simply isn't

It creeps up on you so slowly that you don't know you're even sick, especially if it hits you at middle age. I would never have been diagnosed if I hadn't been to the doctor for an infected finger and she was able to see something was terribly wrong with me. People in this thread just do not get it. And it isn't just thyroid, there are a lot of things that can cause unexplained weight gain or metabolism problems. People need to quit being so damn judgmental.

[tangent90]

145. I don't understand how pointing out the laws of physics and thermodynamics is judgmental.

Could you please explain that too me? (I have read the creationist answer to that but you probably can relate to my failure to give them credibility, yes?)

[we can do it]

132. In Your Own Words- It's called google look it up

google search -symptom weight gain fatigue
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,670,000 for symptom weight gain fatigue.

result no. 1
http://www.thyroid.ca/Articles/weight.html
Fatigue, Weight Gain, and the Thyroid (or is the thyroid why I am so tired and can't lose weight)

[Name removed]

135. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sam sarrha]

122. sandnsea... i want to thank you for giving a voice to truth in this dark cave of bigotry. my wife

is dying from obesity, she's too old for the surgery, can barely get around, she has all the accompanying diseases of obesity except Type2 Diabetes. according to the "SCIENCE" SHE WORKS IN AN INDUSTRY THAT EXPOSED HER TO CHEMICALS THAT DESTROY THE THYROID. the thyroid medication she takes is the MOST PRESCRIBED MEDICATION IN THE UNITED STATES..an F'n EPIDEMIC, the chemical she was exposed to is the major cause of death for cats, carpets/furniture are saturated with the chemical, they lick it off their fur and it kills their thyroid THEY DIE

MY WIFE wont get workman's comp, OR DISABILITY. because if it was revealed that this chemical caused thyroid death, it could bankrupt the medical insurance industry, and cause Corporations to lose money. so people suffer and die horrible deaths.. and Jackass trolls like the ones here who take pride in revealing their ignorance... get a hard-on blaming the victims.

and for those who will take offense at being called a troll.. if you didn't sound like one you wouldn't be called one..

and you troll-folk, ..do you remember when Ronald Reagan, his wife and the F'n family dog, all got thyroid disease.. at the same time. what are the odds of that...???

[sandnsea]

142. I almost frikkin' died

If I know anything, I know what severe thyroid disorders are about. It is one of the greater blessings of my life that I ran into a doctor who could see it in me. I'll be damned if I let anybody get in the way of someone else getting diagnosed sooner than I did. I was so sick for several years. I just did not know, it never occurred to me I might be genuinely sick. I know how it must have been for your wife too.

[BoneDaddy]

218. Your wife is one of the gross exceptions

I am glad she is well but she is by no means a representative for the obesity in America.

[Matariki]

154. how common is thyroid disorder?

sometimes it sounds like people are making the argument that everyone who is 'overweight' has a thyroid problem? do you know actual statistics?

[sandnsea]

160. By age 60, 17%

http://stanford.wellsphere.com/stress-relief-article/undiagnosed-thyroid-disorders-may-be-affecting-your-energy-level/3198

Now, add that to the number with insulin resistance, pancreatic disorders, gallbladder surgeries, medication side-affects, etc., etc.,

and pretty soon you've got A LOT of women (and men) who are overweight because of health complications, not bad diet and exercise.

[Matariki]

167. Thanks, I looked it up too. It's a shockingly high statistic

I wonder how it compares to other cultures.

[sam sarrha]

164. Thyroid medication is the most prescribed med in the country, 10 million un-diagnosed cases

this is a very deadly and devastating condition.. the meds do help, but many have side effects, it doesn't cure them but does keep them alive. the data says most people report an improved quality of life, but consider that comes from PHARMA and the alternatives of not taking it is a horrific DEATH. at that point anything is better.

[Matariki]

169. It also looks like 'pharma' is partly the cause of the problem too

seems as psychiatric medications are a factor in the high statistics.

[sandnsea]

173. Oh brother

Was never on a psychiatric medication in my life. Why can people just not accept the reality that we are not all happy little clones of each other. If you got good genes, be grateful and leave other people the hell alone.

[Matariki]

180. That FACT is from the fucking Mayo Clinic website about causes of Hyperthyroidism

you are WAY too reactive.

[Name removed]

189. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Matariki]

184. Here - from the Mayo Clinic website

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/hypothyroidism/DS00353/DSECTION=causes

Hypothyroidism may be due to a number of different factors, including:

Medications. A number of medications can contribute to hypothyroidism. One such medication is lithium, which is used to treat certain psychiatric disorders. If you're taking medication, ask your doctor about its effect on your thyroid gland.

[Missy Vixen]

260. Thirteen million diagnosed in the United States

As many as ten million undiagnosed and believed to have the disease. The vast majority are women.

That's right. "Everyone" has thyroid disease. :sarcasm: Aren't I the lucky one?

In the meantime, my thyroid's dead. It took me fifteen years and three different doctors to get diagnosed. I might also add that doctors do not treat to symptoms; doctors treat to lab values. In other words, one of the symptoms of hypothyroidism is weight gain (and inability to lose weight.) Those who keep parroting their BS about "calories in, calories out" and thermodynamics can shove it up their asses. Here's the quandary: The body goes into starvation mode below a certain calorie level. Those who know they don't have much of a metabolism to begin with can't go over that calorie level, or they GAIN WEIGHT. If they don't have adequate nutrition, the working out thing becomes a problem. If they have a disease that isn't being treated correctly, the attempts to lose weight are fruitless.

I still haven't seen any explanation at all for those who can eat thousands of calories per day and not gain weight, either, and we've seen several already on the fat-bashing threads who mentioned this.

Go figure.

[we can do it]

303. Its Very Common, Most Cases Are Not Extreme As Some Would Have You Believe

[we can do it]

183. Exercise is an important factor in the treatment of hypothyroidism

Exercise is an important factor in the treatment of hypothyroidism
Exercise is important to maintain health, but many people with hypothyroidism lack the energy to exercise. One expert suggests splitting exercise into several short sessions
Exercise is an important factor in the treatment of hypothyroidism. Exercise increases tissue sensitivity to the thyroid hormone and stimulates thyroid gland secretion. This is especially true in people who are dieting; this is because when dieting the metabolic rate decreases but exercise prevents this decline. An exercise regime of between 15-20 minutes per day will be beneficial with hypothyroidism. This exercise needs to be strenuous enough to raise the heartbeat, an exercise such as walking, swimming, running and cycling.
http://www.gffi-fitness.org/Art_10.htm

How to exercise with hypothyroidism?
Hypothyroidism is a condition in which the thyroid gland produces less thyroid hormone than required by the body. Thyroid hormone is an important hormone that is responsible for smoother metabolism. Any alteration in thyroid hormone will affect the metabolism in a large manner. The metabolism is slower down and the digestion becomes poor. The food that is used to nourish the body now gets stored as fats somewhere in the body and then the body becomes obese.
Hypothyroidism brings lots of problem such as sluggishness, lethargy, overweight and difficultly in digestion is common. There might be edema and peripheral blood circulatory problems. The person may become intolerant to the cold and all the bodily systems start giving problem. Under-active thyroid can be treated well with the help of extra (that is lacking in the body) hormone supplements in the form of pills. One can recover faster if perform some exercises properly.
An under-active thyroid gland creates trouble in each system of the body and hence the body becomes weak and sluggish. Even slightest work creates exhaustion and hence on has to be careful performing any kind of exercises. You do not need to build the body and hence, do not mess up with body-building machines or materials such as dumbles and weight lifting. All you need to do is light exercises. Remember that your body is not ready to work hard within a day and hence, the light exercises are to be continued for some time.
http://thyroidtalk.org/hypothyroidism/exercises-for-hypothyroidism

[sam sarrha]

148. you are projecting a single case/ limited at best.. on a broad spectrum of people who dont have the

same problem.. there are diverse and multi faceted causes, thyroid medication is thE most prescribed medication in this country, WHAT PART OF 'EPIDEMIC' DONT YOU UNDERSTAND..!! there is lots of data on the causes of the problem.. your family just sounds very fortunate in this situation.. then you go and get arrogant an blow it. not everyone is as lucky as you.. especially the 10,000,000 un-diagnosed, and the millions with no insurance,, are you going to tell me since you have great insurance that EVERYBODY ELSE HAS IT TOO..!!

http://thyroid.about.com/cs/publicawareness/a/easytotreat.htm
"SNIP...recent findings that an estimated 10 million people have undiagnosed thyroid conditions -- not 5 million as previously thought. These findings were discussed in a recent article here at the site...SNIP"

WHY AM I WASTING MY TIME HERE..? you don't get it.

[we can do it]

157. Who Are YOU Talking To? I Never Replied To You or Miss Hissyfit To Begin With

I simply stated a fact- proper diet and exercise helps (not cures) people (even very sick people)- PROVE ME WRONG or STFU- you two are just plain out of control.

[sam sarrha]

185. you still dont get it...

[we can do it]

192. what I get is someone who is upset

what I get is someone who is upset because they or a family member is very ill, and they are taking everything WAY TOO PERSONALLY - and negatively.

How is it that someone suggesting proper nutrition and physical activity to alleviate suffering is taken as offensive? It is a fact. It has helped and is helping many people. Hospice helps many people, doesn't cure them helps them.

You have no problem calling people names or stupid all up and down this thread. BTW- my insurance only pays for generic Levothyroxin which wasn't as consistant as synthroid.

[sam sarrha]

206. you come across like your experience is a panacea for others, ,

sure there needs to be education, but the bulk of the problem of the worst cases is obviously environmental, and the causes are covered up by Corporatist interests

http://www.americansportsdata.com/obesitystats.asp
-- Between 1962 and the year 2000, the number of obese Americans grew from 13% to an alarming 31% of the population.
-- 63% of Americans are overweight with a Body Mass Index (BMI) in excess of 25.0.
-- 31% are obese with a BMI in excess of 30.0.
-- Childhood obesity in the United States has more than tripled in the past two decades.
-- According to the U.S. Surgeon General report obesity is responsible for 300,000 deaths every year

and considering that there are 10,000,000 un-diagnosed hypo-thyroid cases your situation and those you mentioned AS EXAMPLES that share genetic material with, ARE NOT THE NORM. and really has nothing to add to the conversation. i'm happy for you.. but the thread turned a corner, and you didn't.. you just repeated the OP, which was crap..to there are serious environmental factors, that you obviously are not effected by, that are decimating the quality of health in this country, this is a catastrophic situation.. you don't get that, one has to get past the "I" part to others suffering... being nice is step one then it's time to start yelling.

when people say or insinuate 'i did it, why cant they'.. during a feeding frenzy of self righteous trolls.. without predicating there are other factors, they come across like the guy who started all this..

i speak from a world as one view.... and yes my wife is dying, and suffering greatly, we may soon be homeless, living in a 93 ford escort, she wont survive a week of that with a blood clot. and we aren't the only ones.

[we can do it]

233. There Is No Disagreement From Me On Environmental Causes

So far I am lucky to only have 2 autoimmune disorders (I'm a retired firefighter). and its not just me that exercise and nutrition (chemical crap food is a big part of the problem, imo) has helped, its millions. we are all in this shitty boat together, lets help each other. helping others to look out for big problems they did not cause is great. eating crappy stuff with HFCS is causing huge problems, as is not getting kids enough exercise.

[Missy Vixen]

261. It's always interesting when one throws bombs

then claims that everyone else who defends themselves or disagrees is "taking everything way too personally".

This is their life, or the life of a loved one. How could they NOT "take it personally"?

BTW, I'm fairly sure I've forgotten more about hypothyroidism than you know. I've been living with it, I estimate, about thirty years now. It is an epidemic. The drug prescribed to those with hypothyroidism never even went through clinical trials till five years ago, but it's the only option we have, now that Armour is causing heart problems, according to our doctor.

Thyroid disease gets little attention because it's primarily a disease suffered by women, and those fatties just don't need a cure, do they?

[we can do it]

272. What Bombs Are You Talking About? Be Specific

I only offered help and got slammed by 2 people who I hadn't replied to in the first place - you want to pile on? Does that make you feel better? I lost my mom to horrible illness and malpractice which precipitated her demise - no one thought she or anyone else I've mentioned or others down thread was worth considering - I've about had enough....I'm freezing right now. very cold intolerant and have very little hair, but hey its not you so its not relevant- BTW I AM HYPOTHYROID also, but you didn't bother to read that either before you went on your self rightious rant -I hope you feel better.

[eridani]

224. Yes, even if you don't lose any weight by doing those things.

Could you please stop the horseshit about "brisk walks"? They certainly make you healthier, but for quite a few people all that happens is that their feedback loops kick in really fast, and they use fewer calories. A brisk 3 hour walk followed by an hour of weight training may be what it takes, and anybody with a life will justifiably say "Screw that!"

[we can do it]

235. So They Should Just Give Up? What Are You Suggesting?

I am suggesting that people will be healthier if they move around, it helps mentally, too. Gradual improvement lasts, that's been proven.

[eridani]

236. I'm suggesting that weight loss as a goal in and of itself is a drect attack on the health of some

Moving around certainly improves the quality of life for everybody and clears away mental cobwebs. It just does not result in significant weight loss. If you aren't very much heavier than average, losing 30 lb might seem like a very big deal. It's pretty chickenshit to someone who weighs 300 lbs. The public abuse certainly doesn't stop. I have a friend who lost 100 lbs by starting regular exercise and sticking to it, and she still gets a major ration of shit every time she goes out in public. Going from 350 lb to 250 lb improved her health and quality of life a lot, but 250 lbs is STILL FAT.

[we can do it]

237. I Merely Suggest You Feel Better When You Exercise and Exercise

you are twisting my support for most everyone to feel better and be healthier into something its not. If you weigh 250 lbs and put on a 30 lb backpack all day- I guarentee you will feel the difference - it will make you more tired. That's my point I don't give a rats ass about how anybody looks- one other thing to consider, a person weighing 300 pounds walking burns more calories than a 150 pound person. I've know several people who have lost significant amounts by merely walking and giving up pop. (my hairdresser lost 61 pounds since last summer, walking eating better and giving up pop)- she is still big but noticably thinner- people she knows notice and encourage her, she keeps going.....she said its worth it just because her back feels better at the end of the day.

[eridani]

240. It may not be true that someone of 300 lbs burns more calories than someone at 150 lbs

On average, yes, but not everybody is average. Hmm. Fat as a way to save money buying expensive weights--you do weight lifting just by walking around. I'm sure that if I weighed less than 215 I could ride my bike up hills faster. And if only I were smarter, I would have won a Nobel Prize by now.

[we can do it]

243. Snark Definately Burns More Calories and Its Directly Proportional To Weight

I hear wallowing in self pity is basically useless in accomplishing anything.

[eridani]

283. Being a member of the reality-based community is not self-pity

What is useless, and utterly stupid and condescending as well, is shilling for the notion that exercising more (or any other lifestyle change) will give you any control whatsoever over what changes then occur in your body as a result.

[we can do it]

292. Prove That or STFU- Reality -Lifestyle changes greatly improve quality of life

Name ONE illness or disorder not helped by proper nutrition and physical activity........and back it up with something other your pissy attitude.

[eridani]

295. You didn't hear what I was saying. I agree that quite a few things are improved

--by physical activity. Really substantial weight loss is just not one of those things. Yet the health Nazis want that, rather than health improvments, to be the most important thing.

[we can do it]

297. You Also Misread What I Wrote, Again I Said You Will Feel Better

I said nothing about substantial weight loss as a goal - I only said you will feel better if you eat right and are active.

[eridani]

299. OK, then two of us agree. Unfortunately quite a few others priotitize weight loss

See half the posts in the thread

[we can do it]

304. Thanks -

I only want to help, not hurt anyone.

:hi:

[sam sarrha]

128. wow a Psychic.. so you know that your problem is the same as the others we are talking about, ..and

i personally dont believe you, there are just tooo many trolls making up shit here, noth'n personal.

this is supposed to be a progressive forum... i have only seen as much hate'n go'n on when someone diss's killer Tobacco.

[mike_c]

89. it is STILL a simple matter of calories in vs calories out....

Most metabolic issues boil down to lowering the amount of energy burned during basal matabolism, i.e. lowering "calories out." Unless you adjust calorie intake to accommodate, you'll gain weight rather than lose it. The OP is entirely correct-- from a physiological standpoint, there is only one way to lose or gain weight-- caloric intake/output imbalance. NO metabolic condition will cause you to retain weight if you're burning more energy than you consume, under any conditions. None. Period.

[sandnsea]

96. Bullshit

You just have no fucking idea. None. Period.

You can eat next to nothing and if you're TSH is 92, you'll gain weight.

[mike_c]

104. bullshit right back atcha....

You can eat next to nothing and if you're TSH is 92, you'll gain weight.

Only because of the lowered metabolic rate that accompanies hypothyroidism. I presume you're talking about something like Hashimoto's disease? Note that low basal body temperature and fatigue are both common symptoms as well-- both usually accompany metabolic decline, i.e. suggest lowered energy expenditure for basic physiological maintenance.

The energy budget relationship remains exactly the same, regardless. If, as you suggest, "you can eat next to nothing" and still gain weight, it is ONLY because you're burning next to nothing. You can still lose weight by shifting the energy balance in the other direction, and burning more than you consume. It's just more difficult to accomplish because you're starting from a deeper energy balance deficit. Nonetheless, the thermodynamics remain unchanged.

[sandnsea]

106. You can't eat that small of an amount

Unless you just eat lettuce and tomatoes all day. If you eat anything remotely near a normal 1200 calorie diet, you will gain weight if your thyroid is not right. That IS the point of the thread, isn't it? That everybody cannot control their weight strictly through diet and exercise?

[we can do it]

105. Dear Sandnsea, Eating Next To Nothing Makes Your Body Think Its Starving

that causes it to hold on to every possible calorie. This has happened to several people I know. I also did a crazy diet once, dropped weight quickly, (I want to add, this was after I modified eating habits and I wanted to be "skinny") well as soon as I stopped all I could think of was eating awful junk! Weight right back on and more....I had to step back and see what I was doing- ruining what I had accomplished sensibly. I say never again.

[sandnsea]

108. You said you did it when you were sick

You said you maintained your weight through diet and exercise. I'm telling you a person's thyroid can be so bad that it is impossible, but you just insist you know better. You would have to eat next to nothing with a TSH of 92 to not gain weight, but you just go on ahead and argue otherwise.

[we can do it]

113. That Is NOT What I Said, I Said Eating Sensible Nutious Foods

I tried a stupid "diet" and it backfired just like they do on everyone else - I said diet and exercise meaning- my diet(foods I eat, not "diet" like the cabbage soup catastrophe) is healthy foods, which provide energy and nutrition naturally. You really need a better endocrinologist and eat a regular diet like people used to do- no chemical/faux/processed foods. Are you taking sythroid or armour - I've been happier since my pharacist suggested armour.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

245. Errr, mike_c knows his shit. He's a biologist, if memory serves me right. Wrong person to say BS to.

[sandnsea]

257. He's not god and he's wrong

There are a multitude of reasons people to not metabolize the same and people who say otherwise are endangering lives. If doctors would give complete work-ups to overweight people, do sleep studies, etc., we'd make a lot more progress than this constant calories in, fat out, bullshit. It almost killed me and that's no joke, at least not to me.

[eridani]

225. Where do you get this silly notion that if you change one part of the equation--

--the other parts stay the same? Take in fewer calories and exercise more, and you then adapt to use fewer calories. For many there is enough lag time that weight loss occurs, but for some there is not, and will never be unless they replicate the living conditions of their ancestors. That is to say 8 or more hours of hard physical labor on semi-starvation rations.

[mike_c]

266. of course there's lag time and yes, the equation is dynamic, too...

...but that changes nothing-- it just means that the target moves. The relationship between energy in and energy out remains the same.

As you say, when healthy people decrease energy intake slowly, for extended periods, most adapt to some extent by lowering metabolic demand-- the energy balance "target" moves. One way to offset this is by increasing lean muscle mass, which has higher basal maintenance cost. Just increasing physical activity has the same result whether it increases basal metabolism or not.

As for the lag, everyone should remember that there are multiple means for storing energy within our bodies. Increasing physical activity and eating a light meal won't cause you to lose weight immediately because the increased metabolic demand is withdrawn from short-term storage, e.g. muscle storage, circulating carbohydrate, and glycogen stores for a start. And homeostatic concentrations of those short-term stores fluctuate, too. Fat loss requires mobilization of long term energy stores and is much more recalcitrant-- it requires shifting the energy budget away from energy intake for longer periods and maintaining metabolic pressure on long-term storage tissues.

[eridani]

279. And some people maintain metabolic pressure that is for all practical purposes non-existent

The only way to do anything about that is to quit your job and devote most of your time to some sort of physical activity, a recommendation that is completely unreasonable.

[ecstatic]

247. But the type of calories consumed is very important

If the calories consumed are not full of sugar and carbs then the math is a little more forgiving.

[mike_c]

264. I'm afraid that's just not correct....

A calorie is a measure of energy. It has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the type of food the energy is obtained from. A calorie is a calorie, no matter where it comes from. The diet industry would like to convince you otherwise, and of course there are lots of OTHER reasons to eat a balanced diet rather than a sugary simple carbohydrate dominated diet, but where the thermodynamics count-- inside cells-- a calorie is just a calorie, no matter where it comes from.

[ecstatic]

267. I guess there's what the book says, and what actually

happens? :shrug: As a veteran dieter, I know that all calories were not created equally.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

269. Isn't the crucial question whether your body will grab and store the calories or not

as it passes through?

Could it be that person A and person B, both eating 50 grams of chicken and 100 grams of potatoes, will retain different amounts and shit out the rest?

"Calories in" means what you retain, not what you eat. One way or the other, you can't escape Lavoisier.

[mike_c]

271. absolutely...

Although the differences are not very great for most people, or at least for most people with healthy digestive systems. Absorption varies from meal to meal in individuals, too, depending upon things like gut residence time, endocrine signaling, and nutritional status. Still, once absorbed, a calorie is just a calorie, regardless of where it comes from.

You raised a good point though-- there is not necessarily a direct correspondence between what we put into our mouths and the "calories in" side of the energy budget.

It's also true that the size of the energy imbalance between "calories in" and "calories out" necessary to stimulate mobilization of long term storage, i.e. adipose accumulation-- varies from person to person, but that doesn't change the basic energy relationship-- just one's personal experience of it, the quality of life we perceive when we intentionally unbalance the budget.

[BoneDaddy]

278. Absolutely

There is a current trend of irresponsibility that runs rampant thru our society. People cannot even take responsibility for what they eat in our country. This is incredibly sad.

[readmoreoften]

3. I'm more interested in the "math of thinness". I've known more skinny people who eat like pigs

than "obese" people. When we're talking about skinny people it's "metabolism". When we're talking about overweight people, it's laziness and immorality.

[whoneedstickets]

10. Metabolism isn't anything but a cognitive shortcut...

..most 'high metabolism' people (those skinny types who seem to eat anything) actually have much more active than average lifestyles. Sometimes they are fidget-ers (who burn up more calories while 'resting' than others), some have more physically active jobs. Because we don't 'see' the circumstances or their whole lives we attribute their condition (thinness) to some individual 'trait'. Aside from tapeworms or gluten-intolerance or some other pathology that prevents digestion/aborbtion there is no super-human who can consume twice as many calories as average but not gain weight.

There is some individual variation in resting metabolic rate but it is not large enough to overcome eating behaviors.

[sam sarrha]

11. if you ignore the causes.. your posit is meaningless, to narrow to be of substance.. the sociology

is interesting, but of no consequence to cause and effect

[sam sarrha]

4. there is absolute proof of a virus that causes obesity, and our environment is INUNDATED with a

chemical fire retardant that destroys the thyroid gland..

http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/107555302317371479?cookieSet=1&journalCode=acm
The number of obese people worldwide has escalated recently, revealing a complex picture of significant variations among nations and different profiles among adults and children, regions, and occupations. The commonly held causes of obesity - overeating and inactivity - do not explain the current obesity epidemic.

http://diabetesupdate.blogspot.com/2008/09/flame-retardants-in-childrens-blood.html

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WXH-4K0D7WD-4&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=657d76cd20f23bcfe4b2c7d7d1da2670

http://www.obesityvirus.com/page.aspx?page=testforobesityvirus
"snip...The Ad-36 virus test is most important for people who are not obese. Based on the animal studies, there is a 60% to 100% risk of becoming obese if a person has a positive Ad-36 test...snip"

[mike_c]

93. "The commonly held causes of obesity..." do indeed explain...

...the "current obesity epidemic." There are NO magic causes, no hidden health effects. Weight gain and loss are simple thermodynamic energy budgets. If you consume more energy than you expend-- in any form of consumption and any form of expenditure-- you gain weight. If you consume less than you expend, you lose weight. The OP is entirely correct. It is THAT simple.

Metabolic disorders, genetics, etc, all affect one side of that equation or the other, lowering or raising basal metabolic activity, or affecting energy absorption efficiency, but the equation remains, simple and irreducible. If you burn more than you consume, you will lose weight-- unless you manage to find a place where the fundamental laws of thermodynamics don't apply. The energy has to come from SOMEWHERE, and if you're absorbing less energy than you're burning, the only way to make up the difference is by catabolism of storage tissues, e.g. fat.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BoneDaddy]

217. Ah the acute science of victimology..so fucking sad

[Love Bug]

5. Losing it is one thing, Keeping it off is another.

Here is something else to add to the psychology: According to every statistic I've ever read that tracks such things the vast majority of those who lose weight will gain it back AND THEN SOME within a few years. Go through that enough times and one does get to the point where you are almost afraid to try to lose for fear of the rebound weight leaving you worse off than where you started.

[AlCzervik]

7. have you ever watched The Biggest loser? So many of the contestants that lose big end up

gaining back weight, some a little and some a lot. Imo the people that go on that show learn nothing, it's a quick hit and then they're on their own.

[we can do it]

34. You Must Commit Yourself To Lifestyle Changes

Not diet take weight off, binge put it and more back on, exercise sporadically....we are bombarded with messages to eat and drink chemical poisons, HFCS, sodas, artificial everything, deep fried animal innerds YUK! The mindset needs to change, respect and keep your body as a temple, not a garbage can......

[Droopy]

6. I've been fat for most of my life

Particularly so for the last 12 years, which coincides with my career as a trucker. It's hard to eat right when you are out on the road, but not impossible. I just picked up a lot of bad habits out there, lived a sedentary lifestyle, and did a lot of snacking on carbohydrate-rich foods.

I'm a local driver now so it is easier for me to eat right and break those bad habits, but it has still been very tough. Last April I quit smoking. From then until the first of this year I went from 237 to 289. When I took the smokes away I could not fight the incredible urge to eat too much. I was probably consuming in the neighborhood of 3000 to 3500 calories a day. But I beat that tobacco, yes I did. I figured it was okay to put on the weight in the short term to kick that addiction. I'd take care of it later. Well, later has come. I signed on with a weight loss clinic after the New Year and I've lost 35 pounds so far. I'm at 254 now. My goal is 185. I feel as happy now as I've ever been. My whole attitude and outlook on life has changed. I have a lot more energy, too. My diet is austere. I consume 1300-1400 calories a day, but I don't feel hungry all the time. I eat 3 small meals and 2 snacks a day. The clinic is also going to show me how to keep the weight off once I reach my goal.

When I took away all of the bad stuff I was putting into my body what was left was someone who was not happy with himself and not happy with his life. I guess you could say that I was self-medicating with the booze, smokes, and junk food. Those things would make me happier if only for a short time. And when you've been feeding a habit for a long time, it's a hell of a lot easier to grab a six pack and a pack of smokes than to commit yourself to a lifestyle change from indulgence to sensibility. I felt terrible the first couple of weeks I was on the diet, but as the weight has come off and as I put distance between myself and those bad habits, I feel better and better about myself.

[whoneedstickets]

12. Congratulations!

A great story. Stick with it!

[Droopy]

30. Thanks!

I post about my weight loss adventures in the weight loss and maintenance forum if you'd like to read more.

[sandnsea]

20. That just makes me smile

Seems I recall a few hit and miss attempts in the past. I am so glad you have taken such gigantic steps forward. :hug:

[Droopy]

28. Thank you

Yeah, I dropped some weight before I quit smoking. I had also tried to quit smoking many times before my successful attempt. I have posted about that stuff here in the past.

[we can do it]

170. Stick With It- It Works I'm At nearly 30 Years of Lifestyle Change

Get to a comfortable weight and be consistent with maintenance. I am so happy for you.

[treestar]

8. It's not so simple as calories consumed vs. calories burned

In fact, they are not equal.

People just desperately want to believe this because it gives them a sense of control. Especially thin people who haven't faced the problem yet and are afraid they might one day have to.

As you get older is the main factor. At 20 I ate at least twice as much as I did at age 40. Yet I was way thinner at 20.

Some of the anti-depressant drugs cause weight gain, too. You eat less and weigh more.

[dustbunnie]

14. People, especially males, tend to lose muscle mass with age.

That's part of the reason, as more calories are required to sustain the muscle. That and our metabolisms slow by up to 20% as we age as well. Perfect reasons to stay 20 forever!! :)

The older we get, the more roller coaster dieting we do as well. Every time someone goes on a near starvation diet, muscle ends up being burned as the body tries to conserve fat. One can really lose only maybe 1-2 pounds of fat per week, so any extra is going to be in the form of muscle mass. The binge eating that inevitably follows the starving adds weight very quickly, only the weight gained will be virtually all fat. So, each starvation diet cycle leaves the person fatter than the last one.

[tangent90]

16. This subject fascinates me. Could you please explain to me where added weight comes from if not

from food that is eaten? I know a bit about how plants grow but have yet to meet a human who photosynthesizes solid material from sunlight.
:D

[sandnsea]

18. From metabolic disorders

Now would you like to know where intelligence comes from?

[tangent90]

23. You didn't explain where the solid matter comes from.

Is it magic?

[Lost in CT]

242. Added weight doesn't come from metabolic disorders...

If you change from a car that gets 18 mpg to a hybrid that gets 45 mpg... you simply need to fill up the tank less...

If you continue to pump gas as if you were still getting 18 mpg you will get fat...

And if you drive less and still pump gas at the same rate you will get fat.

Metabolic disorders simple effects how many calories you burn on idle... It does not trump science nor physics.

[dustbunnie]

22. The aging process is slow enough that people don't realize their metabolisms have slowed -

or are aware that loss of muscle mass requires them to take in less to maintain weight (unless a physical exercise regimen is added)

That's why middle aged men come into the gym and stare at their cute pot bellies in the mirror like deer caught in the headlights, fascinated, as though it belongs to someone else and just latched on for the ride. :D

[tangent90]

26. Please understand I was just asking a simple question. I'm 67 and I know about

metabolism, including my own which has redistributed my body mass somewhat but I still weigh the same as I did in 1980. I was just asking
what mechanism is responsible for adding more mass to a person than is ingested orally. I really don't think the question is like nasty or anything, do you?

[sandnsea]

29. You're 67?

And never known anybody with disorders that change the way they metabolize food? Wow. Incredible. Miracle person.

[CTyankee]

37. I had several abdominal surgeries that caused the removal of quite a bit of my small intestine.

That is where calories are processed. My surgeon told me that as a result I would never be fat. While I recovered from the surgeries, I could eat only much smaller portions of food, because I simply could not ingest that much(when I healed, of course, I could eat more normally and I gained back about 15 lbs) I lost 35 pounds (I had been 165 lbs before). The weight just dropped off of me. No food, no calories, plus reduced metabolization of calories in my somewhat reduced small intestine.

I don't know what this tells you, except perhaps that if medical science could somehow alter obese people's small intestine intake they might be able to lose some weight. How that would be done, of course, is another matter.

I do go through some periods where I am extremely hungry and my doctor tells me it is because my body is experience a plunge in my caloric intake and needs more. That is when I eat more than usual. It's a little strange but just one of those things...

[sandnsea]

41. My sister had gallbladder surgery

and lo and behold, she gained weight for the first time in her life. Look up gallbladder surgery for yourself. Everybody is NOT YOU.

[CTyankee]

45. No, I did not have gallbladder surgery. It was originally surgery to prevent diverticulitis

which had plagued me repeatedly.

However, I developed scar tissue resulting in an intestinal blockage so I had to have surgery to clear it away, then pools of abscess formed, and I had a third surgery. Believe me, if I had had a choice, these complications would not have taken place. It was simply out of my control. You either do or you don't develop scar tissue. There are no tests or ways to predict this happening. It just is.

I don't know if your sister had her small intestine reduced as mine was, as a result of gallbladder surgery. That was the reason for my body's inability to absorb calories efficiently.

I was as surprised as anyone at what happened to me. It's no girl scout badge I can tell you...

[sandnsea]

62. And she was surprised what happened to her

It's no girl scout badge to have weight gain due to gallbladder surgery either, nor due to thyroid disease, that I can tell you as well.

Why is it so hard to comprehend that differences in internal disorders will cause differences in weight?

[CTyankee]

65. Well, I can't speak for anyone else. All I know is that the surgical removal of

a significant amount of small intestine reduces the ability of the body to absorb calories (also nutrition, which makes it tricky). I have no idea how the function of weight is affected by other surgeries.

Do you know of any studies that can address either your sister's situation or thyroid disease, with regard to weight gain?

[sandnsea]

66. It's called google

look it up. YES. Tons of studies.

[CTyankee]

69. What do they say?

Are they helpful? Do they offer any solutions?

[sandnsea]

73. If you care, look it up

Don't go spouting off about shit you know nothing about if you won't take ten minutes to educate yourself.

[CTyankee]

81. I wasn't spouting anything. I was merely telling my story. I said several times I don't know of

other people's situations only my own. I don't understand why you are so angry with me. I am not accusing anyone of anything. I am interested in learning. I thought you would be interested in sharing what you have learned through your research, to help enlighten us on this issue. Don't you think that would be helpful?

[tangent90]

50. I sure hope not (that everybody is me) but I'm still waiting to learn

(which is what I'm here for!) where body mass comes from if not from food that is eaten. Why is that question so hard to address?

[tangent90]

47. I didn't say that, I meant I never met anyone who could violate the laws of thermodynamics.

It's actually pretty elementary...if you have a container with a leak, you can't overfill it unless you pour more in than leaks out. It's a rough analogy but it's entirely appropriate.

[Marie26]

254. You're confusing two things

You keep saying how steam engines work, but that does not mean that human bodies work the same way. You just seem to be operating on that assumption, which is incorrect. The way calories are burned or stored depends on hundreds of complex factors - the levels of insulin in the body, amount of muscle, genetic factors, metabolic rate, type of food, etc. etc. So "1000 calories" will have vastly different effects based on all these factors. If it's "1000 calories" of pure sugar, that'll spike insulin levels & be stored as fat, while "1000 calories" of protein will instead be burned or used for muscle. A person w/a high metabolic rate will burn the 1000 calories, while one w/a low rate will store much of it. Someone who's stressed has high cortisol levels & will store it as abdominal fat, while the same person will burn it off when relaxed. Men will burn more calories than women because of higher muscle levels, etc. etc. There's a million complex biochemical hormonal mechanisms that determine how we process food & none of them are akin to a steam engine.

[dustbunnie]

33. Don't think it's nasty at all!

Health is important and our weight often determines health. Sorry to go on about metabolism.

I would say, in agreement with you, that barring weight gain due to medical issues (edema, etc) which may be exacerbated by medication, the average healthy person puts on pounds cause they eats too much. :)

[cliffordu]

57. There is no mechanism. period.

[tangent90]

63. There is no mechanism? Huh?

What the hell are you talking about?

[cliffordu]

79. You cannot gain weight if the calories ingested are equal to or

less than what you burn.

Period.

Your body cannot manufacture weight gain out of air.

[tangent90]

87. I was trying to say just exactly that. Apparently not as clearly as you just did!

:D :hi:

[cliffordu]

111. I misunderstood you...my bad....

Sorry!!!

:hi:

[tangent90]

117. Hey it happens. I really appreciate your tagline too

:D

[sandnsea]

27. Oh god, thyroid disorder

insulin disorders, pancreas disorder, gallbladder removal, all kinds of things cause people to change the way they metabolize food.

[dustbunnie]

53. I was talking about natural occurences in the body as we age.

Of course there are medical conditions that can affect one's ability to burn energy as well.

[tangent90]

61. I have to mention this here...we do not "burn energy", we change it from chemical to thermal

with our guts. Very little of the energy we convert by metabolizing food is dissipated by mechanical means...virtually all of it ends up as heat (hence the choice of calories - BTUs could be used just as easily.)

[dustbunnie]

80. Yes, I know that as well. It's just common jargen.

And while you are correct that 100 cals of carrots is technically the same as 100 cals of ice cream, these foods can and do have an effect on the way you "wear" them. Ask any bodybuilder who's three days away from his/her show. Foods are used to manipulate fullness of a muscle belly, remove the appearance of water under the skin. Most will carb deplete for several days, then overload on them the final day. The body has been completely depleted of water during the protein-only intake days, so the sudden consumption of carbs will puff up the muscle while maintaining a "thin" skinned appearance. Long distance athletes carb load and deplete as well.

Not that this matters to the average overweight person who's got a long way to go before worrying about water retention under the skin.

[Cronopio]

71. Man, you are just so right about this.

Anyone who has done their homework knows that medical science has long proven that the human body cannot, under any circumstance, malfunction so as to store calories as fat rather than for maintenance and growth. It's not glycogen storage disease that's making them fat, it's just bad math. If they're hungry, let 'em eat a bit of dust.

I'm glad to see someone else on this forum refuse the urge to overanalyze such a trivially easy-to-understand machine like the human body.

:hi:

[tangent90]

75. Well thank you so much, I really appreciate you pointing out where the mystery mass comes from

if not from food! I'll be reevaluating the gas tank on my car so I can find out how to get more energy from it than I put into it at the pump!
:D :hi:

[Cronopio]

85. Glad to be of help. nt

[Tesha]

143. Forget it. This is a topic where a huge swath of DUers believe in magic and you'll never convince...

...them otherwise.

Tesha

[treestar]

213. I don't know, that's why it's complex

Your understanding is the simplistic one.

Could you please explain why we can eat more when we are younger and not gain weight? If it were as simple as you say, age wouldn't matter.

The human body is very complex.

You may not always be thin. Or you may lose only so much weight when you decide to diet. Denying reality isn't going to change it.

[whoneedstickets]

21. Yes it is....

..when you were 20 you were probably more active. Maybe this was sports or just 'getting out and walking around'.

Human beings have not escaped the laws of thermodynamics or evolution...

Energy Intake - Energy Consumption = Left Over (stored) Energy

There are a few things that could make make this vary by person:

Energy Intake: some of us might just be more efficient at extracting energy from food. But the difference can't be that large or the biological advantage that such an adaptation provided would have been readily passed on to offspring and spread through populations. Humans are remarkably similar across great geographical distances in terms of energy extraction

Energy Consumption: Some of us might have faster or slower metabolic rates. However, given the logic above that difference isn't likely to be large.

Ability to store energy: Some of us might have the capacity to store fat more easily than others.

If you happened to come from a society or culture which over time (perhaps due to repeated drought/deprivation) adapted highly efficient digestion, low natural metabolism and an ability to store fat readily (for future drought) then you certainly would be fighting a strong predisposition to obesity. There is a case to be made that certain South Western Native groups display this tendency. Pacific Islanders too tend to have naturally high BMIs through a process of social selection.

But that does not mean weight can't be controlled. Increased activity is the first and easiest step (just walking 30 minutes per day will burn about 200 calories). Doing that while keeping your caloric intake somewhere near 2000-2500 calories / day depending on gender and size will put you in a caloric deficit large enough to take off a pound every two weeks. The problem is avoiding over-eating especially high-calorie foods that will rapidly eliminate this difference. All it takes is one Dairy Queen visit a week (typical items have 500+ calories) to undo most of your effort.


The main problem is that monitoring your intake takes a lot of effort. Going over 500 calories in one day is VERY easy to do if you eat the wrong things (high-fat dairy, nuts, baked goods and fried foods have astonishingly high caloric content by volume).

[treestar]

214. OMG, I exercise so much more now than I did at 20

I go to the gym five or six days a week and work. At 20 I was in college and only walked a little bit.

Do you honestly claim that people can't eat more when they are younger? Younger people's metabolism burns faster. That is a simple fact. Are you afraid you're going to gain weight as you get older? Because you will, so long as you keep the same habits.

I didn't say it couldn't be controlled at all, but it is not so simple as just eat less and exercise more.

People are terrified to think it is not completely within their control in a society where thinness is so valued, but it's not completely within your control. Someday you may just weigh more, and there will only be so much you can do about it. Sure it is frightening to realize this, but true nonetheless.

[eridani]

226. That's bullshit. You can exercise more and eat less, but you have no control

--over whether or not those actions change your calorie balance. Walking does not burn some predetermined number of calories per pound of body weigh, and taking up the habit will cause alterations in the way you use them which are different for each individual.

[mike_c]

97. you've missed the point entirely....

Yes, it is still just a simple energy budget-- calories in vs calories out. As we age, our basal metabolic rate usually declines, and we tend to lose muscle mass, both of which lower the "calories out" side of the equation. Many of us become more sedantary, further reducing energy expenditure. Some metabolic disorders do the same, as do some medications. Others increase appetite, which raises the "calories in" side of the formula.

There are no magic causes of weight gain or loss-- it's simple thermodynamics. You'll maintain weight if you're net average energy input exactly balances your net average energy output. It's that simple. We gain or lose weight according to an imbalance in that simple energy relationship.

[treestar]

216. It may be different for different people though

I have also read in my information on diets that it is not a matter of calories in vs. calories out.

The elliptical machine will say that you have burned x calories, and that depends on your age and your weight as it is. It is not identical for each person. And even then, the fact you burned x calories on the elliptical does not mean you can eat x calories and not still gain weight.

[dbmk]

280. Noone is saying that it is not different from person to person

That seems to the the fault line of this debate. The physics are, on paper, easy here. The personal implications of those physics as varied as we are.

Noone is trying to say that thyroid problems does not exist. Or equivalent issues.

But you cannot gain weight from a net loss in calories. (and we are not counting on what some machine says you spend here)

The problem for some people is establishing a functioning level of energy intake and expenditure that won't leave you starving. You can't just eat nothing and live of your fat. Sadly.

Some conditions make it hard or VERY hard to find the right level or solution there. I think everyone understands that - at least it was the OPs point. The math IS easy. But its not a solution. And thats the tricky part.

Still does not change the _fact_ that you cannot gain weight, if you over a reasonable period expend more energy than you take in. If you know someone who produces energy out of nothing, there are plenty of scientists that would like to have a look I reckon.
Ignoring, or worse denying, that physical fact does not help in moving towards a solution.

For some people it may take some work to get there, while still getting enough calories to function at all - and I reckon for some they possibly might never get there, given their individual situation. Because as far as I understand it some people are in a situation where they cannot burn even the minimal amount of calories they need to take in function at all. But you can try to counter it.

If lifting your arms 3 inches is all you can accomplish today, make it 3,5 tomorrow. Even if it means increasing the energy intake to cover 0,4 of that 0,5 inch increase. You will better off for it. At worst you will decrease the speed of a bad development.

Its swimming against the tide. And for some that will never stop and the tide might even get stronger. Just don't stop swimming.

Thats all said as a overweight/obese person that is trying at times and failing more just as often and knows all to well that this is all easier said than done.

[dynasaw]

13. and then there is anger and stress

"According to latest research unhealthy ways of expressing anger are associated with overweight. 'Anger control' is a healthy way of //expressing anger." According to past research, stress can also lead to adolescent weight gain."

http://www.bio-medicine.org/medicine-news/Anger-Could-Be-Linked-To-Weight-Gain-2560-1/

The sort of life styles in this country where people are stressed out at work, stressed out at home, stressed out over keeping everything together must surely also be a factor.

[AZBlue]

55. Stress has a huge effect on weight, not just in adolescents.

[Marie26]

252. Stress releases cortisol

& cortisol promotes weight gain & abdominal fat. There's a direct relationship between stress & weight.

[cbc5g]

15. I've been fat before..it took dedication, exercise and weight lifting to cut it down

It's much harder to just diet and lose weight, you have to cardio and do strength training to really get it off. And I don't want to hear the excuses, most people can get fit and lose weight if they tried.


Food is extremely addictive though, almost like hard drugs if you take it too far.

[we can do it]

90. Me Too and I Refuse To Go Back. Its Been Nearly 30 Years Since I Took Responsibility

for my weight gain and fatigue. I quit junky unhealthy foods and booze (for the most part), started up weights and all kinds of aerobic activity. It came off slowly and has pretty much leveled off to a good, fit weight. I am committed to helping others help themselves. Didn't find out until I was 40 that my thyroid was going to crap. I agree about the addictive part, too. But after you quit the garbage for a while, that's what it tastes like - garbage.

[eridani]

227. Fuck "dedication." Some of us have lives

What if you don't have 20 hours a week for that? And spare me the crap about how it doesn't really take that much time. Modest exercise has huge health benefits, but rarely produces significant weight loss.

[RedCappedBandit]

239. 20 hours a week is extremely excessive. nt

[eridani]

281. Yes, but some would recommend that if a more modest regimen does not result in weight loss

--to a significant degree, then those people need to put in the 20+ hours or give up any notion that they have status as complete beings, and any other commitments.

[we can do it]

305. Who Needs 20 Hours? - Marathoners Don't Train That Much

Doing anything active like gardening, walking, vaccuming, mowing the lawn all add up.
Increasing intensity in short bursts or intervals has been shown to crank up the metabolism. Also consistantly moving around does too.

[KittyWampus]

17. Your understanding of weight loss is antiquated.

It isn't just calorie count. 100 calories of pasta is different than 100 calories of protein.

Furthermore, we develop insulin resistance and leptin resistance which means simply reducing calories doesn't work. The body has to be allowed to re-sensitize itself.

[we can do it]

38. How Is That?

Don't provide some idiot diet's reasoning either, 100 calories is 100 calories.....period.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

44. Not quite

because the type of food ingested makes a great deal of difference in how it is metabolized. Kindly check out this article about metabolic syndrome--http://www.futurevisionsfoundation.org/metabolics.htm

[tangent90]

54. No. The rate or method of metabolism has absolutely nothing to do with the final caloric result.

The rate may vary but the end result, calories of heat, is independent of the method or speed with which they are generated.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

64. However, there are more than just caloric results to be considered

when you are talking about people. If, for example, I ate a piece of candy made with sugar that had 100 calories, it would do a number on my blood sugar that would make me ill to the point of requiring medication. For others, a 100 calorie piece of cheese would give them an allergic reaction that would incapacitate them.

You have to take these factors into account when you are talking about people on diets.

If you or anyone contends that losing weight is simply predicated on eating a 1000 calorie diet and exercising, then how come so many lose weight on the low carbohydrate diets that don't count calories?

[tangent90]

68. Candy and cheese may cause other reactions but 100 calories of either one have exactly the same

result after they are burned: 100 calories. I don't know why this basic scientific fact meets with so much resistance in a community that generally accepts science and rejects pseudo-science like 'creation science'. It really is mind boggling.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

70. You missed my point

I'm not disagreeing with the fact that 100 calories of anything is 100 calories. The point I am trying to make is that limiting calories only will not necessarily cause a person to lose weight. There are other factors to take into consideration. One is the reactions some people have towards food. The other is that by not eating certain foods, people can lose weight even if they eat more calories than are recommended on a low-calorie diet.

[tangent90]

77. Okay...applying your logic, -some- people can stop eating and lose no weight.

Are you sure you want to claim that?

[we can do it]

116. Apparently Some People Hold This View

[AZBlue]

141. I'll claim it. It happens to me.

And my mom can actually gain weight from it.

You seem to approach this strictly from a physics point of view, not a modern biological point of view.

[tangent90]

149. Okay, I will pay you a thousand dollars a week to show me in a controlled experiment

that you can gain weight without eating. For as many weeks as you wish or are able to. I'm willing to put $10,000 in escrow right now with any reputable repository. (You can have all the water you want during the demonstration, all I want is the ability to insure somebody isn't sneaking cream puffs to you...okay?)

Yes, I'm pretty much committed to physics and not very much to casual undocumented internet claims. :D

[tomp]

201. i'm with you.

i believe it is physically impossible to stop eating and gain weight.

[AZBlue]

209. I don't care if you call me a liar or not, it's what happens to me.

As I told the other DU'er, you can believe me or not, I don't care. Take it or leave it, doesn't affect me. It's like saying "I don't believe that the sky is blue." Ok, don't believe it. But it is.

[tomp]

232. there must be another explanation.

the other du'er challenged you to prove it. have you accepted that challenge?

until you prove it i still say: not possible.

[AZBlue]

208. Your proposal is inherently problematic and can't be done - how safe for you.

How long can a human body last not eating? I don't have a death wish so I'm not going to skip eating for "weeks."

You can believe me or not, I couldn't care less. I know what happens when I don't eat and I've told you, take it or leave it.

Yes, I'm pretty much committed to truth, logic and commonsense.

[snooper2]

249. You can go about a month without eating fairly safely....

:)

I'd take the bet :hi:

[eridani]

228. Easy. First you use glycogen stores, then protein

Only then is fat used. If not eating destroys a sufficient amount of muscle mass, you can go a long time before losing any weight. Not forever, of course, but you might die first.

[we can do it]

98. Thanks Again For Always Being Kind

:-)

[AZBlue]

52. 100 calories of candy = 100 calories of vegetables?

There's a huge difference between the two in how they affect your body, how they are burned and/or stored and how they affect your future ability to lose or gain weight.

[tangent90]

72. That violates the laws of chemistry and thermodynamics. So it has to be wrong.

Do you think 100 calories of heat is somehow different if it comes from burning a little motor oil than if it's from burning a handful of
dry grass? If you do, please explain how it's different. Thanks. :-)

[KittyWampus]

82. for fucks sake. Human bodies aren't simple mechanical machines like lawn mowers. You put a gallono

of diesel or leaded gasoline into my father's BMW and it isn't the same.

[we can do it]

86. If You Actually Burn Off the Calories or Store Them Its Still 100

The empty bad chemical shit causes the problems not the caloric count -

[tangent90]

88. Humans have to obey the laws of thermodynamics just as lawn mowers do.

You put a gallon of diesel or peanut butter into a fuel tank, you aren't going to get more energy (whether to expend or store) than what that gallon contains to begin with. I'm amazed at the amount of scientific ignorance around here.

[we can do it]

172. Me Too and How People Blow a Gasket When Someone Offers Facts As Help

[AZBlue]

121. Candy raises blood sugar levels faster and higher than most vegetables

(starchy vegetables are the exception to that rule).

Candy has no fiber while vegetables are full of it - high fiber foods are proven to keep you fuller longer. Candy is a high glycemic index food, vegetables are low - the higher your insulin levels the faster you'll gain weight. You'll get more food in 100 calories of vegetables than in 100 calories of candy. Sugar slows your immune system, vegetables usually boost it. Sugar also depletes the body of previously stored minerals and vitamins, resulting in high cholesterol and other diseases as well as promoting fatty acid storage within the body; vegetables add to those stores. Sugar can also increase fluid retention whereas vegetables don't. And that's only some of the differences between 100 calories of sugar and vegetables and how they affect your body, how they are burned and/or stored and how they affect your future ability to lose or gain weight - there's even more.

And we didn't even get to the addictive and harmful additives to sugary foods, pesticides or sugar's affect on cancers! Eeeek!!

[tangent90]

127. You've commented on the -rate- of combustion (metabolism) but haven't explained where

or how it's possible to incorporate or process more weight/mass into a body than is introduced orally in the form of food. Can you explain that?

[AZBlue]

131. If you read my first post that you first responded to, you'll see that's not what I said.

You're asking me to prove something I didn't state. I stated:

"There's a huge difference between the two in how they affect your body, how they are burned and/or stored and how they affect your future ability to lose or gain weight."

However, I will add that given the additives in food today and the altered and manufactured state of it, you can't just look at the law of thermodynamics as the only factor at play in our bodies anymore. To do so ignores a huge part of the problem with our food today and a huge part of the reason for the obesity epidemic. We also know better how our bodies react and metabolize different foods today - it's not as simple as they thought in the 1800s.

[tangent90]

156. One more try then I give up. The laws of thermo don't care whether the subject in question is

human obesity, SUV miles per gallon, or how well your home water heater works. They just ARE and nothing outside nuclear reactions or black hole transport can violate them. Most definitely nothing that humans interact with on a normal basis. That the laws of thermo are not the ONLY effectors is correct, but they ARE incontrovertible. You cannot ignore them when it's convenient to support some politically correct position any more than the 'creationists' can do it to suggest their alternative explanation deserves equal or better consideration.

I'll ask one more time (this may be the 9th or 10th)--- if it is possible to gain more weight in the human body than what is ingested by mouth in the form of food, where does it come from?

[AZBlue]

210. Again, I'll answer (and last time, I might add): take off your blinders.

No one has denied the law of thermo. We here are discussing weight, not some science project in a lab.

Really, if you don't want to listen to the answer, please stop asking the question, it's tiresome. I for one won't respond to it again. It's like having a two year old ask the same question over and over because they don't like the answer and just keep hoping to get the one they want, no matter how unrealistic that desired answer might be.

[Matariki]

222. There's no answer in your post - just insults

It's a simple question and I'm curious about the answer too.

If you're not eating, where is the weight coming from?

Pretty simple question that no one has answered. In fact, the question seems to make people angry.

[we can do it]

76. Sorry I Thought You Meant Real Food- Not Chemical Faux Food

I try to avoid that garbage like the plague.

[tangent90]

78. I avoid any food made of chemicals.

Ewww.

[Tesha]

153. Especially anything that contains that deoxyribonucleic acid stuff; that shit'll kill ya! (NT)

[tangent90]

159. As if that's not bad enough, I have to worry about dihydrogen monoxide in my WATER

for gawd's sake!!!~11!1!1!11

Series!!1!1!!


:silly:

[we can do it]

193. GMTA

[Billy Ruffian]

308. Look for water with hydrogen hydroxide instead

I made the switch a while ago, and have been very happy.

The hydrogen hydroxide water tastes much better. My skin cleared up, my BMI dropped to 19.5, and it cured my asthma, too

[we can do it]

174. I Refuse To Give Up Dihydrogen Oxide As a Workout Aid

no matter what anyone says

[Duke Newcombe]

166. All of your food is made of "chemicals". n/t

[Tesha]

175. (It's a pretty good bet that Tangent understands that.) (NT)

[tangent90]

182. Good call. :-)

:D
:hi:

[tangent90]

177. Nope, not my food! I refuse to eat chemicals. Heck, I'd just as soon eat tofu.

:eyes: :D :rofl: :silly: :hi:

[we can do it]

194. I Also Refuse To Have ANY Chemicals In My BOdy - I 'm SERIES!!!! n0w

[tangent90]

51. I believe you are mistaken. Calories are units of heat and have no relation to the fuel that

creates them when it is oxidized. 100 calories of heat from pasta is the exact same quantity of energy as that 100 calories from burning gasoline.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

40. A couple of things

There isn't simply one diet that is going to work for everyone who is overweight. It is vital for an obese person who really wants to lose weight to consult with a physician and to find out specifically what their metabolism is like, and what foods they are allergic to-- only then can you find an eating plan that will work for you.

You may find this article interesting, as it cites some studies on metabolic syndrome and explains how it works to make it difficult to lose weight, among other things:

http://www.futurevisionsfoundation.org/metabolics.htm

[hedgehog]

42. That Harvard study that came out last week and claimed that

all diets are equally effective? What hte news stories failed to emphasize is that the actual results wer that all diets are equally {i]ineffective!

"After six months, participants in each group had lost an average of about 13 pounds. After two years, the average weight loss was down to 6 or 7 pounds"

http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2009/02/25/want-to-lose-weight-just--eat-less-diet-study.html


I only have news reports to go on, not the actual New England Journal of Medicine Article, but I suspect that the so-called low fat diet used in this study wouldn't meet Dr. Ornish's standards and the so-called low carb version wouldn't meet Dr. Atkins. The researcher started with a premise that low fat and low carb are bad for your health, so they didn't go to the actual extremes of these diets.

If anything, this study proves that weight is more complicated than cutting calories and increasing exercise!

[chimpyisstillsatan]

181. it proves nothing of the sort

Weight (mass) is exactly that. Calories in, calories out. Burn more than you consume, lose mass. Do the opposite, see the opposite results.

Sustained weight loss, on the other hand is indeed a more complicated problem than can be addressed through simple diets and thermodynamic arguments. Agricultural economics, psychology, class and race issues, and many other things come into play when someone is trying to get and stay within a healthy weight range.

But calories are still calories.

[BanzaiBonnie]

48. My letter to the President about obesity

Dear President Obama,

I am writing you today about health care. There are many facets to addressing this issue, including my own opinion that some form of single payer health care should be an option, but the most important part of health care reform must be self-responsibility.

It all begins and ends with what we eat. Proper nutrition holds the key to our health. But most people haven’t a clue. We are eating ourselves to disease and early death. Change is in order. While personal behavior is not something we want to go after with the big stick of law, we can do much to support those who want to change.

This is where you can help. As much as possible, support local, organic food production. Make nutritional education a high priority. And help get high fructose corn syrup, a chemical, out of our food. There appears to be a big, bold correlation between when HFCS began to be added to almost all foods and the increase in obesity. (When we began reading labels my husband found HFCS in saltine crackers)These factors play into our health on the most basic level.

The implications surrounding obesity in our population are grave, with a connection directly to all of the following:

• Coronary heart disease
• Type 2 diabetes
• Cancers (endometrial, breast, and colon)
• Hypertension (high blood pressure)
• Dyslipidemia (for example, high total cholesterol or high levels of triglycerides)
• Stroke
• Liver and Gallbladder disease
• Sleep apnea and respiratory problems
• Osteoarthritis (a degeneration of cartilage and its underlying bone within a joint)
• Gynecological problems (abnormal menses, infertility)


I’ve had rounds with four of the above. And yet no doctor had ever mentioned my weight as a factor! And now I’ve learned that it’s not even so much weight as it is nutrition.


According to my BMI, I am obese. That puts me at risk for the primary diseases plaguing our nation. But only last month when I went to the doctor about the deterioration of my knee cartilage (osteoarthritis) did a doctor tell me I needed to lose weight. No doctor in the last thirty years EVER mention my weight as a disease factor. I knew my weight was painful on a personal level, but had not really made a definitive connection to the associated diseases.
Over the last few years, in our search for good health, my husband and I have taken a number of steps to change our lives for the better. First we cut out all soda and replaced it with water. Then the next year, all we did was cut out as much of the high fructose corn syrup as possible. Last fall, we purchased a Wii Fit and began weighing in every day and exercising regularly. My husband is doing step aerobics. I enjoy the hula hoop and downhill skiing. A bit after that, we got a dog. She walks us at least thirty minutes every day.

In December I went to see a naturopath about a couple of issues. She got me started eating more nuts, seeds and taking fish oil, among other things. Then my husband went to her for a couple of minor health issues and she had us both start on the anti-inflammatory diet.

This has not been easy, but both of us feel better after only a few weeks. It does take time and effort to learn to cook in a new way, but it is so worth it. I’ve also put a fair amount of study into this since beginning our new way of eating. The key thing I’ve learned is that inflammation underlies every disease on the above list.

I understand you are struggling with kicking tobacco. That’s something I’ve never had to face, but I know plenty of people who have and I understand it’s excruciating. I applaud your efforts. If you face this with us, we can get through it together. It will also be helpful to get a good three liters of water into yourself daily as you quit smoking. Water is the universal solvent and is essential to clearing the toxins from your body.

It will take time, but I will be a healthy weight and you will be free from tobacco.

Thank you for taking on the big job of being President. I appreciate you more than you will ever know. I’m afraid my family may get tired of hearing it, but every day I say, “I love our President”. I am so happy you are there to lead in doing what’s right for this country.


With great respect and much affection,

[MrMickeysMom]

58. I like to make this even simplier, jp...

Although you can only "blame your parents" for the genes that make it a real challenge to get and stay lean, what matters in the obesity problem seems to come down to a making good food choices (not easy) and EXERCISE AND WEIGHT TRAINING... which just might be easier, once you're shown the way.

Just as the glaciers advanced over time, the amount of energy conserved to expended WILL matter in how much you burn, EVEN WHILE ASLEEP, once a person commits to a program of aerobics (walking at brisk pace, or doing things in your living room, cross training, to keep it interesting) as little as 3 times a week for 20 minutes and lift weights to challenge you biggest energy utilizers - your muscles 2 times a week. That's a Monday through Friday schedule, and we can all do this with proper training.

It WILL matter WHAT WE DO. Meanwhile, obesity is a real existing problem that people should address because it's going to cost us all.

We need to make all efforts not to make people understand how the above will help... NOT FOR BEAUTY... but for HEALTH.

I agree- no more shaming, but let's address the "how to" steps, and encourage each other!

[Marie26]

59. Disagree

I think that it is a "glib" answer & also wrong. I agree that people shouldn't be shamed or belittled, but neither should they be told "eat less, exercise more" as if that's the solution to the problem, when it is not. 98% of diets *fail*. IMO, obesity is not a simple lifestyle issue, but a metabolic disorder that basically throws the whole body out of whack. If people just try "eating less" w/o correcting the underlying problem, they will almost always fail & end up even more overweight than before.

[dustbunnie]

94. Exercise more, eat less is an excellent way to lose weight and keep it off.

Exercising more and eating less has nothing to do with dieting. Starvation diets and bizarre ultra-low cal, weird-food-combo eating plans do not work because a) people starve then binge, growing fatter each time, and b) they become so twisted and all-or-nothing fanatical, they no longer live normally. Couldn't enjoy a meal if they wanted to. However, exercising and eating in moderation is THE ONLY way for most people (who have no underlying medical issue) to lose weight and live better in the long run. A year of eating normally, sans obsessive-compulsive dieting/binging, along with regular exercise, and the metabolic disorder will regulate itself.

[Marie26]

168. Except it isn't

If any prescription had a 98% failure rate, doctors would stop prescribing it, right? "Eat less, exercise more" has the same 98% failure rate & so is *not* an excellent way to lose weight & keep it off. Yet doctors keep recommending diet & excercise for a loss of any better ideas. I agree that weird fad diets cause people to starve & then binge, getting fatter each time. But the thing is, even "moderate" diets like Weight Watchers have a *dismal* success rate & people often end up regaining even more weight on these diets as well. I checked out this latest study about the low-calorie diet, & the average weight loss was 3-4 kg. The study started out w/1000 people, who cut their calories by 750 calories a day. They received free counseling & exercise sessions, and maintained the diet & exercise for two years. 200+ dropped out before the end of the study. So, 750 people "ate less, exercised more" consistently for TWO YEARS, yet the average weight loss was only 3-4 kg. That's pathetic. And I bet if they averaged in the 200+ people who dropped out, there'd be an average *gain* for their efforts. Also, I bet if they followed up on those 750 people after the study ended, even that small loss would probably be regained. That's consistently what happens on low-calorie diets. As much as it seems like common sense, it simply does not work for the most part & the statistics bear that out.

[dustbunnie]

197. You just bolstered my whole argument.

Weight Watchers may help people for a few months or even a few years, but it's still a cult-ish diet fad. The whole going to get weighed in, the cards with cals and meal-planners, it's sort of like mommy telling you what you can and can't eat... is also doomed to failure eventually. Everyone has a breaking point. Doesn't surprise me that people in a study would drop out or stick with it for awhile then flop either. All of these measures are controlling and dependent on discipline, rather than promoting a joy in being healthy, eating for both sustenance AND pleasure, but in moderation. It's the same with all these fat cults. Eventually you have to "graduate" and get it on your own. But because programs like Weight Watchers are simply a crutch, people never discover how to simply "be" on their own. That's why they all fail. And you're lumping in what I said about everything in moderation with a pinch of exercise added, with these loser programs.


What I meant was, it's the people who eat moderately out of a wish for health and well-being that succeed in maintaining a healthy weight. They eat when hungry, don't even think about it much, understand when they are full, don't flog themselves if they pig out one night (by then pigging out 7 days straight afterward just to prove how loathsome they are to themselves) and include exercise into the program so that their innards are working fine, which includes the brain as well as the intestines. Depression is often a cause of weight gain and exercise can do so much elevate mood. Once mind and body are committed to being healthy for one's own sake, that's when eating moderately and exercising regularly works. And it does work!

[Marie26]

205. So you agree that diets don't work?

Weight Watchers is not a "faddish" diet - it's pretty much the gold standard for diets & what most doctors will recomend. And as much as it sucks to be weighed in, programs w/counseling & support actually get better results than when people try to do it on their own. It's just that NO diet works really well long-term.

"it's the people who eat moderately out of a wish for health and well-being that succeed in maintaining a healthy weight."

I'd wager that probably every obese person in that study, or Weight Watchers, or whatever, wishes for health & well-being. But I don't see how they're supposed to lose weight w/o monitoring calories, or carbs, or something. No offense, but it sounds like you are thin - you sound like many naturally thin people I know. And for them, it does seem to come naturally - they eat moderately & maintain their ideal weight, because their metabolic system is working properly. The problem is, that simply doesn't work for obese people because the body is not working properly - e.g. high blood sugar leads to intense cravings & never feeling full, pigging out one night erases 4 months of dieting, etc. If they don't think about it much, they will remain obese or even gain weight; while low-calorie diets will only work temporarily. As you've said, everyone has a breaking point & the lower-calorie diet will fail eventually. The traditional advice does not work. And also, many studies now show that exercise actually has very little effect on weight loss. So, for an obese person it just is not that simple. While it's easy to blame the person, IMO it's time to start blaming the advice & looking for the real cause & cure for obesity.

Full disclosure, I'm a low-carb disciple & believe a high-calorie, low-carb diet is one of the only things that really works to take off weight. Because the body is not a machine & it's not as simple as calories in, calories out. Weight is regulated by a complex balance of hormonal mechanisms, & when that goes out of whack, obesity results. IMO we should be investigating why obesity has suddenly sky-rocketed along w/thyroid problems, etc. I think it's more than just people eating too much, something fundamental has changed w/the food supply in the US that has caused this epidemic. Just IMO.

[dustbunnie]

212. I'm low-carb as well, but disagree that WW is not cultish.

There may be a whole thyroid issue here now, but doubt it's different than what happened in Germany/Switzerland many years ago. Many German children from WWII (and before) became hypothyroid because the food they grew up with was grown in depleted soil. Plus the added affinity for cabbage etc...

I very much like your argument, and will answer you tomorrow. I truly believe that aside from people who become obese because of medical reasons/medication, (which is mostly edema) the primary factor is what the mind perceives. There are those who suffer from environmental factors, but many people are obese because they eat too much. I'm not qualified to say anything, but I have seen so much mental self-torture, it kills me.

[eridani]

229. Yes, but it isn't a way to make fat people thin

Plenty of fat Type II diabetics have done that and gotten better sugar control as a result. Typically there is some weight loss, but nowhere near enough to move them out of the "obese" category.

[Hello_Kitty]

60. The math of obesity is that people will get on your case way sooner for it when you are female

Folks start worrying about women's "health" at about a size 10 or so, whereas men have to be of Limbaugh proportions before anyone says boo. When Jordin Sparks won American Idol some horrible woman named (I shit you not) MeMe Roth formed an "anti-obesity organization" (of which she was the only member) and managed to get herself onto all kinds of TV shows denouncing Sparks for setting a bad example for other young women by being - I'm guessing - all of a size 14 or so. And very tall to boot. Jordin looked fine to me, and perfectly healthy but this concern troll was acting like she was about to keel over. But ain't it funny how no one spoke out about Ruben Studdard, a previous winner who was obese? Where was MeMe then?

Here's some more math that puzzles me: No matter how much an unseen man is said to weigh, people will seek other infomation before pronouncing him fat. "Bob weighs about 380 lbs." will usually be met by, "Well how tall is he? And is he athletic?" OTOH, say "Barbara weighs 170 lbs." and most people will assume she's overweight, even if she's 6 feet tall and a basketball player.

[we can do it]

95. Women Need To Get Off the Scale, Go By How Fit and Healthy They Are Instead

Women are told to avoid weight/resistance training (other than teeny little amounts) because it will make them "manly" ...They are so worried about not being feminine enough they miss out on what will keep them healthy and leaner- muscle burns more calories and weighs more than the same volume of fat. Look at olympic athletes, they look great not manly (except those on steroids) as doo many actresses and singers like madonna.......so girls forget the scales, get into a healthy size and keep moving, it will work throughout your life.

[Hello_Kitty]

101. Society is still stuck in the "all women must weigh no more than 120 lbs" mindset

Seriously, ask the average guy if he thinks a woman can be 140 lbs and slim. He won't believe it. Yet, I wore a size 4 when I weighed that much. Now I'm 170 and a size 10 or 12. (Yes, I know sizes have changed over the years but I'm not remotely approaching obese yet, though I'm sure some people are starting to worry about my "health".)

[we can do it]

195. Funny That Is Still True With the Size People Have Become

I am 155 lbs or so, size 10 .....not only men, I've had more women at the gym not believe how much I weigh, or that I do eat.

[pansypoo53219]

67. i eat well. home cooking.

tho in winter i am more a carnivore. but damned if i am giving up 1/2+ 1/2 in my coffee. but i am just having it in the morning. forcing myself to do tea in the evening. and i will never ever give up butter.

[KittyWampus]

84. I am also firmly pro-butter

[Taverner]

92. With caveats - not all calories get digested

Pretty much all of the sugar you eat gets digested

Not all of the fat you do does...you only have so much bile

Based on genetics, lifestyle, diseases, etc - you can digest more or less fat depending on the circumstances.

[Mike 03]

102. I used to be in your camp, but my view has shifted as I've begun to keep up

with the medical studies that are coming out now.

It's fun and smug, for those of us who have always been thin, to reduce obesity to simple math. But it's becoming clear that something more is going on.

[we can do it]

120. I Think All the Chemicals In Food & Environment Have Adverse Affects

[tangent90]

129. Ultraviolet solar radiation has adverse effects but obesity isn't one of them.

Right?

[we can do it]

136. Right I Believe the Earth Is Round & 100=100

I also think a lot of crap can mess with someone's system. Abusing your system with junk and no physical activity makes things worse. Has a study been done with quality/quantity of foods eaten, level of physical activity and obesity?

[Mike 03]

130. Yes, exactly.

Me too. There is much more going on here than meets the eye.

[AllieB]

118. We are not combustion engines. It's not as simple as 'calories in, calories out'.

Read Gary Taubes 'Good Calories, Bad Calories'. We are too hormonally and chemically complex to reduce our physiology to the principles that govern a combustion engine.

A good article:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F04E2D61F3EF934A35754C0A9649C8B63

A good movie:

http://www.fathead-movie.com /

[tangent90]

123. Actually we are. Combustion engines, the product of millions of evolutionary years,

the "original" combustion engine, if you want to be precise*. I think you aren't an engineer or a physicist or you wouldn't make a statement like that.

* to include all living organisms as well. How they (we) function is merely a study in relative thermodynamic efficiency.

[AZBlue]

125. If we still ate only whole foods, that would still be true. But we've created

a world full of additives, chemicals, preservatives and toxins in our food that alter or stop that furnace from acting as it should.

[tangent90]

139. Well, to the extent that is true, it diminishes rather than supports the argument that

net 'caloric' intake level has no bearing on weight gain. If anything, a reduction of efficiency would make it less of a concern, not more.

I've asked about 5 times so far in this message thread and nobody has explained yet how it is possible to gain and/or retain more mass than is ingested. Maybe you can be the first...?

[AZBlue]

144. The problem is that your question is only a part of the equation.

I did answer this upthread - you don't seem to see the entire picture but only focus on one small part of it. The law of thermodynamics holds, but it's not the only factor at work here.

[tangent90]

162. Sorry but it IS the only factor that controls the energy/mass balance equations.

If I am wrong, you can easily show me wrong...just explain where the added mass originates. It's a simple question.

[hedgehog]

178. Here's the deal : the body must take what you ingest, take it apart

chemically and mechanically, then store or use the chemicals and calories contained within. Eat 100 calories of sugar and your body is going to handle that differently than 100 calories of celery. Depending of whether you ingest 100 calories of protein, fat or carbohydrates, your body will release different amount of insulin and your liver will see a different workload. Your body will react by using the calories at once or storing them as fat depending on where they came from.

Now as to the notion that calories in must be equal to or less than what is expended to control weight:

Obviously, if someone is starving, that is taking in too few calories, they lose weight. The problem that people on this thread have been discussing is that two people of the same general height and activity level can ingest the same food and one will gain weight and the other won't. Two people of similar builds but different ethnic origins may see the same result. Again, it's easy to say person A needs to stick to 1500 calories a day while person B can take in 3000. But what if person A is hungry and distracted on 1500 calories and comfortable on 2000? Why isn't person A satisfied with 1500 calories? We don't overbreathe, and breathing is also part of our energy metabolism. Why do we overeat?

[tangent90]

191. Your analysis is correct in a short slice of time, it is completely irrelevant over a long period.

It's as if you toss 5 "heads" in a row before one "tails" in a coin toss and conclude the odds are 5 to 1 in favor of heads. All your numbers are meaningless in the face of the basic physical principle that requires a thermodynamic balance (in this universe and as far as we know, at least) that it's not possible without divine intervention for a human body to increase its mass to a greater degree than the amount ingested.

It does not matter how the (caloric-equivalent-food) is processed, it might even be oxidized one hundred percent (not likely but considered for the sake of argument), in which case it represents the maximum possible added mass to the human in question. There seems to be a lot of scientific ignorance around here that indicates a belief that 'calories' are somehow just little bit of 'fat' or some other kind of foodstuff...they're nothing of the sort, they're just units of heat, and their equivalents are approximated by various kinds of organic materials according to their average energy yield from oxdidation combination (which is called metabolism in living organisms.) Calories don't exist, per se in the body, until they are produced by exothermic chemical reactions.

[AZBlue]

207. You're doing it again. Energy/mass is not the only factor in weight.

This is a discussion of weight, not energy/mass. It's like we're having two different discussions - you want to discuss energy/mass in a vacuum, just that principle. I'm talking about what causes people to gain or not gain weight, only part of which is the energy/mass discussion.

[eridani]

298. Energy balance does not even come close to explaining fat deposition

http://www8.utsouthwestern.edu/vgn/images/portal/cit_56417/45/13/178697mcgarry.handout.pdf

This is a study of 12 twin pairs who were overfed by 1000 calories a day for 100 days. It clearly shows that calories in = calories out does not explain individual differences in fat deposition.

The average gain was about 18 lbs (range = 9 lbs to 29 lbs), 2/3 of which was fat mass.

The twin pair that gained the least gained about 6.5 lbs of fat, and the twin pair that gained the most gained 19 lbs of fat.

The total number of calories overfed for all subjects was about 84,000.

Not a single one of the subjects stored all of the extra calories as fat.

The pair that gained the least stored 22,000 calories as fat.

The pair that gained the most stored 68,000 calories as fat.

Since neither of these numbers is 84,000, the notion that all calories you consume over what you “need” become fat is bullshit.

Since energy balance has to account for the missing calories, something else must have happened to them.

What happened to them was solely dependent on genetic differences between the twin pairs, which were dramatic.

If the effects of overfeeding are so dramatically different for twin pairs, it is highly likely that underfeeding will demonstrate equally dramatic differences.

You can decide to eat less and exercise more, but you have absolutely no control over the effects these changes will have on your body.

[dustbunnie]

301. Interesting.

"You can decide to eat less and exercise more, but you have absolutely no control over the effects these changes will have on your body."

How do you explain the dramatic changes in appearance bodybuilders regularly produce by manipulating both the type of food they eat as well as the kind of exercise they do? Why are Olympic athletes trained by masters in the field who micro-manage every morsel of food intake and training duration/programs? Obviously, they believe that alternating eating and training patterns will make athletes stronger and/or faster.

Why do long distance athletes employ food manipulation techniques such as the following:

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/carbohydrate-loading/MY00223

[eridani]

311. That's easy. People would not be bodybuilders or endurance athletes unless they had the genes for i

And then they spend most of their waking hours focused on their sport. That is irrelevant to normal people. And they still have no control over their results. If a bodybuilding regimen does not make you bulk up sufficiently, you quit the sport. Why don't you talk about all the dropouts who never make it to competition? You can't control the effects of carbo loading either--it is going to work better for some than for others, and only one person is going to win the race. Of course all those things have effects; just not the SAME effects on everybody.

A few years ago, I was doing some treadmill reading at my health club, and remembered an article about testing the effects of weight training on different groups of college athletes. They tested a diet and weight training regimen designed to add muscle mass on three groups--football players, weightlifters, and long distance runners. The first two groups added significant bulk, and the distance runners added almost nothing. All groups had solid strength improvements, which varied a lot among individuals.

Why I remembered the article was the basic common sense rational analysis of the results, almost totally absent in popular literature when the subject is fat rather than muscle. Not a single smidgeon of horseshit about how the distance runners had to be doing it wrong, didn't really want to succeed at bulking up, were lying about sticking with the program, had emotional issues with their fathers yaddayaddayadda. They concluded that people genetically suited to sports favoring endurance weren't going to bulk up much, while those genetically suited to sports requiring strength would. Like, DUH.

I suppose the point of your reply was that the twins who gained the most fat were morally defective, or what?

[dustbunnie]

312. Actually, that's not true. There are lots of bodybuilders who really shouldn't be on stage -

but fill up the gyms across the country because they enjoy training, because they like to "be big" and also in many cases because they were once out of shape and/or overweight but got the bug and completely changed their fat to lean mass ratio. Of course their experiences are relevant to normal people if only to illustrate that manipulating both food intake, types of food eaten and training regimens can completely change what a person looks like.

I can't comment on your other study since there are no links, other than to say, yes of course people have different affinities for sports based on the way fast and slow twitch muscles relate to their body structure, etc. But again, by your own admission, the training "changed" their bodies.

I responded to your post because you seem to be implying everywhere that people ought not bother to attempt to eat less, exercise more because you find it useless if great gains can't be made. That a 200 lb woman who loses 30 pounds will still be "fat." This is erroneous if the woman has trained herself from a 30+% bodyfat percentage to 15% while slapping on the muscle. That woman 170 lb woman would look very fine indeed. People will have varying degrees of fat loss and muscle gain, but that isn't the issue. The point is, they WILL make changes.

The one thing I did notice about the twins study is that all were fed an extra 1000 calories and they ALL gained weight. And of course they did. Eat more, gain weight. Eat less, lose weight or maintain. Why some gained more than others is hard to say really, as the study didn't give details such as the stats of their lean to fat ratios to start with. But it did point out very clearly that if you overeat, you gain weight, no matter who you are. If you don't, you won't.

Have no idea why you've brought up morality. I certainly don't care what a person chooses to do with his/her body. But I do know it isn't particularly helpful to tell people that the attempt to change their bodies by eating less and exercising more is useless as you appear to be doing, simply to project your own lifestyle choice on others. Since in the majority of cases that formula works, I would rather encourage people who want to change, to go for it.

[eridani]

313. Certainly eating more predisposes you to weight gain

And weight training is going to lead to more strength, regardless of changes in muscle mass.

For anybody capable of rational thought, the differences in weight gain cited in the initial studies are accounted for by genetics, period. The monozygotic twin pairs were close to each other, and different from the other twin pairs. There is no explanation other than genetics that is possible. And "overeating" is a slippery term unless you are doing a controlled experiment which increases calories by a specific defined amount. Eat less, and your body adapts to need less.

All I am arguing against is having goals that are excessively specific. There is no fucking way you can control how much weight you lose or muscle mass you gain with any particular program. If you don't have Lance Armstrong's genes, no amount of training will make you qualify for the Tour de France. That isn't "fatalistic" and it isn't "being a professional victim." That doesn't mean you can't get to be a much better biker and learn to enjoy Cat 3 racing with no expectations of ever moving up to a higher category. The magazine articles are always about the rare person who discovers untapped potential and goes to the Olympics or something. What is the point of making all the rest feel like shit? What is the point of saying that everyone who does not get the best possible result out of the full range of possibilites is a failure? That just takes focus off of the here and now direct benefits, the only possible basis for sustainable change.

Having no expectations of som particular change is a healthy thing. It enables you to live with whatever changes do occur. The National Weight Loss Registry has been collecting data on people who lose large amounts of weight and keep it off for at least 5 years. Heavy representation of people who don't have to work for a living. Minimum exercise commitment 10 hours a week. Permanent calorie intake of 1000-1500 calories a day. As one woman said when asked for the secret of her success said "It's what I do." Fuck that straight to hell. That is not a life worth living.

[dbmk]

282. It still hasn't made the furnace an energy creating machine

Tangent is fighting against the idea that the math is not right, which is an unfortunate crutch that many have seemed to find.

A lot of stuff may have made the furnace slower burning. But it will still not create energy out of stuff that is not put into it.

All people have to do is say: Thats undeniably true - now how do we make that work FOR us?

Any solution MUST be based on that recognition. Consciously or not.

[tonysam]

146. Prejudice of All Kinds is Still Prejudice

and I detest bigotry based on somebody's appearance. Fat prejudice is based on a very shallow value system, though perhaps a holdover of some kind of puritan ethic or something.

Diets will never work because they aren't supposed to. What is really needed is a change in attitude by our anorexic-worshipping society.

[BoneDaddy]

277. So where does pointing out the obvious of cause and effect

clash with "prejudice"? If I say that someone who eats poor quality food, does not take care of their physical form and participates in maladaptive habits is responsible for their well being is your equivalent of "prejudice" then we have a severe disagreement.

There is a difference between pointing out the obvious and shaming someone.

[BlooInBloo]

161. It would be helpful if the Fat Is Never Anyone's Fault crowd...

would acknowledge the correctness of the statement: (cals in) > (cals out) --> weight gain.

Everybody knows it, but it's impossible to take the FINAF people seriously when they deny simple truths like this.

I completely acknowledge that there are a wide variety of *reasons* why the basic inequality can be thrown out of whack (both genetics and lifestyle can affect either side of the inequality, for example).

But as far as what causes weight gain, it's nothing more than (cals in) > (cals out). You can't get something from nothing.

[Lex]

163. The calorie deficit and the resulting weight loss seem to be different

depending on a number of factors, however.

[sam sarrha]

171. when your BMI exceeds a certain level, you can never lose the weight, that was from the Bariatric

seminar run by one of the foremost gastric surgeons in the country that my wife and i went to..

so unless you have actually talked to world rebound surgeons and have bothered to actually do some research, and you havent watched your wife or loved one slowly die.. just shut the fuck up..

i am sick of this ignorant bigoted bullshit.. i am ashamed of some of the people here who call themselves "Progressive"... they make the Trolls look good.

[flvegan]

188. What level is that?

As bullshit as the BMI is, I've never heard that and I'd like to look into that myself.

[sam sarrha]

202. it was about 4 years ago.. i'll have to look it up, , i'll save this and get back to you.

[localroger]

186. Except that it's not true

Your body is not a fire. It does not automatically consume whatever you eat; it has complex regulatory mechanisms. In my case once I realized I was pre-diabetic and started eating to keep my blood sugar below 140 mg/dl even after meals (there are no drugs that can do this except very complex and expensive "reactive" insulin therapy) my weight and blood pressure both magically normalized. Simply reducing calories, but with those calories being carbohydrates, didn't work. There are probably other similar conditions responsible for a lot of the obesity that doesn't respond to normal dieting.

[BlooInBloo]

190. (shrug) Fine. Make it a vector inequality. Doesn't change the substance of the matter in the least.

[sam sarrha]

203. There is some connection, after Bariatric surgery and some weight loss Type 2 can go away.. as do a

bunch of other physical ailments

[eridani]

238. Type II never goes away

If you have a regulatory system that does not work normally, having most of your calories not be abaorbed avoids stressing it--it does not fix it. PKU doesn't go away after a kid's brain has mostly developed, either. If you have a car with a blown valve, don't drive it and you won't trash the engine. Not driving it does not fix the valve.

[tangent90]

196. No kidding...so what do we do with the NIEAF crowd?

sheesh

[AZBlue]

211. That's only one part of it.

That part of it is correct, but it's only a portion of the problem. Just attacking that part doesn't work for many people. For some lucky ones it does - for the rest it doesn't and it's a situation of trying to figure out which other factors are at work and what can be done about them.

[Pithlet]

179. Excellent post.

It's a damn shame it will fall on a lot of deaf ears. But it gets a hearty k&r from me :kick:

[BoneDaddy]

221. utter crap

stop eating shit, exercise and move. No more pitiful excuses.

[eridani]

230. I refuse to give up having a life

I am unwilling to spend half my waking hours working out. I am unwilling to cut calories to the point where I can't concentrate on intellectually demanding tasks. If you think that attaining average BMI should be my purpose in life no matter how much time it takes, then fuck you.

[BoneDaddy]

276. How bout you watch what you eat and walk

in the outdoors. Stop with your lame pitiful excuses. No one is asking you to be a hardbody. Just do a little to take care of your body. Christ what a bunch of fucking whiners.

[eridani]

286. I already do that. I walked 5 hours a day, 6 days a week precinct walking

I follow a low glycemic index diet. Wherever did you get the stupid notion that all people will lose enough weight to become thin doing that? I biked 500 mile in Europe a few times, and didn't lose a single pound.

If you are into wasting even more time on useless bullshit, why not tell black people to get over racism and just stay out of the sun? My skin is considerably darker when I spend a lot of time outdoors, and much lighter if I stay inside. If black people stay indoors all the time and have no noticable changes in their skin color, the only possible conclusion is that they must be doing it wrong. That has been conclusively proven correct by my personal experience. They should just stop making excuses for spending so much time outdoors.

[BoneDaddy]

307. Your analogy is ridiculous

I don't believe you for a second. I don't believe you follow a diet, nor do I believe your exercise didn't yield in you losing any weight. If, and I say IF, you are one of the rare metabolicly challenged people with a legitimate hormone or physiological problem that may affect your endocrine system you have my sympathy. But you are most certainly not the norm and should not apply your regime to the countless other unmotivated, over indulgent, sloths out there who do nothing. Is that a judgement? Hell yeah.

I love these "liberal" message boards who ridicule the over consumption of America on a daily basis, can point out how we poison our waters and lands, who condemn american for it's gluttony, yet do not have the simplest sense to see that "as above so below". That the macro is the micro and that we, as individuals, are a manifestation of the whole and that our "collective mindset" is that of the individual. And this pervasive mindset to justify, protect and "victimize" anyone who doesn't have half a fucking braincell to take care of themselves.

I personally do not care what people do, I am all for self determination. But have the balls, the guts, the fortitude to at least own it. Stop the blaming of society, stop the victimization. If you want to be fat, out of shape and an anchor on our health system, do so, but have the courage to own it.

[eridani]

309. If I'm not following a glycemic index diet, why aren't my a1C values dangerous?

The analogy is exact. You know exactly jackshit about what someone eats by looking at them. Living on Planet Reality is not "victimization." Why are you even here? Shouldn't you be over at Free Republic blaming poor people for buying houses they couldn't afford? I'd rather be fat than stupid and bigoted.

[knitter4democracy]

199. The problem is, people don't know their numbers.

I gained massive weight after they took out my kidney tumor. I had my doctor on my back about it and my STBX (also a doctor). Finally, after one too many comments about how I shouldn't snack or eat too much, I started keeping track of everything I ate. My doctor just stared at my food journal and said that I shouldn't be gaining weight at all, and my STBX asked me what I wasn't writing down. I was writing it all down, and when they believed me, both confirmed that I was only eating about 1200-1300 calories a day and only maintaining, not losing. Since the divorce started, I've been eating less than that and finally losing weight. Apparently, my body was starved by the tumor and thinks it only needs this to survive on with the rest going to fat.

I think the first thing people need to do is figure out what their personal caloric intake should be--and that's highly individual. I've been told that I should be starving at this level, but I'm not. I make sure to take supplements, as I can't eat all I need with that number. I'm just sayin'--you are saying that it's just math, but you have to know the numbers first.

[defendandprotect]

204. It's basically . . . "just say, 'no'..."

We seem to be getting garbage for food, for one thing ---

highly processed, high sugar, high salt -- all making us sick.

Also, chemical farming has produced food that isn't supplying the nutrition

that organic food supplies. That seems to creat a constant call by our

systems to "eat more."

When you undereat/cut calories to lose weight, your metabolism drops, your

energy drops. When you begin eating once again, you put on weight until you've

reach your prior level, plus some extra. Your system is preparing for the next

famine!


Meanwhile, we have to believe that we have a nation with almost no will-power,

no ability to control themselves! Is that possible . . . ???

[BoneDaddy]

215. Wow how fucking amazing is it that people can justify

everything...for most people fat is a lifestyle

[eridani]

231. Yes. It is a choice to spend time on your career, family and community

--instead of in a gym.

[bettyellen]

250. but if the fat takes years of your life, that's less time w/ family, etc,

and people actually can get a great work out outdoors- you know =- in the community. and their family can go with!

[eridani]

288. But it doesn't, not unless you are extremely fat

Even then, it depends on your genetics. Among people with a high incidence of genetic insulin resistance, the fattest people are the ones who live the longest. The Pima Indian women with the longest life spans are fully two times as heavty as the actuarial ideal weight. The men are 150% heavier.

[Spider Jerusalem]

263. And to drive everywhere and never walk.

And to spend hours every day in front of a computer or television screen. Those are choices too.

[eridani]

293. I apologize for being so fucking stupid as to work 20 miles from where I live

I apologize for choosing a research career over subsistence farming. I guess I must have personally designed our crappy regional transportation system.

[BoneDaddy]

275. Are you serious?

I spend most of my time with my family...I go to sleep when my kids do so I can get up and practice tai chi and exercise at 5am before I go to work. Don't give me your excuses.

[eridani]

287. Having a life means taking part in community activities

It means taking non-aerobic professional courses to improve your skills. It means coping with physical conditions that don't allow you to do tai chi every now and then.

What kind of an idiot do you have to be to think that tai chi will make anyone lose weight anyway? Not knocking it-I once went to a demonstration class taught by a woman who weighed about 275 lbs. I was very impressed by her (and her assistant, who demontrated every exercise in modified form from a seated position for the mobility impaired), but the ongoing classes were too far away from my workplace.

[BoneDaddy]

306. That is how you determine "having a life"

I do all of the above. My tai chi regime is a bit more aerobic than "new age feel good tai chi". It is highly martial and aerobic. Depends on your approach to the art.

Do not get me wrong, I am not holding the physically impaired or injured to the same standard I am holding your basically healthy, functional american who "chooses" to eat crap and sit in front of the playstation or idiot box called the tv or for that matter the computer.

If you are trying to sell me your justification because you are obese, sell it elsewhere.

[eridani]

310. I'm saying that no activity that I've undertaken has resulted in significant weight loss

By that, I mean that the roughly 20 lb difference between my weight when I am more active compared to being relatively inactive is trivial and meaningless. The effect of increased activity on my sense of well-being is direct, and has no relationship at all to any weight changes. As a grad student I did all nighters and lived out of vending machines. I weighed less than I do now, when I am retired and have the time for scratch cooking and gardening and biking to the store. Of course when I was younger, that kind of carelessness didn't make me feel lousy. Now it does, which is reason enough to avoid it.

Some summers you want to write a book, and other summers you want to train for an extended bike tour. That is called having a life. You do not have a life if you think that there should be some kind of cultural imperative to always choose the latter over the former. By spending my life telling people like you to STFU and go straight to hell, I've managed to keep my weight closer to 200 lbs that the 300 lbs I would probably weigh if I were constantly obsessed about it. I've seen that happen to plenty of other people.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

248. Addictions are nasty.

Addiction to feeling superior is one of the worst.

[jpgray]

255. Amen to that.

[BoneDaddy]

274. Even worse is the addiction to being a victim or powerless

that is even more sad

[northofdenali]

219. "The undue piling on of shame is what cements the problem"

Amen.

I don't have the problem. My particular metabolism/eating habits keep me at 115 pounds (5'7") where I've been since I was 18, except when pregnant with my daughter. I caught the "lucky" genetic makeup.

My spouse, however, did not. In him, we are battling not only heart disease, but weight.

[BoneDaddy]

220. What utter bullshit....

You keep people sick. I would never advocate shaming people for their weight but at the same time i will not excuse people for their bad habits. You sir or madam are a fraud.

[eridani]

223. The people who are least likely to lose weight benefit the most from exercise

Weight loss may be math, but it damned fucking well isn't additive math. Taking in fewer calories than you burn is a matter of non-additive math because of metabolic feedback loops. If you take in fewer calories and exercise more, that by no means implies that you then burn more calories because your metabolism quickly adjusts to use fewer calories. For some there is a sufficiently long lag in this process that weight loss occurs; for others the feedback is near instantaneous. Sure, the latter could probably lose weight with sufficient effort, that being defined as treating weight loss and maintenance as a near fulltime job and an obsession that must always come before career, family and community.

You often hear that insulin resistant people need lose "only 10%" of body weight to achieve reasonable sugar control, but it isn't true. Studies that monitor data daily rather than on a snapshot basis clearly show that controlling intake of foods with high glycemic index and regular exercise improve sugar control (and blood pressure, if high) immediately, well before any observable weight loss. If those things occur first, they can't possibly be caused by weight loss. Furthermore, there is absolutely zero correlation between the amount of weight loss and improvement of sugar control. Add to that the fact that if fat insulin resistant people lose 10% of their body weight, they are STILL FAT.Therefore, insulin resistant people lose weight with great difficulty compared to the non-insulin resistant, but nontheless benefit greatly from modest exercise and better eating habits. It is therefore counterproductive, vicious and snotty to make weight loss a success criterion.



My HMO newsletter refuses to draw logical conclusions, unfortunately. They are willing to say that most type II diabetics are overweight and that being overweight does not cause Type II diabetes. So why do they not have a DUH moment and state the obvious: the genetics behind Type II diabetes also causes weight gain in adulthood?

[Kalyke]

234. Actually, I haven't been able to lose weight and I take in so

few calories that my husband sometimes worries about me. It's all located in my trunk - my arms and legs aren't very overweight at all.

But, my ENT thinks he's found the answer: I don't sleep well. I'm in the process of being treated for sinus issues that cause my nasal passages to swell up and block drainage - this causes me extreme sleep apnea. I, theoretically, even though we haven't tested it, wake up between 4 and 100 times an hour, even if my conscious mind isn't aware of it.

As a result, my metabolism sucks. The body lowers metabolism in response to a lack of energy and, since I'm not sleeping to replenish any energy, my body has decided to make my metabolism move at a snail's pace.

I have been sleeping better now - I can tell. No weight loss, yet, but the energy level is climbing.

Therefore, your theory that a vast majority of us are decadent is somewhat flawed. I think pollution, preservatives and stress cause far more cases of obesity than overeating. And I think all those things are far worse than smoking and/or drinking.

Just look at the French - they eat decadent food, smoke like choo-choos and drink like fish, but they get health care, far more exercise by virtue of mass transit and several more days off during the work year. Plus, they pick up and prepare, daily, fresh foods sans preservatives.

Hmmmm......

[Big Blue Marble]

300. Take a look at this man's story.

It is a remarkable journey. He lost over 200 pounds after he stopped dieting.
http://www.jongabriel.com.au/

If you are interested in finding out more, his book is available
at Amazon for less.

[Evoman]

241. Lol...I never thought I would see people disagreeing with the laws of thermodynamics.

Weight loss is a really complicated issue, which metabolism and habit and illness makes more complicated. But seriously...thermodynamics people...thermodynamics.

[snooper2]

244. People were not as big 60 years ago....

Less Cubes- more manual labor, no escalators, no playstation....

Should be pretty easy to understand...

[Hell Hath No Fury]

253. I did somethinmg interesting recently ---

I was looking through old pictures and found my grammar school class shots from kindergarten through 8th grade.

The first thing I immediately noticed was that not ONE of my classmates looked like too many of the children of today -- there wasn't a single obese child in my class, nor my two sister's classes. Not ONE. The "chubby" kid of each of the classes looked no more than a few pounds over the rest of the class.

It was truly shocking to see.

I live near several grammar schools and when I watch the kids going to/coming from school, I am floored by the number of obese -- there is just no other way to describe it -- kids I am seeing. :( I am talking about kids in second grade -- girls with enormous waists, boys with large breasts and "beer guts". :cry:

Families are slowly killing their own children with their food and lifestyle choices.

[Mollis]

265. I know what you mean.

When I babysat two girls that were much younger than me...both weighed much more than me.
Their mom and dad were the same...it was so sad to see :cry:

[Terran]

258. You're right

There's some commercial for a butter substitute that portrays a blissfully ignorant 1950's sit-com style family eating baked potatoes with a whole stick of butter stuck in each of them. I saw that and the first thing I thought of was "Yeah, and people were way less fat in the 1950's, they didn't eat crap loads of fatty processed foods or spend all their free time in front of tv, computers or game consoles."

I've been relatively happy with my weight as an adult; I'm a 'big' guy no matter what I do, so even when I weighed 230, that was skinny for me. Since I was diagnosed with diabetes, I'm 99% certain that the medication I take is responsible for my weight gain of about 25 pounds in two years. My weight was stable for many many years and suddenly it shoots up after I start taking this medication. I'm going to see an endocrinologist soon.

[eridani]

294. And so very easy to do somthing about

Why are we so stupid that we can't even control the direction of our economy?

[mzmolly]

256. Perhaps also of note = "Obese individuals have different populations of microbes"

http://bacteriality.com/2007/08/09/obesity/

All humans have trillions of bacteria living in the gut. Their role is to combat pathogens and break down food. In 2004, Gordon proposed that these microbes might play a role in controlling body weight.

Gordon theorized that certain bacteria have the ability to harvest energy more effectively than others. Bacteria in the gut are able to extract many of the nutrients from the foods with which they come in contact. If some species of bacteria are better at harvesting these nutrients than others, then people with more energy efficient bacteria might absorb more calories and gain weight more easily.

Gordon tested his hypothesis on twelve obese volunteers and five lean volunteers. He used genetic sequencing to identify the different species of bacteria in the subjects’ guts.

The majority of the bacteria he identified fell into two groups - the firmicutes and the bacteroidetes. However, the sequencing showed that the obese volunteers had 20 percent more firmicutes and almost 90 percent less bacteroidetes than the lean volunteers.

http://bacteriality.com/2007/08/09/obesity/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/20/AR2006122001271.html

That said, weight loss can change the make up of gut flora ...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/73357/output/print

Mice are mice. Does any of this apply to humans? To find out, the Washington University team asked a dozen obese men and women to follow a low-fat or low-carbohydrate diet for a year. Before starting these diets, these obese volunteers had more Firmicutes and fewer Bacteroidetes in their guts than did several lean volunteers acting as controls—just as was seen in obese and lean mice. As the volunteers lost weight, their microbial communities underwent a remarkable shift, with an increase in the gas guzzlers (Bacteroidetes) and a decrease in the efficient energy extractors (Firmicutes). The type of diet didn't matter; only significant weight loss sparked the shift.

http://www.raysahelian.com/bacteroidetes.html

Reading this, I wonder if eating seafood and root vegetables would increase Bacteroidetes bacteria in the flora and aid in weight loss?

"The phylum Bacteroidetes is made of three large classes of bacteria that are present in the environment, including in soil, in sediments, sea water and in the gastrointestinal system of animals."

Lastly ~ Researcher Jeffrey Gordon and his colleagues found that obese humans and mice had intestinal flora (gut flora) with a lower percentage of a family of bacteria called Bacteroidetes and more Firmicutes. However, they are unsure if Bacteroidetes prevent obesity or if these intestinal flora are merely preferentially selected by intestinal conditions in those who are not obese.<1><2><3>

[mzmolly]

259. One more important study regarding genetics and studies conducted on Native Pima population.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071016074958.htm

The metabolic rates of 200 obese Pima individuals were measured and revealed that two of the three known SNPs influence metabolic efficiency. The researchers then used the genetics software TreeSAAP, to analyze the biochemical changes caused by these SNPs and then tracked the evolutionary selection of these genetic variations in 107 different types of mammals. This allowed them to propose a mechanism by which these SNPs affect the mitochondrial respiratory chain and consequently increase metabolic efficiency in the Pima people.

The team suggests that an increased metabolic efficiency could have been an evolutionary advantage. The SNPs may have persisted because they helped the Pima survive the harsh dietary environment of the Sonora desert throughout the history of the people. In the current environment of caloric over-consumption an increased efficiency is unfavorable and may contribute to the high rates of obesity among the Pimas.

While the Pima Indians are an extreme case, the entire human population may also have evolved in a restricted caloric environment, say the researchers. Many populations may exhibit similar SNPs that were advantageous to our ancestors but may now be detrimental. The presence of these SNPs may thus provide one explanation as to why obesity is so rife in the 21st century.

I have a friend who's hispanic. She's morbidly obese. It's in her family, and genetics is definitely a factor. She likely comes from generations of poverty which made her more likely to survive famine, than people who are healthier/thinner in times of abundance?

[mzmolly]

270. Grammar correction regarding the post above.

I stated ~ "I have a friend who's hispanic. She's morbidly obese. It's in her family, and genetics is definitely a factor. She likely comes from generations of poverty which made her more likely to survive famine, than people who are healthier/thinner in times of abundance?"

I should have said ~ "I have a friend who's hispanic. She's morbidly obese. It's in her family, and genetics are definitely a factor. She comes from generations of poverty which make her more likely to survive famine than those who are slender. People who are thinner in times of abundance, may have ancestry that did not have to survive such conditions?"

I have no idea how that made sense the first time I read it? Lack of sleep perhaps? ;)

[dbmk]

284. Could be true.

Means she faces a tougher battle.

It can't be argued that losing weight or gaining weight is easier for some than others. Can be wildly different. Tons of physical and mental factors in play.

I am on the BMI border of obese. Shit is hard but I have noone to blame but myself when I am not fighting as hard as I could to rectify it.

But I KNOW that the OPs math is at the heart of it. Its finding that spot where you can make it work for you thats the hard part - and I have read sufficient stories about peoples illnesses to understand that some might feel an incentive to just let the idea go and let the tide take you away. If we were beings with supreme willpower and immaculate physically cognitive skills a lot of things would be a lot easier.

But don't ever tell me that it can't be fought. That the math isn't right.
For some the fight is "just" harder - much harder. And extremely complex for some.

And that was the OPs point.
Recognise the facts - and then find an actual solution where they work for you and not against you. Those two steps are separate.

[mzmolly]

285. I agree.

Each person has to find what works. :hi:

[eridani]

296. Another thing about the Pima. The heaviest ones are those with the longest life spans

The longest lived women are 200% of the actuarial ideal weight, and the men 150% of it.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

289. Obesity is one area where "blaming the victim" is usually (not always) a good idea.

Yes, there are some conditions which make losing weight somewhat harder than it is for other people. There are virtually none which make it impossible, though.

However, most obesity is mostly caused by lifestyle - eating the wrong things (sometimes just "eating too much", but often not) and to a lesser extent exercising too little (eating differently/less is usually a more effective way to lose weight than exercising more).

It's very striking how many posters on obesity threads on DU say "I'm overweight because I have a medical problem" than say "I'm overweight and it's wholly or mostly my own responsibility". Comparing this to the ratio of the two groups in the population, we see that either the former are far, far more prone to posting about it on DU, or that many of the latter don't want to admit it to themselves (or both).

[Iris]

290. So how do you determine which ones to blame when you run in to them on a daily basis?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

291. I don't, and it's none of my business.

I don't have any seriously obese close friends or family, and I'm not a professional doctor or dietician or similar.