Is this true, Steven Draker?

[Guest]

Hmmm....are you quite sure that is a lady?

That's why I put in the question mark...

[Guest]

The latest studies show that people tend to reach equilibrium at a weight that is consistent with their body type and metabolism (in other words, they're destined to be fat) and are hurt more by dieting (which usually behaviorally resembles an eating disorder) than by their weight. Plenty of overweight, even obese people, are as healthy as they would be if they were thinner. Plenty of thin people are not healthy. Stop judging us.

 

"Destined to be fat"? What a crock of baloney.

http://albertsmeats.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/jumbalya-597x398.jpg

 

Obesity rates have skyrocketed in the last 30 years. The DNA hasn't changed. Why were there so many fewer people "destined to be fat" in the 70s? Who was it who said "You're not a loser until you blame others for your own mistakes?" Consider yourself judged: guilty!

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000387003/polls_032607_judge_alex_1043_711865_answer_3_xlarge.jpeg

[BaronArtz]

I agree with Unicorn. Nobody is 'destined to be fat'. That is BS, pure and simple. Stop deluding yourself. If you don't know what to do, speak with a nutritionist.

 

And here is a thought about the 'inner city - poverty' argument: if you can spend $5.00 on a greaseball hamburger, you can spend $5.00 on a piece of grilled chicken and an avocado instead. You ALWAYS have choices.

[+ poolboy48220]

I think it's a lot of what Deej said above - you've got the $5.00 to spend, but there's no place to get a piece of grilled chicken and an avocado in inner city neighborhoods. Grocery stores and produce markets are all over where I live, and even if they weren't, I have a car and can get to them. Decent groceries and produce stores are much harder to find in inner city neighborhoods, and many are limited to what's within walking distance because of lack of transportation.

[Rudynate]

I have to admit I do love bacon.

 

And I am a pig.

 

 

Bacon has been rehabilitated.

 

Mainstream healthcare providers are still committed to the lipid hypothesis of heart disease, but there is an ever-larger minority that believe excesses of calorie-dense carbs and sugar are much more of a factor in heart disease than saturated fats. Some even think that saturated fats are good for you.

[+ quoththeraven]

In the course of cleaning out my e-mail inbox, I ran across the link to the article by someone who has reason to know about the (in)efficacy of diets and dieting. Her scientifically supported conclusion is that they don't work.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/05/04/why-diets-dont-actually-work-according-to-a-researcher-who-has-studied-them-for-decades/

 

Some excerpts:

 

So dieting doesn't work, and it's not for the reasons people think. What are these reasons we are looking past?

What people tend to think is that if only Joe had self-control then he could succeed on his diet forever. And that's not accurate, as it turns out. That's not true.

 

After you diet, so many biological changes happen in your body that it becomes practically impossible to keep the weight off. It's not about someone's self-control or strength of will.

What kind of biological changes?

There are three biological changes that take place that seem most important to me.

 

The first is neurological. When you are dieting, you actually become more likely to notice food. Basically your brain becomes overly responsive to food, and especially to tasty looking food. But you don't just notice it — it actually begins to look more appetizing and tempting. It has increased reward value. So the thing you're trying to resist becomes harder to resist. So already, if you think about it, it's not fair.

 

Then there are hormonal changes, and it's the same kind of thing. As you lose body fat, the amount of different hormones in your body changes. And the hormones that help you feel full, or the level of those rather, decreases. The hormones that make you feel hungry, meanwhile, increases. So you become more likely to feel hungry, and less likely to feel full given the same amount of food. Again, completely unfair.

 

And the third biological change, which I think people do sort of know about, is that there are metabolic changes. Your metabolism slows down. Your body uses calories in the most efficient way possible. Which sounds like a good thing, and would be good thing if you're starving to death. But it isn't a good thing if you're trying to lose weight, because when your body finds a way to run itself on fewer calories there tends to be more leftover, and those get stored as fat, which is exactly what you don't want to happen.

So calling it unfair doesn't even begin to describe the injustice.

How could it when you have to fight against all of that? You can do it, potentially, but it's going to take over your life. And that's no way to live.

 

Dieting is actually a lot like starving, physically. It's living like you're starving. A lot of people do it, but what they're actually doing is living as if they're starving. They're putting their body into that exact same state that it would be in if they were literally starving to death.

 

Would you say that it's pointless then to try to lose weight? Or are we simply doing it wrong?

I don't think people should try to live at a lower weight than their set range. If you try to lose weight so that you're below your set weight range, that I believe is folly, or farce. It's not healthy. It's what sets off all those biological changes that are effectively trying to defend your set range. When your body goes lower than your set range, it makes changes to bump your weight back into it. And what people don't know is that if your weight goes above it, it also makes changes to push it back down into the ideal weight.

 

I do understand that people are people, and want to look a certain way. I get that, of course. That's why I recommend trying to be at the lower end of that set range. I'm trying to convince people that that's the right place to be. It's a healthy place to be, and an easy place to be. It's the sweet spot.

So people should feel comfortable just as they are? That seems like a pretty tough truth to swallow.

If you think about it, people do drop below their set range and stay there. A small percentage of dieters — something like 5 percent — can do it. And they do do it. But they do it by devoting every minute of their life to staying at that weight. Basically, they spend their entire life living like a starving person, fighting biology, and evolution. And to me that seems wrong.

 

People who have the means to not be starving to death should not be starving to death. How can we ask that of people? It just seems outrageous to me.

 

What's really sad to me is that it isn't just society that blames dieters when they gain weight. Dieters blame themselves, and I really think that that's a shame. They're in a situation where food looks more tempting, they're hungrier than they should be, their body is getting by on fewer calories, and everything is just working against them. And yet people are always so quick to say, 'well, it was their hand holding the fork.'

 

I find that to be such a frustrating comment to respond to. Yes, it is their hand holding the fork, but it's the context that is much more important here. There are so many things that affect your ability to control what you do with that fork, that make it impossible to not pick it up. If I could help people understand anything, it would be that.

 

There is also evidence from longitudinal studies to suggest that being moderately overweight is healthier than being thin/slightly underweight. I believe this is measured by mortality rates.

 

I am not against exercise or sensible eating. I am for evidence-based strategies, and the evidence shows diets don't work and that hammering home how horrible, lazy, and unhealthy people who are overweight are is a vast oversimplification, to say the least, and a great way to inflict psychological damage. I am overweight (wasn't always), have conditions that make it highly unlikely that's going to change, yet other than those conditions, I am reasonably healthy. My mother underwent a similar change in her body at about the same time of life as I did. I refuse to apologize for my weight or my looks.

 

(Just to be clear: other than the entry immediately above this, I haven't read this thread since I commented on it.)

[Guest]

There is also evidence from longitudinal studies to suggest that being moderately overweight is healthier than being thin/slightly underweight. I believe this is measured by mortality rates.

 

Well, it is certainly true that being significantly underweight such as models, anorexics, etc., especially to the point where women lose their periods is quite unhealthful. Losing one's periods and fertility happens in overweight women, too--it's called PCOS. Obviously, one cannot look at longitudinal studies and say that because underweight people don't live as long on average, that therefore keeping one's weight down is unhealthful. Underweight people are often battling all kinds of illnesses, from genetic diseases, to chronic diseases like Crohn's Disease or COPD, to viral or other infectious illnesses, to neurological disease, to cancer. It may not be the weight itself that is killing these people. But deciding not to make healthful choices because you feel you're "destined to be that way" is not only wrong, but it's also a horrible attitude to take.

 

http://michigantoday.umich.edu/archive/2012/11/bmi_health.jpg

[Steven_Draker]

My endocrinologist tells me to never eat in restaurants. The meals are too calorie dense without enough variety ...

 

http://media.salon.com/2015/06/7x7-steakburger.jpg

• Steak 'N Shake
  THE MOST EXTREME MENU ITEMS OF 2015
  7x7 Steakburger 'N Fries & Chocolate Fudge Brownie Milkshake
   
  This stupid sandwich is seven burgers layered with seven slices of American cheese. It is seven hamburgers trying to pretend it is only one hamburger. CSPI added a Chocolate Fudge Brownie Milkshake to its order, making the whole meal 2,530 calories, 68 g of saturated fat and 5,060 g of sodium.
   
   
  
• http://media.salon.com/2015/06/8-cheesecake-factory-warm-apple-crisp.jpg
  The Cheesecake Factory
  THE MOST EXTREME MENU ITEMS OF 2015
  Warm Apple Crisp
   
  This is a dessert that has fruit in the title so you might think it is virtuous. You would be wrong. The single dish has 1,740 calories (more than any cheesecake on the menu), 48 g of saturated fat and 32 teaspoons of sugar.
   
   
  
• http://media.salon.com/2015/06/7-chorizo-fiesta-omelette.png
  IHOP
  THE MOST EXTREME MENU ITEMS OF 2015
  Chorizo Fiesta Omelette
   
  The omelette alone (which is "loaded with spicy chorizo sausage, roasted peppers, onions & pepper jack cheese, then topped with a citrus chili sauce & sour cream") is 1,300 calories alone, but since it is served with three buttermilk pancakes, the whole meal clocks in at 1,990 calories -- with 42 g of saturated fat, 4,840 mg of sodium and 1,035 mg of cholesterol. Essentially you are eating a breakfast that could feed a child for three days.
   
   
  
• http://media.salon.com/2015/06/6-pineapple-upside-down-master-blast.png
  Sonic
  THE MOST EXTREME MENU ITEMS OF 2015
  Pineapple Upside Down Master Blast
   
  This is a milkshake, people. ONE MILKSHAKE. At 32 oz, the beverage is 2,020 calories, 61 g of saturated fat, 4.5 g of trans fat and has 29 teaspoons of added sugar. As a general rule, resist getting all your daily calories from a drink unless your mouth is wired shut.
   
   
  
• http://media.salon.com/2015/06/5-uno-pick-and-choose.jpg
  Uno Pizzeria & Grill
  THE MOST EXTREME MENU ITEMS OF 2015
  2 for $12 Pick & Choose
   
  For this bargain, CSPI picked Baked Ziti & Sausage Pasta and a Chicago Classic Deep Dish Pizza (both of them... as one meal). Together, they're 2,190 calories, 49 g of saturated fat, 5,420 mg of sodium and enough simple carbohydrates to run 100 marathons.
   
   
  
• http://media.salon.com/2015/06/4-CCF_LousianaChickenPasta-1280x960.jpg
  The Cheesecake Factory
  THE MOST EXTREME MENU ITEMS OF 2015
  Louisiana Chicken Pasta
   
  Hello again, Cheesecake Factory. This carbo-horror show weighs 1.5 pounds, which is a lot of pounds for pasta. It clocks in at 2,370 calories, 80 g of saturated fat and 2,370 mg of sodium.
   
   
  
• http://media.salon.com/2015/06/3-S_S_primerib_600x438.png
  Outback Steakhouse
  THE MOST EXTREME MENU ITEMS OF 2015
  Herb Roasted Prime Rib
   
  This 16 oz cut of cow is 1,400 calories alone -- paired with a dressed baked potato, classic blue cheese wedge salad and bread with butter, it becomes 2,400 calories, 71 g of saturated fat and 3,560 mg of sodium. Eating this is like impregnating yourself with a small cow. Note: The meal shown in the above photo is another Outback steak.
   
   
  
• http://media.salon.com/2015/06/2-dickeys-3-meat-plate.png
  Dickey's Barbecue Pit
  THE MOST EXTREME MENU ITEMS OF 2015
  3 Meat Plate with Free Ice Cream Cone
   
  There are a number of potential combinations one could choose for this platter of formerly-sentient beings, but CSPI chose Polish sausage, pork ribs and beef brisket, with fried onion tanglers and mac & cheese as their sides. Dickey's also gives customers free ice cream cones as they wait which contributes to a very charming portrait of today's America. The whole thing is 2,500 calories, 49 g of saturated fat and 4,700 mg of sodium.
   
   
  
• http://media.salon.com/2015/06/1-red-lobster-1280x960.jpg
  Red Lobster
  THE MOST EXTREME MENU ITEMS OF 2015
  Create Your Own Combination
   
  For this combo platter, you get smaller portions of three dishes, a side and unlimited Cheddar Bay Biscuits. CSPI chose Parrot Isle Jumbo Coconut Shrimp, Walt's Favorite (also shrimp) and Linguine Alfredo, french fries and a Caesar salad. They only ate one Cheddar Bay Biscuit because they are icons of good health. In total, that gets you to 2,710 calories, 37 g of saturated fat and 6,530 mg of sodium. Note: The image shown is another Red Lobster meal.
   
   
  
• 
  

[bigvalboy]

My endocrinologist tells me to never eat in restaurants.

 

With all due respect ISC, surely you don't mean....

 

http://www.artsdeli.com/

 

http://www.artsdeli.com/images/webpage_r10_c5.gif

 

http://s3-media2.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/9t2i0xsAYPlPG3_P9XvKJw/l.jpg

[BaronArtz]

"I refuse to apologize for my weight or my looks." said somebody above. Well said. That truly is the core of the problem.

 

Don't be surprised then if nobody out there wants to have sex with you.

 

By all means, let's stop taking responsibility for our looks.

[instudiocity]

With all due respect ISC, surely you don't mean....

 

http://www.artsdeli.com/

 

http://www.artsdeli.com/images/webpage_r10_c5.gif

 

http://s3-media2.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/9t2i0xsAYPlPG3_P9XvKJw/l.jpg

The Tougue is to die for.

 

Alas, fat ass me waddles over to Lemonade instead.

 

Also, I've never seen an Art's sandwich that couldn't satisfy a family of four.

[instudiocity]

"Destined to be fat"? What a crock of baloney.

 

Obesity rates have skyrocketed in the last 30 years. The DNA hasn't changed. Why were there so many fewer people "destined to be fat" in the 70s? Who was it who said "You're not a loser until you blame others for your own mistakes?" Consider yourself judged: guilty!

look at the changes in the food chain for the first answer, then refuse to buy into that logic. Why did my 90 year old dad think one 6-1/2 Coke a day was plenty? Why do I want to slam back to back 20 ounce Cokes?

[bigvalboy]

The Tougue is to die for.

 

Alas, fat ass me waddles over to Lemonade instead.

 

Also, I've never seen an Art's sandwich that couldn't satisfy a family of four.

 

Yes the tongue is amazing...but I had to Google 'Lemonade'....things have changed since I left, and apparently for the better, it looks delish.

[Rudynate]

My endocrinologist tells me to never eat in restaurants. The meals are too calorie dense without enough variety. His rule is more veggies (without ham seasoning) more fruits and less meats. But the big deal is to spread 1,500 calories across an entire day.

 

I've found The Engine 2 diet works pretty good.

 

http://engine2diet.com

 

 

1500 would be OK for someone who is totally sedentary. Personally, I lose weight on anything less than 2800 calories/day.

[Rudynate]

As someone with chronic pain and invisible disabilities, I ask you to consider the following. I am overweight bordering on obese. Barring some unexpected developments, I will be the rest of my life because any amount of exercise often means I'll be too tired and in too much pain to do anything the following day. I have to walk a very fine line between getting some exercise (mostly stretching and strengthening) and aggravating my condition. I would probably have greater mobility using one of these carts, but I'm so klutzy that I'm likely to run into someone or something while using them. Much of my "exercise" is in the form of grocery and other forms of shopping, bringing items in from the car, and schlepping to the other side of the building and walking up and down a series of stairs to do laundry.

 

I would love to be able to be more active, but I can't. If I tried, I'd be non-functional for days if not weeks. There are plenty of other people in the same position. You can't tell who we are just by looking at us. Most of us are not malingerers.

 

The latest studies show that people tend to reach equilibrium at a weight that is consistent with their body type and metabolism (in other words, they're destined to be fat) and are hurt more by dieting (which usually behaviorally resembles an eating disorder) than by their weight. Plenty of overweight, even obese people, are as healthy as they would be if they were thinner. Plenty of thin people are not healthy. Stop judging us.

 

Also, there is evidence to suggest it's high carbohydrate diets (especially high glycemic acid), not high fat or protein, that are the bulk of the problem. At any rate, I find that I feel more satisfied if I keep the simple carbs low and emphasize protein (however that comes), vegetables, fruit, and higher glycemic index carbs, I don't eat a lot of sweets and avoid salty food as). That's probably also a healthier diet. I would rather be relatively happy and content than be miserable spending time I don't really have because I'm feeling to tired to do other things obsessively tracking calories, especially since without the ability to commit to exercising for 30 minutes a day most days I'm unlikely to be able to lose much weight on diet alone.

 

I think it is true that someone's metabolism can become so disordered that they can't lose weight, and reversing the metabolic derangement is necessary in order for them to lose weight. But they didn't start out that way. It took years of too much food/too little activity to throw their metabolism out of equilibrium.

[Steven_Draker]

Those of you who are Europeans are deluding yourselves if you believe the same thing isn’t happening in Europe today. The only difference is that we in the U.S. we are future along the road to obesity than our European cousins but given time they are catching up.

 

I concur with you, Epigonos. Europe is always behind.

 

All the good things from the USA arrive in Europe 10-15 years later.

 

 

[Guest]

So much for the genetic argument....

http://paul.kedrosky.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/colorado.png

 

http://mdnetsolutions.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/obesity-by-country.gif

 

http://www.hivehealthmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/obesity-rates.jpg

[Guest]

It's amazing that Belgium does so well comparatively, what with all of their fries, chocolates, beer, and Liege waffles...

 

http://kristinhillery.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/waffles-1.jpg

 

[Guest]

Of course, the American version of Liege waffles is even more frightening!

http://www.wafflecakes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Waffle-Cakes-Special-Events-2.jpg

[Rudynate]

Europeans just seem to have an ingrown restraint about food that is foreign to Americans. Europeans, when they do eat those European treats like Belgian Waffles and Danish pastries, just eat a couple of bites and leave the rest on the plate. They don't hoover up the whole thing and ask for seconds. The only country in which I have seen systematized gluttony such as in the US is Germany. I remember being astonished at portion sizes in restaurants. I also remember coffee time in the late afternoon. At about 4P, the cafes and konditoreis would fill up with people having a snack of coffee and dessert. I remember seeing plump little old ladies ordering two pastries or a slice of each of two different kinds of torte, piled with whipped cream. And yet, even so, the Germans somehow seem to be able to eat a lot without getting fat. Don't understand it.