1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Campaign to end the 'stigma' of obesity

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Uther, Oct 11, 2018.

  1. jpaul


    Joined: Mar 1, 2010

    Posts: 7,346

    so BBC an others seem to misprepresent the new research

    what the research paper says

    paper does not , afaiks, say how they established thick and thin (that's the power of tefal) people in the study had similar calories/diet ?
  2. Ayahuasca


    Joined: Apr 23, 2014

    Posts: 18,667

    Location: County Durham

    Articles like that BBC one are quite damaging, will this be the new excuse instead of "He/She is just big boned".
  3. Screeeech


    Joined: Dec 29, 2014

    Posts: 3,107

    Location: Farnham, Surrey

    Yeah I think it is bad, not only is it misrepresenting the contents of the study, but it propagates a false message that obesity is down to things like luck, which isn't going to help people understand the actual root cause of their obesity - which in the vast majority of cases, is overeating and bad diet.

    It doesn't make that much sense when you look at the population in general, if you go back to pre 1980 - just about everyone was slim, so if our genes have changed so dramatically in under 40 years (which is a blink of an eye) to the point where we're 68% overweight or obese, and the genes are a significant cause - I'd find that pretty difficult to believe. Even more so in the presence of a much simpler and obvious cause - propagation of terrible food, convenience, child-advertising, inactivity, etc..

    It would require extraordinary evidence to believe genes are a significant driving factor for obesity in normal everyday people.
  4. Nasher


    Joined: Nov 22, 2006

    Posts: 12,182

    It's a very weird genetic problem which only effects people who eat to much food and don't exercise...

    We need some kind of investigation which meets BBC P.C standards.
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2019
  5. dowie


    Joined: Jan 29, 2008

    Posts: 38,939

    Yup, people will love to use stuff like the above to muddy the waters a bit.

    I mean I'm sure there probably is some genetic aspect to it to some extent whereby some for some people the **** we have available in modern diets today has less of an effect on them than others. Bottom line though is still that they're eating unhealthily and/or not exercising.

    I'm not sure they can easily control all factors though - for example people who fidget more are likely to be thinner:


    Technically that behaviour is burning calories, does represent extra activity that is perhaps unaccounted for but is also seemingly linked to genetics too.

    So some people are lucky in the genetic lottery in terms of size, it isn't much of an excuse, the thinner people who eat **** and don't exercise are also leading unhealthy (but less visibly so) lifestyles. It isn't like there isn't plenty of information out there to let people know that exercising is good for you, that junk food is bad, recommendations on the daily calorie intake for men/women, fat, sugar, protein, various vitamins etc... etc...
  6. krooton


    Joined: May 9, 2004

    Posts: 24,757

    Location: Leafy outskirts of London

    I'm a significant fidgeter, and when left to my own eating devices, I would never leave the 76-80kg range.

    The only time I was out of that range, was a constant 75kg when I was going to the gym every day, tracking every calorie, and eating keto, which was for the year running up to my wedding.

    My dad is naturally very slim, and has essentially mini-fasted his entire life as he never eats breakfast.

    My brother has also been slim at times, but more recently has been a bigger than either of us, and he doesn't fidget, and has a beer intake which I don't have.

    So many variables to it all, but lifestyle and diet are obviously the largest contributors to it all.