Yep.
I was referring to our previous discussion. I didn't realise that you were still posting rubbish in order to bait me - please accept my apologies.
Or neither, unless you didn't weigh yourself so you wouldn't know... or something.
Obesity is not a choice
- Thread starter G-MAN2004
- Start date
Yep.
I was referring to our previous discussion. I didn't realise that you were still posting rubbish in order to bait me - please accept my apologies.
Or neither, unless you didn't weigh yourself so you wouldn't know... or something.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,305
- Location
- 2
Water retention, perhaps?
There can many reasons why a body wont break down fat, but I think one common reason is if someone temporarily eats less (for a variety of reasons this could happen), then they revert to a normal eating pattern, what will happen is when they slow down eating the body adjusts and stops breaking down fat as a means to combat starvation, but then it wont adjust again afterwards when food intake is increased again, leading to someone becoming obese. That person maybe then be leading the same lifestyle as someone else with same diet and exercise but be much fatter. Now of course that person could increase exercise etc. but they would need to have a balance significantly different to what another person might need, in some people the balance isnt obtainable, medication or even surgery is needed because the body is incapable on its own of losing fat.
You cant stop eating altogether as that leads to malnutrition, muscles will start been broken down by the body.
So what you're saying is there's no "get slim fast" method that works, and that people need to actually commit to changing their habits.
But because that would take more than like, a couple weeks, it's too much effort. Easier to just moan about "fat shaming" and do keep stuffing burgers in your mouth.
I'm no example to anyone, but at least I know to only point the finger at myself when I'm overweight.
Seems far too many people are just looking for excuses to absolve themselves of any responsibility.
And no, two people on the same diet and exercise plan aren't going to have wildly differing outcomes (in your words "much fatter"). It's absolute nonsense to say that a truly fat guy is on the same diet and exercise plan as a fit, slim guy. And moreover we all know it's nonsense. Whilst there is room for small differences in outcome due to genetics, the reality is that the fat guy isn't putting the effort in, and hence can never hope to be the slim, fit guy. Just more excuses.
No I am not saying that.
Your post is just ignorance really, I read the first line and though ok maybe you just struggle to think outside of extremes.
But then you proceeded to spout some prejudice nonsense. A reason doctors even advise against fasting is because it will mess up your body in the long term for breaking down fat.
No we dont all know its nonsense, unless you think I am outright lying.
Just to let you know the word "will" doesnt mean always, "can" doesnt mean always, I never suggested this applies to one and every person.
Your post is just ignorance really, I read the first line and though ok maybe you just struggle to think outside of extremes.
But then you proceeded to spout some prejudice nonsense. A reason doctors even advise against fasting is because it will mess up your body in the long term for breaking down fat.
No we dont all know its nonsense, unless you think I am outright lying.
Just to let you know the word "will" doesnt mean always, "can" doesnt mean always, I never suggested this applies to one and every person.
I think what you posted is wrong, and contradicts reality.
Two people on the same diet and exercise plan are not going to end up with wildly different outcomes. Your words: one could be "much fatter" than the other.
Sorry, that's just wrong.
The outcomes don't have to be exactly the same, but to claim one person can be "much fatter" than another, despite their calories in and work done being the same - over anything other than a very short space of time... this contradicts reality.
Face it, you're just another of these "progressive" types who want to blame society/a.n.other for bad personal outcomes. Again I'm no example to anyone, but on matters of diet and exercise and associated body shape outcomes, I will never put responsibility on anybody but myself.
e: Just to clarify: for two people in the same diet and exercise plan, there is no way in hell that one ends up being 11 stone and one ends up being 16 stone (which qualifies as "much fatter" without going to extremes).
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,305
- Location
- 2
You could have a look at the BBC Panorama on fasting. There were several doctors advocating fasting, including the presenter Dr Michael Mosley.
To be fair, you're still drawing pretty flawed comparisons.
In the case of the 10 year old and her child smoking a cigarette, it's actually illegal for a start, that's quite different from eating some bad food, and I'd say it's perhaps more reasonable to condemn the mother for allowing something so egregious. And also remember, you can eat treats / fast food, in healthy amounts - you cannot smoke in healthy amounts.
I'd agree in some respects, that making obesity socially unacceptable could in theory be useful, but I think in reality it won't help us actually solve the problem, not without enacting really hardline rules such as those found in Japan with the metabo law, but then again - Japan, despite having very low levels of obesity, is socially very distant from the west - I'm not sure we could ever do it here.
For example, I'm against these silly ideas, such as 'fit at any size' where you have obese women celebrating how great it is to be 'big' and how they're super healthy even though they're probably pre-diabetic and have high blood pressure. I think that's dangerous.
However, inside all of this, there's a bigger question;
You want to allow the condemnation of obese people - I get it. But instead, why not aim your condemnation at the food industry and make it unacceptable for them to wreck the food chain? They're the ones who've created this crazy environment, since 1980 they've been making more and more money, whilst the health of western nations has been into steep decline. When children get obese - instead of forcing the food industry to change their ways, we try to solve the problem by prescribing Metformin and then later send them for Bariatric surgery. It seems like we're putting the cart before the horse.
Children get pocket money, they also spend a lot of time outside/away (school, friends, etc) so any attempt to keep reigns on them will just fail and it does fail, hence the childhood obesity epidemic, it's hard enough to prevent children from smoking (although thankfully thats on the decline) let alone them eating unhealthily, because kids like to be on the boundaries of just about everything.
And, I'm not against parents setting health boundaries, or teaching their children to be healthy - but it seems like we're playing with half-measures, when we send them outside into the world (or they go online) they're absolutely saturated with opposing messages, powered by billions of pounds of dollars, in advertising and scientific research - the majority can't compete with it.
Surely, you must accept, or partially accept - that the food industry are a problem here? or are you happy for them to just carry on as they are without interference or legislation?
Last edited:
I think there's plenty of evidence that fasting works well, provided it's done properly (not for children, or if you're pregnant, etc) it's literally guaranteed to work for just about anybody, unless you're ill with some very rare diseases.
The only question I'd have about fasting, is that whilst there's no doubt you'll lose a lot of weight - what happens when the fasting stops and you go back to normal eating regimes, does it fail in the same way that 90% of diets do, after the diet targets are reached, and the person re-gains all the weight they previously lost, when they return to their old habits?
The only question I'd have about fasting, is that whilst there's no doubt you'll lose a lot of weight - what happens when the fasting stops and you go back to normal eating regimes, does it fail in the same way that 90% of diets do, after the diet targets are reached, and the person re-gains all the weight they previously lost, when they return to their old habits?
Calories in + calories out is sort of physics and the number one rule in the sense that you literally can’t exert more energy than you consume and retain the same mass over a longer period of time.
The ‘perpetual rabbit’ (i.e. always eating many low calorie meals) is in my experience not a very good way of losing mass. Your body seems to adapt and goes into ‘starvation mode’ to prevent mass loss. I find it far better to eat under my calorie needs but confine my eating to one or two meals, one of which is large. That way, I get full, feel satiated and can pretty much eat what I want for that meal, plus the body never goes into ‘starvation mode’. Have lost over a stone recently by doing just that. It does require a bit of willpower during the days - coffee helps a lot.
Piece of cake. Nom.
The ‘perpetual rabbit’ (i.e. always eating many low calorie meals) is in my experience not a very good way of losing mass. Your body seems to adapt and goes into ‘starvation mode’ to prevent mass loss. I find it far better to eat under my calorie needs but confine my eating to one or two meals, one of which is large. That way, I get full, feel satiated and can pretty much eat what I want for that meal, plus the body never goes into ‘starvation mode’. Have lost over a stone recently by doing just that. It does require a bit of willpower during the days - coffee helps a lot.
Piece of cake. Nom.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 407
@Screeeech You keep referring to the issue being from the 80s, but it is way older than that and the first big explosion was with TV dinners in the 50s in the US (if I recall correctly) which changed everything. Lots of other stuff has followed, of course, and here we are.
The book 'Salt Sugar Fat' is a really interesting (and depressing) read.
The book 'Salt Sugar Fat' is a really interesting (and depressing) read.
Yeah, when I say the 1980s I mean that was roughly the point at which we started seeing children with serious problems, such as the first recorded cases of type-2 diabetes.
I’d still say it wasn’t until 1980, when the problem started getting serious, despite that, I’d agree that 1950s TV dinners and processed food in general would ultimately be the root of all the issues.
I’ve actually also read that book, I think the bit that stuck me the most, was how they use the palette of a 5 year old, in order to tune the sugar levels to generate as much pleasure as possible, to the point where it’s actually too sweet for an adult to tolerate.
I wouldnt worry too much about that:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/pdf/postmedj00315-0056.pdf
We were designed to have periods of feast and famine and to overeat during the feasts and lose weight during the famine. There is no famine in the western world now. It is a change in environment which has made people obese, not inherent personal failings. Thats doesnt mean people dont have to take responsibility but one should pity the obese, if it was easy no one would be overweight.
It's not easy but it's not hard either. Hell if I can do it it can't be hard
It literally just requires a person to eat less.
It basically is a choice.