It's actually an anti-diabetic medicine, so yeah.So, it can help diabetics too?
My interest in it comes from being pre-diabetic with a risk of type 2.
It's actually an anti-diabetic medicine, so yeah.So, it can help diabetics too?
Seeing as obesity and being over weight is more likely to occur in deprived areas, then charging poor people for being obese or over weight seems a rather ridiculous thing to suggest seeing as they are least able to pay
It's a little simplistic to think that weight management is as simple as calories in vs calories out. There's a lot of other stuff in play as well.So, how is it they can afford to eat 4k+ calories a day consistently if they are so poor and deprived?
It's a little simplistic to think that weight management is as simple as calories in vs calories out. There's a lot of other stuff in play as well.
So your car will get EXACTLY the same consumption regardless of conditions, or flat tyres, or driving uphill, or a tailwind?I will have to remember that when i fill up my car with petrol. last time i checked moving more burned more fuel, going faster burned more fuel etc, if my car was sat on the drive not moving with a constant supply of fuel my tank would overflow.....
The above works exactly the same for a human too... it really is not rocket science.
Sure some cars get better mpg than others, just the same as some humans burn less/more calories but in that case you calculate what you need and eat less/more to suit your BMR
So your car will get EXACTLY the same consumption regardless of conditions, or flat tyres, or driving uphill, or a tailwind?
It really isn't that simple, honest. There's hormones involved, and differing metabolic pathways. There's no simple combustion system in your stomach that converts x amount of food into x amount of muscle/brain fuel at a standard conversion rate.
OK thenthe only time it become complicated is when people make it complicated.
Sure you may go up 1-2 pound a week or down 1-2 a week. if you are consistantly gaining 2 pounds a week you know you are eating too much, you know what you ate the previous week, you can either A) bury your head in the sand and continue or B) eat less the following weeks until you are either staying the same weight or losing weight depending on your goal
the only time it become complicated is when people make it complicated
So, how is it they can afford to eat 4k+ calories a day consistently if they are so poor and deprived?
if the metabolic rate in your car decreases as a result of regular 'exercise' then I need that ICE , they do have optimum operating temperature and cooling too, so I suppose there are some parallels.
Because cheap food is often highly processed and loaded with calories (sugar and fat) compared to good quality wholesome food which often costs more. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people/eating-healthy-diet-expensive-many-britons-research-finds/#:~:text=“Unhealthy food is so cheap,very low levels of nutrients.
Lets be honest here, but fat is the easy option, im not putting others down this is there choice but then it comes to people wanting help with fat loss via drugs from the NHS because they cannot work it out themselves, this bugs me.
Not really, EASY FOOD is cheaper and processed and loaded with calories. You can make your own meals most likely cheaper but this is not "quick" and "easy"
It's not that simple.
One of the biggest driving rates behind obesity, are overweight and obese children. They're getting overweight and obese, because they're getting battered with hyper-pallatable fake food, calorie dense yet lacking in proper nutrition - designed only addict them and nothing else, we've done nothing about it for years - and now it's too late.
The goverment and others have been harking on about "personal responsibility" but children are the weak link, because they generally have much lower levels of fortitude and don't know how to say no, or see that they're being fed junk as easily as healthy adults.
When children learn these bad habits and become addicted, they're far more likely to carry that behaviour into later life, where metabolic diseases and other problems start - by which point it's too late.
I was a bit slow to post an edit which said,
"Among UK households, the report predicts that the poorest 20 per cent would need to spend more than 39 per cent of their disposable income, after housing costs, to eat in line with the Eatwell Guide.
There is continuing divergence between the cost of healthy and unhealthy foods, with the average cost of healthy foods in 2019 being around £7.68 compared to £2.48 for less healthy food of the same calorific value.""
So poor people are going to take the easy and cheap way and end up on a poor diet, which is generally why deprived areas suffer more from obesity and poor health
For the same reason society does a lot of things. Because ultimately they foot the bill. Doesn't matter why people are overweight, have diabetes etc, they have it and the NHS is on the hook for it. They have 2 choices. Try and pay a little now in the vague hope it will change someones life or pay 100x more in treatment for them. If even a few % of people change their ways as a result then its money well spent.
Would it make a difference to this conversation if I pointed out that I was a tax payer?No, the tax payer foots the bill. Which has an knock on effect to everyone else.
Being overweight is caused by laziness and lack of discipline. Giving lazy people free stuff or vouchers doesn't all of a sudden make them no longer lazy. It actually encourages them to continue living an unhealthy lifestyle because they never work for it.
So poor people are going to take the easy and cheap way and end up on a poor diet, which is generally why deprived areas suffer more from obesity and poor health
I have been poor, extremely to the point of having 1 "meal" a day between the ages of 18-20. there was zero chance i was going to get fat on what i could afford to buy.