The Next Frontier in Social Justice: Fattitude

[OverVolt]

However, that is only a partial answer and if you ignore what causes people to make the poor decisions to begin with you are not going to be able to effectively address the problem.

Peer pressure from the long line wrapped around a busy McDonalds. What other excuses you got?

How about people learn to cook and eat real food. Because nobody knows how to cook anymore overall. I know so many people who can't even make boxed meals yet alone a real one.

If you cook alot in one go, like the weekend and eat your leftovers you have food for days. Take them into work instead of TV diners. Time is absolutely not an excuse. A good system would be to eat your leftovers for 4 days, which is kind of pushing it and treat yourself and eat out on friday. Huzzah. Not that hard.

You can't eat lunchmeat sandwhiches everyday. You can't drink soda everyday. You can't eat fast food everyday. You can't eat TV diners at work everyday. Just the reality. Yet this is what I see 80% of the time.

 

[IronWing]

If conservatards want me to house-sit, they can pay me.

10/10, well done.

 

[Knowing]

Because demonizing drug addicts certainly ended the drug problem in the US.

No, it didn't. Neither did the drug war. If we ever declare war on obesity I'd be pleased to take wagers on how much obesity will go up.

Nobody is denying that for the most part those who suffer from obesity have no small amount of responsibility for their condition. However, that is only a partial answer and if you ignore what causes people to make the poor decisions to begin with you are not going to be able to effectively address the problem.

The fat acceptance people are denying any responsibility for their condition. I totally agree, we do need to figure out why people are displaying an utter lack of any sort of critical thinking skills. That is perhaps the most pressing issue to be solved today.

 

[Abraxas]

Peer pressure from the long line wrapped around a busy McDonalds. What other excuses you got?

How about people learn to cook and eat real food. Because nobody knows how to cook anymore overall. I know so many people who can't even make boxed meals yet alone a real one.

If you cook alot in one go, like the weekend and eat your leftovers you have food for days. Take them into work instead of TV diners. Time is absolutely not an excuse.

Sure, but unless you have a means to train everyone lacking in culinary skills how to cook, this falls under basically the same category as they should all exercise. Cost and availability of high quality ingredients are other issues. Awareness that there is even a problem is an issue in and of itself.

I agree this is certainly part of a solution but this is not a panacea and the issue at hand is no less complex.

 

[AViking]

Don't want to be gay, don't be! Don't want to be poor get a job!

That you lived in ignorance of scientific facts doesn't change anything. Exactly how much time have you spent becoming educated? None. ******s are criminals, and I bet you know what that blanked out word is. Well yes they are using your limited reasoning. The statistics "prove" it. If they weren't so shiftless and lazy there would be no poverty. And stupid! Oh yeah, you are so right there! Of course you are ignoring everything going on, but basically you are saying blacks are shiftless and lazy and it's their fault. Oh, but no, you would never say that about blacks because you'd be banned from the forum in oh, 10 seconds, but you can be as ignorant, cruel and spiteful if you omit race. How nice.

In the meantime I'll remember this conversation and use it as an example at the medical conference on the topic. Unfortunately you'll not be the only case.

I'm done with this bigoted thread.

You are constantly trying to equate things that people CANNOT control with things people CAN control. Get over yourself. I have not brought up gays or blacks or any of that. You're just in your own little world and trying to justify being fat as something you can't control when for the VAST MAJORITY it is something they can definitely control.

 

[WelshBloke]

You are constantly trying to equate things that people CANNOT control with things people CAN control. Get over yourself. I have not brought up gays or blacks or any of that. You're just in your own little world and trying to justify being fat as something you can't control when for the VAST MAJORITY it is something they can definitely control.

Plus, being gay isn't a problem and being black isn't a problem and neither are worthy of criticism.

Having lots of unprotected sex with random strangers is a problem and being involved in lots of petty crime is a problem, both are worthy of criticism.

 

[Nebor]

Sure, I was just hoping to get clarification on their position. Earlier, Nebor in particular seemed particularly proud of having lost weight and spoke of those who haven't as weak failures. If strength is of such importance, are they of the opinion that having to meet their personal needs to feel empowered and belonging through insulting those they perceive as weak failures shows their own strength?

I salute his achievements in weigh loss, though, and do hope he meets his struggles with his social disorders with equal vigor and success.

I don't think I ever said anything indicating I was proud of losing weight. For me, due to my activity level, that's as easy as not stuffing myself with food. I have a much harder time gaining weight.

 

[Nebor]

Then we are in agreement here.

Which gets you part way home. On the other hand, some foods are healthy or not by preparation, such as fried chicken vs. grilled. Sometimes it isn't the type of food but the quantity, the portions you are raised with seeming normal.

What is more, the way food is packaged often makes it very difficult to determine what a serving is while consuming it. I have next to me at this very moment a package of butter toffee sunflower kernels, which are quite good by the way, and I am told from looking at the package which does not reseal or lend itself to storage in any way that one serving size is 1/3 of a cup or 1/6 of the package. While intellectually I can use that information, it is more challenging in practice short of getting out a measuring cup each and every time I wish to have a snack without overindulging.

20 oz bottles of soda have long been considered two servings even though they have been treated as one by almost everyone who consumes them. To reemphasize, it is frequently not what you eat but in what quantity.

Because demonizing drug addicts certainly ended the drug problem in the US.


Another poster in this thread made a great analogy on this point. This line of argumentation is akin to saying that the solution to poverty is for poor people to get a job or for the homeless to buy houses or for crime for people to stop doing bad things. Nobody is denying that for the most part those who suffer from obesity have no small amount of responsibility for their condition. However, that is only a partial answer and if you ignore what causes people to make the poor decisions to begin with you are not going to be able to effectively address the problem.

These are the worst excuses I've ever seen. You expect me to believe that a person is capable of balancing their checkbook, paying their credit cards & bills and performing some series of tasks sufficiently well enough to warrant getting paid but they can't work out the right amount of food to put in their body to stop gaining weight? Particularly when there are huge, glaring signs that they're going off the rails, like when your pants don't fit any longer, or when you have to ask the flight attendant for a seat belt extender?

Portions, packaging and "societal pressure" can only be blamed for people who simply don't care. They're lazy, and weak, and they prefer to blame someone else for their shortcomings. Attempting to conflate fatties' lack of willpower with the plight of the poor, black gays is ridiculous on it's face.

 

[Nebor]

By the way, check out the reddit/swj (social justice warriors.) It's a magical land where every wrong in the world is due to white, straight men and no one else is responsible for anything they do, ever.

 

[Bowfinger]

I'm always interested in learning more. Knowledge beats ignorance 99.9% of the time. I've also read a fair bit on the subject already, and I know things like metabolic rate vary tremendously between individuals. I remember one study that fed a controlled diet to a group of people over a one month period. The diet was slightly above the recommended caloric intake, so all the subjects gained weight, but despite similar intake and exercise levels, the weight gain across the group had incredible variance - as little as 3 pounds for some to over 30 pounds for others! Genetics can be a bitch sometimes.

Moreover, I come from a fat family. My paternal grandfather was north of 350 most of his adult life. My father was probably around 250 or so when he died. Both were under 6 feet, and the weight was fat, not muscle mass. My brothers are all overweight to varying degrees. We all know that we have a disposition to gain weight, just like our father, grandfather, uncles, etc. But we also know how they got there - lots of rich southern cooking, with plenty of 2nd and 3rd helpings. Lots of trips to the all-you-can-eat restaurants whenever grandpa was in town. Lots of sitting around watching TV, with little to no exercise. It's no mystery how they got there, or how I was headed there until I decided to do something else.

OK. Here are links addressing the factors I mentioned earlier. They aren't necessarily the same articles I read, but they cover the same topics.

First, here's a good overview I found discussing many of the factors that complicate obesity, including those I mentioned and others (viruses, sleep, stress, artificial lighting, heat + AC, etc.) I'd suggest it as a good read for anyone with a thoughtful mind. Obesity is a serious, even epidemic problem that deserves informed consideration, not ignorant, bigoted stereotyping and hate-mongering.

The Obesity Era

[ ... ]
For the first time in human history, overweight people outnumber the underfed, and obesity is widespread in wealthy and poor nations alike. The diseases that obesity makes more likely — diabetes, heart ailments, strokes, kidney failure — are rising fast across the world, and the World Health Organisation predicts that they will be the leading causes of death in all countries, even the poorest, within a couple of years. What's more, the long-term illnesses of the overweight are far more expensive to treat than the infections and accidents for which modern health systems were designed. Obesity threatens individuals with long twilight years of sickness, and health-care systems with bankruptcy.
[ ... ]
Of course, that’s not the impression you will get from the admonishments of public-health agencies and wellness businesses. They are quick to assure us that ‘science says’ obesity is caused by individual choices about food and exercise. As the Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, recently put it, defending his proposed ban on large cups for sugary drinks: ‘If you want to lose weight, don’t eat. This is not medicine, it’s thermodynamics. If you take in more than you use, you store it.’ (Got that? It’s not complicated medicine, it’s simple physics, the most sciencey science of all.)

Yet the scientists who study the biochemistry of fat and the epidemiologists who track weight trends are not nearly as unanimous as Bloomberg makes out. In fact, many researchers believe that personal gluttony and laziness cannot be the entire explanation for humanity’s global weight gain. Which means, of course, that they think at least some of the official focus on personal conduct is a waste of time and money. As Richard L Atkinson, Emeritus Professor of Medicine and Nutritional Sciences at the University of Wisconsin and editor of the International Journal of Obesity, put it in 2005: ‘The previous belief of many lay people and health professionals that obesity is simply the result of a lack of willpower and an inability to discipline eating habits is no longer defensible.’
[ ... ]
Yet a number of researchers have come to believe, as Wells himself wrote earlier this year in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, that ‘all calories are not equal’. The problem with diets that are heavy in meat, fat or sugar is not solely that they pack a lot of calories into food; it is that they alter the biochemistry of fat storage and fat expenditure, tilting the body’s system in favour of fat storage. Wells notes, for example, that sugar, trans-fats and alcohol have all been linked to changes in ‘insulin signalling’, which affects how the body processes carbohydrates. This might sound like a merely technical distinction. In fact, it’s a paradigm shift: if the problem isn’t the number of calories but rather biochemical influences on the body’s fat-making and fat-storage processes, then sheer quantity of food or drink are not the all-controlling determinants of weight gain.
[ ... ]
No one has claimed, or should claim, that any of these ‘roads less taken’ is the one true cause of obesity, to drive out the false idol of individual choice. Neither should we imagine that the existence of alternative theories means that governments can stop trying to forestall a major public-health menace. These theories are important for a different reason. Their very existence — the fact that they are plausible, with some supporting evidence and suggestions for further research — gives the lie to the notion that obesity is a closed question, on which science has pronounced its final word. It might be that every one of the ‘roads less travelled’ contributes to global obesity; it might be that some do in some places and not in others. The openness of the issue makes it clear that obesity isn’t a simple school physics experiment. ...

Here's one about a study showing lab animals of various species are heavier now than they were years ago, in spite of controlling for calories and exercise. (It also touches on the viral link.) I'd love to hear the bigots explain how that is caused by Big Gulps:

Obesity on the Rise in Animals

The problem of obesity isn't confined to just humans. A new study finds increased rates of obesity in mammals ranging from feral rats and mice to domestic pets and laboratory primates.
[ ... ]
"We can't explain the changes in [the animals'] body weight by the fact that they eat out at restaurants more often or the fact that they get less physical education in the schools," Allison told LiveScience. "There can be other factors beyond what we obviously reach for."

Allison first stumbled across evidence of overweight animals while looking at data on marmosets from the Wisconsin National Primate Research Center. The average weight of the monkeys had gone up over the decades, he noticed, and there seemed to be no plausible explanation. Allison queried primate center researcher Joseph Kemnitz as to what the cause might be: Were the marmosets from a different supplier? Had they been bred to be larger? The answers were "no" and "no."

But the monkeys' diets had been changed over the years, a switch that was well-documented by the lab. So Allison tried running the numbers again, this time controlling for the diet change.

"It only made the results stronger," he said. With the diet change, the animals should have lost weight, if anything.
[ ... ]
"It just highlights how little we understand about what's happening in terms of why we see this rise in body weight in our population,"

Jennifer Kuk, an obesity researcher at York University in Toronto who was not involved in the research, told LiveScience. "Perhaps this problem isn't as simple as just energy intake and energy expenditure, which has been the prevailing message over the last 10 years."

While it's not surprising that pets should be getting fatter along with their owners, or even that rats might be getting bigger by eating calorie-rich human garbage, Kuk said, the increase in body weight in controlled lab animals is unexpected

There are several theories as to why animals and humans might be getting fatter even without the help of fast food and desk-jockey jobs, Allison said. Pathogens could be to blame: A virus called adenovirus 36 has been linked to obesity in both humans and animals. Hormone-disrupting compounds, or endocrine disruptors, have been shown to trigger obesity in mice exposed to the compounds in utero

The change could be something as simple as our increasingly artificial environments, Allison said. Light pollution and sleep disruption have been linked to obesity. It's even possible that air conditioning and central heat are to blame. ...

Here are a couple about gut bacteria. Note one correction to my earlier comment. I said that thin mice gained weight when they were given gut bacteria from fat mice. It was actually gut bacteria from fat humans. Mice were given gut bacteria from either fat or thin people. Even though their calories and exercise remained the same, the mice given the fat gut bacteria gained weight, while those receiving bacteria from thin people did not.

Gut Bacteria May Be Key to Fighting Obesity
Different kinds of bacteria that live inside the gut can help spur obesity or protect against it, according to new research from scientists at Washington University in St. Louis.

They transplanted intestinal germs from fat or lean people into mice and watched the rodents change. ...

Obesity: Wider Understanding
How the bacteria in your gut may be shaping your waistline

A CALORIE is a calorie. Eat too many and spend too few, and you will become obese and sickly. This is the conventional wisdom. But increasingly, it looks too simplistic. All calories do not seem to be created equal, and the way the body processes the same calories may vary dramatically from one person to the next.

This is the intriguing suggestion from the latest research into metabolic syndrome, the nasty clique that includes high blood pressure, high blood sugar, unbalanced cholesterol and, of course, obesity. This uniquely modern scourge has swept across America, where obesity rates are notoriously high. But it is also doing damage from Mexico to South Africa and India, raising levels of disease and pushing up health costs. ...

Here are a couple about a virus linked to obesity. This was new to me. I vaguely remember hearing about it, but don't believe I'd read any specific articles:

Obesity Virus: More, Bigger Fat Cells

Aug. 20, 2007 - Infection with a virus linked to human obesity ups fat-cell production and makes fat cells fatter.

"Infectobesity" is the term coined by Louisiana State University researcher Nikhil Dhurandhar, PhD, and colleagues to describe the phenomenon. Their research strongly links a common human virus -- adenovirus-36 or Ad-36 -- to human obesity.

Previous research showed that nearly 30% of obese people, but only 11% of lean people, have been infected with Ad-36. Monkeys experimentally infected with Ad-36 gain significant weight.

Now Dhurandhar's team finds evidence that Ad-36 has a direct effect on human fat cells. Infection of adult stem cells from human fat triggers their transition into pre-fat cells. And these virus-infected cells hold much more fat than normal pre-fat cells.

The end result: more, fatter fat cells. ...

Virus is Linked to Obesity

A new study has found a link between obesity and a type of virus, providing additional evidence that factors other than diet and exercise may be responsible for the increasing numbers of overweight people.

A number of researchers have been exploring whether the virus, known as adenovirus 36, might play a role in the development of obesity. Obesity rates among both children and adults have skyrocketed in the past 30 years. Viruses are one avenue of research that scientists are investigating as a possible environmental factor leading to the growth in obesity rates ...

Finally, from the New England Journal of Medicine, an article about obesity maths. It's a bit dense (which is why I mostly linked to popular press above), but seemed like an appropriate way to summarize:

Myths, Presumptions, and Facts About Obesity

Passionate interests, the human tendency to seek explanations for observed phenomena, and everyday experience appear to contribute to strong convictions about obesity, despite the absence of supporting data. When the public, mass media, government agencies, and even academic scientists espouse unsupported beliefs, the result may be ineffective policy, unhelpful or unsafe clinical and public health recommendations, and an unproductive allocation of resources. In this article, we review some common beliefs about obesity that are not supported by scientific evidence and also provide some useful evidence-based concepts. We define myths as beliefs held to be true despite substantial refuting evidence, presumptions as beliefs held to be true for which convincing evidence does not yet confirm or disprove their truth, and facts as propositions backed by sufficient evidence to consider them empirically proved for practical purposes.
[ ... ]
Myth number 1: Small sustained changes in energy intake or expenditure will produce large, long-term weight changes.

Predictions suggesting that large changes in weight will accumulate indefinitely in response to small sustained lifestyle modifications rely on the half-century-old 3500-kcal rule, which equates a weight alteration of 1 lb (0.45 kg) to a 3500-kcal cumulative deficit or increment.5,6 However, applying the 3500-kcal rule to cases in which small modifications are made for long periods violates the assumptions of the original model, which were derived from short-term experiments predominantly performed in men on very-low-energy diets (<800 kcal per day).5,7 Recent studies have shown that individual variability affects changes in body composition in response to changes in energy intake and expenditure,7 with analyses predicting substantially smaller changes in weight (often by an order of magnitude across extended periods) than the 3500-kcal rule does.5,7 For example, whereas the 3500-kcal rule predicts that a person who increases daily energy expenditure by 100 kcal by walking 1 mile (1.6 km) per day will lose more than 50 lb (22.7 kg) over a period of 5 years, the true weight loss is only about 10 lb (4.5 kg),6 assuming no compensatory increase in caloric intake, because changes in mass concomitantly alter the energy requirements of the body. ...

In other words, the "one pound == 3500 calories" talking point is a gross over-generalization, and does not apply over time.

 

[Nebor]

As the Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, recently put it, defending his proposed ban on large cups for sugary drinks: ‘If you want to lose weight, don’t eat. This is not medicine, it’s thermodynamics. If you take in more than you use, you store it.’ (Got that? It’s not complicated medicine, it’s simple physics, the most sciencey science of all.)

The emotional arguers love science when it favors them, but when it doesn't? Ridicule it! Never mind that physics is the basis of all other sciences.

Bloomberg has the right of it here: Our bodies aren't violating the basic laws of thermodynamics. There are plenty of doctors willing to tell people what they want to hear, but that doesn't change the ground truth of the matter. There's a reason why the vast majority of doctors still see obesity as a personal matter, not a result of uncontrollable environmental or genetic factors.

 

[Nebor]

In other words, the "one pound == 3500 calories" talking point is a gross over-generalization, and does not apply over time.

Duh. We've known that for years. It's an approximation accurate to within ~600 calories in either direction. The underlying principle remains absolute however: Consuming calories in excess of calories expended results in weight gain.

 

[shortylickens]

 

[Abraxas]

I don't think I ever said anything indicating I was proud of losing weight. For me, due to my activity level, that's as easy as not stuffing myself with food. I have a much harder time gaining weight.

In my experience people don't brag about things they aren't proud of.

These are the worst excuses I've ever seen. You expect me to believe that a person is capable of balancing their checkbook, paying their credit cards & bills and performing some series of tasks sufficiently well enough to warrant getting paid but they can't work out the right amount of food to put in their body to stop gaining weight? Particularly when there are huge, glaring signs that they're going off the rails, like when your pants don't fit any longer, or when you have to ask the flight attendant for a seat belt extender?

Duh. We've known that for years. It's an approximation accurate to within ~600 calories in either direction. The underlying principle remains absolute however: Consuming calories in excess of calories expended results in weight gain.

/Facepalm

Let me get this straight, you readily admit that the number of calories to the pound can be different as much as 34% between two people, 1200 calories, but you want to act like it is equivalent to balancing a checkbook, which, by the way, in my experience a lot of people can't do? Never mind that their number changes depending on age, hormonal changes, activity level changes, sleep cycles, general health, and a host of other factors, the fact alone, that you freely acknowledge, that the number varies for everyone in exactly how many calories will make one pound and the obvious, humans don't come with an instruction manual that indicate how many calories will do it for them, and on its face the idea that this is a simple task is already farcically absurd.

Portions, packaging and "societal pressure" can only be blamed for people who simply don't care. They're lazy, and weak, and they prefer to blame someone else for their shortcomings. Attempting to conflate fatties' lack of willpower with the plight of the poor, black gays is ridiculous on it's face.

Fucking hell, do you read yourself? What you just posted is almost word for word an exact replica of the shit that gets posted on here all the time about the poor.

"Outsourcing, automation, and "societal pressure" can only be blamed for people who simply don't care. They're lazy, and weak, and they prefer to blame someone else for their shortcomings. Attempting to conflate poor's lack of willpower with the plight of the, black gays is ridiculous on it's face."

I don't know where you fall politically but you sound like the nuttiest of right wing fucknuts right now.

The emotional arguers love science when it favors them, but when it doesn't? Ridicule it! Never mind that physics is the basis of all other sciences.

Bloomberg has the right of it here: Our bodies aren't violating the basic laws of thermodynamics. There are plenty of doctors willing to tell people what they want to hear, but that doesn't change the ground truth of the matter. There's a reason why the vast majority of doctors still see obesity as a personal matter, not a result of uncontrollable environmental or genetic factors.

/double facepalm

Really, are you pretending that the body is a closed system wherein thermodynamics applies in a measurable and meaningful fashion in this discussion? Does nobody poop in your world? I think I finally have a good handle on how you got so full of shit...

 

[Nebor]

It is a simple task. Most people in the world manage to do it. Accountability-free Americans seem to struggle with it.

It's amazing how I see all the excuses that you list vanish, and people take responsibility for themselves and lose weight when I tell them they're going to lose their job if they don't.

 

[AViking]

The variability in metabolisms is easily managed by people who don't try to come up with an excuse for everything.

Everyone here has probably had that friend who could eat anything. Good for stick boy. Most people however recognize that if they eat junk food, too much food, etc they might gain weight, get acne, or not feel well. They then adjust their intake. People notice when they get older that their metabolism slows down and adjust accordingly.

Idiots keep eating that stuff, eating too much, and getting fat or breaking out.

 

[OverVolt]

OK. Here are links addressing the factors I mentioned earlier. They aren't necessarily the same articles I read, but they cover the same topics.

First, here's a good overview I found discussing many of the factors that complicate obesity, including those I mentioned and others (viruses, sleep, stress, artificial lighting, heat + AC, etc.) I'd suggest it as a good read for anyone with a thoughtful mind. Obesity is a serious, even epidemic problem that deserves informed consideration, not ignorant, bigoted stereotyping and hate-mongering.




Here's one about a study showing lab animals of various species are heavier now than they were years ago, in spite of controlling for calories and exercise. (It also touches on the viral link.) I'd love to hear the bigots explain how that is caused by Big Gulps:



Here are a couple about gut bacteria. Note one correction to my earlier comment. I said that thin mice gained weight when they were given gut bacteria from fat mice. It was actually gut bacteria from fat humans. Mice were given gut bacteria from either fat or thin people. Even though their calories and exercise remained the same, the mice given the fat gut bacteria gained weight, while those receiving bacteria from thin people did not.





Here are a couple about a virus linked to obesity. This was new to me. I vaguely remember hearing about it, but don't believe I'd read any specific articles:


Finally, from the New England Journal of Medicine, an article about obesity maths. It's a bit dense (which is why I mostly linked to popular press above), but seemed like an appropriate way to summarize:


In other words, the "one pound == 3500 calories" talking point is a gross over-generalization, and does not apply over time.

So close, now you just need the personal responsibility bit to avoid all the trans fat, alcohol, and HFCS.

Rats will get into peoples houses and eat bread and cereal with HFCS. Mind is not blown yet. Same with dogs and cats if they get ahold of people food.

 

[Abraxas]

It is a simple task. Most people in the world manage to do it. Accountability-free Americans seem to struggle with it.

It's amazing how I see all the excuses that you list vanish, and people take responsibility for themselves and lose weight when I tell them they're going to lose their job if they don't.

Wow. Just wow. I hope for the sake of your employees you get well soon.

 

[Abraxas]

So close, now you just need the personal responsibility bit to avoid all the trans fat, alcohol, and HFCS.

Rats will get into peoples houses and eat bread and cereal with HFCS. Mind is not blown yet. Same with dogs and cats if they get ahold of people food.

You seem to have misread what you are replying to. The animals in question were part of a control that specifically avoided people food and they are still gaining weight when the science says they shouldn't. These aren't just wild animals and pets, this is occurring in controlled, laboratory settings as well.

 

[Bowfinger]

You seem to have misread what you are replying to. The animals in question were part of a control that specifically avoided people food and they are still gaining weight when the science says they shouldn't. These aren't just wild animals and pets, this is occurring in controlled, laboratory settings as well.

Exactly, which I've explained at least twice now. While diet and exercise remain the foundation of weight management, that's not the whole story. There are many other factors in play, and scientists who actually study the issue recognize it's a complex problem for which man does NOT have all the answers. That has been my point throughout, that the ignoranuses who insist this is a simple, black and white issue are wholly clueless. They are as just as misinformed and hatefully bigoted as those who insist one chooses to be gay, or blacks are poor solely due to their life choices, or Jews are all greedy, or any other form of prejudice based on ignorant stereotypes.

It's a pity one can't gain intelligence and compassion as readily as one can gain weight.

 

[Bowfinger]

The variability in metabolisms is easily managed by people who don't try to come up with an excuse for everything. ...

The facts show otherwise. While it may be easy to avoid becoming fat -- if you are well-educated on nutrition and have control of your meals -- that doesn't help people who are already fat, for example, those who've been fat since childhood, or those who've made poor decisions in the past but want to change now. It is not at all easy for those people (which, not coincidentally, describes the majority of the obese).

Actively working to prevent childhood obesity may help reduce this epidemic in the future, but the challenge is what can be done to help today? When the traditional diet and exercise "treatment" has a >99% failure rate for those who are extremely obese, it's time to look a bit deeper. Diet and exercise are clearly critical, but it is equally clear they are not enough.

 

[Nebor]

Wow. Just wow. I hope for the sake of your employees you get well soon.

I think you missed the point there. When people are properly motivated, EVERYONE loses weight. All their bullshit excuses evaporate and they get results. For some people it's not fitting into the same size pants that triggers the change, but some people need to be threatened with being out on the street, unable to provide for their families in order to slim down.

 

[Abraxas]

I think you missed the point there. When people are properly motivated, EVERYONE loses weight. All their bullshit excuses evaporate and they get results. For some people it's not fitting into the same size pants that triggers the change, but some people need to be threatened with being out on the street, unable to provide for their families in order to slim down.

Even if everything you said is true, it isn't, but even if it were, that you would threaten to fire someone because of their appearance or even their health choices and that you don't see the problem with that puts you in a worse boat than they are. I'm beginning to suspect all this ignorance and hatred you are spouting is coming from getting sued over harassing an employee about their weight.

Maybe you work in modeling or something where weight matters, which would also explain your fucked up perspective, but from the sound of it you have a mental illness and it is hurting those who work for you. Good luck on your recovery.

 

[Murloc]

The facts show otherwise. While it may be easy to avoid becoming fat -- if you are well-educated on nutrition and have control of your meals -- that doesn't help people who are already fat, for example, those who've been fat since childhood, or those who've made poor decisions in the past but want to change now. It is not at all easy for those people (which, not coincidentally, describes the majority of the obese).

Actively working to prevent childhood obesity may help reduce this epidemic in the future, but the challenge is what can be done to help today? When the traditional diet and exercise "treatment" has a >99% failure rate for those who are extremely obese, it's time to look a bit deeper. Diet and exercise are clearly critical, but it is equally clear they are not enough.

if you fix diet and exercise in your home, you may stay fat, but your children will not become fat. A fat baby becomes a fatty later.

 

[Nebor]

Even if everything you said is true, it isn't, but even if it were, that you would threaten to fire someone because of their appearance or even their health choices and that you don't see the problem with that puts you in a worse boat than they are. I'm beginning to suspect all this ignorance and hatred you are spouting is coming from getting sued over harassing an employee about their weight.

Maybe you work in modeling or something where weight matters, which would also explain your fucked up perspective, but from the sound of it you have a mental illness and it is hurting those who work for you. Good luck on your recovery.

I've had one person fail to lose weight when her job was on the line. She was a single mother and also supported her sick mother. She had 6 months to show positive trends and failed to do so. She claimed she was unable to do any physical activity other than walk on a treadmill, and she still ate fried chicken and whiskey every weekend. She was also 4 years short of retirement. I didn't feel the slightest bit of remorse separating her. I felt sick that someone could care so very little about their family as to lose everything they've worked for rather than lose some weight.

I work for the US Army. Our standards are codified in law. Please explain to me why this group of people seem to almost universally be able to lose weight when they're threatened with losing their jobs, health care & pensions? Because to me, it says that it's a matter of motivation, not a matter of factors beyond their control.