Article questioning the "lose weight for health" doctrine.

[Joanne]

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/03/diets_do_not_work_the_thin_evidence_that_losing_weight_makes_you_healthier.3.html

 

I disagree with "being against" classifying obesity as a disease. In the article, they take issue with the AMA having classified it as a disease. I fully, absolutely, 100% believe it IS a disease. There is something much more going on with my body than "calories in, calories out."

 

My favorite part:

 

The idea that obesity is a choice, that people who are obese lack self-discipline or are gluttonous or lazy, is deeply ingrained in our public psyche. And there are other costs to this kind of judgmentalism.

[mathmarm]

Your included link doesn't work. This is the link that you want. It is the first page of the article.

 

The link you gave is wrong because there is a ' on the end of it. But thanks for sharing this article, I look forward to the discussion.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I think fit is a better goal than thin.  However, you probably noticed that they said that being overweight and moderately obese is ok.  They did not say that morbid obesity is ok.  There is a point where health problems from weight do start to affect people very negatively.  

[PeachyDoodle]

I think it is important to acknowledge that there are people who deliberately refuse to avoid gluttony, and people who refuse to control what they eat. I know several. They freely share that it is their choice to eat what they please in the volumes that make them happy. Hiding their existence does not help solve the issue. Frankly, I think they have an oral stimulation issue which should have been attended to before they became morbidly obese and some have a personality disorder that leads them to believe they deserve to

Indulge themselves frequently. Then add in the ones who are gettin g their social needs met thru medical care....the term obesity is just a catch all that obscures the real roots. The fact that these people exist doesnt mean that everyone who is morbidly obese has the same reason that they do.

 

There is also a denial issue...the belief that popping a metformin means that volume and choice of what is ingested doesnt have to be considered.

 

This was me, without a doubt. I never really rode the diet roller-coaster. I just ate and ate and sat on my behind, and then complained that I tried so hard and never got anywhere. NOT saying that all overweight people are like that! There are a myriad of issues, and we truly don't understand them all. But I think the reason it is viewed as a moral/character/laziness issue is that sometimes... it is. That doesn't mean it's fair to categorically lump all overweight people into the same bin, of course! But neither does it mean that we can ignore the fact that sometimes personal choices matter.

 

For me, in the end, it turned out to be a spiritual issue that I needed to address through the lens of my faith. That's not going to be the case for everyone, obviously (although I'm happy to discuss my experience privately with anyone who is interested). I am still in the midst of my weight loss journey, and only time will tell if I become a statistic and regain it all. I don't really think I will, though. The "competent eating" described at the end of the article closely resembles what dh and I now do. There has been a fundamental shift in the way we approach food altogether. We have also found that we enjoy exercise (NEVER the case for me before!) and that contributes a lot to my overall well-being.

 

I will say that I no longer desire to be super thin and will be happy with a BMI in the overweight/mildly obese category (I was well into morbidly obese before). I am close to that now, but would like to lose another 25 lbs. or so. That is a healthy, maintainable weight range for me, and because I am now fit (even though overweight/obese), I feel so much better. I have no interest in being skinny for the sake of being skinny.

 

[Bluegoat]

I think it is important to acknowledge that there are people who deliberately refuse to avoid gluttony, and people who refuse to control what they eat. I know several. They freely share that it is their choice to eat what they please in the volumes that make them happy. Hiding their existence does not help solve the issue. Frankly, I think they have an oral stimulation issue which should have been attended to before they became morbidly obese and some have a personality disorder that leads them to believe they deserve to

Indulge themselves frequently. Then add in the ones who are gettin g their social needs met thru medical care....the term obesity is just a catch all that obscures the real roots. The fact that these people exist doesnt mean that everyone who is morbidly obese has the same reason that they do.

 

There is also a denial issue...the belief that popping a metformin means that volume and choice of what is ingested doesnt have to be considered.

 

If you want to talk in terms of gluttony, it is in no way confined to people who have weight issues.  There are plety of people who are not over-weight who go to no effort to control their eating and who over-eat.

 

And gluttony isn't always about over-eating.  Being very controlling about food (your own or what others eat), getting attention through food, being picky about food, can all be manifestations of gluttony.  Factory and industrial farming is also a manifestation of gluttony - the desire to eat large amounts of high-input foods or out of season foods without paying the real price of them.

 

Most people who have weight problems on a personal level are more than just greedy, there are other issues or greed has nothing to do with it at all, but I don't know that that can be said for the rest of us.

[Joanne]

I think fit is a better goal than thin.  However, you probably noticed that they said that being overweight and moderately obese is ok.  They did not say that morbid obesity is ok.  There is a point where health problems from weight do start to affect people very negatively.  

 

The article questions the science and conclusions made to (continually) assert this.

[Joanne]

Your included link doesn't work. This is the link that you want. It is the first page of the article.

 

The link you gave is wrong because there is a ' on the end of it. But thanks for sharing this article, I look forward to the discussion.

 

I fixed it. I may be in a bad mood, but this post seemed kinda snarky to me.

[Murphy101]

If you want to talk in terms of gluttony, it is in no way confined to people who have weight issues.

 

This is certainly true, but in most other cases where it leads to the equivalent of morbid obesity, it is usually deemed a mental health and sometimes a physical health issue then too.

 

For example, extreme hoarders, shopping addicts and more.

 

I would agree that just like you won't solve a hoarder's problem by shaming them about their piles of junk, you also won't help someone who is morbidly obese by telling them it is a calorie in vs calorie burn issue. It is. But it is far more than that too and thus that alone won't make a difference for them.

[staceyobu]

I fixed it. I may be in a bad mood, but this post seemed kinda snarky to me.

 

I didn't read it like that.  I just read it as being helpful and telling you why it wasn't working.  Sometimes I try to type really concisely, especially if I'm on a mobile device.  

[plansrme]

I fixed it. I may be in a bad mood, but this post seemed kinda snarky to me.

I am wondering how else she was supposed to convey this very helpful information in a way that would not have come across as snarky to you. Sample alternative language would be helpful.

[chiguirre]

My favorite part:

 

The idea that obesity is a choice, that people who are obese lack self-discipline or are gluttonous or lazy, is deeply ingrained in our public psyche. And there are other costs to this kind of judgmentalism.

Yes, but remember that the J-curve is the best revenge of all!

 

I fully expect there will be tons of breakthroughs over the next 25 years and in the meantime check out some Titian or Rubens portraits for a mental break from today's standards of beauty. They were painting those particular women because they thought they were the most beautiful. It might just be that they were the healthiest too.

[staceyobu]

For me, this article doesn't necessarily show that calories in/calories out doesn't work.  I think what it does show is weight loss is really, really hard to maintain.  If you aren't REALLY active, your calories needed for the day are sooo minimal.  

 

I think in many regions in America, we have so many factors working against us.  Very readily available food.  We also are very inactive.  No one bikes or walks to work where I live.  People don't even walk to the bus stop.  Kids don't walk to school.  If you allow your kids to walk down the street, you are risking them being kidnapped, so instead they sit inside on devices.  

 

When people cut calories, they do lose weight.  I would be interested to see research on why some people seem much more easily able to regulate their food intake. I have one kid that will turn up her nose at ice cream if she is full.  I have another kid that will literally keep eating ice cream until she pukes.  They have been raised in the same home.  Why the difference?

[Jean in Newcastle]

Once you get past a certain point, your metabolism changes so that it is harder to lose weight doing the very same things that would work for someone much thinner.  

[GailV]

 

When people cut calories, they do lose weight. 

 

 

Up to a point this is true.  Then the metabolism slows so the body can protect against starvation.  Not to pick on you by focussing on this tiny little statement in your post, but the calorie-in-calorie-out paradigm really bugs me.  It's way too simplistic.  It assumes we are build like, say, a car engine rather than living beings with incredibly complex hormonal systems.

 

I sort of like the "get healthy to lose weight" comeback to the "lost weight for health" statement.  I'm pretty sure I picked it up from Matt Stone's 180degreehealth, which I'd recommend as reading for anyone who likes to nerd out on weight loss and health (with the caveat that Matt Stone writes like a teenage boy, complete with more info than you probably want to know about how various diets affect his sex drive).

[staceyobu]

Up to a point this is true.  Then the metabolism slows so the body can protect against starvation.  Not to pick on you by focussing on this tiny little statement in your post, but the calorie-in-calorie-out paradigm really bugs me.  It's way too simplistic.  It assumes we are build like, say, a car engine rather than living beings with incredibly complex hormonal systems.

 

I sort of like the "get healthy to lose weight" comeback to the "lost weight for health" statement.  I'm pretty sure I picked it up from Matt Stone's 180degreehealth, which I'd recommend as reading for anyone who likes to nerd out on weight loss and health (with the caveat that Matt Stone writes like a teenage boy, complete with more info than you probably want to know about how various diets affect his sex drive).

 

But, looking at anyone who is starving to death.  Obviously low calories in eventually causes dramatic weight loss.

[wendyroo]

I would be interested to see research on why some people seem much more easily able to regulate their food intake.

 

And why some people's metabolisms seem so much higher.

 

That is the aspect of calories in/calories out that I don't hear a lot about.  Much of our "calories out" is just our resting body functions, but that number seems to vary a lot person to person.  My mom has the metabolism of a hummingbird.  She is 30 years older than me, weighs 50 pounds less than me, is not as active as me day to day, but she eats way more calories (and almost all refined carbs/sugars) than me just to maintain her body weight while I'm overweight and in a constant fight not to let my weight creep further up (just like my dad and 3 of my 4 grandparents, but my brother's metabolism is just like my mom's).

 

I see the same thing in my boys.  Peter and Elliot are 2 years apart, but they weigh within a couple pounds of each other.  I feed them exactly the same foods every day and on average Peter eats more than Elliot.  Elliot is also quite a bit more active than Peter, but he is built like a line backer and has a BMI that always measures in the obese range while Peter is a string bean.

 

Since Elliot has a lot of food allergies, the whole family ends up eating a paleo-ish diet (whole foods, gluten-free, dairy-free, soy-free, food dye-free, only water to drink).  The pediatrician is somewhat worried about Elliot's weight, but after keeping a food diary and meeting with a dietitian, we could not identify any bad habits to eliminate so trying to control his weight would mean limiting how much good, healthy food we were letting him eat which no one thinks is a good idea.

 

How is this child who eats almost exclusively fruits, vegetables, proteins, and healthy fats and spends 3+ hours a day running around like a maniac weighing in the obese range?

 

Wendy

[Sandragood1]

I recently read an article about a study, conducted in Africa I think, of identical twins who ate the exact same diet and amounts but one was healthy and one was starving. At the same caloric intake! It wasn't just one set of twins.

 

The authors suspected that it was due to differing gut biome but didn't know why the kids would have different biomes.

 

There is also the case of the woman who treated her Crohn's disease by fecal transplant from her daughter, who was fat. She recovered from the Crohn's but ended up fat.

 

Neither of these "knock it out of the park" but I think they support the idea that our internal gut biome may make a big difference in calories used by our bodies. I look forward to more research in this direction.

[Joanne]

For me, this article doesn't necessarily show that calories in/calories out doesn't work. I think what it does show is weight loss is really, really hard to maintain. If you aren't REALLY active, your calories needed for the day are sooo minimal.

 

 

 

When people cut calories, they do lose weight. I would be interested to see research on why some people seem much more easily able to regulate their food intake. ?

Nope. I've lived and observed that many people who are overweight or obese don't have a problem with under-activity or "regulating food intake." It is predictable that many peoe won't believe me or agree. My (former) WW Leader didn't.

 

But it is true: I ate less and moved more than many of my thin peers.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Neither of these "knock it out of the park" but I think they support the idea that our internal gut biome may make a big difference in calories used by our bodies. I look forward to more research in this direction.

:iagree:  :iagree:  :iagree:

 

This is not as simple as people make it out to be.  Hormones, gut biomes, metabolism and genetics can all play a part.  

[Jean in Newcastle]

Many obese people are starving themselves to death even though they don't look like it.  Vitamin and mineral deficiencies are very common in people with significant weight problems.  

[busymama7]

I keep eating about this gut biome connection. What can be done about it?

 

ETA: hahaha. I meant hearing. Not eating. But I guess I will leave it ;)

[Jean in Newcastle]

I keep eating about this gut biome connection. What can be done about it?

The gold standard treatment would be a fecal transplant from a healthy thin person.  But insurance doesn't tend to cover that.  I'm taking lots of probiotics and eating fermented foods in the hope that will help me.  

[busymama7]

The gold standard treatment would be a fecal transplant from a healthy thin person. But insurance doesn't tend to cover that. I'm taking lots of probiotics and eating fermented foods in the hope that will help me.

That's what I figured. Thanks.

 

I'm desperate enough that if it was available I'd try it. I will up the probiotics and ferments though. I know I feel better when I do so that has to be something.

[Joanne]

You cant compare to others, especially if you have metabolic syndrome and they don't -- your chemistry is different.

What you eat and when matters as much as quantity. Do you consume low glycemic, nutrient dense food?

Actually, I believe that my weight issues are more like others than many who believe in the "eat less, move more" dogma.

 

I am not commenting on what I eat. I am VERY familiar with what currently held science suggests I should eat. What I do eat can be gleaned from other posts I have written over the years. During my WW duration, I ate 100% on plan, no food "products."

[Bluegoat]

But, looking at anyone who is starving to death.  Obviously low calories in eventually causes dramatic weight loss.

 

That's not really a very useful thing to look at though.  I don't think anyone argues that people who eat massive amounts of calories, or no calories, will not have physical effects follow. 

 

What is useful I think is to look at people who were overweight, but lost it and have kept it off.  Research done on that suggests that people who accomplish that don't go on a diet to lose and then maintain that by eating what most people would consider a normal amount.  Rather, they have to carry on eating a diet of around 1400 calories per day and exersizing far more than the average as well.

 

Now, we could argue that it might be worth it to do that, at least in some cases.  But I think we have to aknowledge that what that means is nothing like what most people would consider a normal way to eat, or a nice way to live in the long term - it means constantly counting calories, a lot of being hungry, and spending a lot of time in the gym.

 

I've never been inclined to be overweight, I tend to lose it if I am stressed, but I can tell you that if I had to eat 1400 a day to maintain my weight, I probably wouldn't manage it, and I don't know that I would try, because I don't really want to live like that.

[Bluegoat]

 

I cant agree that Ingesting foods that are out of season in ones immediate area is gluttony....those that live in the north can certainly benefit from, say, citrus fruits. For ex. British experience with scurvy.

 

It isn't necessarily, but it can be.  eating a lot of imported food is not very energy efficient, among other things.  Where I live a lot of the produce imported in winter is from California.  Not only is a lot of fuel spent on moving it, the farming practices to supply so many are not sustainable, and it is essentially exporting water from a place afflicted with drought.  I pay for that, but at a price that really does not come close to accounting for all the damage that comes from those things.  Our food system is set up to allow that, and it is a kind of gluttony.

 

There are ways to avoid scurvy in pretty much every environment humans can sucessfully live in.

[busymama7]

That's not really a very useful thing to look at though. I don't think anyone argues that people who eat massive amounts of calories, or no calories, will not have physical effects follow.

 

What is useful I think is to look at people who were overweight, but lost it and have kept it off. Research done on that suggests that people who accomplish that don't go on a diet to lose and then maintain that by eating what most people would consider a normal amount. Rather, they have to carry on eating a diet of around 1400 calories per day and exersizing far more than the average as well.

 

Now, we could argue that it might be worth it to do that, at least in some cases. But I think we have to aknowledge that what that means is nothing like what most people would consider a normal way to eat, or a nice way to live in the long term - it means constantly counting calories, a lot of being hungry, and spending a lot of time in the gym.

 

I've never been inclined to be overweight, I tend to lose it if I am stressed, but I can tell you that if I had to eat 1400 a day to maintain my weight, I probably wouldn't manage it, and I don't know that I would try, because I don't really want to live like that.

Thank you for that validation. It is a depressing place to be to realize how many years I have ahead of me(hopefully) and how much I would have to live in depravation to lose and then maintain.

[kiana]

Thank you for that validation. It is a depressing place to be to realize how many years I have ahead of me(hopefully) and how much I would have to live in deprivation to lose and then maintain.

Busymama, especially if you haven't yo-yo'd a lot before, you may end up being one of the more fortunate few. It is at least worth a shot. For me I found that a minor variation of no-S along with daily weigh-ins allowed me to maintain weight loss without feeling constantly deprived and miserable. I realize I haven't hit the 5-year mark yet, but I've been out of obese for 3 and still slightly dropping, although very slowly now.

 

If you've already tried everything and nothing has worked, feel free to ignore me.

[SKL]

I don't know anyone who is a "glutton" in my eyes, but I know many people who eat too much, because they don't seem to understand what "too much" is.  These people also feed their loved ones "too much" and make it harder for all involved to stay fit.

 

I wish we knew how to educate people about how much is too much, without making them feel badly about themselves.

[busymama7]

Busymama, especially if you haven't yo-yo'd a lot before, you may end up being one of the more fortunate few. It is at least worth a shot. For me I found that a minor variation of no-S along with daily weigh-ins allowed me to maintain weight loss without feeling constantly deprived and miserable. I realize I haven't hit the 5-year mark yet, but I've been out of obese for 3 and still slightly dropping, although very slowly now.

 

If you've already tried everything and nothing has worked, feel free to ignore me.

Thank you. :) I didnt know that.

 

I have not lost any weight really ever but have steadily gained over the past 19 years and 10 babies. I actually lose in pregnancy while growing big healthy babies but then gain like crazy while nursing. My nursing and prenancies overlap so I haven't yet discovered if weaning would allow easier loss.

 

The most I've ever lost was 10 lbs the first few week of THM but then I couldn't lose any more. I haven't tried very hard though since my last baby 7 months ago. I feel less tired etc on higher protein and fat and lower carb but I find it very hard to cook for a large family that way and so end up eating the carbs I'm feeding them since they are all skinny skinny and I don't want to take the time(or it is an impossibility) to cook different for me.

 

ETA: what is your variation? I struggle with sugar and only have success if I NEVER have it but then inevitably go back to it since I don't like the long term outlook of never having it :/

[kiana]

ETA: what is your variation? I struggle with sugar and only have success if I NEVER have it but then inevitably go back to it since I don't like the long term outlook of never having it :/

 

Combination of stuff that just works better for me and psychological tricks.

 

Seconds -- if I am genuinely still hungry after I have put all the food away and washed up and had a drink, I will reheat a small serving. It is important to be able to distinguish hunger from "man that was delicious". I feel this works better for me than a blanket ban on seconds, because when I was not eating seconds I was serving extra large firsts in case I got hungry. Putting the food away and having a drink seems to add closure and most of the time I do not need seconds.

 

Sweets/Snacks -- I only buy my favorite sweets and snacks in single-size servings on S-days. That way I am not trying to do some crap like eat one handful of potato chips and seal the bag back up. It is never going to happen and I have given up pretending it will. I buy the 50 cent 1-ounce bag of potato chips on the day I am going to eat it, and it is delicious.

 

Fake sugar -- I do still drink diet soda. It hasn't hurt me so far. It would be better to give it up, I am sure, but every time I tried I ended up backsliding. I'm going to make another effort this summer -- we'll see.

 

Meals -- I do eat two meals a day because it just works better for me. I feel happier and fuller with two large meals and no breakfast. I like to go to bed on a full stomach because I sleep better. YMMV. I do eat breakfast on S-days but that's because S-days are either family holidays or heavy exercise days.

 

I will warn that weight loss is much slower on this. You are not going to see an "Oh my gosh I lost 10 lbs in a week". I am gently drifting downwards -- but this is something that I can genuinely live with for the rest of my life, and I feel it is much better to be gently drifting downwards than to be crashing off 40 lbs and gaining back 60.

[purplejackmama]

Whoa! Anyone read the comments on the article page? Yikes! There's people saying obesity is directly related to lower IQ scores, overweight people deserve their lot in life, etc etc.

[kiana]

Whoa! Anyone read the comments on the article page? Yikes! There's people saying obesity is directly related to lower IQ scores, overweight people deserve their lot in life, etc etc.

The internet is full of trolls and jackasses. :(

[kiwik]

I have been a weight that was in the mid healthy range and maintained until I started SSRIs busted my knee and then had two kids. I am fairly sure I could do it again BUT I am not in place now where I can put weight loss and maintenance first in my list of priorities. For me to do it it has to be first, exercise would have to come before the kids, no foods I have a weakness for could be in the house and I would avoid social situations with food. I am a single working mum with 2 young kids and that is not really feasible. I am trying to exercise more and be more mindful of what I eat but I cannot dedicate my life to it.

[kiwik]

Just go away

[ktgrok]

 

 

When people cut calories, they do lose weight.  I would be interested to see research on why some people seem much more easily able to regulate their food intake. I have one kid that will turn up her nose at ice cream if she is full.  I have another kid that will literally keep eating ice cream until she pukes.  They have been raised in the same home.  Why the difference?

 

This is an excellent question and one the science needs to answer. The one that doesn't want the ice cream isn't morally superior. She isn't restraining herself in the face of temptation. She isn't showing will power. she just doesn't want the ice cream. 

 

yet so often, people that fit that category, shame those who do want the ice cream as giving into temptation, when the one that didn't want it was never actually tempted. You can't get uppity about avoiding temptation if you aren't actually facing temptation. 

 

Drives me bonkers. 

 

My son, my ex husband, my ex FIL, my mother until she had cancer, her mother, they were naturally thin. Ate what they wanted, when they wanted, and maintained a slim physique, in some cases slightly underweight. Other people, like myself and my husband, eat what we want when we want, and end up obese. That's not a moral failing. We are both doing the same thing in regards to will power. Actually, I'm showing way more will powerthan say, my ex, because I actually don't eat what I want when i want, because i'd be even more obese if I did. I'm restraining myself on a daily basis. But yet, here we are. And the tv and the radio and the doctors tell me it's about will power and personal habits. 

 

Well, when they are finding that gut bacteria can make mice fat or obese, it makes me truly understand how much we don't know. The gut bacteria in particular. Think about the parasitic creatures that can make say, an insect do something it doesn't want to do, to better serve the parasite. I think that is what we will find with gut bacteria. Some people have gut microbes saying "feed me, feed me, feed me" and others don't. 

 

that said, it definitely is a disease, just not one of will power. I don't buy that for a heartbeat. I know too many very strong people that are obese. 

[kiwik]

My skinny stepmother always thought it was a moral/character issue until her third son started putting on weight.

[ktgrok]

But, looking at anyone who is starving to death.  Obviously low calories in eventually causes dramatic weight loss.

 

Yes, but they are obviously also hungry. Most people won't starve to death in the face of plentiful food. The amount of calories required to lose weight for many obese people is very very low. Low enough that they would be constantly hungry. After weight loss surgery they typically eat 600-800 calories a day to lose weight. That would be nearly impossible to tolerate without the surgery. 

 

It's been shown that once you are obese your body wants to stay at the higher rate. So when you lose down to say, 160lbs, you have to eat way less than someone that was always 160lbs. 

[ktgrok]

Focus on fit, not on fat. That's my mantra and I'm sticking to it.

 

It's entirely possible to be skinny and unhealthy as all get out.

 

Let's turn our focus to fitness and strength instead of size.

 

I agree, to a point. the problem becomes, as I am finding out, that as your size increases it is very hard to stay fit. I used to run. Now even walking hurts my knee and my feet. Yes, even in properly fitted shoes at a running store. Trying to do yoga around my massive stomach is nearly impossible in some positions. I modify, but don't get the same benefit I used to. I'm getting out of breath doing simple things, just from carrying the extra 80plus pounds around. As I get heavier it is harder to exercise, which means I get heavier, it's a vicious cycle. Right now I'm focusing on aquafit, but even walking around the house aggravates my feet at this point. 

[SKL]

I agree, it's harder to stay active-fit as one puts on weight.  Especially as one gets older and arthritis etc. combines with the extra weight to slow us down.

 

Also, isn't there research that links hormonal issues with overweight (for females at least)?

[Carrie12345]

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/03/diets_do_not_work_the_thin_evidence_that_losing_weight_makes_you_healthier.3.html

 

I disagree with "being against" classifying obesity as a disease. In the article, they take issue with the AMA having classified it as a disease. I fully, absolutely, 100% believe it IS a disease. There is something much more going on with my body than "calories in, calories out."

 

My favorite part:

 

The idea that obesity is a choice, that people who are obese lack self-discipline or are gluttonous or lazy, is deeply ingrained in our public psyche. And there are other costs to this kind of judgmentalism.

 

I can agree that there's often much more going on, but I'm not sure how that makes obesity a disease instead of a symptom/manifestation of other issues (which may or may not be diseases.)

 

For example, not being able to get out of bed is unhealthy, but it isn't a disease.  One might not be able to get out of bed for many reasons; mental health illness, physical injury, disease...  Stuck in bed is the symptom/manifestation.

[Bluegoat]

I have been a weight that was in the mid healthy range and maintained until I started SSRIs busted my knee and then had two kids. I am fairly sure I could do it again BUT I am not in place now where I can put weight loss and maintenance first in my list of priorities. For me to do it it has to be first, exercise would have to come before the kids, no foods I have a weakness for could be in the house and I would avoid social situations with food. I am a single working mum with 2 young kids and that is not really feasible. I am trying to exercise more and be more mindful of what I eat but I cannot dedicate my life to it.

 

One of the meds my dad is on makes him put on a lot of weight - I think it is for anxiety?  When he goes off it, he loses something like 50, 75 pounds without making any real effort to change his diet.  Unfortunatly, it also tends to make him into a serious insomniac and kind of crazy.  He's diabetic as well, and has high cholesterol, so it isn't an insignificant issue.

 

On the other hand, he's said straight out that he is not willing to modify his diet in any way, he expects his drugs to do the job for him, which is also pretty typical.  I am disopsed to be sympathetic to his issues with the meds, but man his attitude of being completely unwilling to take any behavior responsibility at all makes it hard to maintain that.

[TranquilMind]

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/03/diets_do_not_work_the_thin_evidence_that_losing_weight_makes_you_healthier.3.html

 

I disagree with "being against" classifying obesity as a disease. In the article, they take issue with the AMA having classified it as a disease. I fully, absolutely, 100% believe it IS a disease. There is something much more going on with my body than "calories in, calories out."

 

My favorite part:

 

The idea that obesity is a choice, that people who are obese lack self-discipline or are gluttonous or lazy, is deeply ingrained in our public psyche. And there are other costs to this kind of judgmentalism.

I do not believe it is a disease at all.  ALS is a disease. 

 

However, I do not believe it is a choice either.  It is a byproduct of the contamination of the food supply with chemicals and other non-food products, in my view.  It is affecting hormonal levels which control weight. 

[ktgrok]

I do not believe it is a disease at all.  ALS is a disease. 

 

However, I do not believe it is a choice either.  It is a byproduct of the contamination of the food supply with chemicals and other non-food products, in my view.  It is affecting hormonal levels which control weight. 

 

Not sure if I agree it isn't a disease. It starts to act on the body, all that extra fat. It becomes a metabolic condition causing all sorts of havoc. At that level, it isn't just a symptom, it's a cause of other problems.

[Joanne]

Yes, there is.

 

Here is my anecdote:

I put on 15 lbs one year in my late 30s, out of the blue. Everyone told me I was lazy. I became fatigued, and anemia developed. Several doctors later, someone checked my vitamin d (which I know diabetics that have 2 freezers plus a fridge to store the weekly processed food. I also know one who is losing his extremeties, piece by piece as he is end stage.so, to me, it was worth the experimenting and the gardening despite the naysayers.

 

Heigh Ho,

 

This post was a very helpful personal share. Thank you. It overlaps much of what have been/am going through.

 

With regard to ice cream, I have noticed on my traditional low carb (which can include heavy whipping cream), I stall. I *think* I also stall when I eat greek yogurt. That inspired me to do a Whole 30, trying to "re-set." It was an ok transition, since my diet from Jan 15 has been primarily meat and (non starchy) vegetables.

[Scarlett]

I don't know anyone who is a "glutton" in my eyes, but I know many people who eat too much, because they don't seem to understand what "too much" is. These people also feed their loved ones "too much" and make it harder for all involved to stay fit.

 

I wish we knew how to educate people about how much is too much, without making them feel badly about themselves.

My mom isn't over weight....but your post made me think about her bowls of ice cream. Easily 4 servings. Topped with caramel and pecans. At least she knows to cut out the ice cream when she starts gaining a few pounds.

[Scarlett]

Yes, there is.

 

Here is my anecdote:

I put on 15 lbs one year in my late 30s, out of the blue. Everyone told me I was lazy. I became fatigued, and anemia developed. Several doctors later, someone checked my vitamin d (which is a hormone, not a vitamin) and found I was in single Digits

Wow. 2 years ago mine was 19 and I was having crashing fatigue. Can't imagine how bad you must have felt. I think that may have been when I started gaining weight. Hmmmm.

[Jean in Newcastle]

Re. the whole health thing as a goal.

 

Exercise is good for me.  There are specific recommendations for cardio and strength training but of course that will depend on your fitness level to begin with.  But intentional movement is always good.  

 

Eating vegetables are good for me.  Sure I could have an allergy to something that would make that not good or might not be able to eat certain things because of medical conditions but overall increasing vegetables are a good healthy thing.  Same for fruits though at smaller amounts.  That's why you get the government slogans "Five a day " etc.

 

Eating healthy fats are good for me.  I've had more and more doctors finally catch up to that recommendation.  

 

Eating lean meats are good for me but are not without controversy!  I have no ethical objections to it so I will stick with it being good for me.

 

A 40/30/30 ratio of macro-nutrients are good for me.  That is 40% carbs / 30% protein / 30% fats.  This ratio has been found to be optimal for bloodsugar regulation (which affects health tremendously because insulin is a fat storer and has various bad affects on the body).  Some 40/30/30 plans are the Zone Diet or the Formula.  As an aside, I found the Formula to be easiest to use, was not hungry at all on it and did lose some weight at least initially.

 

Processed foods are bad for me.  That doesn't mean that I don't eat some, but overall they are not good for health.

 

I've probably forgotten some good things but my point is that I can do all of these things and not lose weight.  I can 100% say that because I've done it.  On paper, I'm stellar!  But I don't lose the weight.  But I do all of these things anyway because they are good for my health and because losing weight is not my only goal.  I still hope that the cumulative effects of these things will help with the weight.  Right now I'm being super strict on testing my bloodsugars because keeping them from spiking is important.  I'm hoping it will help with that stubborn weight but even if not. . . it's healthy to have steady bloodsugar levels toward the lower end of the normal range.  

[Murphy101]

My mom isn't over weight....but your post made me think about her bowls of ice cream. Easily 4 servings. Topped with caramel and pecans. At least she knows to cut out the ice cream when she starts gaining a few pounds.

My kids eat like (quantity wise - mostly healthy bc they live here, but it's always quantity) that and they are twigs. I ate like that and was slender to average until I hit 38 and then it was BAM! Body decided to make up for lost time. And it was at a time when my health declined making it really hard to do the standard thing and it sneaked up. I swear I went from great to whoa! Wtheck did all that come from?! And why didn't anyone say anything?!

[Greta]

... but the calorie-in-calorie-out paradigm really bugs me. It's way too simplistic. It assumes we are build like, say, a car engine rather than living beings with incredibly complex hormonal systems.

 

Just had to say how strongly I agree with you!

 

First of all, people make the mistake of assuming that you can change one variable while keeping the other constant, but you generally can't. If you lower your caloric intake, your body reduces the number of calories it burns. If you increase the amount of calories you burn, your appetite increases in response. So no, it is definitely NOT as simple as calories in versus calories out.

 

The other aspect which gets ignored/denied by CICO is that not all calories are created equal. Your body does not do the same thing with a calorie of protein as what it does with a calorie of fat, or a calorie of carbohydrate. About 70-90% of the protein you eat, if memory serves, gets used for "building" not for fuel. Carbohydrate is a quick burning fuel that must be used almost immediately, or it gets stored, mostly as fat. Fat is a slow-burning fuel. So a calorie is not a calorie.

 

I like what Tom Naugton said about this in Fat Head: when skinny people and fat people sit down to a meal, they do the same thing. They eat until they're full.

 

I also heard once that there's a simpler and more truthful equation than CICO:

 

Hunger = calories in

 

We don't get fat by forcing ourselves to eat more food than we need or want. We get fat when our appetite (sensations of hunger versus sensations of satiety) malfunctions, and/or when we have metabolic problems.