Weight loss - some honest data to consider

[Laurie4b]

I am guessing that there might even be a difference between obese and morbidly obese people in terms of how tenaciously their body resists weight loss. 

 

Obese is 30+. Morbidly obese is BMI of 40+ . 

[Annie G]

But, do people do this? This is the part where I do see calories as an important aspect of the equation. Let's say "Jane" is going to use a tracker like Spark People or something (not wven sure what the latest app or thing is), and she has determined that she wants to aim for a daily caloric intake of 1600-1800, with 1800 being at the tippety-top daily allowance. If she thinks, "not giving up my morning donut and caramel coolatta at Dunkins," she is clearly going to bust her caloric goals before she ever reaches dinner, regardless of the other negative body chemistry effects from eating the simple carbs. If you munch an entire package of Snackwells, you would bust calorie goals for weight loss no matter whether it also incites more eating or not.

 

So, I don't even understand how a person could eat in a consistently junky fashion if they were committed to a CICO goal. I agree that it is very helpful to understand the rolls of protein and fat in satiety; it was a huge revelation to me when I did learn this. BUT, I do think the CICO concept still "works" in the sense that starving people are never fat. If a person's food is entirely controlled by an outside group or person (in the most negative, a POW; in the more positive, say, a marine at boot camp), they will get thinner.

 

So while I don't think every caloric source is equal, I do still see over consumption and under expenditure of calories as an important part of the equation.

 

Yeah, I do know people who eat junk all the time and keep their caloric intake below 1800, thinking that calories are calories. 

 

As an example: 

A daily Mcdonald's menu

 

Breakfast- egg Mcmuffin and plain coffee 300 calories

 

Lunch- McChicken 370

medium fries 340

diet soda 0

 

Dinner- Filet of fish (Hey, fish is healthy, right?) 390

medium fries 340

diet soda 0

 

daily calories: 1740

[Pawz4me]

Yeah, I do know people who eat junk all the time and keep their caloric intake below 1800, thinking that calories are calories. 

 

As an example: 

A daily Mcdonald's menu

 

Breakfast- egg Mcmuffin and plain coffee 300 calories

 

Lunch- McChicken 370

medium fries 340

diet soda 0

 

Dinner- Filet of fish (Hey, fish is healthy, right?) 390

medium fries 340

diet soda 0

 

daily calories: 1740

 

But people do lose weight eating nothing but McDonalds.

 

[ktgrok]

Joanne disagreed with my use of "many or most" people and said that she believes it is the opposite: many or most people will not get thinner by eatting less and choosing differently.

 

I took her to mean people most obese people, I could be wrong. 

[Guest]

For the record, I know a few fat marathoners.

 

And again, that works at an extreme when starving. But I'm willing to say that there is selection bias when it comes to exercise, military, etc. You had to be within a certain weight to get into the military, so you already probably have a pretty well working metabolism. If you are morbidly obese you probably aren't taking up extreme ultra marathons or iron man triathalons. So not sure we can say that the exercise will make obese people slender.

 

And without going into starvation, yes, many obese people can't lose weight because their metabolism fights them, unless they utilize other strategies. They just get more and more efficient if they stay in "normal" weight loss calorie guidelines.

Marathoning wasn't the sport(s) I was thinking of, but no matter. I was thinking more of whole-body involved, very active sports, like rock climbing or snowboarding. Also, while there is some selection bias because people who are already morbidly obese don't scale cliff faces, it is also true that they are not getting fatter while engaging in this sport.

 

In the military, you not only must complete your physical drills daily, your food intake is limited. This was the point I was making. Nobody gets fatter at bootcamp. The demands are intense and food is not readily available; eating is to be disciplined because in a military emergency, you can't have soldiers looking for a sugar fix.

 

My point of view focuses on prevention, no doubt because prevention is the mode I have operated in for the past 30 years. I get that the morbidly obese are not at prevention. Prevention has long sailed. At that point, the MO must deal with what is. It may be that the only option left at some point is surgery. But, because I think in terms of prevention, I don't want to see the day when half the population of the US over age 30 will have no choice but undergo surgery. Surgery is a drastic solution to a drastic problem. I would like to see "drastic" never become an issue.

 

It is why I would so much rather see young people and kids being brought up with a much better understanding of all these facets of weight and physical health. This is why I think it is a much healthier (on a national scale) trend to have people understand caloric intake, muscle tone and metabolism, the effects of sugar and the need for unadulterated foods, than it would be to teach younger generations that there's something going on in obesity and we just don't really know what it is.

 

Personally, I think weight-bearing exercise is the best-kept secret in female long-term weight and health maintenance. It should not be a secret! Ladies, strength training with weight resistance is the freakin' Fountain of Youth! It sets your metabolism high and it keeps it there for a long time, even when you take breaks from weight training. It increases bone density, helping to prevent Osteoporosis. It defies many signs of aging common to women: the swing-low, sweet chariot backs of the arms, the sack of potatoes belly, the dreaded Long Butt. If I had my way, this is what I would teach every young woman in her late teens, early twenties: build up all major muscle groups with weight training. Anyway...sorry for the soap box. I got carried away.

[ktgrok]

I am guessing that there might even be a difference between obese and morbidly obese people in terms of how tenaciously their body resists weight loss. 

 

Obese is 30+. Morbidly obese is BMI of 40+ .

 

True story. 

[ktgrok]

Marathoning wasn't the sport(s) I was thinking of, but no matter. I was thinking more of whole-body involved, very active sports, like rock climbing or snowboarding. Also, while there is some selection bias because people who are already morbidly obese don't scale cliff faces, it is also true that they are not getting fatter while engaging in this sport.

 

 Right, but they have, I assume healthy metabolisms to begin with. 

 

In the military, you not only must complete your physical drills daily, your food intake is limited. This was the point I was making. Nobody gets fatter at bootcamp. The demands are intense and food is not readily available; eating is to be disciplined because in a military emergency, you can't have soldiers looking for a sugar fix.

Again, people with healthy metabolisms. 

My point of view focuses on prevention, no doubt because prevention is the mode I have operated in for the past 30 years.

 

 

 

Ok, we really are talking past eachother. At no point did I think the main point of this thread was prevention.I have been discussing people who are obese and need to lose weight :)

[Guest]

But people do lose weight eating nothing but McDonalds.

 

Fascinating!

 

But of course, my frugal side screams, "What??? That's so expensive!" ;)

[Guest]

Ok, we really are talking past eachother. At no point did I think the main point of this thread was prevention.I have been discussing people who are obese and need to lose weight :)

Ah, well. I think I'm doing well in this thread because, as far as I know, thirty people have not put me on ignore.

 

I decided to join the thread because of discussion about prevention and the role of calories. Besides that, there is a long continuum of "obese." I do think "Eat less and choose differently" can work for the vast majority of people, whether we are talking a ten-pound baby-fat weight adjustment, fifty pounds that crept on over four pregnancy, or some on the 75+ obese side. Certainly we're getting into complex territory when the subject is over 100 lbs and the obese condition has lasted for decades. I don't imagine in my dizziest daydream to know what that is like or how to repair it, nor all the factors that caused and retained the weight gain. But it is the idea that caloric intake making no difference or having no role that brings me back for another post.

[creekland]

Personally, I think weight-bearing exercise is the best-kept secret in female long-term weight and health maintenance. It should not be a secret! Ladies, strength training with weight resistance is the freakin' Fountain of Youth! It sets your metabolism high and it keeps it there for a long time, even when you take breaks from weight training. It increases bone density, helping to prevent Osteoporosis. It defies many signs of aging common to women: the swing-low, sweet chariot backs of the arms, the sack of potatoes belly, the dreaded Long Butt. If I had my way, this is what I would teach every young woman in her late teens, early twenties: build up all major muscle groups with weight training. Anyway...sorry for the soap box. I got carried away.

 

Well, at least as far as bone density is concerned, I think farms work nicely.  At one of the recent local screenings mine ended up with a score of 3 (and I was told that was very good for my age).  The IMT test gave a vascular age of 37 (I'm 48) so I think I'm ok there too. ;)

 

I think y'all need to come here in the mornings or evenings and assist with getting weeds out of my pastures. (Envision my best Tom Sawyer impersonation.) In another month there will be pony training opportunities too. 

 

Of course, I also have a nice Farmer's Tan, but I'm ok with that.  I've never wanted to lay out on a beach or head to a tanning salon to erase natural lines.

[ktgrok]

Ah, well. I think I'm doing well in this thread because, as far as I know, thirty people have not put me on ignore.

 

I decided to join the thread because of discussion about prevention and the role of calories. Besides that, there is a long continuum of "obese." I do think "Eat less and choose differently" can work for the vast majority of people, whether we are talking a ten-pound baby-fat weight adjustment, fifty pounds that crept on over four pregnancy, or some on the 75+ obese side. Certainly we're getting into complex territory when the subject is over 100 lbs and the obese condition has lasted for decades. I don't imagine in my dizziest daydream to know what that is like or how to repair it, nor all the factors that caused and retained the weight gain. But it is the idea that caloric intake making no difference or having no role that brings me back for another post.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that caloric intake makes NO difference...just that it often doesn't make enough difference to be the main focus, once someone is significantly overweight. It has a role, but on its own won't work for most people. That's where the "choose different" comes in, and that I do agree matters a lot. However, when people say CICO, they USUALLY don't mean choose differently, they mean that it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you stay in your calorie allotment. And on the flip side, I think those that say it's JUST about what you eat, and calories don't matter are also wrong. I think it's both, plus a few other things. 

 

And given that MOST people already know the saying of eat less move more, and yet so many people are overweight/obese and getting worse every year, I think if that saying were going to help it already would have. 

 

At least we are over the low fat thing mostly, that did so much damage. Twizzlers were marked as "low fat" and marketed as health foods!

[Greta]

Personally, I think weight-bearing exercise is the best-kept secret in female long-term weight and health maintenance. It should not be a secret! Ladies, strength training with weight resistance is the freakin' Fountain of Youth! It sets your metabolism high and it keeps it there for a long time, even when you take breaks from weight training. It increases bone density, helping to prevent Osteoporosis. It defies many signs of aging common to women: the swing-low, sweet chariot backs of the arms, the sack of potatoes belly, the dreaded Long Butt. If I had my way, this is what I would teach every young woman in her late teens, early twenties: build up all major muscle groups with weight training. Anyway...sorry for the soap box. I got carried away.

Quill, do you follow a particular program or plan? I did this one for awhile: http://stronglifts.com/5x5/ I was making more progress with it than with any other plan I'd ever tried. But then I got thrown off track by a huge upsurge in migraines, and even though that's better now, I've never gotten back on track. :(

[creekland]

Quill, do you follow a particular program or plan? I did this one for awhile: http://stronglifts.com/5x5/ I was making more progress with it than with any other plan I'd ever tried. But then I got thrown off track by a huge upsurge in migraines, and even though that's better now, I've never gotten back on track. :(

 

So... you're not going to come help with pasture weeds?  (sigh)  I miss having my three younguns around.  Some of these jobs went far more quickly with 4 or 5 humans attacking them.  But it helps with CO and more...  When I had my younguns around (helping) I was gaining weight.

[Annie G]

But people do lose weight eating nothing but McDonalds.

 

 

Yeah, some people do. But it's not healthy food, and for many of us, the carb counts alone would stall weight loss. 

[Sarah CB]

I know lots of people for whom that worked - in the long term. They lost solely from eating less and moving more, and never regained.

 

As we discussed earlier: no, that does not work for everybody. Some people have metabolic conditions that make this impossible. But for many people who are not yet severely obese, eating less and moving more has caused weight loss and worked just fine. Myself included.

 

This thread has made me more interested in what other people have in their grocery carts.  Obviously, this is about as far away from a scientific study as it could be, but what I observed was that people who look fit and healthy tend to have a lot of fresh produce in their carts and very few packaged foods.  People who do not look very fit tend to have a lot of packaged foods - often numerous boxes of things like pop tarts, sugary cereals, cookies, etc.  

 

I've never been particularly interested in other people's carts before, but I was feeling bad about my own opinion of the CICO - that it works (based on my own experience).  After reading all of the posts against CICO I thought I'd see lots of people that didn't look very fit with carts full of very healthy foods, but I didn't.  Again - certainly not a scientific study but I was surprised at how consistent the cart contents were.

[regentrude]

This thread has made me more interested in what other people have in their grocery carts.  Obviously, this is about as far away from a scientific study as it could be, but what I observed was that people who look fit and healthy tend to have a lot of fresh produce in their carts and very few packaged foods.  People who do not look very fit tend to have a lot of packaged foods - often numerous boxes of things like pop tarts, sugary cereals, cookies, etc.  

 

I've never been particularly interested in other people's carts before, but I was feeling bad about my own opinion of the CICO - that it works (based on my own experience).  After reading all of the posts against CICO I thought I'd see lots of people that didn't look very fit with carts full of very healthy foods, but I didn't.  Again - certainly not a scientific study but I was surprised at how consistent the cart contents were.

 

That's what I see at Aldi's every single week...but I predict that we will get attacked for stating this observation.

[ktgrok]

This thread has made me more interested in what other people have in their grocery carts.  Obviously, this is about as far away from a scientific study as it could be, but what I observed was that people who look fit and healthy tend to have a lot of fresh produce in their carts and very few packaged foods.  People who do not look very fit tend to have a lot of packaged foods - often numerous boxes of things like pop tarts, sugary cereals, cookies, etc.  

 

I've never been particularly interested in other people's carts before, but I was feeling bad about my own opinion of the CICO - that it works (based on my own experience).  After reading all of the posts against CICO I thought I'd see lots of people that didn't look very fit with carts full of very healthy foods, but I didn't.  Again - certainly not a scientific study but I was surprised at how consistent the cart contents were.

 

Well, are you measuring calorie intake or quality of food?  I don't think anyone is saying low quality high sugar/carb food is good for you. 

[PeachyDoodle]

I am guessing that there might even be a difference between obese and morbidly obese people in terms of how tenaciously their body resists weight loss. 

 

Obese is 30+. Morbidly obese is BMI of 40+ . 

 

I was morbidly obese. BMI of 46.6.

 

Personally, I think weight-bearing exercise is the best-kept secret in female long-term weight and health maintenance. It should not be a secret! Ladies, strength training with weight resistance is the freakin' Fountain of Youth! It sets your metabolism high and it keeps it there for a long time, even when you take breaks from weight training. It increases bone density, helping to prevent Osteoporosis. It defies many signs of aging common to women: the swing-low, sweet chariot backs of the arms, the sack of potatoes belly, the dreaded Long Butt. If I had my way, this is what I would teach every young woman in her late teens, early twenties: build up all major muscle groups with weight training. Anyway...sorry for the soap box. I got carried away.

 

YES!!!!!!!!!!!! Squats and dead lifts, ladies -- that's where it's at!!! :coolgleamA:

[Guest]

Quill, do you follow a particular program or plan? I did this one for awhile: http://stronglifts.com/5x5/ I was making more progress with it than with any other plan I'd ever tried. But then I got thrown off track by a huge upsurge in migraines, and even though that's better now, I've never gotten back on track. :(

I like this book: http://www.amazon.com/Strength-Training-Women-Calories-Strong/dp/0756605954/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1441759944&sr=1-3&keywords=strength+training+for+women

I generally make my own programs, but this is one of the better books I've used. I like books that were written for women specifically, because women have different needs than men and most often have different goals. I invested a tremendous amount of work in my arms, trapss and delts and I have seen a big payoff there. Women typically get little to no intentional exercise of the Triceps and it quickly turns flabby and shapeless in the 35+ time period.

[Abeille]

I'm not going to question what you're seeing in people's carts, but I will suggest that just because it's in the cart doesn't mean they're eating it. If you saw me at Aldi, you'd think what's in my cart reinforces the idea that we unhealthy folks (I'm morbidly obese, well beyond any numbers I've seen mentioned in the thread thus far) are just too dumb or weak-willed to pick healthy foods like the fit and healthy folks do. You won't see many fruits and veggies in that Aldi cart because at my store the quality is subpar and the prices aren't great; we buy fruits and veggies elsewhere, in large quantities. My cart usually does have packaged foods in it, though we don't buy sugary cereals, junk food, etc. But guess what? I don't eat any of the processed, less-than-healthy foods you'll see in my cart. My husband does; he's an adult and I don't police what he eats. My three teenaged boys eat healthier than many of their peers, but one in particular is autistic and exceptionally picky and we do choose to feed him what he will eat rather than watch him vomit trying to force down healthier choices. I personally eat low-carb, because severely limiting carbs (even whole-grain, made from scratch ones) makes me feel better that eating other styles of eating do. I have more energy, I don't have constant hunger, and I don't need to take heartburn medication daily to avoid waking up with stomach acid coming back up my throat. I don't lose much weight, but at least I seem to have stopped the unrelenting weight gain that happens when I eat any other way. I eat lots of non-starchy veggies, and everything I eat is made from scratch because I don't trust the convenience foods marketed to low-carb eaters. I track my portion sizes, calories, and macros and by the damn numbers I should be losing weight steadily. I haven't given up yet, not quite, but I completely understand those who have.

 

I rarely talk about my struggles to lose weight both because I'm an outlier, and also because I'm very very tired of not being heard (or not being believed) when I share my experiences. CICO most definitely does not work for me. I wish it did.

 

[Pawz4me]

I like this book: http://www.amazon.com/Strength-Training-Women-Calories-Strong/dp/0756605954/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1441759944&sr=1-3&keywords=strength+training+for+women

I generally make my own programs, but this is one of the better books I've used. I like books that were written for women specifically, because women have different needs than men and most often have different goals. I invested a tremendous amount of work in my arms, trapss and delts and I have seen a big payoff there. Women typically get little to no intentional exercise of the Triceps and it quickly turns flabby and shapeless in the 35+ time period.

I have that book, too!

[mommymilkies]

That's a very small sample size and there are so many factors.  I do NOT buy processed foods except rarely if we are going on a trip and I need shelf stable foods, or frozen pizzas when we were moving.  I buy exclusively whole foods.  Yet I am overweight despite trying about everything under the sun, including prolonged very low calorie diets.  I'm a foodie and about as snobby about butter, salt, and greens as it is possible to be.  My kids even have been known to ask for smoked Hawaiian salt instead when we visit family.  I ration out my 21 grain organic bread like the apocalypse is nigh.  We buy the organic wild berries and raw nuts in bulk when we go to the "city". But if you judged me off a rare trip to Aldi before a road trip or me buying for a food drive, then yes, you'd see a different view. ;)

 

And let's remember there is an issue with poverty, food selection, and obesity.  If you don't have proper cooking supplies or appliances, you are not going to be able to eat as healthy. If you don't have a working refrigerator, or time between your jobs, then maybe you shouldn't be judged for buying convenience foods.  I know that I can buy a whole lot more cheap processed food than healthy food.  For the price of a package of salad for my family, I can buy 4 meals of mac n cheese with Little Debbies for breakfast for a week.  If your budget is super tight, you're going to pick more food over the healthier expensive options.  And not everybody is prepared with the life skills needed for preparing healthier food.  

 

One feminist view on classism and food.  I am not saying this is the ultimate article on the subject, and feel free to add your own, but it's an interesting view, and pretty spot on from just my experience. Maybe less judgment for what's in the cart, and more empathy? 

[kiana]

re: weight training

 

I did do lifts for a while, but I got really inconsistent with heading to the gym. I just hate having to go get dressed in "workout clothes" and proper shoes and all that.

 

I switched to the http://www.startbodyweight.com/program and saw great results there, and then eventually to the reddit.com/r/bodyweightfitness program, which is very similar. I have been seeing awesome physical results from it, muscles popping out all over the place. I recommend them both highly.

[Greta]

So... you're not going to come help with pasture weeds? (sigh) I miss having my three younguns around. Some of these jobs went far more quickly with 4 or 5 humans attacking them. But it helps with CO and more... When I had my younguns around (helping) I was gaining weight.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that sounds like the kind of thing that could involve sunburns, insect bites, and other unpleasantness. So, regretfully, I'm going to have to decline. :) You probably don't really want to share all of that good calorie-burning, anyway, right? ;)

[Greta]

I like this book: http://www.amazon.com/Strength-Training-Women-Calories-Strong/dp/0756605954/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1441759944&sr=1-3&keywords=strength+training+for+women

I generally make my own programs, but this is one of the better books I've used. I like books that were written for women specifically, because women have different needs than men and most often have different goals. I invested a tremendous amount of work in my arms, trapss and delts and I have seen a big payoff there. Women typically get little to no intentional exercise of the Triceps and it quickly turns flabby and shapeless in the 35+ time period.

Awesome, thank you Danielle!

[Guest]

re: weight training

 

I did do lifts for a while, but I got really inconsistent with heading to the gym. I just hate having to go get dressed in "workout clothes" and proper shoes and all that.

 

I switched to the http://www.startbodyweight.com/program and saw great results there, and then eventually to the reddit.com/r/bodyweightfitness program, which is very similar. I have been seeing awesome physical results from it, muscles popping out all over the place. I recommend them both highly.

I concur. I do weights at home, though I know this option is not open to everyone.

[Ausmumof3]

This thread has made me more interested in what other people have in their grocery carts. Obviously, this is about as far away from a scientific study as it could be, but what I observed was that people who look fit and healthy tend to have a lot of fresh produce in their carts and very few packaged foods. People who do not look very fit tend to have a lot of packaged foods - often numerous boxes of things like pop tarts, sugary cereals, cookies, etc.

 

I've never been particularly interested in other people's carts before, but I was feeling bad about my own opinion of the CICO - that it works (based on my own experience). After reading all of the posts against CICO I thought I'd see lots of people that didn't look very fit with carts full of very healthy foods, but I didn't. Again - certainly not a scientific study but I was surprised at how consistent the cart contents were.

I see the opposite so often. I see a trolley full of packaged food and expect to see an unhealthy person pushing it and it's actually someone really thin. I presume they just don't care about food a lot. Or they are buying for someone else.

[Joanne]

I know you disagree on this point, Joanne, but I disagree with you. Why would you think almost all people would have "been sold bologna" in that eating less and choosing differently makes one thinner? For one thing, that would be a pretty magnificently large-scale duping. Additionally, Observation tells me otherwise. I have observed it in my own physiology. I have observed it in friends and acquaintances.

 

 

 

Because nutritional advice is dubious, and has been proven to be political and agendized. I am not pulling this out of the air. The studies that have been done, what those studies have shown, and the information the general public was given show a huge (pardon the pun) discrepancy.

 

The good pyramid, the plate thing, the low fat stuff suggested in the 70's and 80's and even the stuff suggested for diabetic or cardiac care today are not straightforward or research based suggestions.

Along the way, studies were ignored, and information circulated that served profit rather than health.

 

An entire industry (weight loss, fitness) has grown up around the lies that have been circulating for years.

 

Straightforward CICO is part of that lie. A version of WW I attended was part of that lie. Those who believe that everyone can "low carb" without regard to calories are (or dairy) are part of that lie.

 

Look, I am morbidly obese. I have that disease; the disease of obesity. Just like my alcoholism, it is not my fault, but it is my responsibility. It's ok - I will either diet in an extreme way or I will find a way to increase fitness and strength at my current weight and not go to the extremes needed to lose weight. I'm ok. But the lies and stereotypes that continue to follow fat people are harmful  - and inaccurate. I will continue to speak out against them.

[Free]

We will have to agree to disagree. Your mother now and then choosing to forgo dessert isn't what I mean. I meant, at each meal, does she want to keep eating because it is there and tastes good, but stops herself with sheer will power, or does she just feel satisfied and therefore doesn't keep eating past what her body needs? If she stops because she just doesn't really care for any more, why doesn't your father?

 

And yes, food is very much an addiction for many.

Well, I know people in my family who eat because of habit. It is meal/snack time, so we must eat. I think this is actually very common. Like regentrude, I too don't know anybody who eats only when they are hungry. I also think it is easy to condition our brains to eating a certain portion size, or certain foods. For example, before marriage I wasn't fond of sweets. I wasn't fond of snacking on oily stuff. I never drank soft drinks of any kind. My husband loves snacking and sweets and I picked up these habits from him. Nowsdays I don't feel 'satiated' if I don't end my meal with something sweet. My brain is conditioned this way. It has nothing to do with hunger.

[LibraryLover]

I'll say that I'm still not onboard with huge amounts of added fats in say, coffee. I'm ok with a bit of cream, or 1/2 and 1/2 . I'm a- ok using good butter to cook etc. I'm not sure that adding a ton of fat to my coffee is the absolute answer. I don't want to go cray. I can't give up avocado. :)

[frogger]

I agree that it would seem physically impossible to not lose weight while restricting calories to less than what you use but it sure feels that way. My husband was eating slightly less than a maintenance amount of calories for his size and gender for a non-active person and riding his bike to work and back. He works 20 miles away, well 19 and a half and hasn't lost much weight. That is biking 40 miles a day (he got fast at it) and eating like a sedentary person.

 

So though it makes sense to simply say cut back portions and exercise more there really needs to be more to it. To lose weight you ARE starving yourself so it's not fun. As mentioned earlier maintaining weight and losing weight are two different things. So yes, sometimes people need tricks. Protein takes longer to digest so it can make you feel satiated longer. Even mental games can help.

 

It is easy to say a budget simply means your expenses need to be less than your income but how to get there in a sustainable way is different for everyone and sometimes takes some interesting finagling especially if you don't have much income. A person who gains weight really easy is like a person with a really low income. They have to choose wisely what they can eat.

 

Try telling someone below a poverty level of income, just cut your expenses and you'll be fine. I feel like the average person can sound condescending to state the obvious when the devil in the details.

 

My mother has eaten off of nothing but a saucer for years and is still gaining weight. At some point things just become ridiculous. How frustrating to live so differently than everyone else and still gain weight.

[frogger]

Oh and sugar is evil. My body will crave sugar and I will long to eat even though my stomach is full. It is dreadfully addictive unless I cut it out entirely. This is something I avoid though most people would call me thin.

[Carol in Cal.]

Re mommymilkies' great post about poverty:

There is another factor also.  It is hard for small hunger nonprofits to store and distribute refrigerated food.

I'm on the board of one, and thankfully a church that was closing gave us a walk in refrigerator.  Finally we could offer bags of shredded cheese, and lots of fresh fruits and veggies!  But before that, with only one pick up of food from the food bank allowed per week, we did not have a good way to pass out produce, except for shelf stable items like potatoes and onions, and sometimes some thickskinned citrus.  

 

We did already have a smallish chest freezer, but don't often get donations of frozen veggies or fruit.  It's great for other things that are available reasonably often, though, like bagged frozen dinners for 4, or tubes of ground beef, or packages of chickens.  These are hugely helpful to provide variety as well as protein.

 

So, the moral of the story is, if you are donating to your local hunger nonprofit and trying to think of a good project to help them, consider raising money to buy and install a walk in fridge.  And, maybe start a community garden in which everyone agrees to donate one row of their produce to the hungry.  A little makes a big difference!  And variety is hard to come by in the hunger circles, so it's a great thing to be able to treat people to some *different* stuff, which gardeners are great at!

[Carol in Cal.]

I concur. I do weights at home, though I know this option is not open to everyone.

When I did weights, I used "Strong Women Stay Young" and did it at home.  It was a lot cheaper than a gym, and easier to fit into my day.

[Laura Corin]

 

And again, that works at an extreme when starving. 

 

Not only when starving.  Reduced calories at a population level meant that almost every person I knew in China from 1985-6 was slim.  The only fat person I knew had political clout and therefore more calories.

 

I doubt of any of them was obese to start off with, so I don't have any data on that.

 

The British wartime experience is also interesting:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2001/jan/14/life1.lifemagazine5

[Guest2]

What an interesting thread.    

 

 Calories in/calories out doesn't work with everyone, in my experience, regardless of weight loss/weight gain goals.  When I worked at a nursing home, we put people on nutrition team watches.  These patients had dementia.  They would walk for hours, not sleep, and and had  all of their food tracked.  Their rooms were in front of the nurses' station for better monitoring.  The food intake was extremely regulated and documented. There is no medical explanation as to why they would maintain the same weight for long periods of time based on calories in/ calories out.  Even when weight loss would occur it would be slight amounts weekly.

 

I agree with above posters that indicated that there are more physiological forces at work. Wish we knew better how /why to improve health in all!

[LisaKinVA]

My mother is obese.  She was not obese when I was growing up.  She (and my dad) both followed extreme diets in their younger days.  My mom exercised a lot, ate very low-fat meals (which I was raised on), and despite cooking from scratch, exercising regularly, and eating very low calories (about 1200), she gained weight in her 40's.  When she hit peri-menopause, it got even worse.  She has not been able to lose weight (and keep it off) for 20 years.  She eats very, very little, she rides a bike 1-2 hours a day, and there is no change in her weight.  Her knees and feet are in horrible shape, and she keeps exercising and trying to eat better (she's never really eaten really unhealthily, according to the guidelines).  But, I think the problem is that she was eating close to -- or at -- too low a level for too long, eating foods that didn't meet her true needs, and her body gradually started resisting all her efforts to lose weight.  When her hormones went nutty, it just added to the problem.

 

My mom eats one, maybe two meals a day.  Her caloric intake is not usually over 1,000 calories (for a 5'7" woman).  

 

She is now at a point she doesn't care.  She's tired of caring.  She's tired of working so hard and never seeing results.  

 

I was put on this same path...by the lifestyle in which I was raised.  I grew up eating a lot of low-fat carbohydrates, and focusing on a number on the scale.  I was told -- because of that number, you're fat -- the mirror, my clothes, and my body type was irrelevant.  The scale said 125 pounds, and I was 5'5" -- therefore, I must be fat (or bordering on fat).  The more I exercised, the more I weighed.  I cut calories/nutrients, was hungry often.  But I was still "fat."

 

Is it really any wonder that once I hit middle age and had children I wound up where I am?  No, I'm not morbidly obese -- but I am definitely far from where I should be.  This is all thanks to the politically-motivated, zero-research-based, dietary suggestions that Joann is talking about.  

 

This problem did not happen overnight -- and solving it is not a simple issue.  My generation is probably filled with wrecked bodies dealing with insulin resistance (to varying degrees).  That isn't going to change.  The damage to our systems has been done.  For me, the best I can do is to eat as healthfully as I can now, be as fit as I can now, and help my children make better choices.

 

For my kids, this means NOT counting calories, but relying on hunger cues.  This means teaching them to take a smaller amount and eat slowly, and only get seconds (again, a small amount) if they are still hungry after eating a balanced plate.  This means limiting breads/treats, in favor of veggies.  This means eating fruits with things that have some fat/protein (nut butters, cheese, for example).  This means constant conversations about how and why, because I want them to better understand how their bodies function.  At times this means insisting that a certain child has protein for breakfast and not just toast.  It also means, not freaking out because my child has a candy bar...

 

Right now, as part of PE, my daughter has to log her food, and even weight and measure her food.  I do like that she is becoming more "aware" of what she's eating, but I don't like that the focus is on some sort of caloric number -- I had to bring up that that number was way too low given her daily exercise level (1 hour of running/calisthenics/yoga and 90 minutes of swimming a day requires more calories than 1300).  I am now having to regularly fight the CICO with the PE teacher.  I'm also having to fight the low-fat, non-fat carp.  

 

I think what many of us are saying, is that the dietary advice we were given for so long may have had a short-term positive effect, but the net-effect long term has been disastrous.  That a continued, sustained path that relies on starving oneself (because back in my day, we ate 1200 calories and then were expected to exercise on just those calories -- meaning we lived in starvation mode), killed our systems.  We don't know if we'll ever really heal them completely.  We're hoping for the best we can.  We aren't giving up, but we have to change course.  CICO is not THE end-all-be-all answer, and the hyper-focus on that has been detrimental.

 

Back in the day (before CICO and low-fat/non-fat became gospel), if someone needed to lose weight, they were told to lay off the sweets and the starch (potatoes and bread).  That's what they did.  That's what my grandma did.

 

I'm not denying that we don't move as much as we used to -- but the hyper focus on calories, vs. what we actually eat and eating when we are hungry (we've taught ourselves to ignore hunger/full cues) has not helped the cause.  I no longer eat breakfast...which sounds horrible -- but the truth is, I'm not hungry.  I lose weight easier if I only eat when I'm hungry and THEN eat good foods, and watch my carbs/sugars.  If I just eat because "it's time" ... not so much.  

 

And, fwiw, the Egg McMuffin at McDonald's is probably one of the healthiest things they serve ;)  And with that, it's time for my late-morning meal.  

 

 

 

 

[creekland]

Interesting observation through the years, Lisa.

 

For all of my youth and up until relatively recently I didn't care what I ate.  By luck of the taste bud lottery I never cared for baked sweets, but our diet overall was just as unhealthy as healthy.  Most of my teen years were spent with my dad and we ate out more often than in.  Whenever we ate in... I can't remember anything I'd call healthy now, except maybe cereal for breakfast.  I was an active kid and definitely not overweight.

 

My weight came on quite the traditional way with college, having kids, and for many of those years, not having the farm, so having the typical city/suburb lifestyle - only exercising when we went on walks or hikes or whatever, and those weren't daily.

 

On the farm, I can tell I gained weight once we had the boys trained to do many of the chores.

 

My weight didn't come on all at once.  It was gradual over the years.

 

But now it's coming off relatively easier.  It's not unexplained weight loss.  I'm eating far less and definitely differently except when we travel or when the boys are home, but even then, it's still less than before usually.  I'm purposely exercising more.

 

I wonder if it's easier for me simply because I didn't care for years and didn't have my body "trained" to be efficient?  If so, I'm no longer worried about traveling once per month (or so) and "messing up" my current eating plan.  It might keep my body guessing and assist with keeping the diet changes working.

 

It's a very interesting thought.

 

As for grocery carts, etc, etc, etc, I suspect it's best to remember the difference between statistics and individuals.  Stats only apply to large groups - never to individuals.  I think the stats we see are correct - that exercise and healthy eating via veggies, fruits, and getting a diet to match the individual (low carb or low fat or similar) will help the majority of the population.  There will always be outliers though as stats never apply to the individual.

[Pawz4me]

Stepping back to the weight training tangent, a few resources I'm using at home with free weights --

 

New Rules of Lifting for Women -- I'm currently reading this, so can't give a personal recommendation yet.  Overall it comes highly recommended.

 

Hasfit has some good videos.  I've been using the 15 minute beginner weight training (about halfway down on the right side of this page) since I've been trying to get back into this after getting my thyroid back up to normal.  I think he goes through the workout too fast, but I think the sequence is good.  So I wrote it down and do it w/o the video.

 

This is a sequence meant for men who want to add bulk, but I think it would work fine for women.  I like the easy to follow guidelines for adding reps and weight.

 

And don't forget, ladies, that walking is a weight bearing exercise.  I like to think of how I'm strengthening my hip bones every time I go on a walk!

[LisaKinVA]

Interesting observation through the years, Lisa.

 

For all of my youth and up until relatively recently I didn't care what I ate.  By luck of the taste bud lottery I never cared for baked sweets, but our diet overall was just as unhealthy as healthy.  Most of my teen years were spent with my dad and we ate out more often than in.  Whenever we ate it... I can't remember anything I'd call healthy now, except maybe cereal for breakfast.  I was an active kid and definitely not overweight.

 

My weight came on quite the traditional way with college, having kids, and for many of those years, not having the farm, so having the typical city/suburb lifestyle - only exercising when we went on walks or hikes or whatever, and those weren't daily.

 

On the farm, I can tell I gained weight once we had the boys trained to do many of the chores.

 

My weight didn't come on all at once.  It was gradual over the years.

 

But now it's coming off relatively easier.  It's not unexplained weight loss.  I'm eating far less and definitely differently except when we travel or when the boys are home, but even then, it's still less than before usually.  I'm purposely exercising more.

 

I wonder if it's easier for me simply because I didn't care for years and didn't have my body "trained" to be efficient?  If so, I'm no longer worried about traveling once per month (or so) and "messing up" my current eating plan.  It might keep my body guessing and assist with keeping the diet changes working.

 

It's a very interesting thought.

 

As for grocery carts, etc, etc, etc, I suspect it's best to remember the difference between statistics and individuals.  Stats only apply to large groups - never to individuals.  I think the stats we see are correct - that exercise and healthy eating via veggies, fruits, and getting a diet to match the individual (low carb or low fat or similar) will help the majority of the population.  There will always be outliers though as stats never apply to the individual.

 

And this is where the uniqueness of each one of our body systems comes into play.  Just as I only need 2 meals a day (and not necessarily large meals), my 9yo needs 6 small meals.  There are genetic and hereditary issues that are not homogeneous across populations (certain groups of people do not possess the enzyme to digest milk -- whereas other populations do).  Certain populations do better on higher carbohydrates, others do better with limited grains or even zero carbohydrate diets.  With immigration and intermarriage between these populations, people are more unique than ever in their dietary needs.  

 

Body types/composition also make a huge difference in an overall healthy diet.  Because of muscle mass, I get physically ill if I cut my protein level to the "recommended" amount for my height/weight for a long period of time.  However, when I up my protein amounts to those designed for a "man" of my height/weight, I do fine.  This is something I have learned over time (as I began to track what I ate and how I felt, etc.).  For most women, those recommendations are just fine.  For me, they are not.

 

In some cases, it may take more than one generation for dietary changes to manifest -- but there is research indicating that we can pass problems onto our progeny.  And, the problem can be much worse one generation later.  Kinda like how my one daughter really craves sweets and breads, but I have another child who can easily walk away from them.  

 

I'm very happy that what you are doing works so well for you.  Just like what I do works for me.  I'm in the "sugar-is-sugar" as far as how my body reacts to it.  I am not diabetic, or even pre-diabetic, but if I eat more than 2 servings of dairy, my weight stalls, if I eat more than 2 fruits a day, weight loss stalls.  If I eat more than 1 serving of bread, my weight stalls.  When I'm not actively trying to lose weight, I can eat more of those numbers and do fine (I can actually eat quite a bit of protein, fat, veg/fruits and 2-3x the amount of grains and not gain weight...but when my diet changes substantially and for a long period of time, like being stuck in a hotel with minimal cooking ability and minimal refrigerator space, and I start eating heavily processed, snacky, sugary foods...I pay the price -- mostly, because in eating the wrong foods, I actually become more hungry and overeat.).

[Guest]

Because nutritional advice is dubious, and has been proven to be political and agendized. I am not pulling this out of the air. The studies that have been done, what those studies have shown, and the information the general public was given show a huge (pardon the pun) discrepancy.

 

The good pyramid, the plate thing, the low fat stuff suggested in the 70's and 80's and even the stuff suggested for diabetic or cardiac care today are not straightforward or research based suggestions.

Along the way, studies were ignored, and information circulated that served profit rather than health.

 

An entire industry (weight loss, fitness) has grown up around the lies that have been circulating for years.

 

Straightforward CICO is part of that lie. A version of WW I attended was part of that lie. Those who believe that everyone can "low carb" without regard to calories are (or dairy) are part of that lie.

 

Look, I am morbidly obese. I have that disease; the disease of obesity. Just like my alcoholism, it is not my fault, but it is my responsibility. It's ok - I will either diet in an extreme way or I will find a way to increase fitness and strength at my current weight and not go to the extremes needed to lose weight. I'm ok. But the lies and stereotypes that continue to follow fat people are harmful - and inaccurate. I will continue to speak out against them.

Listen, I don't disagree that nurtritional "advice" coming from authorities we thought we could trust is frequently wrong. I remember well the low-fat, non-fat debacle, which I mentioned in this thread (Snackwell cookies). It's probably mere luck that caused me to latch on to some really good concepts early in adulthood, which have continued to serve me well. (For instance, eating few manufactured food, eating "close to nature", weight training, understanding portion size, and others.) But I have also seen evidence that caloric balance is a concept that both makes logical sense and often works. it is no better to deny that it often works for many than it is to assume that because it works for someone, it surely works for all.

[creekland]

I'm very happy that what you are doing works so well for you.  Just like what I do works for me.  I'm in the "sugar-is-sugar" as far as how my body reacts to it.  I am not diabetic, or even pre-diabetic, but if I eat more than 2 servings of dairy, my weight stalls, if I eat more than 2 fruits a day, weight loss stalls.  If I eat more than 1 serving of bread, my weight stalls.  When I'm not actively trying to lose weight, I can eat more of those numbers and do fine (I can actually eat quite a bit of protein, fat, veg/fruits and 2-3x the amount of grains and not gain weight...but when my diet changes substantially and for a long period of time, like being stuck in a hotel with minimal cooking ability and minimal refrigerator space, and I start eating heavily processed, snacky, sugary foods...I pay the price -- mostly, because in eating the wrong foods, I actually become more hungry and overeat.).

 

I feel I'm still very much in the learning stage.  At the moment I'm thinking losing weight (for me) is easier due to not already having my body trained to be efficient and not having to overcome hunger - both more or less due to situations and luck rather than planning.

 

When/if those change, I'm taking in many of the thoughts of what works for others so I can play with them to see what, at that point, works for me.  I'm also keeping hubby in mind as he has pounds to go before he hits his ideal weight.

 

I'm certainly not criticizing or arguing again anyone who shares what works - or doesn't - for them.

[Jane in NC]

One of the problems I think with the Snackwell debacle returns to the issue of portion size.  I remember my elderly neighbor telling me that her daughter was convinced she could eat the entire package because it was "low fat".  I don't believe that nutritionists ever recommended eating an entire package or half package of a treat for that matter.  Perception does not equate to expert advice.

 

For decades I have subscribed to the Nutritional Action Health Letter from the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The newsletter does an excellent job of examining food trends, health news, nutritional studies (short and long term) and deconstructing ads and menus from chains.  I highly recommend it.

[creekland]

For decades I have subscribed to the Nutritional Action Health Letter from the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The newsletter does an excellent job of examining food trends, health news, nutritional studies (short and long term) and deconstructing ads and menus from chains.  I highly recommend it.

 

This newsletter was part of our homeschooling health class - read each month every year we homeschooled (since PA wants health covered to some extent every year).  My boys still flip through issues when they're home.  I'm thinking a subscription will make terrific Christmas presents.

[ktgrok]

Not only when starving.  Reduced calories at a population level meant that almost every person I knew in China from 1985-6 was slim.  The only fat person I knew had political clout and therefore more calories.

 

I doubt of any of them was obese to start off with, so I don't have any data on that.

 

The British wartime experience is also interesting:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2001/jan/14/life1.lifemagazine5

 

Right, I'm not arguing about healthy people but about obese people. 

 

The wartime rationing is interesting,because sugar was rationed as well as general calories, meat, etc. 

[Carrie12345]

I don't think anyone is saying that caloric intake makes NO difference...just that it often doesn't make enough difference to be the main focus, once someone is significantly overweight. It has a role, but on its own won't work for most people. That's where the "choose different" comes in, and that I do agree matters a lot. However, when people say CICO, they USUALLY don't mean choose differently, they mean that it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you stay in your calorie allotment. And on the flip side, I think those that say it's JUST about what you eat, and calories don't matter are also wrong. I think it's both, plus a few other things. 

 

And given that MOST people already know the saying of eat less move more, and yet so many people are overweight/obese and getting worse every year, I think if that saying were going to help it already would have. 

 

At least we are over the low fat thing mostly, that did so much damage. Twizzlers were marked as "low fat" and marketed as health foods!

 

There are legitimate reasons that the two go hand in hand.  If the one and only goal is to weigh less, you could cut off your legs and weigh less.  I don't think most people, when they stop and think about it, ONLY want the scale to change for the sake of the scale changing.  Health and vanity (no negative or positive connotation implied) are the two main reasons that come to mind.

 

Someone who fears for their health should not accept CICO with a junk food menu.  That's not going to promote health.

Someone who wants to wear pants in the next size down shouldn't starve themselves for a month and expect their new jeans to fit for more than another month.

 

I'm not discounting your mention of "a few other things", but focusing on the main point of this particular quote.  "Choose different" is a means with many ends.  It's a way to get more nutrient dense food into a body.  It's a way to make the body feel more satisfied/less hungry.  It's a way to more efficiently fuel vigorous activity.  It's a way to promote more muscle gain, improved organ/system functions, yadda yadda.

 

When you're more satisfied/less hungry, the CI end is a lot easier than when you feel deprived.

When you have more energy and more muscle, the CO is a lot easier than when you feel sluggish and weak.

For most people.

 

I did think this was common knowledge and that most people (excluding the morbidly obese for the specifics of this post) just struggled with adapting.  I can certainly say that's been my own case and that of many people I know.

[creekland]

Someone who fears for their health should not accept CICO with a junk food menu.  That's not going to promote health.

 

Some people take all the fun out of possible suggestions.   :glare:   :lol:

[ktgrok]

My mother is obese.  She was not obese when I was growing up.  She (and my dad) both followed extreme diets in their younger days.  My mom exercised a lot, ate very low-fat meals (which I was raised on), and despite cooking from scratch, exercising regularly, and eating very low calories (about 1200), she gained weight in her 40's.  When she hit peri-menopause, it got even worse.  She has not been able to lose weight (and keep it off) for 20 years.  She eats very, very little, she rides a bike 1-2 hours a day, and there is no change in her weight.  Her knees and feet are in horrible shape, and she keeps exercising and trying to eat better (she's never really eaten really unhealthily, according to the guidelines).  But, I think the problem is that she was eating close to -- or at -- too low a level for too long, eating foods that didn't meet her true needs, and her body gradually started resisting all her efforts to lose weight.  When her hormones went nutty, it just added to the problem.

 

My mom eats one, maybe two meals a day.  Her caloric intake is not usually over 1,000 calories (for a 5'7" woman).  

 

She is now at a point she doesn't care.  She's tired of caring.  She's tired of working so hard and never seeing results.  

My mom is similar. She was 100lbs at 5'7 most of her life. Then she had lung cancer and surgery (no chemo, no radiation, no meds) and was laid up for a while. After that she gained weight. She probably did snack more while laid up, but to my mother a snack is steamed vegetables. She gained about 50lbs or a bit less over a year or two. She's lost some, but only by keep calories around 900 a day, and eating mostly vegetables. She's paleo now to try to help her arthritis, eats ONLY whole foods, very low calorie, and is active, and the weight doesn't budge. MAYBE  a pound every few weeks.  

 

I was put on this same path...by the lifestyle in which I was raised.  I grew up eating a lot of low-fat carbohydrates, and focusing on a number on the scale.  I was told -- because of that number, you're fat -- the mirror, my clothes, and my body type was irrelevant.  The scale said 125 pounds, and I was 5'5" -- therefore, I must be fat (or bordering on fat).  The more I exercised, the more I weighed.  I cut calories/nutrients, was hungry often.  But I was still "fat."

 

Yup, I look back of photos of me where I was "fat" and in weight watchers and I was NOT fat! I was perfect! Oh, to be that size again! I was curvy, yes, but that's my body type. 

 

Is it really any wonder that once I hit middle age and had children I wound up where I am?  No, I'm not morbidly obese -- but I am definitely far from where I should be.  This is all thanks to the politically-motivated, zero-research-based, dietary suggestions that Joann is talking about.  

 

This problem did not happen overnight -- and solving it is not a simple issue.  My generation is probably filled with wrecked bodies dealing with insulin resistance (to varying degrees).  That isn't going to change.  The damage to our systems has been done.  For me, the best I can do is to eat as healthfully as I can now, be as fit as I can now, and help my children make better choices.

 

For my kids, this means NOT counting calories, but relying on hunger cues.  This means teaching them to take a smaller amount and eat slowly, and only get seconds (again, a small amount) if they are still hungry after eating a balanced plate.  This means limiting breads/treats, in favor of veggies.  This means eating fruits with things that have some fat/protein (nut butters, cheese, for example).  This means constant conversations about how and why, because I want them to better understand how their bodies function.  At times this means insisting that a certain child has protein for breakfast and not just toast.  It also means, not freaking out because my child has a candy bar...

 

Exactly what I'm doing with my kids. My oldest luckily has his father's metabolism, my ex. The men in that family are stick thin, so although we talk about nutrition he doesn't have to worry about obesity. My youngest is still very thin as well. My daughter has a tendency to reach for carbs and eat and eat, and although her body is strong and lean I want to curb that tendency now. So we talk about getting protein with our meals and snacks, the problem with processed carbs, etc all in the context of health, NEVER in the context of weight. 

 

 

 

Back in the day (before CICO and low-fat/non-fat became gospel), if someone needed to lose weight, they were told to lay off the sweets and the starch (potatoes and bread).  That's what they did.  That's what my grandma did.

 

Yup. And then when I first started losing weight it was "eat all the carbs you want, just no fat". Sigh. 

 

I

 

 

Thanks for sharing. 

[Carrie12345]

Some people take all the fun out of possible suggestions.   :glare:   :lol:

 

:D  :001_tt2:

[Pawz4me]

One of the problems I think with the Snackwell debacle returns to the issue of portion size.  I remember my elderly neighbor telling me that her daughter was convinced she could eat the entire package because it was "low fat".  I don't believe that nutritionists ever recommended eating an entire package or half package of a treat for that matter.  Perception does not equate to expert advice.

 

For decades I have subscribed to the Nutritional Action Health Letter from the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The newsletter does an excellent job of examining food trends, health news, nutritional studies (short and long term) and deconstructing ads and menus from chains.  I highly recommend it.

 

I think the same thing is true for the trend toward more protein and fat nowadays.  More protein may be good.  I tend to think chugging down drinks made from protein powder that likely has all sorts of artificial crap in it is likely not good.  Fat may not be so bad as we used to think, but I tend to think putting a gob of butter or coconut oil in your coffee--ingesting that much fat with no other nutrients to go along with it, with the idea that it's somehow good for you--is ludicrous.

 

JMHO, of course.