"... Could Be Linked to Obesity..."
Replies
-
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »
Two threads a few days back were on obesity and pollutants, sorry, was going off of that, since this topic seemed so open ended.
No matter how much your hormones may or may not be disrupted, you body can't store fat if you haven't eaten enough to enable your body to do so.
But it can mess with my satiety, possibly my thyroid function, and doubtless my energy levels, too.
I'm a human being, not a robot. What, when, and how much I eat are not simple logical formulas. They're all driven by my biochemistry and all I have to fight back with is my poor conscious mind, who also has plenty of other stuff to be doing and which I'd much rather use for more important things than fighting excess hunger, cravings, fatigue, and other issues that may very well be related to pollutants, thanks very much. Also, jogging outside in polluted air might just make us all stupider. Doesn't that matter to you?
Are you saying your conscious mind isn't better than that of a pet that's gonna eat everything and get fat if you put the food in front of it? I think you're doing yourself a disservice if you're gonna put the importance of your own mind down like that.
If that were true I'd never have lost the weight that I have lost. I am saying it has cost me incredible effort to lose weight and it costs me incredible effort every day not to gain it all back. And if any part of it is due to the ingestion of man made chemicals (and possibly the over ingestion of natural mimickers, such as soy) then it's time to figure out how to put an end to that, both by avoiding these chemicals as much as I can and by being politically and socially active in an effort to clean up our environment and prevent a worsening of the problem.
What is wrong with soy and man made chemicals? I understand that soy can be bad for some, but some soy has had the isoflavins removed, which is what people, like cancer patients, are worried about. What are the man made chemicals you're talking about?0 -
Kimegatron wrote: »So I'm reading the new issue of Parents magazine... Not even 1/2 way in, I have read 3 articles already saying "such and such" is or could be linked to obesity...
Isn't what you feed yourself, or your children, as in quantity, the only thing linked to obesity, aside from medical issues??? What is going on?!
Drinking more than 12oz of caffeine a day COULD be linked to obesity
Giving antiobotics can cause tummy troubles and have been linked to obesity
What you talk about at the dinner table COULD/IS linked to obesity...
I do not know about the other things you talked about and I have my doubts about some of what people have printed but I can tell you that antibiotics, if you are on them a lot can mess up your system and cause you to gain weight. It happen to me.0 -
@stevencloser Of course calories in and out is the basis of energy in your body but we aren't talking about energy, the headlines were regarding the different links to obesity. And of course in the end everyone CAN be in control of how much they eat, but these links were researched and proven to make it HARDER to control therefore leading to weight gain or obesity. The links don't cause obesity overnight and like I said previously taking antibiotics aren't going to make you gain 10 pounds over night, but it MAY affect something inside that will impede your diet. This doesn't mean we need to stop taking antibiotics or coffee it is just something we should maybe be more aware of and can explain why some people have a harder time losing weight and controlling their appetite.
Anyway you are arguing with medical research. If you would like to read more about it you can google it and read some scholarly articles.
0 -
Cynthiamr2015 wrote: »Kimegatron wrote: »So I'm reading the new issue of Parents magazine... Not even 1/2 way in, I have read 3 articles already saying "such and such" is or could be linked to obesity...
Isn't what you feed yourself, or your children, as in quantity, the only thing linked to obesity, aside from medical issues??? What is going on?!
Drinking more than 12oz of caffeine a day COULD be linked to obesity
Giving antiobotics can cause tummy troubles and have been linked to obesity
What you talk about at the dinner table COULD/IS linked to obesity...
I do not know about the other things you talked about and I have my doubts about some of what people have printed but I can tell you that antibiotics, if you are on them a lot can mess up your system and cause you to gain weight. It happen to me.
same here0 -
LastingChanges wrote: »@stevencloser Of course calories in and out is the basis of energy in your body but we aren't talking about energy, the headlines were regarding the different links to obesity. And of course in the end everyone CAN be in control of how much they eat, but these links were researched and proven to make it HARDER to control therefore leading to weight gain or obesity. The links don't cause obesity overnight and like I said previously taking antibiotics aren't going to make you gain 10 pounds over night, but it MAY affect something inside that will impede your diet. This doesn't mean we need to stop taking antibiotics or coffee it is just something we should maybe be more aware of and can explain why some people have a harder time losing weight and controlling their appetite.
Anyway you are arguing with medical research. If you would like to read more about it you can google it and read some scholarly articles.
But then we're back at the umbrella argument. They're "linked" only so far that if you don't do anything about it you might gain weight. And if you keep being complacent and not doing anything you'll eventually become obese. By then, in my opinion, it's nothing but an excuse to say that it's because of anything other than you not doing anything to correct the problem.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »LastingChanges wrote: »@stevencloser Of course calories in and out is the basis of energy in your body but we aren't talking about energy, the headlines were regarding the different links to obesity. And of course in the end everyone CAN be in control of how much they eat, but these links were researched and proven to make it HARDER to control therefore leading to weight gain or obesity. The links don't cause obesity overnight and like I said previously taking antibiotics aren't going to make you gain 10 pounds over night, but it MAY affect something inside that will impede your diet. This doesn't mean we need to stop taking antibiotics or coffee it is just something we should maybe be more aware of and can explain why some people have a harder time losing weight and controlling their appetite.
Anyway you are arguing with medical research. If you would like to read more about it you can google it and read some scholarly articles.
But then we're back at the umbrella argument. They're "linked" only so far that if you don't do anything about it you might gain weight. And if you keep being complacent and not doing anything you'll eventually become obese. By then, in my opinion, it's nothing but an excuse to say that it's because of anything other than you not doing anything to correct the problem.
The point of the articles isn't to use it as an excuse and become complacent it is to help people become aware of what may hinder their weight or appetite. Some people are able to control their appetite easier than other groups of people, and with research we can better understand why there is a difference between these groups of people. And maybe create solutions based on the reasons. But you are right in the end we have control over ourselves, just for some people it comes a little bit easier.0 -
Already had a thread I put up about this.
The linked to, well really is correlated with, studies are useful for policy. At the individual level, anyone that accurately monitors and controls calories will achieve the weight they desire.
As a society, we're not about to start monitoring every single person's calorie intake for them, so if we'd like to reduce obesity, it becomes useful to know what things are the low hanging fruit for policy recommendations.0 -
The coffee correlation is the first study to state this, and says it still needs more research. Why would they even put it in the mag, then? It was done by De-Kun Li, M.D., Ph.D.
For the table conversation one, it's by Jerica Berge, Ph. D., M.P.H.. Also a new study from the University of Minnesota0 -
Kimegatron wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »
Two threads a few days back were on obesity and pollutants, sorry, was going off of that, since this topic seemed so open ended.
No matter how much your hormones may or may not be disrupted, you body can't store fat if you haven't eaten enough to enable your body to do so.
But it can mess with my satiety, possibly my thyroid function, and doubtless my energy levels, too.
I'm a human being, not a robot. What, when, and how much I eat are not simple logical formulas. They're all driven by my biochemistry and all I have to fight back with is my poor conscious mind, who also has plenty of other stuff to be doing and which I'd much rather use for more important things than fighting excess hunger, cravings, fatigue, and other issues that may very well be related to pollutants, thanks very much. Also, jogging outside in polluted air might just make us all stupider. Doesn't that matter to you?
Are you saying your conscious mind isn't better than that of a pet that's gonna eat everything and get fat if you put the food in front of it? I think you're doing yourself a disservice if you're gonna put the importance of your own mind down like that.
If that were true I'd never have lost the weight that I have lost. I am saying it has cost me incredible effort to lose weight and it costs me incredible effort every day not to gain it all back. And if any part of it is due to the ingestion of man made chemicals (and possibly the over ingestion of natural mimickers, such as soy) then it's time to figure out how to put an end to that, both by avoiding these chemicals as much as I can and by being politically and socially active in an effort to clean up our environment and prevent a worsening of the problem.
What is wrong with soy and man made chemicals? I understand that soy can be bad for some, but some soy has had the isoflavins removed, which is what people, like cancer patients, are worried about. What are the man made chemicals you're talking about?
Read up on estrogen mimickers. Also known as xenoestrogens. Lots of good stuff out there. Soy is a little different, from what I understand, unlike the nastier man-made mimickers, it leaves the body rather quickly. I don't like to consume it daily, however. Could be too much of an otherwise good thing. Why risk it? There are some studies starting to come out on air pollution and possible insulin disruption, too. And the whole air pollution and other pollutants making us stupid studies. We should probably tackle that first, while we still have a few brain cells left to do anything about it.0 -
Kimegatron wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »
Two threads a few days back were on obesity and pollutants, sorry, was going off of that, since this topic seemed so open ended.
No matter how much your hormones may or may not be disrupted, you body can't store fat if you haven't eaten enough to enable your body to do so.
But it can mess with my satiety, possibly my thyroid function, and doubtless my energy levels, too.
I'm a human being, not a robot. What, when, and how much I eat are not simple logical formulas. They're all driven by my biochemistry and all I have to fight back with is my poor conscious mind, who also has plenty of other stuff to be doing and which I'd much rather use for more important things than fighting excess hunger, cravings, fatigue, and other issues that may very well be related to pollutants, thanks very much. Also, jogging outside in polluted air might just make us all stupider. Doesn't that matter to you?
Are you saying your conscious mind isn't better than that of a pet that's gonna eat everything and get fat if you put the food in front of it? I think you're doing yourself a disservice if you're gonna put the importance of your own mind down like that.
If that were true I'd never have lost the weight that I have lost. I am saying it has cost me incredible effort to lose weight and it costs me incredible effort every day not to gain it all back. And if any part of it is due to the ingestion of man made chemicals (and possibly the over ingestion of natural mimickers, such as soy) then it's time to figure out how to put an end to that, both by avoiding these chemicals as much as I can and by being politically and socially active in an effort to clean up our environment and prevent a worsening of the problem.
What is wrong with soy and man made chemicals? I understand that soy can be bad for some, but some soy has had the isoflavins removed, which is what people, like cancer patients, are worried about. What are the man made chemicals you're talking about?
Read up on estrogen mimickers. Also known as xenoestrogens. Lots of good stuff out there. Soy is a little different, from what I understand, unlike the nastier man-made mimickers, it leaves the body rather quickly. I don't like to consume it daily, however. Could be too much of an otherwise good thing. Why risk it? There are some studies starting to come out on air pollution and possible insulin disruption, too. And the whole air pollution and other pollutants making us stupid studies. We should probably tackle that first, while we still have a few brain cells left to do anything about it.
I eat soy all of the time, but I'm also not worried about the estrogen. However, I do also consume soy w/out the isoflavins sometimes. I love soy, though
I also am cool with GMO's. I'll eat a GMO anything. 0 -
Kimegatron wrote: »The coffee correlation is the first study to state this, and says it still needs more research. Why would they even put it in the mag, then? It was done by De-Kun Li, M.D., Ph.D.
For the table conversation one, it's by Jerica Berge, Ph. D., M.P.H.. Also a new study from the University of Minnesota
They put it in the magazine and make these researches public because it is good to have knowledge about things. It may not help you, but someone else reading may find the info very helpful.
I randomly read somewhere online (not even a medically backed up post) all the negatives of coffee and how they effect things inside our body and mind. I decided to quit coffee (which took many tries) and this was the best decision in my life. My energy is better than ever and I am eating way less. Not all medical advice/research applies to everyone but it may help someone who needs it. Just like with estrogen, it may not be an issue for you but someone else might find random info in a magazine about it helpful.
0 -
LastingChanges wrote: »Kimegatron wrote: »The coffee correlation is the first study to state this, and says it still needs more research. Why would they even put it in the mag, then? It was done by De-Kun Li, M.D., Ph.D.
For the table conversation one, it's by Jerica Berge, Ph. D., M.P.H.. Also a new study from the University of Minnesota
They put it in the magazine and make these researches public because it is good to have knowledge about things. It may not help you, but someone else reading may find the info very helpful.
I randomly read somewhere online (not even a medically backed up post) all the negatives of coffee and how they effect things inside our body and mind. I decided to quit coffee (which took many tries) and this was the best decision in my life. My energy is better than ever and I am eating way less. Not all medical advice/research applies to everyone but it may help someone who needs it. Just like with estrogen, it may not be an issue for you but someone else might find random info in a magazine about it helpful.
Ummm...not trying to be a smartalec...but you do realize that just because it's on the internet, doesn't mean it's true, right???
I mean, even some of our greatest past presidents knew this
0 -
^ This is why we desperately need to teach scientific literacy in schools.
If research shows no causality between A and B, and you do A and B happens, then there are three possibilities:
1) The placebo effect, i.e. you expected A to cause B, so you feel the effects from it anyway.
2) A spurious correlation, i.e. C caused A and C caused B, so you only think that A caused B.
3) A coincidence. A happened. B happened. There's no link whatsoever.
0 -
It doesn't have to be true. Just helpful.juggernaut1974 wrote: »LastingChanges wrote: »Kimegatron wrote: »The coffee correlation is the first study to state this, and says it still needs more research. Why would they even put it in the mag, then? It was done by De-Kun Li, M.D., Ph.D.
For the table conversation one, it's by Jerica Berge, Ph. D., M.P.H.. Also a new study from the University of Minnesota
They put it in the magazine and make these researches public because it is good to have knowledge about things. It may not help you, but someone else reading may find the info very helpful.
I randomly read somewhere online (not even a medically backed up post) all the negatives of coffee and how they effect things inside our body and mind. I decided to quit coffee (which took many tries) and this was the best decision in my life. My energy is better than ever and I am eating way less. Not all medical advice/research applies to everyone but it may help someone who needs it. Just like with estrogen, it may not be an issue for you but someone else might find random info in a magazine about it helpful.
Ummm...not trying to be a smartalec...but you do realize that just because it's on the internet, doesn't mean it's true, right???
I mean, even some of our greatest past presidents knew this
0 -
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." -- Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
And yes, he really said that. Though most quotes on the internet are misattributed. (Not quite as blatantly as the Lincoln one above -- LOL -- but yeah.)
Point being, you can do whatever you like with the facts. But you shouldn't invent them. Or spread false ones.0 -
This one's pretty good, too:
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
^ This is why we desperately need to teach scientific literacy in schools.
If research shows no causality between A and B, and you do A and B happens, then there are three possibilities:
1) The placebo effect, i.e. you expected A to cause B, so you feel the effects from it anyway.
2) A spurious correlation, i.e. C caused A and C caused B, so you only think that A caused B.
3) A coincidence. A happened. B happened. There's no link whatsoever.
I have before mentioned that scholarly articles point out similar information. My point was that even if not 100% proven yet but have been scientifically studied and printed, it may help someone.
Maybe 'logic' is another one desperately needed to be taught. As I have posted before caffeine may not be directly linked to obesity but maybe caffeine causes some kind of change in bodies which eventually may lead to obesity. Kind of like a=b=c, therefore a=c. Dont know the correct term for this.0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »LastingChanges wrote: »
But there is medical research and reasoning behind why there is a link.Kimegatron wrote: »So I'm reading the new issue of Parents magazine... Not even 1/2 way in, I have read 3 articles already saying "such and such" is or could be linked to obesity...
Isn't what you feed yourself, or your children, as in quantity, the only thing linked to obesity, aside from medical issues??? What is going on?!
Drinking more than 12oz of caffeine a day COULD be linked to obesity
Giving antiobotics can cause tummy troubles and have been linked to obesity
What you talk about at the dinner table COULD/IS linked to obesity...
The link is not.. You take antibiotics and it automatically adds 10 pounds. Instead the link with antibiotics is that it affects hormones, specifically the ghrelin and leptin hormones which control appetite and control the feelings of satiety. Because antibiotics mess this up you feel more hungry and less full causing a person to eat more which may eventually lead to obesity if not controlled. Personally I've felt this after taking a high dose of antibiotics and took a long time to get back to normal. Same goes for coffee its not the calories that would lead to obesity but probably something in caffeine/coffee effects blood sugar causing increased eating habits. So i think that is what they mean when they use the word 'link'. It's not an a=b effect but more of an a=b=c therefore a=c effect (if that makes sense).
I...don't remember learning that in pharmacy school. Source?
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/health/scientist-examines-possible-link-between-antibiotics-and-obesity.html?referer=
If you look up the dr who did this research you can find his full report.
Sometimes theres more to learn after pharmacy or medical school. Im not in the medical field but I am sure lots of different research is published all the time and sometimes eventually proven false when new research is done. So who knows what eventually they will figure out with antibiotics. Was just making point that there is research out there saying that something about antibiotics could affect our weight goals.0 -
Kimegatron wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »
Two threads a few days back were on obesity and pollutants, sorry, was going off of that, since this topic seemed so open ended.
No matter how much your hormones may or may not be disrupted, you body can't store fat if you haven't eaten enough to enable your body to do so.
But it can mess with my satiety, possibly my thyroid function, and doubtless my energy levels, too.
I'm a human being, not a robot. What, when, and how much I eat are not simple logical formulas. They're all driven by my biochemistry and all I have to fight back with is my poor conscious mind, who also has plenty of other stuff to be doing and which I'd much rather use for more important things than fighting excess hunger, cravings, fatigue, and other issues that may very well be related to pollutants, thanks very much. Also, jogging outside in polluted air might just make us all stupider. Doesn't that matter to you?
Are you saying your conscious mind isn't better than that of a pet that's gonna eat everything and get fat if you put the food in front of it? I think you're doing yourself a disservice if you're gonna put the importance of your own mind down like that.
If that were true I'd never have lost the weight that I have lost. I am saying it has cost me incredible effort to lose weight and it costs me incredible effort every day not to gain it all back. And if any part of it is due to the ingestion of man made chemicals (and possibly the over ingestion of natural mimickers, such as soy) then it's time to figure out how to put an end to that, both by avoiding these chemicals as much as I can and by being politically and socially active in an effort to clean up our environment and prevent a worsening of the problem.
What is wrong with soy and man made chemicals? I understand that soy can be bad for some, but some soy has had the isoflavins removed, which is what people, like cancer patients, are worried about. What are the man made chemicals you're talking about?
Read up on estrogen mimickers. Also known as xenoestrogens. Lots of good stuff out there. Soy is a little different, from what I understand, unlike the nastier man-made mimickers, it leaves the body rather quickly. I don't like to consume it daily, however. Could be too much of an otherwise good thing. Why risk it? There are some studies starting to come out on air pollution and possible insulin disruption, too. And the whole air pollution and other pollutants making us stupid studies. We should probably tackle that first, while we still have a few brain cells left to do anything about it.
Soy and many plants contain phytoestrogens. The effects of soy phytoestogen is generally health beneficial. Worst thing I've seen linked to them with any legitimacy is breast cancer might be able to use it in place of natural estrogen, so maybe avoid soy if you're going through breast cancer treatment.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
LastingChanges wrote: »^ This is why we desperately need to teach scientific literacy in schools.
If research shows no causality between A and B, and you do A and B happens, then there are three possibilities:
1) The placebo effect, i.e. you expected A to cause B, so you feel the effects from it anyway.
2) A spurious correlation, i.e. C caused A and C caused B, so you only think that A caused B.
3) A coincidence. A happened. B happened. There's no link whatsoever.
I have before mentioned that scholarly articles point out similar information. My point was that even if not 100% proven yet but have been scientifically studied and printed, it may help someone.
Maybe 'logic' is another one desperately needed to be taught. As I have posted before caffeine may not be directly linked to obesity but maybe caffeine causes some kind of change in bodies which eventually may lead to obesity. Kind of like a=b=c, therefore a=c. Dont know the correct term for this.
I believe it's called a false or unproven conclusion.0 -
LastingChanges wrote: »^ This is why we desperately need to teach scientific literacy in schools.
If research shows no causality between A and B, and you do A and B happens, then there are three possibilities:
1) The placebo effect, i.e. you expected A to cause B, so you feel the effects from it anyway.
2) A spurious correlation, i.e. C caused A and C caused B, so you only think that A caused B.
3) A coincidence. A happened. B happened. There's no link whatsoever.
I have before mentioned that scholarly articles point out similar information. My point was that even if not 100% proven yet but have been scientifically studied and printed, it may help someone.
Maybe 'logic' is another one desperately needed to be taught. As I have posted before caffeine may not be directly linked to obesity but maybe caffeine causes some kind of change in bodies which eventually may lead to obesity. Kind of like a=b=c, therefore a=c. Dont know the correct term for this.
I always prefer empiricism to logic. Logic isn't required to conform to reality, but empiricism is.0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »LastingChanges wrote: »UltimateRBF wrote: »LastingChanges wrote: »
But there is medical research and reasoning behind why there is a link.Kimegatron wrote: »So I'm reading the new issue of Parents magazine... Not even 1/2 way in, I have read 3 articles already saying "such and such" is or could be linked to obesity...
Isn't what you feed yourself, or your children, as in quantity, the only thing linked to obesity, aside from medical issues??? What is going on?!
Drinking more than 12oz of caffeine a day COULD be linked to obesity
Giving antiobotics can cause tummy troubles and have been linked to obesity
What you talk about at the dinner table COULD/IS linked to obesity...
The link is not.. You take antibiotics and it automatically adds 10 pounds. Instead the link with antibiotics is that it affects hormones, specifically the ghrelin and leptin hormones which control appetite and control the feelings of satiety. Because antibiotics mess this up you feel more hungry and less full causing a person to eat more which may eventually lead to obesity if not controlled. Personally I've felt this after taking a high dose of antibiotics and took a long time to get back to normal. Same goes for coffee its not the calories that would lead to obesity but probably something in caffeine/coffee effects blood sugar causing increased eating habits. So i think that is what they mean when they use the word 'link'. It's not an a=b effect but more of an a=b=c therefore a=c effect (if that makes sense).
I...don't remember learning that in pharmacy school. Source?
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/health/scientist-examines-possible-link-between-antibiotics-and-obesity.html?referer=
If you look up the dr who did this research you can find his full report.
Sometimes theres more to learn after pharmacy or medical school. Im not in the medical field but I am sure lots of different research is published all the time and sometimes eventually proven false when new research is done. So who knows what eventually they will figure out with antibiotics. Was just making point that there is research out there saying that something about antibiotics could affect our weight goals.
Well the thing about the internet is that you can find just about anything to confirm just about any viewpoint, whether it's legit or not.
That article (which did not link to the study..) was...how you say, less than convincing.
Preliminary research suggests that overuse of some antibiotics may lead to weight gain. In rats. Doesn't say how significant the weight gain was...and I'm going to guess it wasn't significant.
If you read through the article you would find the Dr who did this research is named Dr. Blaser and his study is easily found when googling. His research was also done on humans. Theres a lot of interesting information regarding antibiotics if you look him up. I don't think he is trying to prove antibiotics should be stopped just trying to find solutions to how we can fix the after effects of antibiotics. Shouldn't medicine be current? And research continued so that we can find new information, causes, cures, etc, even if it is preliminary research?0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
My kids' activity is not remotely like mine was at their age.rankinsect wrote: »
Well, the fact that for thousands of years, we were hunter-gatherers and then laboured in the fields and then laboured in the factories might have something to do with it. For most of human history, we were very active, and we didn't have enough food. So we became very efficient at using energy.
Evolution hasn't caught up to the 21st century internet age, where we do everything at the touch of a smartphone and sit on our butts at a desk for 8, 10, 15 hours a day, and where we have access to all the food we could possibly want. Our bodies weren't designed for that.
That's certainly true and doubtlessly plays some part, but there's likely more to it - the baby boomers had sedentary lifestyles and availability of lots of calories yet much lower obesity rates compared to today. Each generation of the past four is significantly more obese than the preceding generation, without that significant of lifestyle changes.
I left the house after breakfast and came back when the streetlights came on. They move, but nothing like that.
That's true and all we ate and drank back then was a 2 litre bottle of squash and a big bag of jam sandwiches on white bread.
Simpler times, but much more fun.0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Kimegatron wrote: »It just really seems... like a far stretch. Is everything just going to be linked now?
6 Degrees of Obesity.
Now instead of Kevin Bacon, they all just end in bacon.
Am listening to "Footloose" right now, actually. Does this count as being linked?
Ban dancing, and all the kids get obese.
Have you seen Kevin Bacon's male side kick from "Footloose"? He stopped dancing and look at him now.
Chris Penn died in 2006 at the age of 40. He was apparently 300 lbs. at the time of his death.
He obviously didn't keep up the dancing. Or was too foot'long'loose with his diet.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »Well, obesity is about what you eat, but consider this - your body is supposed to be able to keep you at a reasonable weight without extra help. That is, the whole point of hunger and satiety is to keep you at a healthy body weight, and your body has mechanisms to regulate these.
The fact that so many of us need to resort to artificial methods like calorie counting just to not be obese anymore tells you something about that weight regulation system is broken. It's true that we can use technology to augment our lives and achieve the results we want, but it would be better if our bodies could do that on their own - if we could just use hunger and satiety to keep our weight in line.
I think research into why obesity is on such a huge rise is useful so not everyone needs to go through what we are to be healthy.
Just wanted to say this was very well-stated and refreshing to read.0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »oyChihuahua wrote: »DragonShoe_GCole wrote: »I lol'd; this just in----
Posting on MyFitnessPal now linked to obesity...
Therefore flagging spam could be linked to obesity
I thought if you ate Spam it lead to. . . . .
That's only if you eat Spamalot (sorry, bad joke...which can also lead to obesity)
0 -
Ashtoretet wrote: »rankinsect wrote: »Well, obesity is about what you eat, but consider this - your body is supposed to be able to keep you at a reasonable weight without extra help. That is, the whole point of hunger and satiety is to keep you at a healthy body weight, and your body has mechanisms to regulate these.
The fact that so many of us need to resort to artificial methods like calorie counting just to not be obese anymore tells you something about that weight regulation system is broken. It's true that we can use technology to augment our lives and achieve the results we want, but it would be better if our bodies could do that on their own - if we could just use hunger and satiety to keep our weight in line.
I think research into why obesity is on such a huge rise is useful so not everyone needs to go through what we are to be healthy.
Just wanted to say this was very well-stated and refreshing to read.
I seemed to have missed this post. You are right, this is a really good point that didn't even occur to me. It isn't really "natural" to count calories, we should be able to regulate this naturally without gaining weight.
Don't understand why so many posters are against research giving new information. Do you all want to live in a world where medicine has no advances? So strange.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions