Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
NYT article about obesity stating it's genetic, not lack of willpower
Replies
-
jenniferinfl wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »I just saw this article in the New York Times today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/health/americans-obesity-willpower-genetics-study.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-2&action=click&contentCollection=Health®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article&_r=0
I don't generally tend to put much stock in what the NYT says, but is it possible that obesity can't be helped by willpower? Should we bother to try to lose weight? My first thought about this is that it's a load of crap, but if it's what science says how can I dispute it?
You are missing the point that matters. What I hate most about being obese, is that people assume that I eat everything that isn't bolted down AND I'm lazy. People who have spent their entire lives skinny think about what they eat and assume that you are eating double what they eat. That's the part that needs to change because that's the part that isn't true. I know skinny people who occasionally go on diets, they lose that last ten lbs in 2 weeks or so by just quitting pizza and not calorie counting at all. I mean, seriously? They aren't working harder, they aren't smarter, they aren't better, they are just one of those lucky people blessed with muscles which are wasteful and obese people have muscles which are thrifty. It's all genetic. 70% of weight is genetic. Compare that to height, 80% of your height is genetic, but, you don't see a bunch of ads around encouraging you to diet down to a more petite stature. People generally accept that height is not changing.
For a scientific article on differences in the genetically lean: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
Yeah, if you have to count every calorie and log it and double your activity to make a measly lb a week shift, you may be genetically obese. If you just quit eating pizza and lost all the weight, you are probably genetically predestined to be lean anyways.
There are some genetically thin people who have managed to make themselves obese. But, those are the people eating a whole chocolate cake or ordering a large pizza and eating the whole thing. Genetically thin people have to be outright gluttons to get obese and as soon as they just stop eating pizza (or pick any one similar food) the weight melts off without much exercise or thought into it. I don't know ANY obese people like that. All the obese people I know, eat less and weigh more than thin people.
The thing that really grinds me, is that someone who is genetically destined to be obese who has finally toughed it through the hunger and sweat to be thin is just lumped in with the genetically thin who have been thin the whole time eating candy, drinking alcohol, ordering appetizers before their steak dinner and so on.
I have a couple genetically thin friends. One of them eats an EASY 3000 calories for lunch and brings in candy everyday and then still eats some pasta dish for dinner every night. She gets like 3000 steps per day on her fitbit. Once a month or so she brings her kids to the pool at the YMCA and REALLY believes that the half hour she stands in the pool during swim class once a month is the activity that keeps her thin.
I don't want to lose all the weight and finally have my thin coworker act like I've learned her secrets to being thin. Give me a break. She should need a bigger door cut. If I ate like her I would qualify for "My 600lb Life". It's just absolutely not fair that thin people are glorified when most of them just lucked into it like a trust fund baby.
The thin you EARNED is worth way more than that.
I think that the genetic component being common knowledge would result in people being more understanding. Hopefully it would cut down on the naturally thin giving diet advice. I would love to never have another thin person tell me I could be thin too if I just ate candy only twice a week. Like, seriously? The last time I had candy was a single Cadbury egg around Easter time. I eat candy MAYBE 5 times per year. I've been told I should cut down to pizza once a week. At that point, I hadn't had pizza in YEARS.
Yeah, a lot of these thin people need to know they just lucked into it. I'm so tired of hearing them talk about how they got a salad once 2 weeks ago and that's why they're thin. (Meanwhile salad they got had more calories than the steak dinner but they don't even know what a calorie is because they've never had to know their entire lives)
Alright, rant over. A lot of thin people are naturally thin while eating more and moving less. A lot of obese people are eating less and moving more to still be obese. It isn't fair. It's up to you whether or not you want to swim upstream.
I choose to swim upstream, but, I know that it is a situation which is not fair.
Then they're either calculating calories in incorrectly or calories out incorrectly.8 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »I just saw this article in the New York Times today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/health/americans-obesity-willpower-genetics-study.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-2&action=click&contentCollection=Health®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article&_r=0
I don't generally tend to put much stock in what the NYT says, but is it possible that obesity can't be helped by willpower? Should we bother to try to lose weight? My first thought about this is that it's a load of crap, but if it's what science says how can I dispute it?
You are missing the point that matters. What I hate most about being obese, is that people assume that I eat everything that isn't bolted down AND I'm lazy. People who have spent their entire lives skinny think about what they eat and assume that you are eating double what they eat. That's the part that needs to change because that's the part that isn't true. I know skinny people who occasionally go on diets, they lose that last ten lbs in 2 weeks or so by just quitting pizza and not calorie counting at all. I mean, seriously? They aren't working harder, they aren't smarter, they aren't better, they are just one of those lucky people blessed with muscles which are wasteful and obese people have muscles which are thrifty. It's all genetic. 70% of weight is genetic. Compare that to height, 80% of your height is genetic, but, you don't see a bunch of ads around encouraging you to diet down to a more petite stature. People generally accept that height is not changing.
For a scientific article on differences in the genetically lean: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
Yeah, if you have to count every calorie and log it and double your activity to make a measly lb a week shift, you may be genetically obese. If you just quit eating pizza and lost all the weight, you are probably genetically predestined to be lean anyways.
There are some genetically thin people who have managed to make themselves obese. But, those are the people eating a whole chocolate cake or ordering a large pizza and eating the whole thing. Genetically thin people have to be outright gluttons to get obese and as soon as they just stop eating pizza (or pick any one similar food) the weight melts off without much exercise or thought into it. I don't know ANY obese people like that. All the obese people I know, eat less and weigh more than thin people.
The thing that really grinds me, is that someone who is genetically destined to be obese who has finally toughed it through the hunger and sweat to be thin is just lumped in with the genetically thin who have been thin the whole time eating candy, drinking alcohol, ordering appetizers before their steak dinner and so on.
I have a couple genetically thin friends. One of them eats an EASY 3000 calories for lunch and brings in candy everyday and then still eats some pasta dish for dinner every night. She gets like 3000 steps per day on her fitbit. Once a month or so she brings her kids to the pool at the YMCA and REALLY believes that the half hour she stands in the pool during swim class once a month is the activity that keeps her thin.
I don't want to lose all the weight and finally have my thin coworker act like I've learned her secrets to being thin. Give me a break. She should need a bigger door cut. If I ate like her I would qualify for "My 600lb Life". It's just absolutely not fair that thin people are glorified when most of them just lucked into it like a trust fund baby.
The thin you EARNED is worth way more than that.
I think that the genetic component being common knowledge would result in people being more understanding. Hopefully it would cut down on the naturally thin giving diet advice. I would love to never have another thin person tell me I could be thin too if I just ate candy only twice a week. Like, seriously? The last time I had candy was a single Cadbury egg around Easter time. I eat candy MAYBE 5 times per year. I've been told I should cut down to pizza once a week. At that point, I hadn't had pizza in YEARS.
Yeah, a lot of these thin people need to know they just lucked into it. I'm so tired of hearing them talk about how they got a salad once 2 weeks ago and that's why they're thin. (Meanwhile salad they got had more calories than the steak dinner but they don't even know what a calorie is because they've never had to know their entire lives)
Alright, rant over. A lot of thin people are naturally thin while eating more and moving less. A lot of obese people are eating less and moving more to still be obese. It isn't fair. It's up to you whether or not you want to swim upstream. I choose to swim upstream, but, I know that it is a situation which is not fair.
Are you aware that the types of food you eat is not responsible for your inability to lose weight? You aren't automatically entitled (although I bet it feels like that denying yourself) to lose weight because you cut out a specific thing you like. You failed to create a caloric deficit. You can get plenty overweight on avocados and brown rice.
8 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »I just saw this article in the New York Times today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/health/americans-obesity-willpower-genetics-study.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-2&action=click&contentCollection=Health®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article&_r=0
I don't generally tend to put much stock in what the NYT says, but is it possible that obesity can't be helped by willpower? Should we bother to try to lose weight? My first thought about this is that it's a load of crap, but if it's what science says how can I dispute it?
You are missing the point that matters. What I hate most about being obese, is that people assume that I eat everything that isn't bolted down AND I'm lazy. People who have spent their entire lives skinny think about what they eat and assume that you are eating double what they eat. That's the part that needs to change because that's the part that isn't true. I know skinny people who occasionally go on diets, they lose that last ten lbs in 2 weeks or so by just quitting pizza and not calorie counting at all. I mean, seriously? They aren't working harder, they aren't smarter, they aren't better, they are just one of those lucky people blessed with muscles which are wasteful and obese people have muscles which are thrifty. It's all genetic. 70% of weight is genetic. Compare that to height, 80% of your height is genetic, but, you don't see a bunch of ads around encouraging you to diet down to a more petite stature. People generally accept that height is not changing.
For a scientific article on differences in the genetically lean: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
Yeah, if you have to count every calorie and log it and double your activity to make a measly lb a week shift, you may be genetically obese. If you just quit eating pizza and lost all the weight, you are probably genetically predestined to be lean anyways.
There are some genetically thin people who have managed to make themselves obese. But, those are the people eating a whole chocolate cake or ordering a large pizza and eating the whole thing. Genetically thin people have to be outright gluttons to get obese and as soon as they just stop eating pizza (or pick any one similar food) the weight melts off without much exercise or thought into it. I don't know ANY obese people like that. All the obese people I know, eat less and weigh more than thin people.
The thing that really grinds me, is that someone who is genetically destined to be obese who has finally toughed it through the hunger and sweat to be thin is just lumped in with the genetically thin who have been thin the whole time eating candy, drinking alcohol, ordering appetizers before their steak dinner and so on.
I have a couple genetically thin friends. One of them eats an EASY 3000 calories for lunch and brings in candy everyday and then still eats some pasta dish for dinner every night. She gets like 3000 steps per day on her fitbit. Once a month or so she brings her kids to the pool at the YMCA and REALLY believes that the half hour she stands in the pool during swim class once a month is the activity that keeps her thin.
I don't want to lose all the weight and finally have my thin coworker act like I've learned her secrets to being thin. Give me a break. She should need a bigger door cut. If I ate like her I would qualify for "My 600lb Life". It's just absolutely not fair that thin people are glorified when most of them just lucked into it like a trust fund baby.
The thin you EARNED is worth way more than that.
I think that the genetic component being common knowledge would result in people being more understanding. Hopefully it would cut down on the naturally thin giving diet advice. I would love to never have another thin person tell me I could be thin too if I just ate candy only twice a week. Like, seriously? The last time I had candy was a single Cadbury egg around Easter time. I eat candy MAYBE 5 times per year. I've been told I should cut down to pizza once a week. At that point, I hadn't had pizza in YEARS.
Yeah, a lot of these thin people need to know they just lucked into it. I'm so tired of hearing them talk about how they got a salad once 2 weeks ago and that's why they're thin. (Meanwhile salad they got had more calories than the steak dinner but they don't even know what a calorie is because they've never had to know their entire lives)
Alright, rant over. A lot of thin people are naturally thin while eating more and moving less. A lot of obese people are eating less and moving more to still be obese. It isn't fair. It's up to you whether or not you want to swim upstream. I choose to swim upstream, but, I know that it is a situation which is not fair.
So I take it you didn't read the thread, where this was discussed multiple times, that unless you are with someone 24/7 - you really have no idea what these supposedly "genetically thin" people are eating OR what their activity level is like.
I'm curious about the context of these conversations though, where a thin person suggests that if you only ate candy twice a week you'd lose weight too. Are you talking about your struggles with losing weight? Why would they bring up their eating habits? Or is this completely unsolicited advice?2 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »I just saw this article in the New York Times today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/health/americans-obesity-willpower-genetics-study.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-2&action=click&contentCollection=Health®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article&_r=0
I don't generally tend to put much stock in what the NYT says, but is it possible that obesity can't be helped by willpower? Should we bother to try to lose weight? My first thought about this is that it's a load of crap, but if it's what science says how can I dispute it?
You are missing the point that matters. What I hate most about being obese, is that people assume that I eat everything that isn't bolted down AND I'm lazy. People who have spent their entire lives skinny think about what they eat and assume that you are eating double what they eat. That's the part that needs to change because that's the part that isn't true. I know skinny people who occasionally go on diets, they lose that last ten lbs in 2 weeks or so by just quitting pizza and not calorie counting at all. I mean, seriously? They aren't working harder, they aren't smarter, they aren't better, they are just one of those lucky people blessed with muscles which are wasteful and obese people have muscles which are thrifty. It's all genetic. 70% of weight is genetic. Compare that to height, 80% of your height is genetic, but, you don't see a bunch of ads around encouraging you to diet down to a more petite stature. People generally accept that height is not changing.
For a scientific article on differences in the genetically lean: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
Yeah, if you have to count every calorie and log it and double your activity to make a measly lb a week shift, you may be genetically obese. If you just quit eating pizza and lost all the weight, you are probably genetically predestined to be lean anyways.
There are some genetically thin people who have managed to make themselves obese. But, those are the people eating a whole chocolate cake or ordering a large pizza and eating the whole thing. Genetically thin people have to be outright gluttons to get obese and as soon as they just stop eating pizza (or pick any one similar food) the weight melts off without much exercise or thought into it. I don't know ANY obese people like that. All the obese people I know, eat less and weigh more than thin people.
The thing that really grinds me, is that someone who is genetically destined to be obese who has finally toughed it through the hunger and sweat to be thin is just lumped in with the genetically thin who have been thin the whole time eating candy, drinking alcohol, ordering appetizers before their steak dinner and so on.
I have a couple genetically thin friends. One of them eats an EASY 3000 calories for lunch and brings in candy everyday and then still eats some pasta dish for dinner every night. She gets like 3000 steps per day on her fitbit. Once a month or so she brings her kids to the pool at the YMCA and REALLY believes that the half hour she stands in the pool during swim class once a month is the activity that keeps her thin.
I don't want to lose all the weight and finally have my thin coworker act like I've learned her secrets to being thin. Give me a break. She should need a bigger door cut. If I ate like her I would qualify for "My 600lb Life". It's just absolutely not fair that thin people are glorified when most of them just lucked into it like a trust fund baby.
The thin you EARNED is worth way more than that.
I think that the genetic component being common knowledge would result in people being more understanding. Hopefully it would cut down on the naturally thin giving diet advice. I would love to never have another thin person tell me I could be thin too if I just ate candy only twice a week. Like, seriously? The last time I had candy was a single Cadbury egg around Easter time. I eat candy MAYBE 5 times per year. I've been told I should cut down to pizza once a week. At that point, I hadn't had pizza in YEARS.
Yeah, a lot of these thin people need to know they just lucked into it. I'm so tired of hearing them talk about how they got a salad once 2 weeks ago and that's why they're thin. (Meanwhile salad they got had more calories than the steak dinner but they don't even know what a calorie is because they've never had to know their entire lives)
Alright, rant over. A lot of thin people are naturally thin while eating more and moving less. A lot of obese people are eating less and moving more to still be obese. It isn't fair. It's up to you whether or not you want to swim upstream. I choose to swim upstream, but, I know that it is a situation which is not fair.
Or not... and the thin folks are eating fewer calories and more active than you actually think and the obese are in denial about what they are actually eating...
https://youtu.be/KA9AdlhB18o
https://youtu.be/bYJrC3RTtgQ 6 -
The_Enginerd wrote: »jenniferinfl wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »I just saw this article in the New York Times today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/health/americans-obesity-willpower-genetics-study.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-2&action=click&contentCollection=Health®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article&_r=0
I don't generally tend to put much stock in what the NYT says, but is it possible that obesity can't be helped by willpower? Should we bother to try to lose weight? My first thought about this is that it's a load of crap, but if it's what science says how can I dispute it?
You are missing the point that matters. What I hate most about being obese, is that people assume that I eat everything that isn't bolted down AND I'm lazy. People who have spent their entire lives skinny think about what they eat and assume that you are eating double what they eat. That's the part that needs to change because that's the part that isn't true. I know skinny people who occasionally go on diets, they lose that last ten lbs in 2 weeks or so by just quitting pizza and not calorie counting at all. I mean, seriously? They aren't working harder, they aren't smarter, they aren't better, they are just one of those lucky people blessed with muscles which are wasteful and obese people have muscles which are thrifty. It's all genetic. 70% of weight is genetic. Compare that to height, 80% of your height is genetic, but, you don't see a bunch of ads around encouraging you to diet down to a more petite stature. People generally accept that height is not changing.
For a scientific article on differences in the genetically lean: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
Yeah, if you have to count every calorie and log it and double your activity to make a measly lb a week shift, you may be genetically obese. If you just quit eating pizza and lost all the weight, you are probably genetically predestined to be lean anyways.
There are some genetically thin people who have managed to make themselves obese. But, those are the people eating a whole chocolate cake or ordering a large pizza and eating the whole thing. Genetically thin people have to be outright gluttons to get obese and as soon as they just stop eating pizza (or pick any one similar food) the weight melts off without much exercise or thought into it. I don't know ANY obese people like that. All the obese people I know, eat less and weigh more than thin people.
The thing that really grinds me, is that someone who is genetically destined to be obese who has finally toughed it through the hunger and sweat to be thin is just lumped in with the genetically thin who have been thin the whole time eating candy, drinking alcohol, ordering appetizers before their steak dinner and so on.
I have a couple genetically thin friends. One of them eats an EASY 3000 calories for lunch and brings in candy everyday and then still eats some pasta dish for dinner every night. She gets like 3000 steps per day on her fitbit. Once a month or so she brings her kids to the pool at the YMCA and REALLY believes that the half hour she stands in the pool during swim class once a month is the activity that keeps her thin.
I don't want to lose all the weight and finally have my thin coworker act like I've learned her secrets to being thin. Give me a break. She should need a bigger door cut. If I ate like her I would qualify for "My 600lb Life". It's just absolutely not fair that thin people are glorified when most of them just lucked into it like a trust fund baby.
The thin you EARNED is worth way more than that.
I think that the genetic component being common knowledge would result in people being more understanding. Hopefully it would cut down on the naturally thin giving diet advice. I would love to never have another thin person tell me I could be thin too if I just ate candy only twice a week. Like, seriously? The last time I had candy was a single Cadbury egg around Easter time. I eat candy MAYBE 5 times per year. I've been told I should cut down to pizza once a week. At that point, I hadn't had pizza in YEARS.
Yeah, a lot of these thin people need to know they just lucked into it. I'm so tired of hearing them talk about how they got a salad once 2 weeks ago and that's why they're thin. (Meanwhile salad they got had more calories than the steak dinner but they don't even know what a calorie is because they've never had to know their entire lives)
Alright, rant over. A lot of thin people are naturally thin while eating more and moving less. A lot of obese people are eating less and moving more to still be obese. It isn't fair. It's up to you whether or not you want to swim upstream. I choose to swim upstream, but, I know that it is a situation which is not fair.
Or not... and the thin folks are eating fewer calories and more active than you actually think and the obese are in denial about what they are actually eating...https://youtu.be/KA9AdlhB18ohttps://youtu.be/bYJrC3RTtgQ
Thank you, I was trying to find that earlier!
0 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »I just saw this article in the New York Times today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/health/americans-obesity-willpower-genetics-study.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-2&action=click&contentCollection=Health®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article&_r=0
I don't generally tend to put much stock in what the NYT says, but is it possible that obesity can't be helped by willpower? Should we bother to try to lose weight? My first thought about this is that it's a load of crap, but if it's what science says how can I dispute it?
You are missing the point that matters. What I hate most about being obese, is that people assume that I eat everything that isn't bolted down AND I'm lazy. People who have spent their entire lives skinny think about what they eat and assume that you are eating double what they eat.
Some of this is projection on your part. Most people probably don't think about others all that much or assume they are fortunate if they indeed don't have to think about their weight much. My sister has always been thin and even though she works at it (she exercises a lot), she tends to see it as her being naturally thin and doesn't think I ate much more than she does when I was fat (I actually did, at least at times).
I do agree that it's annoying that some people likely assume you are a huge pig or, especially, that you are always eating donuts and fast food (which I did not do when fat). When I was heavier I was actually self-conscious about eating much at all around others and would always pick the lower cal/healthier option because I was afraid of judgment, but I suspect that was me more than anyone else. I also would say that I dislike the stereotype that one must eat a whole lot to be fat, as you can gain a lot of weight not eating that much, but just somewhat over your TDEE for a while. I gained weight largely when I was going through some stuff, became abruptly sedentary, but didn't change my diet from what had been appropriate when I did a lot of cardio (so I was eating around 2100 to 2200 calories). Hardly some enormous amount, and reasonably healthy choices, but too much for me when I'm not that active.I mean, seriously? They aren't working harder, they aren't smarter, they aren't better, they are just one of those lucky people blessed with muscles which are wasteful and obese people have muscles which are thrifty.
Eh. They aren't smarter, sure, and they might not be working harder, for them, as they may have found a way to eat and be active that they don't have to think about, but the idea that thin people never think about it or work at it is wrong, IMO, and also it's completely not useful to be resentful about.It's all genetic. 70% of weight is genetic. Compare that to height, 80% of your height is genetic, but, you don't see a bunch of ads around encouraging you to diet down to a more petite stature. People generally accept that height is not changing.
That there are genetic influences does not mean it's set in stone. Again, the weight of the country on average has increased significantly over the past 30 years. That's not because we are all genetically preprogrammed weights. I can lose weight, I cannot increase my height, not now.There are some genetically thin people who have managed to make themselves obese. But, those are the people eating a whole chocolate cake or ordering a large pizza and eating the whole thing. Genetically thin people have to be outright gluttons to get obese and as soon as they just stop eating pizza (or pick any one similar food) the weight melts off without much exercise or thought into it. I don't know ANY obese people like that. All the obese people I know, eat less and weigh more than thin people.
The thing that really grinds me, is that someone who is genetically destined to be obese who has finally toughed it through the hunger and sweat to be thin is just lumped in with the genetically thin who have been thin the whole time eating candy, drinking alcohol, ordering appetizers before their steak dinner and so on.
Where do you get this idea that there are the -- as I think you are saying -- deserving obese and the undeserving obese. People who should be shamed for being obese (they must be huge gluttons -- and I guess this is anyone who is successful in losing?) and those who can't help it? That seems like a way to tell yourself not to be inspired by others losing and that you cannot change anything for yourself. Or else that for you its harder and more praiseworthy to lose, but for others it is easy and doesn't count, it's a worthless achievement.
And like others are saying, you don't know what others do when you aren't around, how hard they work.
In college and even law school I was into the idea that smart people didn't have to work, at all. I pretended not to. My boyfriend at the time even got annoyed with me because he said it wasn't fair that I blew everything off and did better on tests than him. It was a pride thing for me to pretend like I wasn't studious and didn't care, but did well anyway. It was a front. Similarly with weight loss, some find it more appealing to talk about it as really hard, to focus on the difficulties and vent, it probably is a way of encouraging themselves. Others find it easier to minimize those things. You don't know. You certainly don't know it's more difficult for you than anyone else.6 -
mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.0 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
Are you with her all day everyday to know for sure she wears her fitbit all day everyday? I know tons of people who charge them and forget to put them back on until hours later.3 -
@CSARdiver
Since you cannot find the science in my post, here it is: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
And another study: http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v6/n3/abs/nrg1556.html
And another study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18842775
And yet another study: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1400613?rss=searchAndBrowse&#t=article
Obesity is genetic. Science knows that beyond refute. Scientist's KNOW that obesity and thinness are genetic. It's the entire fat-shaming population that wants to plug their ears to it the same as they plug their ears and hum over global warming.
I don't mean that people cannot lose weight, they can, just for a lot of the population it is going to be very, very hard to lose weight and keep it off. It can be done, but, it is not the same as being a person who is genetically thin.
4 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
Why are you spending so much time and energy thinking about your friend's activity level and estimating what you believe that she consumes calorie wise?
Why not just focus on how you are going to achieve your own goals?7 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
People who weigh 120 lbs and burn 3000-5000 calories consistently without being active don't exist. No matter how much "metabolism" varies, what you are saying is not possible. Unless she has this very rare disease that only a handful of people in the world have (and believe you would know if she does) this is impossible. Just like "premonition dreams", we tend to strongly favor remembering them but not all the other dreams that didn't come true, you are strongly favoring remembering the times she ate a lot but not all the times she didn't. Her portions look larger to you than your portions look to you because you have these preconceived notions about her eating behavior. You also have no idea if she wears her fitbit the whole time or how she eats at home. Fitbit doesn't pick up stationary cycling, for example, among other things.
You just would rather believe that your friend is a special case way off the charts of any documented metabolic differences (she should be studied for science if this is the case) than believe that you're not genetically doomed because, in your mind, that means you ate too much (which you likely did, and I did too). It more about what you do eat, not what you don't eat. Not eating pizza and chocolate does not mean you aren't overeating other things, and there is no shame in that.7 -
BurlzGettingFit wrote: »jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
Are you with her all day everyday to know for sure she wears her fitbit all day everyday? I know tons of people who charge them and forget to put them back on until hours later.
She states that she only gets about 3500 steps a day and needs to move more. She offers me unsolicited advice. She asks me why in the world I'm getting 15000 steps a day, she says it isn't necessary because she 'loses' weight at 3500 steps. She says that's the adult average anyways. I absolutely do not know what she eats at home. I know that in a typical day she eats 2 sausage and egg biscuits from the local gas station. They are 450 calories each. She also has a 32 ounce Mountain Dew slushie which is 460 calories. ( breakfast is 1360 calories so far) For lunch, she gets a large Little Caesers pizza and eats half of it. Last I checked, that's 1000 calories for the plain cheese, I'm not going to bother checking the pepperoni, so now we're at 2360. She also usually eats one king sized bag of peanut M&M's, that's another 480 calories. (Obviously, we're closing in on 3000 calories already. She also consumes several of those Kuerig latte's, but, I'm not going to bother checking the calories in that, she's already at 3000 calories) When she doesn't get pizza, she goes to burger king and gets 2 whoppers, a large fry and sometimes also an order of cheese sticks. When she doesn't get the cheese sticks, she's at 1840 for lunch- so, 3680 calories on a day she goes to burger king instead of little caeser's.
So, yes, I can only go by her fitbit numbers and the fact that she says she doesn't exercise. I also ONLY know what I see her eat at work. I have no idea how much more she eats at home. But, even if she skips dinner, she should weigh over 200 lbs with her consumption.0 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »
@CSARdiver
Since you cannot find the science in my post, here it is: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
And another study: http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v6/n3/abs/nrg1556.html
And another study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18842775
And yet another study: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1400613?rss=searchAndBrowse&#t=article
Obesity is genetic. Science knows that beyond refute. Scientist's KNOW that obesity and thinness are genetic. It's the entire fat-shaming population that wants to plug their ears to it the same as they plug their ears and hum over global warming.
I don't mean that people cannot lose weight, they can, just for a lot of the population it is going to be very, very hard to lose weight and keep it off. It can be done, but, it is not the same as being a person who is genetically thin.
1st link is a rat study.
2nd link is behind a pay wall.
3rd link if I'm reading the abstract correctly was a study done on 21 people and I believe is suggesting that if you lose weight your BMR declines.
4th link is an article.
There are scientists studying how much of a role genetics plays in obesity, and as many here have said I'm sure it's a factor, but it is in no way a scientific fact that obesity is genetic.
Most people would say I'm naturally thin. They see me eat fast food and pizza, drink beer, and never hear me talking about my food choices or the gym. Many people have said to me how lucky I am to be thin. Luck my *kitten*.
I have logged on MFP for over 1,000 consecutive days. I use a food scale for everything I eat/prepare at home and I make choices at fast food, sit down restaurants, and other peoples homes that I know will fit my calorie allotment. If I know there will be cake, I skip breakfast. I work out 4 times a week, and take walks every day. I do the work, I just do it in the privacy of my home. Almost all of my relatives are overweight.
MFP is full of people who were sure they were just meant to be obese, until they started accurately and consistently logging food and exercise. Obviously there are exceptions, which usually involve a medical condition that affects CO.
As far as I'm concerned, it's just as insulting to say most thin people are naturally thin as it is to say that most overweight people are lazy.14 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
Almost anyone would become obese on those calories. You are quite obviously way overestimating her intake because no one is exempt from the laws of thermodynamics. Is she seeking medical attention or being studied by science for being a unicorn?5 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
People who weigh 120 lbs and burn 3000-5000 calories consistently without being active don't exist. No matter how much "metabolism" varies, what you are saying is not possible. Unless she has this very rare disease that only a handful of people in the world have (and believe you would know if she does) this is impossible. Just like "premonition dreams", we tend to strongly favor remembering them but not all the other dreams that didn't come true, you are strongly favoring remembering the times she ate a lot but not all the times she didn't. Her portions look larger to you than your portions look to you because you have these preconceived notions about her eating behavior. You also have no idea if she wears her fitbit the whole time or how she eats at home. Fitbit doesn't pick up stationary cycling, for example, among other things.
You just would rather believe that your friend is a special case way off the charts of any documented metabolic differences (she should be studied for science if this is the case) than believe that you're not genetically doomed because, in your mind, that means you ate too much (which you likely did, and I did too). It more about what you do eat, not what you don't eat. Not eating pizza and chocolate does not mean you aren't overeating other things, and there is no shame in that.
Except that they absolutely DO exist.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00hbsk2
This program was about the work of Ethan Sims where prison inmates were offered early release in exchange for weight gain for a scientific study. Some could not gain on 10,000 calories per day. So, yeah, just science.. Or, maybe it's witches..3 -
@jenniferinfl how long did it take you to get to goal(if you did)? do you believe it was more difficult for you because of your genetics? Or if you didn't get there do you believe your genetics played a role?0
-
jenniferinfl wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
People who weigh 120 lbs and burn 3000-5000 calories consistently without being active don't exist. No matter how much "metabolism" varies, what you are saying is not possible. Unless she has this very rare disease that only a handful of people in the world have (and believe you would know if she does) this is impossible. Just like "premonition dreams", we tend to strongly favor remembering them but not all the other dreams that didn't come true, you are strongly favoring remembering the times she ate a lot but not all the times she didn't. Her portions look larger to you than your portions look to you because you have these preconceived notions about her eating behavior. You also have no idea if she wears her fitbit the whole time or how she eats at home. Fitbit doesn't pick up stationary cycling, for example, among other things.
You just would rather believe that your friend is a special case way off the charts of any documented metabolic differences (she should be studied for science if this is the case) than believe that you're not genetically doomed because, in your mind, that means you ate too much (which you likely did, and I did too). It more about what you do eat, not what you don't eat. Not eating pizza and chocolate does not mean you aren't overeating other things, and there is no shame in that.
Except that they absolutely DO exist.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00hbsk2
This program was about the work of Ethan Sims where prison inmates were offered early release in exchange for weight gain for a scientific study. Some could not gain on 10,000 calories per day. So, yeah, just science.. Or, maybe it's witches..
I'm aware of this program, and every single one of the participants either gained weight or dropped out due to not being able to eat the required 5000 calories (for men, less for women). Those who gained the least weight increased their non-exercise activity dramatically. They just moved more.9 -
That's interesting, I didn't know about that.
Which only compounds the fact that BMI was never meant to be used the way it is. In fact, its creator (who designed it for statistical purposes across large populations) issued a warning with it that it should never be used as a health marker for individuals.
Caused me all kinds of issues when I was 17 & it said I had a considerable weight problem at 200lbs. Of course no one ever stopped to consider the fact that I was lifting weights like it was a second job & had 14% body fat.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
Why are you spending so much time and energy thinking about your friend's activity level and estimating what you believe that she consumes calorie wise?
Why not just focus on how you are going to achieve your own goals?
I do mostly try to focus on my own journey, but, I'm lucky to have the cognitive ability to be capable of focusing on many things at once. You know, I don't just log my food and walk and chat on message boards. I also go to a full-time job, home-school my daughter, entertain family and so on. But, since my coworker draws attention to it constantly by pressuring me to eat with her and since it lines up well with the topic of this thread, I couldn't help but mention it.
I'm really tired of science being shushed. I'm just tired of it. I wasn't a 240 lb 12 year old because I was eating a lot more or moving less than my siblings. I just WAS. It was what I was fated to be. I know I can fight it, I've lost 100 lbs before and kept it off for 10 years. But, then I was depressed for a couple months, (Not clinically obviously, but, just depressed about job loss) and gained nearly 100 lbs back in around 3 months. It should have been impossible. I would have had to have eaten over 10,000 calories per day and I absolutely didn't. I just ate single servings of regular meals with my normally sized family. That shouldn't be enough to gain 100 lbs in 3 months. It shouldn't. I knew my weight the day before I got laid off. 3 months later I got on the scale again to a complete nightmare. Meanwhile, in Ethan Sim's Vermont prison study, he had men who couldn't gain on 10,000 calories a day and I could gain 100 lbs in 3 months on what HAD to be less than 3000 calories per day even assuming my mom used whole sticks of butter in her food.
It should be impossible to gain 100 lbs in 3 months. But, it wasn't impossible for me. I've done it. I've spent years since gradually trying to take it back off.
I think that's why watching my coworker really bothers me. I gained 100 lbs in 3 months eating no fast food at all, eating less than I see her eat every single day.1 -
I want to say, I absolutely know there is a genetic component. I suspect there may be epigenetic factors as well. However, I believe a lot of the blame can be places on the insulin spikes caused by the massive amounts of sugar in our diets, hidden in foods that have not business containing sugar in the first place. I know for me, hormonal factors also played a role. Not will power. There was no will power strong enough at my highest weight. I could not stop eating because I had this insatiable hunger I couldn't ignore. Believe me, I tried to ignore it. It got ridiculous & I was desperate & disgusted with it, but I couldn't stop.
Eliminating the sugar (and carbs that act like sugar in the body) that stopped that process has been night & day for me. No more insulin spikes & drops. No more ridiculous hunger that I couldn't win against. Suddenly, I'm perfectly content with one meal a day most days & even did a 48hr fast without it being a struggle.
I didn't miraculously gain more willpower. I'm not a different person. I'm not moving much more than I was. I was severely anemic for 2yrs & am just recovered from that so I'm only slowly upping my activity level. I'm sedentary more days than not & I haven't yet been able to get back into a gym. I'm also middle aged (41) and have hormone issues. Yet I've been able to easily & comfortably lose 5lbs a month on average. (down 36lbs total, long way to go still)
It isn't a will power issue. I always had the will to be thinner. I just finally figured out what was skewing my body's sense of hunger & eliminated that issue.2 -
mrsnattybulking wrote: »jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
Almost anyone would become obese on those calories. You are quite obviously way overestimating her intake because no one is exempt from the laws of thermodynamics. Is she seeking medical attention or being studied by science for being a unicorn?
There are a rare number of people who are true hard gainers. Typically they have trouble gaining because they don't have sufficient appetite, but they also do have their metabolism go up disproportionally when they eat more. Is this enough to mean they could regularly do no exercise, eat 3000, and not gain at, say 5'2 and 110? No, not really, but there are some people who have much more trouble than others.
Anyone significantly out of the norm on this is, of course, very unusual, and worrying about it because one thinks one's friend is one such person makes no sense to me. Obviously most people are not. So like you, I think it's impossible, but even if not, I don't get why it's supposed to matter.
I don't really see anyone around me who seems to be way out of the norm with eating and weight (but like the poster I wouldn't know). Pretty much everyone around my age, or even in their 30s, seems to have to pay attention and watch what they eat somewhat to stay a healthy weight, and most everyone I know does. Some people seem not to be interested in food, some exercise more than others, but I really don't see around me all these people who supposedly never gain weight despite eating huge amounts of calories and not moving.2 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »jenniferinfl wrote: »mrsnattybulking wrote: »@jenniferinfl You don't know what they eat or don't eat when they get home, nor do you know their activity level. I bet people see me in a McDonald's and curse me just the same. Never mind the 12-15K steps I take in a day or the lifting 3/week.
I do know, she's my fitbit friend. It wouldn't matter if she ate nothing when she got home. I've logged her at over 3000-5000 calories at work, just the things I've seen her eat.. and I KNOW she hasn't taken more than 3500 steps per day in the last 5 months. She has been 120 lbs the whole time.
Why are you spending so much time and energy thinking about your friend's activity level and estimating what you believe that she consumes calorie wise?
Why not just focus on how you are going to achieve your own goals?
I do mostly try to focus on my own journey, but, I'm lucky to have the cognitive ability to be capable of focusing on many things at once. You know, I don't just log my food and walk and chat on message boards. I also go to a full-time job, home-school my daughter, entertain family and so on. But, since my coworker draws attention to it constantly by pressuring me to eat with her and since it lines up well with the topic of this thread, I couldn't help but mention it.
I'm really tired of science being shushed. I'm just tired of it. I wasn't a 240 lb 12 year old because I was eating a lot more or moving less than my siblings. I just WAS. It was what I was fated to be. I know I can fight it, I've lost 100 lbs before and kept it off for 10 years. But, then I was depressed for a couple months, (Not clinically obviously, but, just depressed about job loss) and gained nearly 100 lbs back in around 3 months. It should have been impossible. I would have had to have eaten over 10,000 calories per day and I absolutely didn't. I just ate single servings of regular meals with my normally sized family. That shouldn't be enough to gain 100 lbs in 3 months. It shouldn't. I knew my weight the day before I got laid off. 3 months later I got on the scale again to a complete nightmare. Meanwhile, in Ethan Sim's Vermont prison study, he had men who couldn't gain on 10,000 calories a day and I could gain 100 lbs in 3 months on what HAD to be less than 3000 calories per day even assuming my mom used whole sticks of butter in her food.
It should be impossible to gain 100 lbs in 3 months. But, it wasn't impossible for me. I've done it. I've spent years since gradually trying to take it back off.
I think that's why watching my coworker really bothers me. I gained 100 lbs in 3 months eating no fast food at all, eating less than I see her eat every single day.
Have you had your thyroid checked? (Apologies if this has been asked/answered previously)0 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »
@CSARdiver
Since you cannot find the science in my post, here it is: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
And another study: http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v6/n3/abs/nrg1556.html
And another study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18842775
And yet another study: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1400613?rss=searchAndBrowse&#t=article
Obesity is genetic. Science knows that beyond refute. Scientist's KNOW that obesity and thinness are genetic. It's the entire fat-shaming population that wants to plug their ears to it the same as they plug their ears and hum over global warming.
I don't mean that people cannot lose weight, they can, just for a lot of the population it is going to be very, very hard to lose weight and keep it off. It can be done, but, it is not the same as being a person who is genetically thin.
None of these articles support your contention of genetics equating to fate. There was a recent flat earth experiment conducted that went about as well as this exercise.
Despite the volume of evidence contradicting your contention you are desperately clinging to one study conducted by Ethan Sims? That’s a sound plan to keep yourself a victim.
I do understand the effort to shift the blame from behavior to fate, but the evidence is quite simply…lacking. One of my favorite points in this site are the success stories where people shift from the victim mentality to one of ownership and accountability. Once people do this the impossible becomes possible.
I think you need to sort out precisely what you mean, because at this point this is coming across as excuses. You state that people are genetically fated to a set point weight, but can engage in behavior to change this. So which is it?
13 -
http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
Rat study, as noted, but interesting because of the following:
"In the midst of this obesity epidemic, one-third of people remain lean. A key trait that predicts resistance to weight gain is activity-related energy expenditure or non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT). It is therefore crucial to identify the neural and molecular mechanisms underlying this increased NEAT..."
In other words, the study is not about the idea that some people are just fat, or born to be fat -- something that makes 0 sense given the huge increase in obesity in recent years. It is about the fact that some people seem to be immune to it. Related to this, one thing we talk about here off and on is the idea that people should be able to just intuitively eat (even mindlessly not overeat). My view is that it makes total sense that most of us would not be able to -- genetically it seems to convey an advantage to be able to eat when food is available and not just up to your TDEE for the day or week. However, it also makes sense that some people might be different and have more of an internal barometer of how many calories they need. It's a difference that can be observed among domestic animals, for example.
So some people may be naturally thin (although the average thin person likely is not, but puts some thought into it). It doesn't follow that obese people were destined to be obese. The better evidence is that the same genes 50 years ago would not have resulted in obesity, which suggests there's a huge environmental and habit element.7 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »
@CSARdiver
Since you cannot find the science in my post, here it is: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
And another study: http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v6/n3/abs/nrg1556.html
And another study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18842775
And yet another study: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1400613?rss=searchAndBrowse&#t=article
Obesity is genetic. Science knows that beyond refute. Scientist's KNOW that obesity and thinness are genetic. It's the entire fat-shaming population that wants to plug their ears to it the same as they plug their ears and hum over global warming.
I don't mean that people cannot lose weight, they can, just for a lot of the population it is going to be very, very hard to lose weight and keep it off. It can be done, but, it is not the same as being a person who is genetically thin.
None of these articles support your contention of genetics equating to fate. There was a recent flat earth experiment conducted that went about as well as this exercise.
Despite the volume of evidence contradicting your contention you are desperately clinging to one study conducted by Ethan Sims? That’s a sound plan to keep yourself a victim.
I do understand the effort to shift the blame from behavior to fate, but the evidence is quite simply…lacking. One of my favorite points in this site are the success stories where people shift from the victim mentality to one of ownership and accountability. Once people do this the impossible becomes possible.
I think you need to sort out precisely what you mean, because at this point this is coming across as excuses. You state that people are genetically fated to a set point weight, but can engage in behavior to change this. So which is it?
I see this community is exactly the same as ever.
I'm not saying that fat people can't lose weight, I've done it and kept it off for years. I see you've conveniently missed the part where I lost 100 lbs and kept if off for nearly a decade? That's right, wouldn't fit the way you perceive me. But, when I got down to those last 10 lbs, I was eating 800 calories, hadn't had my period in 6 months and walked 12 miles a day and could BARELY maintain it. Because, oh yeah, science indicates that genetically obese people who lose more than 10% of their body weight burn around 25% less than naturally thin people of the same size/age. Which, you would have read had you legitimately read the articles I posted. That's a pretty huge difference. That's being able to eat 1200 calories to maintain 120 lbs with a sedentary lifestyle versus having to eat 900 calories to maintain a sedentary 120 lbs. (I'm just using sedentary because it's the easiest to calculate, not actually suggesting that it's a good idea). I'm sorry, that may not seem like a big deal to you, but, if you'd ever done it you'd see why that's a huge deal. 300 more calories is a pretty big deal.
To the other poster, yes, I'm borderline hypothyroid, my doctor says it's not worth treating; I beg to differ a bit. I use a fitbit Blaze to track calories burned. I measure and weigh everything I eat. I track with trendweight. Supposedly the Blaze has a caloric overburn by about 2-3%. I'm a pretty active person and usually walk/jog enough to burn around 3200 calories per day. When I eat 2200 calories, which should be a 1000 calorie deficit (every single thing logged, even a single mini M&M) according to Trendweight my actual loss indicates that I am at a 638 calorie deficit per day. The most the Blaze should be off for me is by about 96 calories, but, I burn 362 calories less than I should or 266 calories allowing for the Blaze to be off. I'm sure that a big part of that is the fact that I just burn 10% less than the average. That would make sense with the borderline thyroid numbers. This is with my metabolism at pretty much the best it's been in awhile. I know that will keep dropping as I lose weight even after factoring in that light people burn less. Right now I'm losing 1.5 lbs a week, which is fine with me.
I'm still a bit annoyed though about how the lies we tell fat people just have ruined huge parts of my life. I destroyed my metabolism eating a 1200 calorie diet because I believed the people who told me I was sedentary. My fitbit has been a lifesaver. I can finally KNOW that I'm not lazy. I KNOW it. No one can hurt me with that ever again. I had 10,000 steps in before 3 pm and I didn't go for a walk. That was just wandering around the house taking care of my kid and pets and light housework and the pacing/fidgeting I've always done. I made myself so sick last time I tried to lose weight, I did the math here and everyone told me that I was probably sedentary or assume sedentary so I was eating 1200 calories or eating 1500 if I'd gone for a walk. I woke up one morning vomiting and had to use Pepto Bismal to be able to go to work. I was nauseous every single day for months and I know it was my diet here that caused it. The only thing my doctor could find wrong with me was borderline low albumin (a marker for anorexia) and low Vitamin D. I only quit having to bring a coffee can with me in my car to barf in around 5 months ago.
So, yes, I'm pretty touchy about all this. I'm just glad I finally tried a Fitbit. I thought they were the dumbest gimmick. I was over the moon when I looked at it at the end of my first day and saw my numbers.
Most of the fat people I know are fully aware of what they are eating. I know my skinny coworker is a fluke, most of my coworkers are at least somewhat mindful of what they eat. I've only met one other person like her and that was an exboyfriend from years ago. Back when the cops around here still had minimum weight limits to join, he tried so hard to get up to weight and just couldn't do it. He had to gain 20 lbs to qualify and just couldn't do it. But, those are the only two I've known. Most people I know are more the go up and down 10 lbs regularly people.
I also know that in some ways, I'm really lucky. No matter what, my crazy body stops at 240 every time. 100 lbs is a lot to lose. But, dear lord, those poor people who have a body that stops at 340 or 440? I just can't even imagine. As annoyed as I get about it, it could always be much worse.3 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
Rat study, as noted, but interesting because of the following:
"In the midst of this obesity epidemic, one-third of people remain lean. A key trait that predicts resistance to weight gain is activity-related energy expenditure or non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT). It is therefore crucial to identify the neural and molecular mechanisms underlying this increased NEAT..."
In other words, the study is not about the idea that some people are just fat, or born to be fat -- something that makes 0 sense given the huge increase in obesity in recent years. It is about the fact that some people seem to be immune to it. Related to this, one thing we talk about here off and on is the idea that people should be able to just intuitively eat (even mindlessly not overeat). My view is that it makes total sense that most of us would not be able to -- genetically it seems to convey an advantage to be able to eat when food is available and not just up to your TDEE for the day or week. However, it also makes sense that some people might be different and have more of an internal barometer of how many calories they need. It's a difference that can be observed among domestic animals, for example.
So some people may be naturally thin (although the average thin person likely is not, but puts some thought into it). It doesn't follow that obese people were destined to be obese. The better evidence is that the same genes 50 years ago would not have resulted in obesity, which suggests there's a huge environmental and habit element.
Well, obviously.. Even 50 years ago there were less government benefits programs and more poor people starved. My parents went to bed hungry, they were born in the 50's. My Dad's family frequently ate only one meal per day. Children who couldn't thrive on reduced calories died. My dad lost a few cousins in childhood (not to actual starvation, but, they were malnourished and couldn't fight off disease). I'm sure they would have been these genetically thin people. We've been selected for famine survival. I'm sure if you would have gone back to the 30's with modern food in today's quantities, everyone would be obese, because the kids who could eat more calories without gaining weight already died.
The only way you would see more balance is if you could find a population that hadn't experienced starvation in 1000 years. Then you would probably see more selection to naturally thin. But, that population doesn't exist. We are selecting for them now. The genes for obesity have already been identified. We're probably only a few short years away from being able to select offspring without obesity. Even something extreme like gastric bypass doesn't really cure obesity since you still pass it on to your own children.
This holds promise: (I would find the real scientific article, but, it doesn't seem like anyone's reading them anyways): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2288991/Switching-obesity-gene-prevent-weight-gain-EVEN-eating-high-fat-diet.html
Ugh, I couldn't stop myself, here's the science should anyone be fascinated: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3622329/
Basically, the cure to the obesity epidemic is starvation. Mass starvation. That's what prevented the obesity epidemic up until now, periodic starvation. Though, let's face it, that would just kill off all the genetically thin people and then we would be obese again as soon as food was available again. So, not really a solution.
Or, we could just quit shaming fat people for being evolutionary superiors? Because, after all, that's why obesity is prevalent, because people who used less calories hunting/gathering survived longer to have children and the children who survived without starving were also selected to be thrifty with calorie use. We just haven't had any good old fashioned starvation recently enough here in the US to prove the genetic superiority of fat people.
If some mass food shortage ever happens, it would be obvious that 70% of the population was equipped for it with bodies which are more efficient with less calories.3 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »jenniferinfl wrote: »
@CSARdiver
Since you cannot find the science in my post, here it is: http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
And another study: http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v6/n3/abs/nrg1556.html
And another study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18842775
And yet another study: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1400613?rss=searchAndBrowse&#t=article
Obesity is genetic. Science knows that beyond refute. Scientist's KNOW that obesity and thinness are genetic. It's the entire fat-shaming population that wants to plug their ears to it the same as they plug their ears and hum over global warming.
I don't mean that people cannot lose weight, they can, just for a lot of the population it is going to be very, very hard to lose weight and keep it off. It can be done, but, it is not the same as being a person who is genetically thin.
None of these articles support your contention of genetics equating to fate. There was a recent flat earth experiment conducted that went about as well as this exercise.
Despite the volume of evidence contradicting your contention you are desperately clinging to one study conducted by Ethan Sims? That’s a sound plan to keep yourself a victim.
I do understand the effort to shift the blame from behavior to fate, but the evidence is quite simply…lacking. One of my favorite points in this site are the success stories where people shift from the victim mentality to one of ownership and accountability. Once people do this the impossible becomes possible.
I think you need to sort out precisely what you mean, because at this point this is coming across as excuses. You state that people are genetically fated to a set point weight, but can engage in behavior to change this. So which is it?
I see this community is exactly the same as ever.
I'm not saying that fat people can't lose weight, I've done it and kept it off for years. I see you've conveniently missed the part where I lost 100 lbs and kept if off for nearly a decade? That's right, wouldn't fit the way you perceive me. But, when I got down to those last 10 lbs, I was eating 800 calories, hadn't had my period in 6 months and walked 12 miles a day and could BARELY maintain it. Because, oh yeah, science indicates that genetically obese people who lose more than 10% of their body weight burn around 25% less than naturally thin people of the same size/age. Which, you would have read had you legitimately read the articles I posted. That's a pretty huge difference. That's being able to eat 1200 calories to maintain 120 lbs with a sedentary lifestyle versus having to eat 900 calories to maintain a sedentary 120 lbs. (I'm just using sedentary because it's the easiest to calculate, not actually suggesting that it's a good idea). I'm sorry, that may not seem like a big deal to you, but, if you'd ever done it you'd see why that's a huge deal. 300 more calories is a pretty big deal.
To the other poster, yes, I'm borderline hypothyroid, my doctor says it's not worth treating; I beg to differ a bit. I use a fitbit Blaze to track calories burned. I measure and weigh everything I eat. I track with trendweight. Supposedly the Blaze has a caloric overburn by about 2-3%. I'm a pretty active person and usually walk/jog enough to burn around 3200 calories per day. When I eat 2200 calories, which should be a 1000 calorie deficit (every single thing logged, even a single mini M&M) according to Trendweight my actual loss indicates that I am at a 638 calorie deficit per day. The most the Blaze should be off for me is by about 96 calories, but, I burn 362 calories less than I should or 266 calories allowing for the Blaze to be off. I'm sure that a big part of that is the fact that I just burn 10% less than the average. That would make sense with the borderline thyroid numbers. This is with my metabolism at pretty much the best it's been in awhile. I know that will keep dropping as I lose weight even after factoring in that light people burn less. Right now I'm losing 1.5 lbs a week, which is fine with me.
I'm still a bit annoyed though about how the lies we tell fat people just have ruined huge parts of my life. I destroyed my metabolism eating a 1200 calorie diet because I believed the people who told me I was sedentary. My fitbit has been a lifesaver. I can finally KNOW that I'm not lazy. I KNOW it. No one can hurt me with that ever again. I had 10,000 steps in before 3 pm and I didn't go for a walk. That was just wandering around the house taking care of my kid and pets and light housework and the pacing/fidgeting I've always done. I made myself so sick last time I tried to lose weight, I did the math here and everyone told me that I was probably sedentary or assume sedentary so I was eating 1200 calories or eating 1500 if I'd gone for a walk. I woke up one morning vomiting and had to use Pepto Bismal to be able to go to work. I was nauseous every single day for months and I know it was my diet here that caused it. The only thing my doctor could find wrong with me was borderline low albumin (a marker for anorexia) and low Vitamin D. I only quit having to bring a coffee can with me in my car to barf in around 5 months ago.
So, yes, I'm pretty touchy about all this. I'm just glad I finally tried a Fitbit. I thought they were the dumbest gimmick. I was over the moon when I looked at it at the end of my first day and saw my numbers.
Most of the fat people I know are fully aware of what they are eating. I know my skinny coworker is a fluke, most of my coworkers are at least somewhat mindful of what they eat. I've only met one other person like her and that was an exboyfriend from years ago. Back when the cops around here still had minimum weight limits to join, he tried so hard to get up to weight and just couldn't do it. He had to gain 20 lbs to qualify and just couldn't do it. But, those are the only two I've known. Most people I know are more the go up and down 10 lbs regularly people.
I also know that in some ways, I'm really lucky. No matter what, my crazy body stops at 240 every time. 100 lbs is a lot to lose. But, dear lord, those poor people who have a body that stops at 340 or 440? I just can't even imagine. As annoyed as I get about it, it could always be much worse.
Thankfully my weight always stopped increasing at 250 pounds regardless of my calorie intake. For two years I have maintained at about 200 eating all I want to eat as long my daily carb intake stays just under 50 grams daily since Keto fixed my cravings nearly three years ago.
We are all different but that is not universal knowledge perhaps.0 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
Rat study, as noted, but interesting because of the following:
"In the midst of this obesity epidemic, one-third of people remain lean. A key trait that predicts resistance to weight gain is activity-related energy expenditure or non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT). It is therefore crucial to identify the neural and molecular mechanisms underlying this increased NEAT..."
In other words, the study is not about the idea that some people are just fat, or born to be fat -- something that makes 0 sense given the huge increase in obesity in recent years. It is about the fact that some people seem to be immune to it. Related to this, one thing we talk about here off and on is the idea that people should be able to just intuitively eat (even mindlessly not overeat). My view is that it makes total sense that most of us would not be able to -- genetically it seems to convey an advantage to be able to eat when food is available and not just up to your TDEE for the day or week. However, it also makes sense that some people might be different and have more of an internal barometer of how many calories they need. It's a difference that can be observed among domestic animals, for example.
So some people may be naturally thin (although the average thin person likely is not, but puts some thought into it). It doesn't follow that obese people were destined to be obese. The better evidence is that the same genes 50 years ago would not have resulted in obesity, which suggests there's a huge environmental and habit element.
Well, obviously.. Even 50 years ago there were less government benefits programs and more poor people starved. My parents went to bed hungry, they were born in the 50's. My Dad's family frequently ate only one meal per day. Children who couldn't thrive on reduced calories died. My dad lost a few cousins in childhood (not to actual starvation, but, they were malnourished and couldn't fight off disease). I'm sure they would have been these genetically thin people. We've been selected for famine survival. I'm sure if you would have gone back to the 30's with modern food in today's quantities, everyone would be obese, because the kids who could eat more calories without gaining weight already died.
The only way you would see more balance is if you could find a population that hadn't experienced starvation in 1000 years. Then you would probably see more selection to naturally thin. But, that population doesn't exist. We are selecting for them now. The genes for obesity have already been identified. We're probably only a few short years away from being able to select offspring without obesity. Even something extreme like gastric bypass doesn't really cure obesity since you still pass it on to your own children.
This holds promise: (I would find the real scientific article, but, it doesn't seem like anyone's reading them anyways): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2288991/Switching-obesity-gene-prevent-weight-gain-EVEN-eating-high-fat-diet.html
Ugh, I couldn't stop myself, here's the science should anyone be fascinated: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3622329/
Basically, the cure to the obesity epidemic is starvation. Mass starvation. That's what prevented the obesity epidemic up until now, periodic starvation. Though, let's face it, that would just kill off all the genetically thin people and then we would be obese again as soon as food was available again. So, not really a solution.
Or, we could just quit shaming fat people for being evolutionary superiors? Because, after all, that's why obesity is prevalent, because people who used less calories hunting/gathering survived longer to have children and the children who survived without starving were also selected to be thrifty with calorie use. We just haven't had any good old fashioned starvation recently enough here in the US to prove the genetic superiority of fat people.
If some mass food shortage ever happens, it would be obvious that 70% of the population was equipped for it with bodies which are more efficient with less calories.
Nonsense.
11 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »...Or, we could just quit shaming fat people for being evolutionary superiors? Because, after all, that's why obesity is prevalent, because people who used less calories hunting/gathering survived longer to have children and the children who survived without starving were also selected to be thrifty with calorie use. We just haven't had any good old fashioned starvation recently enough here in the US to prove the genetic superiority of fat people.
No, we've replaced it with science showing all the comorbidities that go along with being obese, and the accordingly shortened lifespans and diminished quality of life from said comorbidities.
LOL at fat people being genetically superior. If "good old fashioned starvation" happened again, it would be survival of the fittest - not the fattest.9 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »http://gradworks.umi.com/37/32/3732324.html
Rat study, as noted, but interesting because of the following:
"In the midst of this obesity epidemic, one-third of people remain lean. A key trait that predicts resistance to weight gain is activity-related energy expenditure or non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT). It is therefore crucial to identify the neural and molecular mechanisms underlying this increased NEAT..."
In other words, the study is not about the idea that some people are just fat, or born to be fat -- something that makes 0 sense given the huge increase in obesity in recent years. It is about the fact that some people seem to be immune to it. Related to this, one thing we talk about here off and on is the idea that people should be able to just intuitively eat (even mindlessly not overeat). My view is that it makes total sense that most of us would not be able to -- genetically it seems to convey an advantage to be able to eat when food is available and not just up to your TDEE for the day or week. However, it also makes sense that some people might be different and have more of an internal barometer of how many calories they need. It's a difference that can be observed among domestic animals, for example.
So some people may be naturally thin (although the average thin person likely is not, but puts some thought into it). It doesn't follow that obese people were destined to be obese. The better evidence is that the same genes 50 years ago would not have resulted in obesity, which suggests there's a huge environmental and habit element.
Well, obviously.. Even 50 years ago there were less government benefits programs and more poor people starved.
Hmm. Then why were people thinner across classes? Also, please show some evidence to support the idea that the only reason our obesity rate was lower 50 years ago (1967!) was that people were starving or struggling to find adequate calories in large percentages. (Remember the overweight rate now is about two-thirds and obesity about a third, higher in some states.)
[quote[Children who couldn't thrive on reduced calories died. [/quote]
The child mortality rate in the US in 1967 was not high enough for this to make a difference in the obesity rate then vs. now, even if this were true.I'm sure if you would have gone back to the 30's with modern food in today's quantities, everyone would be obese, because the kids who could eat more calories without gaining weight already died.
Got some numbers to support this? It's pretty absurd on its face.The genes for obesity have already been identified.
Not really, not in any causative sense. You talk about this like having some such gene makes you automatically unable to not be obese, and again this makes no sense if you just look back a few years. When I was a kid in the '80s there were vanishingly few obese kids. That's not true now.Ugh, I couldn't stop myself, here's the science should anyone be fascinated: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3622329/
This has nothing to do with someone being genetically programmed to be fat.Or, we could just quit shaming fat people for being evolutionary superiors?
I'm not shaming fat people (and I've been fat, although I think calling that evolutionarily superior is absurd. Calling anything "superior" in evolutionary term is inconsistent with how evolution happens, really, it's about fitness for a particular environment.)Because, after all, that's why obesity is prevalent, because people who used less calories hunting/gathering survived longer to have children and the children who survived without starving were also selected to be thrifty with calorie use.
Not really. It's just as likely that there was no evolutionary advantage to having an off-switch when it comes to consuming calories, not that there was some advantage to not having one.9
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions