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.

STUDY: Making Progress on the Global Crisis of Obesity and Weight Management

AnvilHead
AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
edited November 28 in Debate Club
2018 study by Lean, et al: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5997033/

Infographic which summarizes the study points, courtesy of Myolean Fitness:

6yv3vxjrwo40.png

Replies

  • middlehaitch
    middlehaitch Posts: 8,486 Member
    Well isn't that just a nice, concise, infograph.

    I will read the long version tomorrow when SO is away for the night- I need time and solitude to digest. :(

    Cheers, h.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    middlehaitch wrote: »
    Well isn't that just a nice, concise, infograph.

    I will read the long version tomorrow when SO is away for the night- I need time and solitude to digest. :(

    Cheers, h.

    I haven't read the long version yet either, just skimmed a bit of it earlier before posting. Look forward to it maybe later tonight.
  • Stockholm_Andy
    Stockholm_Andy Posts: 803 Member
    edited August 2018
    I really like the infographic above and the report makes very interesting reading, but, it will not be completely non-controversial IMHO.

    The section below is an extract looking at willpower versus society. I happen to agree with most of what is written below.

    However, I have seen many times within this sub-forum people arguing the food industry and society in general have no responsibility as it's down to each individual and their fork.


    Individual willpower versus societal responsibilities: gluttony and sloth?
    The “victim blaming” view that individuals are responsible for their afflictions has been persistent and destructive. Although some people at risk can resist obesity through vigilance, external factors are hard to overcome. Evidence indicates a recent environmentally led global epidemic, mediated by obesogenic factors such as frequent eating out, large portion sizes, and the commercial normalisation of routinely consuming high sugar, high fat snacks and sweetened drinks between meals.

    Sustained conscious effort and willpower are needed to lose weight and not regain it when food is easily available. However, that does not imply that lack of individual willpower—gluttony and sloth—is the cause or that insufficient motivation and engagement explains the failures of interventions. Hunger, greed, and temptation are sensations originating in the unconscious brain, which are affected by the food environment in ways that are resistant to willpower: the sight or smell of attractive food triggers a cascade of hormone and sympathetic nervous system responses that increase hunger and desire to eat. Thus calorie cutting strategies that increase hunger tend to fail because willpower is ineffective over the more potent lower brain functions. Individually directed willpower centric approaches towards prevention will therefore almost inevitably fail while the food environment is unregulated. Collective responsibility is therefore required for effective progress at a population level (box 2).

    Box 2
    Failures of willpower centric view
    • National behavioural recommendations for weight management are largely based on application of willpower and are poorly accepted because they are (accurately) viewed as difficult and ineffective
    • Uniquely for a major disease causing multiple pathologies, the prevailing perception of obesity is as a cost to healthcare and a burden on society, rather than its disabling and distressing effect on individuals
    • There is insufficient investment in effective treatments for obesity, thus numerous profitable non-evidence-based approaches are promoted, with inflated claims to meet popular desire for easier weight control
    • Intense media coverage of commercial “treatments” that are not evidence based or are minimally effective contribute to mass confusion and undermine professional advice
    • The view that food companies are not responsible for the obesity epidemic leaves them free to create and promote an increasing variety of tempting obesogenic products
    • Less obesogenic food products tend to be more expensive per calorie, which is a barrier to population shifts towards healthier eating habits
    • Willpower centricity leads to an underdevelopment of population directed measures that avoid individual accountability
    • Government funding for obesity treatment is less than for other diseases relative to numbers of resulting disability or deaths
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Thanks for posting this!
  • tbright1965
    tbright1965 Posts: 852 Member
    AlabasterVerve wrote: »
    Sure, at the individual level we're all responsible for ourselves but that sort of myopic view clouds the issue. You see it all of the time here - people know what they need to do and yet they keep failing. That lack of a bigger picture has them focusing on nonsense like their food relationships, getting in healthy snacks, counseling to figure out what childhood trauma is causing them to sabotage their diet or self medicate with food - focusing on what's wrong with them that they can't manage their weight. Some cobble together a sustainable approach that works for them, most don't.

    We've been banging the self help drum for at least 40 years now while the food industry and government guidelines have continued to eroded the food norms that kept us relatively fit and healthy. It's a problem with our society and it needs a population level approach to reverse it.

    But all any person controls is themselves.

    Therefore, if you want to solve the problem of being overweight, you do table pushbacks and fork putdowns.

    I'm not going to tell someone to wait until the food industry gets their act in line with what others think they should be doing. I'm going to suggest that people make the personal choice to eat better to improve their personal circumstances.

    I realize its circular, demand and supply. Marketing and advertising can stimulate demand. I get it.

    But I cannot control what others will do. As soon as we legislate and regulate one thing, very sharp people will figure out how to get around it. It might be as simple as cutting portion sizes in half. I can see corporations getting around rules by cutting the portion size to meet some regulatory requirement. I.E. a can of coke is now 2 servings instead of 1.

    Or they make the smaller cans....

    Coke is no more healthy in a 6oz can than it is in a 12oz can. Or if the label on the 2L bottle says 6oz is a serving, when they fill up the 24oz tumbler, it's going to have the same volume of soda.

    So I suggest that people control what they can, which is their behavior. They can eat less and move more. If they find they cannot resist the ad-man, turn off the TV. If they cannot resist the Oreo package, choose to not go down that aisle in the grocery store.

    They have more control over what is on their fork than they do over what the food manufacturers do.

    There are as many ways for the individual to mitigate any influence marketing and advertising has as there are ways for companies to work around any new regulatory efforts.

    So, the winning strategy is to not rely on others, but to take charge of your choices.

    Any other strategy puts one at risk of being complacent, expecting that everything is fine.

    Kinda where were are now with all the foods that say "Low Fat" or "Light" or "Natural" or whatever, but may not be your best choices.

    The food companies are in the business of selling food. That may or may not intersect with your best interests.

    Choose wisely.
  • tbright1965
    tbright1965 Posts: 852 Member
    wmd1979 wrote: »

    The problem with society is the constant barrage of excuses and laying blame elsewhere instead of actually putting in the work. Weight loss is simple, but it is not easy, and unfortunately we live in a technology driven society that is constantly looking for easy. It also takes time, dedication, and patience because going from obese to a healthy weight doesn't just happen overnight. If anything is going to reverse this epidemic, then it is going to require convincing the population that each person individually has control over their weight and not the food industry or the government or anyone else.

    ^ - sums up the thread.

    It's simple, but isn't easy.

    We look for efficiency, for easy.

    Easy is make that guy over there change what he's selling me. I don't have to do anything. I will rely on others to change the other guy.

    Simple is take control over what is on my fork. I own my outcome.
  • tbright1965
    tbright1965 Posts: 852 Member
    AlabasterVerve wrote: »

    Until the cost of pushing BS messages like this outweighs the profits or we as a people learn to disregard the noise things aren't going to change.

    Actually, if you look at the foods, they are portion controlled packages of the foods. For example, the Pop Tart is just that. ONE Pop Tart in the package, not a package of Pop TARTS.

    Still, the foods don't spontaneously jump into ones shopping cart or mouth. Someone has to put them there.

    Now we can debate if a Pop Tart is a good food choice or not. I personally fall into the camp of everything in moderation. So maybe you have a Pop Tart once a week.

    I'm losing weight and yet I manage to have biscuits and gravy about once a month.

    But I don't have 4 biscuits and a gallon of gravy. I might not even have the biscuit, choosing an SoS with the gravy over wheat toast for that meal. I just don't make it a habit.

    I don't know any organization that is recommending people eat 3000 calories a day of anything. So to recommend smaller portion sized packages of tasty items, to me anyway, seems to be a reasonable choice.

    Kinda like what you were talking about. We can teach our kids that you can enjoy such things, in moderation, and demonstrate what that moderation looks like.

    It's really not MY job to teach anyone's kids but my own.

    Again, I can only control me and what I do. If my neighbor doesn't teach their kids and they weigh 300# in 8th grade, let the consequences lay with them. Don't expect the rest of us to pick up the tab because they didn't take time out of their busy schedule of watching Honey Boo Boo to figure out what makes up a healthy diet.
  • VUA21
    VUA21 Posts: 2,072 Member
    Stockholm_Andy wrote: »
    I really like the infographic above and the report makes very interesting reading, but, it will not be completely non-controversial IMHO.

    The section below is an extract looking at willpower versus society. I happen to agree with most of what is written below.




    Individual willpower versus societal responsibilities: gluttony and sloth?
    The “victim blaming” view that individuals are responsible for their afflictions has been persistent and destructive. Although some people at risk can resist obesity through vigilance, external factors are hard to overcome. Evidence indicates a recent environmentally led global epidemic, mediated by obesogenic factors such as frequent eating out, large portion sizes, and the commercial normalisation of routinely consuming high sugar, high fat snacks and sweetened drinks between meals.

    Sustained conscious effort and willpower are needed to lose weight and not regain it when food is easily available. However, that does not imply that lack of individual willpower—gluttony and sloth—is the cause or that insufficient motivation and engagement explains the failures of interventions. Hunger, greed, and temptation are sensations originating in the unconscious brain, which are affected by the food environment in ways that are resistant to willpower: the sight or smell of attractive food triggers a cascade of hormone and sympathetic nervous system responses that increase hunger and desire to eat. Thus calorie cutting strategies that increase hunger tend to fail because willpower is ineffective over the more potent lower brain functions. Individually directed willpower centric approaches towards prevention will therefore almost inevitably fail while the food environment is unregulated. Collective responsibility is therefore required for effective progress at a population level (box 2).

    Box 2
    Failures of willpower centric view
    • National behavioural recommendations for weight management are largely based on application of willpower and are poorly accepted because they are (accurately) viewed as difficult and ineffective
    • There is a consistent lack of resources dedicated to community wide nutrional education, particularly in communities with the highest rates of obesity
    • Uniquely for a major disease causing multiple pathologies, the prevailing perception of obesity is as a cost to healthcare and a burden on society, rather than its disabling and distressing effect on individuals
    • There's more profit in treating a disease than curing a disease. Routinely patients are referring to WLS over weight loss treatment including nutritional education and psychological counseling
    • There is insufficient investment in effective treatments for obesity, thus numerous profitable non-evidence-based approaches are promoted, with inflated claims to meet popular desire for easier weight control
    • Intense media coverage of commercial “treatments” that are not evidence based or are minimally effective contribute to mass confusion and undermine professional advice
    • An extreme lack of over site and legal, moral, and athical accountability opens the door for "snake oil" products to make unsubstantiated and often dangerous claims. Compounded with a lack of nutritional education in the general public, leads to uninformed and mislead consumers to purchase products that do not do what the advertisers claim
    • The view that food companies are not responsible for the obesity epidemic leaves them free to create and promote an increasing variety of tempting obesogenic products
    • Less obesogenic food products tend to be more expensive per calorie, which is a barrier to population shifts towards healthier eating habits
    • Willpower centricity leads to an underdevelopment of population directed measures that avoid individual accountability
    • Government funding for obesity treatment is less than for other diseases relative to numbers of resulting disability or deaths
    • This is the result of victim blaming. The same attitudes can be seen with rape victims, and of AIDS victims (particularly in the 1980's, where many otherwise intelligent people believed that STD's were caused by 'deviant' sexual behavios)

    While it is simple to blame people for thier weight. To ignore that as a whole people are very uneducated about nutrition and diet. It is a systematic problem that needs to addressed. The two biggest obstacle are:
    1. Financial: because of the profitability of weight loss products that may only treat obesity and not cure it, many companies refuse to change strategies unless ordered by law.
    2. Education vs. infallibility: humans prefer ignorance over accepting that thier beliefs are incorrect. Educating someone against thier held beliefs is notoriosly difficult and often impossible (example: attempting to educate someone that believes the Earth is flat, that the Earth is fact a spherical object) in a single generation. True community education against misinformation and incorrect beliefs often takes 3 generations.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,097 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    AlabasterVerve wrote: »
    "So I suggest that people control what they can, which is their behavior. They can eat less and move more. If they find they cannot resist the ad-man, turn off the TV. If they cannot resist the Oreo package, choose to not go down that aisle in the grocery store."

    That's part of the problem - no one is telling people to put down the oreos. They're telling them "don't deprive yourself it's not sustainable", "you deserve a treat", "everything in moderation", "80/20". So people eat the oreos. And fail and wonder what's wrong with them. Or people feed their kids breakfast, they get lunch and two "healthy snacks" at school, and a treat and dinner and maybe another treat before bed at home.

    I don't think regulation is the answer but there is a tremendous amount of push back against all of the things we used to know - simple things like sugars & starches are fattening and snacking ruins your appetite. In other words, people used to be taught/shown effective ways to eat less and move more and when and how to indulge. There's a whole generation of people who don't know how to take care of themselves now because good food habits were never modeled to them.

    Until the cost of pushing BS messages like this outweighs the profits or we as a people learn to disregard the noise things aren't going to change.

    To the bolded: When was that? I was alive and adult before the "obesity crisis" started, and I don't remember that.

    Sure, there was some point where children saw adults "modeling" moving more and eating less (more incidentally than intentionally) . . . and then those same children went on to start the obesity crisis.

    I remember that there used to be less ubiquity of ready-to-eat food (and more actual scarcity, relative to now), and everyday life simply required moving more every day, by everyone. I saw that part. I didn't see this wise teaching and guidance thing that you seem to be saying once happened . . . unless it consisted of the parents getting fed up with us - in a social context that revolved much less around the littles - and shouting at us to for heaven's sake go play outside (where coincidentally there weren't many snacks).

    That's probably the problem. Videos, computers and electronic games keep kids pretty quiet indoors, where there are also snacks, and because they're quiet, their parents don't shout at them to go play outside. ;)

    Also, most parents seem to be afraid to let their kids outside if they're not with them (which would pretty much defeat the purpose of trying to get them out of the house so you could have some peace and quiet or just talk to another adult), and the few that aren't have to worry that other adults will call the police or social services if they see a 10-year-old playing outside without an adult.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories