Opinions? Somewhat "fat" is OK?

juanwilly1
juanwilly1 Posts: 26 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
People can be 'fat but fit' and should focus on exercise rather than dieting for a longer life, experts say!
Researchers have found that "a weight-centric approach to obesity treatment and prevention has been largely ineffective" and that people should concentrate on exercise not dieting when it comes to cutting the risk of dying early.

They said "a weight-centric approach to obesity treatment and prevention has been largely ineffective", adding: "Moreover, repeated weight loss efforts may contribute to weight gain, and is undoubtedly associated with the high prevalence of weight cycling (yo-yo dieting), which is associated with significant health risks."

They pointed to studies suggesting that exercise was better for a longer life than just losing weight.

"But shifting the focus away from weight loss as the primary goal, and instead focusing on increasing physical activity to improve cardiorespiratory fitness, may be prudent for treating obesity-related health conditions," they said.
«1

Replies

  • SnifterPug
    SnifterPug Posts: 746 Member
    This suggests there is nothing imprudent about exercise but points out that it is not always feasible for the very obese to exercise effectively.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811477/

    The British Heart Foundation has suggested there is no such thing as "fat but fit":

    https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/news/behind-the-headlines/weight-and-heart-risk

    Personally, exercise was the key to my weight loss. Not the doing of the exercise - the weight loss was managed by diet. But the enjoyment of the exercise and the desire to do more of it and achieve my goals. Ultimately it comes down to individual motivations, though. I used not to live a healthy lifestyle and I became overweight because I didn't care enough to change my behaviour. Now I do care enough. But I had to find that within myself and even if a doctor had looked me in the eye and said "you must do XYZ and stop ABC" I don't think that would have given me the will to do it.

  • barefootbridgey
    barefootbridgey Posts: 81 Member
    edited September 2021
    I imagine that I probably fall into this category. I'm 39, I've weighed as much as 240 lbs (not pregnant, anyway) and as low as 180 which, arguably probably would still put me in this category, even though that's my ideal weight (personally, I liked how I looked and felt at that weight). Currently I'm about 217ish.

    I'm healthy - quite, actually. I have a sedentary job, but outside of that, i'm very active at home (i''m on my feet and moving until about 45 minutes before I go to bed) and workout 5-6 days a week. My blood sugar is good. My blood pressure is great, and even on the low end of great. I do not feel tired and slovenly and gross - I did at 240, but I do not currently. I lift weight, I run, I do a lot of Les Mills classes. I don't get out of breath going up stairs or anything. i have many friends who either are or were overweight and not active and they all talk about being so tired and exhausted at the end of the day and on weekends, so much so that it keeps them from living life. I don't ever feel like that. My joints and back dont hurt - i don't notice the aches and pains that a lot of people seem to have as they get near 40.

    I'm sure that there's an argument to be made that eventually those things will happen to me at some point, but I suspect that argument can be made for a lot of people. My work friend down the hall, for example, is in very good shape...but has high cholesterol and blood pressure.

    I surely think you can be fat and fit. I also don't think that being fat allows me to be as healthy as I could be - surely I COULD be healthier. But that doesn't mean I'm not fit and healthy like this.

    That being said -re: the original post. Those excerpts in quotations are great points. Focusing on being "fat" never once made me feel better about myself. what it normally does is throw me into a cycle of emotional eating and crying. I surely have needed "mirror checks" before - I surely have had to recognize that i NEEDED to lose weight, and that was a starting point. But anytime I've ever actually been successful it was by understanding myself as capable of whatever it is that I wanted to do and whatever goal I actually set. Paying attention to the non-weight benefits of exercise is leaps and bounds ore healthy and helpful for me to focus on and it's what keeps me going back to do more of it.
  • Jruzer
    Jruzer Posts: 3,501 Member
    Sauce:

    https://news.sky.com/story/people-can-be-fat-but-fit-and-should-focus-on-exercise-rather-than-dieting-for-a-longer-life-experts-say-12412836
  • HoneyBadger302
    HoneyBadger302 Posts: 2,073 Member
    Regardless of the source, I could see the approach being another tool in the tool belt to fight weight issues depending on the individual. Using it as a blanket statement to remain overweight, that would be the issue IMO - being overweight has a plethora of health issues associated with it, so someone saying they are "fit" while still carrying significant fat could be very problematic.

    That issue aside however, for someone working with overweight individuals, it could be another tool to consider - but it's about approach, not end results...

    I'll just use myself as an example here:

    I am HORRIBLE about losing weight if I am trying to do it by primarily focusing on diet. If, however, I am primarily focused on fitness and working out, I find it a lot easier to get my diet to follow. Therefore, focusing on fitness first does help me lose weight a LOT more effectively than just focusing on food.

    Some of it is the mental shift from "I can't eat x, can barely taste z, and c is a straight up no-no" to "because I did y, I can now eat x, and z, and maybe even a little bit of c."

  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    I think we'd have to define "somewhat fat". I would consider myself right now to be "somewhat fat" with the 20 Lbs I put on during COVID lockdowns. I'm around 20% BF right now. In maintenance I'm around 15%. Aesthetically I prefer leaner, but from a health standpoint (I'm active and exercise regularly either way) it has had no meaningful impact.
  • KosmosKitten
    KosmosKitten Posts: 10,476 Member
    edited September 2021
    juanwilly1 wrote: »
    People can be 'fat but fit' and should focus on exercise rather than dieting for a longer life, experts say!
    Researchers have found that "a weight-centric approach to obesity treatment and prevention has been largely ineffective" and that people should concentrate on exercise not dieting when it comes to cutting the risk of dying early.

    They said "a weight-centric approach to obesity treatment and prevention has been largely ineffective", adding: "Moreover, repeated weight loss efforts may contribute to weight gain, and is undoubtedly associated with the high prevalence of weight cycling (yo-yo dieting), which is associated with significant health risks."

    They pointed to studies suggesting that exercise was better for a longer life than just losing weight.

    "But shifting the focus away from weight loss as the primary goal, and instead focusing on increasing physical activity to improve cardiorespiratory fitness, may be prudent for treating obesity-related health conditions," they said.

    I think emphasizing and prioritizing the benefits of exercise (even low-impact exercise) and eating a varied, moderately healthy diet is probably going to go a lot further for most overweight folks than constantly reminding them that they are fat or "ugly" by society's fickle standards. It doesn't seem to work for most people and instead tends to make their mental health plummet unless they really have that spiteful streak that allows them to do things just to piss off their detractors (we admittedly do not all have this trait, sadly).

    Focusing only on weight leads a lot of people to feeling like they are "less than" because they aren't at the goal they should be.. or the goal they think they ought to be based on arbitrary things like people's opinions or the whims of mental health on a day-to-day basis. Taking the focus off of weight and appearance and putting it more on the benefits of exercise and how it can make a person feel during/afterward is probably going to do more for keeping people engaged, especially if you can make that exercise not seem like exercise (like taking a fitness class, swimming freestyle, playing a game with friends or colleagues or even going on a long walk in the evenings).

    I'd be interested in seeing long term studies of a focus on health in overweight individuals that didn't focus mostly on weight or appearance and more about their endurance, enjoyment and longevity, but I'm sure that would take several years at the soonest, probably decades at the latest.

    Personally, I fall into the fat but relatively healthy category (I don't categorize myself as fit). I get blood work panels yearly and go in for a physical at the same time. I've been overweight my entire life (now in my mid-30s), but my blood work always comes back just fine and my physical numbers are always in the green. I attribute most of that more to long walks (even though I've been around 205 for a decade now.. which makes me obese at my height and age) and the fact that due to having a GI condition, I have to be a tad mindful of what and how much of certain things I can eat, but.. I still overeat which is why I'm here.. fighting the good fight and logging calories. As we do.
  • SnifterPug
    SnifterPug Posts: 746 Member
    callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »
    This is one of those things I have mixed feelings on. Because yes you can be overweight (significantly so, even), and have 'perfect' health metrics across the board- except for that number on the scale. I'm on that spectrum, myself.

    And having those metrics, despite what the scale says, is a fantastic thing.

    However, that does not negate or remove the fact that increased weight, not speaking of vanity pounds, or possibly 20-30 extra pounds (though that might be getting borderline, I don't know where the cut off would be exactly), puts a person at increased risk for any number of health issues including cardiovascular disease or heart attacks and diabetes- even with no previous issues or warning. That is simple fact.

    What we also don't know (or at least I don't know if there have been any studies) is whether there are cumulative effects of obesity. Younger people with obesity are, I suspect, living with a health time bomb.

    Anecdotally, my father in law was obese and in rude health for many years until he died suddenly of pancreatic cancer in his early 70s. My husband is morbidly obese (has been for years) and all of his health metrics were totally fine for years. Until one day they weren't. And now the unhelpful habits are deeply ingrained in him and nothing will change. He would maybe exercise more but his knees won't permit it these days.

    I was thinking about this thread again today because the study was reported in our mainstream press. I wonder who funded the study. Because it is a total gift to the fitness industry. They for years have peddled the myth that you can lose significant amounts of weight by going to the gym. People are beginning to rumble that. But now they can say "Meh. Lose weight or don't. But you need to be fit, whatever. So come to the gym." I have no axe to grind with gyms as I (now) love exercise. But it seems to me that very few big studies are not funded by someone with some sort of vested interest.

  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,226 Member
    edited September 2021
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    SnifterPug wrote: »
    callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »
    This is one of those things I have mixed feelings on. Because yes you can be overweight (significantly so, even), and have 'perfect' health metrics across the board- except for that number on the scale. I'm on that spectrum, myself.

    And having those metrics, despite what the scale says, is a fantastic thing.

    However, that does not negate or remove the fact that increased weight, not speaking of vanity pounds, or possibly 20-30 extra pounds (though that might be getting borderline, I don't know where the cut off would be exactly), puts a person at increased risk for any number of health issues including cardiovascular disease or heart attacks and diabetes- even with no previous issues or warning. That is simple fact.

    What we also don't know (or at least I don't know if there have been any studies) is whether there are cumulative effects of obesity. Younger people with obesity are, I suspect, living with a health time bomb.

    Anecdotally, my father in law was obese and in rude health for many years until he died suddenly of pancreatic cancer in his early 70s. My husband is morbidly obese (has been for years) and all of his health metrics were totally fine for years. Until one day they weren't. And now the unhelpful habits are deeply ingrained in him and nothing will change. He would maybe exercise more but his knees won't permit it these days.

    I was thinking about this thread again today because the study was reported in our mainstream press. I wonder who funded the study. Because it is a total gift to the fitness industry. They for years have peddled the myth that you can lose significant amounts of weight by going to the gym. People are beginning to rumble that. But now they can say "Meh. Lose weight or don't. But you need to be fit, whatever. So come to the gym." I have no axe to grind with gyms as I (now) love exercise. But it seems to me that very few big studies are not funded by someone with some sort of vested interest.

    I was thinking this exact same thing and your phrase "Younger people with obesity are, I suspect, living with a health time bomb" encapsulates it perfectly.

    I was also thinking specifically of knee issues, having been plagued with that myself for the last 12 years.

    Yeah, I've got knee issues, too, and I'm certain the decades of obesity (and only slightly fewer decades of too little exercise) were major contributors to that. There's no incidence in my family, for example, so unlikely to be genetic.

    Bigger deal on the time bomb front, speaking as a woman who experienced it: Some types of cancer are substantially more likely if overweight/obese. Diagnosed with one at stage III (about as advanced as it gets without being nearly certainly fatal, and relatively quickly) in my 40s, I'm grateful to have lived to be 65.

    There are no guarantees of bad outcomes if overweight/obese/inactive, no guarantees of longevity/health if a healthy weight and active . . . but it's a question of playing the odds, hedging the bets.

    I suspect that some people believe reaching a healthier weight/activity zone would require deprivation and sweaty misery. I'm quite certain that's not universally so . . . perhaps not even commonly so.
  • Speakeasy76
    Speakeasy76 Posts: 961 Member
    edited September 2021
    I have so, so many thoughts on this. Like others have questioned, how much "fat" is ok to be healthy? Also, is focusing on exercising REALLY the only thing that would improve health while also shifting the focus away from dieting for weight loss?

    Yes, I think when people are "put on a diet" it often fails because there's often no thought about how to do it in a way that is sustainable for life. A huge part of that is focusing not only on quantity but quality of foods, which is equally (if not more so) important. I do believe, having personally experienced this myself, that focusing on nutrition for better health vs. as just to lose weight can be a better approach to sustainable weight loss. However, we also need to learn some form of portion control if we don't have it innately built in us (which, if we're overweight, either we became a lot less active but still ate the same, or never really had that "inner voice" to begin with).

    It's interesting how this article fails to mention that bigger portion sizes and more access to and variety of fast food and convenience food just MIGHT be contributing, combined with more and more people living mostly sedentary lifestyles. Look at how many Starbucks alone there are in most places, and all the calorie bombs the have--most in liquid form that really aren't that satiating. Oh, and more people are not only under stress, but rely on maladpative behaviors (i.e., overeating, drinking, etc.) to cope. Also, the general public has very little knowledge about good nutrition, and it doesn't help that several popular diets are often unsustainable long-term and still rely on the gimmick of "fast" weight loss.

    I've heard the claim that you can be "fat and fit" by measuring numbers like cholesterol, A1C, and blood pressure. Yeah, sure, those can be normal when you're obese--my best friend is a perfect example of this! She also knows that her weight alone puts her at increased health risks, including inflammation. Genetics also play a role in one's propensity to develop high cholesterol, blood pressure and AC1. Also, what about other things that aren't measured regularly--like atheroscerlosis and inflammation, or sleep quality and muscle/joint functioning? Overweight and obese people are at increased risk for sleep apnea, something that can be deadly if not treated.

    I agree that we simultaneously have an obesity crisis in the crisis while continuing to be weight/look-obsessed. So I think something can be said for shifting focus away from losing weight for looks as opposed to health, but I think it's also a generally false notion that you can be "fat" and just as fit than if you weighed less and were still equally as active.

  • robertw486
    robertw486 Posts: 2,399 Member
    Quite a number of studies have linked low cardiorespiratory fitness with increased risk of mortality, regardless of many other factors including age and weight. Naturally, being at a healthy weight with increased fitness is even better, but weight alone doesn't increase risks as much as some might think.

    Having poor cardio fitness can bring any weight group into a higher risk than people with Type II Diabetes, High Blood Pressure, Smokers, or High Cholesterol levels.

    And some also show that an obese person with good cardio health and ability is often at lower risk than many healthy weight person with any of the above.

    So for me it's a no brainer really. While being at healthy weight is obviously better with all other things being the same, having less cardio ability is always worse, all other things being the same. And from the studies I've seen, the cardio ability actually seems to have more impact than just weight, at least up to the obese categories.

    So I'd rather maintain a cardio base and make weight secondary myself. But the best option is both.
  • jonathanrtaylor
    jonathanrtaylor Posts: 3 Member
    edited September 2021
    Surely this isn't a zero-sum game; the focus should be exercise and diet, not on one or the other. Bizarre article imo.
  • drmwc
    drmwc Posts: 1,041 Member
    Here is the original article:
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004221009639

    It seems odd to me; being overweight is clearly bad and exercising too little is also clearly bad. It is unclear to me why addressing one better than addressing both. It is easier to be active whilst small than whilst big.
  • penguinmama87
    penguinmama87 Posts: 1,155 Member
    drmwc wrote: »
    Here is the original article:
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004221009639

    It seems odd to me; being overweight is clearly bad and exercising too little is also clearly bad. It is unclear to me why addressing one better than addressing both. It is easier to be active whilst small than whilst big.

    I think there's a lot of motivations to untangle, some of them maybe more noble than others. I've never been part of the "fat acceptance" movement (beyond agreeing wholeheartedly that every person has dignity and is worthy of being treated with kindness and respect, and you can't know a person's character by their size), but I do think it's worth it to push against the notion of "thin at any cost." Lots of people do really horrible things to their health in order to get/stay thin (or at least their idea of it), or don't pursue things that would be good for their health because they don't see the direct link to weight loss - things like good sleep, or exercise even if it isn't the super calorie-burning kind, or learning to prepare and enjoy a wider variety of foods.

    My own family seems to be pretty lucky genetically, and I used to tell myself that it would be fine for me to be overweight long term because my own health markers were excellent and so were my parents, who have been overweight or obese all their adult lives - but now that my parents are getting close to 60, I've been able to see how things are getting much more difficult for them and they complain a lot more about aches and pains and various medical troubles - things my grandparents didn't deal with at all or if they did, decades later. I'm not interested in that. I'm still a few pounds over normal BMI range but am definitely the healthiest and feel the best I have ever felt. I expect to maintain that into the normal range and keep it up. The last time I was in a normal range I was not very active (I was a moody, angsty teenager who had deep things to think about, no time for going outside and enjoying life). I don't think I'll have to pick between them, but I like this me, even a little overweight still, better than that one!
  • MikePfirrman
    MikePfirrman Posts: 3,307 Member
    When I lost my weight originally, 165 was an ideal weight for me (I'm not real tall, like 5' 9" and a half). Medium sized guys always add that 1/2 inch like it's a big deal!

    After working out, pretty hard and consistently, both cardio and weights, for well over 10 years, a good weight for me now is like 187. I've put on a lot of muscle.

    With Covid-19, I put on around 7 to 8 lbs and was around 200. Even with the exercise, my waist was over 35 inches. My waist is where it comes off last (and my face second to last). I've lost the face weight again but my waist is just shy of 35 inches again. Now, I do have really strong abs, but that's the metrics that I look at most -- is my waist less than half of my height.

    I would like to believe that all my cardio work (I'm very fit, cardio wise, for someone my age, because I do roughly 6 to 7 hours of cardio a week -- two hard very hard sessions included) has me at great health, but that waist measurement, to me at least, is just as important. I'm at around 194 right now and I'd bet I'm only 23% body fat, but there's so much research on how vital it is to keep your waist less than half your height that I work very hard at that all the time. It's ongoing.

Categories