Are people helpless in controling their weight?

Achrya

Just quoting for relevance.


Enjoy your victim status.

LiftAllThePizzas

Also both my parents were obese. I have never been.

While I agree with the larger point you made, FYI the above doesn't mean something is not genetic or heritable. You inherited half of your mother's genes and half of your father's genes. You also did not inherit the other 50% of each of their genes. So if for example a Mendelian dominant gene were responsible, both parents could each be heterozygous for it and 1 in 4 of their offspring would not inherit that allele and would not exhibit the same trait as the parents.

magerum

More excuses. Personal accountability.

ElizaB84

I think people inherit bad eating habits more than they inherit fat genes.

But I am not a scientist.

Phoenix_Warrior

I'm always looking for more reasons I'm a genetic mutant because...Xmen.

Sjenny5891

Oh. Okay.
Well no one can discount that genetic factors play a huge role in obesity. But that is far from the only determining factor. While those with the genetic propensity toward obesity may likely have to be more diligent in their diet and activity levels, there are also learned behaviors as well which cannot be overlooked. In fact, some scientists are even beginning to wonder if poor habits leading to obesity are difficult to change due to the degree to which they are practiced without deliberate action, while lifestyle changes require constant conscious choice. The rather nascent science of automaticity is only beginning to investigate the possibility incorporating new healthier behaviors into patients' lives by making them more automatic. This is something that, while intriguing, may raise ethical questions.

Isn't MFP based on the principal of making people change their behavior? Counting Calories requires a deliberate planned action.
Daily practice makes it automatic after a while. Would that make MFP unethical?

Sjenny5891

Who do you guys think would have the best chance to transform their body?

1) An obese person with genetic disposition to be obese --but has all the knowledge and facts on how to lift and count calories and lose weight.

2) A generally average obese person with no "fat gene" --but has no clue or experience ever actually losing weight or even knows where to begin?

The person that keeps active.
Ignorant people that are active can be lucky enough to burn off the calories they overeat, but the average person can still gain weight eating the "right" number of calories if they spend all day on the couch.

LiftAllThePizzas

If he had studied normal, slow weight loss we might not be having this conversation.

"Normal, slow weight loss" has been studied.

That method has the same abysmal regain rate as quick, fast, low calorie.

None of the current methods of weight loss lead to lasting change in the vast majority of people. Call it a lifestyle change, slow and steady wins the race, etc, it all leads to the same road for the overwhelming majority of people.

Fat and fat again.

That's why the concentration has to be on a total and complete mind change AFTER the weight is gone, because how you lost it is proving to matter so little.

I disagree with this and would like to see studies that compare the regain rates/percentages of people who did the different techniques. Also, I'd like to see the measurements be body fat instead of "pounds"....

I think that there is a huge difference in success long term between people who do quick starvation diets and those who do slow and steady. First of all, slow and steady is sustainable and IS a lifestyle change. Second, when you lose weight by sever calorie restriction, you lose critical muscle mass which lowers your metabolism. You also encourage a mind-set of all or nothing... as opposed to a mind set of moderation.

I did slow and steady, lost 50 lbs and gained back 20. But as I said, I would like to see the measurements not in pounds but in body fat...because my weight is up, but so is my muscle mass (I lift heavy). My body fat was down to 19% at it's lowest and is now up to 23%. Not something I'm ashamed of, considering I started in the ball park of 40% four years ago.

You can chose to believe whatever you like, but it's the truth. Losing weight/fat/pounds/whatever, regardless of method, the overwhelming majority of times, in the overwhelming majority of people, leads to significant regaining of weight in the long term.

Long term success is extremely rare, and even most of the 'successes' are people who managed to not gain back ALL the weight.

There is no evidence that calling it a "lifestyle change", doing it the "slow, or "right", way leads to a great percentage of long term weight loss success. Those are popular dieting mantras that have no basis in fact at all. They just sound really good and encouraging, and for companies in the business of weight loss, they're great ways to keep people hooked for long periods of time.

This article references a study where almost all the slow, moderate, and fast losers regained the weight. The difference was that the quicker losers, on the whole, enjoyed far more weight loss because they'd lost more in the same amount of time. Everyone regained about similar amounts of weight, regardless of rate of loss.
http://triathlon.competitor.com/2011/11/nutrition/the-myth-of-slow-weight-loss_43011

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20443094

An excerpt from the study:

"Our study provides further evidence that, within the context of lifestyle treatment, losing weight at a fast initial rate leads to greater short-term weight reductions, does not result in increased susceptibility to weight regain, and is associated with larger weight losses and overall long-term success in weight management," the authors write in the International Journal of Behavioral Medicine.

Here is an analysis over over two dozen US studies, done across 5 years, comparing people who lost on a very low energy diet (less than 800 a day) vs a more balanced diet of 1200-1500 calories.

The conclusions?

"Participants who completed a very low energy diet programme lost significantly more weight and maintained greater weight losses after four to five years than those who completed a hypoenergetic balanced diet programme".

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/74/5/579.long



Anecdotally I've lost slow, and lost fast. Regain rates were the same following each type of loss. I have never seen any advantage to slowing down weight loss, except frustration. Most important is how you adjust after you lose weight, regardless of how you lost it.

I challenge you to find a single study that champions strong long term success for slow, "lifestyle" change dieters.

Regardless of all of this, I guarantee you that 100% of the people who regained did so because they ate above maintenance, and 100% of the people who did not regain were because they did not eat above maintenance.

Sjenny5891

And please feel free to go on your merry way as the discussion is clearly above your pay grade. The article references several studies which show the genetic connection to obesity. Its not the only answer, but a huge factor in explaining why so few people who are overweight can sustain their weight loss. Is that so controversial or difficult to understand? Perhaps for some. Read these forums if you doubt it. Clearly there is a metabolic quotient (?) that seems to be significantly different from person to person that may make long term possible difficult/impossible for some beyond the environmental ones.

You keep saying the same thing and we keep saying the same other thing and even though I know you made this thread to get a rise out of us, I'm just going to say:

We've read these forums. Some of us for many many years. If you think you can use any group of related posts to confirm or deny any of your claims, well good luck with that. Anyone who comes in here and acts the way you are acting is going to get his or her hat handed to him.

Continue to be rude and argumentative, and that's what you will get in return. Post threads with titles and claims like this one and expect pictures and arguments. Attack long-time intelligent members and find yourself on the "other" end of friendly.

Better to come in expecting the best rather than the worst.

We eagerly await your next attempt at proving your non-point.
[/quote]

Actually I have cited 4 scientific articles that address the issue. Your narrow viewpoint on what you read on a forum is not really compelling evidence to the contrary. And continuing to be argumentative "that my brother this", or "my sister that", is really not convincing evidence to dispute the fact that there are serious genetic reasons that may make real weight loss impossible for some. /how many people fail in ongoing weight loss 95%??? They are not all fat slobs who lack will power. There are genetic, chemical, and biological reasons that underly the problem.
[/quote] END QUOTE

---

How do you fit into this study? You have lost 47 pounds in three months. If you stop exercising and start eating like you did before you started MFP you would gain the weight back.

Two plus two equals four. If you eat more calories than you burn you will gain weight. SOME people have physical conditions that make it hard for them to lose weight. MOST people gain the weight back because they went back to the old habbits.

Your studies said the people went back to their old ways. OBVIOUSLY they were bound to gain the weight back. Find me a study that shows people that kept following the menu and exercise schedule they were on that they gained everything back.

hastingsmassage

no ...
Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter

jofjltncb6

Also both my parents were obese. I have never been.

While I agree with the larger point you made, FYI the above doesn't mean something is not genetic or heritable. You inherited half of your mother's genes and half of your father's genes. You also did not inherit the other 50% of each of their genes. So if for example a Mendelian dominant gene were responsible, both parents could each be heterozygous for it and 1 in 4 of their offspring would not inherit that allele and would not exhibit the same trait as the parents.

If I become fat, I'm going to blame this guy because he uses too many big words.

LiftAllThePizzas

And yet they never answer why human beings only started inheriting all this fat in the last 30 or so years on an epidemic scale.

The reason the majority of human beings today fail at losing weight, or keeping it off after losing, regardless of what plan they use, including "lifestyle changes", is because so many of the world's citizens live in overfed societies where tasty, cheap food is readily available. They eventually crack under the pressure of being "different", and fall right back into old habits.

Let a famine sweep through and come talk to me then about "inherited obesity"

Yes, indeed. It's a mystery, right?

Look, OP, learned behaviors are hard to change. If you're born into a family of all obese people, not a huge stretch to think you're going to have a high probability of being obese since you'll likely learn your eating habits from them. Something tells me that little kids adopted into obese foster homes would have the same high probability. Look at all the people from other countries who move here. How many learn from us, adopt the "Typical American Diet" and become obese? Same thing, but they have a better shot at not becoming obese. At least they had a good foundation to fall back on.

Besides, the body is pretty tightly regulated - metabolism especially, since it is so tightly intertwined with everything that occurs in the body. I don't know if anyone's done the research because metabolism is not my field, but I would be surprised if you can have much variation in the rates of the various metabolic processes without serious physiological consequences - well beyond just gaining weight.

Re-read the section about adoptees and twins. Its the nature versus nurture argument. The article is stating that the major causes are more likely genetic and not environmental. That is what I found to be interesting because it goes against what many of the "experts" here think and are spewing.

The causes of weight gain and loss are eating at a caloric surplus or a caloric deficit respectively. The results of the experiments in the article you linked to also demonstrate this to be true. Using loaded language like "spew" and sarcastically calling people 'experts' is not evidence.

sarafischbach9

No. I think people can do something to some degree. We can all improve ourselves; and we can all do better. Not all people are destined to be stick figures. Some people naturally have a hard time putting on weight. There are certain things that are beyond our control, but we are not helpless.

Some people are naturally heavier and have always been, but if they are active and eating well, then they are doing their part. ( No one eats perfectly all the time though ). I don't think anyone is helpless and naturally 600 or 700 lbs and has to be wheeled around in a wheel chair all day.

scottYBRIDGEWATER

And please feel free to go on your merry way as the discussion is clearly above your pay grade. The article references several studies which show the genetic connection to obesity. Its not the only answer, but a huge factor in explaining why so few people who are overweight can sustain their weight loss. Is that so controversial or difficult to understand? Perhaps for some. Read these forums if you doubt it. Clearly there is a metabolic quotient (?) that seems to be significantly different from person to person that may make long term possible difficult/impossible for some beyond the environmental ones.

You keep saying the same thing and we keep saying the same other thing and even though I know you made this thread to get a rise out of us, I'm just going to say:

We've read these forums. Some of us for many many years. If you think you can use any group of related posts to confirm or deny any of your claims, well good luck with that. Anyone who comes in here and acts the way you are acting is going to get his or her hat handed to him.

Continue to be rude and argumentative, and that's what you will get in return. Post threads with titles and claims like this one and expect pictures and arguments. Attack long-time intelligent members and find yourself on the "other" end of friendly.

Better to come in expecting the best rather than the worst.

We eagerly await your next attempt at proving your non-point.

Actually I have cited 4 scientific articles that address the issue. Your narrow viewpoint on what you read on a forum is not really compelling evidence to the contrary. And continuing to be argumentative "that my brother this", or "my sister that", is really not convincing evidence to dispute the fact that there are serious genetic reasons that may make real weight loss impossible for some. /how many people fail in ongoing weight loss 95%??? They are not all fat slobs who lack will power. There are genetic, chemical, and biological reasons that underly the problem.
[/quote] END QUOTE

---

How do you fit into this study? You have lost 47 pounds in three months. If you stop exercising and start eating like you did before you started MFP you would gain the weight back.

Two plus two equals four. If you eat more calories than you burn you will gain weight. SOME people have physical conditions that make it hard for them to lose weight. MOST people gain the weight back because they went back to the old habbits.

Your studies said the people went back to their old ways. OBVIOUSLY they were bound to gain the weight back. Find me a study that shows people that kept following the menu and exercise schedule they were on that they gained everything back.
[/quote]

I don't fit because I never had a genetic or fattie issue. I packed on weight after a neck and back injury. For me, a relatively easy fix. Hit the weights, cardio, and cut calories. I don't need any excuses. But I know numerous people who are motivated, have will power, and just can't get it off or keep it off. Why is that??? Its not a matter of laziness or pulling themselves up by their boot straps. But I dont have the answer. Heck, how many people in this forum have the same issues. A lot apparently......

Mr_Knight

Then please refute the point with the wealth of evidence you have acquired.

Strawman.

The links provided do not make the point you are claiming.

Until you understand that, there is insufficient grounds for meaningful discourse.

Yes they do.

You forgot to stomp your feet and pout

OP tried, but strawmen don't have movable limbs.

:drinker:

_db_

I made it chubby, I can make it fit.

^ this is the correct attitude.

brenda5476

losing weight is based on 80% diet 10% exercise and 10% genetics

PetulantOne

Not reading. Not helpless.

blytheandbonnie

Regardless, 100 calories is nothing. You can easily burn that by standing up for a while instead of sitting.

.

Is this true?

LiftAllThePizzas

I don't fit because I never had a genetic or fattie issue. I packed on weight after a neck and back injury. For me, a relatively easy fix. Hit the weights, cardio, and cut calories. I don't need any excuses. But I know numerous people who are motivated, have will power, and just can't get it off or keep it off. Why is that??? Its not a matter of laziness or pulling themselves up by their boot straps. But I dont have the answer. Heck, how many people in this forum have the same issues. A lot apparently......

100% of those people lose weight when they eat below their maintenance calories.

Learning habits that will get them below maint cals may be difficult for some, but it is not impossible. Beyond that, any able-bodied adult who is so "helpless" that they cannot choose what does or doesn't go into their mouth and how much activity they participate in really doesn't deserve any sympathy anyway.