Have you ever seen Fat Head? Thoughts?

jlr_12

I just watched the documentary Fat Head, which is kind of a response to Supersize Me. It basically turns everything you thought you knew on it's head. Just wondering if any one else has seen it and what your thoughts on it are? I found it hard not to believe the viewpoints expressed. If you haven't seen it, you definitely should! I just downloaded it online (oops..). If you've been struggling with weight loss, and can't figure out why, this could really turn things around for you!

I was going to try to summarize, but it really is better to see for yourself. Basically it promotes a higher fat/higher protein diet...but it's not just another theoretical idea, there's hard facts to back it up. It uncovers a sort of...conspiracy. My boyfriend suggested I watch it, and I was skeptical at first, but it was pretty eye opening!

Acg67

Supersize Me = eat in a caloric surplus get fat

Fathead = eat in a caloric deficit and lose weight

not groundbreaking stuff there

the rest of Fathead is garbage. any movie that promotes the ideas of Gary Taubes is not a very good movie.

And there are no hard facts to back it up, for instance did you know you can store fat without the presence of insulin? wait wut?

among other takedowns of the Taubes nonsense, this is a pretty good one

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/carbohydrate-hypothesis-of-obesity.html

lanniemcvern

Acg67--Thanks for the link to the article. A good read.

taem

I suggest complying to a diet that you know you can follow. For better or for worse, this is a solution. After you lose the weight, you will figure out more about your body and what you have to do.

I do not eat meats, dairy and seafood. I used to cut out sugar (added) until I started jogging over 14 miles, I put sugar back in when I jog long miles.

So, get fit and healthy and do what you need to do!

For every video that says this is good for you, there is another video that says it's bad for you. Stick to a diet and comply with it!

tidmutt

I felt he made too many unsubstantiated claims, passing hypothesis off as well supported "fact".

Saying that, he had some good points and it was fairly entertaining. I like how he shot down the trend to treat the general population as idiots, i.e. people don't realize a Big Mac with large fries and a coke is unhealthy, which is a load of crap IMO. I also agree with his opinion that if I want to chow down on a deep fried Mars Bar then that's my business and no government or private institution should be standing over me reminding me that it's going to make me a fat *kitten*.

To those that haven't watched it, I say it's worth a watch, just keep an open mind and take the some of the science he espouses with a grain of salt.

stylistchik

I hated it. It was produced like 5 years after supersize me so the stats were different. They were also out to prove different points. Plus I have this little crush on Morgan Spurlock... lol

jlr_12

I fully understand that there's arguments in both directions...I just found it really interesting to hear another side as I've mostly only heard things advocating low fat. Since I started counting calories and what not, I've been buying low fat whenever I can...milk, cheese, cream cheese, etc...after seeing the movie, I feel like I can be less of a stickler and that perhaps it's even better to go for full fat rather than chemical laden. That's mostly what I took from it...that and not to feel as guilty about my weekend bacon and eggs. There is another thread on here currently that has people talking about the positive effects of eating a lower carb diet...which are the same as the ones stated in the movie...it just made me think that this is something that might be worth trying. I'd never go full on no carb...and I'd never start eating mcdonalds every day....but it certainly does have some valid points in my opinion. Even though I knew about diabetes and the like, it never crossed my mind that blood sugar was such a player in heart health. I knew if effected energy levels, and that too much sugar over time would cause weight gain...but I 100% did not know that it is the main enemy in fighting heart disease.

tidmutt

Supersize Me = eat in a caloric surplus get fat

Fathead = eat in a caloric deficit and lose weight

not groundbreaking stuff there

the rest of Fathead is garbage. any movie that promotes the ideas of Gary Taubes is not a very good movie.

And there are no hard facts to back it up, for instance did you know you can store fat without the presence of insulin? wait wut?

among other takedowns of the Taubes nonsense, this is a pretty good one

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/carbohydrate-hypothesis-of-obesity.html

Just a small caveat to that link... Stephan Guyenet and Taubes had/have a major feud going on that started at the Ancestral Health Symposium when Taubes called Guyenet out on something. I'm not siding with either here, but I mention it in the interest of full disclosure.

MrsCon40

I fully understand that there's arguments in both directions...I just found it really interesting to hear another side as I've mostly only heard things advocating low fat. Since I started counting calories and what not, I've been buying low fat whenever I can...milk, cheese, cream cheese, etc...after seeing the movie, I feel like I can be less of a stickler and that perhaps it's even better to go for full fat rather than chemical laden. That's mostly what I took from it...that and not to feel as guilty about my weekend bacon and eggs. There is another thread on here currently that has people talking about the positive effects of eating a lower carb diet...which are the same as the ones stated in the movie...it just made me think that this is something that might be worth trying. I'd never go full on no carb...and I'd never start eating mcdonalds every day....but it certainly does have some valid points in my opinion. Even though I knew about diabetes and the like, it never crossed my mind that blood sugar was such a player in heart health. I knew if effected energy levels, and that too much sugar over time would cause weight gain...but I 100% did not know that it is the main enemy in fighting heart disease.

Fat is not the enemy. It is required for hormone regulation and production.

Insulin is the latest buzzword - and unless it is in referece to a diabetic, take its use with a grain of salt.

No macro is the enemy. Protein and fat are required and carbs are a quality of life consumable.

tidmutt

I fully understand that there's arguments in both directions...I just found it really interesting to hear another side as I've mostly only heard things advocating low fat. Since I started counting calories and what not, I've been buying low fat whenever I can...milk, cheese, cream cheese, etc...after seeing the movie, I feel like I can be less of a stickler and that perhaps it's even better to go for full fat rather than chemical laden. That's mostly what I took from it...that and not to feel as guilty about my weekend bacon and eggs. There is another thread on here currently that has people talking about the positive effects of eating a lower carb diet...which are the same as the ones stated in the movie...it just made me think that this is something that might be worth trying. I'd never go full on no carb...and I'd never start eating mcdonalds every day....but it certainly does have some valid points in my opinion. Even though I knew about diabetes and the like, it never crossed my mind that blood sugar was such a player in heart health. I knew if effected energy levels, and that too much sugar over time would cause weight gain...but I 100% did not know that it is the main enemy in fighting heart disease.

oooohh... now there's a can of worms... hehehe

Researching Saturated Fat and it's impact on blood lipids, heart disease risk is well worth the time. Just don't mention your conclusions to a dietician.

jlr_12

I fully understand that there's arguments in both directions...I just found it really interesting to hear another side as I've mostly only heard things advocating low fat. Since I started counting calories and what not, I've been buying low fat whenever I can...milk, cheese, cream cheese, etc...after seeing the movie, I feel like I can be less of a stickler and that perhaps it's even better to go for full fat rather than chemical laden. That's mostly what I took from it...that and not to feel as guilty about my weekend bacon and eggs. There is another thread on here currently that has people talking about the positive effects of eating a lower carb diet...which are the same as the ones stated in the movie...it just made me think that this is something that might be worth trying. I'd never go full on no carb...and I'd never start eating mcdonalds every day....but it certainly does have some valid points in my opinion. Even though I knew about diabetes and the like, it never crossed my mind that blood sugar was such a player in heart health. I knew if effected energy levels, and that too much sugar over time would cause weight gain...but I 100% did not know that it is the main enemy in fighting heart disease.

Fat is not the enemy. It is required for hormone regulation and production.

Insulin is the latest buzzword - and unless it is in referece to a diabetic, take its use with a grain of salt.

No macro is the enemy. Protein and fat are required and carbs are a quality of life consumable.

That's what I was trying to get at...carbs are a quality of life consumable. I never thought of it that way before. I always heard, "eat whole grains" "eat oatmeal" ..etc..when in reality I'd probably be better off eating some eggs if I want to stay full all morning. I think many many people are under the impression that carbs are a necessity, as much as protein and fat...so it just kinda turned my viewpoint around!

tidmutt

Protein and fat are required and carbs are a quality of life consumable.

I like that, quality of life consumable... alludes to it's non-essentialness.

fteale

Whenever things like this come up, the article quoted always says things like "obesity epidemic" as if it is something, one thing, that has magically made people fat.

What about the fact that we are designed to physically work all day every day, and we don't do this any more? half an hour of exercise a day isn't like spending all day physically had washing clothes, hunting/gathering food, farming, preparing everything from scratch, weaving, sewing, embroidering, walking miles for water, and then having to draw it yourself from the well/ground. etc etc?

And then the fact that really high calorie, low nutritional value food is available just by driving to a supermarket and pooling around the aisles.

Why do people need to find any one food group to demonise, how about our entire Western life style in just about every possible way?

tidmutt

I fully understand that there's arguments in both directions...I just found it really interesting to hear another side as I've mostly only heard things advocating low fat. Since I started counting calories and what not, I've been buying low fat whenever I can...milk, cheese, cream cheese, etc...after seeing the movie, I feel like I can be less of a stickler and that perhaps it's even better to go for full fat rather than chemical laden. That's mostly what I took from it...that and not to feel as guilty about my weekend bacon and eggs. There is another thread on here currently that has people talking about the positive effects of eating a lower carb diet...which are the same as the ones stated in the movie...it just made me think that this is something that might be worth trying. I'd never go full on no carb...and I'd never start eating mcdonalds every day....but it certainly does have some valid points in my opinion. Even though I knew about diabetes and the like, it never crossed my mind that blood sugar was such a player in heart health. I knew if effected energy levels, and that too much sugar over time would cause weight gain...but I 100% did not know that it is the main enemy in fighting heart disease.

Fat is not the enemy. It is required for hormone regulation and production.

Insulin is the latest buzzword - and unless it is in referece to a diabetic, take its use with a grain of salt.

No macro is the enemy. Protein and fat are required and carbs are a quality of life consumable.

That's what I was trying to get at...carbs are a quality of life consumable. I never thought of it that way before. I always heard, "eat whole grains" "eat oatmeal" ..etc..when in reality I'd probably be better off eating some eggs if I want to stay full all morning. I think many many people are under the impression that carbs are a necessity, as much as protein and fat...so it just kinda turned my viewpoint around!

yes, they are technically non-essential, many people say they are the body's preferred fuel so that makes them important... not really, just because the body uses them effectively doesn't mean it should, or at least to the extent that some claim. Many people find protein provides more satiety and honestly, refined carbs, often provide little but empty calories. That doesn't apply to carbs from fruit and vegetables of course.

tidmutt

Whenever things like this come up, the article quoted always says things like "obesity epidemic" as if it is something, one thing, that has magically made people fat.

What about the fact that we are designed to physically work all day every day, and we don't do this any more? half an hour of exercise a day isn't like spending all day physically had washing clothes, hunting/gathering food, farming, preparing everything from scratch, weaving, sewing, embroidering, walking miles for water, and then having to draw it yourself from the well/ground. etc etc?

And then the fact that really high calorie, low nutritional value food is available just by driving to a supermarket and pooling around the aisles.

Why do people need to find any one food group to demonise, how about our entire Western life style in just about every possible way?

I suppose people are looking for answers given that the generally accepted solutions fail so frequently.

_Bob_

I still need to see both of those

bcattoes

I've seen it. A lot of nonsense, and it wasn't even funny. Which at least Supersize Me was, though just as nonsensical. Neither gives useful information on nutrition or how food affects our bodies. But then they are films meant for profit and entertainment.

yoshi91610

I think in comparison with Supersize me, it's a good movie. That being said I don't think either "diets" make much sense and they both just prove how much the average person doesn't know about food and what we put into our bodies. I had a friend who watched Supersize me and pretty much stopped eating fast food. But she still ate processed foods high in calories and low in nutrition, she hardly ever ate vegetables and never ate lean meats (She said she didn't like chicken/fish unless it's fried), needless to say even though she cut out fast food she still ate horrible.

fteale

Whenever things like this come up, the article quoted always says things like "obesity epidemic" as if it is something, one thing, that has magically made people fat.

What about the fact that we are designed to physically work all day every day, and we don't do this any more? half an hour of exercise a day isn't like spending all day physically had washing clothes, hunting/gathering food, farming, preparing everything from scratch, weaving, sewing, embroidering, walking miles for water, and then having to draw it yourself from the well/ground. etc etc?

And then the fact that really high calorie, low nutritional value food is available just by driving to a supermarket and pooling around the aisles.

Why do people need to find any one food group to demonise, how about our entire Western life style in just about every possible way?

I suppose people are looking for answers given that the generally accepted solutions fail so frequently.

I don't see that they do, though. I have never seen anyone genuinely eat at a deficit and do some exercise and not lose weight. I have seen plenty of people claim they eat "nothing" but drink alcohol like it's the end of the world, and eat out 3 times a week. I was one of them, but that is still eating at a surplus.

Yanicka1

bump

tidmutt

I don't see that they do, though. I have never seen anyone genuinely eat at a deficit and do some exercise and not lose weight. I have seen plenty of people claim they eat "nothing" but drink alcohol like it's the end of the world, and eat out 3 times a week. I was one of them, but that is still eating at a surplus.

That's not really the point, if the majority of people find eating at a deficit impossible then you can hardly blame them and others for searching for other options. I for one would go to just about any lengths if it assisted with weight loss if it was proven safe and effective. The reality is, we can talk about calorie deficits all we like but if you're someone with 100 - 200 lb to lose (I had a 100 lb to lose at one point) you are likely facing 1-2 years of calorie deficits (or more) in order to reach that goal, realistically. Combine that with the likely plateaus and the resulting demotivation, the hunger, the feeling of deprivation and it's probably one of the toughest challenges many people will face. If eating ketogenic resulted in amazing weight loss (it doesn't) I'd do it, hell I've contemplated juice fasts even though I don't agree with them in order to help me reach my goals. I see you've lost a good deal of weight so you know the drill I'm sure.