naturally thin people

You know what every so-called 'naturally skinny' person I know has in common?

Keeping busy. They are always occupied with something. It's hard to snack when you are in the workshop building furniture, or tending your garden, or sewing dresses, or spelunking, or horse back riding, or scuba diving, or hunting, or painting or any number of other things. When you're just sat in front of the TV or a computer, it's easy to shovel handfuls of snacks into your mouth mindlessly.

If you want to be 'naturally skinny', get off your backside, and get a hobby besides watching TV and browsing the internet. Even if it's a less active hobby, so long as you are engaged, you won't be simply counting down the time until you can next eat to break the monotony.

This is a good point. Slim people would also like to eat tons of food if it did not lead to weight gain. But, they find other ways to cope with emotions and boredom. People that are having trouble with that can get help. We all get help when we find ourselves coping with life in ways that are not healthy or addictive.

I hate to keep on harping, but this drives me nuts. Of course there are thin people who would also like to eat tons of food if it did not lead to weight gain. I am now one of them. But I also know slim people who never struggle with that, and they are no more emotionally stable than I am.

I know what cuts my cravings: Red meat and lots of it, no bread. Does that mean dead cow is my therapist, solving my emotional issues with carnivorous therapy sessions? I don't think so.

I'm not saying it's never about emotions, but it isn't always about emotions for everyone all the time.

Sorry, all I have to go on is these most recent comments and I misunderstood.

It's not you, it's a few other posts from earlier with a similar outlook. Sorry for being snappy. I just get frustrated when people don't take into account the research indicating genetic and other factors in weight gain and loss.

You know what every so-called 'naturally skinny' person I know has in common?

Keeping busy. They are always occupied with something. It's hard to snack when you are in the workshop building furniture, or tending your garden, or sewing dresses, or spelunking, or horse back riding, or scuba diving, or hunting, or painting or any number of other things. When you're just sat in front of the TV or a computer, it's easy to shovel handfuls of snacks into your mouth mindlessly.

If you want to be 'naturally skinny', get off your backside, and get a hobby besides watching TV and browsing the internet. Even if it's a less active hobby, so long as you are engaged, you won't be simply counting down the time until you can next eat to break the monotony.

This is a good point. Slim people would also like to eat tons of food if it did not lead to weight gain. But, they find other ways to cope with emotions and boredom. People that are having trouble with that can get help. We all get help when we find ourselves coping with life in ways that are not healthy or addictive.

I hate to keep on harping, but this drives me nuts. Of course there are thin people who would also like to eat tons of food if it did not lead to weight gain. I am now one of them. But I also know slim people who never struggle with that, and they are no more emotionally stable than I am.

I know what cuts my cravings: Red meat and lots of it, no bread. Does that mean dead cow is my therapist, solving my emotional issues with carnivorous therapy sessions? I don't think so.

I'm not saying it's never about emotions, but it isn't always about emotions for everyone all the time.

Sorry, all I have to go on is these most recent comments and I misunderstood.

It's not you, it's a few other posts from earlier with a similar outlook. Sorry for being snappy. I just get frustrated when people don't take into account the research indicating genetic and other factors in weight gain and loss.

I completely understand! I know that it's not my place to place judgement on people that have a different struggle than I do. I know that I don't know enough about them and their specific situation. We would all get a little snappy in those circumstances.

Of course it's my fault and a matter of willpower. If I eat a breakfast that makes me crave junk all day, it's my fault. The point is, not everyone has this problem. I'm utterly sick of people who don't know what this is like downplaying it as an issue for those of us who do.

Ok enough on this but.... you shouldnt really care that other people have other levels of willpower.

It isn't a matter of willpower if nothing ever triggers a desire to seriously overeat to begin with. Which is my whole point.

But that isn't exclusive to thin people. There are plenty of overweight people who are overweight because they make bad choices/eat fatty food that puts them over their maintenance calories and causes them to gain a great deal of weight. I know plenty of obese/overweight people who don't have issues with bingeing and are not obsessed with food/have ridiculous cravings. And I'm not downplaying those issues, because I have them myself, and it's extremely difficult. I agree that someone who doesn't have that does not know how hard it is. I understand what you're saying. Yes, people with smaller appetites/less interest in food exist, and a lot of them stay thin forever because of it. If that's your definition of "naturally thin," I agree that those people exist. I can name off about 15 people in my life like that off the top of my head.

The thing is, this shouldn't be termed so much "naturally thin" as "naturally weight stable" IMO. Some overweight people are blessed with this sort of disinterest too, and the only reason they're overweight is what I mentioned above - poor eating habits/ignorance (and I envy the pants off them because it should be very very easy for them to lose weight if they stick to a deficit consistently). I mean, but there's still a difference between someone who is good at maintaining a certain weight who is thin and has always been thin, and someone who's overweight and maintaining, obviously, because the overweight person HAD to have experienced a calorie surplus for long enough to gain that excess weight . . . but the way people are using "naturally thin" in this thread, previous to this post, has basically been "skinny people who can eat above their maintenance calories and somehow magically not get fat" and that's just ridiculous when you're considering the average person, I'm sorry. Those people might exist, and I do know that some people are genetically more inclined to gain muscle than fat in response to overfeeding. I wouldn't argue that those people are "naturally thin" or "naturally fit" but they are genetic anomalies and they're pretty rare in the general population

But that isn't exclusive to thin people. There are plenty of overweight people who are overweight because they make bad choices/eat fatty food that puts them over their maintenance calories and causes them to gain a great deal of weight. I know plenty of obese/overweight people who don't have issues with bingeing and are not obsessed with food/have ridiculous cravings. And I'm not downplaying those issues, because I have them myself, and it's extremely difficult. I agree that someone who doesn't have that does not know how hard it is. I understand what you're saying. Yes, people with smaller appetites/less interest in food exist, and a lot of them stay thin forever because of it. If that's your definition of "naturally thin," I agree that those people exist. I can name off about 15 people in my life like that off the top of my head.

The thing is, this shouldn't be termed so much "naturally thin" as "naturally weight stable" IMO. Some overweight people are blessed with this sort of disinterest too, and the only reason they're overweight is what I mentioned above - poor eating habits/ignorance (and I envy the pants off them because it should be very very easy for them to lose weight if they stick to a deficit consistently). I mean, but there's still a difference between someone who is good at maintaining a certain weight who is thin and has always been thin, and someone who's overweight and maintaining, obviously, because the overweight person HAD to have experienced a calorie surplus for long enough to gain that excess weight . . . but the way people are using "naturally thin" in this thread, previous to this post, has basically been "skinny people who can eat above their maintenance calories and somehow magically not get fat" and that's just ridiculous when you're considering the average person, I'm sorry. Those people might exist, and I do know that some people are genetically more inclined to gain muscle than fat in response to overfeeding. I wouldn't argue that those people are "naturally thin" or "naturally fit" but they are genetic anomalies and they're pretty rare in the general population

I guess I assumed the definition of naturally thin covers people who simply don't have an urge to overeat, no matter what their diet or lifestyle is like. Clarifying it that way should have been my first priority. Sorry about that!

Yes, there are people who are overweight purely from emotional eating. I just know I'm not one of them, because if I were then what I eat wouldn't matter, I would overeat on a given day strictly based on my emotions. But I'm not that way. So it's strange to me when people completely dismiss research into physiological causes and the genetics behind them.

A lot of people forget that the "calories out" part of the equation involves a lot more than just exercise. There is a component call non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT) which includes activities such as fidgeting and normal everyday walking. It is my opinion (and this is based off of some research) that "naturally thin" people have a relatively much higher NEAT rate than others. In other words they fidget, move around, walk faster, are more physically expressive, talk more, etc. than others. On top of that, other people probably overestimate how much they actually eat.

I also believe that this is what’s behind some of the weight gain that happens when people go on antidepressant and/or antianxiety medication. They are less nervous and anxious so they fidget a lot less and stay more calm and docile on top of just eating more because they are out with people eating, drinking and being merry!

It really comes down to balancing an equation, but the equation is more complicated than people realize. It's not magic!

Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12468415

put peanut butter in and on everything then tell me you can't gain weight..

put peanut butter in and on everything then tell me you can't gain weight..

The whole NEAT thing is totally unproven in humans.

So your saying fidgeting burns zero calories?

Here is an amazing Steve...

---

This?

Not a proven significant factor.

Just an excuse.

Not so much.

So another MFP thread arguing over something that hasn't even been given a consistent definition.

Sweet.

Easier than counting calories, I guess...

Hey, I'm not complaining! I lost a ring size!

I was naturally thin my whole life. I was underweight according to the BMI scale but I ate like a pig. I literally had a hollow stomach… I ate 24/7. I could eat anything in large amounts and not gain a pound. Then I started anxiety meds and gained 100 lbs in three years.

Maybe your anxiety kept you moving around alot. People who have it usually tend to be figety and can't keep still.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition