Adam Ruins Everything: Weight Loss
PaulaWallaDingDong
Posts: 4,641 Member
So far, I'm disappointed. Sigh...
2
Replies
-
:huh:
Is this a pop culture reference? I'm terribad at that stuff, but I like to be the first one to post, so...6 -
Is that a new one?0
-
Yes it's new. I'm missing a lot of it because I'm on the job, but they lost me at someone using a razor blade to cut lines of sugar. They went on to slam Biggest Loser a bit (missed the specifics, though), but I'm hurting.
0 -
Isn't that how you make icing sugar from your regular table sugar? Cutting with a razorblade. On a shiny surface, of course.5
-
Adam Ruins Everything basically finds the most negative research about any topic, (or misrepresents research/data in order to make it look more negative) in order to "ruin" everything. He brings up some good points in some of his videos, but sometimes he stretches a little much. I've noticed his videos don't take the totality of the subject at hand, but rather show a biased, negative view. It's his prerogative, since he is trying to ruin everything, but take it with a grain of salt.8
-
cmriverside wrote: »:huh:
Is this a pop culture reference? I'm terribad at that stuff, but I like to be the first one to post, so...
It's a show where Adam messes up everyone's good time by correcting popular myths and whatnot.
And the "doing lines of sugar" wasn't a hyberbole about the evils of sugar being a joke. It was in support of the notion that it's like cocaine.2 -
Yep, I give up. Not really.1
-
So disappointing. Shot down some myths by supporting other myths. Shot down low fat, superiority of specific diets, and the Biggest Loser.
But did so by pushing Big Sugar is diabolically making us fat. Genetics means many of us are destined to be fat. Closed with the idea that it's fine being overweight. Actually said weight is not directly related to health. <facepalm>
I honestly don't think I can watch this show anymore 11 -
So disappointing. Shot down some myths by supporting other myths. Shot down low fat, superiority of specific diets, and the Biggest Loser.
But did so by pushing Big Sugar is diabolically making us fat. Genetics means many of us are destined to be fat. Closed with the idea that it's fine being overweight. Actually said weight is not directly related to health. <facepalm>
I honestly don't think I can watch this show anymore
On the plus side, he's staying true to his title. He ruined his show.18 -
Just watched it... disappointed is just putting it lightly.
So much denial and HAES- inspired misinformation.
I'm 256 lbs, down from 304 lbs, in 125 days.
Not having laboratory grade accuracy with calories didn't stop the CICO strategy from being efficient.
Too bad this makes me question his other theories. Not going to enjoy the show as much ever again.
4 -
Funny, I was JUST watching ARE: Low-Fat Foods Are Making You Fatter (part of that episode you mentioned). I haven't eyerolled that hard in ages. It had everything: from the sugar industry, to adding piles of sugar to low fat foods, to low fat recommendations causing obesity... It was like all MFP woo threads distilled into one video. I'm glad I haven't watched the whole thing, I would have contracted heart disease (which is caused by sugar and was nearly non-existent before low fat recommendations by the way).6
-
So disappointing. Shot down some myths by supporting other myths. Shot down low fat, superiority of specific diets, and the Biggest Loser.
But did so by pushing Big Sugar is diabolically making us fat. Genetics means many of us are destined to be fat. Closed with the idea that it's fine being overweight. Actually said weight is not directly related to health. <facepalm>
I honestly don't think I can watch this show anymore
I had a similar response to Consumer Reports years ago. They reviewed some products that I actually knew quite a bit about--and their misrepresentations were so glaring that I could never trust anything they wrote about anything else.
5 -
I was really curious what kind of denial I would find in this topic. Kinda funny how people are convincing themselves that the topics of this show are fake, despite the sources provided throughout the show, and the medical professionals who appear throughout.
I personally found it quite interesting, and based on my own research, quite accurate.23 -
TheViperMan wrote: »I was really curious what kind of denial I would find in this topic. Kinda funny how people are convincing themselves that the topics of this show are fake, despite the sources provided throughout the show, and the medical professionals who appear throughout.
I personally found it quite interesting, and based on my own research, quite accurate.
Since I'm not gonna give myself that show, let's take what the others wrote on what was in it:
"Big Sugar is diabolically making us fat. Genetics means many of us are destined to be fat. Closed with the idea that it's fine being overweight. Actually said weight is not directly related to health."
Do you think any of that is accurate?6 -
Denial? Care to go more in depth @TheViperMan?0
-
^^ It *could* be, if taken in the right light.
Big Sugar IS a thing, utilizing tactics similar to Big Tobacco for marketing, branding, and product composition;
Genetics CAN make it more difficult to lose weight or easier to gain, especially if you have specific genetic disorders, but are not a "destiny";
Some people are fine being "overweight" because BMI is meant for a collective rather than the individual, and some people are "overweight" due to higher muscle mass;
Weight is not directly related to health in that being overweight is a symptom of your habits, lifestyle, nutrition, and genetics. It's the things that come with being overweight (higher cholesterol, poor blood circulation, insulin resistance, etc.) that have the DIRECT impact on your health. Causation vs. correlation. This is up to a point, of course. If you're overweight enough that you can't get out of bed... well, that's a whole 'nother beast.
BUT this is not how most people who watch that channel are going to interpret the things that he's saying.
Also: have not watched the episode.12 -
^^ It *could* be, if taken in the right light.
Big Sugar IS a thing, utilizing tactics similar to Big Tobacco for marketing, branding, and product composition;
Genetics CAN make it more difficult to lose weight or easier to gain, especially if you have specific genetic disorders, but are not a "destiny";
Some people are fine being "overweight" because BMI is meant for a collective rather than the individual, and some people are "overweight" due to higher muscle mass;
Weight is not directly related to health in that being overweight is a symptom of your habits, lifestyle, nutrition, and genetics. It's the things that come with being overweight (higher cholesterol, poor blood circulation, insulin resistance, etc.) that have the DIRECT impact on your health. Causation vs. correlation. This is up to a point, of course. If you're overweight enough that you can't get out of bed... well, that's a whole 'nother beast.
BUT this is not how most people who watch that channel are going to interpret the things that he's saying.
Also: have not watched the episode.
False. Big corn might be a thing, big sugar isn't.
Very few... and as one of them, I recognize that it works pretty well for most people.
The extra pounding on your knees, hips and ankles, unless you're working on building the necessary strength skills and supporting muscles will take a toll4 -
Denial? Care to go more in depth @TheViperMan?
Seems like:
"it's not my fault I'm fat, Big Sugar did it"
or
"it's not my fault I'm fat, I'm genetically programmed"
or
"no reason not to be fat anyway, the health claims are made up"
are more denial than the opposite. Certainly excuses/justifications.
(I didn't see the show and had never heard of it, going by the description above.)6 -
^^ It *could* be, if taken in the right light.
Big Sugar IS a thing, utilizing tactics similar to Big Tobacco for marketing, branding, and product composition
Most of the sugar in ultra processed/hyper marketed foods is probably HFCS (i.e., Big Corn), not "Big Sugar."
The reason HFCS is added in large amounts to some products is that it's cheap and has a consistency (liquid) that makes it easy to do so, apparently. And, most significantly, it's a cheap way to make food taste good to the average consumer. People don't consume sweet foods because they are convinced it's "cool" to do so or healthy for them (as with tobacco at various times), but because they enjoy them. Most of the consumption is in products that are called "junk food" and known to be bad for us in excess (sweet dessert foods or soda).
Before the rise of cheap mass marketed sweets, people still loved and craved sweet foods -- apple pie, Sacher torte, Christmas pudding, all sorts of examples going back forever. The difference is they are cheap and easily available now. If one is not a snob (I'm a bit of a snob, admittedly), you can go to the store and buy for little the same thing you used to have to devote time to making (or paying much more for at a bakery, if you lived somewhere that was an option).
Anyway, main point is that we don't eat foods that are bad for us because of Big Sugar. Big Snack Food (sugary and not) saw an opportunity and seized it. Many humans will easily overeat in a situation where they are surrounded by foods they perceive as tasty and little or no cultural restrictions (eating times or cultural norms) that prevent it.4 -
I loved the episode, big thumbs up.2
-
stevencloser wrote: »TheViperMan wrote: »I was really curious what kind of denial I would find in this topic. Kinda funny how people are convincing themselves that the topics of this show are fake, despite the sources provided throughout the show, and the medical professionals who appear throughout.
I personally found it quite interesting, and based on my own research, quite accurate.
Since I'm not gonna give myself that show, let's take what the others wrote on what was in it:
"Big Sugar is diabolically making us fat. Genetics means many of us are destined to be fat. Closed with the idea that it's fine being overweight. Actually said weight is not directly related to health."
Just quoting you to slyly quote myself
While the Big Sugar thing annoyed me, because it's the *kitten* health fad of the moment, the bolded is what sealed the deal for me. I have heard so many testimonials on these boards of people who changed absolutely nothing but quantity of food, lost weight, and saw all their health markers drastically improve. I cannot imagine a doctor who would say it's no big deal to be overweight. I know the show probably caters to Millenials, but the whole - you're a special snowflake who could just be destined to be 50 lbs overweight and maybe it's not even bad for your health, so carry on being the amazing miracle unicorn you are - was too much.
You can't say Big Evil Sugar is Big Evil Sugar because they single-handedly caused the obesity crisis, and in the same show say being overweight isn't directly related to health.
10 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »^^ It *could* be, if taken in the right light.
Big Sugar IS a thing, utilizing tactics similar to Big Tobacco for marketing, branding, and product composition
Anyway, main point is that we don't eat foods that are bad for us because of Big Sugar. Big Snack Food (sugary and not) saw an opportunity and seized it. Many humans will easily overeat in a situation where they are surrounded by foods they perceive as tasty and little or no cultural restrictions (eating times or cultural norms) that prevent it.
There once was a heated argument between Fat vs. Sugar in the diet and which was more detrimental. Fat lost and Sugar won (mostly by appealing to consumers) - manufacturers had to add sugar to help make up for he lack of flavor due to low fat. We now know that certain fats, like saturated fats, aren't particularly good for you but there are healthy fats as well. We also know that a diet high in sugar is strongly linked to insulin resistance and type II diabetes. So at one point in time you probably could argue for the presence of Big Sugar, but whether it truly exists today...we probably won't find out for years to come.
Conspiracy theories aside I thought it was a pretty good episode. Unfortunately I think they oversimplified their explanations a bit which is leading to some debate. For instance, aeloine's point about obesity vs health and correlation and causation is absolutely correct. The writers could have explained that better. Obesity in and of itself is not the source of health problems. That's like saying the increase in murder rates during the summer drives the sale of ice cream higher in the summer. Lifestyle and diet cause both obesity and other health problems. You can lose fat by eating a bag of Twix every day, but you sure won't help reverse any insulin resistance by doing that.
3 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »Isn't that how you make icing sugar from your regular table sugar? Cutting with a razorblade. On a shiny surface, of course.
Nah, that's inefficient. Throw sugar in coffee grinder.
1 -
^^ It *could* be, if taken in the right light.
Big Sugar IS a thing, utilizing tactics similar to Big Tobacco for marketing, branding, and product composition;
Genetics CAN make it more difficult to lose weight or easier to gain, especially if you have specific genetic disorders, but are not a "destiny";
Some people are fine being "overweight" because BMI is meant for a collective rather than the individual, and some people are "overweight" due to higher muscle mass;
Weight is not directly related to health in that being overweight is a symptom of your habits, lifestyle, nutrition, and genetics. It's the things that come with being overweight (higher cholesterol, poor blood circulation, insulin resistance, etc.) that have the DIRECT impact on your health. Causation vs. correlation. This is up to a point, of course. If you're overweight enough that you can't get out of bed... well, that's a whole 'nother beast.
BUT this is not how most people who watch that channel are going to interpret the things that he's saying.
Also: have not watched the episode.
Yes genetics plays a role, but the VAST majority of people who are overweight are overweight because they eat too much and move too little. As to the bolded, you are playing with semantics. Being overweight is strongly at least correlated with diabetes risk, heart disease, high blood pressure, cancer-risk, joint and mobility issues. While it may not directly cause them, it is a red flag with neon lights telling you that your body needs you to eat less and move more. To suggest that people shouldn't worry about being overweight, they are just fine the way they are, when such a large percentage of the population are obese and living the kind of lifestyle that you would expect to get them there, is disingenuous.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the % of the people out there who are considered overweight by BMI but are really just muscular athletic types whose sick gym bodies are throwing off the numbers is pretty small.6 -
stanmann571 wrote: »extra pounding on your knees, hips and ankles, unless you're working on building the necessary strength skills and supporting muscles will take a toll
Which is why I mentioned being very large. If you're large enough to be getting a beating out of your own body, that's a whole 'nother level of issues.0 -
Just to add, because I really don't want to do the work I have in front of me, you have to put this into the context of the show. It's a half hour, with a lot of commercials.
After saying - low fat doesn't work, nutrition labels lie so calorie counting doesn't work, exercise doesn't work, weight loss shows are a lie, they finished with - being overweight does not directly affect health. Now while we might be able to argue correlation and causation and degrees of truthfulness, and all the factors that go into becoming obese and developing health issues, the show did not. They do throw up graphics with web addresses to back up what they are saying, but I doubt very many viewers jot them down.
So basically they said that everything you can think of doing to lose weight is a lie, and weight doesn't affect your health, so just enjoy your life and don't worry about it, because everyone gets fat. Have a nice day.
And yes it might have triggered me
9 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »^^ It *could* be, if taken in the right light.
Big Sugar IS a thing, utilizing tactics similar to Big Tobacco for marketing, branding, and product composition
Anyway, main point is that we don't eat foods that are bad for us because of Big Sugar. Big Snack Food (sugary and not) saw an opportunity and seized it. Many humans will easily overeat in a situation where they are surrounded by foods they perceive as tasty and little or no cultural restrictions (eating times or cultural norms) that prevent it.
There once was a heated argument between Fat vs. Sugar in the diet and which was more detrimental. Fat lost and Sugar won (mostly by appealing to consumers) - manufacturers had to add sugar to help make up for he lack of flavor due to low fat.
I know what you are talking about, but that's terribly distorted.
What I would say is true:
People used to think that fat in general was more detrimental than it is (although the kinds of added fats common in processed foods probably were detrimental and still are, although less so, as back then they were more likely to be transfats).
Marketers picked up on the low fat trend and started promoting foods that were always low or no fat as if they were special and extra healthy (low fat on dried pasta or oats, for example, how absurd).
SOME foods, ones that in many cases NO ONE reasonably thought were actually super healthy (like Snackwells) got seen as guilt-free ways to indulge (but still indulge) because they were low fat. NO ONE was actually recommending that people eat Snackwells when cutting back on fat, though -- the recommendations were for whole foods, higher fiber grains, vegetables and fruits, lean meats, low fat dairy -- the usual. NONE of these foods should have added fat.
Indeed, the lie that low fat=more sugar drives me crazy, because essentially the only low fat foods I ever eat are lean ground beef and low fat dairy products, and none of those have added sugar. (Some yogurts have added sugar, but that has nothing to do with them being low fat or not.)
In any case, despite the recommendations that people eat less fat and the popularity of stupid stuff like Snackwells and flavored rice cakes and the like as "healthy" snacks, the truth is -- and this goes against the sugar did it, it's all carbs nonsense -- the US population did not actually decrease the amount of fat consumed. Period. Full stop. We did not. Instead, we kept fat about the same and increased carbs some and ate more calories. To blame this on a demonization of fat (which was stupid) and claim that the correct response is to demonize carbs or sugar (just as stupid, IMO), would be a mistake.
So I'm going to point again to my explanation of what happened from before:
"Many humans will easily overeat in a situation where they are surrounded by foods they perceive as tasty and little or no cultural restrictions (eating times or cultural norms) that prevent it."7 -
Here's a sample from the show. Enjoy the "heart disease was rare before sugar brought it about" and "sugar is more addictive than cocaine". This ruined the show for me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rWjb7t8cfo 7 -
Read this as "admins ruin everything" and was thinking this was a very edgy thread lol6
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »Here's a sample from the show. Enjoy the "heart disease was rare before sugar brought it about" and "sugar is more addictive than cocaine". This ruined the show for me.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rWjb7t8cfo
when you can't afford cocaine, sugar is the next best thing!3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions