"Fat-shaming may curb obesity" ???

10 PAGES
first ... 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
previous topic · next topic
Spacey47

Joined: Apr 12
Posts: 916

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 16:21
@Bgln

I hear what you say, I find the same thing with so many people and without stereotyping it does tend to be women though not exclusively

It's like any excuse not to face up to the harsh reality that staying in shape especially as you get older and are not naturally lean requires
a strong degree of discipline and hard work..not magic pills, magic diets, or some other fanciful made up science based on BS

Think of all the ridiculous diet books there have been, all claiming to be THE ONE to EASILY lose weight . Must be dozens of them in the past 20 years
Low carb, high carb, high protein,high fibre,low fat, fruit diet, cayenne pepper and honey drinks, cabbage, etc etc

What about just eat healthy most of the time and do some exercise
CONSISTENTLY and stay under your RDI when you want to lose weight or on it to maintain it

When something is SIMPLE but takes hard work people don't want to believe it or do it..they want short cuts which just do not work in the long run, hence yo yo dieting, complaints about imaginary metabolic disorders , fat glands etc etc


There is only one guaranteed way and I think we all know that by now,


BgIrn

Joined: Dec 12
Posts: 97

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 16:33
mikefarinha wrote:
BgIrn wrote:

Show me a study that disproves this one.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16403234

If I don't see one, or a serious back step, I'll assume your whole schtick is a ruse meant to misinform and not just blind faith, and then I'll be done with you.


How about this one:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/87/1/44.abstract

A metabolic ward study with ad libitum feeding.

Quote:
Results: Ad libitum energy intakes were lower with the LC diet than with the MC diet [P = 0.02; SE of the difference (SED): 0.27] at 7.25 and 7.95 MJ/d, respectively. Over the 4-wk period, hunger was significantly lower (P = 0.014; SED: 1.76) and weight loss was significantly greater (P = 0.006; SED: 0.62) with the LC diet (6.34 kg) than with the MC diet (4.35 kg). The LC diet induced ketosis with mean 3-hydroxybutyrate concentrations of 1.52 mmol/L in plasma (P = 0.036 from baseline; SED: 0.62) and 2.99 mmol/L in urine (P < 0.001 from baseline; SED: 0.36).


Long story short, High Fat/Low carb diet led to spontaneous calorie restriction and greater weight loss.

Getting the right solution is all about asking the right questions. Which would be the more relevant question:
- How to lower an individuals calorie consumption?
or
- How to lower an individuals hunger?

If you focus on reducing calories then your focus is on the energy measurement of food... 'Food A' is no different than 'Food B'. McDonalds is no different than a farmers market.

If you focus on hunger then things get tricky and you have to have a more focused approach on which foods promote satiety.

Just because of the fact that a calorie deficit equals weight loss doesn't mean calories are of primary importance.

The fact that the only way to get rich is to spend less than you earn doesn't tell you anything useful about getting rich.



Ad libitum



Sorry, but ad libitum is the problem. That study does not disprove the first as intake was not controlled or measured.

It may prove satiety, but that's it.
Nimm

Joined: Dec 10
Posts: 669

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 16:48
BgIrn wrote:
Ad libitum

Sorry, but ad libitum is the problem. That study does not disprove the first as intake was not controlled or measured.

It may prove satiety, but that's it.


But satiety and hunger are important, and strategies for eating ad lib are important too, since that's how the overwhelming majority of people do and will eat during our lifetimes.

Having said that, other free-living observational studies and meta-analyses with ad lib eating show a lot of convergence in success rates after 12 months. LC is a restrictive approach (especially keto), and this leads to adherence difficulties over time. For many, but of course not all people.

Once again, the inescapable conclusion seems to me - no single strategy is categorically superior for every person. We each have to find the overlap between what is biologically necessary to reach our goals, and what we can live with over the long term. While meeting our macro- and micro-nutritional needs, of course.
mikefarinha

Joined: Jun 11
Posts: 443

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 16:53
BgIrn wrote:

It may prove satiety, but that's it.


That is the point.

Why so dismissive?

Satiety is the single most important factor of adherence to any weight loss diet.

So unless the goal is to be skinny for a day then it would be wise to pay attention to hunger signals.

This is why this thread is so illuminating. So many people on either side are so unwilling to even consider the other's argument. You guys just talk past each other so dismissively.

... carry on my wayward son, there'll be peace when you are done

-Mike
"Eat as if your life depends on it!"
BgIrn

Joined: Dec 12
Posts: 97

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 16:56
Nimm wrote:
BgIrn wrote:
Ad libitum

Sorry, but ad libitum is the problem. That study does not disprove the first as intake was not controlled or measured.

It may prove satiety, but that's it.


But satiety and hunger are important, and strategies for eating ad lib are important too, since that's how the overwhelming majority of people do and will eat during our lifetimes.

Having said that, other free-living observational studies and meta-analyses with ad lib eating show a lot of convergence in success rates after 12 months. LC is a restrictive approach (especially keto), and this leads to adherence difficulties. For many, but of course not all people.

Once again, the inescapable conclusion seems to me - no single strategy is categorically superior for every person. We each have to find the overlap between what is biologically necessary to reach our goals, and what we can live with over the long term. While meeting our macro- and micro-nutritional needs, of course.



We are in agreement that satiety is important in lifestyle and eating in general.

I was more speaking of the LCHF being superior to other diets metabolically. The study furnished lends no less credence to the Noakes study.


I'm bowing out of this one, I am responding on a conviction and that is not good for discussion. However, I have to stand by the science.
Spacey47

Joined: Apr 12
Posts: 916

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 17:02
What is being said is that no matter how you get there high fat low fat high carb low carb its how, many calories you digest that count in the end and how many you burn off to create a deficit overall




If you adhere better to low carb go for it but there is nothing intrinsically better about it for weight loss and you may be missing out on some nutrition


Nimm

Joined: Dec 10
Posts: 669

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 17:03
BgIrn wrote:
I was more speaking of the LCHF being superior to other diets metabolically. The study furnished lends no less credence to the Noakes study.


I see your point, but I don't think Mike cited his study to rebut your claim so much as provide some context - that whether or not juggling macros results in any meaningful metabolic advantage, the bigger picture is that people may find success with LC because of other factors that are pretty important in the real world.

...but he can speak for himself if I'm wrong.
erika2633

Joined: Nov 11
Posts: 806

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 17:15
FullaBella wrote:
I'm curious to know how many people joined FS and started their 'journey to change their weight and be healthy' because they were shamed into it?

I'll start - put me down for a 'no'. No mirror, photographs of myself, or photographs of other people, obese or thin, inspired or motivated me.


When I first read this question, I immediately thought, "No! Nobody shamed me into this journey!" But then I read the last sentence in your quote... and I realized that I probably shamed myself into it, unprovoked by anyone/anything else. I was starting to get a little muffin top, and I felt self-conscious even though nobody else ever said anything or even looked at me differently When I first brought up the idea of losing some weight, pretty much everyone said "Oh you look fine! You don't have any weight to lose!" until I actually lost 25 pounds and then it was like, "Oh wow, you look great!" - haha.. But then again, some people didn't even know there was a difference! I guess that's a benefit (or drawback, however you want to look at it) for being tall..

mikefarinha wrote:
Getting the right solution is all about asking the right questions. Which would be the more relevant question:
- How to lower an individuals calorie consumption?
or
- How to lower an individuals hunger?

If you focus on reducing calories then your focus is on the energy measurement of food... 'Food A' is no different than 'Food B'. McDonalds is no different than a farmers market.

If you focus on hunger then things get tricky and you have to have a more focused approach on which foods promote satiety.


Yes, that is very very well said, Mike. I agree very much and think it's important to keep in mind. In an extremely controlled environment, calories and calories and it doesn't matter. In the real world, where some certain foods can "trigger" different emotions and cravings for people, some things are better avoided. This is also why I tend to try to avoid liquid calories (as far as juice, pop, sports drinks, high cal liquor, etc) because they can provide a lot of calories without much satiety at all.

Nimm wrote:
I like the way Marion Nestle addressed the tension between stigma/shaming and complacency/acceptance.


Excellent interview, thanks for sharing!


Someone who is busier than you is working out right now.
There will come a day when you can no longer do this. Today is not that day.
mikefarinha

Joined: Jun 11
Posts: 443

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 17:16
BgIrn wrote:

We are in agreement that satiety is important in lifestyle and eating in general.

I was more speaking of the LCHF being superior to other diets metabolically. The study furnished lends no less credence to the Noakes study.


The interesting thing about the study you provide was this wonderful quote:
Quote:
"Isocaloric VLCARB results in similar fat loss than diets low in saturated fat, but are more effective in improving triacylglycerols, HDL-C, fasting and post prandial glucose and insulin concentrations."


Interestingly, for the duration of the study the low-carb group had more beneficial health markers.

As far as fat loss the study you posted showed equal fat lost while a very restrictive caloric deficit.

The study I posted showed greater fat lost while using biological hunger signals.

Which study gives the reader more practical information?

Now I agree with Nimm that all diets tend to equal out over time and I don't think a low-carb diet is a very useful long-term strategy for the general population.

I think they tend to level off because we all have to live in the modern food landscape which is, IMHO, incompatible with health. Our instincts to determine what is healthy is distracted by information overload which is often conflicting. So we then delegate that decision making process to the government and food corporations (they are one in the same, don't try to separate them) and end up fat sick and nearly dead.

But we have to ponder the implications of what these studies mean with more than just a knee-jerk reaction.

Spacey47 has mentioned that he believes it is the habit of overeating that is to blame. How does that square with this ad libitum feeding study? Did the subjects take a course on how to adjust their habits?

As Dora the Explorer often says "Let's stop and think!"

-Mike
"Eat as if your life depends on it!"
jonnybadback

Joined: Aug 12
Posts: 321

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 17:40
One for the scientists here...
Calories are defined by the law of thermogenics as in how much heat an item produces when burnt. Wood in my stove has a calorific value. Wood is a plant. I eat plants. Avoiding the splinters if i ate 1000 calories of wood i doubt i wood absorb the 1000 calories as my digestive system could not break it down sufficiently before nature took its normal passage and what was not digested was expelled. Sweet corn often goes the same way lol. In the wild mountain gorillas suffer the same dilemma and will eat certain vegetation, expel it naturally but will then take advantage of the partial breakdown and eat their faeces to fully obtain the nutrients. So although i accept a calorie is a calorie i do find it hard to fully accept 100%... Sad
ctlss

Joined: Mar 10
Posts: 2,452

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 17:41
Does SHAMING work? Nope...if so, then all of the hurtful, shaming things that have been said to me over the years (starting at age 14, when my mother put me in WW because I was 5'4" and weighed 132, and I had to stand in front of people and weigh myself while she looked on [the rest of the females in my family were all about 100 pounds] or when she told me to "suck in that gut, you look like you are pregnant" or my dad asked me "How much more are you going to eat?" or when I got called a FAT HOG) would have worked, yet here I am 40 years later and 90 pounds heavier, but a couple of inches shorter (yep, we really do shrink as we age), still fighting the battle to get control and be healthy and happy. There is a lot of information in this thread to disseminate. I have tried so many weight loss programs in my lifetime (many of them more than once), including Diet Center (chicken, lemon juice with oil in hot water, and salad), Weight Watchers, liquid diets, diet chews, diet pills, both prescription and non, and simple calorie restriction...in the last 40 years I have probably tried as many different ways to lose weight as the years I have been trying. The one that works best for me and helps me feel the best is a low carb diet. In reading through this thread, I felt FullaBella's statement was the most reasoned and compassionate of all the ones here. In her statement, it feels like she has been there/done that as many times as I have. To decide that everyone else simply needs to do what you do and they will lose weight...well, not in my experience. But that, just like the lifestyle I choose to follow, is my own opinion.
Let us be grateful to people who make us happy, they are the charming gardeners who make our souls blossom.
~Marcel Proust~


"Each morning when I open my eyes I say to myself: I, not events, have the power to make me happy or unhappy today. I can choose which it shall be. Yesterday is dead, tomorrow hasn't arrived yet. I have just one day, today, and I'm going to be happy in it. "
~Groucho Marx~


ctlss
riocaz

Joined: Jun 12
Posts: 657

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 17:44
jonnybadback wrote:
One for the scientists here...
Calories are defined by the law of thermogenics as in how much heat an item produces when burnt. Wood in my stove has a calorific value. Wood is a plant. I eat plants. Avoiding the splinters if i ate 1000 calories of wood i doubt i wood absorb the 1000 calories as my digestive system could not break it down sufficiently before nature took its normal passage and what was not digested was expelled. Sweet corn often goes the same way lol. In the wild mountain gorillas suffer the same dilemma and will eat certain vegetation, expel it naturally but will then take advantage of the partial breakdown and eat their faeces to fully obtain the nutrients. So although i accept a calorie is a calorie i do find it hard to fully accept 100%... Sad


I think you will find that "indigestible carbohydrate" is what we call fibre mate.

42" jeans(25/01/2013) 40"(28/02/2013) 38"(20/03/2013) 36"(25/05/2013)
Down from 60" waist jeans since June 21st 2012.

Still keeping to my 26" jeans, but they are too tight for comfort. too many tasty things in the US, and over Xmas.

Onwards and Downwards! Smile
http://www.menu52.com/
liv001

Joined: Oct 09
Posts: 676

      quote  
Posted: 04 Feb 2013, 22:18
I have no objection to people cutting calories and increasing exercise to lose weight - it that is what they want to try

I often find that people get mad with us low carbers though because we eat to lose weight - and we do not recommend exercise beyond what is long term sustainable. No need to stress teh body Smile
Many peopel think that if you do not starve or you do not spend 3 hours in the gym you are doing something wrong - even when it is working
Fat people should suffer - not enjoy foods when they lose weight
It is so funny to me.
When I say that I eat at least 65% fat - they tell me cholesterol should be horrible - even when I can show them the reading that says it is very good.

In some sort of absolute terms - calories go in and out
But it is very simplistic and wrong to believe that if you eat x amount of calories and do x amount of exercise you will mathematically lose x amount of weight.
I think you only need to check a few journals and read a few diet calendars here to see that is not true
What happens will determined on the person and circustances
If I am getting my period I will put on weight no matter how little I eat.

(And it was sort of shame that did made me diet. I am horrible at dieting - I have never been thin - I have not really worried about that - but when I got in my 40s and the body got slower I put on more weight - I thought it was somewhat unacceptable - though there were no health issues that forced me to change)

Spacey47

Joined: Apr 12
Posts: 916

      quote  
Posted: 05 Feb 2013, 00:05
Why the assumption that people starve and do 3 hours in the gym who are not low carbers?


I train about 4.5 Hours every 8 days hardly loads. I eat over 2000 calories a day often more and sometimes a lot more.
Exercise helps to retain muscle mass so losing weight is more about fat loss than lean tissue loss


Its also about health exercise increases all sorts of health markers More than just dieting alone and in men keeps testosterone levels high and in women which is vital for health




jonnybadback

Joined: Aug 12
Posts: 321

      quote  
Posted: 05 Feb 2013, 03:13
Thankyou Dr Riocaz. ... I didn't want to eat my sweet corn a second time to get my full calories...
erika2633

Joined: Nov 11
Posts: 806

      quote  
Posted: 05 Feb 2013, 10:40
jonnybadback wrote:
Thankyou Dr Riocaz. ... I didn't want to eat my sweet corn a second time to get my full calories...


Eeeeeeeew!!!!!!!!! Laughing



Someone who is busier than you is working out right now.
There will come a day when you can no longer do this. Today is not that day.
jonnybadback

Joined: Aug 12
Posts: 321

      quote  
Posted: 05 Feb 2013, 11:06
Lol well we evolved from apes...learn from nature people keep saying lol
paperiniko

Joined: Jul 11
Posts: 343

      quote  
Posted: 07 Feb 2013, 03:02
erika2633 wrote:


Yes, that is very very well said, Mike. I agree very much and think it's important to keep in mind. In an extremely controlled environment, calories and calories and it doesn't matter. In the real world, where some certain foods can "trigger" different emotions and cravings for people, some things are better avoided. This is also why I tend to try to avoid liquid calories (as far as juice, pop, sports drinks, high cal liquor, etc) because they can provide a lot of calories without much satiety at all.


This is absolutely true and that is why even for high or medium carbs diets it is important to eat foods rich in fibers and proteins.

That is a strategy that everybody can agree with, but it is very different from saying that carbs by themselves do make fat certain people for some strange metabolic reason that make them unique and different from anybody else.
This is simply not true and while we have obviously different caloric needs depending on lbm and lifestyle the way our body works is the same.
lipoadvisor

Joined: Jan 13
Posts: 10

      quote  
Posted: 07 Feb 2013, 04:22
paperiniko wrote:


This is absolutely true and that is why even for high or medium carbs diets it is important to eat foods rich in fibers and proteins.


Can't agree more paperiniko! I follow the same strategy with great results and hopefully this if combined with a laser lipo (which is scheduled next month) will give me the ideal results
Ambrose D. - hope this site will help me achieve my goals!
Spacey47

Joined: Apr 12
Posts: 916

      quote  
Posted: 07 Feb 2013, 05:46
I think low carbers lump all carbs together

I.e. the rubbish sugars and corn syrup with the good carbs like veggies and fruit



Forum Search
Advanced forum search



Latest Posts

Quinoa???
I haven't been able to find it yet....will keep looking
by roseyhillgirl on 22 Dec 14 09:46 PM
Weight Gained
After not exercising for a couple of months, indulging in chocolates and cakes, not watching calories, gained whooping 5 kilos (upsetting):( !! Wow, just realised what difference keeping tab of what you ...
by Sarafiennes on 22 Dec 14 06:43 PM
Holidays
Brilliant Link JadenMiller :)
by AKRSAR on 22 Dec 14 04:45 PM
too upset with my weight
Keep active the majority of your hours. Clean house, gentle walking, t-tapping, and Miranda Esmonde White's classical stretch are some ideas. You are probably eating too few calories so you body ...
by ranajoan on 22 Dec 14 09:58 AM
We need better fast food options
Healthier choices are there like soups, it's really up you to pay close attention while ordering.
by jadenmiller on 21 Dec 14 11:53 PM