Obesity is a disease.

[popcorn]

The science is there, it's called amphetamines. They're also insanely fucking dangerous.

I said "safely"

[itsfredtitmus]

Good thread, fellas!

[itsfredtitmus]

The science is there, it's called amphetamines. They're also insanely fucking dangerous.

Just not true - actual weight loss pills like ephedrine, pseudo, etc, etc is a lot more taxing on your body than anything like that. If you're taking mental health wise or addiction then fair, yeah, pretty fuckin' bad

[Clatty McCutcheon]

I blame Pavarotti for making it cool. Within a couple of weeks of Italia '90 starting, all the kids were morbidly obese and had dyed black beards. It really was a very pronounced watershed moment.

[Thursday]

Nope not having this. I'm better than anyone who weighs more than me, and they should all be applauding me and telling me how attractive I am.

[touchingcloth]

They hardly eat anything. All their money goes to booze.

Nope.

Nope they don't know, or nope it's not true? A pisshead will be spending more of their money on calories and ingesting more calories than most people, but the effects alcohol has on metabolism and the way it's broken down in the body means they don't put on the weight you'd expect based on the calories they consume and the amount they move. And even when looking at non-alcoholics, people's basal metabolic rates can vary by hundreds of calories per day.

[jamiefairlie]

Nope they don't know, or nope it's not true? A pisshead will be spending more of their money on calories and ingesting more calories than most people, but the effects alcohol has on metabolism and the way it's broken down in the body means they don't put on the weight you'd expect based on the calories they consume and the amount they move. And even when looking at non-alcoholics, people's basal metabolic rates can vary by hundreds of calories per day.

Muscle mass plays a huge role in that.

[Kankurette]

It's disgust.

All fat-hate comes down to disgust.

It's never about concern for health when it comes to strangers. It's 'ugh, look at that hideous fatty McFatterson, hope I never look like that, if I mock them then they'll magically lose weight.' The Mumsnet crowd go 'BUT MUH NHS' but it's bullshit, it's because they don't like fatties. Fat people are the only group they hate more than trans people.

Not that lefties aren't guilty of fat hate, they are, but a lot of conservatives REALLY hate fat people, especially fat women (which is especially ironic if they're Trump/Johnson fans). I think they see fat as a sign of weakness, laziness, cowardice and decadence.

[touchingcloth]

Muscle mass plays a huge role in that.

Aye, but it's not the only thing which does.

[jobotic]

Except for the very, very many who frame anorexia and bulimia as vain, shallow, frivolous modern-day inventions. Goes hand in hand with the "In my day we didn't have all these diets, we just ate what was put in front of us, and we played outside instead of sitting in front of the TV like teenagers nowadays, and so all these silly disorders didn't even exist!" discourse.

Like depression innit?

[flotemysost]

Like depression innit?

Exactly, or pretty much anything that people are convinced "no one used to get offended about until now".

Yep. Binge eating disorder is a real thing but nobody ever feels sorry for people who have it, it's 'put down the fork and exercise, you fat cunt'. I guess anorexia is seen as glamorous, that whole walking in the snow and not seeing a footprint thing, and extreme thinness is desirable in some fields (like modelling or ballet) whereas fat people are seen as repulsive. One fat model is on Cosmo and Mumsnet start screaming about Glorifying Obesity.

Incidentally, I've never understood the logic of mocking fat people exercising. You're mocking them for being fat but shouldn't you be glad they're exercising? Would you prefer it if they just sat on their arses all day long?

There isn't any logic at all, especially given that you can't tell from looking at a random stranger the circumstances behind their body mass at that particular time. I was bulimic/binge eating for years and no one had a clue I had an eating problem, not my friends or flatmates or anyone, because I wasn't overweight (but not extremely skinny either) - but in the meantime someone else who happened to be bigger, but with a far healthier diet and mindset than mine, might be ridiculed as a gluttonous slob. It's fucked up.

The whole "it's just laziness/stupidity/poor life choices and therefore they don't deserve nice stuff/normal lives/to exist at all" mindset also completely disregards the fact that for lots of people, binge/overeating is often a coping mechanism and it's incredibly common in people who end up being carers (officially or not) in their home environment because, as I saw written once, it's a way of "fucking yourself up without getting fucked up" i.e. it doesn't incapacitate you in the same way that booze or drugs would - and for many it might essentially be a survival tactic. (Not saying every overweight or obese person has a binge eating disorder obviously, but yeah there's a complete unwillingness to see it as a symptom of anything other than feckless selfishness, with none of the pity that's *sometimes* reserved for other mental health issues and coping mechanisms.)

And a you say the abuse that fat people get, especially fat women, is vile. The excuse about "glorifying unhealthy lifestyles" whenever a bigger body is celebrated is fucking bullshit too, otherwise these same people would be up in arms every time someone was pictured with a drink or cigs or whatever. It's almost as if to some people, seeing an overweight person have the sheer audacity to do things supposedly reserved for normal people like exercising, or wearing nice clothes, or having a sex life, is like an affront to their world view and has to be shut down because they can't comprehend it.

[canadagoose]

It's hard, because eating can be comforting, and I totally get how people get to huge weights, especially if they're predisposed to it through genetics and have larger appetites. I've lost weight recently after a good few years of being a bit overweight, but not through any personal struggle or anything, just losing my appetite and vomiting (good old gastroparesis and med side-effects). My best pal has to work a lot harder than me to lose weight, it seems - he goes to the gym and exercises more than me but is still heavier than me (we're about the same height, 5'10"). Life's a bastard, eh.

What I really hate about people is that they think fat people are fair game to abuse in the street, especially in summer when people don't wear as much. They think they're "showing off their fat" but honestly, why should they cover up (and therefore get really sweaty, I know I do when I wear too much) for your comfort? Childish and daft, so they are.

[touchingcloth]

It's amazing that obesity is widely seen as being something which is easy to avoid and reverse, and very often gets met with the advice to "eat less, move more". It's so fucking reductionist, in a way that other addictions don't receive similar advice more - I've never seen anyone seriously suggest to a smackhead that they should "maybe just shoot up a bit less".

Obesity is also a vicious cycle, where the fatter you get the easier it is to carry on gaining weight due to things like leptin resistance and a decreased BMR. What's worse is that dieting as a fat person can hinder future attempts at weight loss - dieting for weight loss is a relatively recent phenomenon, so our bodies haven't evolved to be able to tell the difference between a voluntary food shortage and one which is due to a famine. Our evolved response to famine is to increase appetite and decrease metabolism, which is plausibly responsible for the yo-yo-ing but ultimately upwardly-trending weight which many habitual dieters experience.

And to the armchair moralisers, the fatties among us probably devote far, far, far more conscious effort to their weight than you ever have done. There's not an hour that goes by when I'm not thinking about what the next thing to go into my mouth will be, shortly followed by thinking what a disgusting worm I am for daring to have such thoughts.

[Pijlstaart]

In a rare moment of sincerity, I'm glad to see the ideas discussed in the article may be slowly permeating the mainstream. I've been running a side project on metabolism and I have a fair few disease models where food consumption and activity levels don't correlate in the way the CICO brigade would expect with lipid stores, in these mutants dietary intervention doesn't do much unless pushed to extremes, genetic manipulation at key metabolic chokepoints can be ineffectual too, can even have the opposite effect on mutants as it does in controls, it really is amazing how stubborn metabolic homeostasis can be and how many workarounds it has. Loads of interesting stuff to be unpicked, but if I'm struggling to modify fat stores in these animals in controlled conditions, what hope for us on the side of the cage where the turkey twizzlers are?

Having said that, one exception worthy of ire comes to mind, When I look at Donald Trump's partner in crime, Bernie Sanders, there's big Violet Beauregarde vibes, why's his face that colour we all ask, and when he lifts his arms up a heaving corned beef tum peekaboos under his shirt, rococo lattice of varicose veins and a calloused panniculus, thick skin, like the bottom of a foot, maybe he's been dragging it across stuff, could he even walk on it? Would turn the other cheek, but with Bernie it ties intimately into his misogyny, he's adopted the aesthetic of a woman mid-childbirth both as an act of mockery and to raspingly insert himself into one of the few lived experiences reserved for the fairer sex. It's what he was taught at Berkeley, no woman would have agreed to the Summer of Love because they were the ones that had to clean it up afterwards, imagine the poor christian soul that had to upend Bernie from his paddling pool of melted carob and towel him off whilst he chanted Free Love and left smeary gropemarks down their apron. How CAN you interpret that in a good light? As befits a creature so wantonly in service of the devil, his ruby jubbler is a barometer of his sin, and each time it's pressed against a motel window, the bacchanalianist demise of christendom comes one wet thwap closer.

[Kankurette]

There's also the idea that fat people must all hate themselves and, as flotesmyost says, should not have the AUDACITY to want to dress up or look good. They must all wear ugly clothes or they might encourage other people to get fat.

Anyone reckon there's a class aspect too? Actually I think some of you have said that.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

It's amazing that obesity is widely seen as being something which is easy to avoid and reverse,

Really?! I don't think I've encountered that as the prevailing view. Most people's reaction to those who have lost lots of weight to a healthier size is admiration, precisely because it is difficult.

In the scenario obesity is intertwined with mental illness one has to start by addressing the underlying illness, of which obesity is one symptom, so that's certainly complex.

I think perhaps what is being conflated is that eat less/move more sounds almost patronisingly easy but in fact it is much easier said than done (although it also for most happens to be true) due to the many barriers and distractions involved. If it was phrased as 'eat less/move more while being depressed, agoraphobic, body conscious, desperately unfit, ashamed, distracted by comforting easy wins and sedentary hobbies' the truth of how difficult that is starts to emerge.

It seems like we have a choice to continue down the 'all bodies are beautiful, own your life' route where making obese people feel happier and accepted in the present by taking the stigma away comes at a later cost of chronic pain and early death, or we treat obesity similarly seriously as alcoholism with interventions, tougher regulations, as the opening link suggests, if it is a disease.

[Bazooka]

It's amazing that obesity is widely seen as being something which is easy to avoid and reverse, and very often gets met with the advice to "eat less, move more". It's so fucking reductionist, in a way that other addictions don't

Why? The addiction part aside, this is exactly the best solution for the vast majority of cases. I'm sorry but there is a reason obesity rates have continued to rise decade upon decade, and it is because people are less active on average especially in the West in their daily life and eating high fat and sugar convenience food. It doesn't mean it's easy, but let's not act like it's controversial this advice is being given, regardless of how hard the cycle is to break.

Also I don't think you can be as critical on others reactions based on the terms you've used to describe other addicts in this thread.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

Why? The addiction part aside, this is exactly the best solution for the vast majority of cases. I'm sorry but there is a reason obesity rates have continued to rise decade upon decade, and it is because people are less active on average especially in the West in their daily life and eating high fat and sugar convenience food. It doesn't mean it's easy, but let's not act like it's controversial this advice is being given, regardless of how hard the cycle is to break.

But why are we less active? Where did the high fat and sugar convenience food come from? Why do people gravitate towards convenience food?

Look, I was the stereotypical fat person. I did it to myself by eating garbage and washing it down with gallons of sugar-water and I have no excuse for that. But the people I see at my weight-loss class are overwhelmingly working mothers. They have early starts and long commutes and other people in the house to shop and cook for and children who need to be ferried places. They're not just changing their lifestyle, the rest of the family has to adapt too. You're talking about 3+ other people who are used to living a certain way and in many cases are bound by working hours and other people's schedules. "Less cake, more exercise!" is meaningless if you can't find a way to get more exercise and if the people you live with insist on cake.

[Sebastian Cobb]

Obesity is also a vicious cycle, where the fatter you get the easier it is to carry on gaining weight due to things like leptin resistance and a decreased BMR.

There's also things like if you're older and your weight is starting to cause problems that may affect mobility e.g. knackered knees then you might get told you need to lose weight before having surgery done on them, but how are you going to lose weight if your knees are fucked to the point you're hobbling around. I think that one's not uncommon.

[touchingcloth]

Why? The addiction part aside, this is exactly the best solution for the vast majority of cases. I'm sorry but there is a reason obesity rates have continued to rise decade upon decade, and it is because people are less active on average especially in the West in their daily life and eating high fat and sugar convenience food. It doesn't mean it's easy, but let's not act like it's controversial this advice is being given, regardless of how hard the cycle is to break.

It's the best solution for shifting relatively small amounts of extra weight, but obesity is fundamentally different. That's absolutely correct about levels of activity and Western diets, but in a lot of cases people haven't made hugely informed choices to be sedentary and eat shite, it's just that life in the West makes it incredibly easy to do those things - our environment is pretty much perfect for tipping anyone with the slightest predisposition into full blown obesity. Especially so where the "high fat and sugar convenience foods" you mention are concerned - it's not just convenience foods which are affected, but unless you prepare everything you eat from scratch by yourself or devote hours to inspecting nutrition labels, it's next to impossible to avoid food which will help you put on weight, because it's so easy for manufacturers to cram things with sugar and vegetable oils - this is compounded by public health advice to avoid saturated fats, because it means that manufacturers can use polyunsaturated fats and legitimately label their products as being "heart healthy" according to government guidelines, or cram things with sugar and legitimately label them as "low fat".

Also I don't think you can be as critical on others reactions based on the terms you've used to describe other addicts in this thread.

That's fair, though for context I've struggled with all of those addictions myself. I think it's only food and booze I've mentioned in this thread.

[Bazooka]

I agree, but I think we should be careful in not conflating sound advice with a misunderstanding of the difficulties of weight loss and lifestyle change, or nastiness, the message isn't wrong, it's how it is packaged.

[popcorn]

When I moved to Japan I lost about 4 stone over 12 months. I hadn't been consciously trying to lose it through dieting or exercising or anything - it just magically happened by virtue of my circumstances and environment. Japanese people aren't thinner than British people because they're better people with more self-control, they're just in a different situation. I suspect this is true of the majority of thin people vs fat people everywhere.

[touchingcloth]

When I moved to Japan I lost about 4 stone over 12 months. I hadn't been consciously trying to lose it through dieting or exercising or anything - it just magically happened by virtue of my circumstances and environment. Japanese people aren't thinner than British people because they're better people with more self-control, they're just in a different situation. I suspect this is true of the majority of thin people vs fat people everywhere.

My understanding is that migration has a huge impact on people's weight, pretty much in a hierarchy of nations - a Japanese person moving to the Gulf states would tend to gain weight while an American moving there would tend to lose weight, while Arabs would gain weight if they moved to the US and lose it if they moved to Japan. It's pretty damn hard to eat healthily in certain environments, in much the same way as the ease of following, say, a vegan diet varies based on where in the world you find yourself.

[touchingcloth]

I agree, but I think we should be careful in not conflating sound advice with a misunderstanding of the difficulties of weight loss and lifestyle change, or nastiness, the message isn't wrong, it's how it is packaged.

Apologies for any nastiness in my posts. I was being careless and flippant rather than cruel.

[MojoJojo]

Why? The addiction part aside, this is exactly the best solution for the vast majority of cases. I'm sorry but there is a reason obesity rates have continued to rise decade upon decade, and it is because people are less active on average especially in the West in their daily life and eating high fat and sugar convenience food. It doesn't mean it's easy, but let's not act like it's controversial this advice is being given, regardless of how hard the cycle is to break.

Also I don't think you can be as critical on others reactions based on the terms you've used to describe other addicts in this thread.

A listened to a podcast recently* which made a couple of interesting points. If we take it that you're supposed to eat 2000 calories a day, that's 730,000 calories a year. 3500 calories is about a pound of fat, so if you deviate by more than 1% you're going to be gaining or losing 2 lbs a year.

The point is no one maintains a healthy weight by consciously counting calories. It is all very dependent on a complex system that we really don't understand.

The obesity epidemic didn't start till the 1980s, along time after the sedentary lifestyle that often gets blamed for it came in.

I can't really being my thoughts about obesity and weight loss into a coherent point. Like I know diets don't work but I still think about starting one and listen with interest when some one starts singing the praises of whatever one they've started this week.

(*You're Wrong About - Obesity Epidemic)

[touchingcloth]

A listened to a podcast recently* which made a couple of interesting points. If we take it that you're supposed to eat 2000 calories a day, that's 730,000 calories a year. 3500 calories is about a pound of fat, so if you deviate by more than 1% you're going to be gaining or losing 2 lbs a year.

The point is no one maintains a healthy weight by consciously counting calories. It is all very dependent on a complex system that we really don't understand.

The obesity epidemic didn't start till the 1980s, along time after the sedentary lifestyle that often gets blamed for it came in.

I can't really being my thoughts about obesity and weight loss into a coherent point. Like I know diets don't work but I still think about starting one and listen with interest when some one starts singing the praises of whatever one they've started this week.

(*You're Wrong About - Obesity Epidemic)

That's another reason why the basic CICO arithmetic doesn't match reality. Findings vary between studies, but a conservative estimate for US adult males is that they eat 500 calories per day more now than in the 70s, which would be 50-odd pounds' worth of additional calories per year, and yet the average weights in that group haven't gone up by that amount in total over the same period, much less gone up by that amount per year.

[who cares]

I watched that recent programme by Van Tulleken on the BBC about ultra-processed foods (UPFs). Very interesting. For me that might be the missing link in why obesity rates are rising in the West. It's not that we suddenly have less willpower, or more greed. There's something about these foods, and their relative low price, availability, and their addictiveness that seems to create the conditions for obesity. They've been created in a kind of laboratory to be as delicious as possible- and at the same time, they are barren of nutrition. But perhaps the most disturbing thing of all is that in some way, they fuck with our natural sense of satiety. We can eat enough calories from these foods, but for some reason, we crave more.

It's something I definitely want to learn more about. I'm considering banning these foods from my diet. These delicious, wonderful nightmare foods.

As a sidenote, I think if you have conquered other addictions then food becomes a last little treat, and when these foods are a treat too often- and it's very easy for that to happen- it's a problem.

[touchingcloth]

^ modern research seems to be uncovering lots of thing which affect weight in surprising ways. From what I've read, the ratio of omega 3 (fish oils, green plants, olive oil) to omega 6 (vegetable oils, seeds and nuts) has significant effects on the way your body processes foods and stores fat. I'm trying to ban the worst offenders - trans fats in the form of vegetable oils, margarine and shortening - from my diet, which is easy when I'm cooking for myself at home but nigh on impossible when eating on the go.

[JamesTC]

That's another reason why the basic CICO arithmetic doesn't match reality. Findings vary between studies, but a conservative estimate for US adult males is that they eat 500 calories per day more now than in the 70s, which would be 50-odd pounds' worth of additional calories per year, and yet the average weights in that group haven't gone up by that amount in total over the same period, much less gone up by that amount per year.

But where does the energy go? It is either used by the body, converted into fat/muscle or leaves the body as waste. From what I understand, we lose very few calories as waste (unless you are suffering from something like diabetes).

It is also worth noting that average adult male is 25lbs heavier than one in the 70s which would account for around 200 of those calories (heavier bodies need more calories to function). Any exercise/movement would burn more when you are a heavier weight too.

[JaDanketies]

The science is there, it's called amphetamines. They're also insanely fucking dangerous.

simply substitute beer for whiskey and breakfast for amphetamines to make weight loss fun!