Modern obesity: less to do with how much you eat?

[Deeko]

I understand that. I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but my point is that if they eat less....they'll lose weight. Yea, its harder for some people. Maybe their hormones screw up their hunger levels, causing them to eat more, or something like that. However, with rare exceptions, they CAN eat less & lose weight because of it.

 

[brikis98]

I understand that. I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but my point is that if they eat less....they'll lose weight. Yea, its harder for some people. Maybe their hormones screw up their hunger levels, causing them to eat more, or something like that. However, with rare exceptions, they CAN eat less & lose weight because of it.

For a lot of people, changing the quantity of the food they eat will not be enough: they may need to change the quality as well. It is much harder to limit yourself to, say, 1500 calories of fast food than to 1500 calories of fresh/whole fruits, veggies, meats, etc. If you've read any studies of hunger levels, you'd be amazed at how powerful a force it can be. And when hunger levels are totally out of whack due to the interaction of crappy food + genetics, weight loss can become MUCH harder than the average person can reasonably handle. The lack of general knowledge of these issues - and the reluctance of many to accept the role of hormones and the like in body weight management - leads to the perception that people get fat solely due to a weak will. That's certainly true in some cases, but with an obesity epidemic of the size we have today, people will need to acknowledge that there is more at play before they can get healthy.

Therefore, it truly is important to get this information out there. This article isn't perfect, but it's at least a step in the right direction. People need to understand that their ability to stay a healthy bodyweight is not just about how many calories they eat, but also the type.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

For a lot of people, changing the quantity of the food they eat will not be enough: they may need to change the quality as well. It is much harder to limit yourself to, say, 1500 calories of fast food than to 1500 calories of fresh/whole fruits, veggies, meats, etc. If you've read any studies of hunger levels, you'd be amazed at how powerful a force it can be. And when hunger levels are totally out of whack due to the interaction of crappy food + genetics, weight loss can become MUCH harder than the average person can reasonably handle. The lack of general knowledge of these issues - and the reluctance of many to accept the role of hormones and the like in body weight management - leads to the perception that people get fat solely due to a weak will. That's certainly true in some cases, but with an obesity epidemic of the size we have today, people will need to acknowledge that there is more at play before they can get healthy.

Therefore, it truly is important to get this information out there. This article isn't perfect, but it's at least a step in the right direction. People need to understand that their ability to stay a healthy bodyweight is not just about how many calories they eat, but also the type.

Good points. Eating healthier foods such as fish and vegetables satiates your hunger better than the equivalent number of calories worth of fast food.

Also, I didn't see hydration discussed in the article. Many people are chronically dehydrated. If they drank enough water regularly, they would stay hydrated and also satiate hunger a bit, thus ingesting fewer calories overall.

 

[Special K]

It's not just about calories in versus calories out.

If that were all it took to lose weight — eating a little less and exercising a little more — then weight loss would be as simple as grade-school math: Subtract Y from Z and end up with X.

But if you've ever followed a diet program and achieved less than your desired result, you probably came away feeling frustrated, depressed, and maybe a bit guilty. What did I do wrong?

While I'm not denying the role of different types of food and genetic factors as they relate to obesity, I have to honestly question how many so-called "dieters" even have a ballpark estimate of how many calories they are consuming in a day. How many of them use a website like www.fitday.com to track their calories? How many of them use a cheap kitchen scale to weigh their portions?

Although entering this information into Fitday won't be 100% accurate, it should work if you combine it with weighing yourself each morning and aiming for a set number of calories each day. If your weight hasn't dropped in a week or two, then reduce your target number of daily calories by 100 or so. Repeat this procedure and eventually you will be in a caloric deficit.

I think the problem most people have is they aren't nearly methodical enough with their weightloss approach. They will make some vague change like "cut out all soda", without paying attention to all of the other calories they are consuming throughout the day.

 

[Zebo]

I just use my 😛 actually.

Hey, I mean I do exercise a lot and I'm sure I burn a lot of calories every week, but I still pay attention to my portions. On a few occasions I've continued to eat the same amount even when going into a taper (reducing mileage before a race) and I ended up gaining a few pounds 😱. I still have to roughly match my calories to my workload.

I eat lots of calories because that's what I need to sustain my training. If I didn't train, I could cut my caloric intake by like 2/3 and still have a good body weight.

Never seen a fat runner.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Never seen a fat runner.

No, you're right. I've seen recreational runners who probably could drop a bit of weight if they modified their diet, but they were certainly not overweight/obese.

 

[brikis98]

Although entering this information into Fitday won't be 100% accurate, it should work if you combine it with weighing yourself each morning and aiming for a set number of calories each day. If your weight hasn't dropped in a week or two, then reduce your target number of daily calories by 100 or so. Repeat this procedure and eventually you will be in a caloric deficit.

I agree that this approach works well for most people, but there are a couple ways it can fail:

1. Calories in and calories out are not independent variables. By reducing your caloric intake, it is quite possible that your body will reduce your expenditure as well. Your metabolism may slow, your energy levels might drop, and so on. Moreover, the type of food you eat may influence the caloric equation - for example, in Good Calories, Bad Calories, Taubes argues that certain foods can mess up our insulin levels/sensitivity, which in turn messes up our ability to mobilize fat stores for energy. So while on paper you may have eaten 500 calories, you may only be able to use 300 of them for energy.

2. As I said numerous types in this thread, the type of food you eat can also play a big role. For example, for the same caloric value, some foods are significantly more filling than others. So if all you eat is junk food, hunger levels can become a serious concern as caloric intake is cut. For someone who eats generally healthy, cutting back by a few hundred calories may seem easy; for someone that eats crap, it could become a mental and physical torment.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Agreed about the type of foods. You can eat 3000 calories worth of McDonalds or you can eat 3000 calories worth of spinach and chicken with olive oil and vinegar.

I dont believe in most of that stuff the article says. According to my professor (which I may or may not believe in everything he says) Human genetics have not changed greatly over the last 100 years, but our lifestyle has.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Agreed about the type of foods. You can eat 3000 calories worth of McDonalds or you can eat 3000 calories worth of spinach and chicken with olive oil and vinegar.

I dont believe in most of that stuff the article says. According to my professor (which I may or may not believe in everything he says) Human genetics have not changed greatly over the last 100 years, but our lifestyle has.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

I dont believe in most of that stuff the article says. According to my professor (which I may or may not believe in everything he says) Human genetics have not changed greatly over the last 100 years, but our lifestyle has.

The article isn't about genetics, it's about environmental factors.

 

[vi edit]

I just hate articles that try to point out particular reasons that people are fat. You aren't fat because of chemicals. You aren't fat because of your body type. You aren't fat because of the amount of food you eat. You aren't fat because you sit on your ass all day only only move to go to the bathroom or shovel more food in your mouth.

You're fat because of your lifestyle which is all of these things combined. It's one giant equation akin to a quarterback rating. Every peice adds up to the overall affect.

Track your calories. Eat clean foods. Exercise (and I mean exercise...not walk your dog around the block). Take the stairs instead of the elevator. Get out and work in your yard. Pass on the candy bar or quart of ice cream and eat a yogurt instead. And so on.

Our diets have gone to shit. Our activity levels have dropped like a rock. We can't sleep well because we're stressed at work and are over weight and have apnea. We pass our fat ass lifestyle choices on to our kids and doom them to obesity before they hit double digits. We've got a mountain of problems working against us. Processed foods are just one small pebble on that giant mound of apathy.

 

[ScottyB]

I feel the food eaten is the most significant part to gaining, remaining the same, or losing weight. Exercise helps burn fat.

<---Down from a size 44 to a 38 and 66 pounds in 4 months.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

I feel the food eaten is the most significant part to gaining, remaining the same, or losing weight. Exercise helps burn fat.

<---Down from a size 44 to a 38 and 66 pounds in 4 months.

It depends on the individual. Some people are active, eat reasonable diets, and are overweight. Also, exercise helps burn calories. Depending on the type of exercise, you may burn both muscle and fat while in a caloric deficit - not just fat.

 

[MJinZ]

anyone who understands how insulin works in the body can tell you it isn't a matter of calories in < Calories out

That's how it works. If your body needs energy (aka, you didn't get enough calories), it will use your fat and muscle.

 

[MJinZ]

This isn't the best written article, but the underlying ideas are actually pretty accurate. Some key things to mention:

1. The laws of thermodynamics are NOT being violated.
2. However, calories in vs. calories out is much more complicated than most people expect.

Remember, when you are tracking calories, you are just ESTIMATING. Calories in and calories out are not independent variables and they are not magically consistent values through all conditions; how many calories you absorb from a certain food or expend from a certain activity will vary depending on the person and the situation; what happens with the calories in your body - where/how they are stored, where they are mobilized from - will vary depending on the person and the situation; and not all calories are created equal - fat, protein and carbs are all handled very differently by the body. There are just SOME of the issues that make calorie tracking tricky. If anything, we should be amazed that it is still an excellent tool that does work for many people in an effort to lose or gain weight.

There are a bunch of people on here who love to babble about staying skinny despite eating massive amounts of fast food. This is called anecdotal evidence and is meaningless. Just look around you: for every person lucky enough to stay skinny despite a crappy diet, there are many more who ended up obese. There are also many people here who seem to think that the obesity epidemic is purely the result of people being "weak willed" and allowing themselves to eat too much and exercise too little. This is a fine theory, until you look at the data: Obesity rates absolutely skyrocketed in the 80's. Do you really believe that the entire nation magically lost all will power in the 80's? It isn't like we are talking about a few fat guys here and there. We are taking about one third of an entire country suddenly getting shockingly fat in a VERY short period of time. If that isn't evidence of external factors at play, I don't know what is.

So what are these external factors? I have no idea. This article suggests a few of theories, Good Calories, Bad Calories suggests some others, and The Omnivore's Dilemma suggests some more. Chances are that something IS screwing with our hormones. No one would argue that a growing child or pregnant woman gains weight because of hormonal changes. Sure, they eat more calories than they burn, but they don't do that because of a weak will, but because of hormonal influence. And there is plenty of evidence that food (and the various chemicals now in our food) can affect our hormones. Therefore, it is only natural to assume that something in the environment is making people MUCH more susceptible to obesity. Maybe it screws up our processes of hunger management, fat storage, fat mobilization, and/or energy levels. So even though we may not be inherently any more "weak willed" than people 30 years ago, something in our diet today is making the average person fat anyway. In fact, to stay health today, you need to have a STRONGER will than the average person back in the day.

Oh hell, it doesn't have ANYthing to do with the fact that the average person today sits on his ass all day and eats donuts and the average person 30 years ago worked with his body all day long doing physical activities right?

No WAYZ.

 

[MJinZ]

For a lot of people, changing the quantity of the food they eat will not be enough: they may need to change the quality as well. It is much harder to limit yourself to, say, 1500 calories of fast food than to 1500 calories of fresh/whole fruits, veggies, meats, etc. If you've read any studies of hunger levels, you'd be amazed at how powerful a force it can be. And when hunger levels are totally out of whack due to the interaction of crappy food + genetics, weight loss can become MUCH harder than the average person can reasonably handle. The lack of general knowledge of these issues - and the reluctance of many to accept the role of hormones and the like in body weight management - leads to the perception that people get fat solely due to a weak will. That's certainly true in some cases, but with an obesity epidemic of the size we have today, people will need to acknowledge that there is more at play before they can get healthy.

Therefore, it truly is important to get this information out there. This article isn't perfect, but it's at least a step in the right direction. People need to understand that their ability to stay a healthy bodyweight is not just about how many calories they eat, but also the type.

I'd say to any MALE trying to lose weight, eat whatever the fuck you want and work out and you'll lose fat and gain muscle. Your MALE body was DESIGNED that way. It isn't rocket science and if you can't do it, you suck at life. Sorry.

Women are a little different, as they have less testosterone and far more prone to hold weight for evolutionary purposes.

 

[purbeast0]

I just hate articles that try to point out particular reasons that people are fat. You aren't fat because of chemicals. You aren't fat because of your body type. You aren't fat because of the amount of food you eat. You aren't fat because you sit on your ass all day only only move to go to the bathroom or shovel more food in your mouth.

You're fat because of your lifestyle which is all of these things combined. It's one giant equation akin to a quarterback rating. Every peice adds up to the overall affect.

Track your calories. Eat clean foods. Exercise (and I mean exercise...not walk your dog around the block). Take the stairs instead of the elevator. Get out and work in your yard. Pass on the candy bar or quart of ice cream and eat a yogurt instead. And so on.

Our diets have gone to shit. Our activity levels have dropped like a rock. We can't sleep well because we're stressed at work and are over weight and have apnea. We pass our fat ass lifestyle choices on to our kids and doom them to obesity before they hit double digits. We've got a mountain of problems working against us. Processed foods are just one small pebble on that giant mound of apathy.

vi edit wins this thread.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

I'd say to any MALE trying to lose weight, eat whatever the fuck you want and work out and you'll lose fat and gain muscle. Your MALE body was DESIGNED that way. It isn't rocket science and if you can't do it, you suck at life. Sorry.

Women are a little different, as they have less testosterone and far more prone to hold weight for evolutionary purposes.

Lmao. And you don't have enough experience to understand that it doesn't work that way. If somebody "worked out" with aerobic exercise, they might lose both fat and muscle... then again, they might not lose anything. I've also seen PLENTY of guys who lifted, but ate way too much crap. They gained way more fat and increased their body fat percentage. Did they gain muscle? Sure. But they looked like hell and felt worse about themelves than they did before. I've worked with guys who just couldn't keep their diet in check. They had crappy progression because of it. They didn't lose weight, they had slower goal acquisition, they were slower, and they were weaker. The human body in general actually runs pretty high up there in complexity. Testosterone isn't the end-all, be-all. Women actually have the capacity to hypertrophy the same &#37; of muscle mass (or muscular cross-sectional area) as men, in the absence of high testosterone levels.

 

[MJinZ]

Lmao. And you don't have enough experience to understand that it doesn't work that way. If somebody "worked out" with aerobic exercise, they might lose both fat and muscle... then again, they might not lose anything. I've also seen PLENTY of guys who lifted, but ate way too much crap. They gained way more fat and increased their body fat percentage. Did they gain muscle? Sure. But they looked like hell and felt worse about themelves than they did before. I've worked with guys who just couldn't keep their diet in check. They had crappy progression because of it. They didn't lose weight, they had slower goal acquisition, they were slower, and they were weaker. The human body in general actually runs pretty high up there in complexity. Testosterone isn't the end-all, be-all. Women actually have the capacity to hypertrophy the same &#37; of muscle mass (or muscular cross-sectional area) as men, in the absence of high testosterone levels.

Lift weights + run on the treadmill + eat whatever you want = LOSE WEIGHT AND GAIN MUSCLE.

Guys who weigh 200lbs need like 4000 calories a day just to maintain their muscle mass. Big legs = big maintenance. Don't be an idiot like most people at the gym and take your legs seriously.

It's like the easiest shit ever.

 

[Deeko]

Lift weights + run on the treadmill + eat whatever you want = LOSE WEIGHT AND GAIN MUSCLE.

Guys who weigh 200lbs need like 4000 calories a day just to maintain their muscle mass. Big legs = big maintenance. Don't be an idiot like most people at the gym and take your legs seriously.

It's like the easiest shit ever.

A) Running on a treadmill will not give you big legs, not even close. Go do some heavy squats if you want big legs.

B) More size does indeed raise your maintenance calories - but not that much.

C) Your equation absolutely does not work as a generalized function like that. The first two create caloric expenditures. The latter is caloric intake. If the first two (+ your calories burned throughout your day) are not bigger than the 3rd, it will NOT equal weight loss.

"Eat whatever you want" is a silly generalized term, you have to factor caloric intake. And your comment about 4000 calories is totally incorrect. If you were short (say, 5'6"), 200lbs, and 22 years old, your BMR would be about 2000 calories. Tack on your expenditures throughout the day, you're still plenty under 3,000 in most cases. If you ran for an hour or so plus went to the gym and lifted for an hour EVERY DAY you might hit 4,000 calories average burned....but that seems pretty unlikely.

In short, you're wrong.

 

[M0oG0oGaiPan]

Don't worry guys, I'm almost positive there are some pro bodybuilders that lift once or twice a month. Legs are huggeeee.

 

[BlackTigers]

I'd say to any MALE trying to lose weight, eat whatever the fuck you want and work out and you'll lose fat and gain muscle. Your MALE body was DESIGNED that way. It isn't rocket science and if you can't do it, you suck at life. Sorry.

Women are a little different, as they have less testosterone and far more prone to hold weight for evolutionary purposes.

You must be massive, with your once a month training and super lean and ripped body, if it's so easy.

 

[MJinZ]

You must be massive, with your once a month training and super lean and ripped body, if it's so easy.

I'm a massive 180lbs 🙄 and getting flabby. I haven't been to the gym in probably 1/2 a year but getting back into when it warms up.

 

[brikis98]

Oh hell, it doesn't have ANYthing to do with the fact that the average person today sits on his ass all day and eats donuts and the average person 30 years ago worked with his body all day long doing physical activities right?

No WAYZ.

Wow, way to completely and totally miss the point. I never disputed that we are eating too much or not exercising enough. The question is WHY? Why, after thousands of years of civilization without obesity, heart disease, diabetes, etc being serious problems, did they grow to epidemic proportions in the last 30 years? Do you seriously believe this is a matter of will power? That the every American sponatenously and magically decided to become a lazy slob in the 1980's? That, despite all the variety in races, cultures, beliefs, socioeconomic status, geographic location, etc in this country, everyone chose to lose control of their appetites?

People today are no different genetically than they were 30 years ago. However, something in the environment clearly is. As a result, people no more "mentally weak" than they were just a few generations ago simply cannot stave off obesity. There are many theories for what exactly changed - many of them revolving around the type of food we eat - but it is unquestionably harder today to stay thin & healthy than it was a few decades ago. There is little doubt that consciously watching your diet and taking time to exercise will help this situation, but neither of these had been particularly necessary though most of human history.

I'd say to any MALE trying to lose weight, eat whatever the fuck you want and work out and you'll lose fat and gain muscle. Your MALE body was DESIGNED that way. It isn't rocket science and if you can't do it, you suck at life. Sorry.

Oh man, thank god you were here to explain this to us. It's so easy! I can eat anything I want in any quantity so long as I "work out"? 20 big macs a day is no problem so long as I do bicep curls, right? I'll just drink soda all day and run around the block once per week and I'll build muscle and lose fat at the same time. It doesn't matter if I'm 45 or 15, eat 10,000 or 1,000 calories per day, so long as I work out, I'll be all set! Wow!

Your lack of understanding of diet & exercise is appalling. Go do some reading before you give advice on the health & fitness forum in the future.

 

[MJinZ]

Wow, way to completely and totally miss the point. I never disputed that we are eating too much or not exercising enough. The question is WHY? Why, after thousands of years of civilization without obesity, heart disease, diabetes, etc being serious problems, did they grow to epidemic proportions in the last 30 years? Do you seriously believe this is a matter of will power? That the every American sponatenously and magically decided to become a lazy slob in the 1980's? That, despite all the variety in races, cultures, beliefs, socioeconomic status, geographic location, etc in this country, everyone chose to lose control of their appetites?

People today are no different genetically than they were 30 years ago. However, something in the environment clearly is. As a result, people no more "mentally weak" than they were just a few generations ago simply cannot stave off obesity. There are many theories for what exactly changed - many of them revolving around the type of food we eat - but it is unquestionably harder today to stay thin & healthy than it was a few decades ago. There is little doubt that consciously watching your diet and taking time to exercise will help this situation, but neither of these had been particularly necessary though most of human history.


Oh man, thank god you were here to explain this to us. It's so easy! I can eat anything I want in any quantity so long as I "work out"? 20 big macs a day is no problem so long as I do bicep curls, right? I'll just drink soda all day and run around the block once per week and I'll build muscle and lose fat at the same time. It doesn't matter if I'm 45 or 15, eat 10,000 or 1,000 calories per day, so long as I work out, I'll be all set! Wow!

Your lack of understanding of diet & exercise is appalling. Go do some reading before you give advice on the health & fitness forum in the future.

Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner - or split em up into 6 meals - whatever. I'm exaggerating obviously, but you'd have to really work at it to eat more 3000-4000 calories a day.