A Weightloss and diet forum. WeightLossBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » WeightLossBanter forum » alt.support.diet newsgroups » Low Carbohydrate Diets
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Food fight! Food fight!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 1st, 2012, 07:19 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
Dogman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 540
Default Food fight! Food fight!


Diet wars turn family feud
http://www.cjr.org/the_observatory/g...t_m.php?page=1

"Given what has transpired since, the backlash against 'What if It’s
All Been a Big Fat Lie' is beginning to take on the look of a sad,
strange hysteria whose time has mercifully passed. Taubes spent five
years producing an exhaustively footnoted, 600-page book called Good
Calories, Bad Calories, which was published in 2007. It landed
quietly, but has since come to command a kind of totemic status among
paleo dieters and pragmatic health professionals, and is widely read
in the bariatric, metabolic and diabetes research community..."

"Poor Taubes. No one warned him that 600 pages of evidence were never
going to be enough. The theory that weight gain boils down
'calories-in, calories-out' is the last man standing in the diet wars.
The principle anchors the comforting American belief that personal
responsibility explains all of our ills. It validates all that wasted
time on the treadmill that people like Kolata and others endorse. It
keeps us watching shows like The Biggest Loser. It leaves the door
open to low-calorie, high-carbohydrate food products that make the
economy hum, are portable, do not require we learn to cook, make
children stop crying, and taste good. Any efforts at reporting science
to the contrary will always have a rough road."

We're winning the war, but the fight is far from over. Too many vested
interests!

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman
  #2  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 07:41 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
Doug Freyburger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,866
Default Food fight! Food fight!

Dogman quoted:

The theory that weight gain boils down
'calories-in, calories-out' is the last man standing in the diet wars.


Old time low carbers have known this is false for a very long time.
Calories are a useful approximation in a limited set of applications.

The real equation is grams of fat into storage minus grams of fat out of
storage equals net change in the amount of fat. Find a plan that drives
fat out of storage and you have a winning system all else being equal.
Find a plan that only included limited times of hunger and the win gets
even bigger. Early low carbing moves fat out of storage better than
other plans. All along low carbing results in less hunger for more
people.

The principle anchors the comforting American belief that personal
responsibility explains all of our ills.


If personal responsibility worked you could go to the mall and not see
fat people. Some of these concepts are much easier to test than the
adherents want to believe.

Humans instinctively crave food that is carby, fat and salty. The carby
part is addictive so products stress carbs. Chemicals other than sodium
chloride can be added to alt to increase appetite. Companies don't even
have to have a deliberate plan to take advantage of these instinctive
cravings. All companies need to do is make more of the products that
sell better, make less of the products that sell worse, keep trying
variations on products to continue development to incrase profitability.
Any product that hits the instinctive human cravings will sell better.
Any product that triggers addictive behavior patterns will sell better.
The market will tune the rest until we have vast numbers of fat people
even wtihout any intent for that to happen.

It validates all that wasted
time on the treadmill that people like Kolata and others endorse.


Exercise is beneficial for other reasons.

Try running the calorie arithmatic as if this were one of its valid
applications. A marathon is a pound of fat. To exercise enough to
force loss it takes so much time on the tradmill employed people lose
their jobs and married people lose their families. But check out the
numbers to prevent weight regain and the story is very different. Half
an hour every day or an hour every other day burns as many calories as
the typical weight gain between diets. That's a pretty good
preventative. Now check the national database of the folks who have
managed to keep off weight they lost. The huge majority of them
continue to exercise often and long. It's nearly enough to account for
the entire database.

It keeps us watching shows like The Biggest Loser.


Think of how these folks work. When they are not doing other exercise
they are on treadmills to fill out 16 hour days. it comes down to "A
marathon is a pound of fat". They keep these folks doing at least that
much work every day. They do it to the exclusion of their jobs and away
from their families. They don't do it as their "job". They do it as
their "life".

It leaves the door
open to low-calorie, high-carbohydrate food products that make the
economy hum, are portable, do not require we learn to cook, make
children stop crying, and taste good. Any efforts at reporting science
to the contrary will always have a rough road."


And all that industry need do is observe what sells well, make more of
it, and advertise it. No ulterior motives othe than profit are needed.
  #3  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 09:45 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
Dogman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 540
Default Food fight! Food fight!

On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 18:41:44 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
wrote:

[...]
The principle anchors the comforting American belief that personal
responsibility explains all of our ills.


If personal responsibility worked you could go to the mall and not see
fat people.


I don't know exactly what you mean by that, Doug. How does "personal
responsibility" not work? On the other hand, either you accept
personal responsibility for your actions, or you don't. Those who do,
don't usually have these problems.

Humans instinctively crave food that is carby, fat and salty. The carby
part is addictive so products stress carbs. Chemicals other than sodium
chloride can be added to alt to increase appetite. Companies don't even
have to have a deliberate plan to take advantage of these instinctive
cravings. All companies need to do is make more of the products that
sell better, make less of the products that sell worse, keep trying
variations on products to continue development to incrase profitability.
Any product that hits the instinctive human cravings will sell better.
Any product that triggers addictive behavior patterns will sell better.
The market will tune the rest until we have vast numbers of fat people
even wtihout any intent for that to happen.


Well, you've identified the problem, but...

It validates all that wasted
time on the treadmill that people like Kolata and others endorse.


Exercise is beneficial for other reasons.


You bet. But it doesn't really help anyone lose weight, and can even
help to increase your weight, chance of injury, etc. Better to lose
the weight first, primarily through diet and very moderate (safe)
exercise, then, once the weight is lost, decide on what kind of
exercise is right for you.

It keeps us watching shows like The Biggest Loser.


Think of how these folks work. When they are not doing other exercise
they are on treadmills to fill out 16 hour days. it comes down to "A
marathon is a pound of fat". They keep these folks doing at least that
much work every day. They do it to the exclusion of their jobs and away
from their families. They don't do it as their "job". They do it as
their "life".


Yeah, and it's sad to watch.

It leaves the door
open to low-calorie, high-carbohydrate food products that make the
economy hum, are portable, do not require we learn to cook, make
children stop crying, and taste good. Any efforts at reporting science
to the contrary will always have a rough road."


And all that industry need do is observe what sells well, make more of
it, and advertise it. No ulterior motives othe than profit are needed.


Yep. GREED kills.

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman
  #4  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 09:21 AM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 993
Default Food fight! Food fight!

On Aug 2, 4:45*pm, Dogman wrote:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 18:41:44 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger

wrote:

[...]

The principle anchors the comforting American belief that personal
responsibility explains all of our ills.


If personal responsibility worked you could go to the mall and not see
fat people.


I don't know exactly what you mean by that, Doug. How does "personal
responsibility" not work?


What he means and which I agree with is that clearly it usually
doesn't work in practice. A lot of people try to excercise personal
responsibility when it comes to dieting. They try a variety
of diets and still fail because in the end, it's very difficult. And
choosing say a low fat diet instead of a low carb one just
makes it a lot harder.


On the other hand, either you accept
personal responsibility for your actions, or you don't. Those who do,
don't usually have these problems.


That's like saying if you fall into a well, personal
responsibility will get you out.



Humans instinctively crave food that is carby, fat and salty. *The carby
part is addictive so products stress carbs. *Chemicals other than sodium
chloride can be added to alt to increase appetite. *Companies don't even
have to have a deliberate plan to take advantage of these instinctive
cravings. *All companies need to do is make more of the products that
sell better, make less of the products that sell worse, keep trying
variations on products to continue development to incrase profitability.
Any product that hits the instinctive human cravings will sell better.
Any product that triggers addictive behavior patterns will sell better.
The market will tune the rest until we have vast numbers of fat people
even wtihout any intent for that to happen.


Well, you've identified the problem, but...


Yes the problem for you is that Doug apparently doesn't
buy your vast evil conspiracy theory either. Companies are
simply producing the products that people want. It';s
how the free market works.




It validates all that wasted
time on the treadmill that people like Kolata and others endorse.


Exercise is beneficial for other reasons.


You bet. *But it doesn't really help anyone lose weight, and can even
help to increase your weight, chance of injury, etc.


Which of course is nonsense. That's your problem in general.
You take something that has a bit of validity and then run it out
to extremes, turn it into nonsense, and disregard the mountain of
evidence that says you're wrong.

You brought up The Biggest Loser show. What exactly
is going on there? They are losing weight at fantastic
rates on a variety of diets and a lot of it is because they
are excercising at levels few ordinary folks would ever
reach. They also have a huge support and motivation
system that almost no one else excercising "personal
responsibility" has. Maybe you should try excersice
and see the effects. I have and it works.





Better to lose
the weight first, primarily through diet and very moderate (safe)
exercise, then, once the weight is lost, decide on what kind of
exercise is right for you.


First you argue that excercise doesn't do any good
and can make you gain weight, now you're endorsing
some excercise. I don't know of any health authority
that says excercise has to be "very moderate" for
the typical person trying to lose weight. You have a
source for that?




It keeps us watching shows like The Biggest Loser.


Think of how these folks work. *When they are not doing other exercise
they are on treadmills to fill out 16 hour days. *it comes down to "A
marathon is a pound of fat". *They keep these folks doing at least that
much work every day. *They do it to the exclusion of their jobs and away
from their families. *They don't do it as their "job". *They do it as
their "life".


Yeah, and it's sad to watch.


Then don't watch it. But don't come in here and
claim that it doesn't work during the course of the
show.




It leaves the door
open to low-calorie, high-carbohydrate food products that make the
economy hum, are portable, do not require we learn to cook, make
children stop crying, and taste good. Any efforts at reporting science
to the contrary will always have a rough road."


And all that industry need do is observe what sells well, make more of
it, and advertise it. *No ulterior motives othe than profit are needed..


Yep. *GREED kills.


Yes, and greed has also produced everything from all
the drugs that have saved the lives of hundreds of millions to the
iPhone.




  #5  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 04:50 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
Dogman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 540
Default Food fight! Food fight!

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 01:21:24 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:


The principle anchors the comforting American belief that personal
responsibility explains all of our ills.


If personal responsibility worked you could go to the mall and not see
fat people.


I don't know exactly what you mean by that, Doug. How does "personal
responsibility" not work?


What he means and which I agree with is that clearly it usually
doesn't work in practice.


What? Are you psychic, too?

Personal responsibility works. I don't know how taking responsibility
for your weight problem wouldn't work. By definition, taking
responsibility for it means you will succeed.

A lot of people try to excercise personal
responsibility when it comes to dieting.


If they were taking responsibility, it would work. It stops working
when they stop taking responsibility.

They try a variety
of diets and still fail because in the end, it's very difficult.


It can be difficult, but that's what taking responsibility means. You
do the difficult things as well as the easy ones.

And choosing say a low fat diet instead of a low carb one just
makes it a lot harder.


There are all kinds of ways to make it harder, but if one takes
responsibility, he or she will eventually find something that works.

Throwing one's hands in the air and giving up is the personification
of not taking responsibility.

On the other hand, either you accept
personal responsibility for your actions, or you don't. Those who do,
don't usually have these problems.


That's like saying if you fall into a well, personal
responsibility will get you out.


Who do you think will get out of the well fastest? The guy who sits
on his hands and does nothing? Or the guy who tries and tries to find
different ways to climb out, screams loudly, etc?

In the movie "127 Hours," a true story, the rock climber fell into a
crevasse out in the middle of nowhere. His arm was wedged into the
rocks, and he couldn't escape. He created ways to trap rain water, to
survive on. When he ran out of ways to escape, food, water, etc., and
realized that no one was coming for him, he accepted responsibility
for getting himself out. He cut off his own arm with his knife, tied
off the stub, and proceeded to hike his way out. He eventually came
across some hikers, and they called for help and he was flown out by
helicopter.

He lived, because he took responsibility for saving his live. Had he
sat on his hands and did nothing, he would have died.

Humans instinctively crave food that is carby, fat and salty. *The carby
part is addictive so products stress carbs. *Chemicals other than sodium
chloride can be added to alt to increase appetite. *Companies don't even
have to have a deliberate plan to take advantage of these instinctive
cravings. *All companies need to do is make more of the products that
sell better, make less of the products that sell worse, keep trying
variations on products to continue development to incrase profitability.
Any product that hits the instinctive human cravings will sell better.
Any product that triggers addictive behavior patterns will sell better.
The market will tune the rest until we have vast numbers of fat people
even wtihout any intent for that to happen.


Well, you've identified the problem, but...


Yes the problem for you is that Doug apparently doesn't
buy your vast evil conspiracy theory either. Companies are
simply producing the products that people want. It';s
how the free market works.


I figured that was common knowledge by now.

But that's not taking responsibility for your own health. If one takes
resonibility for one's own health, it shouldn't/doesn't matter what
certain companies make. To the best of my knowledge, no one with a gun
is forcing people to eat fast food, sugar, refined and processed
foods, etc.

It validates all that wasted
time on the treadmill that people like Kolata and others endorse.


Exercise is beneficial for other reasons.


You bet. *But it doesn't really help anyone lose weight, and can even
help to increase your weight, chance of injury, etc.


Which of course is nonsense. That's your problem in general.
You take something that has a bit of validity and then run it out
to extremes, turn it into nonsense, and disregard the mountain of
evidence that says you're wrong.


There is a mountain of evidence out there, anecdotal and scientific,
that suggests that exercising simply to lose weight is essentially a
waste of time. If you don't eat properly, you can exercise until the
cows come how, and you won't lose much if any weight. If you're
exercising properly, you're probably building muscle. Muscle weighs
more than fat, so you're probably going to gain weight, not lose it.

Again, this is something that you can prove to yourself, and pretty
easily.

You brought up The Biggest Loser show. What exactly
is going on there? They are losing weight at fantastic
rates on a variety of diets and a lot of it is because they
are excercising at levels few ordinary folks would ever
reach.


Exactly! No one is going to do that!

They also have a huge support and motivation
system that almost no one else excercising "personal
responsibility" has.


Exactly! And no one is going to have that.

That's where personal responsibility comes in.

Maybe you should try excersice
and see the effects. I have and it works.


Yes, it works, but it doesn't make you lose weight. It just makes you
hungrier, then you eat more food, and losing weight becomes that much
harder.

Better to lose
the weight first, primarily through diet and very moderate (safe)
exercise, then, once the weight is lost, decide on what kind of
exercise is right for you.


First you argue that excercise doesn't do any good
and can make you gain weight, now you're endorsing
some excercise.


Of course I endorse exercise, you moron! But not to lose weight! We
should exercise to become more fit, etc.

The vast majority of us are not even fit enough to exercise, because
we're so overweight that anything but walking short distances is
dangerous to our joints, our heart, etc.

I don't know of any health authority
that says excercise has to be "very moderate" for
the typical person trying to lose weight. You have a
source for that?


Find me a "health authority" who suggests that a seriously obese man
can do anything but moderate exercise! Seriously obese people can
barely walk, much less enter a CrossFit competition. So they should
focus on their diets (which is hard enough to do, without adding
insult to injury, by trying to strenuously exercise, too), and try to
get at least some exercise, but not enough to injure themselves.
Injury just makes people give up altogether.

It keeps us watching shows like The Biggest Loser.


Think of how these folks work. *When they are not doing other exercise
they are on treadmills to fill out 16 hour days. *it comes down to "A
marathon is a pound of fat". *They keep these folks doing at least that
much work every day. *They do it to the exclusion of their jobs and away
from their families. *They don't do it as their "job". *They do it as
their "life".


Yeah, and it's sad to watch.


Then don't watch it.


You don't get to tell me what to do, Pusher Man.

But don't come in here and
claim that it doesn't work during the course of the
show.


I can do whatever I want to do, and you can't do **** about it, Little
Man.

If you think Biggest Loser is a reflection of what goes on in the Real
World, you're even more delusional than I figured.

It leaves the door
open to low-calorie, high-carbohydrate food products that make the
economy hum, are portable, do not require we learn to cook, make
children stop crying, and taste good. Any efforts at reporting science
to the contrary will always have a rough road."


And all that industry need do is observe what sells well, make more of
it, and advertise it. *No ulterior motives othe than profit are needed.


Yep. *GREED kills.


Yes, and greed has also produced everything from all
the drugs that have saved the lives of hundreds of millions to the
iPhone.


I don't know. Subtract all the people it harmed or killed from the
people it helped, and it's probably a wash.

But the point is, it KILLS. It's indisputable. And if you don't take
responsibility for your own health, it'll likely KILL you, too.

See: Darwin, and natural selection.

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman
  #6  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 05:39 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
Doug Freyburger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,866
Default Food fight! Food fight!

Dogman wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:

The principle anchors the comforting American belief that personal
responsibility explains all of our ills.


If personal responsibility worked you could go to the mall and not see
fat people.


I don't know exactly what you mean by that, Doug. How does "personal
responsibility" not work? On the other hand, either you accept
personal responsibility for your actions, or you don't. Those who do,
don't usually have these problems.


It's the same as when people say moderation always works. I reply with
the same mall comment and ask if they think there's even one fat person
at the mall who has failed to try moderation again and again and again.
The usual response is they should try harder. And harder. And harder.
Until it does work. My response is that's not what moderation means.
They never seem to get how much effort they actually mean nor what
moderation means.

Humans instinctively crave food that is carby, fat and salty. The carby
part is addictive so products stress carbs. Chemicals other than sodium
chloride can be added to alt to increase appetite. Companies don't even
have to have a deliberate plan to take advantage of these instinctive
cravings. All companies need to do is make more of the products that
sell better, make less of the products that sell worse, keep trying
variations on products to continue development to incrase profitability.
Any product that hits the instinctive human cravings will sell better.
Any product that triggers addictive behavior patterns will sell better.
The market will tune the rest until we have vast numbers of fat people
even wtihout any intent for that to happen.


Well, you've identified the problem, but...


On the one hand "It's not my fault. I'm powerless in the face of
corporate greed and propaganda" is a failing strategy. On the other
hand "It's my responsibility. All I need to is become a hermit so I am
not immersed in the endless media and peer messages to eat the wrong
way" is also a failing strategy. The gripping hand is we all know that
the law suit against Nuttella for claiming to be a health food is legal
harassment.

The fact of the matter is we get both messages that it's all personal
responsibility *and* messages to do the wrong thing. In endless
streams.

With both margarine and low fat the people who started pushing them
sincerely believed they were doing the right thing. Vast propaganda
engines were created to push those ideas even though they were
objectively harmful. In time the propaganda engine turned against
margarine as it's bad for everyone. Low fat is good for probably more
than a quarter of the population. It's a far harder sell to stop
pushing it so the roll off of that propaganda engine is much slower.
Worse there's the temptation to push low carb as the next all
encompassing solution for everyone because people really do want the
magic one size fits all solution for everyone.

Personal responsibility *can* *not* work in the face of endless pressure
to do the wrong thing. People jumped on the low fat bandwagon in droves
and got fat.

But it's worse. There is the profit motive of business that pushes fast
food. That message can't and won't change based on better knowledge
about what actually works in diet.

It validates all that wasted
time on the treadmill that people like Kolata and others endorse.


Exercise is beneficial for other reasons.


You bet. But it doesn't really help anyone lose weight, and can even
help to increase your weight, chance of injury, etc. Better to lose
the weight first, primarily through diet and very moderate (safe)
exercise, then, once the weight is lost, decide on what kind of
exercise is right for you.


Better still to start including some exercise any exercise from the gate
and build appropriately as you lose.

It's a different topic for how to deal with the fact that there are zero
physical pleasure in exercise to most of us. Who here has ever felt any
of that endorphin thing even when in peak condition for high school
sports or whatever? Motivation is easy when there's a drug effect from
doing the exercis eand that does happen for some people. For some
people who've never gotten fat in the first place. Motivation is a lot
harder for those of us who have never experienced that in our lives.
The focus is different. Pride in accomplishment. The very indirect
pleasure of better health. Very much a different topic.

It leaves the door
open to low-calorie, high-carbohydrate food products that make the
economy hum, are portable, do not require we learn to cook, make
children stop crying, and taste good. Any efforts at reporting science
to the contrary will always have a rough road."


And all that industry need do is observe what sells well, make more of
it, and advertise it. No ulterior motives othe than profit are needed.


Yep. GREED kills.


But it's duty not greed. At least for some. Businesses have a duty to
profit. Businesses hire greedy folks to implement the process or they
just plain hire professionals who do it.
  #7  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 05:50 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 993
Default Food fight! Food fight!

On Aug 3, 11:50*am, Dogman wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 01:21:24 -0700 (PDT), "

wrote:
The principle anchors the comforting American belief that personal
responsibility explains all of our ills.


If personal responsibility worked you could go to the mall and not see
fat people.


I don't know exactly what you mean by that, Doug. How does "personal
responsibility" not work?


What he means and which I agree with is that clearly it usually
doesn't work in practice.


What? *Are you psychic, too?


Doug will probably weigh in with his thougts. And I'll
bet my take is right. By saying that personal responsibility
isn't working he means that it doesn't work from a
practical perspective.

Capiche now?



Personal responsibility works. *I don't know how taking responsibility
for your weight problem wouldn't work. By definition, taking
responsibility for it means you will succeed.


It doesn't work because like Doug said, if it did you
would not see all the fat people at the mall. We
would not have an obesity epidemic.



A lot of people try to excercise personal
responsibility when it comes to dieting.


If they were taking responsibility, it would work. It stops working
when they stop taking responsibility.


That's like arguing that they wouldn't be fat
if they weren't fat.




They try a variety
of diets and still fail because in the end, it's very difficult.


It can be difficult, but that's what taking responsibility means. *You
do the difficult things as well as the easy ones.


OK. We have people who are personally responsible
in all other aspects of their lives. They have good jobs.
They pay their bills. They put their kids through school.
The stay out of trouble with the law. So, clearly most
people out there have a high degree of personal
responsibility. But yet, when they try to lose weight,
they fail. The obvious point is that the level of personal
responsibility that you require them to have, is
impossible for most people. It's like saying willpower
can overcome anything for most people, including
holding their hand in a fire. It just doesn't work that
way and hence the "personal responsibility" approach
is a proven failure when it comes to dieting.




Throwing one's hands in the air and giving up is the personification
of not taking responsibility.


And tilting at windmills, pretending that personal
responsibility is going to somehow cure obesity is just as
foolish.





Yes the problem for you is that Doug apparently doesn't
buy your vast evil conspiracy theory either. *Companies are
simply producing the products that people want. *It';s
how the free market works.


I figured that was common knowledge by now.


You wouldn't know it from your constant bitching about
drug companies.


Exercise is beneficial for other reasons.


You bet. But it doesn't really help anyone lose weight, and can even
help to increase your weight, chance of injury, etc.


Which of course is nonsense. * *That's your problem in general.
You take something that has a bit of validity and then run it out
to extremes, turn it into nonsense, and disregard the mountain of
evidence that says you're wrong.


There is a mountain of evidence out there, anecdotal and scientific,
that suggests that exercising simply to lose weight is essentially a
waste of time.


It's no more a waste of time than expecting "personal
responsibility" to cure obesity. Neither has proven
successful in reversing the obesity epidemic.



If you don't eat properly, you can exercise until the
cows come how, and you won't lose much if any weight.


BS. The Nazi concentration camps proved that.



If you're
exercising properly, you're probably building muscle. Muscle weighs
more than fat, so you're probably going to gain weight, not lose it.


I see, so the 400lb fat guys on The Biggest Loser
wound up at 450lbs. Which season was that?




Again, this is something that you can prove to yourself, and pretty
easily.

You brought up The Biggest Loser show. *What exactly
is going on there? * They are losing weight at fantastic
rates on a variety of diets and a lot of it is because they
are excercising at levels few ordinary folks would ever
reach.


Exactly! No one is going to do that!


The issue isn't that no one is going to do that.
You're really confused here. First you argue that
personal responsibility works. Then you argue that
excercising does not. Now you agree that people
on that show were losing weight due in part to
the excercise.

So, why isn't this then an issue where excercise
works, but people just won't do it in the real world.
Just like people have proven that personal
responsibility doesn't work in dieting either?






They also have a huge support and motivation
system that almost no one else excercising "personal
responsibility" has.


Exactly! And no one is going to have that.

That's where personal responsibility comes in.


Oh God, you just go in circles.




Maybe you should try excersice
and see the effects. *I have and it works.


Yes, it works, but it doesn't make you lose weight.


You just agreed above that it did make people
lose weight on Biggest Loser.




First you argue that excercise doesn't do any good
and can make you gain weight, now you're endorsing
some excercise.


Of course I endorse exercise, you moron! But not to lose weight! *We
should exercise to become more fit, etc.

The vast majority of us are not even fit enough to exercise, because
we're so overweight that anything but walking short distances is
dangerous to our joints, our heart, etc.


Speak for yourself. If you're so fat you can't
excercise, that's an issue of personal responsibility....




I don't know of any health authority
that says excercise has to be "very moderate" for
the typical person trying to lose weight. * You have a
source for that?


Find me a "health authority" who suggests that a seriously obese man
can do anything but moderate exercise! Seriously obese people can
barely walk, much less enter a CrossFit competition.


The experience we all see on The Biggest Loser says
you're wrong. And clearly they have health authorities who
have cleared the people participating. Now, who should
we all believe, you or our lying eyes?






Yes, and greed has also produced everything from all
the drugs that have saved the lives of hundreds of millions to the
iPhone.


I don't know. Subtract all the people it harmed or killed from the
people it helped, and it's probably a wash.


Good. Next time you're seriously ill, call a hippie
and try some meditation.



  #8  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 06:09 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
Dogman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 540
Default Food fight! Food fight!

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 16:39:19 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
wrote:

[...]
Personal responsibility *can* *not* work in the face of endless pressure
to do the wrong thing. People jumped on the low fat bandwagon in droves
and got fat.


I disagree. If something isn't working, try something else. Do more
research, etc. Taking responsibility means that you won't quit until
you find a solution.

That's what it means to me, anyway.

You bet. But it doesn't really help anyone lose weight, and can even
help to increase your weight, chance of injury, etc. Better to lose
the weight first, primarily through diet and very moderate (safe)
exercise, then, once the weight is lost, decide on what kind of
exercise is right for you.


Better still to start including some exercise any exercise from the gate
and build appropriately as you lose.


Sure, I don't have a problem with that (which is why I said moderate
exercise, e.g., walking), provided the person understands that his
weight loss will be coming from eating properly, not from exercising.
And that it might make him even hungrier, cause injury, etc.

It leaves the door
open to low-calorie, high-carbohydrate food products that make the
economy hum, are portable, do not require we learn to cook, make
children stop crying, and taste good. Any efforts at reporting science
to the contrary will always have a rough road."

And all that industry need do is observe what sells well, make more of
it, and advertise it. No ulterior motives othe than profit are needed.


Yep. GREED kills.


But it's duty not greed. At least for some. Businesses have a duty to
profit. Businesses hire greedy folks to implement the process or they
just plain hire professionals who do it.


Frankly, I don't care what businesses do. I'm a free-market
capitalist. And I wouldn't even want to restrict a company's right to
sell CRAP (I think Nanny Bloomberg should be tarred and feathered!).
Because I believe in personal responsibility, and it's my personal
responsibility to make the effort, do the research, etc., and not to
eat that CRAP. Or get that FAT. Waiting around for companies, and
people, for that matter, to do the right thing, is an exercise in
futility. I can control what *I* do, so it doesn't really matter to me
what *they* do.

It takes a looooong time to correct most errors (I think we can agree
on that), and I only get a certain amount of time on this planet. But
I don't have to wait around for them to finally get it right; I can
get it right myself. Today. And I do.

The only person responsible for my heath is moi. Not the government,
not the scientists, not the doctors. Just little ol' moi.

Again, that's my opinion and I'm stickin' to it.

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman
  #9  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 06:39 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
Dogman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 540
Default Food fight! Food fight!

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:50:24 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:


I don't know exactly what you mean by that, Doug. How does "personal
responsibility" not work?


What he means and which I agree with is that clearly it usually
doesn't work in practice.


What? *Are you psychic, too?


Doug will probably weigh in with his thougts. And I'll
bet my take is right. By saying that personal responsibility
isn't working he means that it doesn't work from a
practical perspective.

Capiche now?


Yes, I clearly understand by now, that you're ignorant fascist doofus,
Was that your point?

But whether taking personal responsibilty is "practical," is a moot
point. Because it almost always works when someone actually takes
responsibility rather than just talk about it.

That is, walking the walk, rather than just talking the talk.

Aspirins don't work either, if you don't take them.

Personal responsibility works. *I don't know how taking responsibility
for your weight problem wouldn't work. By definition, taking
responsibility for it means you will succeed.


It doesn't work


Of course it does! The evidence is all around you!

The fat people you see haven't taken responsibility.

The healthy and fit people you see, have.

A lot of people try to excercise personal
responsibility when it comes to dieting.


If they were taking responsibility, it would work. It stops working
when they stop taking responsibility.


That's like arguing that they wouldn't be fat
if they weren't fat.


No, it's not. Because they wouldnt be fat in the first place had they
taken responsibilty for their weight.

They try a variety
of diets and still fail because in the end, it's very difficult.


It can be difficult, but that's what taking responsibility means. *You
do the difficult things as well as the easy ones.


OK. We have people who are personally responsible
in all other aspects of their lives. They have good jobs.
They pay their bills. They put their kids through school.
The stay out of trouble with the law. So, clearly most
people out there have a high degree of personal
responsibility.


But we're not talking about those things! We're talking about taking
responsibilty for your own health, your own weight, etc.

Their kids wouldn't be in good schools, they wouldn't have good jobs,
they wouldn't pay their bills, etc., if they hadn't taken
responsibilty for doing so!

But yet, when they try to lose weight,
they fail.


Taking personal responsibilty means never giving up! You do more
research, you try different things, etc. until you succeed!

The obvious point is that the level of personal
responsibility that you require them to have, is
impossible for most people.


I don't believe that. Sorry.

It's like alcohol and drug addiction. Until someone hits bottom and
finally decides that the pain and misery just isn't worth it, he
remains addicted. Some people just don't make it. That's life.

Throwing one's hands in the air and giving up is the personification
of not taking responsibility.


And tilting at windmills,


What's foolish about realizing that you *must* keep trying, do more
research, etc. to maintain one's health?

To do otherwise is to admit defeat before you even start.

How smart is that?

Yes the problem for you is that Doug apparently doesn't
buy your vast evil conspiracy theory either. *Companies are
simply producing the products that people want. *It';s
how the free market works.


I figured that was common knowledge by now.


You wouldn't know it from your constant bitching about
drug companies.


I bitch about drug companies because of the harm many of them do to
our health. Can you think of a better reason to bitch?

You, on the other hand, have a drug "cure" for every known "ailment"!

In fact, you sound more like a Phizer rep than a low-carb fan.

Exercise is beneficial for other reasons.


You bet. But it doesn't really help anyone lose weight, and can even
help to increase your weight, chance of injury, etc.


Which of course is nonsense. * *That's your problem in general.
You take something that has a bit of validity and then run it out
to extremes, turn it into nonsense, and disregard the mountain of
evidence that says you're wrong.


There is a mountain of evidence out there, anecdotal and scientific,
that suggests that exercising simply to lose weight is essentially a
waste of time.


It's no more a waste of time than expecting "personal
responsibility" to cure obesity. Neither has proven
successful in reversing the obesity epidemic.


The only thing that will reverse the epidemic is TIME and KNOWLEDGE.

Hoping for instant change is yet another exercise in futility.

If you don't eat properly, you can exercise until the
cows come how, and you won't lose much if any weight.


BS. The Nazi concentration camps proved that.


How exactly did concentration camps prove that??? They were starved,
they lost almost all of their weight (virtual skeletons), and most
died. What should they have been doing? Running marathons?

If you're
exercising properly, you're probably building muscle. Muscle weighs
more than fat, so you're probably going to gain weight, not lose it.


I see, so the 400lb fat guys on The Biggest Loser
wound up at 450lbs. Which season was that?


The season they didn't diet, you freakin' moron.

Again, this is something that you can prove to yourself, and pretty
easily.

You brought up The Biggest Loser show. *What exactly
is going on there? * They are losing weight at fantastic
rates on a variety of diets and a lot of it is because they
are excercising at levels few ordinary folks would ever
reach.


Exactly! No one is going to do that!


The issue isn't that no one is going to do that.


That's exactly the issue!

You're really confused here. First you argue that
personal responsibility works.


It's 100% effective!

They also have a huge support and motivation
system that almost no one else excercising "personal
responsibility" has.


Exactly! And no one is going to have that.

That's where personal responsibility comes in.


Oh God, you just go in circles.


It's not a circle. It's like being a little bit pregnant.

Either you're personally responsible, or you're not.

Maybe you should try excersice
and see the effects. *I have and it works.


Yes, it works, but it doesn't make you lose weight.


You just agreed above that it did make people
lose weight on Biggest Loser.


They diet! They lose weight from dieting!

First you argue that excercise doesn't do any good
and can make you gain weight, now you're endorsing
some excercise.


Of course I endorse exercise, you moron! But not to lose weight! *We
should exercise to become more fit, etc.

The vast majority of us are not even fit enough to exercise, because
we're so overweight that anything but walking short distances is
dangerous to our joints, our heart, etc.


Speak for yourself. If you're so fat you can't
excercise, that's an issue of personal responsibility....


Exactly!

I don't know of any health authority
that says excercise has to be "very moderate" for
the typical person trying to lose weight. * You have a
source for that?


Find me a "health authority" who suggests that a seriously obese man
can do anything but moderate exercise! Seriously obese people can
barely walk, much less enter a CrossFit competition.


The experience we all see on The Biggest Loser says
you're wrong. And clearly they have health authorities who
have cleared the people participating. Now, who should
we all believe, you or our lying eyes?


How many people have personal trainers to help prevnt them from
getting injured?

Yes, and greed has also produced everything from all
the drugs that have saved the lives of hundreds of millions to the
iPhone.


I don't know. Subtract all the people it harmed or killed from the
people it helped, and it's probably a wash.


Good. Next time you're seriously ill, call a hippie
and try some meditation.


I don't plan on getting seriously ill. But should **** happen, I will
tell my doctor exactly how I will be treated. I will take total
responsibilty for my treatment, my health, etc. Period.

Feel free to take as many deadly, toxic drugs as you can! Shove them
into your mouth with both hands! Wash them all down with some tasty
AZT, too!

See: Darwin and natural selection.

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman
  #10  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 07:14 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 993
Default Food fight! Food fight!

On Aug 3, 1:39*pm, Dogman wrote:

But whether taking personal responsibilty is "practical," is a moot
point.


It's not a moot point because it's obviously not
working for the vast majority of people and we have
an obesity epidemic.



It doesn't work


Of course it does! The evidence is all around you!

The fat people you see haven't taken responsibility.

The healthy and fit people you see, have.


Uh huh and the obese ones are growing in numbers
each year. So, personal responsibility is not working
for most people. That is the point Doug is making
too.



OK. *We have people who are personally responsible
in all other aspects of their lives. *They have good jobs.
They pay their bills. *They put their kids through school.
The stay out of trouble with the law. *So, clearly most
people out there have a high degree of personal
responsibility.


But we're not talking about those things! *We're talking about taking
responsibilty for your own health, your own weight, etc.


We are talking about it now because I brought it up.
I gave those as obvious examples that show most
people do have a considerable amount of personal
responsibility. Hence, it's also obvious that when
it comes to diet and food it's beyond the level of
personal responsibility that works with keeping a
job, paying bills, raising kids, etc.

In other words the biological urges governing eating
and weight are so strong that saying all that's
needed is personal responsibility doesn't work for
most people when it comes to diet.




The obvious point is that the level of personal
responsibility that you require them to have, is
impossible for most people.


I don't believe that. Sorry.


That's OK, given all the nonsense that you believe,
like HIV doesn't cause AIDS and that no
virus can cause cancer, that is actually a comfort.



It's like alcohol and drug addiction. Until someone hits bottom and
finally decides that the pain and misery just isn't worth it, he
remains addicted. Some people just don't make it. That's life.


It's not just some people. It's a growing obesity epidemic
that gets worse each year. As for the alcohol comparison,
let's make the correct comparison. The
level of personal responsibility you think people are
capable of is like having an alcoholic patronize a
bar every night, take two drinks, and not wind up
binging and getting drunk. Doing that night after night
with all his old friends.

Because that is exactly what the obese person trying
to diet has to do. Unlike an alcoholic, they can't just
avoid food. They can't avoid eating food with their
family and friends either.

You think maybe, just maybe, that's why personal
responsibility is failing?





Throwing one's hands in the air and giving up is the personification
of not taking responsibility.


And tilting at windmills,


What's foolish about realizing that you *must* keep trying, do more
research, etc. to maintain one's health?


It's foolish when you have a public health crisis and
that approach clearly isnt' working.



To do otherwise is to admit defeat before you even start.


It's not like we're just starting. We have 3 decades of failure
with obesity getting significantly worse each year.





If you don't eat properly, you can exercise until the
cows come how, and you won't lose much if any weight.


BS. *The Nazi concentration camps proved that.


How exactly did concentration camps prove that??? *They were starved,
they lost almost all of their weight (virtual skeletons), and most
died. What should they have been doing? Running marathons?


They proved it by the fact that they were doing hard
forced labor, eating little and losing weight. You claimed
that excercise without eating right won't cause weight
loss. They were not eating right, doing forced excercise
and they lost a lot of weight.

QED




Yes, it works, but it doesn't make you lose weight.


You just agreed above that it did make people
lose weight on Biggest Loser.


They diet! They lose weight from dieting!


Oh, I see now it's back to they only lost weight
due to dieting, not from excercise. But wait....
You claimed they should have put on weight from
the excercise. Confused again.



First you argue that excercise doesn't do any good
and can make you gain weight, now you're endorsing
some excercise.


Of course I endorse exercise, you moron! But not to lose weight! We
should exercise to become more fit, etc.


The vast majority of us are not even fit enough to exercise, because
we're so overweight that anything but walking short distances is
dangerous to our joints, our heart, etc.


Speak for yourself. *If you're so fat you can't
excercise, that's an issue of personal responsibility....


Exactly!


Well, I'm sorry to hear you say that you're so fat
you can't excercise, but I'm not surprised either.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
the fight Cubit General Discussion 33 October 28th, 2007 03:23 PM
"Food Fight" Book with Good Insights Carol Frilegh General Discussion 2 November 4th, 2004 07:03 PM
Fighting Fat: Food fight erupts among diet gurus at conference jmk General Discussion 0 June 17th, 2004 12:19 PM
Low-Carb Could Spell Next Fast-Food Fight Anonymous General Discussion 16 October 16th, 2003 08:24 PM
Low-Carb Could Spell Next Fast-Food Fight Andi Low Carbohydrate Diets 16 October 14th, 2003 08:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 WeightLossBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.