# Obesity and Covid-19



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

We all know there is a correlation between obesity and the severity of Covid-19. The experts say lose weight, like those of us who are overweight never thought of that.

I did some research to see if I could find why there is this relationship. Of course, there are comorbidities that go along with being obese, but the studies indicate that obesity even without comorbidities is correlated to severe covid-19.

Here are the 4 factors I was able to identify (there are probably more):

Inflammation - Obesity is associated with chronic inflammation in the body 
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5507106/)

Cardio Fitness - Obesity is associated with increased cardiovascular risk 
(https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jdr/2018/3407306/)

Blood Clots - Obesity is a risk factor for blood clots
(https://mybariatriclife.org/obesity-risk-for-deadly-blood-clots/)

ACE2 Receptors - Obese people appear to have more ACE2 receptors than non-obese
(https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200714/why-obesity-may-stack-the-deck-for-covid-19-risk)

I wanted to know what I can do starting right now that lowers my risk.

Inflammation - A way to measure inflammation in the body is with the HS-CRP (not CRP) lab test. Probably through genetics, my level of inflammation is usually low. I can drive it even lower by going on a low inflammation diet. Some foods are inflammatory and some are anti-inflammatory. Going on a low inflammation diet might help reduce a person's level of inflammation.

Cardio Fitness - Severe Covid-19 is associated with breathing problems. If you are obese, you are more likely to have a lower level of cardio fitness. People tend to think cardio exercise, but breathing techniques and meditation can also help. 

Blood Clots - We know blood clots are a problem with some Covid-19 patients. Some foods appear to be able to reduce the risk for blood clots. Walking seems to reduce the risk of blood clots. For drugs that may help, talk to your doctor.

ACE2 Receptors - This is how the SARS-COV2 virus gets into the cells. Obese people appear to have more ACE2 receptors. That implies more viruses can get into the cells. Blockers may help so you should discuss that with your doctor. For me, I think this is where Ivermectin comes into play as it interferes with the virus getting into the cells.

*Ivermectin Docks to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Receptor-binding Domain Attached to ACE2 * 
*Ivermectin Docks to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Receptor-binding Domain Attached to ACE2 - PubMed * 

So if you are obese or even just overweight, or a friend or family member is, there may be some things that will reduce the risk of severe covid-19, whether you are vaccinated or not.

I am only sharing with you the research I did and the action I am going to take that I think will reduce my chance of having a case of severe Covid-19. Please do your own research. This is only a starting point for your research.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

I would not be surprised to see the scale for what is considered to be obese adjusted sometime in the future, and not as one might think.
That is in spite of the obvious.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> We all know there is a correlation between obesity and the severity of Covid-19.


Along with the problems it causes itself, obesity seems to make everything worse.



MoonRiver said:


> The experts say lose weight, like those of us who are overweight never thought of that.


Some act as though they haven't.



MoonRiver said:


> I did some research to see if I could find why there is this relationship. Of course, there are comorbidities that go along with being obese, but the studies indicate that obesity even without comorbidities is correlated to severe covid-19.


I think when it comes to comorbidities, there may be less obvious and undiagnosed ones at play. Cardiovascular disease for example. We all know that the standard American diet is to blame. And, it is something that occurs over time, beginning in childhood and in the absence of obvious symptoms it goes unnoticed. But it is still developing. Early signs have been found in the arteries young children. It's reasonable to suspect that earlier stages of cardiovascular disease that have gone unnoticed could effect one's covid prognosis. This would be true for people of a healthy weight as well, I would think.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

When I was younger I traveled and worked all over the world. When you live in third world countries, and stay in remote villages for long periods of time, something you almost never see are fat people. You see big strong people, you see thin tough people, you see people whose weight is correct for there body structure. You see people who need to put on some weight, but you almost never see fat people. Something else you never see are fast food joints. People cook their food, and manage to get by on what they have. In many places in the third world, people only eat two times a day. They are probably a little bit hungry most of the time, but they aren't fat.

Americans as a group are fat, lazy, and blissfully ignorant. Health care providers are some of the worst. When was the last time you saw a nurse who wasn't over weight? Most doctors in the United States die before they reach sixty years old. Everyone knows they shouldn't eat so much, or eat junk food, yet they don't change their ways. Then when they get sick, they demand a pill that will make them feel better. Even when they are sick they don't change their eating habits, they just take a pill. 

You can't fix stupid, with a pill.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

muleskinner2 said:


> When I was younger I traveled and worked all over the world. When you live in third world countries, and stay in remote villages for long periods of time, something you almost never see are fat people. You see big strong people, you see thin tough people, you see people whose weight is correct for there body structure. You see people who need to put on some weight, but you almost never see fat people. Something else you never see are fast food joints. People cook their food, and manage to get by on what they have. In many places in the third world, people only eat two times a day. They are probably a little bit hungry most of the time, but they aren't fat.
> 
> Americans as a group are fat, lazy, and blissfully ignorant. Health care providers are some of the worst. When was the last time you saw a nurse who wasn't over weight? Most doctors in the United States die before they reach sixty years old. Everyone knows they shouldn't eat so much, or eat junk food, yet they don't change their ways. Then when they get sick, they demand a pill that will make them feel better. Even when they are sick they don't change their eating habits, they just take a pill.
> 
> You can't fix stupid, with a pill.


Those villagers also live very close to where their parents grew up and their grandparents and their grandparents grew up. That's good for one's genes. They also eat the same food their mother ate and her mother ate, that's also good for their genes. They spend a lot more time outside close to nature, good for their health. What that means is they don't experience the environmental stressors people in the West do.

It's not just what they eat.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

MoonRiver said:


> Those villagers also live very close to where their parents grew up and their grandparents and their grandparents grew up. That's good for one's genes. They also eat the same food their mother ate and her mother ate, that's also good for their genes. They spend a lot more time outside close to nature, good for their health. What that means is they don't experience the environmental stressors people in the West do.
> 
> It's not just what they eat.


Poor eating habits cause a lot more over weight people than any amount of stressors. People in the so called West, are just better at blaming their problems on the wrong things. If your environmental is stressful, than change your environment. Inventing new excuses for why they can't loose weight, isn't going to help.

The expression, "Fat, dumb and happy" comes to mind.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

muleskinner2 said:


> Poor eating habits cause a lot more over weight people than any amount of stressors. People in the so called West, are just better at blaming their problems on the wrong things. If your environmental is stressful, than change your environment. Inventing new excuses for why they can't loose weight, isn't going to help.
> 
> The expression, "Fat, dumb and happy" comes to mind.


I'm referring to environmental stressors on one's genetic makeup.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

muleskinner2 said:


> When I was younger I traveled and worked all over the world. When you live in third world countries, and stay in remote villages for long periods of time, something you almost never see are fat people. You see big strong people, you see thin tough people, you see people whose weight is correct for there body structure. You see people who need to put on some weight, but you almost never see fat people. Something else you never see are fast food joints. People cook their food, and manage to get by on what they have. In many places in the third world, people only eat two times a day. They are probably a little bit hungry most of the time, but they aren't fat.
> 
> Americans as a group are fat, lazy, and blissfully ignorant. Health care providers are some of the worst. When was the last time you saw a nurse who wasn't over weight? Most doctors in the United States die before they reach sixty years old. Everyone knows they shouldn't eat so much, or eat junk food, yet they don't change their ways. Then when they get sick, they demand a pill that will make them feel better. Even when they are sick they don't change their eating habits, they just take a pill.
> 
> You can't fix stupid, with a pill.


Suppose there are 2 doctors, side by side. Same qualifications, equally rated. 1, Dr Joe, 2 Dr. Moe. guy goes see Dr Joe, and the Dr looks at him for about 5 seconds. Tells him "Lose 125 pounds, start eating food instead of garbage. Quit smoking, and do some exercise. That'll be $100."

Another guy goes to Dr Moe. He sits in a waiting room, as first one person and then another drop in for a few seconds, take his BP, maybe, ask a question. Finally, Dr Moe appears. Looks at the chart like it all means something, Nods his head here and there. Prescribes 10 different kind of pills, 4 tests for this and that. Tells the guy, Come back in a month, lets see if those pills are working, we'll do another round of tests. Patient goes to the testing facility across the road that DR Moe's brother owns. Comes back in a month, Then every 3 months the rest of his life.

Which one of those doctors are going to stay so busy they'll have to expand their waiting room and hire a couple more cute nurses? And which one will eventually go broke?

There's no money in trying to fix people. Lots of money in letting them stay broke and give them enough pills for their constipation because of horrendous eating habits, and the opiates Dr Moe prescribed for the lingering pain of whatever cause constipation, too. Tell them it's not their fault, they have a disorder. As long as they keep coming back...


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

If you are willing to pay our of pocket, there are many doctors who will try to fix you, but they don't accept insurance.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> I'm referring to environmental stressors on one's genetic makeup.


It _may _contribute, but probably not enough to cancel out the positive effects of a healthy diet.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

kinderfeld said:


> It _may _contribute, but probably not enough to cancel out the positive effects of a healthy diet.


This isn't diet, but similar. Why do African Americans have low vitamin d levels?


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> This isn't diet, but similar. Why do African Americans have low vitamin d levels?


Because having more melanin reduces ones ability to synthesize vitamin d. What's your point? My point is still...diet and lifestyle change is the cure for being fat.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

kinderfeld said:


> Because having more melanin reduces ones ability to synthesize vitamin d. What's your point? My point is still...diet and lifestyle change is the cure for being fat.


My point is producing more melatonin is genetic. Because blacks lived in a geographic location with blistering sunlight, they developed genetic protection against it. Move them to a different location with less sunlight, and the positive becomes a negative.

The same happens with the foods one's ancestors ate and the soil and climate it was grown in.


----------



## exodus (Jun 18, 2012)

Losing weight and exercise are the best medicine. Good for everyone and everything. Not just to help with covid but to help with everyday living. Doctor's don't prescribe this. Everything i monetized.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

exodus said:


> Losing weight and exercise are the best medicine. Good for everyone and everything. Not just to help with covid but to help with everyday living. Doctor's don't prescribe this. Everything i monetized.


Everything you said is true, except that doctors do prescribe this. Patients just don't listen. Many people would rather take five pills a day than to just eat less and go for a walk.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

todd_xxxx said:


> Everything you said is true, except that doctors do prescribe this. Patients just don't listen. Many people would rather take five pills a day than to just eat less and go for a walk.


People listen, but diet and exercise fail many more times than it succeeds. If it was that simple, there wouldn't be a diet industry.


----------



## exodus (Jun 18, 2012)

You might be right. It could be just mentioned during a vist but not driven home. I've accompanied some over weight people to the doctors not much was mentioned about weight or exercise even after the 4th and 5th vist?? It would alleviate many aches and pains. Make for a better life.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

MoonRiver said:


> People listen, but diet and exercise fail many more times than it succeeds. If it was that simple, there wouldn't be a diet industry.


How does diet and exercise fail more often than it succeeds?


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

GTX63 said:


> How does diet and exercise fail more often than it succeeds?


It doesn't. Ever. Is there anyone that really thinks if you ate exactly what you ate yesterday, but only half as much of it, you wouldn't lose weight? 



MoonRiver said:


> People listen, but diet and exercise fail many more times than it succeeds. If it was that simple, there wouldn't be a diet industry.


There is a diet industry because people love to pay for something they think will give them results with no effort. As soon as one diet is a little uncomfortable, people buy the next one hoping it won't be.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

GTX63 said:


> How does diet and exercise fail more often than it succeeds?


Exercise for losing weight doesn't work because it is almost physically impossible to exercise enough to have major weight loss.

Diets typically don't work because of hormones.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

MoonRiver said:


> Exercise for losing weight doesn't work because it is almost physically impossible to exercise enough to have major weight loss.
> 
> Diets typically don't work because of hormones.


I might agree that one by itself isn't enough in many cases, but you originally stated that diet *and* exercise fail.
Maybe it is just semantics.
How would one combined with the other fail more than it succeeds?


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

And explain diet fails because hormones.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

GTX63 said:


> I might agree that one by itself isn't enough in many cases, but you originally stated that diet *and* exercise fail.
> Maybe it is just semantics.
> How would one combined with the other fail more than it succeeds?


It makes little difference if you take them separately or together. There is very little evidence to show that diet and exercise result in long-term weight loss. Very few people are able to maintain a weight loss for 5 years. Even with a gastric sleeve, almost half the people regain the lost weight within 5 years.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

todd_xxxx said:


> And explain diet fails because hormones.


You will have to look it up. It is too complicated for a post.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

MoonRiver said:


> It makes little difference if you take them separately or together. There is very little evidence to show that diet and exercise result in long-term weight loss. Very few people are able to maintain a weight loss for 5 years. Even with a gastric sleeve, almost half the people regain the lost weight within 5 years.


I'm referring to the two as a lifestyle rather than a treatment.
ie consuming an average of 1800 calories per day and burning 2500.
I think I'm about 3 stop signs behind you right now so let me make sure I understand what you are saying-
A sedentary lifestyle with an undisciplined diet has little difference in weight loss vs a structured daily menu and consistent physical activity?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

GTX63 said:


> I'm referring to the two as a lifestyle rather than a treatment.
> ie consuming an average of 1800 calories per day and burning 2500.
> I think I'm about 3 stop signs behind you right now so let me make sure I understand what you are saying-
> A sedentary lifestyle with an undisciplined diet has little difference in weight loss vs a structured daily menu and consistent physical activity?


No, what I'm saying is everything you think you know about long-term weight loss is probably wrong.


----------



## exodus (Jun 18, 2012)

It has to be looked at as a life style change. I know cliché. But that is what it is stick with it stay "green" it will work. This things need to be taught at a young age. Strong foundations are important.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

MoonRiver said:


> You will have to look it up. It is too complicated for a post.


I don't think I do. I think I'm in a position to know more about this than you might think. I can also tell you, diet change works. Every time. But you have to do it.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

todd_xxxx said:


> I don't think I do. I think I'm in a position to know more about this than you might think. I can also tell you, diet change works. Every time. But you have to do it.


And I think I am in a position to say BS.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> My point is producing more *melatonin* is genetic.


Melanin. And, yes it is.



MoonRiver said:


> Because blacks lived in a geographic location with blistering sunlight, they developed genetic protection against it. Move them to a different location with less sunlight, and the positive becomes a negative. The same happens with the foods one's ancestors ate and the soil and climate it was grown in.


I get your point. And, I agree that it _may _contribute. But not enough to account for the epidemic of fat people we have today. I think that the only positive that has become a negative that accounts for this is that we now have an over abundance of food, people have more than enough to eat and yet they are malnourished. That's the standard American diet at work. I doubt that someone's preference for eating rice when there ancestors were restricted to potatoes is going to make them fat.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

MoonRiver said:


> And I think I am in a position to say BS.


So, if you started today, and eat half what you eat normally, you won't lose weight, because hormones. You go ahead and call BS. Next you can talk about your slow metabolism, thyroid problems, and how you can starve yourself and exercise for two hours a day and just can't lose weight.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> Exercise for losing weight doesn't work because it is almost physically impossible to exercise enough to have major weight loss.


It helps in that it can increase your metabolism, as far as how many calories you burn in a day. That benefit doesn't end when the workout is over. The increased rate lasts awhile. 



MoonRiver said:


> Diets typically don't work because of hormones.


Actually, given the correct eating habits and mindset, positive results are typical. The person has to change. A permanent lifestyle change works. "It's hormonal" or "I have a large bone structure"...these are lies told to fat kids to avoid hurting their feelings. We didn't all of a sudden, in the past thirty or forty years start producing kids with jacked up hormones. Although, the standard American diet can greatly impact the endocrine system, ie, insulin. But, again, correct the diet and this problem can be fixed.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

todd_xxxx said:


> So, if you started today, and eat half what you eat normally, you won't lose weight, because hormones. You go ahead and call BS. Next you can talk about your slow metabolism, thyroid problems, and how you can starve yourself and exercise for two hours a day and just can't lose weight.



Let's say Joe weighs 300 lbs.
Joe loses 100 lbs and now weighs 200 lbs.
Tom is the same height as Joe and also weighs 200 lbs.
If they both eat the same number of calories and do the same amount of exercise every day, will they continue to both weigh the same?


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> Let's say Joe weighs 300 lbs.
> Joe loses 100 lbs and now weighs 200 lbs.
> Tom is the same height as Joe and also weighs 200 lbs.
> If they both eat the same number of calories and do the same amount of exercise every day, will they continue to both weigh the same?



If they both continue to burn more calories than they consume, they will both continue to lose weight. Whether or not they weigh the same is irrelevant to this fact.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

kinderfeld said:


> If they both continue to burn more calories than they consume, they will both continue to lose weight. Whether or not they weigh the same is irrelevant to this fact.


That wasn't the question. I've noticed you have a tendency to change the subject.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

MoonRiver said:


> Let's say Joe weighs 300 lbs.
> Joe loses 100 lbs and now weighs 200 lbs.
> Tom is the same height as Joe and also weighs 200 lbs.
> If they both eat the same number of calories and do the same amount of exercise every day, will they continue to both weigh the same?


I'm not playing that game anymore where I ask a very simple question, and it is answered with questions. 

So, do you think if you start today, and eat half what you did yesterday, and you keep doing that, you won't lose weight?


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> That wasn't the question. I've noticed you have a tendency to change the subject.


No. Actually, I've been staying on point. The fact is, create a calorie deficit, and it will happen. There are healthy and unhealthy ways to do it. Your question is moot. One individual's rate of weight loss has nothing to do with another's.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

I've written about this before.
I retired in 2004, at 53 years old, having spent decades in construction So, I burned through a ton of calories a day.

Flash forward 6 years. They said my wife was going to need a kidney. I volunteered one, the Dr looked at me and told me "We won't even talk to you til you're under 250 pounds. I had no idea how much I weighed, I DID know I'd gained a lot since I quit working. "I'll do it, and real fast" I told her. "Everybody says that, nobody does it" She said. I was miffed, told her "Hold my beer and watch this..."

I weighed myself after my shower that night. 288 pounds.
I was at 214 when we had her funeral a few months later. and now, 10 years later, maintain a range of 205-215. There is a terrible story about what happened to her, but it's irrelevant to this issue. But there was not a kidney transplant, and I could easily have felt I did all that for nothing.
How you reckon I lost all that weight?? One simple thing, I got up every morning and had to decide what was most important. And I lost weight because I was honest with myself. No lying about sneaking a coke and a bag of chips. Nothing. I had lied to myself for years, saying being overweight was genetically inherited. I lied to myself saying if I didn't eat enough I'd be too weak to hold my balance and fall and break something.

Fact is this, 11 years later, I still weigh about what I weighed after losing 70 pounds over a few months. Because, I'm still honest with myself. Every single morning, I weigh myself. If I break out the top of my range, I severely restrict my calories until I get back midway. I have cravings, sometimes like a drug addict or something. I feel like I NEED some sort of high sugar candy, of a whole loaf of homemade bread in grilled cheese sandwiches. BUT I DON'T!!!! Before I break down and make a batch of no-bake cookies, I think about what is more important. Yeah, sometimes I do make them, and eat them. and, they're best if I overindulge. But never when I'm at the top of that range. And I'm aware of exactly how many calories are involved, and what I'll need to sacrifice both the day before and the day after.

All because I'm not believing I have a "condition" and I'm not personally responsible for my own choices.

This is my true story, and I understand if people WANT to consider it critical of them, because they just won't take responsibility for their own habits. Just like smoking, drinking, and drugging, overeating is an addiction, and it may well be genetic in some cases, but you can overcome that, much as have millions who quit smoking, countless alcoholics and drug addicts who quit. The need is still there, but some things are more important than the damage caused by drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and bad diet. I've had personal relationships with women who smoked, drank, drugged, and ate themselves into severely bad health. I know they believe they can't help it. And I always consider "There, but for the grace of God...." But everybody actually is responsible for their own choices. Like if you kill somebody, would "I can't help it, I'm a psychopathic killer" get you a not guilty? Well, would it?

Clearly, I was fat because I ate more than I could use up. Choose what's important. Quit making excuses for your poor choices.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

GTX63 said:


> How would one combined with the other fail more than it succeeds?


If it's being done wrong. Or not long enough. Some give up pretty quick.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Does anyone think that if an obese person were to be locked in a cage and fed a very calorie restricted diet that they would not eventually lose weight?
Or hey…let’s just lock an obese person in a cage and only give him water. Are we to believe that said person will never starve? Do we turn into air ferns and pull calories from the atmosphere?
Calorie restriction will always work if the dieter is being honest about it.
And that’s the hardest part.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Lisa in WA said:


> Does anyone think that if an obese person were to be locked in a cage and fed a very calorie restricted diet that they would not eventually lose weight?
> Or hey…let’s just lock an obese person in a cage and only give him water. Are we to believe that said person will never starve? Do we turn into air ferns and pull calories from the atmosphere?
> Calorie restriction will always work if the dieter is being honest about it.
> And that’s the hardest part.


You'd think people would not, could not argue about that.

This thread proves people can argue about anything


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Lisa in WA said:


> Does anyone think that if an obese person were to be locked in a cage and fed a very calorie restricted diet that they would not eventually lose weight?
> Or hey…let’s just lock an obese person in a cage and only give him water. Are we to believe that said person will never starve? Do we turn into air ferns and pull calories from the atmosphere?
> Calorie restriction will always work if the dieter is being honest about it.
> And that’s the hardest part.


And does anyone believe that 5 years later that person would not have gained back all or most of the weight?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

I let you guys suck me in.

This thread is about what someone who is overweight or obese might do to mitigate covid-19 if they do get it. If someone is 100 lbs overweight, and the delta variant is right now, mitigation is the best they can do.

Feel free to start your own weight loss thread or clinic.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> And does anyone believe that 5 years later that person would not have gained back all or most of the weight?


They would not if they stayed on that calorie restricted diet. the problem is, that we keep looking for some magic bulletin to excuse ourselves from calorie restriction. I do it too. Certain situations can influence weight loss like menopause, certain medications, etc. but if calories are continuously restricted you’re not going to be obese.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Lisa in WA said:


> They would not if they stayed on that calorie restricted diet. the problem is, that we keep looking for some magic bulletin to excuse ourselves from calorie restriction. I do it too. Certain situations can influence weight loss like menopause, certain medications, etc. but if calories are continuously restricted you’re not going to be obese.


Show me the science.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Show me the science.


Dude, make your own damn sammich. 
Frankly I think you wouldn’t know science if it bit you hard on the backside. You have a very bad case of wannabe-itis.
You aren’t a doctor and you aren’t a scientist and your “research“ isnt research…it’s googling.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Lisa in WA said:


> Dude, make your own damn sammich.
> Frankly I think you wouldn’t know science if it bit you hard on the backside. You have a very bad case of wannabe-itis.
> You aren’t a doctor and you aren’t a scientist and your “research“ isnt research…it’s googling.


I didn't think you had any facts to back up your assertion.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

Lisa in WA said:


> Calorie restriction will always work if the dieter is being honest about it.
> *And that’s the hardest part.*


Exactly. Everyone knows how it's done. But, knowledge in and of itself isn't enough. Otherwise, we'd all be millionaires with six pack abs.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> I didn't think you had any facts to back up your assertion.


That’s a big part of your problem. 
You think the facts don’t exist if you haven’t found them or more likely you just don’t understand the science Or they don’t confirm your bias.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Lisa in WA said:


> That’s a big part of your problem.
> You think the facts don’t exist if you haven’t found them or more likely you just don’t understand the science Or they don’t confirm your bias.


Why don't you use your expertise to start a thread on how to lose weight? I'm sure it will be fascinating.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Why don't you use your expertise to start a thread on how to lose weight? I'm sure it will be fascinating.


I don’t have any expertise.
Thats why I listen to people whoa actually do. Scientists and doctors who specialize in the field. 
Not crackpots on the interwebz


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> Why don't you use your expertise to start a thread on how to lose weight? I'm sure it will be fascinating.


Some of yours are kind of comical. She could just chime in on one of those. 😁
Don't know about fascinating. I mean...it is what it is. Some folks have a tendency to over think things and make it more difficult than it needs to be. How much saturated fat do I need? What kind of butter should I put in my coffee? Sheesh!!!


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

MoonRiver said:


> And does anyone believe that 5 years later that person would not have gained back all or most of the weight?


*I believe they *SHOULD not!


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

po boy said:


> *I believe they *SHOULD not!


Gaining back the weight isn't something that happens to everyone. Not to people who make their healthy changes permanent. Fall back into old habits of chips and ice cream, then yeah, it'll come back.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

A lot of fat people want to blame their genetics. Was your Mama a walrus? No? A human being you say? Well, there goes the genetic excuse. Hormones? Lose weight and your hormones won't be out of whack. It really is simple math, energy in, energy out. Because it is so simple, the tendency is to over complicate it with excuses, and conspiracy theories, and fads, and cult like schemes. There is absolutely no excuse, with the technology currently available that anyone should be overweight. 

Doctors don't make a lot of money from healthy people, fat people aren't healthy. Nutritionists don't make a lot of money on people who have learned how to control their weight. Diet book writers don't sell books if the first one solves everyone's problems. Here is your book, eat less food, didn't lose weight, drop down a notch, losing weight, OK, hold it right there. The end.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

If you need research to tell you that eating less makes you lose weight, the situation is hopeless anyway.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

todd_xxxx said:


> If you need research to tell you that eating less makes you lose weight, the situation is hopeless anyway.


Because if you don't do research, you might say something dumb.

*6 Years after The Biggest Loser, Metabolism Is Slower and Weight Is Back Up*
Six years after dramatic weight loss on the TV show "The Biggest Loser," most contestants in a recent study had regained the pounds - and on top of that, their metabolism had slowed and they were burning fewer calories every day than they did before their stint on the show. Scientific American

Or if you want the original study - *Persistent metabolic adaptation 6 years after The Biggest Loser competition*
*Conclusions*
Metabolic adaptation persists over time and is likely a proportional, but incomplete, response to contemporaneous efforts to reduce body weight.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> Because if you don't do research, you might say something dumb.
> 
> *6 Years after The Biggest Loser, Metabolism Is Slower and Weight Is Back Up*
> Six years after dramatic weight loss on the TV show "The Biggest Loser," most contestants in a recent study had regained the pounds - and on top of that, their metabolism had slowed and they were burning fewer calories every day than they did before their stint on the show. Scientific American
> ...


The biggest loser!!! Seriously. "Reality TV". That's your "research".
LMAO!!!


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

Starting to see why you might be having troubles.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Let's see, how does it go?? something, something, something...Quit digging.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Reality TV is not realistic. Neither are fad diets, or groups of foods listed as good. It must be sustainable to work. What is sustainable is learning how much fuel your body needs and eating a tiny bit less than that when you need to lose weight.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

For the goals you mentioned in the first post, maybe look into intermittent fasting.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Or working as grunt labor for a landscape company.


----------



## boatswain2PA (Feb 13, 2020)

Pickwickian syndrome makes all breathing worse.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

kinderfeld said:


> The biggest loser!!! Seriously. "Reality TV". That's your "research".
> LMAO!!!


If you had actually read the post instead of showboating, you would have realized I referenced a scientific study.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

MoonRiver said:


> We all know there is a correlation between obesity and the severity of Covid-19. The experts say lose weight, like those of us who are overweight never thought of that.
> 
> I did some research to see if I could find why there is this relationship. Of course, there are comorbidities that go along with being obese, but the studies indicate that obesity even without comorbidities is correlated to severe covid-19.
> 
> ...



Not being a jerk here but just pointing out the obvious: JUST LOOK INTO THE MIRROR. We all know what is. If you are, do something about it. I may not be easy.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

MoonRiver said:


> Those villagers also live very close to where their parents grew up and their grandparents and their grandparents grew up. That's good for one's genes. They also eat the same food their mother ate and her mother ate, that's also good for their genes. They spend a lot more time outside close to nature, good for their health. What that means is they don't experience the environmental stressors people in the West do.
> 
> It's not just what they eat.


Life in most of the world is tough. There is not a lot of excess. Our life and challenges are for soft people.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

MoonRiver said:


> My point is producing more melatonin is genetic. Because blacks lived in a geographic location with blistering sunlight, they developed genetic protection against it. Move them to a different location with less sunlight, and the positive becomes a negative.
> 
> The same happens with the foods one's ancestors ate and the soil and climate it was grown in.


So Americans are just a bunch of victims of genetics? Give me a break


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

If you want to get healthy, start acting healthy. Make the choice, it doesn't need to be complicated. First, go for a walk, 10 minutes, when you get up. Cook your own food, leave some on the plate for tomorrow, OR NOT. Your choice, but not my responsibility.

Maybe this comorbility is how nature is resetting. Darwin does promote the fittest.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

MoonRiver said:


> Those villagers also live very close to where their parents grew up and their grandparents and their grandparents grew up. That's good for one's genes. They also eat the same food their mother ate and her mother ate, that's also good for their genes. They spend a lot more time outside close to nature, good for their health. What that means is they don't experience the environmental stressors people in the West do.
> 
> It's not just what they eat.


So you have sooo many reasons not to loose weight, how about HOW TO LOOSE WEIGHT? Or you can die.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

A test. Whatever you normally eat, cut the portions in half. Walk two miles every day. Do this for ninety days. If you don't loose weight call up Barnum and Baily, they will have a job for you.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa said:


> So you have sooo many reasons not to loose weight, how about HOW TO LOOSE WEIGHT? Or you can die.


Please open your own weight loss clinic and let's see how successful you are, as you are one more with all the answers. Or better yet, why don't all of you go in together and open a chain.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

MoonRiver said:


> Please open your own weight loss clinic and let's see how successful you are, as you are one more with all the answers. Or better yet, why don't all of you go in together and open a chain.


You keep giving all the reasons everyone is wrong, but you won't answer a simple question. I contend that if you change nothing at all about what you are eating, but eat half as much from this point forward as you do on a normal day, you will lose weight, and rapidly. Do you agree with this or not?

Eating less every meal is harder for me than not eating at all for part of the day and then eating my regular sized dinner, so when I want to lose weight, I use intermittent fasting rather than eating the regular three meals a day but smaller meals. Fasting has extra benefits as well that are very well established. When a person starts fasting, it is uncomfortable, especially at their normal mealtimes. If you stay busy through those, it gets easier again. That tells me eating at certain times a day is more habit than actual hunger. If you decide to try intermittent fasting, many people have good results doing a 16 hour fast followed by 8 hours of time that they can eat. You have to guard against eating extra because "you're starving" if you do it that way. I do best if I fast 23 hours and eat 1. I fast all day except for my regular dinner time because that one works best for me. I don't do it every day even when I need to loss weight. I usually only do it two or three days a week and eat slightly less than normal on regular eating days.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

todd_xxxx said:


> You keep giving all the reasons everyone is wrong, but you won't answer a simple question. I contend that if you change nothing at all about what you are eating, but eat half as much from this point forward as you do on a normal day, you will lose weight, and rapidly. Do you agree with this or not?
> 
> Eating less every meal is harder for me than not eating at all for part of the day and then eating my regular sized dinner, so when I want to lose weight, I use intermittent fasting rather than eating the regular three meals a day but smaller meals. Fasting has extra benefits as well that are very well established. When a person starts fasting, it is uncomfortable, especially at their normal mealtimes. If you stay busy through those, it gets easier again. That tells me eating at certain times a day is more habit than actual hunger. If you decide to try intermittent fasting, many people have good results doing a 16 hour fast followed by 8 hours of time that they can eat. You have to guard against eating extra because "you're starving" if you do it that way. I do best if I fast 23 hours and eat 1. I fast all day except for my regular dinner time because that one works best for me. I don't do it every day even when I need to loss weight. I usually only do it two or three days a week and eat slightly less than normal on regular eating days.


I know a guy who only eats at night. He's been doing it for ten years now. According to him that is all a human needs. Back in the cave days we spent all day looking for food. Then we brought it home and ate it.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

mreynolds said:


> I know a guy who only eats at night. He's been doing it for ten years now. According to him that is all a human needs. Back in the cave days we spent all day looking for food. Then we brought it home and ate it.


And fasted on the days there was no food to be found.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Calorie restriction on it's own does not work for everyone because their metabolism slows down. Then they need to eat less and it continues. It is a cycle that depends on your hormone system.

Intermittent fasting works better because your hormones don't get used to a set point. It actually works best if every so often you eat one full day, or you vary your eating windows. Your body can handle long periods of not eating ( several hours or a day or two) after you have worked up to it. You reset your hunger system and break the mental cycle of eating because your brain instead of your hormones telling you to.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

painterswife said:


> Calorie restriction on it's own does not work for everyone because their metabolism slows down. Then they need to eat less and it continues. It is a cycle that depends on your hormone system.
> 
> Intermittent fasting works better because your hormones don't get used to a set point. It actually works best if every so often you eat one full day, or you vary your eating windows. Your body can handle long periods of not eating ( several hours or a day or two) after you have worked up to it. You reset your hunger system and break the mental cycle of eating because your brain instead of your hormones telling you to.


so you’re saying that if an obese person was locked in a cage and fed a diet of say…1200 calories a day, the prisoner wouldn’t lose weight?
That his body could just continue on at the same weight forever on 1200 calories a day?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Lisa in WA said:


> so you’re saying that if locked in a cage and fed a diet of say…500 calories a day, the prisoner wouldn’t lose weight?
> That his body could just continue on at the same weight forever on 500 calories a day?


I did not say that.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

painterswife said:


> I did not say that.


Yes you did. 
You said calorie restriction on its own does not make everyone lose weight.
And you’re wrong. It absolutely does.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Lisa in WA said:


> Yes you did.
> You said calorie restriction on its own does not make everyone lose weight.
> And you’re wrong. It absolutely does.


I did not.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Moonriver ( in my opinion) is talking about the sustained long-term and then the maintenance of weight loss that for so many people is not just about reducing calories but the mental part of hunger as well.

I don't agree with all of his opinions on how best to do this but I can discuss it without the bashing.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

painterswife said:


> Moonriver ( in my opinion) is talking about the sustained long-term and then the maintenance of weight loss that for so many people is not just about reducing calories but the mental part of hunger as well.
> 
> I don't agree with all of his opinions on how best to do this but I can discuss it without the bashing.


No, he was talking about ways to mitigate the effects of Covid on obese people and thread drift took it to how to lose weight.
it was claimed by him and you that calorie restriction does not work on all and the fact is that it does.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

painterswife said:


> I did not.





painterswife said:


> Calorie restriction on it's own does not work for everyone because their metabolism slows down.


You did.
Calorie restriction works for everyone to lose weight regardless if the metabolism slows.
Keep restricting calories and you lose weight.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa said:


> So Americans are just a bunch of victims of genetics? Give me a break


Genetics, endocrine system out of whack, etc. Odd though, these issues have only become widespread in the past thirty or forty years. Stranger still...they coincide with major national dietary trends. Probably a coincidence though.


----------



## gilberte (Sep 25, 2004)

Slow down when you're eating and listen to your body. It will tell you what it needs and when you are truly hungry, rather than just mouth hungry. It amazes me how fast people eat these days, how can they tell when they're full?


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

Lisa in WA said:


> You did.
> Calorie restriction works for everyone to lose weight regardless if the metabolism slows.
> Keep restricting calories and you lose weight.


Holocaust pictures are proof of this fact.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

painterswife said:


> Calorie restriction on it's own does not work for everyone because their metabolism slows down. Then they need to eat less and it continues. It is a cycle that depends on your hormone system.
> 
> Intermittent fasting works better because your hormones don't get used to a set point. It actually works best if every so often you eat one full day, or you vary your eating windows. Your body can handle long periods of not eating ( several hours or a day or two) after you have worked up to it. You reset your hunger system and break the mental cycle of eating because your brain instead of your hormones telling you to.


Lets lock you in a room and let you live off of your magic hormones for a while and take some scale readings. I predict that math and science will win this argument, and pretty simple math and science at that.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Weight loss reminds me of a saying about growing a tree. The best time to plant a tree was twenty years ago. The next best time to plant a tree is today.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

MoonRiver said:


> Please open your own weight loss clinic and let's see how successful you are, as you are one more with all the answers. Or better yet, why don't all of you go in together and open a chain.


If you do not care for yourself, why should I or others?

Covid likes people who do not care.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Obesity - or just being very overweight - makes every illness more dangerous and the effects worse. Our world has changed so much when it comes to weight that it is shocking. All you have to do is look at film from the past decades 40s 50s 60s and 70s and you hardly - if ever - see an overweight person let alone an obese one. Certainly not in children

Today the number of overweight and obese people you see everywhere is shocking and well over 50% of the population. And the most concerning thing for me is how people are just accepting it and it has now become the norm. I struggled with being over weight for a part of my life but never accepted that this was normal and the way it should be. I still do not accept this as I know the physical cost to the body that it has caused me and others I know who are overweight and obese. Losing weight is very difficult because your body wants to store calories for a rainy day. This is in our DNA. The best way to lose weight is to be vigilant and not gain it. This too is very hard but it can be done.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

emdeengee said:


> Obesity - or just being very overweight - makes every illness more dangerous and the effects worse. Our world has changed so much when it comes to weight that it is shocking. All you have to do is look at film from the past decades 40s 50s 60s and 70s and you hardly - if ever - see an overweight person let alone an obese one. Certainly not in children
> 
> Today the number of overweight and obese people you see everywhere is shocking and well over 50% of the population. And the most concerning thing for me is how people are just accepting it and it has now become the norm. I struggled with being over weight for a part of my life but never accepted that this was normal and the way it should be. I still do not accept this as I know the physical cost to the body that it has caused me and others I know who are overweight and obese. Losing weight is very difficult because your body wants to store calories for a rainy day. This is in our DNA. The best way to lose weight is to be vigilant and not gain it. This too is very hard but it can be done.


saw this a while back:

”I'm amazed by people who lose weight w exercise. When I exercise nothing happens bc my DNA still thinks I'm a European peasant. So it's like "Oh! Are we running from the English again, lass? Dinnae ye worry: we'll keep ye plump as a partridge to outlast the murderous bastards!"


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

LOL! Yes, studies are slowly showing that once you gain the weight your body wants to hang on to it for future need and even exercise gets treated like the enemy. 

But the reality is that the only way to lose weight is to eat less and move more. Eating less was often not a choice for our ancestors as they ran out of game or foods to harvest (wild or domestic) before the next growing season and of course they did not have the excellent storage for food that we have today. And hunter gatherers were moving all the time as were humans who eventually became farmers - all manual labour.

I finally lost all the extra weight by eating less ( a lot less) and walking miles every day. Choosing healthy foods (it is actually quite easy to identify these) and strictly monitoring portions worked for me over a two year period. Better slowly so that the new habits form than trying to get it done quickly. No other way of trying to lose weight worked or lasted.


----------



## boatswain2PA (Feb 13, 2020)

MoonRiver said:


> Because if you don't do research, you might say something dumb.
> 
> *6 Years after The Biggest Loser, Metabolism Is Slower and Weight Is Back Up*
> Six years after dramatic weight loss on the TV show "The Biggest Loser," most contestants in a recent study had regained the pounds - and on top of that, their metabolism had slowed and they were burning fewer calories every day than they did before their stint on the show. Scientific American
> ...


It wouldn't surprise me if there were a biological component to this that could be considered permanent damage done by obesity. Perhaps once your body has HAD to pack all those calories into fat cells it becomes more efficient to do so, thus after the rapid weight loss the body may be more primed to do it again.

But I think a greater problem would be the psychiatric/pschological problems associated with those who are morbidly obese, and even more so anyone who would go on such a show.

If Calories in > calories out, then weight goes up.

If calories out > calories in, then weight goes down. 

It really is that simple, even if it isn't that easy.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

boatswain2PA said:


> It wouldn't surprise me if there were a biological component to this that could be considered permanent damage done by obesity. Perhaps once your body has HAD to pack all those calories into fat cells it becomes more efficient to do so, thus after the rapid weight loss the body may be more primed to do it again.
> 
> But I think a greater problem would be the psychiatric/pschological problems associated with those who are morbidly obese, and even more so anyone who would go on such a show.
> 
> ...


Except as the study pointed out, calories out is extremely complicated.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

MoonRiver said:


> Except as the study pointed out, calories out is extremely complicated.


Calories out = BMR + calories burned by activity


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

todd_xxxx said:


> Calories out = BMR + calories burned by activity


And if you read the study you would see that BMR was changed for the worse.


----------



## todd_xxxx (Apr 19, 2018)

MoonRiver said:


> And if you read the study you would see that BMR was changed for the worse.


I did read it. If BMR goes down, the equation stays the same. 

It seems like you are looking for some other answer, but I don't think there is one.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

Lisa in WA said:


> so you’re saying that if an obese person was locked in a cage and fed a diet of say…1200 calories a day, the prisoner wouldn’t lose weight?
> That his body could just continue on at the same weight forever on 1200 calories a day?


Couldn't stop laughing when I read this.

It is so obviously true, yet people just dance around it.

Give me a break, take responsibility for yourselves and your actions. 

Own who you are. Lisa in WA I agree with you. It is ludicrous what people say

(oh, just to be sure, I AM NOT PERFECT, I am not nearly so good as I think I am, I try though).


----------



## Vjk (Apr 28, 2020)

B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa said:


> (oh, just to be sure, I AM NOT PERFECT, I am not nearly so good as I think I am, I try though).


I tried to be The Most Interesting Man in the World. But, I only got as far as eccentric.


----------



## Vjk (Apr 28, 2020)

Everybody knows the only way to lose weight is buying gym memberships and exercise equipment. If it doesn't seem to be working,, buy more. It works by osmosis.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

barnbilder said:


> Lets lock you in a room and let you live off of your magic hormones for a while and take some scale readings. I predict that math and science will win this argument, and pretty simple math and science at that.


Let's shoot you full of heroin for a couple of months and then lock you in a room. Bet you stop using heroin. Bet the withdrawal is, if not the worst experience, one of the worst experiences of your life. What causes withdrawal if not hormones?

Are you now free from being an addict?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

boatswain2PA said:


> If Calories in > calories out, then weight goes up.
> 
> If calories out > calories in, then weight goes down.
> 
> It really is that simple, even if it isn't that easy.


So take 3 people, identical triplets. who all weigh the same.

One eats a paleo diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
One eats a high-carb vegetarian diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
One eats junkfood for 2000 calories a day.

They all have the same starting weight. They all perform the same exercise schedule.

After 90 days, will they all weigh the same weight?


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

MoonRiver said:


> So take 3 people, identical triplets. who all weigh the same.
> 
> One eats a paleo diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
> One eats a high-carb vegetarian diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
> ...


After a sufficient fasting period to let the guy with the most carbohydrates kidneys catch up with the extra water that was bound up in those carbohydrates, yes. The hydra part of carbohydrates means something to chemists.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

MoonRiver said:


> Exercise for losing weight doesn't work because it is almost physically impossible to exercise enough to have major weight loss.
> 
> Diets typically don't work because of hormones.


Diets typically do fail but lifestyle changes work.

I lost 95 lbs 35 years ago and if I can, anybody can.


----------



## boatswain2PA (Feb 13, 2020)

MoonRiver said:


> So take 3 people, identical triplets. who all weigh the same.
> 
> One eats a paleo diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
> One eats a high-carb vegetarian diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
> ...


After a couple of large bowel movements from the vegetarian .......yes.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

MoonRiver said:


> So take 3 people, identical triplets. who all weigh the same.
> 
> One eats a paleo diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
> One eats a high-carb vegetarian diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
> ...


Why it matter if they each weigh exactly the same if they've each lost weight? Success is seldom measured by someone else's achievements and even if you have 3 genetically similar humans, you still can't account for individual committment and level of activity.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

wr said:


> Why it matter if they each weigh exactly the same if they've each lost weight? Success is seldom measured by someone else's achievements and even if you have 3 genetically similar humans, you still can't account for individual committment and level of activity.


Because people are arguing it is simply calorie in/calorie out. If that was true, everyone should be responding of course they would all weigh the same. But no one is answering the question because they know the person on a junk food diet would weigh more which means it is more complicated than calories in/calories out.

Fats and carbs are broken down by different enzymes, are processed through the gut differently, and the metabolization process is different.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

MoonRiver said:


> Because people are arguing it is simply calorie in/calorie out. If that was true, everyone should be responding of course they would all weigh the same. But no one is answering the question because they know the person on a junk food diet would weigh more which means it is more complicated than calories in/calories out.
> 
> Fats and carbs are broken down by different enzymes, are processed through the gut differently, and the metabolization process is different.


They still won't weigh the same unless but it still doesn't mean it can't be done and realistically, 1 - 2 lbs per week is a healthy weight loss.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

Hey! Rationalize it all you want, if you are fat, and have circulatory, breathing, and joint problems it is not my responsibility to enable you because you do not care enough about yourself to be healthy.
I exercise, I watch what I eat, and take Geritol (). It is not easy but I feel it is important. 
You get to decide your priorities.  That is the "pursuit of happiness" part of the constitution. 
I get to pursue my happiness too, and there is no mask in that scenario right now.
.
Sorry. You want a mask, you wear one.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> So take 3 people, identical triplets. who all weigh the same.
> 
> One eats a paleo diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
> One eats a high-carb vegetarian diet of 2000 calories a day (whole foods).
> ...


Way too many other variables.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> Exercise for losing weight doesn't work because it is almost physically impossible to exercise enough to have major weight loss.


In and of itself, no. Not really. However, there are so many other benefits that exercise offers that will help with that goal. It's a valuable part an overall healthy lifestyle.




MoonRiver said:


> Diets typically don't work because of hormones.


Hormones are effected by diet. Whether or not someone is achieving the results they seek from a diet is usually due to the individuals approach. Diets fail due to poor dietary choices.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> It makes little difference if you take them separately or together. There is very little evidence to show that diet and exercise result in long-term weight loss. Very few people are able to maintain a weight loss for 5 years. Even with a *gastric sleeve*, almost half the people regain the lost weight within 5 years.


An individual in need of a gastric sleeve? Maybe it's the person more than the diet. These people aren't known for their will power and "stick to it" attitude.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

I've eaten junk food and lost weight. Doesn't matter what you eat. Doesn't matter how fast your metabolism is. If you eat less than your maintenance calories, you will lose weight. Types of foods can drastically impact the amount of fluid you retain. Fluid doesn't matter. Fat cells are what matters. You need to weigh yourself at the same situation each day, and track progress over months. Make adjustments as needed. You can eat Pizza one night and gain five pounds. Carbs and salt will make you retain a lo of water. They don't make you gain that much in weight of fat cells. Unless you give up the diet because you are addicted to carbs and you have the scale reading as proof. You can learn to lose weight, but not if you deny principles of physics, at that point there is no hope for you to do anything but waste money on fads and shams and die fat from a disease that doesn't bother healthy people all that much.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> Because people are arguing it is simply calorie in/calorie out. If that was true, everyone should be responding of course they would all weigh the same.


Variations in the rate at which people lose weight doesn't negate the calorie in/calorie out point.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

kinderfeld said:


> An individual in need of a gastric sleeve? Maybe it's the person more than the diet. These people aren't known for their will power and "stick to it" attitude.


I have a cousin that had something like that done. Sure, she dropped a lot of weight the first year after the surgery but slowly gained all of it back because she refused to make the necessary lifestyle changes.

My son's doctor keeps pushing for him to get metabolic surgery. But as I said during the appt, if he can't change his bad habits for good ones, the surgery is pretty useless in the long run.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

Danaus29 said:


> I have a cousin that had something like that done. Sure, she dropped a lot of weight the first year after the surgery but slowly gained all of it back because she* refused to make the necessary lifestyle changes.*
> 
> My son's doctor keeps pushing for him to get metabolic surgery. But as I said during the appt, if he can't change his bad habits for good ones, the surgery is pretty useless in the long run.


And therein lies the problem.


----------



## sniper69 (Sep 23, 2007)

MoonRiver said:


> Because people are arguing it is simply calorie in/calorie out. If that was true, everyone should be responding of course they would all weigh the same. But no one is answering the question because they know the person on a junk food diet would weigh more which means it is more complicated than calories in/calories out.
> 
> Fats and carbs are broken down by different enzymes, are processed through the gut differently, and the metabolization process is different.


Fat is not the enemy(not saying you said that, just putting that out there). I switched to Keto (not a diet but a lifestyle change) in April of this year. I've lost 40 pounds so far (and I do not count calories). I have more energy than I've had in a long time, and folks around me can see the difference (and it has been positive not negative comments). The issue isn't with fat in the diet but the excessive amount of carbs, which unfortunately the Standard American Diet (SAD) is full of. To say it is easy to not drink soda (I don't drink diet soda either), sweet tea, and sugary drinks would be a lie- but after the first few weeks the cravings go away.

And before anyone says Keto isn't sustainable long term, there are lots of ways to have a "more normal" feeling of eating while staying within Keto. It is all about the effort one puts into changing their dietary lifestyle and eating habits. But then that is true with about any change one does.


----------



## The Paw (May 19, 2006)

I have lost 50 pounds since March, and it was basically switching to the American Diabetes Association "plate" model. In detail, my main steps were:

1. Went from drinking 4 liters of skim milk per week, down to 2 and switched to lactose free. Also eliminated all cheese from diet.

2. Stopped drinking 2 liters of fruit juice per week. I had been under the impression that cutting mango juice with water would be better for me than soda. Not so much. Now drink more water.

3. Got rid of all deep fried foods. All desserts are verboten.

4. Every meal, 50% of my plate is salad and vegetables. About 25% is protein (lots of fish and chicken, beef maybe once a week, pork twice). 25% of the plate is carbs. Also stopped going back for seconds.

5. For the carbs, i replaced almost all of them with more complex carbs/lower glycemic load (yams, oatmeal, brown rice, etc.) Bread is now limited to one piece of toast a week, and I get a small potato once a week. For an Irishman, that is quite a transition.

The first month was kind of rough, but once I settled in, I found that this strategy was sustainable over the long term. My wife has been a star in finding new forms of salad to keep it interesting.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

sniper69 said:


> Fat is not the enemy(not saying you said that, just putting that out there). I switched to Keto (not a diet but a lifestyle change) in April of this year. I've lost 40 pounds so far (and I do not count calories). I have more energy than I've had in a long time, and folks around me can see the difference (and it has been positive not negative comments). The issue isn't with fat in the diet but the excessive amount of carbs, which unfortunately the Standard American Diet (SAD) is full of. To say it is easy to not drink soda (I don't drink diet soda either), sweet tea, and sugary drinks would be a lie- but after the first few weeks the cravings go away.
> 
> And before anyone says Keto isn't sustainable long term, there are lots of ways to have a "more normal" feeling of eating while staying within Keto. It is all about the effort one puts into changing their dietary lifestyle and eating habits. But then that is true with about any change one does.


Keto, especially meat-based keto, is not a good diet for everyone any more than a vegetarian diet is good for everyone. If a person doesn't create enough stomach acid and enough fat digestive enzymes or doesn't metabolize fat efficiently, then a keto diet is probably the wrong diet for them.

There is still an open question about saturated fats and how much is OK. Through several years of lab testing, I know I have to greatly limit saturated fat. My guess is somewhere between 5% and 10% of the population should not eat a keto diet, especially one high in saturated fat. Looking at an original Paleo-type diet, it would have been substantially lower in saturated fat than today's Paleo or keto diets. Wild animals were lean with much less fat, not marbled with saturated fat like today's meat is.

I think the one thing everyone can agree on is to eat primarily minimally processed foods and avoid processed foods as much as possible.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

kinderfeld said:


> And therein lies the problem.


If she would have made the lifestyle changes first, she might have lost the weight without the surgery. Too many people see stomach surgery as a quick fix. Even my son's doctor who pushed it didn't push the diet change as a first option. 

I know for a fact that lifestyle changes can be extremely difficult. I'm still trying to force myself to drink more water and less soda. It's been a challenge to say the least. But I am not having to buy 12 or more 2 liters every few days now. I'm still on the one I opened Monday.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Danaus29 said:


> If she would have made the lifestyle changes first, she might have lost the weight without the surgery. Too many people see stomach surgery as a quick fix. Even my son's doctor who pushed it didn't push the diet change as a first option.
> 
> I know for a fact that lifestyle changes can be extremely difficult. I'm still trying to force myself to drink more water and less soda. It's been a challenge to say the least. But I am not having to buy 12 or more 2 liters every few days now. I'm still on the one I opened Monday.


The hardest part about lifestyle changes is accepting the idea that they are lifestyle changes. 

It took me longer than it should have change my mindset from thinking, 'when this is over, I'll be so happy to have eat whatever I want again,' to realizing that eating whatever I wanted was what created the problem.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

For those who claim they cannot loose weight.

I can show them how to do it, easily. The trouble is, you must want to do it. Period.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

m


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa said:


> For those who claim they cannot loose weight.
> 
> I can show them how to do it, easily. The trouble is, you must want to do it. Period.


Having successfully lost weight and maintained my current weight for a long time, I would suggest it’s not willpower people lack.

Most lack the understanding that healthy weight loss is not a race, there will be frustrating plateaus from time to time and we can’t shed weight it took years to gain in a matter of weeks.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

wr said:


> Having successfully lost weight and maintained my current weight for a long time, I would suggest it’s not willpower people lack.
> 
> Most lack the understanding that healthy weight loss is not a race, there will be frustrating plateaus from time to time and we can’t shed weight it took years to gain in a matter of weeks.


Good for you. I bet you feel much better for it too.

Good job!


----------

