2 ms·

> Insisting that it must be addressed as a self-control problem (dubious whatever the source of the problem is, if that's not the most efficient intervention)

• dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Perverse is taking a high-functioning part of your body (the efficiency of your gut bacteria) and destroying completely it because you don't want to stop eating more than your body needs. Viewing something operating out of normal parameters that provide desired outcomes is, as I stated upthread, a harmful microoptimization. High-function is hitting the ideal for your needs, not just getting bigger numbers on some measure that ignores its role in the system. With many body systems, excessive function is bad, and when we understand how it is bad and how to treat it, we do. We don't complain that is bad to treat a "high-functioning" immune system and that people with disorders resulting from overactive immune systems should instead learn the self-control to avoid triggers rather than seeking treatment.
  • daenz 11y ago
    I'm really surprised at how hard you are pushing this gut bacteria idea. As I said elsewhere, we've barely scratched the surface of how our bodies are affected by changes in our gut bacteria, and you seem immediately on board with changing it completely in order to help lose weight. As I, and others, have said, there is a simpler solution, one that applies positively to all aspects of health and happiness in life: self-control. But you seem bent on the idea that 2/3rds of adults considered overweight or obese have "abnormal gut bacteria" and the best solution for them is to completely rewrite it, consequences be damned. No point continuing this argument.
    • dragonwriter 11y ago
      > I'm really surprised at how hard you are pushing this gut bacteria idea. I'm really surprised at how hard you are twisting what I've said. > As I said elsewhere, we've barely scratched the surface of how our bodies are affected by changes in our gut bacteria, and you seem immediately on board with changing it completely in order to help lose weight. Questioning your basis for finding the idea that interventions involving gut bacteria might be applied, and then challenging the validity of statements you offered in response is different from being "completely on board" with particular interventions. I think its an interesting line of research that opens up both a potential better understanding of the source of the current epidemic and, to some extent independently of whether it does that, might also open a very productive avenue for interventions in an area where the tools we have clearly aren't working very well. > As I, and others, have said, there is a simpler solution, one that applies positively to all aspects of health and happiness in life: self-control. Self-control is not a solution -- its a state. A solution is a course of action that can result in a desired state. > But you seem bent on the idea that 2/3rds of adults considered overweight or obese have "abnormal gut bacteria" Er, no, I've never said all overweight adults have abnormal gut bacteria. (I wouldn't be surprised if there was a significant correlation, to be sure.) > and the best solution for them is to completely rewrite it, consequences be damned. I don't recall ever arguing that the best solution for all (or even any) is to do that; I have said if the evidence shows that the most effective intervention for overall health some subset of that population involves intervention directed at the gut microbiome, it makes no sense to insist that it must be solely addressed as a self-control problem. You seem to be wedded to the idea of a one-size fits all solution to the extent that not only is it what you offer, but that you can't even see anyone disagreeing with you as offering anything but the same type of solution.