5 ms·

The secret is eat less calories than you burn. What are you talking about?

jahewson 10y ago
And yet knowing that doesn't solve obesity at a societal level. How do you actually get enough people to do that? We have no idea.
- quotemstr 10y ago
  Maybe we don't know exactly the right way to get lots of people to eat less, but it's certainly not making everything ultra-delicious with tons of sugar and running continuous advertisements to children for these new ultra-delicious foods.
  - prostoalex 10y ago
    Just a few comments above you people strongly advocate consuming fewer calories to lose weight, and, as we all know, sugar is less calorie-dense than protein or fat. </sarcasm>
tchock23 10y ago
As the article notes, eating less than you burn is effective for a while until the body works to get back up to a previous set point to maintain homeostasis. An excellent book on this topic is The Obesity Code by Dr Jason Fung
- sn9 10y ago
  That would be news to literally any living thing that's experienced famine and starvation.
matthewmacleod 10y ago
That's true in a strict sense. But how do you implement that at population scale? If it were easy to control one's weight, then we wouldn't have an obesity problem. Obesity is a public health problem, like tobacco smoking or STIs. There's no secret - avoid ling disease by not smoking, and avoid STIs by not having unprotected sex. But clearly the "it's stimple, just fix it" approach isn't effective at improving the overall health of a population.
- lacampbell 10y ago
  But clearly the "it's stimple, just fix it" approach isn't effective at improving the overall health of a population. I honestly don't care at all about the overall health of the population. I really don't. Not that I wish them any ill-will, but I can't even begin to muster up the slightest bit of care for people I don't know ruining their lives because they eat too much or smoke. It's just not even on my radar. I realise I'm not supposed to admit this, but I also realise I'm not the only one who thinks it.
  - prostoalex 10y ago
    You pay for their healthcare through your taxes. Every pothole on the road, unbuilt subway station and uneducated youth is a result of more tax money being redirected to the healthcare system in order to treat some smoker's lung cancer or some sweet tooth's diabetes.
    - lacampbell 10y ago
      Yeah but my response to that is less "let's fix society!" and more "stop taxing me so much". It's the government that puts me in that situation, not people.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]

And yet knowing that doesn't solve obesity at a societal level. How do you actually get enough people to do that? We have no idea.

quotemstr 10y ago
Maybe we don't know exactly the right way to get lots of people to eat less, but it's certainly not making everything ultra-delicious with tons of sugar and running continuous advertisements to children for these new ultra-delicious foods.
- prostoalex 10y ago
  Just a few comments above you people strongly advocate consuming fewer calories to lose weight, and, as we all know, sugar is less calorie-dense than protein or fat. </sarcasm>

tchock23 10y ago

As the article notes, eating less than you burn is effective for a while until the body works to get back up to a previous set point to maintain homeostasis. An excellent book on this topic is The Obesity Code by Dr Jason Fung

sn9 10y ago
That would be news to literally any living thing that's experienced famine and starvation.

matthewmacleod 10y ago

That's true in a strict sense. But how do you implement that at population scale? If it were easy to control one's weight, then we wouldn't have an obesity problem. Obesity is a public health problem, like tobacco smoking or STIs. There's no secret - avoid ling disease by not smoking, and avoid STIs by not having unprotected sex. But clearly the "it's stimple, just fix it" approach isn't effective at improving the overall health of a population.

lacampbell 10y ago
But clearly the "it's stimple, just fix it" approach isn't effective at improving the overall health of a population. I honestly don't care at all about the overall health of the population. I really don't. Not that I wish them any ill-will, but I can't even begin to muster up the slightest bit of care for people I don't know ruining their lives because they eat too much or smoke. It's just not even on my radar. I realise I'm not supposed to admit this, but I also realise I'm not the only one who thinks it.
- prostoalex 10y ago
  You pay for their healthcare through your taxes. Every pothole on the road, unbuilt subway station and uneducated youth is a result of more tax money being redirected to the healthcare system in order to treat some smoker's lung cancer or some sweet tooth's diabetes.
  - lacampbell 10y ago
    Yeah but my response to that is less "let's fix society!" and more "stop taxing me so much". It's the government that puts me in that situation, not people.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]