4 ms·

Asians eat a lot of rice, but then again, they are a physically active people. (Please excuse the gross generalization.) (Weight gain/loss is ultimately a simp

Asians eat a lot of rice, but then again, they are a physically active people. (Please excuse the gross generalization.) (Weight gain/loss is ultimately a simple equation: calories in ‒ calories out. Eat more but exercise more and they'll cancel out.)

latortuga 16y ago
This is an appealing take but ultimately oversimplified. Calories in equals calories out, this is self evident. Assuming that calories in has no effect on calories out or vice versa is where you make the mistake - they are dependent variables and quite obviously so. Don't eat much and you get cold and lethargic, go work out and you work up an appetite. Saying you're fat because you eat too much is like saying you're an alcoholic because you drink too much. It's true but it doesn't say anything about how to solve the problem and it mixes up cause and effect - in the former case you're eating more because you're getting fat (due to insulin resistance, caused by chronically high consumption of carbohydrates according to some or due to chronically high consumption of fructose according to others) and in the latter case you're drinking more because you're dependent upon alcohol.
- blahblahblah 16y ago
  "Saying you're fat because you eat too much is like saying you're an alcoholic because you drink too much. It's true but it doesn't say anything about how to solve the problem and it mixes up cause and effect" I think you're really close to getting at the root of this problem right here. Fundamentally, we're talking about a behavioral compulsion here - people are literally getting addicted to food. Fructose is the substance that's hijacking the brain's reward system. A particular individual's susceptibility to obesity is very likely set up by the same factors that function in other addictions, whether chemical (as in alcoholism) or behavioral (as in gambling) - namely, dysfunctional family systems, psychological trauma, stress, etc. If this is, in fact, what's really going on then the solution is to (A) treat obesity as an addiction and (B) limit the proliferation of fructose in the food supply.
allwein 16y ago
It's more complex than just calories in - calories out. Just to complete your simple equation, what you're saying is: calories in - calories out = fat stored/burned. So for calories in == calories out, stable weight. For calories in > calories out, weight gain. For calories in < calories out, weight loss. The mistake that most people make is that they assume that the left side is independent of the right side. We can rewrite the equation as: //Assume that a negative fat stored is fat burned calories in - fat stored - calories out = 0 OR calories in - fat stored = calories out Now in your original equation, assume that the person needs 1000 calories for their body to function normally. Also assume that the person eats 1000 calories a day. In your equation, since you assume that fat storage is a function of imbalance between needs and consumption, you get 0 fat storage. However, in reality because of an insulin imbalance, what happens is this: 1000 calories are consumed. 200 calories are stored as fat. This only leaves 800 calories to be used by the body. But wait, the body requires 1000 calories to function normally! Well there's two ways to compensate for that, either the person will consumed an additional 200 calories to get the body functioning normally, or the body will adjust it's needs, reduce the energy and movement of the individual, sleep more, etc.

latortuga 16y ago

This is an appealing take but ultimately oversimplified. Calories in equals calories out, this is self evident. Assuming that calories in has no effect on calories out or vice versa is where you make the mistake - they are dependent variables and quite obviously so. Don't eat much and you get cold and lethargic, go work out and you work up an appetite. Saying you're fat because you eat too much is like saying you're an alcoholic because you drink too much. It's true but it doesn't say anything about how to solve the problem and it mixes up cause and effect - in the former case you're eating more because you're getting fat (due to insulin resistance, caused by chronically high consumption of carbohydrates according to some or due to chronically high consumption of fructose according to others) and in the latter case you're drinking more because you're dependent upon alcohol.

blahblahblah 16y ago
"Saying you're fat because you eat too much is like saying you're an alcoholic because you drink too much. It's true but it doesn't say anything about how to solve the problem and it mixes up cause and effect" I think you're really close to getting at the root of this problem right here. Fundamentally, we're talking about a behavioral compulsion here - people are literally getting addicted to food. Fructose is the substance that's hijacking the brain's reward system. A particular individual's susceptibility to obesity is very likely set up by the same factors that function in other addictions, whether chemical (as in alcoholism) or behavioral (as in gambling) - namely, dysfunctional family systems, psychological trauma, stress, etc. If this is, in fact, what's really going on then the solution is to (A) treat obesity as an addiction and (B) limit the proliferation of fructose in the food supply.

allwein 16y ago

It's more complex than just calories in - calories out. Just to complete your simple equation, what you're saying is: calories in - calories out = fat stored/burned. So for calories in == calories out, stable weight. For calories in > calories out, weight gain. For calories in < calories out, weight loss. The mistake that most people make is that they assume that the left side is independent of the right side. We can rewrite the equation as: //Assume that a negative fat stored is fat burned calories in - fat stored - calories out = 0 OR calories in - fat stored = calories out Now in your original equation, assume that the person needs 1000 calories for their body to function normally. Also assume that the person eats 1000 calories a day. In your equation, since you assume that fat storage is a function of imbalance between needs and consumption, you get 0 fat storage. However, in reality because of an insulin imbalance, what happens is this: 1000 calories are consumed. 200 calories are stored as fat. This only leaves 800 calories to be used by the body. But wait, the body requires 1000 calories to function normally! Well there's two ways to compensate for that, either the person will consumed an additional 200 calories to get the body functioning normally, or the body will adjust it's needs, reduce the energy and movement of the individual, sleep more, etc.