5 ms·

I like what this guy has to say about nutrition (take it with a grain of salt, he is an epistemologist) https://meaningness.com/nutrition-resigns https://meani

I like what this guy has to say about nutrition (take it with a grain of salt, he is an epistemologist) https://meaningness.com/nutrition-resigns https://meaningness.com/nutrition-resigns "Your job is to wear white lab coats while saying that food ingredients are healthy and unhealthy, and to wave charts around. That makes the ingredients authoritatively healthy and unhealthy, which covers our asses. ... "Signed, [The governments of every country in the world, the agriculture industry, the food processing industry, the supermarket industry, and so forth.]" I think if you model food as energy / volume / time you'll do better. To lose weight either increase time (fast) or volume (eat more fiber, maybe the easiest to do?) and decrease energy (lower calorie options).

hogFeast 6y ago
Yes, according to the article that kind of science (i.e. the basic logic of energy usage) was invented by Coca-Cola. This is what happens when you combine weak knowledge of science with a credulous mind (you think everything is a conspiracy theory invented by group of people you dislike). Maybe "processed food" (whatever that means, according to the article it is everything not produced in an "artisinal restaurant") is good, maybe it is bad but it is slightly hard to tell given that lots of people in the US are obese: which is a function of greed and laziness, not whether food is "processed" or not. You can lose weight drinking nothing but soda. You can can lose weight eating nothing but chocolate. I have done it (and no, Coca-Cola didn't pay me). As you say, the issue of obesity is a fairly simple one of: how much energy do you use and how much energy do you put in. What is actually remarkable to me is how many people are obese given the high basal metabolic rate of humans (at my normal weight, it was remarkably hard and time-consuming to cram enough calories in to gain weight consistently). I have gained and lost 20-40% of my bodyweight multiple times, it isn't hard, it isn't about "good" or "bad" foods (the "you never see a skinny person drinking a diet soda" phenomenom, every obese person I have ever met thought this way), and doesn't look at what their actual calories-in/calories-out is (in my experience, most people regard tracking calories this as a form of mental illness...I live somewhere that has life expectancy under 70 because of obesity...so, go figure). This isn't to say micronutrients aren't important, they clearly are...you don't have enough iron, you are going to feel very bad...but the issue for most countries in the West is excessive calorie consumption, and a failure to speak about this bluntly with people (pretty much all my older relatives have health issues caused by weight, it is frustrating when a doctor tries to be kind first rather than help them stay alive).
- Miraste 6y ago
  > which is a function of greed and laziness This is incorrect, or at least not a useful lens with which to examine the problem. Societal changes on the level of the obesity epidemic (universal to the point of affecting lab animals) don't happen because of individual increases in greed and laziness. There is at least one broad nutritional/socioeconomic factor behind this, probably several, but because of the state of nutritional science we don't know what they are.
  - hogFeast 6y ago
    Yes, the social factor is...obese people eat more and exercise less. If you are assuming that every other developed country has this problem, they do not. In those countries, people eat less and/or exercise more.
- bonoboTP 6y ago
  1. Yes, if you got fat, you consumed more calories than you used up. The solution will require getting closer to balance. 2. The actionable way to achieve that is non-trivial. Different foods with same amount of calories have different physiological effects, including which hormones are produced with what timings and what neural circuitry is activated. This leads to different degrees of psychological fullness, cravings and potential for addiction. They may also promote more laziness or more fidgety behavior which itself can make more difference than often imagined. Moving your hands around, rocking your legs, standing up more often etc.,being more "restless" feeling the need to "get it out of your system" by going for a walk vs feeling like a slob. CICO and thermodynamics are true as an observation but aren't actionable long term advice. You can lose weight on just eating small amount of crappy pizza, but you'll feel like crap and will have more cravings than eating food with more volume, and various other properties. Even the crunchiness of a food has effects in the brain. CICO is too reductionist as advice.
  - hogFeast 6y ago
    It isn't. And how often have you lost weight eating junk food yourself? I have done it...no effect. Satiety doesn't matter...thinking that it does is why people don't lose weight. You will be hungry, it will be unpleasant, but continue. Again, this is the fat person with the diet soda effect...most diets that exist don't work, that is why there are so many fat people. Reduce it to something simple, measurable, and it works. The idea of Good/Bad food is destructive for weight loss because it introduces guilt and complexity. Also, your basal metabolic rate means you can lose weight eating two medium pizzas a day...again, it is very hard to gain weight the way many people do, it is competitive eating amounts of greed done daily, and very few people have a strong idea of the calories in food...just vague moralising about Good and Bad.

hogFeast 6y ago

Yes, according to the article that kind of science (i.e. the basic logic of energy usage) was invented by Coca-Cola. This is what happens when you combine weak knowledge of science with a credulous mind (you think everything is a conspiracy theory invented by group of people you dislike). Maybe "processed food" (whatever that means, according to the article it is everything not produced in an "artisinal restaurant") is good, maybe it is bad but it is slightly hard to tell given that lots of people in the US are obese: which is a function of greed and laziness, not whether food is "processed" or not. You can lose weight drinking nothing but soda. You can can lose weight eating nothing but chocolate. I have done it (and no, Coca-Cola didn't pay me). As you say, the issue of obesity is a fairly simple one of: how much energy do you use and how much energy do you put in. What is actually remarkable to me is how many people are obese given the high basal metabolic rate of humans (at my normal weight, it was remarkably hard and time-consuming to cram enough calories in to gain weight consistently). I have gained and lost 20-40% of my bodyweight multiple times, it isn't hard, it isn't about "good" or "bad" foods (the "you never see a skinny person drinking a diet soda" phenomenom, every obese person I have ever met thought this way), and doesn't look at what their actual calories-in/calories-out is (in my experience, most people regard tracking calories this as a form of mental illness...I live somewhere that has life expectancy under 70 because of obesity...so, go figure). This isn't to say micronutrients aren't important, they clearly are...you don't have enough iron, you are going to feel very bad...but the issue for most countries in the West is excessive calorie consumption, and a failure to speak about this bluntly with people (pretty much all my older relatives have health issues caused by weight, it is frustrating when a doctor tries to be kind first rather than help them stay alive).

Miraste 6y ago
> which is a function of greed and laziness This is incorrect, or at least not a useful lens with which to examine the problem. Societal changes on the level of the obesity epidemic (universal to the point of affecting lab animals) don't happen because of individual increases in greed and laziness. There is at least one broad nutritional/socioeconomic factor behind this, probably several, but because of the state of nutritional science we don't know what they are.
- hogFeast 6y ago
  Yes, the social factor is...obese people eat more and exercise less. If you are assuming that every other developed country has this problem, they do not. In those countries, people eat less and/or exercise more.
bonoboTP 6y ago
1. Yes, if you got fat, you consumed more calories than you used up. The solution will require getting closer to balance. 2. The actionable way to achieve that is non-trivial. Different foods with same amount of calories have different physiological effects, including which hormones are produced with what timings and what neural circuitry is activated. This leads to different degrees of psychological fullness, cravings and potential for addiction. They may also promote more laziness or more fidgety behavior which itself can make more difference than often imagined. Moving your hands around, rocking your legs, standing up more often etc.,being more "restless" feeling the need to "get it out of your system" by going for a walk vs feeling like a slob. CICO and thermodynamics are true as an observation but aren't actionable long term advice. You can lose weight on just eating small amount of crappy pizza, but you'll feel like crap and will have more cravings than eating food with more volume, and various other properties. Even the crunchiness of a food has effects in the brain. CICO is too reductionist as advice.
- hogFeast 6y ago
  It isn't. And how often have you lost weight eating junk food yourself? I have done it...no effect. Satiety doesn't matter...thinking that it does is why people don't lose weight. You will be hungry, it will be unpleasant, but continue. Again, this is the fat person with the diet soda effect...most diets that exist don't work, that is why there are so many fat people. Reduce it to something simple, measurable, and it works. The idea of Good/Bad food is destructive for weight loss because it introduces guilt and complexity. Also, your basal metabolic rate means you can lose weight eating two medium pizzas a day...again, it is very hard to gain weight the way many people do, it is competitive eating amounts of greed done daily, and very few people have a strong idea of the calories in food...just vague moralising about Good and Bad.