The car/fuel analogy is a bad one. High-test fuel only makes sense if the engine in which you intend to burn it is designed to actually make use of its qualitie

The car/fuel analogy is a bad one. High-test fuel only makes sense if the engine in which you intend to burn it is designed to actually make use of its qualities to reach higher efficiencies (e.g. a higher compression ratio). If not, you're just burning more expensive fuel at the same efficiency. That said, what really interests me is the mechanisms behind addictions. Why do smokers smoke, knowing full well by now that it will kill them earlier than non-smokers? Why stuff obese people themselves, knowing full well that it will cause serious health issues down the line. Bottom-line I tend to agree with those who hold that 'a calorie is a calorie' and simply cutting down on food intake is a good enough principle, though perhaps not entirely scientifically correct, for the majority of obese people. But why don't they do it? What makes it so attractive that they simply ignore the serious long-term disadvantages - and even in some cases deny the existence of said disadvantages even though in reality they must know they are real.