16 ms·

>Should we tell people to get their BMI under 25 too? >What about drinking and smoking? There's a lot of investment in trying to fix these problems already, o

by MSM 5y ago

>Should we tell people to get their BMI under 25 too? >What about drinking and smoking? There's a lot of investment in trying to fix these problems already, or at least offset the costs. For example, there are "sin taxes" for things like cigarettes and alcohol, which means smokers and drinkers are paying disproportionately more taxes than those that don't. You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disproportionately more simply by buying more food than someone who weighs 20% less. All that aside though- forcing fat people to get skinny isn't a valid comparison to forcing people to take a vaccine. One takes a couple minutes and the other is something requiring an hour or more of dedicated time per day for potentially years (or a whole lifetime!). Let's say, hypothetically, there existed a free shot which would immediately make its recipient a perfectly lean 20 BMI and grants all the benefits of health and exercise without the work. How many people would choose not to take it, and how would society view those that decided to walk around weighing 400lbs? That's really the apples to apples comparison here, and I think you'd find there would be very few folks walking around at 400lbs in that scenario.

collegeburner 5y ago
Except the food you eat to get fat is often much cheaper than the food to stay healthy. Produce is expensive per calorie, lean meat is expensive per calorie, cooking takes time and effort, and a gym membership is expensive. This is one of the reasons why obesity is so prevalent, it's much easier than staying healthy. It's not just 20% more of what healthy people eat.
- tayo42 5y ago
  > Produce is expensive per calorie, Thats kind of the point of eating fresh food, your filled with less calories. you eat less, your at a healthy weight. That not the stuff getting people fat. Look how many calories are in mcdonals burgers. People are getting fat becasue they're uneducated. They drink sodas, sweet teas, eat candy and excessive alcohol
  - tsimionescu 5y ago
    The point is that it's much cheaper to fill your belly with a McDonald's burger than artisanal bread, fresh tomato, minced lean meat. Much, much cheaper. If you are aiming to eat 2000 calories per day, you will do eat much more cheaply with a pizza and a burger than with good food.
    - tayo42 5y ago
      There's nothing really bad about a fast food burger. No one is getting obese eating a cheese burger. https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/cheeseburger.html https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/cheeseburger.html The problem is the fries, juice, milk shakes, sodas https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/large-french-fries.html https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/large-french-frie... 500 unnecessary empty calories. > If you are aiming to eat 2000 calories per day, you will do eat much more cheaply with a pizza and a burger than with good food. If you eat 2000 calories your not going to be obese, no matter what your eating
      - tsimionescu 5y ago
        > If you eat 2000 calories your not going to be obese, no matter what your eating BMRs are estimated between typical ranges 1200-2400 across the population (with 1200 being short people with no muscle, and 2400 being tall toned people; body builders and athletes can be significantly above this). If you're 1.6m tall and are not working out at all, eating 2000 calories per day will quickly get you overweight. > There's nothing really bad about a fast food burger. No one is getting obese eating a cheese burger. > The problem is the fries, juice, milk shakes, sodas Well, the burger bread, especially if its sweetened + sauces + the cheese are more than half the calories in the burger, and just as empty as the soda, fries, juice, milk shake. The tomato and pickles are fine, the meat is ok. Even then, your deeper point, which I assume is that 2000 Cal is 2000 Cal, whether you get it from lettuce or burgers, is almost certainly wrong in practice. While in the short term it's true (i.e. someone with a generally healthy diet will not get any more fat by eating an extra burger than by eating an equivalent amount of extra apples), it's very clear that in the long term there is a significant difference in CI (appetite) or CO (BMR, sedentariness) for people on junk diets vs better food. The reasons for this are unknown, and candidate explanations range from "delicious food" addiction, gut microbiome impact, sugar addiction, metabolism-impacting contaminant (with various candidates such as PFAS, trace mineral oils from industrial cooking equipment, etc).
kcplate 5y ago
> You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disproportionately more simply by buying more food than someone who weighs 20% less. Overweight people pay their tax in a significant decrease in their quality of life. Eating unhealthy is way way cheaper. I can confirm both after 170lbs of weight loss. My food budget quadrupled. Rice, pasta, and white bread are cheap. Meat and veggies, not so much.
- clort 5y ago
  It sounds good but I find this framing uncomfortable because tax is not a penalty. Overweight people pay a penalty in a significant decrease in their quality of life, yes. That is not a tax though - tax is a contribution to society, and a decrease in one persons quality of life is not a contribution.
  - kcplate 5y ago
    I was using it metaphorically. And for what it’s worth…some of us do consider tax a “penalty”
- erhk 5y ago
  Carbohydrates are not inherently unhealthy.
  - camhart 5y ago
    I'd add to this that loosing weight simply requires a calorie deficit. There is no requirement that you must eat large portions of meat to loose weight. With that being said, eating low carb may be an easier way for some. Don't want to discount that.
    - kcplate 5y ago
      While this is mostly true…there are other factors at play that can make this deficit difficult. I went for 2 months without losing a pound despite a net -1000kcal between diet, exercise, and my “probable” BMR. My suspicion is that my BMR dropped when my body realized it was basically in a famine state and decided to conserve every calorie it could any way it could.
dham 5y ago
> Let's say, hypothetically, there existed a free shot which would immediately make its recipient a perfectly lean 20 BMI and grants all the benefits of health and exercise without the work I would be very skeptical and wonder what the downside is
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- tommymachine 5y ago
  What if the downside was well studied and not reported on? [1] https://media.patriots.win/post/nWnEYVAL.jpeg https://media.patriots.win/post/nWnEYVAL.jpeg
  - slumpt_ 5y ago
    https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/myocarditis-coronavirus-vaccine https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/myocarditis-coronavirus-va... “patriots.win” was a solid red flag.
    - nradov 5y ago
      I'm not familiar with "patriots.win” but the table image linked above is an accurate excerpt from this CDC presentation. The mRNA vaccines have caused a higher than expected rate of adverse cardiac events in young males. I encourage everyone to read the whole file for context. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-08-30/03-COVID-Su-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-...
      - slumpt_ 5y ago
        Yes. I’m aware. Context is everything, and the scientific community does not deem this concern catastrophic. I invite you to visit that website (patriots…) if you want to see some spectacular bullshit.
        5y ago
erhk 5y ago
>You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disproportionately more simply by buying more food than someone who weighs 20% less. No one ever likes my proposed tax on slower metabolism
jonny_eh 5y ago
Covid is contagious, obesity is not.
- fuzxi 5y ago
  Getting vaccinated doesn't prevent you from spreading covid.
  - brendoelfrendo 5y ago
    No, but if everyone was vaccinated we’d be a lot less concerned about spread in the first place.
    - fuzxi 5y ago
      Same if no one was obese. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28533668 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28533668
  - dwaltrip 5y ago
    It significantly reduces the chances of spreading it…
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  Overweight people put disproportionate strain on the healthcare system.
- shard 5y ago
  I would instead say COVID is physically contagious, while obesity is psychologically and socially contagious.
  - logicchains 5y ago
    No it doesn't. Israel and Singapore both have over 80% eligible vaxed, and the proportion of infectees who are vaxed is similar to the proportion of vaxed in the general population, suggesting vaxed are no less likely to get it. Moreover infection rates are greater after mass vaccination than before.
fuzxi 5y ago
>One takes a couple minutes and the other is something requiring an hour or more of dedicated time per day for potentially years (or a whole lifetime! Nope. You don't have to dedicate time to exercising to lose weight, you can just eat less.
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  You could even have mandates. Exclude them from eating at restaurants or fast food places and ensure they don't purchase too much or unhealthy food. Not only would it be for Their Own Good™, but if it saved just one innocent life due to reducing the load on the healthcare system, it would have been worth it. /s of course - I'm not a lunatic.
  - wincy 5y ago
    For sure, and the government knows that meat is bad for you, and also sugar, and fat. You’re allowed to eat bland protein paste citizen, enjoy! I lost 80 pounds eating mostly hot dogs and kimchi. I doubt the government would prescribe that though.
    - throwawaylinux 5y ago
      Naturally the ruling class would be allowed to eat meat and desserts though. Their palates are sophisticated in ways you would fail to appreciate, pleb. And besides, you're just jealous that they're better than you.
    - stOneskull 5y ago
      meat is good for you.
      - 988747 5y ago
        Except hot-dogs contain almost no meat :)
  - BoxOfRain 5y ago
nradov 5y ago
Are you suggesting then that the US should adopt something like Japan's "metabo law"? It appears to be at least somewhat effective in coercing people into losing weight. https://www.jacksonville.com/reason/fact-check/2016-09-16/story/fact-check-it-illegal-japanese-residents-be-overweight https://www.jacksonville.com/reason/fact-check/2016-09-16/st...
ixacto 5y ago
Actually no, we don’t even need a shot to lose weight you just eat less. Also the government is actively promoting obesity by subsidizing cheap unhealthy food via agriculture subsidies like hfcs and soybeans. So while there are some who have actually spoken out against obesity like Michelle Obama, most are silent as the issue is kinda politically inconvenient for both parties on a macro scale. It’s disgusting and why I don’t support either major political party in this country.
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  At what point can we blame people? Never, it seems. Government cannot and should not regulate every aspect of our lives. Wanna drink a bottle of whiskey and kill yourself? Individual responsibility. Wanna get fat slogging sugar all day without self control? Individual responsibility. Individual responsibility seems to never be part of the conversation.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
phkahler 5y ago
>> All that aside though- forcing fat people to get skinny isn't a valid comparison to forcing people to take a vaccine. One takes a couple minutes and the other is something requiring an hour or more of dedicated time per day for potentially years Well we could just tell the fat people they aren't allowed to eat in restaurants and can't keep their jobs. That way they won't be able afford or get the food that keeps them fat! </sarcasm>
- snovv_crash 5y ago
  I mean, that would work in the hypothetical situation where being skinny was a single free shot away, right.
  - tekknik 5y ago
    You also seem to have no clue about obesity. Do you think everyone with it overeats?
    - polartx 5y ago
      >Do you think everyone with it overeats? Well, yeah. For all the complexities of nutritionist meal plans and fad diets, losing weight can be achieved leveraging nothing more than a caloric deficit. >In an illustrative study of one, Mark Haub a professor of nutrition at Kansas State University, demonstrated to his students that he could lose 27 pounds in just 10 weeks by eating a high-sugar, high-fat, low calorie diet. Professor Haub ate Twinkies, Little Debbie snacks and other sugary fare every three hours, instead of eating meals. To add variety to his dessert regimen, he also chowed-down on Doritos, sugary cereals and Oreos. Despite eating mostly junk food, (plus one protein shake per day), he limited his intake to 1800 calories per day, about 800 calories less than necessary to maintain the body weight of a man his size. >Interestingly, his body fat and cholesterol dropped after this diet, despite eating tons of fat and sugar. In other words, eating sugar and fat does not raise your cholesterol, provided that you are on a low-calorie diet and that you drop body fat. We see similar findings in people who lose weight on the Atkins’ Diet. Their cholesterol levels improve, even though they eat a diet very high in animal fat. This is because being overweight raises cholesterol. >Not surprisingly, Haub showed what all doctors and scientists already know: Weight loss really is about the number of calories that you consume, not the composition of those calories. So why are there so many diets and books about diets if that’s all it takes? Well it’s hard to package and brand the ‘eat less, fatso’ diet. And like everything else in this world, ‘science’ takes a backseat to money.
lambdaba 5y ago
> All that aside though- forcing fat people to get skinny isn't a valid comparison to forcing people to take a vaccine. One takes a couple minutes and the other is something requiring an hour or more of dedicated time per day for potentially years The issue with being overweight is not so much the extra weight itself, but the fact that it is correlated with metabolic dysfunction. "TOFI" (thin-outside fat-inside) are just as unhealthy. Metabolic dysfunction can be resolved in a matter of days to weeks by abstaining from high glycemic index foods and in general fixing modern-day malnutrition. This is with a more aggressive regimen often described as a "ketogenic" diet, although the term is abused by people who don't understand that ketosis is more of a side-effect of a species-appropriate diet that allows for healthy fat burning, and not simply hitting macros. Again I stress that if public health officials had a clue the pandemic would have never happened, it was evident early on that this disease disproportionately affects the malnourished, people with poor blood glucose control, sedentary, and immune compromised. These all go together, although oftentimes the immune dysfunction is deliberately induced by pharmaceutical treatments to mitigate autoimmune disease. See also: [Only 12 percent of american adults are metabolically healthy](https://www.unc.edu/posts/2018/11/28/only-12-percent-of-american-adults-are-metabolically-healthy-carolina-study-finds/ https://www.unc.edu/posts/2018/11/28/only-12-percent-of-amer...)
caeril 5y ago
> One takes a couple minutes and the other is something requiring an hour or more of dedicated time per day 1. No it doesn't. It only requires eating less. 2. One of these is invasive, the other is not. > There's a lot of investment in trying to fix these problems already Not really. We have culturally embraced "health at any size", we don't clamp down on unhealthy food advertisers, we install vending machines in schools. We are now FIRING people for noncompliance with vaccine mandates, but shrugging impotently when childhood obesity rises 9% in 18 months of pandemic lockdowns. Further, the obesity issue isn't just a baseline problem: it's also the #2 comorbidity of COVID itself. If these tinpot tyrant vaccine mandate people were even remotely serious about actual harm reduction from the pandemic, we've had approximately 72 weeks since we knew of the obesity-COVID severity link to include weight loss as a preventative protocol along with masks and vaccines. The fact that we've heard no significant public messaging on this front during a period of time that high-risk obese populations have had the chance to dramatically reduce their risk profile tells you everything you need to know about how serious "public health officials" are about actually reducing deaths. Hint: they're not.
tekknik 5y ago
> You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disproportionately more simply by buying more food than someone who weighs 20% less. You have a real incorrect view of obesity. Being obese does not mean excessive eating. There’s a whole slew of digestive and hormone issues that someone can have and be obese while eating less than 2000 calories a day.

by MSM 5y ago

collegeburner 5y ago

Except the food you eat to get fat is often much cheaper than the food to stay healthy. Produce is expensive per calorie, lean meat is expensive per calorie, cooking takes time and effort, and a gym membership is expensive. This is one of the reasons why obesity is so prevalent, it's much easier than staying healthy. It's not just 20% more of what healthy people eat.

tayo42 5y ago
> Produce is expensive per calorie, Thats kind of the point of eating fresh food, your filled with less calories. you eat less, your at a healthy weight. That not the stuff getting people fat. Look how many calories are in mcdonals burgers. People are getting fat becasue they're uneducated. They drink sodas, sweet teas, eat candy and excessive alcohol
- tsimionescu 5y ago
  The point is that it's much cheaper to fill your belly with a McDonald's burger than artisanal bread, fresh tomato, minced lean meat. Much, much cheaper. If you are aiming to eat 2000 calories per day, you will do eat much more cheaply with a pizza and a burger than with good food.
  - tayo42 5y ago
    There's nothing really bad about a fast food burger. No one is getting obese eating a cheese burger. https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/cheeseburger.html https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/cheeseburger.html The problem is the fries, juice, milk shakes, sodas https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/large-french-fries.html https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/large-french-frie... 500 unnecessary empty calories. > If you are aiming to eat 2000 calories per day, you will do eat much more cheaply with a pizza and a burger than with good food. If you eat 2000 calories your not going to be obese, no matter what your eating
    - tsimionescu 5y ago
      > If you eat 2000 calories your not going to be obese, no matter what your eating BMRs are estimated between typical ranges 1200-2400 across the population (with 1200 being short people with no muscle, and 2400 being tall toned people; body builders and athletes can be significantly above this). If you're 1.6m tall and are not working out at all, eating 2000 calories per day will quickly get you overweight. > There's nothing really bad about a fast food burger. No one is getting obese eating a cheese burger. > The problem is the fries, juice, milk shakes, sodas Well, the burger bread, especially if its sweetened + sauces + the cheese are more than half the calories in the burger, and just as empty as the soda, fries, juice, milk shake. The tomato and pickles are fine, the meat is ok. Even then, your deeper point, which I assume is that 2000 Cal is 2000 Cal, whether you get it from lettuce or burgers, is almost certainly wrong in practice. While in the short term it's true (i.e. someone with a generally healthy diet will not get any more fat by eating an extra burger than by eating an equivalent amount of extra apples), it's very clear that in the long term there is a significant difference in CI (appetite) or CO (BMR, sedentariness) for people on junk diets vs better food. The reasons for this are unknown, and candidate explanations range from "delicious food" addiction, gut microbiome impact, sugar addiction, metabolism-impacting contaminant (with various candidates such as PFAS, trace mineral oils from industrial cooking equipment, etc).

kcplate 5y ago

> You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disproportionately more simply by buying more food than someone who weighs 20% less. Overweight people pay their tax in a significant decrease in their quality of life. Eating unhealthy is way way cheaper. I can confirm both after 170lbs of weight loss. My food budget quadrupled. Rice, pasta, and white bread are cheap. Meat and veggies, not so much.

clort 5y ago
It sounds good but I find this framing uncomfortable because tax is not a penalty. Overweight people pay a penalty in a significant decrease in their quality of life, yes. That is not a tax though - tax is a contribution to society, and a decrease in one persons quality of life is not a contribution.
- kcplate 5y ago
  I was using it metaphorically. And for what it’s worth…some of us do consider tax a “penalty”
erhk 5y ago
Carbohydrates are not inherently unhealthy.
- camhart 5y ago
  I'd add to this that loosing weight simply requires a calorie deficit. There is no requirement that you must eat large portions of meat to loose weight. With that being said, eating low carb may be an easier way for some. Don't want to discount that.
  - kcplate 5y ago
    While this is mostly true…there are other factors at play that can make this deficit difficult. I went for 2 months without losing a pound despite a net -1000kcal between diet, exercise, and my “probable” BMR. My suspicion is that my BMR dropped when my body realized it was basically in a famine state and decided to conserve every calorie it could any way it could.

dham 5y ago

> Let's say, hypothetically, there existed a free shot which would immediately make its recipient a perfectly lean 20 BMI and grants all the benefits of health and exercise without the work I would be very skeptical and wonder what the downside is

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tommymachine 5y ago
What if the downside was well studied and not reported on? [1] https://media.patriots.win/post/nWnEYVAL.jpeg https://media.patriots.win/post/nWnEYVAL.jpeg
- slumpt_ 5y ago
  https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/myocarditis-coronavirus-vaccine https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/myocarditis-coronavirus-va... “patriots.win” was a solid red flag.
  - nradov 5y ago
    I'm not familiar with "patriots.win” but the table image linked above is an accurate excerpt from this CDC presentation. The mRNA vaccines have caused a higher than expected rate of adverse cardiac events in young males. I encourage everyone to read the whole file for context. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-08-30/03-COVID-Su-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-...
    - slumpt_ 5y ago
      Yes. I’m aware. Context is everything, and the scientific community does not deem this concern catastrophic. I invite you to visit that website (patriots…) if you want to see some spectacular bullshit.
      - 5y ago

erhk 5y ago

>You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disproportionately more simply by buying more food than someone who weighs 20% less. No one ever likes my proposed tax on slower metabolism

jonny_eh 5y ago

Covid is contagious, obesity is not.

fuzxi 5y ago
Getting vaccinated doesn't prevent you from spreading covid.
- brendoelfrendo 5y ago
  No, but if everyone was vaccinated we’d be a lot less concerned about spread in the first place.
  - fuzxi 5y ago
    Same if no one was obese. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28533668 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28533668
- dwaltrip 5y ago
  It significantly reduces the chances of spreading it…
throwawaylinux 5y ago
Overweight people put disproportionate strain on the healthcare system.
shard 5y ago
I would instead say COVID is physically contagious, while obesity is psychologically and socially contagious.
- logicchains 5y ago
  No it doesn't. Israel and Singapore both have over 80% eligible vaxed, and the proportion of infectees who are vaxed is similar to the proportion of vaxed in the general population, suggesting vaxed are no less likely to get it. Moreover infection rates are greater after mass vaccination than before.

fuzxi 5y ago

>One takes a couple minutes and the other is something requiring an hour or more of dedicated time per day for potentially years (or a whole lifetime! Nope. You don't have to dedicate time to exercising to lose weight, you can just eat less.

throwawaylinux 5y ago
You could even have mandates. Exclude them from eating at restaurants or fast food places and ensure they don't purchase too much or unhealthy food. Not only would it be for Their Own Good™, but if it saved just one innocent life due to reducing the load on the healthcare system, it would have been worth it. /s of course - I'm not a lunatic.
- wincy 5y ago
  For sure, and the government knows that meat is bad for you, and also sugar, and fat. You’re allowed to eat bland protein paste citizen, enjoy! I lost 80 pounds eating mostly hot dogs and kimchi. I doubt the government would prescribe that though.
  - throwawaylinux 5y ago
    Naturally the ruling class would be allowed to eat meat and desserts though. Their palates are sophisticated in ways you would fail to appreciate, pleb. And besides, you're just jealous that they're better than you.
  - stOneskull 5y ago
    meat is good for you.
    - 988747 5y ago
      Except hot-dogs contain almost no meat :)
- BoxOfRain 5y ago

nradov 5y ago

Are you suggesting then that the US should adopt something like Japan's "metabo law"? It appears to be at least somewhat effective in coercing people into losing weight. https://www.jacksonville.com/reason/fact-check/2016-09-16/story/fact-check-it-illegal-japanese-residents-be-overweight https://www.jacksonville.com/reason/fact-check/2016-09-16/st...

ixacto 5y ago

Actually no, we don’t even need a shot to lose weight you just eat less. Also the government is actively promoting obesity by subsidizing cheap unhealthy food via agriculture subsidies like hfcs and soybeans. So while there are some who have actually spoken out against obesity like Michelle Obama, most are silent as the issue is kinda politically inconvenient for both parties on a macro scale. It’s disgusting and why I don’t support either major political party in this country.

systemvoltage 5y ago
At what point can we blame people? Never, it seems. Government cannot and should not regulate every aspect of our lives. Wanna drink a bottle of whiskey and kill yourself? Individual responsibility. Wanna get fat slogging sugar all day without self control? Individual responsibility. Individual responsibility seems to never be part of the conversation.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

phkahler 5y ago

>> All that aside though- forcing fat people to get skinny isn't a valid comparison to forcing people to take a vaccine. One takes a couple minutes and the other is something requiring an hour or more of dedicated time per day for potentially years Well we could just tell the fat people they aren't allowed to eat in restaurants and can't keep their jobs. That way they won't be able afford or get the food that keeps them fat! </sarcasm>

snovv_crash 5y ago
I mean, that would work in the hypothetical situation where being skinny was a single free shot away, right.
- tekknik 5y ago
  You also seem to have no clue about obesity. Do you think everyone with it overeats?
  - polartx 5y ago
    >Do you think everyone with it overeats? Well, yeah. For all the complexities of nutritionist meal plans and fad diets, losing weight can be achieved leveraging nothing more than a caloric deficit. >In an illustrative study of one, Mark Haub a professor of nutrition at Kansas State University, demonstrated to his students that he could lose 27 pounds in just 10 weeks by eating a high-sugar, high-fat, low calorie diet. Professor Haub ate Twinkies, Little Debbie snacks and other sugary fare every three hours, instead of eating meals. To add variety to his dessert regimen, he also chowed-down on Doritos, sugary cereals and Oreos. Despite eating mostly junk food, (plus one protein shake per day), he limited his intake to 1800 calories per day, about 800 calories less than necessary to maintain the body weight of a man his size. >Interestingly, his body fat and cholesterol dropped after this diet, despite eating tons of fat and sugar. In other words, eating sugar and fat does not raise your cholesterol, provided that you are on a low-calorie diet and that you drop body fat. We see similar findings in people who lose weight on the Atkins’ Diet. Their cholesterol levels improve, even though they eat a diet very high in animal fat. This is because being overweight raises cholesterol. >Not surprisingly, Haub showed what all doctors and scientists already know: Weight loss really is about the number of calories that you consume, not the composition of those calories. So why are there so many diets and books about diets if that’s all it takes? Well it’s hard to package and brand the ‘eat less, fatso’ diet. And like everything else in this world, ‘science’ takes a backseat to money.

lambdaba 5y ago

> All that aside though- forcing fat people to get skinny isn't a valid comparison to forcing people to take a vaccine. One takes a couple minutes and the other is something requiring an hour or more of dedicated time per day for potentially years The issue with being overweight is not so much the extra weight itself, but the fact that it is correlated with metabolic dysfunction. "TOFI" (thin-outside fat-inside) are just as unhealthy. Metabolic dysfunction can be resolved in a matter of days to weeks by abstaining from high glycemic index foods and in general fixing modern-day malnutrition. This is with a more aggressive regimen often described as a "ketogenic" diet, although the term is abused by people who don't understand that ketosis is more of a side-effect of a species-appropriate diet that allows for healthy fat burning, and not simply hitting macros. Again I stress that if public health officials had a clue the pandemic would have never happened, it was evident early on that this disease disproportionately affects the malnourished, people with poor blood glucose control, sedentary, and immune compromised. These all go together, although oftentimes the immune dysfunction is deliberately induced by pharmaceutical treatments to mitigate autoimmune disease. See also: [Only 12 percent of american adults are metabolically healthy](https://www.unc.edu/posts/2018/11/28/only-12-percent-of-american-adults-are-metabolically-healthy-carolina-study-finds/ https://www.unc.edu/posts/2018/11/28/only-12-percent-of-amer...)

caeril 5y ago

> One takes a couple minutes and the other is something requiring an hour or more of dedicated time per day 1. No it doesn't. It only requires eating less. 2. One of these is invasive, the other is not. > There's a lot of investment in trying to fix these problems already Not really. We have culturally embraced "health at any size", we don't clamp down on unhealthy food advertisers, we install vending machines in schools. We are now FIRING people for noncompliance with vaccine mandates, but shrugging impotently when childhood obesity rises 9% in 18 months of pandemic lockdowns. Further, the obesity issue isn't just a baseline problem: it's also the #2 comorbidity of COVID itself. If these tinpot tyrant vaccine mandate people were even remotely serious about actual harm reduction from the pandemic, we've had approximately 72 weeks since we knew of the obesity-COVID severity link to include weight loss as a preventative protocol along with masks and vaccines. The fact that we've heard no significant public messaging on this front during a period of time that high-risk obese populations have had the chance to dramatically reduce their risk profile tells you everything you need to know about how serious "public health officials" are about actually reducing deaths. Hint: they're not.

tekknik 5y ago

> You could argue that overweight folks are also paying disproportionately more simply by buying more food than someone who weighs 20% less. You have a real incorrect view of obesity. Being obese does not mean excessive eating. There’s a whole slew of digestive and hormone issues that someone can have and be obese while eating less than 2000 calories a day.