3 ms·

It's just terrible reporting, and equivocation. It being a lifestyle problem and having a natural weight can both be true. People have a natural weight, and it'

by seneca 4y ago

It's just terrible reporting, and equivocation. It being a lifestyle problem and having a natural weight can both be true. People have a natural weight, and it's difficult to drop below it. No one's natural weight is to morbidly obese. These people are taking a medical finding and blowing it wildly out of proportion to support their agenda. It's an unfortunately common tactic. I don't quite think it's entirely fair to blame on willpower in modern western society though. We have a food supply that is unnaturally calorie dense, and optimized for hyper strong flavor, shelf stability, and profit, and rarely for health. We're also much more sedentary.

bscphil 4y ago
IMO it's purely a question of perspective. From the point of view of individual health, you need to think like a doctor. The important question is "what can this individual do to improve their health?" From that perspective it's a "lifestyle" problem, as you put it. The individual has a food supply that is unnaturally calorie dense and unhealthy. To lose weight and improve their health the individual must make an effort to shift that; for some it might be impossible. For others it might be possible with a great deal of effort or with drugs. From the point of view of public healthy, you need to think like a public health expert. From this perspective it makes perfect sense to talk about "natural weights" as something that can change (and has risen) over time. The calorie dense food environment and sedentary lifestyles are things that exist in the background here. Given these background facts, the weights of the great majority of people (who don't have the time, means, willpower, etc to resist) are going to rise to a new higher "natural" point. For some, foods will be so calorie dense and provide so little nutrition or satiety that they experience runaway obesity. These are just predictable downstream effects of the environment, and so the perspective of the public health expert is that individuals aren't to be blamed and you have to fix the environment. Ban soda in public schools, etc etc.

by seneca 4y ago

bscphil 4y ago

IMO it's purely a question of perspective. From the point of view of individual health, you need to think like a doctor. The important question is "what can this individual do to improve their health?" From that perspective it's a "lifestyle" problem, as you put it. The individual has a food supply that is unnaturally calorie dense and unhealthy. To lose weight and improve their health the individual must make an effort to shift that; for some it might be impossible. For others it might be possible with a great deal of effort or with drugs. From the point of view of public healthy, you need to think like a public health expert. From this perspective it makes perfect sense to talk about "natural weights" as something that can change (and has risen) over time. The calorie dense food environment and sedentary lifestyles are things that exist in the background here. Given these background facts, the weights of the great majority of people (who don't have the time, means, willpower, etc to resist) are going to rise to a new higher "natural" point. For some, foods will be so calorie dense and provide so little nutrition or satiety that they experience runaway obesity. These are just predictable downstream effects of the environment, and so the perspective of the public health expert is that individuals aren't to be blamed and you have to fix the environment. Ban soda in public schools, etc etc.