Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Adult Obesity Facts

cdc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 236 posts

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#201

Post by kiba »

lkey wrote: post #149
yupper32 wrote: post #23

Every time I comment on one of these threads, I mention how most people don't know about the most fundamental component of weight control: Calories-in calories-out. And then I get a mass of people complaining that "it's not that simple! x y and z also impact weight!" I think so much has to do with these two points: 1. Most don't know about CICO. 2. Many who do throw it away as not useful. We should be teaching this i…

Knowing calories matter doesn't solve a thing. You pointing it out like it's a revelation indicates you don't understand the difficulty of what you expect. Let's say you are now 120 lbs over weight. You know CICO. How long will it take you to get skinny, assuming you ate nothing at all until you hit your goal weight? A pound of fat is 454g. A gram of fat contains 9 kcal. Being 120 lbs over weight means you have to bu…

Your basal metabolism can flucutate based on physical activity, and probably nutrition too.

Also, fasting had shown to me that we can have an empty stomach and yet not be hungry. Yet, the state of not being feed seems to be a foreign idea to most people.

I lost weight by mostly intermittent fasting, without needing to count calories. Sometime, I even eat way too much food in one sitting. Over the long term, I did lose weight.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#202

Post by osigurdson »

ptmcc wrote: post #107
kiba wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, exercise is good for you, and should be taken, but diet seems to be the most important factor. Research had came out indicating that exercise doesn't really do much good in losing weight. Might help in maintaining weight.

Indeed it's a heck of a lot easier to not eat 500 calories than to burn off 500 calories. Running a 5k doesn't even burn 500 calories for most people, but you can eat that much in snacks without a second thought. To really make a difference in weight the much more important side of the equation is intake.

While I am not completely convinced that it works to greatly improve fitness, I can attest that the low heart rate running approach (google Maffetone:180 - age) approach does not seem to increase appetite at all.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#203

Post by ab111111111 »

torginus wrote: post #129
rjbwork wrote: post #2

We've designed our cities, suburbs, food industry, and society such that the average person is at least overweight, nearing obese. If the average person suffers from what should be an anomaly, perhaps it is less a personal failing than a societal failing and we should try to fix the societal problems generating the poor outcome.

There have been many suggestions in this thread about the root cause of obesity. While I'm sure these things do contribute to the issue, they are not the main cause - the main cause is that being fat is socially acceptable. I don't believe that if the average person placed great importance on being healthy - as great as making more money, getting a better job etc., they would be unable to afford the extra cost of hea…

Healthy foods (e.g. fresh fruit and vegetables) being more expensive than unhealthy ones (e.g. McDonald's) is one of the structural incentives causing increased obesity in the US. In most countries - including Europe - it's the opposite way around. You're quite right to say that people should take care of their own health, but if you live in a place where cycle lanes will get you everywhere you need to go, there are plentiful public green spaces and healthy food is cheap and available everywhere (as I do in Germany), then staying healthy is a lot easier than if you live in, say, the suburbs of Houston.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#204

Post by kiba »

torginus wrote: post #192
kiba wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to be a form of victim blaming. If people tried to follow normal dieting advice, and they failed, do we keep telling them to try harder? I am speaking as someone who had lost a lot of weight and achieved near normal BMI and had prioritized health. I found intermittent fasting to be much easier and less willpower taxing than counting calories, which was way too much work. People do want to be healthier and a lot…

I disagree - I think it's a matter of perspective. Many people see the task of getting in shape as some herculean effort requiring inhuman willpower, subconsciously setting themselves up for failure. Consider this - most people spend 40+ hours at work, 5+ hours in commute, only to go home and spend most of the rest of the waking hours doing house chores or attending to family needs - this is a truly epic investment o…

I disagree - I think it's a matter of perspective. Many people see the task of getting in shape as some herculean effort requiring inhuman willpower, subconsciously setting themselves up for failure.

It's much easier to do something you have to do. Much harder to do something that isn't required of you.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#205

Post by yupper32 »

kiba wrote: post #194
Loughla wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People like to say that it's something else, in my experience, because they do, in fact, know what CICO is, and have tried it, and have failed when they tried it. With broad strokes, those failures can be lumped into 2 categories: 1) lack of willpower (pretty self-explanatory) and 2) hoodwinked, bamboozled, and otherwise tricked by food package nutrition labels. It is genuinely hard to discern real calories consumed…

I had lost weight without counting calories. CICO works, but it didn't work in the long term for me. My method of losing weight and eventual weight maintenance, is intermittent fasting. It just means that I don't eat for long periods of time. Every week, I undergo a 48 hours fast and for the rest of time, I effectively only eat one meal a day.

IF is CICO.

CICO does not mean counting calories. Counting calories is just the most direct diet. IF and Keto end up doing the same thing, just differently (and it's potentially easier for some).

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#206

Post by kiba »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #118
armagon wrote: post #73

I wish that article talked about the geographical distribution of obesity. I saw a fascinating pre-print paper here a while ago: A Contamination Theory of the Obesity Epidemic. via: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27936016 I also read an interesting book lately called "The Dorito Effect" in which the author makes the case that we have a finely developed ability to associate the flavour of food with the nutrients…

anecdotally, fasting can help restore this sensitivity. Ever noticed "healthy" foods like say broccoli taste amazing after fasting >= 24 hrs?

Sadly, I haven't been able to ascertain these food as tastier despite fasting for 48 hours or more.

They're probably more delicious though.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#207

Post by yupper32 »

lkey wrote: post #197
yupper32 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only is this post wildly incorrect, you also seem to have just given up with the populous? I lose around 2 lbs per week at 1500 calories/day. This is pretty normal. 120lbs would be 60 weeks of that. Little over a year. You are completely off with 700 calories for 3-4 years. It's irresponsible to spout that nonsense. > A more reasonable position is to just accept that some people are going to remain fat and focus…

"Given up" is an interesting way of putting it. Given up on what or whom? Do fat people want me to save and educate them? You're acting like I should be doing something personally about other people being fat. I think it should be treated just like any other chronic condition, you try to be as healthy as possible within the paradigm. If you want to lose weight, great, but people starting to lose weight need to unders…

> Irresponsible to whom? You are the one advocating for this exact kind of analysis, not me, I merely obliged you.

It's irresponsible to say that you need to be on a 700 calorie diet for 3-4 years to lose 120 pounds. That's so far from reality that it's irresponsible.

> Do you control for water and glycogen loss?

I lose more in the first week or so to what I assume is water retention. After that it settles into 2lbs/week.

> What about exercise, what's your basal metabolic rate? etc...

I wear a fitbit and allow myself more calories if I run (based on what it tells me). None of this needs to be perfect. If you're off by 100-200 calories a day, you'll still lose weight.

None of that matters, though. I have my number: 1500 calories. If I'm not losing enough, I'll lower it 100 at a time. Or if I'm losing too much, I'll raise it 100 at a time. That adjusts for BMR and mistakes in my calorie counting. Finding my exact BMR is wasted effort.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#208

Post by feifan »

yupper32 wrote: post #154
feifan wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CICO is probably valid but it's easy to misinterpret. For example, in the presence of insulin, fat and muscle cells take in calories, regardless of the energy state of the rest of the body, resulting in hunger and probably more calories-in. While insulin is elevated, the calories stored wIthin fat cells is inaccessible to the rest of the body … would those calories be considered "in" or "out" according to CICO?

You're the one making it easy to misinterpret by making it massively more complicated than it needs to be. Copy pasting from a previous post of mine: How to lose weight, by me, someone who has lost 30 pounds and kept it off: Step 1: Count every calorie you consume. If you don't know the exact amount of a dish, do your best. Apps like MyFitnessPal make this easier. Step 2: Limit that amount to 1500 calories per day. S…

Oh I know, I've done basically the same thing and dropped/kept off ~20 pounds. My point is that physiologically it's hard, and by reducing it to just-a-number or just-willpower, it's ignoring very real aspects of life for many people (myself included when I did that).

In technical terms, CICO is a very leaky abstraction.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#209

Post by yupper32 »

feifan wrote: post #208
yupper32 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're the one making it easy to misinterpret by making it massively more complicated than it needs to be. Copy pasting from a previous post of mine: How to lose weight, by me, someone who has lost 30 pounds and kept it off: Step 1: Count every calorie you consume. If you don't know the exact amount of a dish, do your best. Apps like MyFitnessPal make this easier. Step 2: Limit that amount to 1500 calories per day. S…

Oh I know, I've done basically the same thing and dropped/kept off ~20 pounds. My point is that physiologically it's hard , and by reducing it to just-a-number or just-willpower, it's ignoring very real aspects of life for many people (myself included when I did that). In technical terms, CICO is a very leaky abstraction.

> In technical terms, CICO is a very leaky abstraction.

I'd call everything else an abstraction. Intermittent fasting and Keto all conform to CICO as an abstraction.

Which is fine and you're right. Calorie counting is the most direct diet but is not for everyone.

Re: Adult Obesity Facts

#210

Post by JumpCrisscross »

woodruffw wrote: post #39
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we should try to fix the societal problems generating the poor outcome What would this look like policywise?

We can probably look at large cities for appropriate policy here: increased investment in pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, localized access to fresh groceries (eliminating food deserts), and investment in public parks and other facilities. NYC's obesity rate is half of the nation's; we could still do better, but it's a starting point.

> NYC's obesity rate is half of the nation's

This is a function of density. We walk more. Look at the boroughs that drive and they're closer to the national average.

Replicating this in e.g. San Francisco would require overcoming the anti-development NIMBYs. That's a hard problem.

Post reply on HN