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

A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 100 posts

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#51

Post by jrockway »

Retric wrote: post #7
opiumden wrote: post #5

It's nice to see that people are developing new models and ways of thinking about weight loss but I wonder how effective this research is going to be. The conclusion of the article is the same old "eat less and eat healthier" which is fantastic advice ... and advice that a great many people don't bother to follow. As a culture we're eating ourselves to death while worrying that low probability events like terrorist a…

Well, stop subsidizing farmers is probably a good takeaway.

I doubt anyone is getting fat from raw whole foods.

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#52

Post by [deleted] »

Mz wrote: post #18
csmeder wrote: post #12

"What caused the obesity epidemic?" "And it’s something very simple, very obvious, something that few want to hear: The epidemic was caused by the overproduction of food in the United States. ...This, of course, is a tremendously controversial idea. However, the model shows that increase in food more than explains the increase in weight." This is analogous to saying: "What caused the increase in car accidents?" "And…

FWIW: A few years ago, someone verbally mentioned to me that some study found evidence of some sort linking type of bacteria in your gut to obesity. (No, I don't have a link.) This fits at least partially with my personal experience: In the quest to get myself well when doctors said it could not be done, I ended up slimming down tremendously in the last year or so. That was not a goal. I did not care about my weight…

[deleted]

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#53

Post by DanBC »

mhartl wrote: post #13

You are an M.I.T.-trained mathematician and physicist. How did you come to work on obesity? ...I didn’t even know what a calorie was. I call bullshit.

We tell lies to children because the truth is too hard for them to understand at their level of knowledge. (See, for example, models of atoms that have a nucleus and protons and electrons buzzing round it.)

So, with that in mind, children learn that one calorie is the amount of energy needed to raise 1 g of water by 1 degree c.

But what does that actually mean for a human body? How is a calorie in fat worked out? How is a calorie in sugar worked out? How do we know they're equivalent?

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#54

Post by [deleted] »

saddino wrote: post #19
brd wrote: post #9

The Omnivore's Dilemma (Michael Pollan) goes into more detail on the history of the food boom in the 1970s and its link to obesity. Its a great read for anyone interested. Essentially we got hit with a one-two punch of food price paranoia and the high fructose corn syrup innovation.

I'd also recommend The End of Overeating (David Kessler) which posits that the obesity explosion is due to recent advances in food science re: foods engineered (precise ratios of fat, sugar and salt) to make you want to eat more ("conditioned hypereating"). If you want to lose weight, stop eating packaged food, cut out fast-food and cut back on restaurants/take-out. Make your own food (like everyone did 40 years ago…

[deleted]

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#55

Post by nopassrecover »

jrockway wrote: post #49
nazgulnarsil wrote: post #44

sugary drinks. I've never known someone to drop these and not lose weight. It is SO EASY to consume an extra 500 calories a day of liquid sugar. It has close to zero satiety. A 500 calorie surplus is a pound of weight gain a week.

I gave up sugar a few years ago and there was pretty much no effect. I didn't have much sugar before, and there are plenty of other sources of calories.

Yeah likewise. I almost never have a sugary drink (maybe a softdrink can once every 3 months) and it's made zero difference to weight. Stress on the other hand is highly correlated personally with weight (I've lost ~10kg in 3 months every time I've quit a job).

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#56

Post by kalid »

eugenejen wrote: post #36
mhartl wrote: post #13

You are an M.I.T.-trained mathematician and physicist. How did you come to work on obesity? ...I didn’t even know what a calorie was. I call bullshit.

Why do you say it as bullshit? One important thing in higher education for math and physics is to be able to perform detail technical computations or modeling for phenomenons. In common high school and undergraduate physics class, it only requires students to be able to come up models with intuitions. But in graduate schools, you are trained to examine each step to make sure nothing is left out or based on assumption…

> Why do you say it as bullshit?

An MIT-trained physicist should know the common name for a unit of energy. Sure, he might not remember the conversion from joules to calories, but to have never heard of it?

That's taking a literal reading ("I didn't know what a calorie was"), but perhaps he was referring to a more nuanced understanding ("I didn't understand how energy was used by the body"). That interpretation wasn't clear from the text though -- it seemed an overwrought attempt to portray an "Aw shucks, I didn't know what I was doing!" attitude.

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#57

Post by koeselitz »

"Well, what do people do when there is extra food around? They eat it! This, of course, is a tremendously controversial idea. However, the model shows that increase in food more than explains the increase in weight."

This doesn't actually follow logically. I know Mr Chow is implying that there's a lot of data that this interview obviously doesn't present, but there are serious problems with this thesis on the face of it. For one thing, if obesity correlates directly with the availability of food, then the most obese people ought to be those to whom food is most available. But the rich in our society are proportionally not as obese as those who face periodic food shortages; and low-income children are proportionally shown to be at much higher risk of suffering from obesity. [1]

Not only that, but the statement that food production has simply gone up and therefore food prices have simply gone down is incredibly... simplistic. There have been arguments for years [2] about what food prices have gone down or up and how that may or may not have affected obesity.

I want to believe that there's data behind this fellow's claims, but I can't help but feel as though, no matter what the data is, summarizing it in the way he does is deceptive.

[1] http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?volume=303&issu...

[2] For example, http://www.good.is/post/the-inconvenient-truth-about-cheap-f...

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#58

Post by codebaobab »

Mz wrote: post #18
csmeder wrote: post #12

"What caused the obesity epidemic?" "And it’s something very simple, very obvious, something that few want to hear: The epidemic was caused by the overproduction of food in the United States. ...This, of course, is a tremendously controversial idea. However, the model shows that increase in food more than explains the increase in weight." This is analogous to saying: "What caused the increase in car accidents?" "And…

FWIW: A few years ago, someone verbally mentioned to me that some study found evidence of some sort linking type of bacteria in your gut to obesity. (No, I don't have a link.) This fits at least partially with my personal experience: In the quest to get myself well when doctors said it could not be done, I ended up slimming down tremendously in the last year or so. That was not a goal. I did not care about my weight…

I've heard that too. Would you mind sharing more details of what you did to promote gut health/chemistry/flora?

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#59

Post by nazgulnarsil »

nopassrecover wrote: post #55
jrockway wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I gave up sugar a few years ago and there was pretty much no effect. I didn't have much sugar before, and there are plenty of other sources of calories.

Yeah likewise. I almost never have a sugary drink (maybe a softdrink can once every 3 months) and it's made zero difference to weight. Stress on the other hand is highly correlated personally with weight (I've lost ~10kg in 3 months every time I've quit a job).

wtf guys obviously if you didn't drink a lot of this stuff before then losing it will have a correspondingly small effect.

Calories in calories out.

Re: A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity

#60

Post by Mz »

codebaobab wrote: post #58
Mz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW: A few years ago, someone verbally mentioned to me that some study found evidence of some sort linking type of bacteria in your gut to obesity. (No, I don't have a link.) This fits at least partially with my personal experience: In the quest to get myself well when doctors said it could not be done, I ended up slimming down tremendously in the last year or so. That was not a goal. I did not care about my weight…

I've heard that too. Would you mind sharing more details of what you did to promote gut health/chemistry/flora?

Really short version: I worked on correcting the extreme acidity my genetic disorder promotes and I consumed a combo of high brine sea salt, coconut oil, glyconutrients and organic yogurt. I did a lot more than that but that is a good place to start, assuming you are hoping to act on the info. Organic yogurt has more varieties of flora than other yogurts and coconut oil does good things for gut flora.
Post reply on HN