Obesity is Officially a Disease

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Yeah I agree. To say that America is a capitalist country isn’t wholly accurate.

I’ll be the first to agree to a small number of simple (I’m talking no more than a page here) regulations that ensure individual liberty, maximum innovation and advancement for every citizen. But we are at, and have been at the point where the government dictates to a large degree almost every aspect of doing business.

Part of the reason I oppose the VAT (Value added tax) is it just pretty much gives government complete control at that point. [/quote]

Just out of curiosity, which regulations ensure individual liberty, or maximum innovation and advancement?[/quote]

I’m talking about things like a factory can’t just dump 300 gallons of old lubricant oil in the local water supply… Common sense things.

If I had time to sit down and think right now, I could come up with a better list, but right now I don’t have it.

62

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Big Pharma, just like Monsanto, profits because of both sides of the aisle. [/quote]

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Correct, which isn’t capitalism.[/quote]

I’m missing the part where this is the fault of anyone but the administration.

The cart getting put before the horse isn’t the fault of the cart or the horse. Obamacare is the fubarred linchpin that ties the horse’s head to the back of the wagon. Syngenta and Monsanto make profits regardless of the administration that’s not really a problem or a bad thing. Both corporations do some decent charitable work, not to mention providing lots of scientists with jobs and lots of farmers with corn to grow and sell. Pretty generally, ‘not inherently evil’, IMO. It’s the idea that consumers are obligated to purchase under penalty of law that’s the problem. I don’t see how the fact that Syngenta or Monsanto would want that is the issue any more than the horse wants to stand at the back of the cart and eat. Still the person that lashes the horse to the back of the cart that’s the problem.

63

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Yeah I agree. To say that America is a capitalist country isn’t wholly accurate.

I’ll be the first to agree to a small number of simple (I’m talking no more than a page here) regulations that ensure individual liberty, maximum innovation and advancement for every citizen. But we are at, and have been at the point where the government dictates to a large degree almost every aspect of doing business.

Part of the reason I oppose the VAT (Value added tax) is it just pretty much gives government complete control at that point. [/quote]

Just out of curiosity, which regulations ensure individual liberty, or maximum innovation and advancement?[/quote]

Basic contract laws.

Basic environmental protection laws.

Basic bankruptcy laws.

A free market can work without these but they sure make it more likely to succeed.

64

[quote]phaethon wrote:

Basic bankruptcy laws.

[/quote]

Good list.

I do want to point out how important the above is. It allows risk to a higher degree, and allows people to take a chance on a “wild” idea.

You certainly eat a ton of shit and it isn’t fun. But your entire life isn’t ruined due to failing once…

Another is the regulations on business formation. Protecting investors from liability etc, all “good” regulations.

Maybe regulation is the wrong word… I’m thinking of things that keep order and prevent wasted time and productivity.

65

I think it’s fine. So what if your choices led you to become obese? That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t get help. If you get run over by a fucking Mack truck the the doctor doesn’t stop and ask you if you were jay walking before he treats you. People who get treated for obesity then won’t have to be treated for the obesity related disease that is gonna kill them or make them completely unable to live any type of a productive existence whatsoever. I think that’s a good deal for them and their families and for tax payers, especially when the first line of defence against this disease is counseling where someone will tell them to stop eating pies and start riding a bicycle. That’s not exactly big bucks right there is it. Not when you compare it to say, a face transplant, something the government will 100% pay for regardless of whether it was your fault you got your stupid face shot/torn/burnt/eaten off or not.

So to that self righteous knobcheese who wrote the fuck my life bit? Yeah quite right, fuck your life. Fuck it to the hilt! You sound like a cruel motherfucker with no heart. I wouldn’t give a fuck what your diet is or what you can bench and the bleeding pussy ‘Folks judge me cos I’m just so ripped!’ thing doesn’t do your argument any favor whatsoever. It just makes you the embodiment of the stereotype you wish people would not impose upon you. Keep your inhumane vision for society locked in your internet babblings and away from the real world where people who live real lives with real problems might want one day to search for a real solution.

66

[quote]lucasa wrote:

[quote]T11 wrote:

I would say GMO are a problem but there are still much bigger problems out there.
[/quote]

WTF?!?! How? Golden rice was designed to have more nutrients in the same or fewer calories and it does, without question. So much more beta carotene that it’s visible. For the same amount of calories. How does consuming the equivalent number of calories in GMO foods make you fatter? There is no reasonable evidence or theory that even remotely links the pathways engineered into GMO crops with obesity that isn’t predicated on over-consumption. Did we suddenly find a gene that converts ambient energy into usable calories and engineer it into our food? Is it a fucking GMO fairy that sneaks out of the closet and feeds you bacon while you’re asleep?

Please, god, tell me you are against GMOs but take vitamins, probiotics, drugs (illicit or other), and supplements from Biotest or another vendor or pharmaceutical manufacturer so that I know you’re fully brain dead.[/quote]

I never said GMO are the main cause of obesity or anything close to that. I am stating that they can potentially lead to health problems. You are saying that it is okay to genetically modify food that will kill insects that eat them? You don’t think that if it is killing insects that it will do no harm to our bodies just because we can’t physically see it. You jump to conclusions and try to insult me with no information at all of me from me just writing a simple statement. Simmer down and take a few steps back. Obesity is a big issue that is caused by many things but the main problem is poor diet and exercise. Most GMO foods are enlarged but provide less nutritional value. That isn’t progressing mankind forward so I’m against that. If the GMO show that they provide health benefits with no increase in health risk then I’m all for it. I have no issue with products such as vitamins or supplements that hold real value. I do have issues with supplements that are pretty much just rice powder that are just used to get money.

67

[quote]T11 wrote:

[quote]lucasa wrote:

[quote]T11 wrote:

I would say GMO are a problem but there are still much bigger problems out there.
[/quote]

WTF?!?! How? Golden rice was designed to have more nutrients in the same or fewer calories and it does, without question. So much more beta carotene that it’s visible. For the same amount of calories. How does consuming the equivalent number of calories in GMO foods make you fatter? There is no reasonable evidence or theory that even remotely links the pathways engineered into GMO crops with obesity that isn’t predicated on over-consumption. Did we suddenly find a gene that converts ambient energy into usable calories and engineer it into our food? Is it a fucking GMO fairy that sneaks out of the closet and feeds you bacon while you’re asleep?

Please, god, tell me you are against GMOs but take vitamins, probiotics, drugs (illicit or other), and supplements from Biotest or another vendor or pharmaceutical manufacturer so that I know you’re fully brain dead.[/quote]

I never said GMO are the main cause of obesity or anything close to that. I am stating that they can potentially lead to health problems. You are saying that it is okay to genetically modify food that will kill insects that eat them? You don’t think that if it is killing insects that it will do no harm to our bodies just because we can’t physically see it. You jump to conclusions and try to insult me with no information at all of me from me just writing a simple statement. Simmer down and take a few steps back. Obesity is a big issue that is caused by many things but the main problem is poor diet and exercise. Most GMO foods are enlarged but provide less nutritional value. That isn’t progressing mankind forward so I’m against that. If the GMO show that they provide health benefits with no increase in health risk then I’m all for it. I have no issue with products such as vitamins or supplements that hold real value. I do have issues with supplements that are pretty much just rice powder that are just used to get money. [/quote]

He’s just on a tear because of the ridiculous conspiracy theory crap that was posted in the GMO thread a few days ago. Don’t mind him, he’ll be stable once he vents a bit to simmer down. It’s hard actually knowing something about the science having done research when you hear crazy theories constantly…once you hit your limit on “crazy” you sort of soap box for a bit. Not saying you are crazy for saying what you did.

Lucasa is usually pretty levelheaded.

68

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]drunkpig wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]drunkpig wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]drunkpig wrote:
I have a BMI of 32.3. DO you getz da Obama phonz wit da obeesiteez?[/quote]
If you think this is about Obama and socialism or whatever then you would be wrong. It’s about capitalism and business. [/quote]

Simmer down, french fry. Attempting to divine my thoughts while I am typing in ebonics/textese is neither wise, nor advised.

This has nothing to do with capitalism. Well, at least not free market capitalism - real capitalism. This is crony-capitalism - the union of an oversized, corrupt bureaucracy and so-called businesses that are nothing more than well-monied vultures feeding at the trough of taxpayer dollars.

Please be a dear and learn the difference between the two. [/quote]
Actually, I’m not the one who needs to learn the difference. Let’s see if you can figure that out…dear.
[/quote]

Actually, you are. Don’t be so proud of your ignorance.
[/quote]
I guess you couldn’t figure it out. Those who need to learn the difference are those who engage in it. Ok, french fry? [/quote]

I have it figured out. I know the difference between free market capitalism, and crony capitalism. You seem lost and confused. Neither your mental state nor your level of ignorance is my responsibility.

What is it about the business=bad crowd that prevents them from understanding the most basic concepts of economics?

69

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]T11 wrote:

[quote]lucasa wrote:

[quote]T11 wrote:

I would say GMO are a problem but there are still much bigger problems out there.
[/quote]

WTF?!?! How? Golden rice was designed to have more nutrients in the same or fewer calories and it does, without question. So much more beta carotene that it’s visible. For the same amount of calories. How does consuming the equivalent number of calories in GMO foods make you fatter? There is no reasonable evidence or theory that even remotely links the pathways engineered into GMO crops with obesity that isn’t predicated on over-consumption. Did we suddenly find a gene that converts ambient energy into usable calories and engineer it into our food? Is it a fucking GMO fairy that sneaks out of the closet and feeds you bacon while you’re asleep?

Please, god, tell me you are against GMOs but take vitamins, probiotics, drugs (illicit or other), and supplements from Biotest or another vendor or pharmaceutical manufacturer so that I know you’re fully brain dead.[/quote]

I never said GMO are the main cause of obesity or anything close to that. I am stating that they can potentially lead to health problems. You are saying that it is okay to genetically modify food that will kill insects that eat them? You don’t think that if it is killing insects that it will do no harm to our bodies just because we can’t physically see it. You jump to conclusions and try to insult me with no information at all of me from me just writing a simple statement. Simmer down and take a few steps back. Obesity is a big issue that is caused by many things but the main problem is poor diet and exercise. Most GMO foods are enlarged but provide less nutritional value. That isn’t progressing mankind forward so I’m against that. If the GMO show that they provide health benefits with no increase in health risk then I’m all for it. I have no issue with products such as vitamins or supplements that hold real value. I do have issues with supplements that are pretty much just rice powder that are just used to get money. [/quote]

He’s just on a tear because of the ridiculous conspiracy theory crap that was posted in the GMO thread a few days ago. Don’t mind him, he’ll be stable once he vents a bit to simmer down. It’s hard actually knowing something about the science having done research when you hear crazy theories constantly…once you hit your limit on “crazy” you sort of soap box for a bit. Not saying you are crazy for saying what you did.

Lucasa is usually pretty levelheaded. [/quote]

It made me chuckle a bit when I read what he wrote. There are good and bad with GMO, what we need to do is get rid of the bad. That is pretty reasonable if you ask me, which should happen over time because you can’t figure out the effects of all GMO overnight.

One of my most hated excuses is of a thyroid problem. My grandma who is 76 has a thyroid problem and is in excellent health for her age. Hers is due to her age while alot of middle aged people’s is due to I am 350+ pounds. Once you have so much fat on your body shit isn’t going to be working right.

70

[quote]T11 wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]T11 wrote:

[quote]lucasa wrote:

[quote]T11 wrote:

I would say GMO are a problem but there are still much bigger problems out there.
[/quote]

WTF?!?! How? Golden rice was designed to have more nutrients in the same or fewer calories and it does, without question. So much more beta carotene that it’s visible. For the same amount of calories. How does consuming the equivalent number of calories in GMO foods make you fatter? There is no reasonable evidence or theory that even remotely links the pathways engineered into GMO crops with obesity that isn’t predicated on over-consumption. Did we suddenly find a gene that converts ambient energy into usable calories and engineer it into our food? Is it a fucking GMO fairy that sneaks out of the closet and feeds you bacon while you’re asleep?

Please, god, tell me you are against GMOs but take vitamins, probiotics, drugs (illicit or other), and supplements from Biotest or another vendor or pharmaceutical manufacturer so that I know you’re fully brain dead.[/quote]

I never said GMO are the main cause of obesity or anything close to that. I am stating that they can potentially lead to health problems. You are saying that it is okay to genetically modify food that will kill insects that eat them? You don’t think that if it is killing insects that it will do no harm to our bodies just because we can’t physically see it. You jump to conclusions and try to insult me with no information at all of me from me just writing a simple statement. Simmer down and take a few steps back. Obesity is a big issue that is caused by many things but the main problem is poor diet and exercise. Most GMO foods are enlarged but provide less nutritional value. That isn’t progressing mankind forward so I’m against that. If the GMO show that they provide health benefits with no increase in health risk then I’m all for it. I have no issue with products such as vitamins or supplements that hold real value. I do have issues with supplements that are pretty much just rice powder that are just used to get money. [/quote]

He’s just on a tear because of the ridiculous conspiracy theory crap that was posted in the GMO thread a few days ago. Don’t mind him, he’ll be stable once he vents a bit to simmer down. It’s hard actually knowing something about the science having done research when you hear crazy theories constantly…once you hit your limit on “crazy” you sort of soap box for a bit. Not saying you are crazy for saying what you did.

Lucasa is usually pretty levelheaded. [/quote]

It made me chuckle a bit when I read what he wrote. There are good and bad with GMO, what we need to do is get rid of the bad. That is pretty reasonable if you ask me, which should happen over time because you can’t figure out the effects of all GMO overnight.

One of my most hated excuses is of a thyroid problem. My grandma who is 76 has a thyroid problem and is in excellent health for her age. Hers is due to her age while alot of middle aged people’s is due to I am 350+ pounds. Once you have so much fat on your body shit isn’t going to be working right.
[/quote]

Agreed on all counts. I believe i have known exactly 1 person (at least that is readily available to memory) out of aaaall the people i have known of the years that had a legitimate problem being fat. And when i say this, i mean he was 300+, but didnt drink soda very often, walked EVERYWHERE in town–and i mean to the tune of a couple hours daily, not just to classes…he almost never drove…and also onky ate a couple times a day. Not a great dietary habit, but the meals weren’t miserable. Certainly not big enough to justify his girth, and i don’t think they were small enough to slow his metabolism down to the point it was at.

Tried to run it off (ouch, knees), lift, change diet, it didnt matter.

But he is still the only one i have ever known in my life. It’s not a disease epidemic clinically speaking. Culturally sure, but not clinically.

71

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Agreed on all counts. I believe i have known exactly 1 person (at least that is readily available to memory) out of aaaall the people i have known of the years that had a legitimate problem being fat. And when i say this, i mean he was 300+, but didnt drink soda very often, walked EVERYWHERE in town–and i mean to the tune of a couple hours daily, not just to classes…he almost never drove…and also onky ate a couple times a day. Not a great dietary habit, but the meals weren’t miserable. Certainly not big enough to justify his girth, and i don’t think they were small enough to slow his metabolism down to the point it was at.

Tried to run it off (ouch, knees), lift, change diet, it didnt matter.

But he is still the only one i have ever known in my life. It’s not a disease epidemic clinically speaking. Culturally sure, but not clinically.[/quote]

People like that I have some sympathy for. I wish they would provide real information in health and PE class, instead of the constant garbage. That plays a factor as well as parents being fat and them being okay with their children being fat. They aren’t fat they are just big boned or muscular. Give me a break, there is a big visual difference between muscular and fat. The BMI charts don’t take this into account but giving every child a hydrostatic test isn’t very practical either. I would say go with someone qualified and go with the caliper test in 12 body locations. That would give a real estimate on childhood obesity as well as adults. Back to my original point though, its the parents fault up to a certain age because they basically control what he/she eats, what he/she does, etc… People can’t face reality though and get offended by being called fat. Well you are so either change it or deal with it.

72

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]T11 wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]T11 wrote:

[quote]lucasa wrote:

[quote]T11 wrote:

I would say GMO are a problem but there are still much bigger problems out there.
[/quote]

WTF?!?! How? Golden rice was designed to have more nutrients in the same or fewer calories and it does, without question. So much more beta carotene that it’s visible. For the same amount of calories. How does consuming the equivalent number of calories in GMO foods make you fatter? There is no reasonable evidence or theory that even remotely links the pathways engineered into GMO crops with obesity that isn’t predicated on over-consumption. Did we suddenly find a gene that converts ambient energy into usable calories and engineer it into our food? Is it a fucking GMO fairy that sneaks out of the closet and feeds you bacon while you’re asleep?

Please, god, tell me you are against GMOs but take vitamins, probiotics, drugs (illicit or other), and supplements from Biotest or another vendor or pharmaceutical manufacturer so that I know you’re fully brain dead.[/quote]

I never said GMO are the main cause of obesity or anything close to that. I am stating that they can potentially lead to health problems. You are saying that it is okay to genetically modify food that will kill insects that eat them? You don’t think that if it is killing insects that it will do no harm to our bodies just because we can’t physically see it. You jump to conclusions and try to insult me with no information at all of me from me just writing a simple statement. Simmer down and take a few steps back. Obesity is a big issue that is caused by many things but the main problem is poor diet and exercise. Most GMO foods are enlarged but provide less nutritional value. That isn’t progressing mankind forward so I’m against that. If the GMO show that they provide health benefits with no increase in health risk then I’m all for it. I have no issue with products such as vitamins or supplements that hold real value. I do have issues with supplements that are pretty much just rice powder that are just used to get money. [/quote]

He’s just on a tear because of the ridiculous conspiracy theory crap that was posted in the GMO thread a few days ago. Don’t mind him, he’ll be stable once he vents a bit to simmer down. It’s hard actually knowing something about the science having done research when you hear crazy theories constantly…once you hit your limit on “crazy” you sort of soap box for a bit. Not saying you are crazy for saying what you did.

Lucasa is usually pretty levelheaded. [/quote]

It made me chuckle a bit when I read what he wrote. There are good and bad with GMO, what we need to do is get rid of the bad. That is pretty reasonable if you ask me, which should happen over time because you can’t figure out the effects of all GMO overnight.

One of my most hated excuses is of a thyroid problem. My grandma who is 76 has a thyroid problem and is in excellent health for her age. Hers is due to her age while alot of middle aged people’s is due to I am 350+ pounds. Once you have so much fat on your body shit isn’t going to be working right.
[/quote]

Agreed on all counts. I believe i have known exactly 1 person (at least that is readily available to memory) out of aaaall the people i have known of the years that had a legitimate problem being fat. And when i say this, i mean he was 300+, but didnt drink soda very often, walked EVERYWHERE in town–and i mean to the tune of a couple hours daily, not just to classes…he almost never drove…and also onky ate a couple times a day. Not a great dietary habit, but the meals weren’t miserable. Certainly not big enough to justify his girth, and i don’t think they were small enough to slow his metabolism down to the point it was at.

Tried to run it off (ouch, knees), lift, change diet, it didnt matter.

But he is still the only one i have ever known in my life. It’s not a disease epidemic clinically speaking. Culturally sure, but not clinically.[/quote]

Same idea…I have known 2-3 people that had medical problems and were obese because of it. To assume that 35% of our society has a disease when clearly other countries don’t have anywhere near the same obesity rate shows it’s no disease as far as I’m concerned.

73

[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:
Imagine if some of these “victims” had the courage to say “No thanks, I’m full.”. [/quote]

I am betting they will discover, one day that when some one’s chemistry is out of whack it makes them more susceptible to over eating

74

[quote]T11 wrote:

I am stating that they can potentially lead to health problems.[/quote]

Sitting and typing for long periods of time will lead to health problems. IMO, that is a far bigger and more salient concern to the topic at hand than GMOs.

Considering that many of the plants and animals have been genetically modifying themselves and each other to kill us for the past several millenia (and most certainly longer) and considering many insects use chemicals and parasites to kill us pretty selectively; generally, yes, kill them by most any means necessary. Specifically, my opinion would depends on how the GMO in question kills the insects. Considering they have thousands of eyes, no real heart or immune system to speak of, bleed hemolymph, are cold-blooded, and are covered in a skeleton of a biological compound that humans don’t even make and may be allergic to, I can see plenty of room for targets/genes/vectors that would kill them and would be completely benign to humans.

No, I asked for evidence before the insulting begins; Supplements? Probiotics? Drugs (illicit or other)?

This is factually incorrect on several points. The majority of GMOs aren’t genetically enlarged. Flavr Savr tomatoes were the closest we’ve come and they were a flop. Larger fruit generally means more physical engineering (i.e. trees couldn’t generally pump water out of the ground to grow nor could they support apples twice as large as they are now) as well as genetic engineering. AFAIK, there are no ‘enlarged’ genes or strains available. The overwhelming majority of enlargement comes from natural selection and cross-breeding or physical means. Any reduction in nutritional value (though prevalent) is strictly incidental. Further, there are a number of GMO organisms that have had their nutrional raised considerably in ways that couldn’t be achieved via crossbreeding. Even then, it’s a matter of taking the genes and proteins that you would eat anyway and putting them in a crop that they don’t knowingly occur in.

What about supplements and/or with no benefits and only an increased health risk? Ecdysone (a weird mirror image of glyphosate and bt) was sold and taken by the ton with little/no testing or long-term evaluation despite the idea that it was intended to have an effect on the human body.

Aragorn’s sorta right. The GMO boogeyman is so backwards from the truth (our probability of accidentally engineering a dangerous GMO is analogous to our probability of accidentally engineering a nuclear weapon. That is, it’s far more likely it will, or has been, done on purpose) that it bugs me every time I hear it. However, there is another thread for that…

Personally, my ‘boogeyman du jour’ wrt the obesity problem is caffeine, and there are decades if not centuries of data on it. There are just all kinds of nuances and conditions on the ‘successful’ use of caffeine wrt weight gain/loss that make me believe that it’s contributing to rather than helping the obesity problem. Also, considering it’s entirely non-nutritive, I consider it to have many other disadvantages over actual food crops. Overall, in my experience with both organic and/or industrial farmers, coffee is best fed to organisms that don’t have a nervous system.

That being said, being a caffeine addict, people who want to regulate it’s consumption can fuck off. And that’s only a problem for the person next to me under the umbrella of Obamacare. IMO, where Bloomberg failed with sugary drinks in NYC, Obamacare will succeed federally. Especially now that obesity is a disease and we’re all on the hook for the bill, once our children grow up knowing nothing other than Obamacare, the ‘victory’ is inevitable.

75

[quote]lucasa wrote:

Personally, my ‘boogeyman du jour’ wrt the obesity problem is caffeine, and there are decades if not centuries of data on it. There are just all kinds of nuances and conditions on the ‘successful’ use of caffeine wrt weight gain/loss that make me believe that it’s contributing to rather than helping the obesity problem. Also, considering it’s entirely non-nutritive, I consider it to have many other disadvantages over actual food crops. Overall, in my experience with both organic and/or industrial farmers, coffee is best fed to organisms that don’t have a nervous system.

That being said, being a caffeine addict, people who want to regulate it’s consumption can fuck off. And that’s only a problem for the person next to me under the umbrella of Obamacare. IMO, where Bloomberg failed with sugary drinks in NYC, Obamacare will succeed federally. Especially now that obesity is a disease and we’re all on the hook for the bill, once our children grow up knowing nothing other than Obamacare, the ‘victory’ is inevitable.[/quote]

Re: victory: shit on the board and knock the pieces over. If they can’t recognize what game was being played in the first place you can claim victory by default.

I never understood the idea of ecdysone. Greeeeeeaaat idea…not.

I’d like to hear more about your perspective on caffeine contributing to the obesity problem. I’ve never heard that one before. I’m a thoroughly indoctrinated coffee drinker and always will be. And Spike. Especially Spike.

76

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

I’d like to hear more about your perspective on caffeine contributing to the obesity problem.[/quote]

Warning: Loose theories intermingled with evidence and anecdote ahead. I don’t expect anything I say to be unknown or controversial on a bodybuilding website forum. And not saying caffeine = obese, just that there’s little to no evidence to suggest GMOs have anything to do with obesity while caffeine has lots of clearly understood metabolic actions that we don’t use/control/coordinate.

Caffeine raises cortisol and triggers insulin release as well as insulin resistance. There’s evidence that type II diabetes is reduced by coffee, but the effect appears to be associated with the coffee rather than the caffeine (decaf coffee offers the same/similar protective effects w/o the adverse hormonal effects). The caffeine dose in coffee is well above the ‘therapeutic dose’ (for both cognitive and metabolic effects) and we are, increasingly, diluting the rest of the coffee with more insulin no-nos (milk and sugar), or even forgoing the coffee component and going with caffeine in straight sugar. It’s beginning to be like HFCS where we put caffeine into food/drink that don’t need or are normally ‘contraindicated’ with caffeine (At least, when I consume e.g. marshmallows in my hot chocolate or around the campfire, I’m looking to unwind, not get jacked).

(REM) Sleep deprivation has a strong association with obesity. Caffeine in even modest doses, mistimed is known to dramatically reduce REM sleep. Sleep deprivation has general metabolic effects but also specifically wrt caffeine both insulin and behavioral effect (impulse control).

Caffeine also adversely effects impulse control and suppresses appetite, however, it does it only transiently. So, if you time coffee or other caffeine consumption well, you may strike a balance. Personally, (and this has changed since I was younger) I can go, pretty easily, 30+ hours with no sleep. However, much past 12 hrs. with no food and suffer from ‘microsleeps’. With caffeine, 30 hours no sleep, no food, and no microsleeps. However, I completely crash and require excessive sleep and feeding for well more than 30 hours afterwards (i.e. the sleep and feeding aren’t deferred zero sum, more like deferred with interest). I notice a lot of ‘normal’ caffeine consumers perform the opposite of striking a balance, they’ll consume coffee with or immediately after a meal where you suffer the hormonal spikes but don’t incur any of the behavioral benefits. They’ll wait until they’re caffeine deprived to go stare at the food at Starbucks or the local Dunkin’ Donuts rather than suppressing their appetite and then going to eat.

Oh yeah, and it’s addictive and we do all of the above despite generally lower activity levels.

77

Curious what you guys think of this video.

78

As authentic (and thankfully, unpretentious) as she comes across, she is simply looking at it the way our culture has taught her to look at it.

If someone is fat and genuinely doesn’t give a damn; they’re happy with their body, or just doesn’t care about their health/appearance, and is productive to society, good for them. If they are sucking up taxpayer dollars due to a lack of self control, then that should probably be addressed, whether through free market, higher premiums due to their higher risk, etc. If they are genuinely unhappy with their body, they can either go the physical or mental path: get in shape, or talk to a shrink to try and convince them to be of the previously mentioned type of fat person.

If they choose to get in shape, they need to surround themselves be people like exist here…communities that will tell it like it is, and be helpful about how to realistically achieve and maintain their goals. She talks about how she’s used all sorts of pills, shakes, diets, etc etc etc…simply proving to me that she never stuck with a simple, proven method, and was consistent with it. She kept jumping from one quick fix to another, like a junkie. It isn’t that 95% of people can’t get in shape, it’s that 95% of people don’t go about it the right way. To the other 5%, congratulations for using your heads.

79

Meh, I always assumed this was a bridge the medical/insurance community was going to cross eventually. With a decent (growing) chunk of medical costs going towards obesity related conditions, IMO it’s worth a shot to (try to) nip it in the bud.

Let’s face it, no matter how many marathons of Biggest Loser are run on TV, fad diets are pimped, or first ladies decide to fight obesity, the odds of an overwhelming majority of the obese (or those who will become obese) proactively taking steps to avoid the condition are slim to none. Humans in general are terrible at assessing long term threats. Maybe, just maybe if the medical establishment can hit it with everything they’ve got they can start to slow the increase in rates we currently see.

Beyond that however, I see labeling obesity as a “disease” potentially less a validation of the condition and more a stigmatization. There are plenty of “diseases” that are hardly a validation of a condition-think of the wrongful stigmatization of mental health issues. Who knows how society is going to treat this. Let’s face it: most who would consider obesity an ailment that they are a “victim” of already think of it in this way. Granted I’m not a member of the population in question, but I would hardly want to think of myself as “diseased” if it were the case.

At the end of the day, unless something is done to bring down or even slow the increase in the rates of obesity, healthcare costs are going to be FUBAR anyway, insurance or no insurance. This is far from the ideal solution, but unfortunately humans are not the ideal population to work with.

80

I personally think no one should look down on any one , I do how ever feel her life would be of a much better quality if she could manage to lose weight . I believe there are powers that exist today that did not exist a couple generations ago