Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
ckn

Normalising Obesity

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Absolutely . I got it for the bizarre offence of being a ‘ swot ‘ . You never forget a school bully either ... to this day !

 


2014 Challenged Cup Winner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t read all this thread as I don’t have time right now so don’t know if this has been mentioned, but I think a big issue at the moment (at least in Australia) is all the ‘healthy’ diet fads.

Raw, keto, paleo organic, gluten-free, etc.

People think if they are eating the above, it gives them license to eat what they like because it’s ‘healthy’.Unfortunately that does not make it low in calories.

Take raw food - raw desserts, protein balls etc are all the rage but they are packed full of calories.

This article sums it up well:

https://www.goodfood.com.au/good-health/are-raw-desserts-actually-good-for-you-20160714-gq5f8t

However natural and healthy food might be, if it’s packed full of calories and you eat a lot of it, you’ll probably gain weight - and you certainly won’t lose any

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This forum is renowned for its respect for the views of experts on other topics and I expect consistency. 

The World Health Organisation has considered obesity a disease since 1936.

According to research published in the British Medical Journal, "... body weight, fat distribution, and risk of complications are strongly influenced by biology – it is not an individual's fault if they develop obesity."

Don't just read the headline, read the article

 

 

  • Like 2

Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, JohnM said:

This forum is renowned for its respect for the views of experts on other topics and I expect consistency. 

The World Health Organisation has considered obesity a disease since 1936.

According to research published in the British Medical Journal, "... body weight, fat distribution, and risk of complications are strongly influenced by biology – it is not an individual's fault if they develop obesity."

Don't just read the headline, read the article

The people suggesting that fat people are just the worst, are not the same people who appreciate expertise.

  • Like 1

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bob8 said:

The people suggesting that fat people are just the worst, are not the same people who appreciate expertise.

Or the same people who are not a tad overweight themselves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was marathon training I went for some tests to assess my optimum heart rate for training and for competing.

In addition to setting my heart rate zones and giving me a training plan the assessor said two things:

1. That I was more suited to distance running than to sprinting / short distances

2. He asked whether I put weight on easily. I said yes and he confirmed that this was common with the pattern he saw from the tests and that basically the only way to deal with it was to eat a diet that managed it. My metabolism is set up to convert to fat rather than burn.

So, if I don't exercise and I overeat I can pile it on pretty quickly.

  • Like 1

"I am the avenging angel; I come with wings unfurled, I come with claws extended from halfway round the world. I am the God Almighty, I am the howling wind. I care not for your family; I care not for your kin. I come in search of terror, though terror is my own; I come in search of vengeance for crimes and crimes unknown. I care not for your children, I care not for your wives, I care not for your country, I care not for your lives." - (c) Jim Boyes - "The Avenging Angel"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tim2 said:

When I was marathon training I went for some tests to assess my optimum heart rate for training and for competing.

In addition to setting my heart rate zones and giving me a training plan the assessor said two things:

1. That I was more suited to distance running than to sprinting / short distances

2. He asked whether I put weight on easily. I said yes and he confirmed that this was common with the pattern he saw from the tests and that basically the only way to deal with it was to eat a diet that managed it. My metabolism is set up to convert to fat rather than burn.

So, if I don't exercise and I overeat I can pile it on pretty quickly.

Them assessors eh, they know everything! Who would have thought it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Private Baldrick said:

Them assessors eh, they know everything! Who would have thought it.

The point being that some people can tolerate a higher calorie deficit - obviously not every day for years but they convert to and from fat much more readily. I know such people. Lucky b******s


"I am the avenging angel; I come with wings unfurled, I come with claws extended from halfway round the world. I am the God Almighty, I am the howling wind. I care not for your family; I care not for your kin. I come in search of terror, though terror is my own; I come in search of vengeance for crimes and crimes unknown. I care not for your children, I care not for your wives, I care not for your country, I care not for your lives." - (c) Jim Boyes - "The Avenging Angel"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tim2 said:

The point being that some people can tolerate a higher calorie deficit - obviously not every day for years but they convert to and from fat much more readily. I know such people. Lucky b******s

I think it changes during life as well - when i was a student i could eat & drink what i liked and was actually doing little physical exercise other than loading unloading PA trucks and the odd mosh - yet i never went over 12 stone and looked like a beanpole

Now i excercise more, drink less, eat more healthily and can only dream of getting under 14 st let alone down to 12 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SSoutherner said:

I think it changes during life as well - when i was a student i could eat & drink what i liked and was actually doing little physical exercise other than loading unloading PA trucks and the odd mosh - yet i never went over 12 stone and looked like a beanpole

Now i excercise more, drink less, eat more healthily and can only dream of getting under 14 st let alone down to 12 

It also changes if you have lost a lot of weight.  The body lowers your metabolism to try and regain what you lost.  And the studies have shown it can be a big drop.  Tests on former biggest loser contestants have shown that they need to eat in the region of 300-500 calories a day less than expected to maintain weight.  

  • Like 1

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Like 1

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who do not know when they are being targetting by marketing will think they are immune to it. That, it is other people who fall for it.

Therefore, they think that a huge marketing machine for food is something that does not effect them as they are too responsible and clever.

Of course, this is nonsense. The people who fall for conspiracy theories think they are the non-gullible ones and those who fall for marketing think it is nothing of the sort.

  • Like 2

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/07/2019 at 11:19, tim2 said:

The point being that some people can tolerate a higher calorie deficit - obviously not every day for years but they convert to and from fat much more readily. I know such people. Lucky b******s

Sorry but that's just not true. A calorie is a fixed unit of energy. The point at which a calorie deficit exists may differ, but a 500 calorie deficit is going to going to see people lose around a pound a week. 

On 18/07/2019 at 11:22, SSoutherner said:

I think it changes during life as well - when i was a student i could eat & drink what i liked and was actually doing little physical exercise other than loading unloading PA trucks and the odd mosh - yet i never went over 12 stone and looked like a beanpole

Now i excercise more, drink less, eat more healthily and can only dream of getting under 14 st let alone down to 12 

Alternatively, when you were a student you did a lot of general moving about and you now have a less active lifestyle, but exercise more. While metabolic slowdown occurs with age, it typically isn't too drastic, i.e. a couple percent per decade.

People are also horrendous at estimating the calorie content of what they actually eat. "More than 4,000 people tracked what they are for four days. Men reported consuming an average 2,065 calories a day, but were estimated to actually consume 3,119; while women reported 1,570 but actually consumed 2,393."

I think this thread massively overstates the complexity of physically losing the weight. It is genuinely as simple as working out your maintenance calories and eating 500 less a day. The difficulty comes from the mental and emotional aspects to doing so, and the fact that behaviour change is difficult, not from questionable arguments about nutrition.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Saint 1 said:

Sorry but that's just not true. A calorie is a fixed unit of energy. The point at which a calorie deficit exists may differ, but a 500 calorie deficit is going to going to see people lose around a pound a week. 

Alternatively, when you were a student you did a lot of general moving about and you now have a less active lifestyle, but exercise more. While metabolic slowdown occurs with age, it typically isn't too drastic, i.e. a couple percent per decade.

People are also horrendous at estimating the calorie content of what they actually eat. "More than 4,000 people tracked what they are for four days. Men reported consuming an average 2,065 calories a day, but were estimated to actually consume 3,119; while women reported 1,570 but actually consumed 2,393."

I think this thread massively overstates the complexity of physically losing the weight. It is genuinely as simple as working out your maintenance calories and eating 500 less a day. The difficulty comes from the mental and emotional aspects to doing so, and the fact that behaviour change is difficult, not from questionable arguments about nutrition.

Yes and no.

Calorie reduction is simple. If it were also easy, the problem would be solved. What is easy for me is clearly not easy for others.


"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bob8 said:

Yes and no.

Calorie reduction is simple. If it were also easy, the problem would be solved. What is easy for me is clearly not easy for others.

Indeed, and that is my argument. The difficult part is the behaviour change, not the actual physiology of it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Saint 1 said:

Sorry but that's just not true. A calorie is a fixed unit of energy. The point at which a calorie deficit exists may differ, but a 500 calorie deficit is going to going to see people lose around a pound a week. 

Alternatively, when you were a student you did a lot of general moving about and you now have a less active lifestyle, but exercise more. While metabolic slowdown occurs with age, it typically isn't too drastic, i.e. a couple percent per decade.

People are also horrendous at estimating the calorie content of what they actually eat. "More than 4,000 people tracked what they are for four days. Men reported consuming an average 2,065 calories a day, but were estimated to actually consume 3,119; while women reported 1,570 but actually consumed 2,393."

I think this thread massively overstates the complexity of physically losing the weight. It is genuinely as simple as working out your maintenance calories and eating 500 less a day. The difficulty comes from the mental and emotional aspects to doing so, and the fact that behaviour change is difficult, not from questionable arguments about nutrition.

OK, calorie deficit is wrong but people have different baselines (the calories they burn if they lay in bed or sat in a chair all day) and also burn differently when they exercise at various levels. They also convert to and from fat differently. 

The system I used estimated 2000 calories a day for me to lose weight safely. I found I had to consume fewer than that (and I meticulously scanned in or entered evrything I ate) - probably around 1800.


"I am the avenging angel; I come with wings unfurled, I come with claws extended from halfway round the world. I am the God Almighty, I am the howling wind. I care not for your family; I care not for your kin. I come in search of terror, though terror is my own; I come in search of vengeance for crimes and crimes unknown. I care not for your children, I care not for your wives, I care not for your country, I care not for your lives." - (c) Jim Boyes - "The Avenging Angel"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I won't tell the whole internet my details, I've found a reason to try hard and I've said I will try lose 2.5 stones in 10 weeks from today.

However, I will use a more appropriate thread to discuss this.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hindle xiii said:

While I won't tell the whole internet my details, I've found a reason to try hard and I've said I will try lose 2.5 stones in 10 weeks from today.

However, I will use a more appropriate thread to discuss this.

I will look forward to seeing you in the Fitness Thread weight matrix. Best of luck with the weight loss.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Saint 1 said:

Sorry but that's just not true. A calorie is a fixed unit of energy. The point at which a calorie deficit exists may differ, but a 500 calorie deficit is going to going to see people lose around a pound a week. 

Alternatively, when you were a student you did a lot of general moving about and you now have a less active lifestyle, but exercise more. While metabolic slowdown occurs with age, it typically isn't too drastic, i.e. a couple percent per decade.

People are also horrendous at estimating the calorie content of what they actually eat. "More than 4,000 people tracked what they are for four days. Men reported consuming an average 2,065 calories a day, but were estimated to actually consume 3,119; while women reported 1,570 but actually consumed 2,393."

I think this thread massively overstates the complexity of physically losing the weight. It is genuinely as simple as working out your maintenance calories and eating 500 less a day. The difficulty comes from the mental and emotional aspects to doing so, and the fact that behaviour change is difficult, not from questionable arguments about nutrition.

No I can guarantee whilst i was a student i was far less physically active than I am now - I would unload a PA truck in about an hour sit around all day in the SU coffee lounge smoking other than going to a lecture or 2 watch the gig from side of stage and then reload the truck. I was given sandwiches at lunch a cooked evening meal (usually lasagne chips and beans) had a few bears and ate all the leftover bags of crisps etc either that night or the following morning for breakfast along with any beers from the rider still sat in the dressing rooms. I lived 5 mins walk from the SU and still rode a motorcycle there most days

Now i eat far more veg less stodge, dont eat 3 packs of crisps and 2 cans of stella at 4am just before crashing out and waking to another can and more crisps. Instead I honestly have more alcohol than the govt recommends but only by a bit, train at least once a week for 2 hurs, play most weekends in the union season plus run line every Sunday for a girls team and usually jog around at their midweek training plus I cycle to a bike club meeting (5 hilly miles each way) each week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SSoutherner said:

I was given sandwiches at lunch a cooked evening meal (usually lasagne chips and beans) had a few bears...

That's a very honest and unexpected twist to that story if I'm honest.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SSoutherner said:

No I can guarantee whilst i was a student i was far less physically active than I am now - I would unload a PA truck in about an hour sit around all day in the SU coffee lounge smoking other than going to a lecture or 2 watch the gig from side of stage and then reload the truck. I was given sandwiches at lunch a cooked evening meal (usually lasagne chips and beans) had a few bears and ate all the leftover bags of crisps etc either that night or the following morning for breakfast along with any beers from the rider still sat in the dressing rooms. I lived 5 mins walk from the SU and still rode a motorcycle there most days

Now i eat far more veg less stodge, dont eat 3 packs of crisps and 2 cans of stella at 4am just before crashing out and waking to another can and more crisps. Instead I honestly have more alcohol than the govt recommends but only by a bit, train at least once a week for 2 hurs, play most weekends in the union season plus run line every Sunday for a girls team and usually jog around at their midweek training plus I cycle to a bike club meeting (5 hilly miles each way) each week.

 

5 hours ago, Dave T said:

That's a very honest and unexpected twist to that story if I'm honest.

It may be to do with the stars I think.

What's ursine SSoutherner?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/07/2019 at 09:50, gazza77 said:

I'm currently staying in an all-inclusive hotel in Madeira. People watching, especially at mealtimes has been interesting, and helped me understand a bit more about some of the issues surrounding eating habits and waste. 

Firstly is the availability and cost of food. Obviously here, food is free and readily accessible. I've been trying to be restrained: breakfast each day has been fresh fruit, and an omelette with mushrooms and grilled tomatoes. Lunch has generally consisted of salad, with either fish or meat and evening meals of a salad to start and a main course of fish or meat, veg and a small portion of rice. After 5 days, I'm yet to touch a fried breakfast, pastry, chips, pizza, etc, however it is a mental challenge to resist, and I do at times feel like I'm punishing myself to avoid all of these foods. Clearly other people would not bring my mindset on holiday with them, and to an extent, why should they? 

Secondly is base metabolism. I'm 5' 10" and 11.5 st. Whilst here, I've averaged 7 or 8 miles per day on foot whilst sightseeing, and been to the gym 3 times in 5 days. My wife is a size 8, and has done the same exercise, yet has eaten more than me, both in terms of quantity and quality, having had more deserts, pastries, fried food, etc. Despite this, evidence of previous holidays suggest that when we get home, it will be me that has put on the most weight. 

Thirdly is alcohol. Perhaps part of the weight gain issue above is because of this, as I'll probably average say 4 large spirits and mixers per day, plus a couple of glasses of wine. My wife will probably only have a third of that. 

Finally is culture. The hotel has a mixture of English, German and French speaking guests, mainly from the former two groups. My findings are by no means scientific, however I'd suggest it's the English speakers that are in the main the most likely to be overweight. Similarly, when out and about, there are far less English speakers proportionately than at the hotel. Is that possibly because the British are more likely to lead a sedentary lifestyle than our European neighbours? 

So, after a week at the all-inclusive, I've put on 2 pounds. I'm actually fairly pleased to limit it to that, as I suspect that had I simply had diet drinks rather than the full fat versions, either alone or as mixers, then I'd probably have remained a constant weight, given the calories in things such as coke. Sadly, they weren't available. 

Next step is to buy some new scales that also assess body fat, etc. I accept that these aren't always 100% accurate, however they'll give a baseline to measure against, as actually that is what I'm more concerned about measuring than weight. 

  • Like 1

Please view my photos.

 

http://www.hughesphoto.co.uk/

 

Little Nook Farm - Caravan Club Certificated Location in the heart of the Pennines overlooking Hebden Bridge and the Calder Valley.

http://www.facebook.com/LittleNookFarm

 

Little Nook Cottage - 2-bed self-catering cottage in the heart of the Pennines overlooking Hebden Bridge and the Calder Valley.

Book now via airbnb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, gazza77 said:

So, after a week at the all-inclusive, I've put on 2 pounds. I'm actually fairly pleased to limit it to that, as I suspect that had I simply had diet drinks rather than the full fat versions, either alone or as mixers, then I'd probably have remained a constant weight, given the calories in things such as coke. Sadly, they weren't available. 

Next step is to buy some new scales that also assess body fat, etc. I accept that these aren't always 100% accurate, however they'll give a baseline to measure against, as actually that is what I'm more concerned about measuring than weight. 

I used a body fat machine at the gym to see how well it worked.

I did it before I started running and exercising again, (March/April) with a view to seeing if it changed over the course of a couple of months.

When I did it again, despite having lost a few lbs and being able to notice a difference with the exercise, it said my body fat percentage had gone up by about 3%.

I didn't use it again! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/07/2019 at 13:52, Saint 1 said:

Sorry but that's just not true. A calorie is a fixed unit of energy. The point at which a calorie deficit exists may differ, but a 500 calorie deficit is going to going to see people lose around a pound a week. 

Alternatively, when you were a student you did a lot of general moving about and you now have a less active lifestyle, but exercise more. While metabolic slowdown occurs with age, it typically isn't too drastic, i.e. a couple percent per decade.

People are also horrendous at estimating the calorie content of what they actually eat. "More than 4,000 people tracked what they are for four days. Men reported consuming an average 2,065 calories a day, but were estimated to actually consume 3,119; while women reported 1,570 but actually consumed 2,393."

I think this thread massively overstates the complexity of physically losing the weight. It is genuinely as simple as working out your maintenance calories and eating 500 less a day. The difficulty comes from the mental and emotional aspects to doing so, and the fact that behaviour change is difficult, not from questionable arguments about nutrition.

You seem to treat it like humans are like robots who all process calories in the same way. Stating that calories are a fixed unit of energy is no more useful than saying petrol is a fixed unit of fuel. We know that this fuel is used more efficiently by some cars and less efficiently than others. I think there is more than enough evidence to suggest that humans process calories differently.

I suspect that most people instinctively know this to be true; we all know people who eat a lot but are thin. There are also studies however. One such study was conducted on prison inmates who were offered early release if they could gain 25% of their body weight. Some couldn't manage it despite eating 10,000 calories a day. A decade ago, BBC Panorama did an experiment with 10 people where they gave each participant double the number of necessary calories for 4 weeks; they also restricted them to less than 5,000 steps. Most predictably put on quite a lot of weight but they did so differently. One participant put on 4.5kg but only increased 1% in fat, the rest went on as muscle. Tellingly, one participant put on less than 0.5kg despite eating double the recommended amount of calories; this is not so easy to explain away.

You do touch on something at the end when you say much of it comes from mental and emotional aspects. I honestly think people who've never dieted or only had to do so once or twice in their lives, have no idea how difficult it can be. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...