More on America's Obesity Problem

[Nichole]

Interesting - if you go to Mimi's website and click on the chopped cobb salad it only admits to weighing 424 grams and to having only 325 calories. Tukey, bacon, avocado, egg, and blue cheese for 325 calories? Oh, by the way 424 grams equals 15 ounces. I want this magic egg, bacon, avocado and blue cheese that is only 22 calories an ounce!

I don't see how it possibly had only 325 calories. Seems way off to me. Perhaps they didn't include the dressing, which the site lists as 316 calories? Still, that is some magic bacon, cheese and avocado. I got the quiche lorraine which had 748 calories. That seems correct.

But let's not forget that everything came with a muffin.

[Kat]

Whenever my parents came to visit me in college, they would take me to the Cheesecake Factory for dinner. I loved it. After nightly meals of pasta or rice and curry for months on end, it was nice to be able to go somewhere that would provide me with several days' worth of leftovers, or over a week if I also took the family leftovers. We could have gone to a nicer, independent restaurant-- Pasadena is full of them-- but most of the nicer restaurants didn't provide me with so many leftovers and I'd have to go back to pasta & red sauce sooner. I can definitely see the value of enormous restaurant portions if you're using them as an escape from really boring food. On the other hand, on recent trips I've taken where I ate out every night, such as to my sister's graduation, the huge portions did seem like a waste since I had nowhere to keep the leftovers and I tend to eat about a third of a typical entree plate when the entrees are that size.

[Starkess]

I love the Cheesecake Factory! Although I definitely eat the whole entree, and have been known to down an appetizer as well. Their guacamole is gooooood!

[Aemon Stark]

Eh? So every virus must have, what, 80%+ infection rate before it's a bona fide virus? So by that rule, then the papillomavirus related to cervical cancer is not real, either? The estimation is that about 70% of sexually active adults have been exposed to HPV, but we see about 1% rate of developing genital warts. See the CDC site for more info.

Look, I'm sympathetic to your skepticism about one study. Indeed, I'm skeptical too. But if you read what people wrote, they said "if this is true" or "if this proves to be true." So nobody is championing as THE truth. Without doubt there is much interest in this story, since obesity and the fight against it is a multi-billion dollar enterprise. We'll hear more in the months and years to come, and then we can form a more solid conclusion.

But, honestly, the way you want to argue against it is.... not that great.

You bring up a good point - and one which I think argues quite soundly against any kind of virus being significantly responsible for the population burden of obesity. HPV has a high prevalence, but the incidence rate of cervical cancer is comparatively miniscule. Infection is common, oncogenic and malignant transformation much less so. Assuming AD-36 can cause a chronic infection of adipocytes and somehow evade cell-mediated immunity like some kind of herpes virus, finding serum antibodies doesn't indicate anything other than viral exposure.

[turinturambar]

For Type 2 diabetes, yes, because it's a factor in insulin resistance. But the others? So long as you are active in some way, even if the weight doesn't come off, no, I don't believe they are factors.

ETA: A vaccine would only prevent the virus from being contracted. It would NOT prevent diabetes, not in and of itself. Thinner people become diabetic as well, it's not an iron-clad "You're fat, therefore you're diabetic" correlation.

complications due to obesity are swiftly making obesity amongst the top killers in the US. http://www.doctorslounge.com/primary/articles/obesity_death/

400,000 obesity related deaths compared to 435,000 smoker-related deaths. And the sad thing is, the # of smokers is declining, while the obese population is younger and hasn't even began to show its true potential when younger generations start to die off from obesity.

And that's not even touching the many non-fatal complications caused by obesity.

Anybody who thinks that obesity isn't a very very serious medical concern is simply kidding themselves. You don't really see a lot of really fat old people, and there's a reason for that.

[fitheach]

Something tells me you didn't read the "science" behind this at all.

Funny, you said below just a few posts before telling me I didn't read the science...

Surprisingly, there are actually a decent number of papers out there linking Adenovirus 36 to obesity. There's even a molecular mechanism. Of course, most of these papers are from a single lab (at the prestigious Louisiana State University no less) and they still have a hell of a long way to go before proving this hypothesis. Still, I guess it's not impossible.

So all the papers are from a single lab? From Louisiana? A fat state?

This would be a better point if there were only one study. The fact that this hypothesis makes you uncomfortable by notionally undermining personal responsibility is not a scientific argument. I really hope you can grasp that.

Wait... What did you say above this? Didn't you say a single lab? Many studies, from a single lab...Okaaay, anyone else researching this besides LSU?

I only get offended when people address scientific questions in a completely non-scientific way. If you're going to discuss about this then talk about the quality of the epidemiological data. Or why you don't believe that an adenoviral protein can regulate CEBP and PPAR transcriptional activity. Or why you're so sure that the SV40 large T antigen can't control the Retinoblastoma-dependent switch between white and brown adipogenesis. Or, you know, just say nothing.

Doesn't matter what I believe or not- although it seems others here can say what they believe. I linked long term studies on obesity from the New England Journal of Medicine and Princeton University- did you read them?

Let's have the scientists on the board work this one out if I'm not allowed.

But, honestly, the way you want to argue against it is.... not that great.

Your argument is.... not that great either.

My take on this (as a non-scientist) who's say means nothing.

BTW, I'm pro science and pro vaccines... :thumbsup:

This is a very serious problem. We know the why and how we got so fat, yet we seem to be sticking our collective heads in the sand about what we know and how to fix it. We know MacD'oh is bad. We know The Cheesecake Factory is bad. We even know that no matter how freaking delicious Southern food is (I loove southern food)- it is deep fried evil.

We love our shit, we're addicted to our junk, and we don't want to be parted from it. We don't want anyone to tell us we have to stop, I can almost hear "keep your government hands off my deep fried Snicker!"... Eating bad food, like a drug addiction, seems to be more important to us than our lives. More important to us than our children's lives.

So yeah, I feel passionate about this and people on this thread are getting offended. Really, what is offensive about wanting to fight obesity? What's offensive about being skeptical that this possible fat virus is causing obesity in children (or adults)? Have you seen what people eat? The portions (mentioned in posts above) are humongous!

Shit, seriously annoyed now. :leaving:

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

"Most" != "all". That's a start, there.

[fitheach]

"Most" != "all". That's a start, there.

Most = All??... I know the difference, and there is a difference. When have I said all? If I have, then I apologise for whatever all you mean.

Is it possible I didn't say all at all?

[Kat]

So yeah, I feel passionate about this and people on this thread are getting offended. Really, what is offensive about wanting to fight obesity? What's offensive about being skeptical that this possible fat virus is causing obesity in children (or adults)? Have you seen what people eat? The portions (mentioned in posts above) are humongous!

I think the point is that if there are other contributing factors, it is worth investigating them fully. In the same way that you can't tell a person whose neurotransmitters are out of whack, "Just cheer up, think happy thoughts, and you'll kick depression," (when there are so many contributing factors), if there turn out to be genetic or viral or hormonal or whatever factors that factor into making people more prone to obesity, telling those people to just eat healthier is only going to go so far, and understanding the underlying conditions can only help people.

I have a friend who is slightly overweight. We pretty much had the same diet and exercise habits and were both healthy and active until the last year, when she started having memory problems and fatigue and was eventually diagnosed with chronic Lyme disease and began intense treatment, which involves being on a whole slew of medications. The treatment made her sensitive to a lot of foods so she has stopped eating anything processed, does not eat anything including most fruits that have sugar in them, barely eats any grains or other starches, etc. When I spent the weekend with her last week, she basically only ate chicken, fish, and vegetables, and she's been on that diet for a few months so far. She told me, "I feel like this is completely unfair. Normally on this diet I would have lost weight, but with my luck and medications, I've gained 15 pounds." I know this is kind of an extreme example, but everyone's body is going to respond differently to diet and exercise, and there's no one-size-fits-all approach to things. I have a very stable weight and metabolism right now, while my ex is prone to quickly and randomly losing or gaining weight, 20-30 lbs at a time. It would be unfair and misguided of me to even begin to give him advice on how to eat and exercise.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Most = All??... I know the difference, and there is a difference. When have I said all? If I have, then I apologise for whatever all you mean.

Is it possible I didn't say all at all?

Nope.

Edited to break it down. DG DC said this

most of these papers are from a single lab

(Which I'm not 100% sure is true, either. I don't know what the paper/lab distribution is.)

Still, you responded with

So all the papers are from a single lab? From Louisiana? A fat state?

So no, not all of the studies are from the same lab (and, coincidentally, not even all are from Louisiana).

Edited because I know my letturs good.

[fitheach]

Nope.

Edited to break it down. DG said this (Which I'm not 100% sure is true, either. I don't know what the paper/lab distribution is.)

Still, you responded with

So no, not all of the studies are from the same lab (and, coincidentally, not even all are from Louisiana).

Ah, thank you and sorry for that. Still, it's being researched and best not to jump the gun or take it for absolute.

In the meantime, how about those huge ass burritos from Chipotle? Mmmmmm, delish.

I think the point is that if there are other contributing factors, it is worth investigating them fully. In the same way that you can't tell a person whose neurotransmitters are out of whack, "Just cheer up, think happy thoughts, and you'll kick depression," (when there are so many contributing factors), if there turn out to be genetic or viral or hormonal or whatever factors that factor into making people more prone to obesity, telling those people to just eat healthier is only going to go so far, and understanding the underlying conditions can only help people.

I have a friend who is slightly overweight. We pretty much had the same diet and exercise habits and were both healthy and active until the last year, when she started having memory problems and fatigue and was eventually diagnosed with chronic Lyme disease and began intense treatment, which involves being on a whole slew of medications. The treatment made her sensitive to a lot of foods so she has stopped eating anything processed, does not eat anything including most fruits that have sugar in them, barely eats any grains or other starches, etc. When I spent the weekend with her last week, she basically only ate chicken, fish, and vegetables, and she's been on that diet for a few months so far. She told me, "I feel like this is completely unfair. Normally on this diet I would have lost weight, but with my luck and medications, I've gained 15 pounds." I know this is kind of an extreme example, but everyone's body is going to respond differently to diet and exercise, and there's no one-size-fits-all approach to things. I have a very stable weight and metabolism right now, while my ex is prone to quickly and randomly losing or gaining weight, 20-30 lbs at a time. It would be unfair and misguided of me to even begin to give him advice on how to eat and exercise.

Of course, I absolutely agree and I have mentioned (plenty of times now) the many reasons for obesity. I also have no problem with research into this possible virus. I do have a problem with it getting jumped on as a reason for obesity before the research is concluded. We don't know yet if this is a fact. They have studied some human subjects, but they have a long way to go before we should even consider this as a possible reason. Until then, I remain a skeptic. I'm not forcing anyone to agree with me- I just tend to wait until any study is a bit more conclusive. So I said I don't buy the "science", just means I'll wait.

I mentioned the Autism\Vaccine study from the 90's as an example (maybe a bad one), of how it's caused (and still causes) much debate. There was research surrounding it, was written up in The Lancet (since retracted), got a lot of press, and now what? The journal has retracted the article, almost all the doctors involved in the study have changed their findings, etc... Yet there are parents not giving their children vaccines because of this early study that was wrong.

We need to wait and see, yet the media and ordinary people are looking into this as possible reason, and writing about it prematurely. We should focus on what we know causes obesity, and not on it (maybe) being a virus at this point. I just thought maybe it isn't heathy to put this out yet, for people to even discuss. Sorry if this offends, not meant to. :ohwell:

I don't live in a bubble, my sister in law has hypothyroidism. I know she has weight issues because of this, but she also doesn't watch her food intake, reads a magazine and doesn't break a sweat when she exercises... Does the hypothyroidism cause this? I don't know. My Grandmother was obese. She was also depressed and had heart disease, had to have a triple bypass. Did the depression and heart disease cause the obesity, or vise versa? I don't know.

So no, I'm not insensitive to this.

[DrownedCrow]

Doesn't matter what I believe or not- although it seems others here can say what they believe. I linked long term studies on obesity from the New England Journal of Medicine and Princeton University- did you read them?

I did read the NEJM paper. Not that it shed any light on the issue at hand. As for everything else you said..at least try to be coherent. It's not even worth my time trying to figure out what your point was.

[fitheach]

I did read the NEJM paper. Not that it shed any light on the issue at hand. As for everything else you said..at least try to be coherent. It's not even worth my time trying to figure out what your point was.

No it didn't shed light, because it discussed long term studies on obesity by mimicked eating habits. Goes onto say (paraphrasing) If your husband or wife is overweight, most likely you'll be as well by eating what your spouse eats.. If your family is, you will be too.. It seems to imply that obesity spreads through influence and environment. But no mention of a virus being the cause. It mentioned (as well as back articles) everything else we've discussed here, but no virus. There is no virus paper in the NEJM. Why? Is this because it's still in early stages of research and the NEJM will not publish an article on this until it's more conclusive? Maybe you know, I'm actually asking. Are you a researcher or work in this field? Maybe you do know better. I'm just stating what I've read and know, didn't realize this is not accepted on the board unless your in the field of topic.

I'd like to know what the opinion is from those who do know.

What you wrote didn't seem coherent, I posted what you wrote... It looked like you contradicted yourself. I missed the "most" in "Of course, most of these papers are from a single lab". I was reading this on my cell. I apologized up thread if you care to look... I'm sure you don't.

You also said: "they still have a hell of a long way to go before proving this hypothesis". So it looks like were in agreement. Yay! :frown5:

[DrownedCrow]

Why? Is this because it's still in early stages of research and the NEJM will not publish an article on this until it's more conclusive? Maybe you know, I'm actually asking. Are you a researcher or work in this field? Maybe you do know better. I'm just stating what I've read and know, didn't realize this is not accepted on the board unless your in the field of topic.

As you have seen, I didn't deny that this research is at an early stage. I only take issue with the fact that you seemed to be rejecting the viral hypothesis on unscientific grounds. In all likelihood, this hypothesis is only going to explain a small part of obesity. And, no, I'm not a researcher in the field and I'd never heard of Adenovirus 36 until today.

[fitheach]

As you have seen, I didn't deny that this research is at an early stage. I only take issue with the fact that you seemed to be rejecting the viral hypothesis on unscientific grounds. In all likelihood, this hypothesis is only going to explain a small part of obesity. And, no, I'm not a researcher in the field and I'd never heard of Adenovirus 36 until today.

No, my "I don't buy the science" basically just meant "I'll wait and see". I used as an example the paper on Autism in the Lancet that's since been retracted, thus my wait and see policy. This hypothisis may hit a dead end... It's not absolute rejection but definite skepticism, not a wrong position to be in.

[BigFatCoward]

this 'virus' has clearly already been cured by the owners of The Biggest Loser house. because everyone who goes in it loses weight. there have been over 100 people in the house so far and everyone of them lost weight, though this clearly had nothing to do with expert nutritional advice and excercise regimes. and what do you know, when they leave the house they almost all put the weight back on. those dastardly TV executives must be reinfecting them with the fat virus.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

It's a good thing you don't waste time reading threads, and instead save all of your energy to beat down those strawmen. Beat them! Beat them good! Don't let them win!!

Also, though it wasn't necessarily your point: just as not all eating plans are created equal, neither are all weight-loss plans. The Biggest Loser presents some of the unhealthiest habits I've seen, all in the name of rapid loss. That would be fine, but it's not accompanied by actual lifestyle change, which makes it pretty much useless in terms of sustainability. I mean, I lost half a stone in four days... by not eating. Not sustainable, I didn't keep the extra weight off*, and I ended up with heart palpitations and other Really Not Good signs. Just because it was fast doesn't mean it was the best.

Similarly, just because a bunch of people exercise several hours every day, with their meals prepared for them, in a competition-type scenario where the goal is simply to lose pounds (not change body comp or anything)... well, it's great for them in the short-term when it comes to the number on the scale. It may even improve their general nutrition, since the meals are pre-planned for them. But it's not exactly a real-world situation, nor should it be.

*And this is when I was sitting at 10.5 stone, running three-four days per week and weightlifting the other two-three (one day rest day). If I tried it now, I'd lose more weight in the same time frame, because I have more to lose. I'd probably do myself more damage, too, though.

[Nichole]

One of my biggest problems with The Biggest Loser is that when one of the contestants only loses 2 or 3 pounds in a week every one acts like they have failed somehow. How dare they lose weight at a healthy rate! :angry2:

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Yeah, it's one of the biggest objections I've seen. (Apparent dehydration is another, to control water weight.) There's nothing about building muscle mass even if the scale doesn't change as much, or ensuring loss is at a healthy, sustainable weight. There's even nothing about 'here, we've helped you lose X pounds, now go away and we'll see how much you've regained in 6 months. The person who's gained the least (or continued to lose the most) gets a prize.'

[BigFatCoward]

my biggest problem with it is that they only pick people who when they lose the weight will be attractive. i've never seen many ugly people on it. mainly formerly hot people who have let themselves go.