Jillian Michaels: Hypocrite.

[Dreamliner]

She's INCENSED about Rex Reed's recent, snide comments about obese actress Melissa McCarthy.

Michaels plays into the cultural bias by appealing to obese people to lose weight. And her claim stems from her participation on the appalling "Biggest Loser", where she has morbidly obese women doing back-bridges, flipping tires and pushing cars, with a battery of doctors in tow.

She's a miserable hypocrite.

[fredsanford]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

She's INCENSED about Rex Reed's recent, snide comments about obese actress Melissa McCarthy.

Michaels plays into the cultural bias by appealing to obese people to lose weight. And her claim stems from her participation on the appalling "Biggest Loser", where she has morbidly obese women doing back-bridges, flipping tires and pushing cars, with a battery of doctors in tow.

She's a miserable hypocrite.

I see no hypocrisy here and I see it everywhere.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by fredsanford

I see no hypocrisy here and I see it everywhere.

Not surprised.

For everyone else, Michaels is saying, in effect, "Stop saying mean things about fat people! Just let me take some weight off of them so people will stop saying mean things about them!"

[LeafUF]

Michaels and the Biggest Loser are doing more harm than good. And now to top it all off they have added children to the show. Glad they are making a ton of money but all they are doing is making people less respectful of the overweight and they are destroying the metabolisms of the contestants on the show.

[Dreamliner]

Jillian Michaels is telling Rex Reed to leave fat people alone.

Jillian Michaels needs to leave fat people alone.

[oragator1]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

Jillian Michaels is telling Rex Reed to leave fat people alone.

Jillian Michaels needs to leave fat people alone.

People on that show have had sleep apnea, diabetes and many other serious medical conditions reversed as they lost weight and got in shape. Many of them are so out of shape initially and overburdened with their weight when they get there that walking a mile makes them pass out.
You may argue that the show is exploitive, but it has saved lives. To compare it to someone simply denigrating a person by calling them a hippo among other things isn't valid.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by oragator1

People on that show have had sleep apnea, diabetes and many other serious medical conditions reversed as they lost weight and got in shape. Many of them are so out of shape initially and overburdened with their weight when they get there that walking a mile makes them pass out.
You may argue that the show is exploitive, but it has saved lives. To compare it to someone simply denigrating a person by calling them a hippo among other things isn't valid.

I am not arguing that the show is exploitive. I am arguing that it is sorely misguided.

People on that show, and almost everyone else who loses weight, gain it back. One former contestant blogged that he'd gained 39 pounds the first five weeks.

No, it has not saved lives.

[oragator1]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

I am not arguing that the show is exploitive. I am arguing that it is sorely misguided.

People on that show, and almost everyone else who loses weight, gain it back. One former contestant blogged that he'd gained 39 pounds the first five weeks.

No, it has not saved lives.

So he is representative of every person who has been on the show?
As i said, others have kept it off and alleviated serious medical conditions. For every individual you bring up I can bring up successful people after the show. And in fact all it takes is one success story against a host of serious illnesses to invalidate your statement. So here is one, and it is not isolated.

http://woodridge.patch.com/articles/...ser-contestant

If you really want to have this debate I can provide many others, as can you, of course it doesn't have a 100% success rate. But pulling one person out of hundreds who didn't keep the weight off is a really weak argument.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by oragator1

So he is representative of every person who has been on the show?
As i said, others have kept it off and alleviated serious medical conditions. For every individual you bring up I can bring up successful people after the show. And in fact all it takes is one success story against a host of serious illnesses to invalidate your statement. So here is one, and it is not isolated.

http://woodridge.patch.com/articles/...ser-contestant

If you really want to have this debate I can provide many others, as can you, of course it doesn't have a 100% success rate. But pulling one person out of hundreds who didn't keep the weight off is a really weak argument.

No, it doesn't have a 100% success rate. It's closer to 0% long-term:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1580453

[oragator1]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

No, it doesn't have a 100% success rate. It's closer to 0% long-term:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1580453

That is a general population study and not one on BL contestants. Their number ranges anywhere from 10% to 50% long term depending on who you ask (no formal study has been done as far as I know, the low end comes from a couple of disgruntled former contestants, the high end from the show). But even at the worst case, 10% with an average of 15-20 people a show over 13 seasons, that's a couple dozen people who have been helped, and above the average of the general population in weight loss sustainability.
There just isn't a valid hypocrisy argument, one has helped people undeniably(regardless of who is right on the percentage), the other simply took a cheap shot for no other reason than to be insulting.
The real question about the show, and the reason I brought up the exploitation argument, is whether the number of overweight people watching who get motivated to change their lives is outweighed by the stigma that the show places on the overweight. That would be a study I would like to see, because beyond the obvious jokes that come from the show, they almost all seem to have serious underlying psychological issues, which is probably more detrimental to the view on the obese than even the more obvious things - codependency and self destructive tendencies are rampant.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by oragator1

That is a general population study and not one on BL contestants. Their number ranges anywhere from 10% to 50% long term depending on who you ask (no formal study has been done as far as I know, the low end comes from a couple of disgruntled former contestants, the high end from the show). But even at the worst case, 10% with an average of 15-20 people a show over 13 seasons, that's a couple dozen people who have been helped, and above the average of the general population in weight loss sustainability.
There just isn't a valid hypocrisy argument, one has helped people undeniably(regardless of who is right on the percentage), the other simply took a cheap shot for no other reason than to be insulting.
The real question about the show, and the reason I brought up the exploitation argument, is whether the number of overweight people watching who get motivated to change their lives is outweighed by the stigma that the show places on the overweight. That would be a study I would like to see, because beyond the obvious jokes that come from the show, they almost all seem to have serious underlying psychological issues, which is probably more detrimental to the view on the obese than even the more obvious things - codependency and self destructive tendencies are rampant.

You're missing the point on the hypocrisy argument. It might be beneficial to peruse my "Obesity Is Not Killing Us" thread on the H-F forum. Because obesity is not, ipso facto, unhealthy, Michaels is doing obese people a disservice (and possibly harming their health) by badgering them into weight-loss.

But to your point, no, Biggest Loser contestants will not maintain their weight-loss for any appreciable time. Almost no one does. This is because the body is wired to maintain a particular weight-range and will defend that weight-range.

[LeafUF]

The show has actually been show to decrease viewers motivation to exercise in at least one recent study.

http://www.weightymatters.ca/2013/01...-watching.html

[oragator1]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

You're missing the point on the hypocrisy argument. It might be beneficial to peruse my "Obesity Is Not Killing Us" thread on the H-F forum. Because obesity is not, ipso facto, unhealthy, Michaels is doing obese people a disservice (and possibly harming their health) by badgering them into weight-loss.

But to your point, no, Biggest Loser contestants will not maintain their weight-loss for any appreciable time. Almost no one does. This is because the body is wired to maintain a particular weight-range and will defend that weight-range.

I actually did read the link when it was first up, but you are simplifying it unless there was evidence on the morbidly obese later in the thread that I haven't seen. For people who are in the higher obesity categories such as almost all of those on the show, they have a much higher mortality rate, the lower rate is only grade one ( i had heard this several years ago as well and I took note as a naturally skinny person and also why I found the link interesting), so "badgering" someone who is 40-50 pounds overweight is a lot different than "badgering" someone. who is 100-200 pounds overweight because being morbidly obese not only puts added stress on the body but leads to ancillary health issues which I pointed out earlier.
So if the people on the show generally fall into the greater mortality bucket, are helped disproportionately with serious illnesses beyond just weight loss specifically, and even by their critic's standards have a higher success rate than the public, what are you arguing? That they will eventually all gain the weight back even though for many it's been over the five year threshold and that any successes don't count because they don't fit known statistics?
When they leave the show they are told how much they have to exercise permanently to keep the weight off... but along with all of the other stuff they learn from full time support via professionals while they are there, that is a knowledge base the general public doesn't get, it makes sense they do a bit better than the public or even what would be expected.
Again though even if they are successful it isn't that important because they are a very small sample set with extreme dedicated assistance and all day to work and learn, change behaviors etc. which most people don't have. In fact many of the ones who are successful go into the training industry to keep the weight off because that routine becomes so engrained in them and they realize it's the only way to keep it off.
What is more important is whether they are good for the millions who watch every week many of whom are overweight or obese, that's a much larger group. Leaf's link would say on exercise anyway the answer is no.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by oragator1

I actually did read the link when it was first up, but you are simplifying it unless there was evidence on the morbidly obese later in the thread that I haven't seen. For people who are in the higher obesity categories such as almost all of those on the show, they have a much higher mortality rate, the lower rate is only grade one ( i had heard this several years ago as well and I took note as a naturally skinny person and also why I found the link interesting), so "badgering" someone who is 40-50 pounds overweight is a lot different than "badgering" someone. who is 100-200 pounds overweight because being morbidly obese not only puts added stress on the body but leads to ancillary health issues which I pointed out earlier.
So if the people on the show generally fall into the greater mortality bucket, are helped disproportionately with serious illnesses beyond just weight loss specifically, and even by their critic's standards have a higher success rate than the public, what are you arguing? That they will eventually all gain the weight back even though for many it's been over the five year threshold and that any successes don't count because they don't fit known statistics?
When they leave the show they are told how much they have to exercise permanently to keep the weight off... but along with all of the other stuff they learn from full time support via professionals while they are there, that is a knowledge base the general public doesn't get, it makes sense they do a bit better than the public or even what would be expected.
Again though even if they are successful it isn't that important because they are a very small sample set with extreme dedicated assistance and all day to work and learn, change behaviors etc. which most people don't have. In fact many of the ones who are successful go into the training industry to keep the weight off because that routine becomes so engrained in them and they realize it's the only way to keep it off.
What is more important is whether they are good for the millions who watch every week many of whom are overweight or obese, that's a much larger group. Leaf's link would say on exercise anyway the answer is no.

The morbidly obese do have higher mortality risks, almost as high as the ... wait for it - underweight. And a Canadian study had morbidly obese women living longer than normal weight men.

But even if we knew how to keep weight off of them, there is no evidence that it would help much. Bear in mind that, since you mentioned diabetes, there is no tenable connection between weight control and remission of Type II diabetes. And a federal study was recently discontinued on finding that weight-loss does not prevent heart attacks in diabetics.

As far as I know, there are no clinical studies which show weight-loss decreasing mortality risk. And there is evidence that weight-loss increases mortality risk.

But you just hit on it. Biggest Losers are outliers. If people who enjoy uncommon levels of intervention can't keep weight off, at least for an appreciable time, what chance does the rest of the population have ?

[Dreamliner]

Google "National Weight Loss Registry" and read about the thousands (among tens of millions who've tried and regained) of people who've lost modest amounts of weight and kept it off a year. Their testimonies are sobering. They still count calories. They engage in prodigious amounts of activity. And they never don't think about food.

And to what end ?

[fredsanford]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

Jillian Michaels is telling Rex Reed to leave fat people alone.

Jillian Michaels needs to leave fat people alone.

Melissa McCarthy didn't ask for Rex's opinions on her weight.

Contestants on BL auditioned to get on the show.

See the difference?

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by fredsanford

Melissa McCarthy didn't ask for Rex's opinions on her weight.

Contestants on BL auditioned to get on the show.

See the difference?

Maybe we'll have a reality show where contestants sign up for ways to commit suicide.

See the difference ? I don't. At least not much.

[fredsanford]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

Maybe we'll have a reality show where contestants sign up for ways to commit suicide.

See the difference ? I don't. At least not much.

That was a fairly ineffective goalpost shift.

Now how exactly is signing up for a weight loss regimen akin to suicide?

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by fredsanford

That was a fairly ineffective goalpost shift.

Now how exactly is signing up for a weight loss regimen akin to suicide?

You're a ten o'clock scholar on this issue of the so-called 'obesity crisis.'

Check that, more like a four o'clock scholar. Hell, it might help if you actually read some of my posts.

[fredsanford]

I read them all.

I take it you are some kind of activist for letting fat people stuff themselves to their hearts' content?