Diabetes Weight-Loss Study Ends Early With Surprising Result

Discussion in 'Gator Country Health and Fitness' started by Dreamliner, Jan 22, 2013.

  1. ATL_Gator
    Offline

    ATL_Gator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Acworth, GA
    Ratings Received:
    +1,399
    Dream, your rhetoric is getting old. I don't know what has happened to you, but this "it isn't your fault" and "you can't maintain it, so don't do it in the first place" really gets on the verge of pissing me off. So much I really consider not even coming around anymore. Anyway, some of your arguments that you litter every single thread with seem QUITE wrong.

    Anyway.

    Agreed: BMI is a horrible measure for an individual in regard to health, at that instant in time. SIMPLY having high BMI does not instantly make one unhealthy, just as eating a McDonalds double quarter pounder with cheese and a super-sized fry doesn't INSTANTLY make one fat.

    Anymore, that is about where it stops.

    -------------

    Obesity is hereditary? WTF is that? Eating a 3rd bag of ho-ho's after 5000 calories of other food is GENETIC?! You are kidding right? Eating more than is needed is LEARNED. IMO, that is the single GREATEST reason why fat kids have fat parents. It has little to do with what genetic markers they have and a whole lot to do with how the parents have taught the kids to eat (fast, and a lot), when they have taught their kids to eat (often), and what they have taught their kids to eat (crap). A fat kid with TWO fat parents (and potentially 4 fat grandparents)... that kid is taught to be fat. Nothing more, nothing less. I will buy the idea that there is nothing the kid can really do about it, given the circumstances, but that doesn't make it genetic.

    Do I neglect that there are cases where obesity IS actually passed from parent to child? NO. There are cases where that is true, but from what I understand, these are NOT normal. These hereditary conditions are rare. Start talking probabilistics (sp?), what are the chances that two people with the same gene anomaly have a kid together and pass that anomaly along? That probability is ESPECIALLY worse if the anomaly is a RECESSIVE gene. Is this the case for 33% of the kids out there?

    Beyond that, when I was at my heaviest (BMI 33.1, Body fat percentage north of 40 more than likely... obese by all means)... I was by far the fattest of any known relative. Well more than my parents, and grandparents. Who then did I inherit my fatness from? I want somebody besides myself to blame!

    -------------

    Inability to maintain weight loss. I take this one personally. Reading this comment aggravates me the most, as I have gone through major weight loss, and maintained it. Also plan on it.

    Why is it so irritating? For me, I was fat due to ignorance. I liked eating crappy food and a lot of it. I would not go as far as saying that I flat out didn't know about calorie content and whatnot, but I was just not thinking about it. I CHOSE to be ignorant about it. (again, personal choice).

    Know what else I chose to do? I chose to spend a lot of time in front of the computer and the TV. I chose to stay inside and sit on the couch. I chose to drive a short distance instead of walking. I chose the easy route in a majority of the things I wanted to do. WHY? So I can get them done faster and I can get back to sitting on the couch watching TV or go spend hours sitting at the computer playing videogames (MMORPGs and FPS).

    Since then, I have made a choice to be more aware about things. Does it mean that things are easy? No. A lot of times they are not. However, those hard decisions lead to make other things that I like to do easier. Like playing and being active with my kid.

    To say that I WILL not maintain this means that I must first make the DECISION to CHOOSE to eat more and be less active. MENTAL DECISION FIRST.

    Do I always maintain the lightest I have ever been in my adult life? Nope. However, that is because I CHOOSE to eat more and/or be less active than what is required to maintain that... for me. It is by choice, and therefore technically under my control.

    --------------

    We are living longer than ever inspite of being fatter than ever. You ALWAYS make this comment as if being fatter and/or diseased EQUATES to living longer without consideration of medical advancements OR the FACT that if you actively have a condition, you are going to the doctor more.

    Here are some stats over the last 50 years.

    Data after the year:
    - Life Expectancy
    - Physicians per 1000 people
    - Health expenditure ($) per capita

    2010: 78.2 - 2.42 - $8,360
    2005: 77.3 - 2.67 - $6,250
    2000: 76.6 - 2.58 - $4,700
    1995: 75.6 - 2.00 - $3,700
    1990: 75.2 - 1.80
    1985: 74.5 - 1.70
    1980: 73.6 - 1.50
    1970: 70.8 - 1.20
    1960: 69.7 - 1.10

    Yes, life expectancy is on the rise... but why are there more doctors? Why are we spending more and more at the doctors every year? Is it because in the 60's, doctors were WAY overworked and there was a huge NEED for more doctors? Bull crap. IMO, it is because we are getting fatter and more unhealthy, thus more doctors are needed to prescribe us things.

    Those stats don't even account for the advancements in medical technology. I.E. surgeries to fix things are less invasive, thus less risky. We are also getting better at major fixes, like transplants. IMO, as technology gets better, people dying from minor things goes down to nearly nothing. That means, it is major things that ends up killing us.

    Of the two options below, which do you think would produce the longest number of years lived with a major problem that can't be avoided. Lets say... breast cancer in a woman. The onset of this cancer occurs at age 50.

    1. Woman is healthy and in normal weight and never has any physical signs of ailment, so never goes to the doctor. Ends up going to see a doctor at age 57 because she hasn't felt good for about 5 or 6 days (unrelated to the cancer). Doctor decides to do some blood tests, notices something severely elevated. Further investigation reveals advanced stages of breast cancer.

    2. Woman is unhealthy and obese. Goes to doctor all the time for knee and ankle pain (100% weight related), and high blood pressure (quite possibly due to the constant pain). Due to pain management program and blood pressure meds, doctor runs blood tests 2x per year. Also, the doctor pesters the crap out of the woman about annual breast examination. Woman doesn't want to, but grows tired of hearing about it from the doctor every 3-6 months. 6 months after her 50th birthday, doctor notices an anomaly in a test result. Further examination reveals the breast cancer, in the early stage.

    Option 2 right? I most certainly would hope so. But why? Is it BECAUSE option 2 was fat and unhealthy in general? Or is it because option 2 is actively going to the doctor and detected the problem early?

    Lets toss in option 3. Healthy normal weight woman goes to the doctor 1x per year for a checkup. Gets full out bloodwork and examination. Examination 1 month past 50th birthday doesn't reveal anything. Examination 1 month past 51st birthday reveals the breast cancer, still in the early stage.

    Would you still chose option 2?

    That said,

    I would bet the ratio... $ spent by "normal weight" people at the doctor : $ spent by overweight and obese people at the doctor is VERY low. Lets guess maybe 0.1:1 (that may be high). Normal weight people with nothing to complain about probably don't go to the doctor. If it isn't broke, don't fix it. Right? Do you take your car into the mechanic if it is running perfectly? I don't.

    Change the above ratio in favor of the healthy... lets say 0.3:1,... I would now bet that "normal weight" people will outlive the overweight by a longshot. Reason, I feel that the biggest problem that "normal weight" people face is finding problems too late. Early detection of manageable problems would go through the roof, thus one would live longer... at a normal weight.

    -------------

    /sigh

    That is enough. For now, possibly forever. Who knows.
  2. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,033
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +806
    Well, glad to see we agree on BMI which, by the way, is how they track the phony 'obesity epidemic.' To the rest of your diatribe - and I can't believe it's me using the word ' 'Meh.'

    First of all, LOL at your 'largess' in acknowledging the possibility of 'some' obesity stemming from heredity. Obesity is, in fact, the most heritable physical attribute, save height. Or haven't you noticed that when you give a population free access to food, that they come in all shapes and sizes ?

    You may have eaten your way, like a barnyard sow, to your former, corpulent self. But you have no cause to project that upon other fat folks. Guess what ? Hunger and satiety are also heritable. One man eats his way to a BMI of 42 via the same mechanisms another man eats his way to a BMI of 23.

    Yes, yes, you've lost a lot of weight. And I can appreciate that even short-term loss was no mean task for you. But I'm the guy people who want to lose weight come running too. And based on the studies, and experience, I can no longer get behind an endeavor which, statistically speaking, is almost certain to lead to frustration and failure, just because some guy I know from Gator Country lost a bunch of weight.

    Proposition: you do what you want to do. I do what I want to do. Further: you are free to blame yourself for your obesity. Please do not presume to blame others for theirs.

    Your theories on longevity are muddled. All shapes and sizes are living longer. We KNOW that overweight and moderately obese people are living longest of all. And we know that obesity offers protective benefits. Hence, the term "Obesity Paradox."

    This correlation with increasing costs and longevity is tendentious. The Americans who really appear to be shelling out are the so-called 'worried well.' Another factor in increasing cost: millions of Americans are being diagnosed with the 'disease' of having a higher-than-average BMI and then given medications they probably don't need.

    Finally, your scenario assumes, as I understand it, that the obese person will receive greater medical attention vis-a-vis their obesity than the normal weight person.

    Problem: there is ample evidence that obese persons receive LESS medical attention that those of normal weight. Indeed, I can't say I can blame them for not going to the doctor. Who wants to be badgered about their weight all the time ?
  3. Gatormb
    Offline

    Gatormb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,736
    Likes Received:
    246
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Bradenton, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +760
    Certainly obesity is not the only cause of diabetes but it is a major cause.

    The science, as I understand it, is the following in layman's terms: Someone more knowledgeable can correct me if I'm wrong.

    When we eat carbs, the body releases insulin to bring sugar levels down. If those carbs are not used as energy the insulin stores them as fat. Eventually, in some people, either the body becomes insulin resistant or eventually the pancreas gets overworked and stops producing insulin in advances stages. High levels of sugar are brutal on the internal organs and nerves (especially in the feet).

    Here's (sort of) an explanation that explains the process in a supplement description. From the Life Extension foundation.

    HCA (hydroxycitric acid) is a close relative of citric acid, the agent that gives citrus fruits their characteristic tart flavor. HCA is obtained as a 50% standardized extract of Garcinia cambogia, a small fruit from southern India, where it has been used for centuries as a food preservative, flavoring agent, and digestive aid. HCA is a safe, natural supplement for weight management.92

    When calorie intake exceeds the body’s energy needs, the excess glucose is converted into glycogen, which is stored in the liver and muscles for future conversion into energy. Weight gain occurs after the body’s capacity for glycogen storage is reached. At this point, glucose from excessive calorie intake is converted into acetyl coenzyme A via a metabolic pathway involving the enzyme ATP-citrate lyase and then into fat molecules, which are stored in fat cells. HCA is a competitive inhibitor of ATP citrate lyase, a key enzyme which facilitates the synthesis of fatty acids, cholesterol and triglycerides. HCA may reduce the synthesis of fatty acids in humans during a persistent excess of energy intake as carbohydrate.93

    It has been suggested that HCA promotes weight loss by increasing serotonin levels, reducing hunger and appetite, and suppressing carbohydrate conversion into fat by inhibiting ATP-citrate lyase,94-100* thus regulating fat and obesity related genes.101 HCA may also attenuate the increases in oxidative stress, and insulin resistance.102

    http://www.lef.org/Vitamins-Supplements/Item01675/HCA.html?source=search&key=GARCINIA CAMBOGIA
  4. MeyerIsBack
    Offline

    MeyerIsBack Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +222
    BMI being an imperfect measurement does not change the fact that people are getting fatter.
  5. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,033
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +806
    Thanks, but this has already been discussed ad nauseum. Obesity does not cause diabetes. Yes, obesity is associated with higher rates of diabetes, but that's just an association (thin people get diabetes too), and so it's not even accurate to point to indirect cause.

    Moreover, the carb-insulin hypothesis has been thoroughly debunked. I mean THOROUGHLY debunked.
  6. bakaduin
    Offline

    bakaduin Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,496
    Likes Received:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +711
    Debating with you Dream is like debating with a brick wall. You post "studies" and then extrapolate facts that aren't there. You act like obesity is a good thing.

    Like I said, the perfect study to refute you already exists and it was done in dogs.

    https://www.avma.org/News/Journals/Collections/Documents/javma_220_9_1315.pdf

    It is intuitive and obvious. It is a LIFELONG STUDY. Something that could never be done in humans. It is a study where every single calorie is measured. Read the results. Eat more, gain more weight, shorter lifespan, more disease. The obvious way to refute the study is saying that it is in dogs and not humans. I maintain you could never ethically do such a study in humans. Furthermore do you honestly think that the results wouldn't be the same?

    Being obese is not a good thing. Losing weight is a good thing. Keeping weight off is difficult, nobody is going to say it isn't but it is doable and it will greatly improve your quality of life (as is pointed out in other studies YOU posted in this thread).
  7. MeyerIsBack
    Offline

    MeyerIsBack Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +222
    Is this not a contradiction? Is it assumed that we have no free will? You must realize that absent certain behaviors obesity is not possible. What other 'inherited traits' can be controlled solely with behavior?

    This coming from the guy who insists that we are badgering fat people. Seriously?

    I would love to see a study that confirms that a variance of hunger and satiety is inherited.

    There really is little blame being thrown around. There is an acknowledgement that weight is the result of behavior.

    I provided a comprehensive study that confirmed the complete opposite. In fact, obesity at age 18 coincided with premature death at the same rate as heavy smokers.
  8. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,033
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +806
    So ? And ?
  9. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,033
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +806
    There is a brick wall of sorts, but I'm not it. Weight-loss, per the HUMAN studies suggest neither remission nor prevention of heart attacks. And even if it did, we're still left with the almost singular inability to maintain weight-loss.

    So here you sit, an animal doctor, expecting to people to undertake interventions that very rarely work and may indeed kill them.

    Anything else you want to do to fat people ?
  10. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,033
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +806
  11. bakaduin
    Offline

    bakaduin Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,496
    Likes Received:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +711
    I'm not arguing with you about the heart attacks. You are making blanket statements that nobody should have to lose weight because being obese/overweight isn't a medical problem. From your own article that started this thread:
    Those are 4 pretty clear and pretty important health benefits to losing weight.

    I also take offense to your idea that just because most people put the weight back on that nobody should try to lose it. If 100 obese folks lose weight and even just 15 keep it off that is 15 people who will have an improved quality of life (according to YOUR study). If people took your attitude all 100 would continue to be obese.
  12. LeafUF
    Online

    LeafUF Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Messages:
    13,406
    Likes Received:
    288
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Wandering
    Ratings Received:
    +344
    Serious question, does this board have a mod? I swear every single thread is covering the same topic. Kinda makes the section pretty silly and useless, right?
  13. MeyerIsBack
    Offline

    MeyerIsBack Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +222
    Translation: Everybody gets whatever they want regardless of their behavior.

    DreamLogic :/

    Translation: Dreamliner is going to ignore the fact that he is the only person badgering fat people while blaming others of doing it.

    Translation: There is zero evidence that a variance in hunger and satiety is heritable

    Translation: There is no sane argument against the fact that a persons weight is a direct result of their behaviors.

    translation: falling back to your default argument of wild and baseless accusations.
  14. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,033
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +806
    Are we going to have to get our buddy orangeblueorangeblue in here to set you straight on correlations ?

    And I can see you're still deeply entrenched in the much-mistaken notion that obesity is harmful.

    Finally, I don't give a f*** what grownups do. If they want to lose weight, then watch it come back (and quite likely wind up heavier than when they began), they are free to knock themselves out.
  15. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,033
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +806
    Translation: somebody can't stop hating fat people.
  16. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,033
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +806
    I hear you. And you're just here trying to help people lose weight, right ? :wink:
  17. bakaduin
    Offline

    bakaduin Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,496
    Likes Received:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +711
    Did you not read the quote from the study YOU posted. It says it right there in black and white? Oh wait...so if a study says something negative about obesity it is a "correlation" but if it says something in your favor its a fact of the study?

    Now I'm clear.
  18. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,485
    Likes Received:
    555
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,499
    ...

    "Relative to normal weight, both obesity (all grades) and grades 2 and 3 obesity were associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality."

    There's really absolutely no room for confusion there, or so I thought.
  19. MeyerIsBack
    Offline

    MeyerIsBack Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +222
    When you have no answer for all of your nonsensical claims, you can always fall back to wild and baseless accusations. Well played , dreamliner... well played :/
  20. Dreamliner
    Offline

    Dreamliner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    64,033
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +806
    One reason I'm okay with obesity is that it is obviously not killing people. The question is, why are you not okay with it (since it's obviously not killing people) ?

Share This Page