|
You can say that people walking more won't solve the obesity crisis while still thinking it will help. Walking/running/biking even 30 minutes a week makes anyone dramatically healthier. Even if people don't lose a lot of weight doing it, their cardiovascular health will improve and they will probably be happier. It sucks getting winded going up one flight of stairs. If you want people to lead healthier lives then promoting even a little more aerobic exercise is a good idea. If you want people to weigh less then what can we do besides making gastric bypass/amphetamines far more widely available? It seems like one reason people focus on childhood obesity so much, besides the fact that little kids with Type 2 Diabetes is sad, is that weight gain is easier to prevent than weight loss is to promote.
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 09:25 |
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:Absolutely false. There are many foods which universally promote satiety relative to calories, such as lean protein and fibrous vegetables. There are many foods which universally promote hunger/reward relative to calories, such as high sugar candies and baked goods, sweetened beverages, and fried potatoes. What is up to the individual is finding a balance that allows for a sustainable diet at below maintenance calories. Sometimes, when I'm hungry but close to my calorie limit, I'll just eat like a half pound of raw carrots. There's like 80-90 calories in that. But isn't that a hard sell to most people who are hungry, but specifically craving something like a grilled cheese or a slice of cake? How can we help people choose to fill up on celery and peanut butter rather than things they tend to like more?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:To be completely fair, most HAES bloggers or "fat activists" are the mobile obese. They aren't anywhere near 500lbs. They're fine with moderate walking and swimming (and the new craze is pole dancing...) The people who are scooting around in motorized wheelchairs aren't as delusional as the people who are living normal lives but obese. And that is the sinister part - these people have decent bloodwork and post videos of them being not entirely sedentary and extrapolate that to perfect health. Most of these people are not having health problems now aside from limited physical endurance (which, as they'll note, is true for anyone who doesn't exercise), but they are at massive risk for health problems as they age. Back in the day (like 10 years ago) I was reading fat positive blogs when HAES was (I think?) just getting going. As I remember, and I could totally be wrong here, the idea was: 1) It would be better if you could lose weight and exercise than do nothing 2) It would be better if you could lose weight, even if you did not exercise, rather than do nothing 3) It would be better if you could exercise, even if you did not lose weight, rather than do nothing Basically I remember it starting as a "harm reduction" kind of thing, trying to decouple the idea of exercising from this constant horrible mental struggle people were feeling about Losing Weight, so that at least they could do some exercise, rather than none, because even if you maintain your weight you'll probably be healthier and happier if you walk 30 mins a day rather than none. I guess in the decade since it changed, or maybe my initial impressions were just wrong?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:I guess it could be possible that HAES/fat acceptance is a net benefit (even though its arguments are fallacious), if it were to be shown that it prevents more suffering via a positive effect on the (incredibly deadly) ED wave and possibly stress relief compared to the suffering it creates by keeping some obese people from losing weight and/or exercising. I don't believe it is empirically true, but it could be true and so far nobody could honestly claim to know otherwise. Can you clarify which ED(s) you mean here? Binge eating disorder? OSFED? All of them?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2016 18:45
|
|