If geeks love it, we’re on it

Howdy, Stranger!

You found the friendliest gaming & tech geeks around. Say hello!

Why are people fat?

124»

Comments

  • ardichokeardichoke Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    nothing like some anal seepage to make you lose weight.... because you won't want to eat anything.
  • erichblas2005erichblas2005 Your Native Texan Houston,Texas Member
    edited Apr 2011
    There is just a certain kind of deep satisfaction that comes from a double quarter pounder with cheese that you don't get from a six-inch turkey sub on whole wheat.

    I can't explain it, and I'm not trying to make light of the situation; there is a definite deep urge to have something like that as opposed to the healthier alternative. Why is that? Why does the thought of a five guys burger literally make my mouth water while thinking of a subway healthy choice make me go "meh"?

    Well its easier and cheaper for fast food companies make high fat foods. These companies feed off peoples depression.
  • TushonTushon I'm scared, Coach Alexandria, VA Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    Well its more profitable for fast food companies to hire food scientists, who engineer foods that exploit both our culture and biological heritage, compounding body image issues, and then exploit our newly soured mood by feeding us more

    a lot of FTFY :rolleyes:
  • the_technocratthe_technocrat IC-MotY1 Indy Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    Basil wrote:
    That said it does at least work, even if the lipase inhibition has some less than pleasant effects...
    Thrax wrote:
    Like oily leakage.

    So, as a society, we would rather address our weight issues by having poor health and greasy anal leakage than change our eating habits to address both?

    If true, this goes beyond just laziness/apathy. We've justified the side effects against a perceived benefit. Perhaps the emphasis on weight/looks is so great it's become a goal, instead of a side effect of good health? Why are the two typically not associated with each other?
  • LincLinc Bard Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    I'd venture the issue is inertia. Inaction & crappy food makes you more tired. Coming up with the willpower to change your habits AND the perseverance to keep doing it is bloody nigh impossible when you live in an on-demand world and already feel like crap all the time.

    If "ugh, not right now" is an option, you will take it. It took me nearly two years to get past that thought completely when deciding to go to martial arts class and I was only in moderately bad shape to start with.
  • LincLinc Bard Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    Also, you will do what you enjoy.

    If your exercise is running on a treadmill and you hate it, you won't do it. If healthy eating to you means Subway sandwiches you hate, you won't do it.

    It took me 2 years to be so into martial arts that I'm chomping at the bit to get there. That's when it stops being constant work.

    //edit: The only "trick" is to not quit in the meantime. My teacher says that all the time (paraphrasing) "How did I become so skilled? I simply didn't quit and did the work. Time took care of the rest."
  • RyanFodderRyanFodder Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    Annes wrote:
    If we get rid of massive corn subsidies the prices of all the shit you shouldn't be eating would go way up. Would still be cheaper than healthful, whole foods, but it would be way more competitive.

    And then there's flawed study about fats and how the USDA picked up and ran with it until this day. Grains as the main basis for a diet is just silly and plays right into the subsidies' hands.

    Will cite if desired off work hours.

    Also, I'm LOVING this thread. So many contributors!

    Corn subsidies aren't the entire problem. Right now, corn production is such a large percentage of the food we eat that if you suddenly dropped the subsidies (right now, btw, corn prices are high enough due to demand that the subisidy isn't even in play) corn would still be produced at a very similar rate that it is now.

    Across the world, corn production has become such a large portion that it is self sustaining with or without the subsidy. This has to do with oil prices, ethanol usage, and all the things other than foods made from corn (biodegradable plastics for instance.)

    If you want HFCS to go away, you have to stop buying vodka and nearly all midshelf alcohols, plastic bags, beef, pork, chicken, and virtually any other commercially raised foods. In addition to this, you should avoid buying ethanol based gas (subsidized, in iowa at least) and every other product that is derived from corn.

    Corn is, simply put, the most productive crop that grows in the climates that cover a large portion of the worlds arable land (Midwest, Ukraine) . It makes sense commercially to make as many products as possible from such an easily mass produced product.

    If you could grow tomatoes on the same scale as corn, there would be products made from tomatoes.

    There are too many people living in cities (across the world) for something like corn to not exist. I seriously doubt seeing the urbanization trend to stop, so corn will not likely go away unless some sort of corn disease happens. Even then, it doesn't take long to breed resistances into corn.

    BTW: I'm from Iowa. Theres a bit of corn here.
  • _k_k P-Town, Texas Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    You will never get rid of HFCS because they are being used in foods for a very specific reason. They can produce different HFCSs that have a degree of sweetness compared to refined sugar. This actually allows for a more accurate recipe and ability to create a taste in a producers product. The argument is actually about degrees of bad, sugar cane and HFCS are sources of just sugar. If there is a personal problem with them then stop consuming both.

    I have severally cut back sources of refined sugars in my diet and upped vegetables, grain, and fruits. Spend a week without refined sugar and then bite into a decent apple that taste is incredible with the volume of the material and excess water in it; not to mention the massive amount of fructose that is naturally in it.

    The other interesting thing that happens when refined sugars are cut out of a person's diet is that the reliance on heavily processed foods drops off. These foods are great for really long workouts because keeping your energy intake high without having to consume large quantities is hard unless you eat, essentially, junk food.

    Something else I actually hate about most day to day schedules is the idea of meal time and eating at specific times. When you become hungry and wait for a meal you consume a large quantity of material and as you are processing it the extra energy needed makes you slightly lethargic and unable to maintain a moderate aerobic activity without issues; cramps, low energy levels, nausea, etc. I have been eating about 4 meals a day with snacks between all of them.

    I broke my day into a light/moderate breakfast, snack, lunch, snack, dinner, snack, ramen. I know ramen isn't the best but it is easy to carb load with it and a fast way to eat an extra 600+ calories before bed. Other than that I usually consume 400-600 calories in snacks, this is in an attempt to create an even energy curve throughout the day but leave my meals "light" enough so I can go exercise within an hour of eating and have a low impact on my run.

    I know Thrax has said most of this before but it is so key for people who are trying to lose weight or work out in any instance. Eat smaller, eat more. My real advice for anyone trying to do any kind of activity is normally eat like you are poor; less meat, more grain, more vegetables. When you get those weird cravings a day after working out and you just want a tomato or a big apple there is a biological reason so follow it.
  • ThraxThrax Professional Shill, Watch Slut, Mumble Hivemind Drone Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    Less protein is the exact opposite of what you want to do when fitness is concerned. Without an ample source of protein to protect the muscles from catabolysis, your metabolism will blow right past glycogen stores and lipid stores to consume muscles for energy. Effective lipolysis directly depends on an optimum protein intake to protect the muscles and suppress insulin secretion.

    Of the three nutrients, protein should be your #1 intake, carbs #2 and fat a very distant #3.
  • CBCB Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Der Millionendorf- Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    _k_ wrote:
    The argument is actually about degrees of bad, sugar cane and HFCS are sources of just sugar. If there is a personal problem with them then stop consuming both.

    I don't agree with this. I think that HFCS is certainly worse for you than just cane sugar. Sucrose (cane sugar) is easily processed by the body, but our body has trouble processing Fructose unless it's accompanied by the correct ratio of fruit fiber. Thusly: The only time you should ever be consuming Fructose is when you are actually eating a piece of fruit.

    Yes, all sugars are bad for your weightloss goals, but they are not all equal in other ways.
  • _k_k P-Town, Texas Icrontian
    edited Apr 2011
    _k_ wrote:
    less meat, more grain, more vegetables. When you get those weird cravings a day after working out and you just want a tomato or a big apple there is a biological reason so follow it.

    When I say less meat I do not mean less protein. I do not use meat as my main caloric source but I still consume a huge amount of protein. Just from my ramen meal I eat approx. 20 grams of protein, other than that I do eat small amounts of meat every day and use nuts as a protein source in substitution of meat. The other reason I am using nuts is that they are small, protein, saturated fat, and I can eat a large calorie amount without feeling full.

    CB: You have to go eat cane to intake cane sugar, or process the sugar out from the plant. The real point I am making is that both of those items have to be extracted and distilled(whatever you want to call it) before they can be place INTO or ON something else. I know brown sugar is tasty but we aren't counting it as a food source:(. Given a choice I would always pick cane sugar when I decide to consume something with added sweetener, which is why I think people should cut back on them or if you are increasing your calorie count make them a smaller percentage.

    I didn't look very hard, but are there products that use fructose as a sweetener that do not already have it in it?
  • KemicaKemica B.C Canada
    edited Jun 2011
    Going to hop into the convo here to ask about sweeteners.
    Do any of you have opinions on the supposed healthier alternative sweeteners such as Stevia or Sucralose?

    I've been working on removing as much processed sugar from what I eat as possible, but in order to make that transition a bit easier on myself (and thus more likely to succeed) I have been trying Stevia as a replacement for sugar. Especially in things like home made iced tea etc.

    A personal review as far as adjustment and taste would be that it is a bit unusual at first, and takes some getting used to, but when used in small amounts, you adjust to it quickly. I find regular sugar in iced tea tastes like syrup to me now, and is quite unpleasant.

    As for personal experience on weight gain. I gained a bit of weight over the last few years due to a pretty drastic diet change. I moved from Canada to Denmark. Where my previous diet had been mostly chicken and fresh vegetables, in Denmark it became mostly starches, carbs and pork.

    Most people in Denmark are a normal weight, but I found at least to me that they ate much larger portions of food that I didn't really consider healthy.

    I have since moved back to Canada and am already dropping weight at a pretty steady pace despite irregular exercise.

    I do wonder about the implications this has, as far as regional diet adaptation.
  • AlexDeGruvenAlexDeGruven Wut? Meechigan Icrontian
    edited Jun 2011
    In moderation, I think (this is me, speaking) non-sugar sweeteners are just fine in moderation (like most other things). It definitely helps for people who have a sweet-tooth, as it creates a big cut in calorie count without a drastic change in diet.

    I dropped 10lb in about 2 months just by switching to diet soda alone.

    I really like stevia. The flavor is great and hooked me from the start. The fact that it's non-caloric is just a bonus. It also is supposed to have some additional beneficial effects on mood and energy levels, but I haven't done the research on it.
  • primesuspectprimesuspect Beepin n' Boopin Detroit, MI Icrontian
    Now that several of us are successfully losing a great deal of weight with a low-carb, high fat diet, I'm wondering if anybody has anything new to add to this fascinating conversation.

    TL;DR: Bompz
  • ardichokeardichoke Icrontian
    For me... it just seems to be too much processed, low fiber foods. Not enough whole fruit and veg.
124»
Sign In or Register to comment.

The 5¢ Tour