Calorie intake among low, normal and obese people pretty much the same

[credoconsolans]

These fat acceptance people are basically arguing against the laws of thermodynamics. That fat on obese people is stored energy. Where is that energy coming from? If they are ingesting the same calories and exercising the same as thin people? If you can harness the source of that energy just popping into our universe we wouldn't even need cold fusion to solve the energy crisis.

The body reacts differently to different types of food, and so uses them to build and repair, and perhaps excrete any extras, or stores them as fat depending on what you eat.
See eg the experiment this guy did:
http://live.smashthefat.com/why-i-didnt-get-fat/
http://live.smashthefat.com/why-i-did-get-fat/

It's not that the laws of thermodynamics are wrong, or that "calories in minus calories out" does not apply; it's that the majority of the "calories out" side of the equation is not under your conscious control.

Basically. This is why men can eat more than women but still not gain weight. Why young people can eat more than normal and not gain any weight. Why older people gain weight eating the same food they did when they were younger and didn't.

Metabolism, age, gender and genetics all play into your weight.

 

[rousseau]

This article isn't saying what you think it's saying.

What it's saying is this:

- energy intake has gone up about equally amongst all weight groups

What it doesn't say is this:

- weight groups all consume the same amount of energy

In other words people of all weight classes eat more than they used to, but the article doesn't touch on the reference point of each weight group.

As to the assertion that 'calorie in-take amongst weight groups is pretty much the same' as a standalone argument, I just don't buy it. Doing a quick survey of the people I work with alone provides a pretty strong correlation between weight/diet. The opposite being true just doesn't make sense, as it's literally calorie count that has the biggest affect on weight-gain.

I disagree.

According to a 2011 study(link is external) published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition--hardly a bastion of fat acceptance--there is very little difference in the way thin people and fat people eat in terms of nutrition and calorie intake. All categories of people in the study—"normal" weight, "overweight," and "obese"—consumed more calories in 2006 than comparable subjects in 1971. The differences between intake in each weight category were small, and nutritional profiles were similar. In other words, we're all eating more than we used to, but overweight and obese people, at least in this study, are not eating substantially more than thin people(link is external).

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...azy-gluttonous-says-world-health-organization

Excuse me for continuing my skepticism, but the new article you're quoting is referencing your original article, which still doesn't say what you think it's saying. It just doesn't. The conclusion they draw from the studies results is incorrect click-bait designed to get people to share the article and drive ad revenue.

And even in this psychology today article they make this pronouncement:

In other words, we're all eating more than we used to, but overweight and obese people, at least in this study, are not eating substantially more than thin people(link is external).

For one, this quote admits that people in higher weight groups are eating more. Two, who defines what 'substantially' means? Small differences in daily caloric intake multiplied by several years to decades is going to amount to significant weight gain.

To me this sounds like a cut and dry case of bad journalism. I'll give you that genetics also plays a significant role in diet/weight, but that diet plays no role at all in weight gain is just an absurd proposition, and you'd be better off letting it go.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I've removed your condescending and inaccurate bullshit. It's tedious and unnecessary.



People that eat crap and too much of it and don't exercise are systematically getting fatter. It's not complicated or controversial.

Why no consensus yet? No funding for study until more recently. No interest in nutrition. No money in healthy people.
In the interim, must rely on commonsense. I'll err on the side of TSwizzle.

It's a fact that there is no money to be made of healthy people. What we need is a Twilight Zone episode where healthy people are regarded as freaks, something to be fixed by the larger society because in that larger society everyone is obese or grossly obese. The day is coming, or maybe it's already here.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

However, calorie intake from carbs have increased in the population proportionately to the rise in obesity rates. In other words, overweight people do not typically EAT more than the average weight person - can we shake this lazy and undisciplined stereotype?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21310830

Stereotypes aside people are different, which renders the article moot when it comes to how one person responds to caloric intake. People respond differently to antibiotics and all manner of medical treatments. People respond differently to the foods they eat. Perfectly healthy food for one person can be fatal if ingested by another person. Medically, we know and accept that what works for one patient does not always work for another patient. If that were not true everyone entering a hospital would be cured if there was a treatment that worked on at least one person. But we already know two people receiving identical treatments will respond differently. So what is the point?

Being overweight is no different except - big exception there - the cure is not at all mysterious. In fact, when it comes to calories and weight gain the person who eats less and is still overweight can still achieve a normal BMI of 24 or lower by a combination of eating less and moving more. That is indisputably factual. I will repeat: That is indisputably factual.

So can we all please stop with the "I eat less but I'm still fat" baloney? Pleeeeeeeeaaaaase can we stop?

 

[Underseer]

I disagree.

According to a 2011 study(link is external) published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition--hardly a bastion of fat acceptance--there is very little difference in the way thin people and fat people eat in terms of nutrition and calorie intake. All categories of people in the study—"normal" weight, "overweight," and "obese"—consumed more calories in 2006 than comparable subjects in 1971. The differences between intake in each weight category were small, and nutritional profiles were similar. In other words, we're all eating more than we used to, but overweight and obese people, at least in this study, are not eating substantially more than thin people(link is external).

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...azy-gluttonous-says-world-health-organization

Excuse me for continuing my skepticism, but the new article you're quoting is referencing your original article, which still doesn't say what you think it's saying. It just doesn't. The conclusion they draw from the studies results is incorrect click-bait designed to get people to share the article and drive ad revenue.

And even in this psychology today article they make this pronouncement:

In other words, we're all eating more than we used to, but overweight and obese people, at least in this study, are not eating substantially more than thin people(link is external).

For one, this quote admits that people in higher weight groups are eating more. Two, who defines what 'substantially' means? Small differences in daily caloric intake multiplied by several years to decades is going to amount to significant weight gain.

To me this sounds like a cut and dry case of bad journalism. I'll give you that genetics also plays a significant role in diet/weight, but that diet plays no role at all in weight gain is just an absurd proposition, and you'd be better off letting it go.

First of all, if someone's weight stays the same, then calories in = calories out. Doesn't really matter if they're fat or thin, if their weight stays the same, they're probably eating about the same relative to their exercise level.

Secondly, most of us just eat until we're fucking full. Binge eating is a pretty rare phenomenon, and yet we have experienced a very large increase in obesity rates over just a few decades, and we're seeing similar patterns in many industrialized nations. This strongly suggests that there is something systemic at work here and that it's not just a matter of people "choosing" to eat more.

 

[TSwizzle]

Secondly, most of us just eat until we're fucking full.

Dunno about that. People's eating habits vary wildly. People are eating all the time, not just their main meals. It's the shit they eat all day, the crappy snacks and sodas. They just keep packing it away.

Binge eating is a pretty rare phenomenon, and yet we have experienced a very large increase in obesity rates over just a few decades, and we're seeing similar patterns in many industrialized nations. This strongly suggests that there is something systemic at work here and that it's not just a matter of people "choosing" to eat more.

It is likely a combination of things that make it worse. But in the end, an awful lot of people just eat crap and lots of it. You can point to the processed foods as a big contributor to it, refined sugar, bread etc.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Dunno about that. People's eating habits vary wildly. People are eating all the time, not just their main meals. It's the shit they eat all day, the crappy snacks and sodas. They just keep packing it away.

Binge eating is a pretty rare phenomenon, and yet we have experienced a very large increase in obesity rates over just a few decades, and we're seeing similar patterns in many industrialized nations. This strongly suggests that there is something systemic at work here and that it's not just a matter of people "choosing" to eat more.

It is likely a combination of things that make it worse. But in the end, an awful lot of people just eat crap and lots of it. You can point to the processed foods as a big contributor to it, refined sugar, bread etc.

We humans are pattern seekers. People are always looking for the magic bullet, trying to reveal the great secret, the profound mystery, the ultimate answer. We eat too much meat. We don't eat enough meat. We eat too much carbs. Carbs are evil. Our ancestors didn't eat carbs. No. We just need a gimmick. Eat lots of cabbage. Ferment your foods. The list is virtually endless.

Yes, maybe our gut flora and hormones are somewhat different because of all the chemicals and how food isn't the same food our great grandparents ate. That could be true, and when you think about it, how could they not be? We're products of our environment. We didn't invent natural selection.

But when you're fat and content but realize you're unhealthy those are the easiest things to think about. Moving your ass and changing your diet aren't as easy as ruminating on such esoteric subjects. It can't be that simple. That can't be the biggest reason so many people are becoming too fat for their own good. The larger, simpler truth just can't be that mundane and certainly shouldn't require any effort on our part.

But in the end, we eat too much, we eat refined garbage, and we don't move enough. Undo that, and the fat goes away without fail - every time.

 

[ronburgundy]

Actually, everyone is partly wrong.

The data show that obese people actually consume less calories than normal weight people, and this was true in 1975 and in 2005. All groups consume more calories today than in 1975 and although obese people increased more than others, they continue to consume less than normal and merely overweight people (who do not differ much from each other).

As for type of calories, the groups all similarly increased their carb intake over 30 years, but if anything, the normal weight people consume slightly more carbs at both time points.

 

[J842P]

Actually, everyone is partly wrong.

The data show that obese people actually consume less calories than normal weight people, and this was true in 1975 and in 2005. All groups consume more calories today than in 1975 and although obese people increased more than others, they continue to consume less than normal and merely overweight people (who do not differ much from each other).

As for type of calories, the groups all similarly increased their carb intake over 30 years, but if anything, the normal weight people consume slightly more carbs at both time points.

NHANES is a survey. I'm not sure how reliable surveys are when it comes to assessing actual caloric intake. I'm extremely skeptical of the numbers I'm seeing here. Not even the relative caloric intake but the absolute numbers.

 

[RavenSky]

These fat acceptance people are basically arguing against the laws of thermodynamics. That fat on obese people is stored energy...

Hey sweetcheeks... fat on skinny people is also stored energy The fact that you just HAD to unnecessarily insert the word "obese" in there negates everything you have to say on the topic because it shows your bias.

 

[RavenSky]

These fat acceptance people are basically arguing against the laws of thermodynamics. That fat on obese people is stored energy. Where is that energy coming from? If they are ingesting the same calories and exercising the same as thin people? If you can harness the source of that energy just popping into our universe we wouldn't even need cold fusion to solve the energy crisis.

The body reacts differently to different types of food, and so uses them to build and repair, and perhaps excrete any extras, or stores them as fat depending on what you eat.
See eg the experiment this guy did:
http://live.smashthefat.com/why-i-didnt-get-fat/
http://live.smashthefat.com/why-i-did-get-fat/

It's not that the laws of thermodynamics are wrong, or that "calories in minus calories out" does not apply; it's that the majority of the "calories out" side of the equation is not under your conscious control.

However, when it comes to nutrition there seems to be debate on this topic. Although a calorie is a calorie as the food sits on your plate, when it enters your body it is introduced to a highly complex organism that has many biochemical processes that will use, store and “dump” the calories in your food in different ways. The notion that we are just a simple calorie formula, adding and subtracting calories from a predetermined daily energy expenditure by nature is a fundamental flaw in how we perceive food and go about weight management. In a clear and concise statement, a calorie is a calorie but the nutrients of the food and your individual biochemistry dictate how your body expresses those calories.

good articles, thank you!

 

[RavenSky]

Being overweight is no different except - big exception there - the cure is not at all mysterious. In fact, when it comes to calories and weight gain the person who eats less and is still overweight can still achieve a normal BMI of 24 or lower by a combination of eating less and moving more. That is indisputably factual. I will repeat: That is indisputably factual.

So can we all please stop with the "I eat less but I'm still fat" baloney? Pleeeeeeeeaaaaase can we stop?

No, because you are wrong

 

[Nexus]

Hey sweetcheeks... fat on skinny people is also stored energy The fact that you just HAD to unnecessarily insert the word "obese" in there negates everything you have to say on the topic because it shows your bias.

Why does the word obese hurt your feelings? Claiming that using the word obese negates an argument is a ridiculous logical fallacy. And what exactly is my bias and how would it effect the truth that fat people need to eat less and exercise more if they want to lose weight.

I don't have a problem with fat people. I have a problem with obese fat acceptance people. Because they're cry babies that want to pedestalize their self perceived victim hood. They're not victims. They're just people with more adipose tissue than they want. You don't hear sumo wrestlers whining about their plight and how its not their fault. It doesn't fucking matter what or who's at fault or that other people can eat loads of junk and not gain weight. If they don't like their level of fat then eat less and/or exercise more. Otherwise quit worrying about it.

 

[RavenSky]

Hey sweetcheeks... fat on skinny people is also stored energy The fact that you just HAD to unnecessarily insert the word "obese" in there negates everything you have to say on the topic because it shows your bias.

Why does the word obese hurt your feelings?

It doesn't. It does, however, show your bias against obese people.

Claiming that using the word obese negates an argument is a ridiculous logical fallacy.

Just a note: throwing the words "logical fallacy" around does not make you look smarter than anyone else. I very clearly stated that your use of the word "obese" in that sentence, that context, showed your bias - and it is your bias that negates anything else you had to say on this topic, in my opinion.

Further, it was a FACTUAL fallacy for you to say "That fat on obese people is stored energy" as if it is stored energy on only "obese people". You've got some stored energy on you, too, sweetcakes. That's the way human bodies work.

And what exactly is my bias and how would it effect the truth that fat people need to eat less and exercise more if they want to lose weight.

Your bias is clearly shown here again.

I don't have a problem with fat people.

And Derec claims he doesn't have a problem with blacks or women too

[deleted a shit-ton of fat-shaming and victim-blaming bullshit that followed your claim of not having a problem with fat people]

If they don't like their level of fat then eat less and/or exercise more. Otherwise quit worrying about it.

And this, yet again, shows that you know nothing about the topic, and are simply spouting your own biased baloney.

 

[TSwizzle]

Actually, everyone is partly wrong.

There may not be a definitive correct answer.

The data show that obese people actually consume less calories than normal weight people, and this was true in 1975 and in 2005. All groups consume more calories today than in 1975 and although obese people increased more than others, they continue to consume less than normal and merely overweight people (who do not differ much from each other).

So what causes a fat person to shift from being merely category fat, to being considered category obese ? Not much I would imagine and I'm sure there are plenty interpretations as to what constitutes being obese.

As for type of calories, the groups all similarly increased their carb intake over 30 years, but if anything, the normal weight people consume slightly more carbs at both time points.

Normal weight people are probably burning off carb calories because they walk around and are a bit more active, instead of sitting on the sofa chugging down soda and eating Cheetos.

I think most people are considered overweight by the people that judge these thing but that does not make them fat.

 

[thebeave]

Hey sweetcheeks... fat on skinny people is also stored energy The fact that you just HAD to unnecessarily insert the word "obese" in there negates everything you have to say on the topic because it shows your bias.

Why does the word obese hurt your feelings? Claiming that using the word obese negates an argument is a ridiculous logical fallacy. And what exactly is my bias and how would it effect the truth that fat people need to eat less and exercise more if they want to lose weight.

I don't have a problem with fat people. I have a problem with obese fat acceptance people. Because they're cry babies that want to pedestalize their self perceived victim hood. They're not victims. They're just people with more adipose tissue than they want. You don't hear sumo wrestlers whining about their plight and how its not their fault. It doesn't fucking matter what or who's at fault or that other people can eat loads of junk and not gain weight. If they don't like their level of fat then eat less and/or exercise more. Otherwise quit worrying about it.

The word "obese" is in the thread title! Further, if you must take offense, the OP title references "low (weight), normal and obese" people, implying skinny people and obese people are "not normal". If you have a problem with the use of offensive words in this thread it should be directed at Playball40, not Nexus. All this word policing is starting to get a little out of hand. God forbid we ever have a thread concerning an "obese, retarded thug".

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Actually, everyone is partly wrong.

The data show that obese people actually consume less calories than normal weight people, and this was true in 1975 and in 2005. All groups consume more calories today than in 1975 and although obese people increased more than others, they continue to consume less than normal and merely overweight people (who do not differ much from each other).

As for type of calories, the groups all similarly increased their carb intake over 30 years, but if anything, the normal weight people consume slightly more carbs at both time points.

NHANES is a survey. I'm not sure how reliable surveys are when it comes to assessing actual caloric intake. I'm extremely skeptical of the numbers I'm seeing here. Not even the relative caloric intake but the absolute numbers.

My thoughts too.

And the difference in caloric intake isn't anything earth shaking, not to mention there is no data for activity. Using this kind of data to claim someone is fat and it isn't their fault is embarrassing to even hear.

Maybe a fat person will say he or she really wants to lose the fat. Show me, don't tell me.

 

[ronburgundy]

NHANES is a survey. I'm not sure how reliable surveys are when it comes to assessing actual caloric intake. I'm extremely skeptical of the numbers I'm seeing here. Not even the relative caloric intake but the absolute numbers.

My thoughts too.

And the difference in caloric intake isn't anything earth shaking, not to mention there is no data for activity. Using this kind of data to claim someone is fat and it isn't their fault is embarrassing to even hear.

Maybe a fat person will say he or she really wants to lose the fat. Show me, don't tell me.

It's more complex than just a simple survey. They use methods to increase the reliability of the reports. If your interested in more than a faith-based dismissal of evidence that contradicts your preconceptions, you might want to read the article.

In addition, other data sources from the Department of Agriculture and USDA show the same patterns in the increase of total calories and increase in % carbs during that period. Although those data do not examine differences between weight groups, there matching patterns on other dimensions support the validity of the survey method data.

Sure, relying on people to record their own intake introduces potential problems, but the data is infinitely more valid than the meaningless informal anecdotes filtered through your biased memory that you are basing your conclusion on.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

My thoughts too.

And the difference in caloric intake isn't anything earth shaking, not to mention there is no data for activity. Using this kind of data to claim someone is fat and it isn't their fault is embarrassing to even hear.

Maybe a fat person will say he or she really wants to lose the fat. Show me, don't tell me.

It's more complex than just a simple survey. They use methods to increase the reliability of the reports. If your interested in more than a faith-based dismissal of evidence that contradicts your preconceptions, you might want to read the article.

In addition, other data sources from the Department of Agriculture and USDA show the same patterns in the increase of total calories and increase in % carbs during that period. Although those data do not examine differences between weight groups, there matching patterns on other dimensions support the validity of the survey method data.

Sure, relying on people to record their own intake introduces potential problems, but the data is infinitely more valid than the meaningless informal anecdotes filtered through your biased memory that you are basing your conclusion on.

I've never been seriously overweight, but have certainly struggled to keep my weight and general health optimal. Perhaps as you imply it is indeed vanity. But if vanity keeps me healthy and fit we need more of it around.

And I don't base my conclusions on meaningless anecdotes. I base them on observations I make everyday. I don't need studies. I work with plenty of people who are fat and unhealthy. I work with diabetics who have neither clue nor desire to change themselves while they're taking their diabetic meds and injecting insulin, all absolutely unnecessary if they'd just get on the wagon. We're not talking Type 1 here.

No, I know what I'm talking about.

What's causing all this? It's simply the fact that unhealthy people can pass on the costs of that bad health to healthy people. And I'm not talking about people who despite good intentions and behavior still become ill. We could very easily use BMI as a measure of health. Lots of people will get failing grades. That should cost them.

 

[ronburgundy]

It's more complex than just a simple survey. They use methods to increase the reliability of the reports. If your interested in more than a faith-based dismissal of evidence that contradicts your preconceptions, you might want to read the article.

In addition, other data sources from the Department of Agriculture and USDA show the same patterns in the increase of total calories and increase in % carbs during that period. Although those data do not examine differences between weight groups, there matching patterns on other dimensions support the validity of the survey method data.

Sure, relying on people to record their own intake introduces potential problems, but the data is infinitely more valid than the meaningless informal anecdotes filtered through your biased memory that you are basing your conclusion on.

I've never been seriously overweight, but have certainly struggled to keep my weight and general health optimal. Perhaps as you imply it is indeed vanity. But if vanity keeps me healthy and fit we need more of it around.

I didn't imply anything about vanity. For many people, fitness is about vanity more than health, but obviously avoiding obesity is wise and has numerous benefits beyond superficial appearances. The fact is that many "fit" people don't struggle to stay "fit" because their biology makes being majorly overweight implausible, even if they don't try to stay fit. While others have biology that require 5 times the effort, and self-control to avoid being overweight. IOW, they often have twice the self control of more "fit" people, but they just don't have the 5 times the self-control required to be as "fit" as people with the random luck of a higher metabolic rate. Of course, they will lose weight with less intake and more exercise. That has nothing to do with the OP or this thread. The present question is what are the causes for between person differences in being overweight. The research in question suggests that it is not primarily quantity or type of calories consumed. Amount of activity is obviously a factor, but so are highly variable uncontrolled biological factors that impact what one's body deals with whatever intake one engages in.

And I don't base my conclusions on meaningless anecdotes. I base them on observations I make everyday.

When it comes to general questions about casual explanations (what this thread is about), everyday observations are meaningless anecdotes. Like all people, you are only exposed to tiny non-representative samples of experiences, you don't notice most events relevant to your hypothesis, don't record them, and mostly remember those consistent with your biases. That isn't a criticism of you, it is a fact about everyone.

I don't need studies.

Spoken like a true faither. Creationists, AGW deniers, and those who believe homosexuality is a choice all applaud your courage to ignore science.

What's causing all this? It's simply the fact that unhealthy people can pass on the costs of that bad health to healthy people. And I'm not talking about people who despite good intentions and behavior still become ill. We could very easily use BMI as a measure of health. Lots of people will get failing grades. That should cost them.

You just demonstrated why your scientifically illiterate faith is more than just objectively wrong, it is morally and politically dangerous.