Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Is diet underestimated

Not necessarily. And it's still not nice continue offering patronising advice where it's not wanted.

Well you're assuming that thinner = healthier, which again, isn't true.

First of all, a healthy person is generally happier than an unhealthy person. I'm not going to bother looking up the research for you.

Second, how is my advice patronising? It's not intended to be patronising.



My goodness! There's a lot of assuming going on.

I have never stated these things.

No, I'm saying that "overweight does not equal healthier than normal weight".

I am saying that "healthier = happier in general".

End of what I am saying.

I was going to write something here ... started and stopped twice ...


forget it

It depends on the methods by which they become healthier. If they are constantly fighting against their body's natural tendencies, whilst denying themselves all sorts of foods that they enjoy, filling every spare minute of their day with exercise and at the same time being told by people who find it easy that they just aren't trying hard enough, that doesn't sound like a recipe for happiness to me. I'd rather be overweight.

To say that healthier people are happier generally is not the same as saying that becoming healthier will make you happier, because this assumption is based on two extremes and ignores the complexities of the process of getting from one to the other.

As is often the case, when the touchy subject of weight and diets crop up, misconceptions and even insults get hurled around....

I wasn't going to post any more here, but after reading some of the posts, I felt obliged to put my scientific hat on and correct some of the misconceptions.

First, some facts - all based on plenty of published scientific research. Assuming that the subjects are otherwise healthy (no genetic diseases or endocrine problems etc):

1)A man who is the same weight and height as a woman (i.e. they have the same BMI) will require more calories to stay the same weight, assuming they are equally active/inactive. That's because men have more muscle bulk than women, and muscle consumes more calories for its weight than fat, even at rest. It also follows that a muscular man or woman will burn more calories at rest than a man or woman of the same weight who is flabby.

2)A person who is heavier will have a higher metabolic rate than someone (of the same sex and body fat percentage) who is lighter, and therefore will need to consume more calories to stay the same weight. This is obviously common sense (more bloated fat cells consume more energy just to survive), but it is also easily proven under controlled conditions, using oxygen consumption studies etc.

3)A person who is heavier will also 'burn' more calories when doing the same activity than someone (of the same sex and body fat percentage) who is lighter. So, a fat person will burn more calories when walking/running the same distance at the same pace as slim person.

There are very few untreatable conditions that cause people to have a 'slow metabolism', and most of them (like Prader-Willi Syndrome which cause chronic hunger among many other problems) are genetic disorders that are easily recognized early on because of the many other health and/or mental problems they are associated with.

Some people who are naturally restless and fidgety tend to be slimmer than most others: it's often thought that they burn a lot of 'insensible' calories just by their fidgeting, but the truth is also that they tend to have short attention spans and often leave their plates unfinished, because there's something more pressing that they've thought of doing....

Therefore, it's obvious that dropping your daily calorie intake consistently will ensure weight loss until your calorie requirements drop sufficiently (due to weight loss = lower metabolic rate) to match your reduced calorie intake, when your weight will then stabilize at the new level. To reduce further, you'll have to reduce your calorie intake further. Exercise boosts your metabolism for a short time - intense exercise gives a longer-term increased calorie 'afterburn effect' after you stop, which is partly why short bursts of running followed by 'recovery' walking (or 'intervals' in sportspeople-speak) are more efficient than slow steady walking for an hour in terms of health gains.

You don't know what it means to be healthy then.



This is definitely unhealthy. You're confusing being healthy with something else, but forcing yourself to exercise every spare minute and not eating will never be classified as healthy. I think you're confusing being thin with being healthy.

Everything is about balance. People who exercise aren't stupid. They're not going to keep up a lifestyle that causes them pain.

Put simply, exercise releases endorphins that make you happier, reduces stress, helps you sleep better, etc. Plus it gives you a better body image.

I exercise in the ways that I enjoy and I eat the foods I love in moderation, but I'm not overweight.



Again, you're thinking that 'thinner' means 'healthier', which is not true.

If you go to tumblr's 'thinspiration' and 'pro-anorexia' blogs, you'll see girls working towards unrealistic goals of being unhealthily thin and underweight. This is dangerous.
However, if you visit 'fitblr' blogs, these are girls and guys who lead (or aspire to lead) 'healthy', balanced lives through exercise and good eating habits. And maintain healthy weights, while building muscle.

Muscle takes up less space than fat, so while athletes have a bit more muscle and may weigh a bit heavier than non-athletes, they generally do not look 'bigger'. Picture a dancer or a yogi.

There is a difference between being healthy and being just thin.

I went out for a date with a guy who I thought had "class", but after our dinner of steak and lobster, he asked if he could scrap my potato and other things from my plate onto his . . . I said "I'm DONE . . . and left the restaurant and got a taxi home. Some people know what to do and how to say it, and others do not.

If you want the pleasure of my "company" & my conversation, you have to earn it!

I'm DONE here!

As my dad used to say, " παν μέτρο άριστο "

Your obsession with your own dating life is irrelevant to this discussion. The world doesn't owe you a ripped movie star. Get over yourself.

My goodness, you said "I'm done and left the restaurant and got a taxi home"? What a strange thing to say!

(To some of us, sins of punctuation are far worse than sins of restaurant left-over protocol. )

-J

Oh & I forgot to say "one" more thing here to you! . . . "TAXI"!!! . .

... I'll scrape your potato.

Actually, I think that behavior is illegal in several states.

Speaking of genetics, they would seem to have an influence on weight without necessarily being considered a disease.

The old "endomorph, ectomorph, mesomorph" types aren't considered valid anymore - I wonder what has replaced them. I know, for example, that I am genetically predisposed to being under the average weight for my height. If we don't say that is being an "ectomorph" any longer, what is it?

As it happens, I am also genetically inclined to overeat, which doesn't have to affect BMI, but is likely to. If those excess calories that result from eating more than I need aren't burned, they will turn to fat.

At any rate, genetics is definitely part of the weight picture for me, and obviously, for others. But I don't know the prevalence of this kind of genetic variation that affects weight.

And for me too. When I look at pictures of my ancestors, they are all built just like me. I look at food and gain weight and all my cousins complain about the same thing. I like to think I am genetically predisposed to surviving a famine because my body stockpiles fat so easily. I'm also well designed for very, very cold weather. (My ancestors came from Russia.) And my husband is happy with me just the way I am.

yeah, i read that 'Wheat Belly' book which made me cut down wheat and gluten rich foods, and unbelievably it made my joint pain in my knees go away, just like that! i used to eat at Panera Bread a lot, loving their bagels and breads, but now i hardly touch such foods anymore. i didn't go entirely gluten free, and rarely i would take a chance on that a little. but still, such a change has made me feel a lot better and healthier. i don't need to read that refute on that book, as it works for me. i truly believe wheat and many gluten rich foods are bad for many people just like me, who don't really have a celiac disease, and yet don't realize our bodies are sensitive at certain level to gluten in foods, and react to it physically with inflammation and pains. also, for some people, weigh gain is linked to eating wheat related products, such as pizza, bread, bagel and pasta, and once they drastically reduce those types of foods, they will loose weight. i have a friend who did just that: stop eating pasta and breads and she finally lost weight.

so, as i said before that what you eat has a lot to do with your health and weight, and unless you eat right foods, you won't get any healthier or loose any weight. sugar and wheat would be the first things people should cut from their diet if they want to be healthier or thinner.

Everyone is predisposed to gaining weight - if they are surrounded by plenty, which we are now. 20 years ago, there were hardly any obese people in China: go to Beijing and see what it's like now. Not quite as bad as in USA and UK, but they're catching up very quickly. The same for the big rich cities in otherwise poor countries (including all African countries). The genes haven't changed - it's the environment that has. But homo sapiens haven't adapted: it now requires an effort (controlling the amount we eat) to stay slim.

Looking at old newsreels program about VE Day celebrations in London, I'm struck by how slim everyone is - everyone. The same when I watched footage of The Great Depression in USA, when, amazingly, the life expectancy soared. That's because a low-calorie (but nutritious) diet prolongs life in all animals from mice to fish to elephants: there's a community of people around the world who've been restricting their calorie intake for some decades to live longer, and many of them look amazingly young for their age - their ageing process has slowed down, and they are also very healthy, and certainly not lacking energy. (Their calorie intake is around 1500 for the men and 1200 for the women - which is, oddly enough, the average calorie intake for the non-affluent population for centuries until fairly recently).

Yes, some people have bigger appetites than others, and genes determine your body shape in terms of whether you're predisposed to being pear-shaped (for women) or muscular (for men). But having a 'beer belly' (a protruding belly) increases your risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease etc, etc. There is a South Pacific island where, before they became rich from tourism with the building of an airport, diabetes was almost unknown and people worked the land and were slim. Now, with imports of fatty lamb from NZ, obesity has gone out of control, everyone is apple-shaped, and half the population (including even children) have become diabetic.

We're eating more processed foods, and those foods contain extra sugar. (I'm not eating them, I'm not including myself in we.)

I wouldn't blame obesity on the eating of fatty lamb. I'm sure the total intake of unnecessary sugars increased in that unnamed South Pacific island as well.

I'm eating more or less the paleo\Atkins diet and consume a great deal of fat. My weight has gone from around 180 pounds to just over 150 (81 kg to 69 kg). I've done this in four months, so the consumption of fat is not an issue. (My breakfast today was a chicken thigh in butter along with broccoli and peas also in butter. I baked a whole chicken last night and I ate what was left over this morning.)

Eating fat is not a problem in losing weight nor does it impact negatively on blood chemistry. (I just had my blood chemistry checked three weeks ago and the numbers were all excellent. I can post them here if anyone's interested.)

The consumption of unnecessary sugars and along with 'starchy' foods is what is driving this obesity epidemic. It's the sodas and fruit drinks, along with the 'healthy' low fat yogurt also with extra sugar, that are the culprits in this obesity epidemic. (I had to laugh when reading In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto by Michael Pollan. He advises to avoid any foods packaged with the word 'healthy' on the label and gives examples like low fat yogurt. They remove the fat and add sugar. There's pictures of fruit on the package but there's no fiber.)

I'm finishing up reading Pure, White, and Deadly, a book on sugar. The sugar industry is just as evil as the tobacco industry.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Not only have I lost weight that I found impossible to lose over the last 20 years, but my blood chemistry improved as well. I have all the proof I need.

My point about the fatty lamb was mainly in relation to the soaring in the amount of calories those islanders ate, once those flights started coming in with the crates of discarded fatty offcuts of lamb (that Kiwis wouldn't eat). Before that, their diet was based around carbs (root vegetables etc) - but not sugar.

IMO, noone who wants a healthy diet should ever drink soda or anything containing high-fructose corn syrup or indeed, any other processed junk.

IMO, noone who wants a healthy diet should ever drink soda or anything containing high-fructose corn syrup or indeed, any other processed junk.

+1

I was at the gym last night and two girls working for Red Bull were handing out free samples of their product. I did my best to educate them.

I mentioned high fructose corn syrup to them but they had no idea what I was talking about (and Red Bull over here just uses sugar). I have since learned that there's a very low production quota of HFCS here in the EU (but it not low for health reasons).

The one girl asked me what I do if my sugar level is a little low and I start getting light headed, no doubt asked as a way to give sugar drinks a more positive light.

I just said I eat an apple. Yea, well apples have sugar. Yea, but they also have fiber which helps to keep the sugar level in my blood from spiking. ... and so on

I added this from NationMaster.com http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/foo_sof_dri_con-food-soft-drink-consumption liters of soda consumer, per capita, from 2002 ... an old statistic