Obese? It's not your fault! There's a new excuse.

[photon]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

What effort did she make? In the article, "Weight-loss programs stressing lifestyle and dietary changes didn't work for her because she didn't have the perseverance to follow them." Basically, she didn't make the effort to follow through.

Not being able to persevere is not the same as not making the effort. You are missing the ADD factor. It's not just about effort, if you lack the ability to maintain focus to carry something though, you can put all kinds of effort in but the efforts going to go into 10,000 different things.

[burn_this_city]

As someone with ADD I feel I should pipe in. We aren't unable to complete a task or see something through to the end. It comes down to desire, if I want something I'll do it. You want me to do 100 mindless math problems, well forget it. I think the success with treating the ADD and weight loss probably comes from the fact drugs like Ritalin are an appetite suppressant.

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by photon

Not being able to persevere is not the same as not making the effort. You are missing the ADD factor. It's not just about effort, if you lack the ability to maintain focus to carry something though, you can put all kinds of effort in but the efforts going to go into 10,000 different things.

I'm not missing the ADD factor. You don't just lose focus and start pigging out on chips and chocolate. You have to make a conscious effort to buy the chips and chocolate to begin with. You can't blame every single decision you make on ADD.

[johnnyluv]

Originally Posted by photon

Not being able to persevere is not the same as not making the effort. You are missing the ADD factor. It's not just about effort, if you lack the ability to maintain focus to carry something though, you can put all kinds of effort in but the efforts going to go into 10,000 different things.

I just wanted to say that I've been reading this, and all your other posts in this thread, in light of the cartoon in your signature. Really makes me wonder if the ADHD actually is the cause of these weight problems.

[photon]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I think the success with treating the ADD and weight loss probably comes from the fact drugs like Ritalin are an appetite suppressant.

Well given that it's a peer reviewed study in a scientific journal, I highly doubt they forgot to control for that.

But I haven't read the study, I can't access it:

http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v3...ijo20095a.html

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

I'm not missing the ADD factor. You don't just lose focus and start pigging out on chips and chocolate. You have to make a conscious effort to buy the chips and chocolate to begin with.

Actually they're saying that's kind of what they do, they "behave impulsively and seek constant stimulation". You are right if they had carrots and celery around instead of chips and chocolate, it wouldn't be much of a problem, but this just goes to show it's not a simple issue.

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

You can't blame every single decision you make on ADD.

Hyperbole for the win? No one was blaming "every single decision you make" on ADD.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Azure

To me, the evidence is as follows, and Gary Taubes laid it out in his book 'Good calories/bad calories' as well.

We've been told for years now that fat was bad, carbs were good....and protein didn't matter. And yet, our cholesterol levels have increased, blood pressure has gotten worse, we have more heart problems than ever before, more people are overweight, etc, etc.

Yeah, I'm not disputing that. What I'm wondering is is there any evidence to suggest that what we have been told is wrong? i.e. Is there a link between the diet the government is advocating and obesity/cholesterol. Or .. are these symptons more likely to be caused by individuals following a bad diet coupled with an unhealthy lifestyle? At the end of the day the government can't make us eat what they suggest. That there is obesity and high cholesterol mightn't necessarily be a result of their suggestions.

Originally Posted by Azure

And yet, people that follow the lower carb, higher fat, even higher protein approach....have lost weight, and have been able to keep it off. Atkins was incredibly popular as a result.

There was an article in Reader's Digest this past month about a doctor in Vancouver who used the low-carb approach on a lot of his patients. Almost 90% of them, including himself lost weight.

Isn't this a tad conflicting from what you posted earlier? The article you linked suggests:

"you don’t need to worry about percentages of fat, protein and carbs, say researchers...
..The main message is that dieting should be simple, say the authors. All you have to do is choose healthy foods and minimize calories. Don’t worry about what percentage of fat, protein and carbs you are eating."

Re. my original question. Has the WHO accepted the basis of a low carbohydrate diet and recommending it? I presume they do pretty thorough literature reviews before throwing out their recommendations.

[Azure]

Realize that by 'low-carb'....I'm not saying go low carb like Atkins diet goes low carb.

Just reverse your macro numbers.

Instead of 60% carbs, go 40% protein, 40% carbs, 20% fat. Which is more or less what would happen if one would do away with the refined carbs, and just eat healthy foods.

Based on the effects on risk of heart disease and obesity, the Institute of Medicine recommends that American and Canadian adults get between 40-65% of dietary energy from carbohydrates.[7] The Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization jointly recommend that national dietary guidelines set a goal of 55-75% of total energy from carbohydrates, but only 10% directly from sugars (their term for simple carbohydrates).

From wikpedia.

BTW, like the tags.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Azure

Realize that by 'low-carb'....I'm not saying go low carb like Atkins diet goes low carb.

Now you tell me! General interpretation of low carb diet is ~20%.

The American Academy of Family Physicians provides the following definition of low-carbohydrate diets.
Low-carbohydrate diets restrict caloric intake by reducing the consumption of carbohydrates to 20 to 60 g per day (typically less than 20 percent of the daily caloric intake). The consumption of protein and fat is increased to compensate for part of the calories that formerly came from carbohydrates. This definition is typical of most sources (from wiki)

So WHO is still at around the 60% mark, and the other 2 have 40% as the minimum limit.

[doozwimp]

I have ADD.

that is all.

[RougeUnderoos]

There is a difference between an "excuse", as the title calls it, and a "reason", which could actually be legitimate.

This woman was 5'7 and she weighed 450 pounds. You can't simply chalk those numbers up to being lazy.She was obviously stationary almost 24 hours a day so it's not like she needed all the food, but something was compelling her to chow down constantly. Whether it was ADHD or "glandular" or who knows what, she didn't get up to a staggering weight (no pun intended) because she is simply lazy.

I'm 3 inches taller than her and she outweighs me by more than 300 pounds. I eat whatever the hell I want, drink far too much beer, sit a desk and rarely exercise. If it's laziness that got her to 450 pounds, what is it that keeps me in fighting trim? I can tell you right now it's not the opposite of laziness.

In other words, there must be some underlying physical or mental condition that got her there, just like there is some reason that no matter they do, some people stay thin.

[Jedi Ninja]

I thought it was McDonald's fault that kids were fat. And that toy in the Happy Meal is the reason they have ADHD.

[doozwimp]

Shouldnt AIDS be associated with significant weight loss, not weight gain?