We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner


It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


 

Part 2 this week being fat


carver
Resolved

Likes # 0

It seems that this week if you have a heart condition enter link description here then you are better to be fat, sorry obese.

Just waiting for some one to tell me I would be better off not having stopped smoking, sorry someone already has.

Like this post
Bing.alau

Likes # 0

It is not natural or healthy to be fat. Nor is it natural or healthy to be thin. If you are fat eat less and if you are thin eat more. Eat a variety of what you fancy and do not take any notice of food fads or diet fads. It's as simple as that.

Like this post
finerty

Likes # 0

double standards and double conflicting advise, funny how these things appear when theres a tory government in power

Like this post
Joseph Kerr

Likes # 0

"It's as simple as that."

It most assuredly is not, as Gary Taubes might put it.

One should try to eat right even if overweight, and not be put off from doing so if you remain overweight. You will be healthier for eating better, just like you will be for exercising, even if weight loss does not result from that either.

There's many a slim person with heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, thinking "ah, I thought this was a fat man's disease".

You can be fat and metabolically healthy.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

"You can be fat and metabolically healthy", and that is possibly the reason why some researcher's seem to change their minds, on perhaps far to frequent times.

When my late mother died, I was approached by the hospital authorities about donating my mother's body for research, because at that time, they could not understand how a 'rather thin but average at that time' person was able to survive a number of intensive care incidents, and come out of it well enough to be discharged.

Was it the 'hardships' that people endured in her lifetime, that made them survive on very little, or was it something else, which research hadn't discovered.

When I see people 'struggling' to walk properly, or the increase of medical problems, due possibly to excess weight, perhaps brought on by laziness or 'junk' food, then I can only wonder why?.

Like this post
Joseph Kerr

Likes # 0

Did anyone see Bang Goes The Theory on sugar tonight? Apalling. And they don't even seem to have a forum for viewer comment.

Like this post
fourm member

Likes # 0

Joseph Kerr

Missed it but thanks for the reminder. I'll catch it on iPlayer because I'm interested in how they were going to deal with it.

Like this post
Joseph Kerr

Likes # 0

They dealt with it like it was irrelevant fluff and not an important health issue. I mean, I know programmes on early evening, only half an hour long, have certain restraints but it was unsubstantial and innacurate (I'm afriad it's a habby horse of mine lately, and I've been doing rather a lot of reading). Do report back with your view.

Like this post
Joseph Kerr

Likes # 0

Heh. Unsubstantial habby.

Like this post
fourm member

Likes # 0

Joseph Kerr

I'm afraid you're going to have to be more specific because it seemed to me, for a popular science programme, to give reasonable coverage and clear explanations of the science.

Where is the problem you saw?

Like this post
Joseph Kerr

Likes # 0

High fructose corn syrup and sucrose are the same. They are both made of glucose and fructose; the ratio of one to the other only varies by 5% from HFCS to sucrose. So if there are, rightly, grave concerns about HFCS, there ought to be about sucrose too.

What's more, by traditional logic, what happens when you eat too many calories? You lose weight. They spoke to a very slim man with fatty liver disease and then cut to someone who said "well, fatty liver disease is just down to calories, really". This - having read my Taubes, Lustig, and some Harcombe - is almost certainly not the case and, if it were, and toomany calories make you fat, why was the chap with fatty liver disease so slim?

In summary (I have to head out) I believe high levels of sugar are dangerous to pretty much anyone, pretty much all the time, and that sugar is capable of increasing weight independant of total calories consumed. These ideas seem to be quite controversial, but they are, oddly, based on science that is established and uncontentious.

Like this post

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



IDG UK Sites

45 Best Android games: top Android games for your smartphone or tablet in 2014 (24 are free!)

IDG UK Sites

How Apple, Adobe, Microsoft and others have let us down over UltraHD and hiDPI screens

IDG UK Sites

Do you have the X-Factor too? Mix Off app puts fans in the frame

IDG UK Sites

iPad Pro release date, rumours and leaked images - 12.9 screen 'coming in 2015'