How Do We Solve a Problem Like Obesity?

[Bairnardo]

Do you normally demand that posters on the General Nonsense section of a Scottish football forum publish their own scientific literature review to accompany every post? 

Well if they are offering up a solution such as "hitting ordinary people in the pocket" then I would expect to see some rationale behind it aye

[vikingTON]

6 minutes ago, throbber said:

Only because the world is so cruel and uncaring. Sometimes I wonder what fat people ever did to hurt you. 

I'm not surprised in the slightest that you rely on pop psychology to explain the world around you tbh; it's the idiot's favourite debate crutch. 

Edited March 7, 2021 by vikingTON

[vikingTON]

3 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

4 minutes ago, virginton said:

Do you normally demand that posters on the General Nonsense section of a Scottish football forum publish their own scientific literature review to accompany every post? 

Well if they are offering up a solution such as "hitting ordinary people in the pocket" then I would expect to see some rationale behind it aye

He set out the rationale of doing it. You're asking for a meta-analysis of the demographics of obesity and likely social impacts as well, which I think you'll recognise as utterly ridiculous as soon as you step back from this debate for a moment.

The General Nonsense section of a Scottish football forum is not a Parliamentary committee nor an academic conference. 

Edited March 7, 2021 by vikingTON

[Bairnardo]

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

He set out the rationale of doing it. You're asking for a meta-analysis of the demographics of obesity and likely social impacts as well, which I think you'll recognise as utterly ridiculous as soon as you step back from this debate for a moment.

The General Nonsense section of a Scottish football forum is not a Parliamentary committee nor an academic conference. 

I think the rationale offered was, I cant think of anything better. Fair enough, but despite the use of the fact we are in the GN section of a football forum, we are still having the conversation. You cant just use that to reduce it down as and when it suits. Every conversation  had here is on a football forum and dont go telling me you personally have never demanded to see some more working?

I just want to see some indication of why taking money off people who are fat might be a good way to deal with it, without making the problems faced by those people worse. I really do think it's a fair enough question. Not asking the guy to become a doctor in it, just let's have a bit more meat on the bones*

 

*open goal

 

[vikingTON]

9 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

I think the rationale offered was, I cant think of anything better. Fair enough, but despite the use of the fact we are in the GN section of a football forum, we are still having the conversation. You cant just use that to reduce it down as and when it suits. Every conversation  had here is on a football forum and dont go telling me you personally have never demanded to see some more working?

I just want to see some indication of why taking money off people who are fat might be a good way to deal with it, without making the problems faced by those people worse. I really do think it's a fair enough question. Not asking the guy to become a doctor in it, just let's have a bit more meat on the bones*

 

*open goal

 

Evidence would help demonstrate the point, sure. But if you disagree with the idea and believe that it will do more harm than good, then the onus is on you to show this through reason and/or evidence of your own, not to say 'where's your research for this? Go away and get some first'. 

[Bairnardo]

Evidence would help demonstrate the point, sure. But if you disagree with the idea and believe that it will do more harm than good, then the onus is on you to show this through reason and/or evidence of your own, not to say 'where's your research for this? Go away and get some first'. 

It's somewhat the point myself and others have been making in this thread though that's it's a problem, but it's an incredibly complex one. It seems to me like a failure to acknowledge that when throwing around ideas like "hit them in the pocket". Its precisely because you need to know the social causes and effects, the demographics of the obese population etc that it's really difficult to offer up any sort of solution. None of us are in possession of all the info needed yet some seem determined to continue saying things like "Humiliate the fatties ahhahaha"

[Aufc]

I think the rationale offered was, I cant think of anything better. Fair enough, but despite the use of the fact we are in the GN section of a football forum, we are still having the conversation. You cant just use that to reduce it down as and when it suits. Every conversation  had here is on a football forum and dont go telling me you personally have never demanded to see some more working?
I just want to see some indication of why taking money off people who are fat might be a good way to deal with it, without making the problems faced by those people worse. I really do think it's a fair enough question. Not asking the guy to become a doctor in it, just let's have a bit more meat on the bones*
 
*open goal
 

Whatever is happening is not working. A lot of people are influenced by money. It stands to reason that as soon as there is a financial impact (positive or negative) people will take notice. How that is done I am not sure.

[vikingTON]

7 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

It's somewhat the point myself and others have been making in this thread though that's it's a problem, but it's an incredibly complex one. It seems to me like a failure to acknowledge that when throwing around ideas like "hit them in the pocket". Its precisely because you need to know the social causes and effects, the demographics of the obese population etc that it's really difficult to offer up any sort of solution. None of us are in possession of all the info needed yet some seem determined to continue saying things like "Humiliate the fatties ahhahaha"
 

I don't recall this clamour to understand the social causes and demographics before a minimum price for alcohol was introduced or when hiking up the cost of tobacco through taxes and duties. What makes obesity fundamentally different when using economic carrots and sticks to tackle the issue? Minimum pricing for example is a straight-up regressive poverty tax. 

I can't speak for others but a straightforward mechanism to mitigate most of the negative consequences would be to use the income tax system to either levy overweight people or provide a 'health credit' from a higher baseline rate to those who are not. If you're losing an extra 2 or 3% on your pay then you are absolutely going to find the time and willpower to change your lifestyle.

What should not be accepted is that obesity is magically immune from the same economic incentives that we use to regulate other behaviour with social costs all the time.

Edited March 7, 2021 by vikingTON

[Cosmic Joe]

3 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

It's somewhat the point myself and others have been making in this thread though that's it's a problem, but it's an incredibly complex one. It seems to me like a failure to acknowledge that when throwing around ideas like "hit them in the pocket". Its precisely because you need to know the social causes and effects, the demographics of the obese population etc that it's really difficult to offer up any sort of solution. None of us are in possession of all the info needed yet some seem determined to continue saying things like "Humiliate the fatties ahhahaha"
 

It's never complex when you are a self - appointed expert on all matters, and have terms in your armoury such as champ and clownshoes to use ad-infinitum over the years. He is a tedious individual, but someone who should probably not be given the attention he so obviously craves. 

I feel sorry for him, and apologise for calling him a p***k earlier. 

[ICTChris]

Saw this documentary linked to in a discussion about this subject on Twitter.  Would increasing the use of bariatic surgery help deal with the health problems due to obesity?

 

[vikingTON]

16 hours ago, Cosmic Joe said:

It's never complex when you are a self - appointed expert on all matters, and have terms in your armoury such as champ and clownshoes to use ad-infinitum over the years. He is a tedious individual, but someone who should probably not be given the attention he so obviously craves. 

I feel sorry for him, and apologise for calling him a p***k earlier. 

It's so cute whenever a no-mark decides to finally share their years of intensive study of box office posting.

[The Moonster]

21 hours ago, Aufc said:

Smoking is an addiction. The money should be spent on curing the addiction to stop money being spent on the effects. If people have no interest in having their addiction treated then it should follow that they dont get the effects treated. Obviously that wont happen though

 

Cool, smokers who have no interest in stopping can stop paying about 80% in taxes per packet if they're having the health services removed from them. 

We can stop treating all of our alcoholics too, they never want help to stop, they only ever want another pint.

Do you think folk who drink an excess of coffee/caffeinated fizzy drinks should also have the effects of that untreated? Or do you now realise how mental this take is?

 

[throbber]

58 minutes ago, virginton said:

It's so cute whenever a no-mark decides to finally share their years of intensive study of box office posting.

Nobody on here takes you seriously. 

[Aufc]

Cool, smokers who have no interest in stopping can stop paying about 80% in taxes per packet if they're having the health services removed from them. 
We can stop treating all of our alcoholics too, they never want help to stop, they only ever want another pint.
Do you think folk who drink an excess of coffee/caffeinated fizzy drinks should also have the effects of that untreated? Or do you now realise how mental this take is?
 

Course i do. Im just putting daft ideas out there. It does amuse me though when people get so defensive when people question their unhealthy habits

[GordonS]

Just catching up on this.

There are people on here who presumably don't believe gambling addiction is real, because it doesn't involve ingesting an addictive chemical. 

I'm too scared to look in the depression thread but I presume they're in there telling folk to pull their socks up.

My theory is that some folk just lack the imagination to try to put themselves in someone else's head, which causes a lack of empathy.

[Guest TheJTS98]

Quite startled (not really) to see suggestions on here that it's definitely the case that nobody is addicted to dessert etc.

Even from casual reading on the subject, it's clear this is not the consensus among experts.

https://www.healthline.com/health/food-nutrition/experts-is-sugar-addictive-drug

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/52/14/910

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/04/is-there-such-a-thing-as-sugar-addiction

I have accidentally conducted my own mini-experiment into the impact of sugar. I was advised by a physiotherapist to try cutting out sugar for a month to try to help with a muscle inflammation problem. So, I did a food diary thing to make sure I cut out sugar and avoided sly sugar in sauces etc.

Firstly, it has made an impact on the pain I was feeling. But it's also had an immediate impact on my weight. I was never fat. I regularly run long distances in the heat and have always been active and sporty. But within a week of ditching sugar my face had sharpened up and I'd dropped a couple of kgs with absolutely no other lifestyle changes.

The point of ditching sugar had nothing to do with weight. I didn't need to lose any. But seeing the positive impact is enough to carry it on. No more donuts.

The problem is how normalised sugar is. As mentioned in one of the linked articles, it's completely socially acceptable and readily available. But we know it's very harmful.

I've obviously never run the numbers on this, but I wonder what the effect would be of a really ambitious project from primary one to provide one genuinely healthy meal every day, such as enforced eating of a properly healthy lunch at school. The Scottish government's latest idea is healthy food should be 'offered'. Go further.

They also propose offering healthier food at tuck shops. Why not just bin tuck shops as an out-dated hangover from an unhealthier time and perhaps even try a sugar ban four days a week or something. A tuck shop just normalises the idea that sugar is part of leisure time and even a reward for surviving maths etc. Not a good habit to form.

This would be expensive and perhaps unpopular up front, but perhaps would pay for itself over decades?

Edited March 16, 2021 by TheJTS98

[Jambomo]

4 hours ago, TheJTS98 said:

Quite startled (not really) to see suggestions on here that it's definitely the case that nobody is addicted to dessert etc.

Even from casual reading on the subject, it's clear this is not the consensus among experts.

https://www.healthline.com/health/food-nutrition/experts-is-sugar-addictive-drug

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/52/14/910

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/04/is-there-such-a-thing-as-sugar-addiction

I have accidentally conducted my own mini-experiment into the impact of sugar. I was advised by a physiotherapist to try cutting out sugar for a month to try to help with a muscle inflammation problem. So, I did a food diary thing to make sure I cut out sugar and avoided sly sugar in sauces etc.

Firstly, it has made an impact on the pain I was feeling. But it's also had an immediate impact on my weight. I was never fat. I regularly run long distances in the heat and have always been active and sporty. But within a week of ditching sugar my face had sharpened up and I'd dropped a couple of kgs with absolutely no other lifestyle changes.

The point of ditching sugar had nothing to do with weight. I didn't need to lose any. But seeing the positive impact is enough to carry it on. No more donuts.

The problem is how normalised sugar is. As mentioned in one of the linked articles, it's completely socially acceptable and readily available. But we know it's very harmful.

I've obviously never run the numbers on this, but I wonder what the effect would be of a really ambitious project from primary one to provide one genuinely healthy meal every day, such as enforced eating of a properly healthy lunch at school. The Scottish government's latest idea is healthy food should be 'offered'. Go further.

They also propose offering healthier food at tuck shops. Why not just bin tuck shops as an out-dated hangover from an unhealthier time and perhaps even try a sugar ban four days a week or something. A tuck shop just normalises the idea that sugar is part of leisure time and even a reward for surviving maths etc. Not a good habit to form.

This would be expensive and perhaps unpopular up front, but perhaps would pay for itself over decades?

I was thinking of doing something similar and trying to cut sugar out as much as I can. Can I ask if you cut out things like honey, fruit and other natural sugars as well or more just refined ones?

[vikingTON]

7 hours ago, GordonS said:

Just catching up on this.

There are people on here who presumably don't believe gambling addiction is real, because it doesn't involve ingesting an addictive chemical. 

Gambling is a behaviour and behaviours can produce compulsive disorders (which we have conflated with 'addiction' to a substance and so muddy the waters all the round). Obesity is not a behaviour though; it is a factual state. 

The insistence from the fat lobby that their propensity for food is i) somehow unique to themselves and ii) the sole cause of their obesity is risible nonsense. It isn't of course, because obesity is the outcome of two processes: calorie input and output. Which is where the gambling 'addict' comparison completely falls apart, because this is a single track state. A compulsive gambler cannot directly undo the impacts of his compulsive behaviour by going for a light jog. A person of healthy weight is just as susceptible to eating too much in one sitting; they just burn it off through regulating their diet at other times and by doing sufficient exercise. Input does not therefore exceed output. 

It's really that straightforward and no amount of self-pitying shite and pop science about 'mah addiction to sugar but only refined sugar and not natural sugar and also multipacks of crisps btw' will deflect from this. 

Edited March 16, 2021 by vikingTON

[ICTChris]

18 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

I was thinking of doing something similar and trying to cut sugar out as much as I can. Can I ask if you cut out things like honey, fruit and other natural sugars as well or more just refined ones?

I'm willing to be corrected on this but my understanding is that in terms of how your body reacts to sugar, it doesn't make any difference if it comes from Haribo or an apple.  However, if you eat fruits the fibre slows down the absorption of the sugar which means you get less of an insulin spike and that sugar is less likely to be stored as fat.  Also, fruit has less sugar than Haribo pound for pound.  And it depends on what fruits you eat - stuff like mango and banana has more sugar in it than apples.

This post was brought to you by Big Apple.

[Guest TheJTS98]

42 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

I was thinking of doing something similar and trying to cut sugar out as much as I can. Can I ask if you cut out things like honey, fruit and other natural sugars as well or more just refined ones?

I went cold turkey for the first few days. No fruit and no refined sugar at all. Wasn't as hard as it sounds, just had to think a little bit more about shopping.

After four or five days I reintroduced fruit. But in terms of cravings for artificial sugar, there was no issue.

A good tip is always having water with lemon and cucumber in it in the fridge. Any time you need a wee sip of something that tastes nice, that takes the edge off and you're fine. I'm at the point now where I can't imagine going to the shop and buying something with refined sugar in it. I used to have honey in the flat and stuff like that, but now it's gone. I use pineapple, bananas, or papaya etc to sweeten up breakfast.

I feel a lot less tired after meals, feel really awake in general. I think the key is to not obsess about having absolutely no sugar. Last night I was out for Chinese with a mate, and they probably used sugar in the meal. But that's fine. The point is to cut it back to a low level and keep it out when you can control it. Still got to enjoy life.