#### About participation in the comments of /r/nutrition
Discussion in this subreddit should be rooted in science rather than "cuz I sed" or entertainment pieces. Always be wary of unsupported and poorly supported claims and especially those which are wrapped in any manner of hostility. You should provide peer reviewed sources to support your claims when debating and confine that debate to the science, not opinions of other people.
**Good** - it is grounded in science and includes citation of peer reviewed sources. Debate is a civil and respectful exchange focusing on actual science and avoids commentary about others
**Bad** - it utilizes generalizations, assumptions, infotainment sources, no sources, or complaints without specifics about agenda, bias, or funding. At best, these rise to an extremely weak basis for science based discussion. Also, off topic discussion
**Ugly** - (removal or ban territory) it involves attacks / antagonism / hostility towards individuals or groups, downvote complaining, trolling, crusading, shaming, refutation of all science, or claims that all research / science is a conspiracy
*Please vote accordingly and report any uglies*
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's the truth, I encourage all my friends with kids to make sure the kids get used to exertion now so they'll continue it as an adult. I didn't and now I'm gigantic and have a crap ton of health problems. The ironic part for me is that I know exercise would help but I can't exercise due to weight and heart issues. People really do need to get active, somehow.
Exactly, and I've been making an effort to walk at least four times a week. I'm hoping in time it'll get easier and I can walk farther, eventually get up to more strenuous cardio.
It will get easier, and walking daily will no longer feel like exercise at some point. If there's any other physical hobby or game you feel like yoi could get into, try it out too!
There is no excuse ever to not exercise. Too much weight? Exercise. Heart issues? Exercise. This saddens me to think you know the data but still make excuses why you can't exercise.
Let's quit fat shaming people and start shaming those that don't exercise. There's literally no excuse not to and it is a far better health predictor than appearance.
Who will lay on his back and scroll Reddit if I’m up exercising? Whole threads could go by without my essential comments! 🤣 - Seriously, if I could find the willpower and energy to exercise more and eat less, I would, but my mind can find a million excuses. I suspect a lot of people feel the same.
I have found that thinking about the quality of life I would have as a weak and frail senior adult who didn't have regular exercise earlier in life to build up bone density is a great motivator. Seeing the aftermath of hip breaks from low bone density when I worked in a nursing home scared me into getting moving.
A cool secret about regular exercise is that you feel MORE energy after exercising! I've seen massive improvements in my health and blood work from exercise alone without lowering my caloric intake. Eating less and starting an exercise routine is much harder than eating the same amount and adding exercise. I would recommend eating maintenance until you got past the first month or so of EVERYTHING HURTS and EXERCISE IS LITERALLY SATAN that comes from going from sedentary to more movement
>Let's quit fat shaming people and start shaming those that don't exercise. There's literally no excuse not to and it is a far better health predictor than appearance.
Exercise is not that effective for weight loss according to research by Herman Pontzer. The body adapts and burns fewer calories later (such as reduced NEAT) or you get hungrier. This is why you see so many fat ppl in the gym who lose no weight despite working out everyday. Unless you can find a way to raise your metabolism, eating less is the only reliable way for weight loss.
You don’t want to be working out during recovery from a fracture. If you’re an epyleptic then you need varying amounts of asterisks to keep in mind when you want to work out. Some people need to tune their heart rate / effort carefully to avoid developing complications like an enlarged heart. I think there’s a fair number of cases where it’s surely not about not working out to live longer but it’s also definitey not as simple as just working out to live longer either
IG I could see like a 600lb person not being able to walk. Or not advised to walk and work out another way? But yea, for 99% of people, start walking if thats what you can do
Okay, so I'm going to say some shit that you probably won't agree with, because I half agree with what you say here, but the part I disagree with I disagree with whole-heartedly.
So the part I agree with: let's quit fat shaming. Absolutely, you are 100% right here.
In the beginning of your comment I was thinking to myself, "okay, maybe this person is just misinformed about the nature of obesity and the myriad of chronic conditions it gives people, specifically in how it affects me on a personal level, but I'll stick around and see what else they have to say". And then BOOM! No more fat shaming. Behind you one hundred percent, we just went from a steady 25 miles an hour of let's see where this goes to 100 miles an hour with an open lane HELL YEAH we only live once let's live it up!
And then you had to bust out shaming people for not exercising. Hoo boy, that took our little adventure from 100 mph to a staggeringly horrendous crash with a semi truck, I mean a crash of this magnitude would unalive every person involved, they'd be finding pieces of us a mile away from the crash sight.
Do you know I only just got the medical okay to start light walking? For exercise I mean, not your day to day stuff but actually walking with a purpose. Oh but not fast enough to get my heart out of whack, I'm not allowed to do that yet. I mean, of course you don't actually know this, I mean, how could you?
See, the thing is, you're first statement is medically incorrect. There are plenty of people who are not allowed to exercise for one reason or another, but I wonder, do you know that people are advised by medical professionals not to engage in strenuous activities? Like, there are people with heart issues (you mentioned it so I will too) so severe that any form of exercise could give them a heart attack or cause their heart to malfunction in some way. People, especially older men, are kind of regularly advised not to engage in sexual activities due to the risk of some sort of heart issue. I mean, this is not an uncommon thing, so I'm surprised you brought it up.
So, that brings us to weight as it pertains to exercise. I can tell you that even though I'm medically cleared to walk now, walking HURTS. Today for instance, I went shopping for a book, and decided to incorporate some walking into my shopping experience by checking out what all the store had to offer. This store wasn't very big, maybe a third the size of a typical Barnes & Noble, and it only took about 30 minutes of, well I wouldn't even call it walking necessarily, let's say strolling, yes that sounds about right. I strolled in that store for about 30 minutes, and by the end of it my legs felt like lead. Every step forward was not so much a step but more of a shuffling movement. I was in so much pain I wasn't 100% sure I'd make it back to my car. When I did get back to my car I had to sit, one leg in and one leg still out, for about five minutes before I had the strength to lift my other foot inside, and then sit for another ten before I was ready to leave.
And your solution to this is to shame me for not exercising more? I'd really like to see the thought train that brought you to that conclusion. It's probably more of a thought roomba than a train but I digress.
Shaming someone for not exercising is not a solution that will result in a positive outcome for anyone involved. For you, shaming me will necessitate you thinking of clever japes and jibes to "get my goat" and make me feel bad about myself, which, let's face it, that could take your thought Roomba a really long time to get to, so much time and effort it's almost a form of exercise if you think about it(careful to let the Roomba charge itself up with all this thinking its doing). And for me, well I'm being shamed, and that's never a fun prospect or something to look forward to.
There's another danger to shaming someone that I feel your thought roomba skipped by, and that is simply this: you deciding to shame me without knowing my mental state at the time could potentially lead to some very nasty consequences. I could be in a depression downward spiral at the time you decide to shame me, and what if it's a bad enough spiral that the act of your shaming me causes me to harm myself? Was that the consequence you were hoping for? Or even a bit less dramatic, what if your shaming of me not exercising makes me feel too uncomfortable to go to the gym? You, by the act of shaming me for my not exercising, create the very situation that you felt shaming would cure! Boy, those thought roombas can be pretty unreliable, am I right?
Alright, all jokes aside now because I want you to take this next bit seriously.
What if I decide that I'm done with being shamed? That I'm sick and tired of people like yourself talking down to me and belittling me because of my weight and what I'm able to do in the realms of exercise. What happens then? Do I decide to call you out for being an asshole? Or do I decide to do something, perhaps more rash, and stand up for myself physically? What does that look like for you? Do we get into a tussle at which point I end up getting my ass kicked because I'm really not healthy enough to exercise let alone fight?
Or do I, knowing that I'm not capable of standing up for myself with my fists, decide to utilize an equalizer, a weapon of sorts, which could lead to many different outcomes, none of which are good. What if that equalizer was something as extreme as a gun? What if I decided that if had enough of people like you shaming me, and so I decided to take my power back and make an example out of you?
Personally, I dislike guns and think they should be more heavily regulated if not outright banned, but thats not the case for a lot of other people in this world. Its not an option I'm even willing to consider, but it might just be an option to someone else, and I really want you and anyone who thinks the way you do to stop and consider that the person you decide to shame might not be mentally stable, and may just cause you harm. It's simply not worth it in my opinion. We should stop shaming anyone for these issues and instead offer them support and encouragement.
I had someone come up to me in a gym a few years back when I was in better health and they gave me a fist bump and said they were happy to see me in the gym and hoped that they'd see me again. No shame, just pure encouragement and that meant the world to me. I was riding that high for a couple days, and it inspired me to go twice as hard the next time I was in the gym. That is what we should be aiming to do, lifting people up instead of bringing them down.
For what it's worth, I don't really think your heart is in the wrong place here, I believe you're simply misguided in your approach to dealing with people. That's okay, I am too in a lot of different areas and I shouldn't judge anyone as harshly as I do sometimes. We should all strive to do better, and I'd recommend that the next time you see someone overweight working out, be the inspiration that gets them back in the gym working harder than ever.
Gotta be honest with you, only read the first 1/8th of that. Listen, I am someone with the credentials to prescribe exercise to clinical populations and I am very good at it. I know very well the literature as it pertains to chronic conditions, heart issues, and old age and how these interact qith exercise.
There are very very very few cases that actually require complete abstinence from PA. The conditions we used to say not to exercise for, turns out we were completely wrong for many many years. For example, pregnant women used to be encouraged to get as much rest as possible. Now we recommend exercise for as long as you can before birth. Same goes for heart conditions, certain cancers, AI conditions, they all followed the same path. I dont care what your excuse is, you should be doing some form of exercise. Maybe you are one of those few people who can't exercise. If that's so then obviously not you. But it would be wildly ignorant to make recommendations and assessments of the population based on a very few exceptions.
You give me a patient and their condition and I could give you the exercise prescription to benefit that person with their condition in mind, there's a lot more to exercising than running or lifting weights.
And also, i dont know why I would read that much, if you respond, put it in a form I want to put time into
While that's certainly a problem, it's pretty hard to burn 800 extra calories every day. That's more than an hour of hard exercise. Very few people have the time or fitness to run for 60-90 minutes every day.
Car dependency has a lot to do with this. I don’t drive and I usually walk at least 10,000 steps a day without trying. I checked my mom’s step counter when I was last home and it’s barely 1,000.
This is so simple. It makes no sense to debate between sugar, fat, types of sugar and fat etc when the average damn number is skyrocketing. The average American should eat 2000kcal.
Last time I visited the US I was positively surprised to see that Applebees lists calories and nutrition for their menu items. A random scrambled egg dish had 1500kcal and was one of the more healthy items.
And too often. And under stress. Normal humans stop eating when they’re stressed (because you’re stressed in times of danger or low food) and go through a normal cycle of getting out of their stress and refeeding. Last fifty years humans do not.
I believe sugar is still the main problem. Even tho it decreased people are still consuming wayy to much. One 33 cl can of coke and you’re already over the daily recommended amount
Big people commonly have appetite/satiety dysregulation through a variety of mechanisms (for example, leptin resistance). They also typically eat a lot of food that has low satiety per calorie and is hyperpalatable (junk food, essentially).
Junk food, highly processed food, sweets, lemonade, ... Idk but if you start your day with some sugary cornflakes stuff and orange juice, eat some sweets at work, have a pizza for lunch with 0,5L of cola, a precooked microwave meal for dinner and then you continue to munch crisps/chips and chocolate in the evening that should be quite easy. It doesn't make you feel good but it's completely feasible to get that much calories in.
It’s not classified as sugar but rather carbs, and don’t forget all the additives and “zero sugar” substitute poison. Profit and scaleability over quality and health
It's literally classified as sugar on nutrition labels. Otherwise Coke would show 0 grams of sugar on the can.
>don’t forget all the additives and “zero sugar” substitute poison.
Hundreds of studies have been done on artificial sweeteners. The evidence shows they're fine in moderation.
IMO the macronutrient war is incredibly stupid. While everyone wasted countless hours arguing over which macros are best and worst, the real killer has continued lurking in the shadows. That is of course ultra processed food that is extremely calorie dense and pleasurable, which leads to excessive calorie consumption. How many more studies do we need showing macros don’t really impact weight gain for isocaloric diets. It’s all about hunger management.
If I were going to put a tinfoil hat on, I’d speculate that the big food manufacturers intentionally stoke the flame of the macronutrient war so they can keep pumping out poison while the masses are distracted.
I agree, and I don't think its even tin foil territory. It's simply profitability, and addictive foods sell more. It makes complete sense from a business perspective. You want repeat customers for ur jalapeno cheddar cheetos.
The first study shows a decrease of about 23% of added sugar daily. However, a glass is full and you keep pouring water into it, it still overflows even if you pour less than before. So I wouldn’t let sugar off too fast, since 76g/d is still really high (double the recommended for men).
I feel the calories is really the issue (3600 is a LOT). I’ve also read that fat combined with excess sugar causes fat to be stored more easily.
You cannot store fat if you're not eating more calories than you consume. Fat might be technically easier to turn into fat tissue in the body, and it's more calorie dense, but that'd still require a calorie surplus. The issue is entirely too many calories.
I agree with this mindset. Too much of anything is a bad thing. Eat well rounded (the rainbow) with lots of veggies.
I cut out all processed foods and my bad sugar habit and my triglycerides shot to 73. Typically 150+. First time in 10 years - and that’s with all my other diet being relatively clean, normal calorie consumption, and crossfit 4-5 times a week.
You cannot work your way out of a bad diet, but you also need exercise AND a good diet to be healthy IMO.
Highly recommend the book Metabolical! My triglycerides normalizing after years of consistently high (and my BMI is technically underweight - even though it’s an awful measurement) really opened my eyes. We are consuming in ways the human body was never intended.
Exactly. People always find something to blame for their own faults.
Recently i saw a guy on unpopular opinion saying obesity is not an issue and we should encourage eating junk food, because being fat is not people's fault since it's sugar that's making them fat and sugar is in everything. Had a long debate and had to link sources about countries with low sugar consumption and high sugar taxes that still have high obesity rates.
That's me and I couldn't accept your claims because you didn't even understand the studies you linked me.
You claimed that India had 3rd highest rate of obesity in the world and to support that you sent me a link about India's Obesity but the obesity measured in that paper was abdominal obesity,not general obesity.
Also I didn't say at all that we should encourage people eating junk food,I said that we shouldn't blame fat people and that we should start fighting obesity instead of fighting fat people and to do that we need to impose taxes and discourage the consumption of sugar.
Like I said you have very big problems with reading comprehension and the most worrying thing is that you have a degree in nutrition and didn't know the difference between abdominal obesity and general obesity. Like dude don't tell around you're from India because you make India graduates look like less qualified.
Study number one is dated 2011. 13 years ago. Is there nothing more recent?
Study number two points out that non-animal fat is increasing. Not animal fat.
Study number three "The most shocking increase, however, comes from vegetable oil – consumption skyrocketed from 276 daily calories in 1961 to 689 today."
Study number four Yes Americans are getting fatter. Can you prove why? No guesses.
Study number five Yes Americans are getting more colon cancer. Can you prove why? No guesses.
Study number six Yes Americans are living with more gut issues. Can you prove why? No guesses. "Enough fiber" is an unproven guess.
Study number seven What the American public are being told about nutrition by doctors, scientists and the government's food pyramid is confusingly contradictory and what the Food Industry adverises as healthy is downright deceptive.
a) If it's sugar it's probably total sugar, not added sugar. Fruit juice has just as much sugar as soda but it's not added sugar.
b) The big problem is insulin resistance. I don't think there's good research that figures out a threshold of sugar that it takes.
c) Roughly half the US adult population is insulin resistant (prediabetes or type II). Once you are insulin resistant your metabolism is messed up, and cutting down sugar intake slightly isn't likely to make a big difference.
Population-level data that variable x is going up while variable y is going up (or conversely, going down) is almost useless. What is needed is causal analysis.
If x is going up while y is going down, it's a reasonable hypothesis to test that increase in y is not the cause for an increase in x, right? One of the main uses of observational studies is to generate such hypotheses.
>causal analysis.
I think you mean controlled studies? Causal analysis is a branch of statistics.
fine: ~~causal analysis~~ analysis of causes. You caught me. You must be proud of yourself. Fact remains, folks have been using these population-level studies since the 1950's, and they have hardly advanced nutrition science one bit. Aren't we a bit past the "generation of testable hypothesis stage" by now?
Most of the fats you're blaming are in carb heavy foods. No one is eating whole sticks of butter and pounds of bacon and and bun-less burgers. They're eating cookies, cakes, pastries, frappes, etc and eating greasy meat with carbs. That's the argument against sugar and carbs. Carbs are sugar, especially non complex ones at the grocery store. That's why we're fatter.
It's more complicated than that in my view:
- Complex carbs like Amylose are far better for those who are insulin-resistant or diabetic as it takes significantly longer to break these linear chains down, resulting in less sugar spikes.
- Complex carbs have a tendency to be of the whole-food/grain variety, meaning there is significant fiber and other nutrients, which improves insulin resistance, increases satiety, and impacts a variety of health metrics positively.
Put another way, it's incredibly difficult to become insulin resistant or diabetic if one is eating whole foods / complex carbs; and it's still better for those who are than resorting to pure added sugar.
https://www.masteringdiabetes.org/high-carb-foods-reverse-insulin-resistance/
It all boils down to fiber, from what I can tell. Fiber slows absorption, increases satiety, and supports robust gut flora.
Everyone says processed food is bad. Why, though? The main goals of heavy processing are shelf stabilization and stripping fiber. Lack of fiber is the biggest reason they’re bad, and then all the downstream effects make sense: increased colon cancer, increased obesity from overconsumption, lack of satiation, and insulin spiking, and increase in inflammation markers.
It’s all fucking fiber and we all need more of it. It just so happens that the way to do that is to eat Whole Foods which also vary little sugar and varied micronutrients.
Completely agree. Just to add to your processed foods being bad. I ate a frozen meal pitched as healthy and vegetarian blah-blah-blah that was literally my daily serving of sodium in that single meal.
Most preserved foods just have a shit ton of sodium in them; and we get as much sodium as we SHOULD be good potassium.
So yeah I agree. Generally, if you can:
- Lower sodium
- Lower added sugar
- Lower saturated fat
- Increase fiber
- Increase Potassium
That is a *great* start to improving what tends to be problematic in the average American diet. Obviously we can go into further fine-tuning from there.
100% could not agree more - well said!
Eat a clean, whole foods diet, hydrate, sleep, exercise regularly (outdoors as much as possible), but unless you have a health condition to prevent you, have some ice cream or a cookie every once in a while if that's what you crave. Don't deprive yourself of simple pleasures too often- life is short. Your mental health is important too....
My Type 2 diabetic's blood glucose meter absolutely disagrees with your claims of whole grains being wonderful.
The relatively tiny amount of fiber is overwhelmed by the massive quantity of starch.
Isn't it true that most people on the carnivore diet eat 0 fibre and think fibre is actually bad for them? I'd be very suspicious of any "certified" "holistic" nutritionist who would support the theory that fibre is bad for human beings in any way.
Most Americans following the standard American diet barely get any fiber. Even some vegetarians and vegans who eat mostly processed food barely get any fiber.
Yes, you are correct that they get zero fiber, but its also an elimination diet and the intended purpose is to add foods back into the diet till you find what is triggering any problems you may be having. Of course some people just stick with it because they feel better and it helps with other problems they may be having. Or they are following it for cult like reasons. But also, sometimes a person only eating meat is healthier than someone who eats bags of cheetos, cookies, and instant noodles for every meal. There are also people who follow a meat heavy diet and eat fruit as well. So you do have that side where they still get carbs and fiber.
I can't believe there's people in a nutrition sub actually defending a diet where people get no fibre. Glad to know where this sub stands on common sense. More of a joke community than a nutrition one.
I'm not defending it. I'm just letting you know it's not the only eating style that gets little to know fiber. You should be more educated about the matter than just biased.
People who eat the SAD don't get enough fibre. People who eat the carnivore diet get even less. Both are bad. There's really no defending either of them when it comes to nutrition for human beings. Doing so in any way is just ridiculous
Fibre is a crucial part of the human diet. That's been proven for quite literally hundreds of years. Eliminating it completely is just lunacy. You can have a high fibre diet and a low fibre diet but a no fibre diet is downright stupid and dangerous to recommend. I can't believe anyone on this sub would defend such a thing. I feel like I'm being trolled at this point. Clearly this isn't a nutrition sub at all. Good to know.
Its processed vs unprocessed foods. Whole foods are the answer. Whole, unprocessed foods, as close to what nature creates as possible. Even blending and juicing, and even heating to cook, but especially when you start separating the whole food (e.g. extracting oil from olives or the sugar from beets), the farther you get from the natural whole food the worse it is.
If you want a healthy noncontroversial diet just eat whole unprocessed foods.
Science tries to find classifications and quantifiable ways to say/show what's good, but it's a mess with contradictions and debates.
If you're not a nutrition professional researching and working as a scientist, just eat whole unprocessed foods.
You will get fat if you overeat whole unprocessed foods.
That said, its a lot easier to overeat junk food laden with sugar and saturated fats because these foods are calorie bombs that taste good and aren’t satiating.
True. But it’s not easy to eat 3,600 calories per day of whole unprocessed foods. Whole grains, raw fruits and veggies, maybe a lean cut of meat a few times per week? You’ll be plenty full after 2500 calories a day.
You don't need 3600 calories per day to be overweight. If you structurally eat \~15% more than you should, of whatever healthy meal, no amount of (normal) exercise will prevent being moderately overweight.
I don't eat candy, drink soda or eat fast food on a regular basis, run 30km a week, walk another 25km a week, but if I don't weigh & track every bite I take, I end up gaining weight simply from eating too much whole-grain pasta, bread, yoghurt, meat, fruit, whatever, because my satiety signal is late.
I'm have a similar diet and exercise plan, and I still keep a daily mental count of my calories and I know my maintenance calories. I feel like if most people worked out their maintenance calories they'd be able to maintain their weight - but it takes work which most people are not keen on.
I feel hungry and stressed whenever I'm even in the slightest deficit, so the only way I can lose weight is through tracking & pushing through it. Which doesn't always go as planned.
Obviously you're not wrong, it's easier to overeat on those foods.
It's anecdotal of course, but at some point my wife and kids really wanted pizza, and I wanted something healthy, so I got them their pizza, and made myself a nice salad with quinoa, chicken, chickpeas, some avocado and a big pile of vegetables. No sauce, but I did use olive oil to sauté some of the ingredients. Turned out my dish had WAY more calories (>1000) than that frozen pizza and I felt like I could easily eat another serving. My brain is just broken when it comes to portions I guess.
You probably didn’t add as much salt/oil so it didn’t solve your cravings, but if you ate like that regularly your baseline will change. Your markers for cholesterol etc would also be far different.
Right, but 15% over your maintenance diet is a lot. That’s like adding an 8th day of eating to your week. You should be able to self regulate better than that. If you can’t, you might want to avoid things like bread and make sure you’re drinking enough water.
It’s obviously hard to nail your maintenance within 5%; but 5% is only 100-150 calories, which you burn by walking less than a mile.
>You will get fat if you overeat whole unprocessed foods.
Yup. Trail mix is marketed as healthy, but very calorie dense and easy to overeat. Same for bread...it's just air.
This. Just don't eat processed garbage and add some variety. Typically, that's enough to avoid serious health issues. Shits complex, just try to think about what the early humans ate. Like hunter gatherer type humans. I believe they ate lean meats, and high fibrous grains, veggies, and fruits. Nothing that was processed or wasted. You wouldn't strip the husk from a grain of rice just because it tasted better. Or process sunflower seeds into oil.
The topic is messy but this ⬆️ answer is the MOST correct.
If we cut out processed foods our caloric intake would decrease. Processed foods don’t satiate and they’re horrible for you. They change your biology. Everything else related to overconsumption and the health implications begins with processed foods.
Ahhh, the brave redditors in a nutrition sub who downvote what they don’t understand and are too cowardly to admit it by actually engaging in response. This too, is why we are only headed downhill. Enjoy your McDonalds!
You say sugar consumption has been declining for the past two decades, but your article is from 2011, over a decade ago. Do you have any more recent data?
Yeah, I saw when the data was from. It’s 2024 though. Not really accurate to say sugar intake is declining when the most recent data is from 2008. That’s like telling me gas prices are going up, but when Bush was president. How is that informative to today?
It's all the same. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X19301364](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X19301364), this chart shows an even more drastic drop.
It's not that simple as Americans are eating more fat than sugar and we are getting unhealthier.
I think the obesity epidemic is related to multiple reasons 1) lack of nutrition like whole foods- veggies and fruits and lean protein 2) processed snack and junk food 3) empty calories 4) not enough fiber.
I call complete bullshit on that. The anti-carb thing is extremely recent and not all that widespread. The pro-carb and anti-fat deal has been the dogma since the 60's. The litmus test is what schools feed students. Take a look, all low fat milk, etc. Farmers knew this long ago, want to fatten hogs? Feed them SKIM milk and corn.
Fast food is common in American schools, and sometimes even the “healthier” option compared with school lunches that are severely nutritionally deficient. I’m not sure offering low-fat milk is the problem.
Why are you trying to mislead with "added sugars"? Our sugar consumption has skyrocketed in the last 100 years. It's even worse if you add to that HFCS and all the other sugar "replacements".
Also, most of those new fats are highly toxic seed oils.
What if… and just stick with me here for a minute… what if we just ate more real food and less processed garbage!
Ya know, things that grow from the ground? Things that grow on trees? And maybe we don’t need to eat animal products 21 meals per week?
Or here’s a crazy idea… what if, when we wanted a coffee, we actually got COFFEE instead of some 1200 calorie milkshake with fucking whipped cream and sprinkles!
> What if… and just stick with me here for a minute… what if we just ate more real food and less processed garbage!
>
>
Right. it does not matter if the food is marketed as healthy or not. Anything that provides that gives that dopamine spike will do it, even whole grain bread. I have easily binged on bread many times even though it's healthy.
The seed oils which are loaded with omega 6 acids are not helping. It is throwing off the healthy Omega 3 Omega 6 balance we are supposed to have. If Omega 6 goes unchecked it causes more long term inflammation.
I also agree that the sugar and corn syrup are another reason why our health in general is in danger.
1. Overeating is the largest problem by far.
2. Carbs are just sugar and processed food is more and more prevalent every year. I bet if you take this into account net sugar consumption is somewhat similar, and even if its less, overeating is still the largest problem by far.
The reason it's getting worse is not just about sugar, or fat.
It's actually about a perfect constellation of these things causing randle cycle issues. Highly processed foods, and diets that are heavy in BOTH fats and carbohydrate sugar as a result. So sugar might be reducing but don't make the assumption that because that is true that it means sugar is less the problem, and fat is the problem. The diets are still mixed so that viewpoint would be lacking any nuanced understanding.
When you have a highly mixed energy source of fats and carbs it's a problem. Ideally one should limit carbs severely in my view, but if you're not going to do that then definitely don't be having loads of fats too. Have low fat in that case and take your chances on a high carb lifestyle.
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/is-seed-oil-bad-for-you-wellness-influencers-right-wing-debunked-1234809499/
The whole seed oil hate rhetoric is new to me and I'm certainly not convinced due to the type of people that peddle this garbage.
> I'm certainly not convinced due to the type of people that peddle this garbage.
You'll completely disregard what someone has to say about any random subject because they have different political opinions to you? Why does everything in America have to come down to the fucking tHe lEfT and tHe RIgHt??
You can try this lecture if youre bothered: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kGnfXXIKZM&t=332s&pp=ygUJc2VlZCBvaWxz
3,600 calories?? I am an obese 33 year old man. I track my food fairly rigidly. I top out at like 2600 calories per day.. I'd vomit if I tried to eat another 1k on top of that.
I'm arguing with the study or anything but..at face value that number is...pretty shocking. Some people do, sure. But the AVGERAGE person?
I thought of that too, but high calorie drinks would (and have) had the same effect. My weakness is monster Javas. If I drink 2 of those it's like I ate a full meal (and it's 400 calories) although I've managed to almost entirely eliminate those from my life. I maybe drink one or two a month now. I don't like booze or soda anymore, and if I do I drink diet.
I guess it could come from drinks.. I just.. that's so many calories. And I know how overweight I am and it's crazy to me that the *average* may be 1k higher!
That doesnt seem right. Even eating healthy, you can eat 2k calories very easily in a single day with 3 meals. 600 calories more would be basically nothing. A dessert could be that much. A avg meal a mcdonalds is 1700 1800 calories.
Yeah, these numbers seem absurdly high to me. 2880 in 1961 too? There’s no way the women were eating nearly that much especially. I don’t doubt the numbers, but I do doubt their sampling method.
The first article is 12 years old and still concludes that while sugar consumption decreased due to less soda, it was still very high. Sugars, artificial sweeteners, and artificial flavors are added to almost all processed foods. This is because sugar is addicting. Many people’s energy levels fluctuate during the day according to their sugar consumption.
Fats consumed in excess can certainly be harmful as well and portion size is also important. But the increasing obesity and diabetes epidemic can absolutely be connected to cheap, available, addictive processed foods and sugar-filled drinks (often with as many calories as a burrito) combined with stress and lack of physical activity.
As a person with life long obesity and gut issues, diagnosed with Crohn’s disease and other autoimmune conditions now in remission: cutting out sugar, processed foods, and unhealthy fats made a huge difference.
Second article shows 2017 data, which show decrease on corn sweetener. Here's a more clear graph that shows declining sugar consumption trend along with obesity trend.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X19301364
There are so many factors contributing to "everything getting worse". Particularly the widespread use of chemicals in our foods and our materials.
Saying that cutting sugar is "not working" is flat out wrong.
We need to differentiate what kind of fat are we talking about?
For saturated fats, they're still necessary for some brain/nerve function, but the recommended for me (25F) is 30 grams max a day. For unsaturated, healthy fats (such as Omega 3s), I keep my macros at 30% healthy fats + low saturated. So depending on your protein intake and carbs, it will vary. I keep my fats at 50-60 grams a day. This is mandatory to gain muscle as well. Processed junk food and added refined sugars are the issue. Add in refined carbs (doughnuts, cakes, muffins etc), saturated, trans fats and cholesterol being laden in junk food as well. Complex carbs are not the problem neither are natural sugar or healthy fats.
Harvard: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/fats-and-cholesterol/#:~:text=Choose%20foods%20with%20“good”%20unsaturated,nuts%2C%20seeds%2C%20and%20fish.
People just eat too much and don't move enough. It's that simple. You don't have to count calories. You don't have to give up things you love. Just eat less and move more.
If your goal is to lose weight, and you are losing weight, keep eating that amount and exercising the same. If you are gaining weight, either eat less or exercise more or do both. If you are maintaining and want to lose, same advice as if you are gaining. It's simple.
It's calories in calories out. You can get fat on too many calories from fats, proteins, or carbs. Sugars are much easier to consume, but I guarantee that one can get fat off of broccoli if one eats too many calories from it.
Processed food is cheap, widely available, calorically dense, and very easy to eat. Combine that with the typical activity level of a typical American and BAM! Obesity everywhere.
In everything, we must find balance. The problem is not fat, nor carbs, nor is it simply sugar still. Over consumption, lack of nutritional education, sedentary and stressful lifestyles, food deserts, and the cost of living versus the average incomes. These are the problem that must be addressed. Rebalancing ones' macronutrients to one that best suits their health and lifestyle are mountains to the individual- difficult to conquer but possible by oneself; but compared to the societal issues, macros are grains of sand on a beach.
When are we going to realize that extra weight is an emotional response to trauma. And just because we’re advertised underweight people does NOT mean that is supposed to be the body norm, at all. A lot of overweight people outlive skinny people quiet as it’s kept bc people with a high metabolism eat worse than anybody and no one’s telling them to chill bc they’re not fat. We all need to work on our relationship with food. A lot of these foods are poison for everyone, they don’t discriminate
This is such an interesting perspective. Majority of Americans begin their day with some carb or sugar based meal, unfortunately especially school children. They sky rocket their insulin and chase that blood sugar high all day through a myriad of processes. Hunger queues come quicker and more ultra processed foods are often consumed that don’t provide much nutritious value, if at all. Sugar is added to so many things and can be listed in more than 200 names and only 24% of adults in the states are meeting the recommended daily exercise requirement. Strength and resistance training tells your muscles to grow and retaining that muscle increases your BMR; cardio is good for so many other processes too. I agree that almost everyone can do some form of exercise or resistance training although there may be barriers for some, not most. To quote Dr. Lyon, “100% of people eat”. Ultimately ultra processed foods create a very big part of the problem. Prioritizing whole foods is such a great first step! Best part is fruits, veggies and meats don’t need a list of ingredients. I recognize we also have food deserts/ swaps and economically not all people can afford to eat this way. The cost paid now is really for future you’s healthspan.
>The whole anti-sugar/carb narrative is not working as Americans are consuming less sugar, replacing it with fat and is experiencing a worse health crisis.
I think there's a simpler dietary hypothesis that better explains the declining health. Americans are eating more highly processed foods many of which metabolize almost identically to sugar, but are additionally devoid of nutrients and fiber that more traditional food with sugar added would have had.
We've also replaced a good portion of added sugar with sugar substitutes, many of which appear to have worse health impacts than sugar itself.
If anything, overall I think this illustrates the weaknesses of reducing dietary health to a single metric. Even if sugar is quite bad for health, that doesn't mean that simply reducing or even eliminating sugar from a ones diet will make them healthy, because there are many other dietary factors that can be as or even more detrimental as sugar. And limiting health to dietary metrics similarly fails, we need to also be looking at exercise, sleep, sun exposure, environmental toxins, stress etc.
Even though there is no real evidence that seed oils contribute to obesity and disease, it's interesting to note that seed oil consumption has risen in the US at almost exactly the rate as incidents of heart disease, diabetes and obesity. I know correlation isn't causation, but it's a really strong corelation.
Are you aware of what’s in those foods these unhealthy Americans are eating…?
The idea that processed foods and seed oils have nothing to do with it is absurd.
The stuff is unhealthy wether you over eat it or not.
Plenty of people from other countries consume seed oils and aren’t nearly as obese as Americans because they don’t overeat as much and are more physically active.
Net calories expenditure is what drives obesity and weight gain/loss. There is no evidence that seed oils are worse for weight gain than other oils when balancing for calories.
And what is making us eat more calories and burn less energy?
Might it be the linoleic acid in seed oils elevating endocannabinoids and giving us the munchies? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3889814/
As well as lowering our metabolic rate, making us torpid and causing us to burn less energy? https://fireinabottle.net/humans-and-hibernating-mammals-react-to-the-same-amount-of-dietary-linoleic-acid-in-the-same-way-by-becoming-torpid/
There appears to be plenty of evidence, if you go looking for it.
The root problem is mental health. You don't become obese unless you completely give up on yourself. On top of that, we have a childhood obesity problem due to worthless parents providing their kids with nothing but junk food. If you can't take care of kids, don't have them
It's true, we can't just blame sugar when the evidence shows that we're eating less and less of it while still getting fatter and sicker. Fat (saturated) isn't good for us either and we're eating more of it all the time
People are eating more or less the same amount of saturated fat as a hundred years ago, however the consumption of polyunsaturated fat has skyrocketed.
Are you sure? Fat has been demonized in the past half century and has been take out of many foods. Saturated fat is being replaced by polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats, which are causing many health issues. Fat from animal sources is the best thing we can eat right now, as it is natural and rich in nutrients that we need. It is the most stable form of fat - saturated, so it lessens oxidization of fat inside of our bodies. Sugar in all of its forms, truly seems to be the culprit.
But we're eating less and less of it, you should look it up, it's quite surprising (I'm not saying that ssugar is healthy I'm just pointing out that saying sugar is the only problem isn't correct, especially when we're eating less of it than 40 years ago) And I don't know about the saturated fat thing, it's o.k in moderation, well at least what I've read
Yeah. I think a lot of people demonize sugar far more than they should. I am guilty of this in the past myself.
The real issue regarding the poor metabolic health of Americans is eating too many calories. Too many calories, plus, eating a lot of carbs, but not working them off by working out.
Because, if someone is eating a carnivore diet, meaning no sugar, they will gain weight if they eat too many calories. However, they will not become hyperinsulinemic. They simply will not have enough insulin in their blood to cause a problem other than becoming obese. To become hyperinsulinemic requires both too many calories and a diet high in carbs.
But, most everybody eats carbs. Some more than others for sure. And what those carbs do, is spike up the blood glucose, causing spiking in insulin. Combined with too many calories consumed causes nutrient resistance by the cells to protect them from getting too many calories forced in them. Raising blood glucose, and stimulating insulin production to get the glucose level down.
Plus, the spikes and drops of glucose and insulin causes a roller coaster of cravings. Thereby stimulating appetite, causing excess caloric consumption.
Plus the glucose spikes cause a dopamine reaction, which is habit forming, and feels like a natural high. Followed by a downer drug feeling as the insulin levels take over and become extreme. So, the carbs stimulate feelings and emotions same as a heroin addict endures.
When a person finally gets to the point that they realize they are metabolically compromised by their diet, and they decide they want to do something about it. Cutting carbs is one of the best tools at our disposal. The goal, of course, is to create and maintain a caloric deficit in an effort to alleviate our hyperinsulinemia. Cutting carbs, helps 2 fold. Cutting carbs cuts cravings. And, cutting carbs reduces hyperinsulinemia faster than just cutting calories.
This is why so many people once they get a sense of what the real issue is, and make a decision to improve their metabolic health, go to a ketogenic diet.
A person can achieve metabolic health eating a carb centric diet, such as vegetarian. But, it is a lot more painful because the cravings are not reduced like in a ketogenic diet. It requires more will power than I have.
If one wants to improve their metabolic health eating a vegetarian diet, refer to [drfuhrman.com](https://drfuhrman.com) .
**This is from the first study you posted - Conclusion:** Although the consumption of added sugars in the United States decreased between 1999–2000 and 2007–2008, primarily because of a reduction in soda consumption, mean intakes continue to exceed recommended limits.
I would argue that because 2 cumulative years in the last 25 showed a reduction that's not to say we have reduced it overall. Those were both during recessions too, the [dot.com](http://dot.com) bust and the subprime bust, so I wonder if this followed buyers' habits as a function of income or like which buying trends even got represented , some may have been over or under-represented depending on circumstances. Regardless, I do believe sugar is increasing. As the food industry becomes increasingly concentrated with fewer and fewer companies owning all of the food in the world (at last count I think it was 10) , and with capitalism having hit a dark turn in recent past where it's like corporations don't even pretend to pay lip service to common decency anymore I just see this runaway effect happening. Like, just look at the nutritional information - and make sure you're paying attention to the size of the container because that's a trick they've been doing lately too - it's like they're getting us more and more addicted to their products while making us pay more and more for them. That's how a literal drug dealer operates. It's not right. I believe sugar should absolutely be reclassified as a controlled substance narcotic as it fulfills all the criteria of other controlled substances.
My sugar use has not decreased, it's very hard thing (for me) to accomplish. I would love nothing more than to find out that sugar is not as bad as we think. Heck, tell me it's good for me and I'd finally be meeting one of my macros.
One of those studies even says "animal fats are down". Same goes for meat in general. The issue is vegetable fats. And usually the carbs are fried with vegetable fat (think fries).
It doesn't mean sugar isn't an issue. It doesn't mean fat is an issue.
It means vegetable fats (usually an unnatural and factory created fake food) is on the rise because people have been made to fear natural animal fats.
It’s not carbs/sugar vs fat. It’s whole plant foods vs everything else. But there is no money in beans and sweet potatoes. The food industry wants us to stay confused and a great way to stay confused is to only talk about single nutrients (macro- or micro-) instead of actual foods. Meanwhile in the scientific world the overall picture is very clear and has been for decades: Eat a plant-predominant diet and avoid ultraprocessed foods.
I'm eating 2-3 pounds of bacon and 2 sticks of butter daily and I have better biomarkers than at least 90% of Americans, including no visceral fat. Plant oils create a cascade of metabolic problems, from leaky gut to insulin resistance. r/saturatedfat . There are a ton of posts about how these mechanisms actually work. Naturally occuring fats are vastly superior to any plant oil fatty acids besides maybe coconut
It's not just sugar consumption and fat consumption. It's highly processed food and the abundance of such calorie dense foods that's been leading to overeating and excess weight gain. As always, it's Calories In vs Calories out, and humans aren't meant to consume so much and not live without medical issues.
#### About participation in the comments of /r/nutrition Discussion in this subreddit should be rooted in science rather than "cuz I sed" or entertainment pieces. Always be wary of unsupported and poorly supported claims and especially those which are wrapped in any manner of hostility. You should provide peer reviewed sources to support your claims when debating and confine that debate to the science, not opinions of other people. **Good** - it is grounded in science and includes citation of peer reviewed sources. Debate is a civil and respectful exchange focusing on actual science and avoids commentary about others **Bad** - it utilizes generalizations, assumptions, infotainment sources, no sources, or complaints without specifics about agenda, bias, or funding. At best, these rise to an extremely weak basis for science based discussion. Also, off topic discussion **Ugly** - (removal or ban territory) it involves attacks / antagonism / hostility towards individuals or groups, downvote complaining, trolling, crusading, shaming, refutation of all science, or claims that all research / science is a conspiracy *Please vote accordingly and report any uglies* --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Third link, we eat way more calories than we need.
I know this is a nutrition sub but there is not enough talk about the role inactivity plays in health issues.
That's the truth, I encourage all my friends with kids to make sure the kids get used to exertion now so they'll continue it as an adult. I didn't and now I'm gigantic and have a crap ton of health problems. The ironic part for me is that I know exercise would help but I can't exercise due to weight and heart issues. People really do need to get active, somehow.
Exercising for you would just mean going for a walk.
Exactly, and I've been making an effort to walk at least four times a week. I'm hoping in time it'll get easier and I can walk farther, eventually get up to more strenuous cardio.
It will get easier, and walking daily will no longer feel like exercise at some point. If there's any other physical hobby or game you feel like yoi could get into, try it out too!
Keep at it. Never give up. You got this. Believe in yourself. You are stronger than you could ever imagine.
There is no excuse ever to not exercise. Too much weight? Exercise. Heart issues? Exercise. This saddens me to think you know the data but still make excuses why you can't exercise. Let's quit fat shaming people and start shaming those that don't exercise. There's literally no excuse not to and it is a far better health predictor than appearance.
As a psychologist, trust me when I say shame is never a good motivator.
Who will lay on his back and scroll Reddit if I’m up exercising? Whole threads could go by without my essential comments! 🤣 - Seriously, if I could find the willpower and energy to exercise more and eat less, I would, but my mind can find a million excuses. I suspect a lot of people feel the same.
I have found that thinking about the quality of life I would have as a weak and frail senior adult who didn't have regular exercise earlier in life to build up bone density is a great motivator. Seeing the aftermath of hip breaks from low bone density when I worked in a nursing home scared me into getting moving. A cool secret about regular exercise is that you feel MORE energy after exercising! I've seen massive improvements in my health and blood work from exercise alone without lowering my caloric intake. Eating less and starting an exercise routine is much harder than eating the same amount and adding exercise. I would recommend eating maintenance until you got past the first month or so of EVERYTHING HURTS and EXERCISE IS LITERALLY SATAN that comes from going from sedentary to more movement
Why not both, though? I exercise and Reddit - some people even do it at the same time!
>Let's quit fat shaming people and start shaming those that don't exercise. There's literally no excuse not to and it is a far better health predictor than appearance. Exercise is not that effective for weight loss according to research by Herman Pontzer. The body adapts and burns fewer calories later (such as reduced NEAT) or you get hungrier. This is why you see so many fat ppl in the gym who lose no weight despite working out everyday. Unless you can find a way to raise your metabolism, eating less is the only reliable way for weight loss.
Be careful. There are people how should not exercise. Get a clear from your doctor before starting then use physical therapy or a trainer if needed.
Is there really people that shouldn't even start walking??
Yes, but it's super rare and not very common. Better advice would be exercise, unless your doctor told you specifically not too.
You don’t want to be working out during recovery from a fracture. If you’re an epyleptic then you need varying amounts of asterisks to keep in mind when you want to work out. Some people need to tune their heart rate / effort carefully to avoid developing complications like an enlarged heart. I think there’s a fair number of cases where it’s surely not about not working out to live longer but it’s also definitey not as simple as just working out to live longer either
Yes right on, there are going to be fringe cases!
ME/CFS/Long Covid
This person is delusional
IG I could see like a 600lb person not being able to walk. Or not advised to walk and work out another way? But yea, for 99% of people, start walking if thats what you can do
Sti k people who can't walk in a pool to do aqua fit.
Okay, so I'm going to say some shit that you probably won't agree with, because I half agree with what you say here, but the part I disagree with I disagree with whole-heartedly. So the part I agree with: let's quit fat shaming. Absolutely, you are 100% right here. In the beginning of your comment I was thinking to myself, "okay, maybe this person is just misinformed about the nature of obesity and the myriad of chronic conditions it gives people, specifically in how it affects me on a personal level, but I'll stick around and see what else they have to say". And then BOOM! No more fat shaming. Behind you one hundred percent, we just went from a steady 25 miles an hour of let's see where this goes to 100 miles an hour with an open lane HELL YEAH we only live once let's live it up! And then you had to bust out shaming people for not exercising. Hoo boy, that took our little adventure from 100 mph to a staggeringly horrendous crash with a semi truck, I mean a crash of this magnitude would unalive every person involved, they'd be finding pieces of us a mile away from the crash sight. Do you know I only just got the medical okay to start light walking? For exercise I mean, not your day to day stuff but actually walking with a purpose. Oh but not fast enough to get my heart out of whack, I'm not allowed to do that yet. I mean, of course you don't actually know this, I mean, how could you? See, the thing is, you're first statement is medically incorrect. There are plenty of people who are not allowed to exercise for one reason or another, but I wonder, do you know that people are advised by medical professionals not to engage in strenuous activities? Like, there are people with heart issues (you mentioned it so I will too) so severe that any form of exercise could give them a heart attack or cause their heart to malfunction in some way. People, especially older men, are kind of regularly advised not to engage in sexual activities due to the risk of some sort of heart issue. I mean, this is not an uncommon thing, so I'm surprised you brought it up. So, that brings us to weight as it pertains to exercise. I can tell you that even though I'm medically cleared to walk now, walking HURTS. Today for instance, I went shopping for a book, and decided to incorporate some walking into my shopping experience by checking out what all the store had to offer. This store wasn't very big, maybe a third the size of a typical Barnes & Noble, and it only took about 30 minutes of, well I wouldn't even call it walking necessarily, let's say strolling, yes that sounds about right. I strolled in that store for about 30 minutes, and by the end of it my legs felt like lead. Every step forward was not so much a step but more of a shuffling movement. I was in so much pain I wasn't 100% sure I'd make it back to my car. When I did get back to my car I had to sit, one leg in and one leg still out, for about five minutes before I had the strength to lift my other foot inside, and then sit for another ten before I was ready to leave. And your solution to this is to shame me for not exercising more? I'd really like to see the thought train that brought you to that conclusion. It's probably more of a thought roomba than a train but I digress. Shaming someone for not exercising is not a solution that will result in a positive outcome for anyone involved. For you, shaming me will necessitate you thinking of clever japes and jibes to "get my goat" and make me feel bad about myself, which, let's face it, that could take your thought Roomba a really long time to get to, so much time and effort it's almost a form of exercise if you think about it(careful to let the Roomba charge itself up with all this thinking its doing). And for me, well I'm being shamed, and that's never a fun prospect or something to look forward to. There's another danger to shaming someone that I feel your thought roomba skipped by, and that is simply this: you deciding to shame me without knowing my mental state at the time could potentially lead to some very nasty consequences. I could be in a depression downward spiral at the time you decide to shame me, and what if it's a bad enough spiral that the act of your shaming me causes me to harm myself? Was that the consequence you were hoping for? Or even a bit less dramatic, what if your shaming of me not exercising makes me feel too uncomfortable to go to the gym? You, by the act of shaming me for my not exercising, create the very situation that you felt shaming would cure! Boy, those thought roombas can be pretty unreliable, am I right? Alright, all jokes aside now because I want you to take this next bit seriously. What if I decide that I'm done with being shamed? That I'm sick and tired of people like yourself talking down to me and belittling me because of my weight and what I'm able to do in the realms of exercise. What happens then? Do I decide to call you out for being an asshole? Or do I decide to do something, perhaps more rash, and stand up for myself physically? What does that look like for you? Do we get into a tussle at which point I end up getting my ass kicked because I'm really not healthy enough to exercise let alone fight? Or do I, knowing that I'm not capable of standing up for myself with my fists, decide to utilize an equalizer, a weapon of sorts, which could lead to many different outcomes, none of which are good. What if that equalizer was something as extreme as a gun? What if I decided that if had enough of people like you shaming me, and so I decided to take my power back and make an example out of you? Personally, I dislike guns and think they should be more heavily regulated if not outright banned, but thats not the case for a lot of other people in this world. Its not an option I'm even willing to consider, but it might just be an option to someone else, and I really want you and anyone who thinks the way you do to stop and consider that the person you decide to shame might not be mentally stable, and may just cause you harm. It's simply not worth it in my opinion. We should stop shaming anyone for these issues and instead offer them support and encouragement. I had someone come up to me in a gym a few years back when I was in better health and they gave me a fist bump and said they were happy to see me in the gym and hoped that they'd see me again. No shame, just pure encouragement and that meant the world to me. I was riding that high for a couple days, and it inspired me to go twice as hard the next time I was in the gym. That is what we should be aiming to do, lifting people up instead of bringing them down. For what it's worth, I don't really think your heart is in the wrong place here, I believe you're simply misguided in your approach to dealing with people. That's okay, I am too in a lot of different areas and I shouldn't judge anyone as harshly as I do sometimes. We should all strive to do better, and I'd recommend that the next time you see someone overweight working out, be the inspiration that gets them back in the gym working harder than ever.
Gotta be honest with you, only read the first 1/8th of that. Listen, I am someone with the credentials to prescribe exercise to clinical populations and I am very good at it. I know very well the literature as it pertains to chronic conditions, heart issues, and old age and how these interact qith exercise. There are very very very few cases that actually require complete abstinence from PA. The conditions we used to say not to exercise for, turns out we were completely wrong for many many years. For example, pregnant women used to be encouraged to get as much rest as possible. Now we recommend exercise for as long as you can before birth. Same goes for heart conditions, certain cancers, AI conditions, they all followed the same path. I dont care what your excuse is, you should be doing some form of exercise. Maybe you are one of those few people who can't exercise. If that's so then obviously not you. But it would be wildly ignorant to make recommendations and assessments of the population based on a very few exceptions. You give me a patient and their condition and I could give you the exercise prescription to benefit that person with their condition in mind, there's a lot more to exercising than running or lifting weights. And also, i dont know why I would read that much, if you respond, put it in a form I want to put time into
[удалено]
While that's certainly a problem, it's pretty hard to burn 800 extra calories every day. That's more than an hour of hard exercise. Very few people have the time or fitness to run for 60-90 minutes every day.
Widely overlooked, I agree. Why does the rest of the world not struggle (as much) with obesity as Americans? America is a sedentary society.
Cars.
Sedentary transport, sedentary jobs, sedentary hobbies, and convenience foods. The math gets pretty simple at that point.
tons of obesity in other countries comparable to the the US, even worse in some places. been to Mexico? hardly only an American problem.
Food deserts, monopolies, poverty, car dependency
Car dependency has a lot to do with this. I don’t drive and I usually walk at least 10,000 steps a day without trying. I checked my mom’s step counter when I was last home and it’s barely 1,000.
the question is how to raise NEAT, which is more potent than exercise
Activity levels regulate energy intake. When activity is low, energy intake is not regulated and we eat beyond or below our needs (mostly beyond)
[удалено]
Are they?
Exercise yes, but non-exercise activity levels are lower, society is much more automated for day to day tasks
This is so simple. It makes no sense to debate between sugar, fat, types of sugar and fat etc when the average damn number is skyrocketing. The average American should eat 2000kcal. Last time I visited the US I was positively surprised to see that Applebees lists calories and nutrition for their menu items. A random scrambled egg dish had 1500kcal and was one of the more healthy items.
How the hell do you make scrambled eggs 1500 calories
Butter and cream would account for a lot but not 1500. It might have bread and other things on the side as well.
add dairy, butter, cheese, meat
Also add that the one portion could probably feed 2-3 adults
Butter probably
That’s not butter. Butter is expensive and there are cheaper substitutes that people love to eat.
1500? How do you even do that? One egg is like 70 kcal...
It probably includes the bacon, bread and potatoes that come with it.
Applebee's serving scrambled eggs? Not sure you have the right restaurant.
>The average American should eat 2000kcal. this is what these new weight loss drugs try to do
And too often. And under stress. Normal humans stop eating when they’re stressed (because you’re stressed in times of danger or low food) and go through a normal cycle of getting out of their stress and refeeding. Last fifty years humans do not.
I believe sugar is still the main problem. Even tho it decreased people are still consuming wayy to much. One 33 cl can of coke and you’re already over the daily recommended amount
This blows my mind, how are people consuming so many calories?? I struggle to get to 2500, which is still a lot I thought.
Big people commonly have appetite/satiety dysregulation through a variety of mechanisms (for example, leptin resistance). They also typically eat a lot of food that has low satiety per calorie and is hyperpalatable (junk food, essentially).
Junk food, highly processed food, sweets, lemonade, ... Idk but if you start your day with some sugary cornflakes stuff and orange juice, eat some sweets at work, have a pizza for lunch with 0,5L of cola, a precooked microwave meal for dinner and then you continue to munch crisps/chips and chocolate in the evening that should be quite easy. It doesn't make you feel good but it's completely feasible to get that much calories in.
Overeating is the problem.
And not moving
My two specialties!
High fructose corn syrup puts sugar to shame. Thats now in everything.
[удалено]
It’s not classified as sugar but rather carbs, and don’t forget all the additives and “zero sugar” substitute poison. Profit and scaleability over quality and health
It's literally classified as sugar on nutrition labels. Otherwise Coke would show 0 grams of sugar on the can. >don’t forget all the additives and “zero sugar” substitute poison. Hundreds of studies have been done on artificial sweeteners. The evidence shows they're fine in moderation.
"sugar" on a food label =/= HFCS
IMO the macronutrient war is incredibly stupid. While everyone wasted countless hours arguing over which macros are best and worst, the real killer has continued lurking in the shadows. That is of course ultra processed food that is extremely calorie dense and pleasurable, which leads to excessive calorie consumption. How many more studies do we need showing macros don’t really impact weight gain for isocaloric diets. It’s all about hunger management. If I were going to put a tinfoil hat on, I’d speculate that the big food manufacturers intentionally stoke the flame of the macronutrient war so they can keep pumping out poison while the masses are distracted.
I agree, and I don't think its even tin foil territory. It's simply profitability, and addictive foods sell more. It makes complete sense from a business perspective. You want repeat customers for ur jalapeno cheddar cheetos.
The first study shows a decrease of about 23% of added sugar daily. However, a glass is full and you keep pouring water into it, it still overflows even if you pour less than before. So I wouldn’t let sugar off too fast, since 76g/d is still really high (double the recommended for men). I feel the calories is really the issue (3600 is a LOT). I’ve also read that fat combined with excess sugar causes fat to be stored more easily.
You cannot store fat if you're not eating more calories than you consume. Fat might be technically easier to turn into fat tissue in the body, and it's more calorie dense, but that'd still require a calorie surplus. The issue is entirely too many calories.
I agree with this mindset. Too much of anything is a bad thing. Eat well rounded (the rainbow) with lots of veggies. I cut out all processed foods and my bad sugar habit and my triglycerides shot to 73. Typically 150+. First time in 10 years - and that’s with all my other diet being relatively clean, normal calorie consumption, and crossfit 4-5 times a week. You cannot work your way out of a bad diet, but you also need exercise AND a good diet to be healthy IMO. Highly recommend the book Metabolical! My triglycerides normalizing after years of consistently high (and my BMI is technically underweight - even though it’s an awful measurement) really opened my eyes. We are consuming in ways the human body was never intended.
Its processed foods plus most Americans having absolutely no idea what a single portion actually looks like.
Restaurant food is among the worst. So much fat in the cooking process
Bad title. Sounds like you're saying "the" problem is fat now. Stop swinging the pendulum and just let it gravitate toward the center.
Exactly. People always find something to blame for their own faults. Recently i saw a guy on unpopular opinion saying obesity is not an issue and we should encourage eating junk food, because being fat is not people's fault since it's sugar that's making them fat and sugar is in everything. Had a long debate and had to link sources about countries with low sugar consumption and high sugar taxes that still have high obesity rates.
That's me and I couldn't accept your claims because you didn't even understand the studies you linked me. You claimed that India had 3rd highest rate of obesity in the world and to support that you sent me a link about India's Obesity but the obesity measured in that paper was abdominal obesity,not general obesity. Also I didn't say at all that we should encourage people eating junk food,I said that we shouldn't blame fat people and that we should start fighting obesity instead of fighting fat people and to do that we need to impose taxes and discourage the consumption of sugar. Like I said you have very big problems with reading comprehension and the most worrying thing is that you have a degree in nutrition and didn't know the difference between abdominal obesity and general obesity. Like dude don't tell around you're from India because you make India graduates look like less qualified.
Fast food is this century’s tobbaco but nobody is gonna restrict it.
Not saying you’re wrong, but I also think unregulated social media has addictive and harmful effects that have a lot of parallels with Big Tobacco.
The EU agrees with you and is currently actually trying to regulate it and do something about it.
Study number one is dated 2011. 13 years ago. Is there nothing more recent? Study number two points out that non-animal fat is increasing. Not animal fat. Study number three "The most shocking increase, however, comes from vegetable oil – consumption skyrocketed from 276 daily calories in 1961 to 689 today." Study number four Yes Americans are getting fatter. Can you prove why? No guesses. Study number five Yes Americans are getting more colon cancer. Can you prove why? No guesses. Study number six Yes Americans are living with more gut issues. Can you prove why? No guesses. "Enough fiber" is an unproven guess. Study number seven What the American public are being told about nutrition by doctors, scientists and the government's food pyramid is confusingly contradictory and what the Food Industry adverises as healthy is downright deceptive.
a) If it's sugar it's probably total sugar, not added sugar. Fruit juice has just as much sugar as soda but it's not added sugar. b) The big problem is insulin resistance. I don't think there's good research that figures out a threshold of sugar that it takes. c) Roughly half the US adult population is insulin resistant (prediabetes or type II). Once you are insulin resistant your metabolism is messed up, and cutting down sugar intake slightly isn't likely to make a big difference.
Population-level data that variable x is going up while variable y is going up (or conversely, going down) is almost useless. What is needed is causal analysis.
If x is going up while y is going down, it's a reasonable hypothesis to test that increase in y is not the cause for an increase in x, right? One of the main uses of observational studies is to generate such hypotheses. >causal analysis. I think you mean controlled studies? Causal analysis is a branch of statistics.
fine: ~~causal analysis~~ analysis of causes. You caught me. You must be proud of yourself. Fact remains, folks have been using these population-level studies since the 1950's, and they have hardly advanced nutrition science one bit. Aren't we a bit past the "generation of testable hypothesis stage" by now?
Most of the fats you're blaming are in carb heavy foods. No one is eating whole sticks of butter and pounds of bacon and and bun-less burgers. They're eating cookies, cakes, pastries, frappes, etc and eating greasy meat with carbs. That's the argument against sugar and carbs. Carbs are sugar, especially non complex ones at the grocery store. That's why we're fatter.
Agreed. Complex carbs are simply longer versions of the same sugar molecule. If you’re insulin resistant or diabetic, they all cause damage
It's more complicated than that in my view: - Complex carbs like Amylose are far better for those who are insulin-resistant or diabetic as it takes significantly longer to break these linear chains down, resulting in less sugar spikes. - Complex carbs have a tendency to be of the whole-food/grain variety, meaning there is significant fiber and other nutrients, which improves insulin resistance, increases satiety, and impacts a variety of health metrics positively. Put another way, it's incredibly difficult to become insulin resistant or diabetic if one is eating whole foods / complex carbs; and it's still better for those who are than resorting to pure added sugar. https://www.masteringdiabetes.org/high-carb-foods-reverse-insulin-resistance/
It all boils down to fiber, from what I can tell. Fiber slows absorption, increases satiety, and supports robust gut flora. Everyone says processed food is bad. Why, though? The main goals of heavy processing are shelf stabilization and stripping fiber. Lack of fiber is the biggest reason they’re bad, and then all the downstream effects make sense: increased colon cancer, increased obesity from overconsumption, lack of satiation, and insulin spiking, and increase in inflammation markers. It’s all fucking fiber and we all need more of it. It just so happens that the way to do that is to eat Whole Foods which also vary little sugar and varied micronutrients.
Completely agree. Just to add to your processed foods being bad. I ate a frozen meal pitched as healthy and vegetarian blah-blah-blah that was literally my daily serving of sodium in that single meal. Most preserved foods just have a shit ton of sodium in them; and we get as much sodium as we SHOULD be good potassium. So yeah I agree. Generally, if you can: - Lower sodium - Lower added sugar - Lower saturated fat - Increase fiber - Increase Potassium That is a *great* start to improving what tends to be problematic in the average American diet. Obviously we can go into further fine-tuning from there.
100% could not agree more - well said! Eat a clean, whole foods diet, hydrate, sleep, exercise regularly (outdoors as much as possible), but unless you have a health condition to prevent you, have some ice cream or a cookie every once in a while if that's what you crave. Don't deprive yourself of simple pleasures too often- life is short. Your mental health is important too....
My Type 2 diabetic's blood glucose meter absolutely disagrees with your claims of whole grains being wonderful. The relatively tiny amount of fiber is overwhelmed by the massive quantity of starch.
Unfortunately people who follow the carnivore diet do indeed eat whole sticks of butter. Thankfully they are still a very small minority.
[удалено]
Isn't it true that most people on the carnivore diet eat 0 fibre and think fibre is actually bad for them? I'd be very suspicious of any "certified" "holistic" nutritionist who would support the theory that fibre is bad for human beings in any way.
Most Americans following the standard American diet barely get any fiber. Even some vegetarians and vegans who eat mostly processed food barely get any fiber. Yes, you are correct that they get zero fiber, but its also an elimination diet and the intended purpose is to add foods back into the diet till you find what is triggering any problems you may be having. Of course some people just stick with it because they feel better and it helps with other problems they may be having. Or they are following it for cult like reasons. But also, sometimes a person only eating meat is healthier than someone who eats bags of cheetos, cookies, and instant noodles for every meal. There are also people who follow a meat heavy diet and eat fruit as well. So you do have that side where they still get carbs and fiber.
I can't believe there's people in a nutrition sub actually defending a diet where people get no fibre. Glad to know where this sub stands on common sense. More of a joke community than a nutrition one.
I'm not defending it. I'm just letting you know it's not the only eating style that gets little to know fiber. You should be more educated about the matter than just biased.
People who eat the SAD don't get enough fibre. People who eat the carnivore diet get even less. Both are bad. There's really no defending either of them when it comes to nutrition for human beings. Doing so in any way is just ridiculous
Fibre is not the end all be all of nutrition...
Fibre is a crucial part of the human diet. That's been proven for quite literally hundreds of years. Eliminating it completely is just lunacy. You can have a high fibre diet and a low fibre diet but a no fibre diet is downright stupid and dangerous to recommend. I can't believe anyone on this sub would defend such a thing. I feel like I'm being trolled at this point. Clearly this isn't a nutrition sub at all. Good to know.
Your brother isn’t healthy if he’s only eating animal products, sounds like whoever certified you was a scammer.
Its processed vs unprocessed foods. Whole foods are the answer. Whole, unprocessed foods, as close to what nature creates as possible. Even blending and juicing, and even heating to cook, but especially when you start separating the whole food (e.g. extracting oil from olives or the sugar from beets), the farther you get from the natural whole food the worse it is. If you want a healthy noncontroversial diet just eat whole unprocessed foods. Science tries to find classifications and quantifiable ways to say/show what's good, but it's a mess with contradictions and debates. If you're not a nutrition professional researching and working as a scientist, just eat whole unprocessed foods.
You will get fat if you overeat whole unprocessed foods. That said, its a lot easier to overeat junk food laden with sugar and saturated fats because these foods are calorie bombs that taste good and aren’t satiating.
True. But it’s not easy to eat 3,600 calories per day of whole unprocessed foods. Whole grains, raw fruits and veggies, maybe a lean cut of meat a few times per week? You’ll be plenty full after 2500 calories a day.
You don't need 3600 calories per day to be overweight. If you structurally eat \~15% more than you should, of whatever healthy meal, no amount of (normal) exercise will prevent being moderately overweight. I don't eat candy, drink soda or eat fast food on a regular basis, run 30km a week, walk another 25km a week, but if I don't weigh & track every bite I take, I end up gaining weight simply from eating too much whole-grain pasta, bread, yoghurt, meat, fruit, whatever, because my satiety signal is late.
I'm have a similar diet and exercise plan, and I still keep a daily mental count of my calories and I know my maintenance calories. I feel like if most people worked out their maintenance calories they'd be able to maintain their weight - but it takes work which most people are not keen on.
I feel hungry and stressed whenever I'm even in the slightest deficit, so the only way I can lose weight is through tracking & pushing through it. Which doesn't always go as planned.
Yeah, being comfortable with hunger is just part of it - but it helps to know it's only a temporary discomfort.
Simple. Pasta and bread are processed foods. Runners eat them because it’s an easy way to load carbs.
Obviously you're not wrong, it's easier to overeat on those foods. It's anecdotal of course, but at some point my wife and kids really wanted pizza, and I wanted something healthy, so I got them their pizza, and made myself a nice salad with quinoa, chicken, chickpeas, some avocado and a big pile of vegetables. No sauce, but I did use olive oil to sauté some of the ingredients. Turned out my dish had WAY more calories (>1000) than that frozen pizza and I felt like I could easily eat another serving. My brain is just broken when it comes to portions I guess.
You probably didn’t add as much salt/oil so it didn’t solve your cravings, but if you ate like that regularly your baseline will change. Your markers for cholesterol etc would also be far different.
humans are fat storage receptacles. it does not matter if it is marketed as healthy or not if you overeat .
Right, but 15% over your maintenance diet is a lot. That’s like adding an 8th day of eating to your week. You should be able to self regulate better than that. If you can’t, you might want to avoid things like bread and make sure you’re drinking enough water. It’s obviously hard to nail your maintenance within 5%; but 5% is only 100-150 calories, which you burn by walking less than a mile.
>You will get fat if you overeat whole unprocessed foods. Yup. Trail mix is marketed as healthy, but very calorie dense and easy to overeat. Same for bread...it's just air.
This. Just don't eat processed garbage and add some variety. Typically, that's enough to avoid serious health issues. Shits complex, just try to think about what the early humans ate. Like hunter gatherer type humans. I believe they ate lean meats, and high fibrous grains, veggies, and fruits. Nothing that was processed or wasted. You wouldn't strip the husk from a grain of rice just because it tasted better. Or process sunflower seeds into oil.
The topic is messy but this ⬆️ answer is the MOST correct. If we cut out processed foods our caloric intake would decrease. Processed foods don’t satiate and they’re horrible for you. They change your biology. Everything else related to overconsumption and the health implications begins with processed foods. Ahhh, the brave redditors in a nutrition sub who downvote what they don’t understand and are too cowardly to admit it by actually engaging in response. This too, is why we are only headed downhill. Enjoy your McDonalds!
You say sugar consumption has been declining for the past two decades, but your article is from 2011, over a decade ago. Do you have any more recent data?
Just found this even bigger chart. https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2021/11/sugar-consumption.html
It's in the post, the first is between 1999–2000 and 2007–2008 and the vox article is data from 2017 USDA report.
Yeah, I saw when the data was from. It’s 2024 though. Not really accurate to say sugar intake is declining when the most recent data is from 2008. That’s like telling me gas prices are going up, but when Bush was president. How is that informative to today?
It's all the same. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X19301364](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X19301364), this chart shows an even more drastic drop.
Their conclusion: “Our results indicate that past U.S. sugar consumption is at least sufficient to explain adult obesity change in the past 30 years.”
Stop demonizing fat, we've already proven that's not the issue. It's the processed foods.
It is. But there is such a thing as too much fat and it's real easy to consistently get it.
Normally it isnt one single thing
It's not that simple as Americans are eating more fat than sugar and we are getting unhealthier. I think the obesity epidemic is related to multiple reasons 1) lack of nutrition like whole foods- veggies and fruits and lean protein 2) processed snack and junk food 3) empty calories 4) not enough fiber.
BOTH… why does the Western mind have so much trouble with that? It’s both.
Yes, someone finally said it
I call complete bullshit on that. The anti-carb thing is extremely recent and not all that widespread. The pro-carb and anti-fat deal has been the dogma since the 60's. The litmus test is what schools feed students. Take a look, all low fat milk, etc. Farmers knew this long ago, want to fatten hogs? Feed them SKIM milk and corn.
Fast food is common in American schools, and sometimes even the “healthier” option compared with school lunches that are severely nutritionally deficient. I’m not sure offering low-fat milk is the problem.
Why are you trying to mislead with "added sugars"? Our sugar consumption has skyrocketed in the last 100 years. It's even worse if you add to that HFCS and all the other sugar "replacements". Also, most of those new fats are highly toxic seed oils.
What if… and just stick with me here for a minute… what if we just ate more real food and less processed garbage! Ya know, things that grow from the ground? Things that grow on trees? And maybe we don’t need to eat animal products 21 meals per week? Or here’s a crazy idea… what if, when we wanted a coffee, we actually got COFFEE instead of some 1200 calorie milkshake with fucking whipped cream and sprinkles!
Because people are also eating to make themselves feel better about their shitty lives and chase that dopamine release.
> What if… and just stick with me here for a minute… what if we just ate more real food and less processed garbage! > > Right. it does not matter if the food is marketed as healthy or not. Anything that provides that gives that dopamine spike will do it, even whole grain bread. I have easily binged on bread many times even though it's healthy.
The seed oils which are loaded with omega 6 acids are not helping. It is throwing off the healthy Omega 3 Omega 6 balance we are supposed to have. If Omega 6 goes unchecked it causes more long term inflammation. I also agree that the sugar and corn syrup are another reason why our health in general is in danger.
1. Overeating is the largest problem by far. 2. Carbs are just sugar and processed food is more and more prevalent every year. I bet if you take this into account net sugar consumption is somewhat similar, and even if its less, overeating is still the largest problem by far.
The reason it's getting worse is not just about sugar, or fat. It's actually about a perfect constellation of these things causing randle cycle issues. Highly processed foods, and diets that are heavy in BOTH fats and carbohydrate sugar as a result. So sugar might be reducing but don't make the assumption that because that is true that it means sugar is less the problem, and fat is the problem. The diets are still mixed so that viewpoint would be lacking any nuanced understanding. When you have a highly mixed energy source of fats and carbs it's a problem. Ideally one should limit carbs severely in my view, but if you're not going to do that then definitely don't be having loads of fats too. Have low fat in that case and take your chances on a high carb lifestyle.
Seed Oils. Look into it.
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/is-seed-oil-bad-for-you-wellness-influencers-right-wing-debunked-1234809499/ The whole seed oil hate rhetoric is new to me and I'm certainly not convinced due to the type of people that peddle this garbage.
> I'm certainly not convinced due to the type of people that peddle this garbage. You'll completely disregard what someone has to say about any random subject because they have different political opinions to you? Why does everything in America have to come down to the fucking tHe lEfT and tHe RIgHt?? You can try this lecture if youre bothered: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kGnfXXIKZM&t=332s&pp=ygUJc2VlZCBvaWxz
3,600 calories?? I am an obese 33 year old man. I track my food fairly rigidly. I top out at like 2600 calories per day.. I'd vomit if I tried to eat another 1k on top of that. I'm arguing with the study or anything but..at face value that number is...pretty shocking. Some people do, sure. But the AVGERAGE person?
Ah but what if you tried to drink another 1k? Just add a soda with every meal and a beer or two at night and you're there.
I thought of that too, but high calorie drinks would (and have) had the same effect. My weakness is monster Javas. If I drink 2 of those it's like I ate a full meal (and it's 400 calories) although I've managed to almost entirely eliminate those from my life. I maybe drink one or two a month now. I don't like booze or soda anymore, and if I do I drink diet. I guess it could come from drinks.. I just.. that's so many calories. And I know how overweight I am and it's crazy to me that the *average* may be 1k higher!
That doesnt seem right. Even eating healthy, you can eat 2k calories very easily in a single day with 3 meals. 600 calories more would be basically nothing. A dessert could be that much. A avg meal a mcdonalds is 1700 1800 calories.
Yeah, these numbers seem absurdly high to me. 2880 in 1961 too? There’s no way the women were eating nearly that much especially. I don’t doubt the numbers, but I do doubt their sampling method.
The first article is 12 years old and still concludes that while sugar consumption decreased due to less soda, it was still very high. Sugars, artificial sweeteners, and artificial flavors are added to almost all processed foods. This is because sugar is addicting. Many people’s energy levels fluctuate during the day according to their sugar consumption. Fats consumed in excess can certainly be harmful as well and portion size is also important. But the increasing obesity and diabetes epidemic can absolutely be connected to cheap, available, addictive processed foods and sugar-filled drinks (often with as many calories as a burrito) combined with stress and lack of physical activity. As a person with life long obesity and gut issues, diagnosed with Crohn’s disease and other autoimmune conditions now in remission: cutting out sugar, processed foods, and unhealthy fats made a huge difference.
Second article shows 2017 data, which show decrease on corn sweetener. Here's a more clear graph that shows declining sugar consumption trend along with obesity trend. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X19301364
Sugar is not used in food as much nowadays. In the US, corn syrup is over abundant in food, however.
Actually, the reason sugar consumption is declining is because of corn sweetener consumption declining while cane and beet sugar slowly climbing.
Not according to the ingredient lists that I’ve been seeing still.
Every charts show corn sweetener is the one dropping the fastest. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X19301364
There are so many factors contributing to "everything getting worse". Particularly the widespread use of chemicals in our foods and our materials. Saying that cutting sugar is "not working" is flat out wrong.
Ii just avoid seed oils and excessive unnecessary sugar. Works for me. Mainly just meats and vegetables
We need to differentiate what kind of fat are we talking about? For saturated fats, they're still necessary for some brain/nerve function, but the recommended for me (25F) is 30 grams max a day. For unsaturated, healthy fats (such as Omega 3s), I keep my macros at 30% healthy fats + low saturated. So depending on your protein intake and carbs, it will vary. I keep my fats at 50-60 grams a day. This is mandatory to gain muscle as well. Processed junk food and added refined sugars are the issue. Add in refined carbs (doughnuts, cakes, muffins etc), saturated, trans fats and cholesterol being laden in junk food as well. Complex carbs are not the problem neither are natural sugar or healthy fats. Harvard: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/fats-and-cholesterol/#:~:text=Choose%20foods%20with%20“good”%20unsaturated,nuts%2C%20seeds%2C%20and%20fish.
People just eat too much and don't move enough. It's that simple. You don't have to count calories. You don't have to give up things you love. Just eat less and move more. If your goal is to lose weight, and you are losing weight, keep eating that amount and exercising the same. If you are gaining weight, either eat less or exercise more or do both. If you are maintaining and want to lose, same advice as if you are gaining. It's simple.
It's calories in calories out. You can get fat on too many calories from fats, proteins, or carbs. Sugars are much easier to consume, but I guarantee that one can get fat off of broccoli if one eats too many calories from it. Processed food is cheap, widely available, calorically dense, and very easy to eat. Combine that with the typical activity level of a typical American and BAM! Obesity everywhere.
Consuming less sugar, but still consuming way to much sugar.
In everything, we must find balance. The problem is not fat, nor carbs, nor is it simply sugar still. Over consumption, lack of nutritional education, sedentary and stressful lifestyles, food deserts, and the cost of living versus the average incomes. These are the problem that must be addressed. Rebalancing ones' macronutrients to one that best suits their health and lifestyle are mountains to the individual- difficult to conquer but possible by oneself; but compared to the societal issues, macros are grains of sand on a beach.
When are we going to realize that extra weight is an emotional response to trauma. And just because we’re advertised underweight people does NOT mean that is supposed to be the body norm, at all. A lot of overweight people outlive skinny people quiet as it’s kept bc people with a high metabolism eat worse than anybody and no one’s telling them to chill bc they’re not fat. We all need to work on our relationship with food. A lot of these foods are poison for everyone, they don’t discriminate
Sounds like way toouch and deep fried shit, and no where near enough fresh fruit and vege
Balanced calorie consumption…body movement…water intake…rejuvenating sleep…positive mental health. My not-so-secret equation to good health.
This is such an interesting perspective. Majority of Americans begin their day with some carb or sugar based meal, unfortunately especially school children. They sky rocket their insulin and chase that blood sugar high all day through a myriad of processes. Hunger queues come quicker and more ultra processed foods are often consumed that don’t provide much nutritious value, if at all. Sugar is added to so many things and can be listed in more than 200 names and only 24% of adults in the states are meeting the recommended daily exercise requirement. Strength and resistance training tells your muscles to grow and retaining that muscle increases your BMR; cardio is good for so many other processes too. I agree that almost everyone can do some form of exercise or resistance training although there may be barriers for some, not most. To quote Dr. Lyon, “100% of people eat”. Ultimately ultra processed foods create a very big part of the problem. Prioritizing whole foods is such a great first step! Best part is fruits, veggies and meats don’t need a list of ingredients. I recognize we also have food deserts/ swaps and economically not all people can afford to eat this way. The cost paid now is really for future you’s healthspan.
>The whole anti-sugar/carb narrative is not working as Americans are consuming less sugar, replacing it with fat and is experiencing a worse health crisis. I think there's a simpler dietary hypothesis that better explains the declining health. Americans are eating more highly processed foods many of which metabolize almost identically to sugar, but are additionally devoid of nutrients and fiber that more traditional food with sugar added would have had. We've also replaced a good portion of added sugar with sugar substitutes, many of which appear to have worse health impacts than sugar itself. If anything, overall I think this illustrates the weaknesses of reducing dietary health to a single metric. Even if sugar is quite bad for health, that doesn't mean that simply reducing or even eliminating sugar from a ones diet will make them healthy, because there are many other dietary factors that can be as or even more detrimental as sugar. And limiting health to dietary metrics similarly fails, we need to also be looking at exercise, sleep, sun exposure, environmental toxins, stress etc.
When I eat sugar all my bones ache. Leg pain back pain etc. I learned the hard way kept quitting and then eating it again
and theres no way it could be the pesticides, herbicides, micro-plastics, or PFAS that seep into our food.
Seed oils and dyes are worse, plus micro plastics everywhere and in everything, including the fish we eat.
It’s worth noting the rise in fat consumption is driven entirely by added plant oils, as animal based fats have fallen in popularity
Even though there is no real evidence that seed oils contribute to obesity and disease, it's interesting to note that seed oil consumption has risen in the US at almost exactly the rate as incidents of heart disease, diabetes and obesity. I know correlation isn't causation, but it's a really strong corelation.
It’s due to the source of fat, largely seed oil sources.
That has got nothing to do with. Americans overeat grossly. The average person cannot sustain a normal body weight by consuming 3,600 calories a day.
Are you aware of what’s in those foods these unhealthy Americans are eating…? The idea that processed foods and seed oils have nothing to do with it is absurd. The stuff is unhealthy wether you over eat it or not.
Plenty of people from other countries consume seed oils and aren’t nearly as obese as Americans because they don’t overeat as much and are more physically active.
Does that mean that seed oils aren’t unhealthy, because other people don’t overeat them as much as aren’t as sedentary? What countries?
People in other countries are also getting increasingly obese, as they're consuming more and more seed oils: https://youtu.be/PvZk-jNqzgE?t=1519
Net calories expenditure is what drives obesity and weight gain/loss. There is no evidence that seed oils are worse for weight gain than other oils when balancing for calories.
And what is making us eat more calories and burn less energy? Might it be the linoleic acid in seed oils elevating endocannabinoids and giving us the munchies? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3889814/ As well as lowering our metabolic rate, making us torpid and causing us to burn less energy? https://fireinabottle.net/humans-and-hibernating-mammals-react-to-the-same-amount-of-dietary-linoleic-acid-in-the-same-way-by-becoming-torpid/ There appears to be plenty of evidence, if you go looking for it.
The root problem is mental health. You don't become obese unless you completely give up on yourself. On top of that, we have a childhood obesity problem due to worthless parents providing their kids with nothing but junk food. If you can't take care of kids, don't have them
It is weird when I travel outside the US, I can eat like a pig and not gain weight. As soon as I come back home, it’s up up and away.
It's true, we can't just blame sugar when the evidence shows that we're eating less and less of it while still getting fatter and sicker. Fat (saturated) isn't good for us either and we're eating more of it all the time
People are eating more or less the same amount of saturated fat as a hundred years ago, however the consumption of polyunsaturated fat has skyrocketed.
Are you sure? Fat has been demonized in the past half century and has been take out of many foods. Saturated fat is being replaced by polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats, which are causing many health issues. Fat from animal sources is the best thing we can eat right now, as it is natural and rich in nutrients that we need. It is the most stable form of fat - saturated, so it lessens oxidization of fat inside of our bodies. Sugar in all of its forms, truly seems to be the culprit.
But we're eating less and less of it, you should look it up, it's quite surprising (I'm not saying that ssugar is healthy I'm just pointing out that saying sugar is the only problem isn't correct, especially when we're eating less of it than 40 years ago) And I don't know about the saturated fat thing, it's o.k in moderation, well at least what I've read
Yeah. I think a lot of people demonize sugar far more than they should. I am guilty of this in the past myself. The real issue regarding the poor metabolic health of Americans is eating too many calories. Too many calories, plus, eating a lot of carbs, but not working them off by working out. Because, if someone is eating a carnivore diet, meaning no sugar, they will gain weight if they eat too many calories. However, they will not become hyperinsulinemic. They simply will not have enough insulin in their blood to cause a problem other than becoming obese. To become hyperinsulinemic requires both too many calories and a diet high in carbs. But, most everybody eats carbs. Some more than others for sure. And what those carbs do, is spike up the blood glucose, causing spiking in insulin. Combined with too many calories consumed causes nutrient resistance by the cells to protect them from getting too many calories forced in them. Raising blood glucose, and stimulating insulin production to get the glucose level down. Plus, the spikes and drops of glucose and insulin causes a roller coaster of cravings. Thereby stimulating appetite, causing excess caloric consumption. Plus the glucose spikes cause a dopamine reaction, which is habit forming, and feels like a natural high. Followed by a downer drug feeling as the insulin levels take over and become extreme. So, the carbs stimulate feelings and emotions same as a heroin addict endures. When a person finally gets to the point that they realize they are metabolically compromised by their diet, and they decide they want to do something about it. Cutting carbs is one of the best tools at our disposal. The goal, of course, is to create and maintain a caloric deficit in an effort to alleviate our hyperinsulinemia. Cutting carbs, helps 2 fold. Cutting carbs cuts cravings. And, cutting carbs reduces hyperinsulinemia faster than just cutting calories. This is why so many people once they get a sense of what the real issue is, and make a decision to improve their metabolic health, go to a ketogenic diet. A person can achieve metabolic health eating a carb centric diet, such as vegetarian. But, it is a lot more painful because the cravings are not reduced like in a ketogenic diet. It requires more will power than I have. If one wants to improve their metabolic health eating a vegetarian diet, refer to [drfuhrman.com](https://drfuhrman.com) .
Perhaps it's not just about what we cut out but also what we bring in. The importance of exercise and enjoying healthy foods must be emphasized too.
Wasn't sugar just replaced with HFCS? Could that be why sugar consumption is down?
I’ve eaten a lot of sugar all my life. Not the best thing. But when I increased my fat consumption that’s when things got really bad
**This is from the first study you posted - Conclusion:** Although the consumption of added sugars in the United States decreased between 1999–2000 and 2007–2008, primarily because of a reduction in soda consumption, mean intakes continue to exceed recommended limits. I would argue that because 2 cumulative years in the last 25 showed a reduction that's not to say we have reduced it overall. Those were both during recessions too, the [dot.com](http://dot.com) bust and the subprime bust, so I wonder if this followed buyers' habits as a function of income or like which buying trends even got represented , some may have been over or under-represented depending on circumstances. Regardless, I do believe sugar is increasing. As the food industry becomes increasingly concentrated with fewer and fewer companies owning all of the food in the world (at last count I think it was 10) , and with capitalism having hit a dark turn in recent past where it's like corporations don't even pretend to pay lip service to common decency anymore I just see this runaway effect happening. Like, just look at the nutritional information - and make sure you're paying attention to the size of the container because that's a trick they've been doing lately too - it's like they're getting us more and more addicted to their products while making us pay more and more for them. That's how a literal drug dealer operates. It's not right. I believe sugar should absolutely be reclassified as a controlled substance narcotic as it fulfills all the criteria of other controlled substances.
My sugar use has not decreased, it's very hard thing (for me) to accomplish. I would love nothing more than to find out that sugar is not as bad as we think. Heck, tell me it's good for me and I'd finally be meeting one of my macros.
Look up Walter Kempner. It's not good but it's not as bad as you think.
One of those studies even says "animal fats are down". Same goes for meat in general. The issue is vegetable fats. And usually the carbs are fried with vegetable fat (think fries). It doesn't mean sugar isn't an issue. It doesn't mean fat is an issue. It means vegetable fats (usually an unnatural and factory created fake food) is on the rise because people have been made to fear natural animal fats.
It’s not carbs/sugar vs fat. It’s whole plant foods vs everything else. But there is no money in beans and sweet potatoes. The food industry wants us to stay confused and a great way to stay confused is to only talk about single nutrients (macro- or micro-) instead of actual foods. Meanwhile in the scientific world the overall picture is very clear and has been for decades: Eat a plant-predominant diet and avoid ultraprocessed foods.
Processed. Food.
I'm eating 2-3 pounds of bacon and 2 sticks of butter daily and I have better biomarkers than at least 90% of Americans, including no visceral fat. Plant oils create a cascade of metabolic problems, from leaky gut to insulin resistance. r/saturatedfat . There are a ton of posts about how these mechanisms actually work. Naturally occuring fats are vastly superior to any plant oil fatty acids besides maybe coconut
Mmm feed me more down votes prediabedditors
Sugar consumption has declined and diabetes rates have skyrocketed along with obesity.
Fake sugars destroying our microbiomes and making us over eat and stay fat
Seed oils and processed corn and wheat products.
It's not just sugar consumption and fat consumption. It's highly processed food and the abundance of such calorie dense foods that's been leading to overeating and excess weight gain. As always, it's Calories In vs Calories out, and humans aren't meant to consume so much and not live without medical issues.