[Osx-nutters] *Big* government

[Stefano Mori]

On 2007-Aug-29, at 19:02, Jared ''Danger'' Earle wrote:

> Oh, and Stefano says he can eat anything he likes and doesn't put  
> on weight? This will change and you'd better be prepared otherwise  
> you're going to make sure you have access to a pryin' bar ("Fetch  
> momma's pryin' bar...") to get out of your fatty hammock.

Yeah... but there's a subtle point in there... somewhere... which is  
that what I *feel* like eating, what I like to eat, seems to be in  
some balance. For example, if I consume a larger than normal meal one  
day, perhaps because that's what I've been fed at a friend's house,  
the next day my appetite is greatly reduced and I just don't feel  
like eating. What I feel like eating changes daily and the kinds of  
foods I fancy change daily. I don't understand people who have a  
regular set breakfast menu or a regular lunch. My feelings about food  
change continuously, in relation to my activity, my sleep, and the  
weather. Sometimes I eat a lot and sometimes I eat a little. Also I  
don't feel like eating cheap junk food, I'd rather go for expensive  
junk food, and expensive healthy food. Perhaps that keeps me away  
from nastier ingredients. And one of the things about eating red meat  
is that it reduces my appetite for anything else, so I end up  
consuming smaller portions.

So if there is a fine balance between energy intake and expenditure,  
eating habits and other factors that affect what people "feel" like  
eating are big factors. It might even be as subtle as choosing more  
interesting foods which make you notice what you eat more, and thus  
make you feel more satisfied more quickly. I hate eating  
unconsciously, like while watching TV. Someone should do a study on  
weight and meals consumed at a dinner table and meals consumed at the  
TV.

So there's something of a point in whether lower quality foods have  
more "hidden" calories... ie. calories that your body doesn't feel as  
it consumes and can't tell your brain, whoa dude, that's enough.

But also, what's known about metabolism? An overweight friend of mine  
always says to me that I eat like a pig and yet we're the same age  
and he's nearly twice my weight. Similar height but different build.

So I think Patrick is right, there are lots of issues involved. Any  
individual can lose weight by eating less, but two people can consume  
the same food and put on weight differently.



On 2007-Aug-29, at 15:35, Patrick Coskren wrote:

> * The number of calories you take in is not necessarily the amount  
> you metabolize.  Food can pass through your gut unused, and out the  
> other end.  Your body regulates this.


Watch a person with colitis turn into an emaciated victim in 4 weeks.



> * Appetite is not a constant, and there's plenty of reason to  
> believe there's feedback involved.   So some foods stimulate  
> appetite when you eat them, others decrease it.  The insulin/ 
> glucagon hormone system is a big part of this, and it's complicated  
> and incompletely understood.
>
> * Activity level is not a constant, and there's plenty of reason to  
> believe your body regulates this, by making you restless, or even  
> just fidgety.  Being fidgety, for example, burns a measurable  
> number of calories, and there's every reason to believe your body  
> turns the subconscious activity level up or down when it needs to  
> fine tune the calorie input/output balance.  After all, it does the  
> same thing by making you shiver when it needs to maintain the heat  
> balance.
>
> * This is where things like high-fructose corn syrup and artificial  
> sweeteners are likely to be a problem.  High-fructose corn syrup,  
> for instance, is so sweet that it can spike your blood sugar up,  
> then crash it down, causing an increase in appetite: if your diet  
> is high in it, this causes a feedback loop that causes you to then  
> eat more things that contain HFCS, etc.  This remains  
> controversial, because after all fruits contain plenty of  
> fructose.  But on the other hand, they tend to deliver it with lots  
> of fiber (slowing gastric processing), and still not in doses as  
> high as many HFCS products.


And if this stuff goes into cheaper foods then that really does hit  
one group hardest. Especially if children in poorer families start  
developing their eating habits in response to this stuff and they  
just keep overeating by 15% starting age 6 and are mountains by the  
time they're 30.




> * Artificial sweeteners can have a different effect: your body (at  
> least potentially, this remains controversial too) detects the  
> sweetness and assumes there's sugar coming in; insulin is released,  
> but there's no actual sugar added to your bloodstream, so your  
> blood sugar drops below where it should, and your appetite  
> increases.  Yes, the idea here is that sugar-free drinks may cause  
> you to eat more.


I can easily believe that.



> So the point is that there may be more to the "diet" side of the  
> "diet and exercise" equation than is currently understood.  Given  
> two people, if one happens to eat foods with higher amounts of HCFS  
> (probably unconsciously... start reading labels, that stuff's  
> *everywhere*) or diet soda, he might wind up increasing his  
> appetite.  Perhaps it'll even be subtle, just a little more  
> appetite, the equivalent of a couple of extra potato chips, and  
> whammo, it adds up to a few pounds by the end of the year, and  
> again year after year.
>
> Now, that's just a theory, and there's evidence for and against.   
> I'll note that I'm rather sympathetic, because I'm very likely  
> prediabetic, so I probably have some issues with my insulin/ 
> glucagon balance already.  I've noticed that if I eat something  
> sugary in the morning (for example, a bowl of raisin bran from Post  
> or Kellogg's... loaded with HFCS), I crash in midafternoon: very  
> sleepy, hard to focus, and I'm sure I'm burning fewer calories.  If  
> I'm more careful (organic bran cereal, no HFCS), I power through  
> the day, maybe a little midafternoon blip (that's normal for other  
> reasons), but not very serious, and I'm probably burning more.   
> (Exercise helps, too, with smoothing this process, in addition to  
> the obvious direct benefits of burning calories).


I don't like cereals, almost never drink milk, so usual breakfasts  
are not my thing. This morning I had a poached egg, some thin ham,  
and a banana.

I see a sub thread in food diaries?


> No, like I said, I'm probably more physiologically sensitive to  
> this than most, but I have little problem believing that HFCS and  
> diet sodas can be a problem making it harder for people to maintain  
> body weight.  It's no accident, smug moralizing about lazy people  
> aside, that America's obesity problem tracks pretty well with the  
> rise of industrial foodstuffs, particularly HFCS and diet sodas.


Still the portions are just shockingly large in USA. Or is that my  
misperception??



> As for govt intervention, I think the primary thing that absolutely  
> should be done is to stop subsidizing corn to the point where it's  
> so artificially cheap that (via HFCS) it's used in everything.  As  
> a possible second step, it would probably be appropriate to  
> discourage its use, either through prominent labeling requirements  
> or even through an outright ban, but I wouldn't support that too  
> strongly until more evidence comes in.
>
> Anyway, I'm not saying this is the whole story (societal effects  
> play a role, and there are definitely things happening there that  
> encourage obesity).  But I think it's an important part of it that  
> some people are too glib about.



Stefano