Jump to content



Photo

Medical Miracle: weight loss pill that works


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#11 maineman

maineman

    maineman

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,987 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 01:22 AM

A very sloppy reference filled with sloppy logic and misquoted information. What's your point? Go ahead and get fat? If a smoker who has emphysema and requires oxygen and medication to breathe dies in a car crash his death is listed as "Motor Vehicle Accident". Does it make his lung disease irrlevant? Likewise deaths due to "obesity" or high BMIs is an irrelevant issue. Obesity is a major health problem and leads to Type 2 diabetes, hypertension, degenerative joint disease, increased cardiovascular disease, and more. Shouldn't we be trying to advise those people who are concerned about their health? Finally, ease up on the paranoia, buddy. No One is making you eat anything you don't want to eat. You are free to eat whatever floats your boat. Want to drink sugar-filled sodas? Go ahead. Want to eat Burger King all day? Go ahead. Want to eat aduki beans, brown rice and bonita fish flakes with miso paste? Go ahead... help yourself. No Federal Agent Food police are going to come knocking your door.... mm
He who laughs laughs laughs laughs.

My Blog -Maineman Market Advice

#12 endisnear

endisnear

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 439 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 08:49 AM

The trailblazing IJO article (by S. W. Keith, D. T. Redden et al) concludes that: "Undue attention has been devoted to reduced physical activity and food marketing practices as postulated causes for increases in the prevalence of obesity, leading to neglect of other plausible mechanisms and well-intentioned, but potentially ill-founded, proposals for reducing obesity rates."

They suggest no fewer than 10 other possible causes.

1. Lack of sleep
2. Polybrominated diphenyl ether
3. New drugs for diabetes, blood pressure, depression, allergies or oral contraceptives
4. Giving up smoking
5. The age at which our mothers bore us
6. The increase of Hispanic American adults
7. Air-conditioning
8. Heredity
9. Natural selection
10. The human adenovirus Ad-36

http://www.theaustra...41-7583,00.html


I guess you are right...you can't blame someone or an industry (pharma/medical) for one's ignorance...we as a society choose our collective mindset....capitalism at all costs...profits profits....everything else is second...

I'm not a communist but at some point, you have to take a 50000 ft view of our society and it's problems and point out what is wrong on a high level...and that is ST profits at the expense of our health...

One year of health class in 8th grade that doesn't get much further than the food guide pyramid and media, pharma, and medical industries, that promotes patching problems w/drugs rather than prevention is the problem. Media constantly ostracizes anyone who promotes natural remedies, and fat, dumbed down public just eats it up.

the article that started this is absurd....i've been in 2 natural bodybuilding comps in college and maintain 6-8% bodyfat for last 20 yrs...

the first thing any bodybuilder does to diet when he wants to lower bodyfat levels is to adjust macronutrients. Lower carbs, raise protien, stop eating high glycemic carbs, and be sure to maintain about 20% good fat intake...lower carb intake while on a reduced calorie diet. Good fats, (omega 3, 6, 9s, flax, fish oil). this allows you to reduce hunger, keep testosterone levels raised, and lower glycemic index of what you consume. Fat and protein lower glycemic index which is based on carb source.

elevated testosterone, increased protien, allow you to keep muscle which burns calories...no matter if you are a sedentary couch potato or a pro bodybuilder...

also, it takes about 25% of protien and most complex carbs consumed for your body to digest...compare that to almost nothing for high glycemic carbs...that fact alone proves this article as bogus disinformation. the fact that is published in a medical journal proves it is meant to deceive and confuse an already dumbed down public and doctors themselves.

I could go on and on but why bother.

the guys that write this crap don't practice it and are only looking at a bunch of numbers on a spreadsheet when coming to their conclusions.

#13 maineman

maineman

    maineman

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,987 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 09:49 AM

Its great that you pay attention to your diet and exercise. You are to be commended. But your views about the science of nutrition, worldwide obesity and scientific research are oddly paranoid and way off the wall. Research in scientific journals is part of a process of groups of people sharing scientific (and in this case) medical knowledge. Nothing hidden. Openly analyzed by statisticians, reproduced in other labs, criticized, etc. No conspiracay buddy. Informtion is analyzed, tested, discarded or added to the knowledge base. No conspiracy here. Research into proper "diet" is extremely difficult due to the enormous number of variables, and admittedly takes a lot of work, over many years and thousands of patient-hours and extensive statistical analysis. (we do not use the "I ate it, I felt better, it must be the "Right" thing to do approach. This goes without saying) Finally, as to the ongoing paranoid conspiracy theories, how do you explain Latin American obesity? Enormous problem there, no organized government, no access to "alternative" medicine/vitamins, no burger kings in rurual slums, no TV even! ANy ideas? How about Phillipine obesity? Hawain Obesity? etc. Try not to be so close-minded and paranoid. Chill out. You'll feel better and learn something. mm
He who laughs laughs laughs laughs.

My Blog -Maineman Market Advice

#14 stocks

stocks

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 4,550 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 10:01 AM

What's your point? Go ahead and get fat?

mm


MM,
You may not be aware of the blowback on the "obesity epidemic" stuff. The bigger truth is that we
are getting healthier and wealthier as the decades roll on.. Not to disparage your efforts to improve
the health of your patients.

Paul Campos, law professor:

http://www.rockymoun...4883941,00.html

A story in The New York Times, authored by its excellent health writer Gina Kolata, illustrates how useful Occam's razor can be. The story chronicles the astonishing improvement in health Americans have enjoyed over the course of the past century - what Kolata describes as our transformation "from small, relatively weak and sickly people to humans who are so big and robust that their ancestors seem almost unrecognizable."

Over the course of the past few generations the average American has gone from being thin and sickly to being fat and healthy. The average American man is 3 inches taller and 50 pounds heavier than he was at the time of the Civil War (Kolata's story focuses on the health records of Civil War veterans).

This means the typical Civil War veteran had a body mass index of 23, which put him in the middle of what our public health officials incorrectly label the "normal" range of weight (it was normal to be thin in the 19th century, mainly because so many people were malnourished).

Meanwhile, today's average middle-age male has a BMI of 28, putting him toward the high end of the government's "overweight" category.

Yet middle-age people today are far healthier than their parents were at the same age, who in turn were much healthier than their parents. Rates of most major illnesses, including heart disease, stroke, respiratory diseases and many cancers, have plummeted over the course of the past few generations, and continue to fall.
-- -
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change, 
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
 

#15 maineman

maineman

    maineman

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,987 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 10:24 AM

First of all, the BMI is a broad stroke measure that sure seems to have fired up a lot of anger. Great article in the NEW YORK TIMES science section. I believe from this week. NO ONE who is involved with weight/obesity work feels it carries much significance ON ITS OWN. Truth? No one has a clue or pretends to know what a "NORMAL WEIGHT" is. We may never now. Too many variables, such as exercise, life style, genetics, etc. etc. Having a "range" like our 100-year wall chart of Weights at Death (from a 100 year old Metropolitan Life Morgue Actuarial table) that hang in most doctors offices, gives people a vague idea of a range. Best use? If people are way above thier "range" we can open up a dialogue about health practice, diet, exercise, etc. Likewise if they are way below. In most cases, the number is irrelevant. Folks know if they are fat, they know if they eat poorly or don't exercise enough. Also, the improvement in health since the civil war is entirely due to hygiene, antibiotics, vaccines, medical and surgical care, clean running water, flush toilets, etc. NOT because we are fatter.... good god, man, THINK. FInally, someone above said that this medical stuff was written "by people who don't practice this stuff". This is nonsense, naive and cynical on multiple levels. I have never had a heart attack and treat them every day. I've never broken a bone and treat them every day. I've never had cancer, but screen for it, diagnose and treat it every day. ANd, for what it's worth, I practice everything I preach when it comes to diet, exercise, smoking, health screening, etc. mm
He who laughs laughs laughs laughs.

My Blog -Maineman Market Advice

#16 stocks

stocks

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 4,550 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 11:15 AM

Also, the improvement in health since the civil war is entirely due to hygiene, antibiotics, vaccines, medical and surgical care, clean running water, flush toilets, etc. NOT because we are fatter....


the post referenced a decrease in malnutrition


good god, man, THINK.


The quote was from a law professor at the U of Colorado. He has also written a book
"The Obesity Myth"

http://www.amazon.co...a...TF8&s=books
-- -
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change, 
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
 

#17 endisnear

endisnear

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 439 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 11:36 AM

Its great that you pay attention to your diet and exercise. You are to be commended.

But your views about the science of nutrition, worldwide obesity and scientific research are oddly paranoid and way off the wall.

Research in scientific journals is part of a process of groups of people sharing scientific (and in this case) medical knowledge. Nothing hidden. Openly analyzed by statisticians, reproduced in other labs, criticized, etc. No conspiracay buddy. Informtion is analyzed, tested, discarded or added to the knowledge base. No conspiracy here.

Research into proper "diet" is extremely difficult due to the enormous number of variables, and admittedly takes a lot of work, over many years and thousands of patient-hours and extensive statistical analysis.

(we do not use the "I ate it, I felt better, it must be the "Right" thing to do approach. This goes without saying)

Finally, as to the ongoing paranoid conspiracy theories, how do you explain Latin American obesity? Enormous problem there, no organized government, no access to "alternative" medicine/vitamins, no burger kings in rurual slums, no TV even! ANy ideas?

How about Phillipine obesity? Hawain Obesity? etc.

Try not to be so close-minded and paranoid. Chill out. You'll feel better and learn something.

mm


obesity in the regions you mentioned are b/c of recent access to processed prepackaged and fast food.
Poorer regions w/access to alot of processed, fast food, will tend to have more overweight people.

Heck, look up medical stats in LA, KY, WV, and MS states. Among highest overweight % and prob diabetes in country. Latin America and other countries are the same.

My fiancee is Romanian and i've been there several times. One thing you notice immediately is that there are almost no overweight people there. Most everyone grows significant amount of their own food in their yards...fruit, veggies, etc.

#18 EntropyModel

EntropyModel

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 2,723 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 12:37 PM

One year of health class in 8th grade that doesn't get much further than the food guide pyramid and media, pharma, and medical industries, that promotes patching problems w/drugs rather than prevention is the problem.

...the article that started this is absurd...


endisnear...I believe you, I and maineman are agreeing on that - that pills are NOT the answer, and public have low education level on health which must be addressed.

Media constantly ostracizes anyone who promotes natural remedies, and fat, dumbed down public just eats it up.


I agree, Public are certainly dumbed down to a frightening degree. As i've said many time here and elsewhere In my view, 99% of people are incapable of determining a fact from a fiction, which contributes greatly to this health crises which relies on understanding some simple facts. The 10+billon$ industry to con the public can only exist with a public who lack the ability to tell fact from fiction.

....i've been in 2 natural bodybuilding comps in college and maintain 6-8% bodyfat for last 20 yrs...

the first thing any bodybuilder does to diet when he wants to lower bodyfat levels is to adjust macronutrients. Lower carbs, raise protien, stop eating high glycemic carbs, and be sure to maintain about 20% good fat intake...lower carb intake while on a reduced calorie diet. Good fats, (omega 3, 6, 9s, flax, fish oil). this allows you to reduce hunger, keep testosterone levels raised, and lower glycemic index of what you consume. Fat and protein lower glycemic index which is based on carb source.

elevated testosterone, increased protien, allow you to keep muscle which burns calories...no matter if you are a sedentary couch potato or a pro bodybuilder...


Agreed, this is pretty much tried and tested and proven in elite fitness circles for last 5-10 years. I give alot of credit to Barry Sears Zone book for that direction - its mostly people outside the establishment that always push knowledge forward. I remember it coming out around 1996 and we all tested it, and the results spread like wildfire in fitness circles.

As you say the knowledge has moved on still further, and medical profession needs to leverage the extensive knowledge of elite athlete's, because we are very have been continously 'testing' , and could suggest alot of studies.

But maineman is correct, its hard to scientifically prove what works, even though we are sure it does, because human body has too many 'dependent variable's as it known - you have to account for genetics & environment. Stastitical methods for doing so are very questionable and so doubt will remain...unless we can Clone people and keep them in isolation chambers and control their environment!!

For example, research shows that the population has a normal distribution of hormonal response to growth stimulus. That is too say, for the same exercise some people will put on little muscle, others alot. Then there is role of Myostatin gene that limit maximum muscle growth as well, huge bodybuilders are the result of gene's missing those limits.[ interesting read on this http://www.ultimate-...se.com/pb8.html ]

In total, genetics play and large but as yet undefinable role in this whole debate, which means folks will always argue about it.

That is why I focus on initially identity 'body type' - which is bizarly ignored in literature I read. It has been well understood for 20+ years that humans have genetic difference in muscle fibres and hormonal responses.

We have to get away from the 'one size fits all' mentality.


BUT for general advice to the public, the only thing that 'fits all' is that eating way more than you need will make you fat, so that's the simple message for public....if you get drawn into all the complexity above, you'll confuse people and they'll change nothing...just keep it simple.

also, it takes about 25% of protien and most complex carbs consumed for your body to digest...compare that to almost nothing for high glycemic carbs...that fact alone proves this article as bogus disinformation. the fact that is published in a medical journal proves it is meant to deceive and confuse an already dumbed down public and doctors themselves.


Right, its just a game, they are forefilling their role in the system - public wants magic pills and they will find one eventually. But of course it will have horrible long term health effects, likely the weight loss will be temporary, and then a nice new crises will exist to exploit.

Capitalism is a good system, but Govt have a role which is to oversee and regulate it in the public interest, I have said that in this case they are failed to do so.

But we must not blame Doctors, they are held in the system, the blame is really Govt for terrible education system making dumb public victims of natural preditory companies, and then failuing to protect dumb public from them.

I could go on and on but why bother.


'Cos you were on a role...you made alot of good points.


the guys that write this crap don't practice it and are only looking at a bunch of numbers on a spreadsheet when coming to their conclusions.



They're just human beings trying to make a $ off the problem...but I don't agree with their ethics.


Mark.

Edited by entropy, 28 December 2006 - 12:43 PM.

Question everything, especially what you believe you know. The foundation of science is questioning the data, not trusting the data. I only trust fully falsified, non vested interest 'data', which is extremely rare in our world of paid framing narratives 'psy ops'. Market Comments https://markdavidson.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLznkbTx_dpw_-Y9bBN3QR-tiNSsFsSojB

#19 EntropyModel

EntropyModel

    Member

  • TT Member*
  • 2,723 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 12:59 PM

A very sloppy reference filled with sloppy logic and misquoted information.

What's your point? Go ahead and get fat?



If a smoker who has emphysema and requires oxygen and medication to breathe dies in a car crash his death is listed as "Motor Vehicle Accident". Does it make his lung disease irrlevant?

Likewise deaths due to "obesity" or high BMIs is an irrelevant issue.

Obesity is a major health problem and leads to Type 2 diabetes, hypertension, degenerative joint disease, increased cardiovascular disease, and more. Shouldn't we be trying to advise those people who are concerned about their health?

Finally, ease up on the paranoia, buddy. No One is making you eat anything you don't want to eat. You are free to eat whatever floats your boat. Want to drink sugar-filled sodas? Go ahead. Want to eat Burger King all day? Go ahead. Want to eat aduki beans, brown rice and bonita fish flakes with miso paste? Go ahead... help yourself. No Federal Agent Food police are going to come knocking your door....



mm




Good points mm, and I just wanted to add, this 'fat is not bad' crowd are ignoring the most important point. They focus almost exclusively on 'death rates' and issues, where my concern is FUNCTIONAL QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES - when your are fit, and not overweight your life has higher funcitonality -

You don't feel as tired, you have more energy
You can play with your kid more physically
You can climb mountains and see the world
You have the choice to enjoy sports and activities requiring high levels fitnes
You fit in a single airline seat
You don't get embarassed in many situations that overweigh people do.
etc

If you carry around 50+lbs of weight reduces functional quality, even without any extra 'disease'. Then as you say Maineman, evidence is overwhelming that a whole host of problems arise, now even in our kids - diabetes, joint pain etc

I think you'd be hard pressed to find a person who's LOST weight and is now 'fit', who claims they felt better when obese...though I have no doubt the internet is full of such claims LOL.

Even if I die 10 years younger because of low body fat, I'd be happy with the trade off for living a far higher quality of life while I was alive!


Mark.

Edited by entropy, 28 December 2006 - 01:09 PM.

Question everything, especially what you believe you know. The foundation of science is questioning the data, not trusting the data. I only trust fully falsified, non vested interest 'data', which is extremely rare in our world of paid framing narratives 'psy ops'. Market Comments https://markdavidson.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLznkbTx_dpw_-Y9bBN3QR-tiNSsFsSojB

#20 stocks

stocks

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 4,550 posts

Posted 28 December 2006 - 03:26 PM

Even if I die 10 years younger because of low body fat, I'd be happy with the trade off for living a far higher quality of life while I was alive!

Mark.


Mark,
I'm in awe of your knowledge of diet and fitness.
By necessity, I know some psychiatry, and here's another reason to exercise:

But the data on exercise and mood have gotten even stronger. One of the most telling studies was reported recently, in which an exercise program was equal in benefit to routine doses of Zoloft, a common antidepressant.Blumenthal The Zoloft and the exercise program were tapered off after 4 months; then the researchers tested the participants again, about 8 months after the treatments were stopped. At that point, the exercise group was doing better than the group that had received Zoloft.Babyak Exercise appears to affect brain chemistry and brain cells in much the same way, perhaps exactly the same way, as antidepressant medications (increasing the "cell fertilizers" discussed in Part II of the Brain Chemistry of Mood Disorders essay).Ernst

http://www.psycheduc...in/exercise.htm
-- -
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change, 
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.