# I unhappily report that I am right about obesity and diet (Very long) **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [February 16, 2011, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543 "2011-02-16T04:25:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/461 "2011-03-10T00:50:26Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > You are missing his point, which is the more mass you have, the more you will need to eat to maintain it, not, as you assume, you overate, therefore you had more mass. This is stupid. They are not mutually exclusive. You can overeat to a point where you have more mass. And then you will need to eat more to maintain that mass. Also, newsflash. If you eat less, you will gradually lose mass. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/462 "2011-03-10T00:50:59Z")
Why do you have to “maintain your mass?” What does that even mean? It sounds like you’re saying you have to overeat to stay fat, which…duh. ---
**Author:** ![Submerged](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/da6949/32.png) [@Submerged](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Submerged)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/463 "2011-03-10T00:52:30Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > For example, counting calories I would make a burger If you really knew anything about diet and nutrition you wouldn’t be eating hamburgers for dinner in the first place. > [@](#): > > A shmear of mayo on big lettuce leaves (not a lot, ew. ) Eww? To _lettuce_? Okaaay. That explains a LOT. > [@](#): > > I’ve lost 5 pounds. Of water. It’s common knowledge that low-carbing causes the body to dump large amounts of water weight. That’s all that has happened here. You have not lost any fat. If your nearly 1000-calorie :eek: hamburger is typical of the meals you are eating, you’ve probably actually \*gained \*weight and are actually fatter than ever. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/464 "2011-03-10T00:53:15Z")
> [@Labrador\_Deceiver](#): > > Going low carb means restricting carbohydrates. Indulging on a high-carb food once a week does not negate the fact that she is on a low carb diet. I agree with you, in theory. But in the real-world conversations I’ve had with people who try lowering carbohydrates, some people can be pretty flexible with how many carbs they can eat while other people have to be pretty strict. For some people, it will make them hungry and have a lot of cravings and will cause what seems like instant weight gain (which is just water and glycogen, but which can be discouraging). I think I’d say I prefer to call this style of eating “thoughtful carbs.” Don’t mindlessly scarf down sugary or starchy foods. Ideally, don’t mindlessly scarf down any foods at all. ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/465 "2011-03-10T00:55:04Z")
> [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > If you mean in terms of percentage of her total calorie intake, you may be technically correct. But if you look at say, the most popular low-carb diet of all time, Atkins requires 2 weeks of sub-20g carbs a day in order to put your body into ketosis. Absolutely no cheating is allowed on the 2 week induction period, and even then it’s another several weeks until you can start testing your carb tolerance to determine when you start to gain weight again. The bottom line is that she read a book, and is going at it like a 3 year old playing with blocks. Smashing around some big ideas on the floor and thinking everyone else is a poopyhead for telling her she’s a little off about her interpretation. I don’t really care what Atkins says. It is perfectly common for people to successfully lose weight on a low carb diet while cheating every now and then. ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/466 "2011-03-10T00:56:05Z")
> [@Labrador\_Deceiver](#): > > I don’t really care what Atkins says. It is perfectly common for people to successfully lose weight on a low carb diet while cheating every now and then. However, she has not been successful on any self-inflicted diet thus far. Your pedantry doesn’t change that. ETA: This is also the method that Taubes himself suggests in the book. So if you want to say that yeah you can be on a low-carb diet and still gorge on an incredibly high amount of carbs after a whopping 2 1/2 weeks of dieting and still lose weight, sure. But it’s a stupid way to try. For those following along, pg. 177. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/467 "2011-03-10T00:58:36Z")
> [@Labrador\_Deceiver](#): > > I don’t really care what Atkins says. It is perfectly common for people to successfully lose weight on a low carb diet while cheating every now and then. Sure - though the reason may well be because such diets ultimately work, whether their proponents know it or not, by calorie-reduction. Thus a bit of cheating really isn’t a big deal. If they worked the way their proponents think they work, it _ought_ to be a big deal, since cheating ought to negate their alleged mechanism of action. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/468 "2011-03-10T01:10:18Z")
> [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > Going “low carb” does not mean eating “quite a bit of cornbread”. At least if you’re going to try and abide by what he says in the book, try and stick with it and not pick and choose what you want to believe out of it. Because I read the book too, and you are wildly misrepresenting its claims. I am? Okay, please explain how I am wildly misrepresenting his claims. Since you’ve read the book, you have some credibility. Please be specific. > [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > It says that certain calories do more for your insulin resistance than others, so avoiding high carbs and sugars is a good way to prevent spikes in insulin that cause you to store the carbs and calories that you can’t immediately burn. Pardon? Care to clarify this? Are you sure you read the book? “certain calories do more for your insulin resistance than others”? What does that mean? Seriously, you aren’t really being clear. Where is the “calories count” part? Let’s say I eat 2000 calories of fat and protein. My insulin doesn’t spike and my body burns and excretes all 2000 calories. Then it reaches into my fat cells and burns another 1500 and I lose 8 ounces of fat. Or I eat 2000 calories of cornbread. My insulin goes crazy and stuffs my fat cells with an extra 8 ounces of fat. 2000 calories. One scenario, I lose weight. The other, I gain. Since the number of calories is the same, it’s nonsensical to say that “calories count”. They don’t. The composition of the calories is what counts. Are they composed of fat and protein, or carbs? So what exactly are _you_ saying? I’m going to guess, based on what other people are saying: that in scenario 2, if I stick with the 2000 calories of cornbread, I won’t gain because of it, but because of the insulin spike I will get hungry again and eat another 2000 calories and THEN gain the extra 8 ounces, is that it? Because if it is, fine, that’s your claim. But it’s not Taubes’. Taubes says that the extra 8 ounces of fat in my cells \*will demand that my body feeds it \*_after it is already there._ > [@Labrador\_Deceiver](#): > > Going low carb means restricting carbohydrates. Indulging on a high-carb food once a week does not negate the fact that she is on a low carb diet. Thank you, Labrador. The simplest things seem to overwhelm some people’s circuits. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/469 "2011-03-10T01:14:51Z")
Dieters rewarding themselves with taboo food is like smokers rewarding themselves with cigarettes after going a couple of days without. It defeats the purpose. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/470 "2011-03-10T01:15:17Z")
> [@Submerged](#): > > If you really knew anything about diet and nutrition you wouldn’t be eating hamburgers for dinner in the first place. You just can’t keep that knee from jerking, can you? ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/471 "2011-03-10T01:18:34Z")
> [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > However, she has not been successful on any self-inflicted diet thus far. Your pedantry doesn’t change that. > ETA: This is also the method that Taubes himself suggests in the book. So if you want to say that yeah you can be on a low-carb diet and still gorge on an incredibly high amount of carbs after a whopping 2 1/2 weeks of dieting and still lose weight, sure. But it’s a stupid way to try. > > For those following along, pg. 177. Don’t call me pedantic when you’re the one nitpicking the he’ll out of her version of a low carb diet. People cheat on diets all the damn time. Also, she probably ate 40 grams of carbs in her cornbread. That isn’t an incredibly high amount. ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/472 "2011-03-10T01:20:21Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Dieters rewarding themselves with taboo food is like smokers rewarding themselves with cigarettes after going a couple of days without. It defeats the purpose. No it doesn’t. Dieters don’t quit food cold turkey. ---
**Author:** ![Meyer6](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/cc9497/32.png) [@Meyer6](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meyer6)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/473 "2011-03-10T01:49:21Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Let’s see… are the Dopers right? Is this guy some clueless clown twisting things for his own use, missing the point of the science he writes about, (or as Dio would have it, is he not even using science at all, just pulling stuff from his credential-free ass?) Look, I’ve said repeatedly that\* I don’t know\* if he’s right or not. I also never said he was lying or twisting things, just that he is only presenting one side of the story. I also am not convinced that his physics degree gives him the credentials to analyze obesity, any more than my biology degree gives me the credentials to argue astrophysics with Stephen Hawking. I don’t know if you’re misrepresenting Taubes work or not, or if you’re just filtering out the parts you want to hear or not. \* I don’t know\*. What I do know is you’ve gone from this: > [@Stoid](#): > > […]it’s actually not “simple” at all. (And I understand very well the difference between simple and easy.) It’s very complex…VERY complex. And you’ve explained it pretty decently: there are a host of factors in play when addressing the issue of obesity, starting with the genes you get in the first instant of life, ranging to how long a life you’ve lived and everything that’s happened and is happening in between. to this: > [@Stoid](#): > > First, I disagree. A “single simple answer” (backed by lots of complex study, research and facts) that actually produces results is perfectly acceptable - particularly, especially since treating it like something that is wildly complex and might have a dozen answers has led us exactly nowhere. Oh wait, that’s not true. > So yeah, a simple answer actually makes a bunch of sense. in a matter of days. Do you not see how that seems excessively overzealous? Do you not see that the you of only a week ago would have viciously disagreed with the you of today? Doesn’t that seem weird? ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/474 "2011-03-10T02:07:06Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > I am? Okay, please explain how I am wildly misrepresenting his claims. Since you’ve read the book, you have some credibility. Please be specific. Part of your problem is that you’re taking this book as the gospel of dieting and weight loss. There are a lot of people in this thread who haven’t read it, it’s really not that great of a book for someone who is so focused on “science” and “data” that you love so much. But he tells you what you want to hear, which is that calories are irrelevant to the weight discussion. There is a good article about the effect of carbs on the body, written by an actual doctor, with actual scientific jargon: [http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/saturated-fat/changing-dietary-trends-and-the-obesity-epidemic/](http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/saturated-fat/changing-dietary-trends-and-the-obesity-epidemic/) > [@](#): > > Pardon? Care to clarify this? Are you sure you read the book? “certain calories do more for your insulin resistance than others”? What does that mean? I find it confusing that you read the book and don’t understand that calories from different sources have varying impacts on insulin production. In fact, you go on to explain parts of it in the next section of your post: > [@](#): > > Seriously, you aren’t really being clear. Where is the “calories count” part? > Let’s say I eat 2000 calories of fat and protein. My insulin doesn’t spike and my body burns and excretes all 2000 calories. Then it reaches into my fat cells and burns another 1500 and I lose 8 ounces of fat. > Or I eat 2000 calories of cornbread. My insulin goes crazy and stuffs my fat cells with an extra 8 ounces of fat. > 2000 calories. > One scenario, I lose weight. > The other, I gain. > Since the number of calories is the same, it’s nonsensical to say that “calories count”. They don’t. The composition of the calories is what counts. Are they composed of fat and protein, or carbs? Yes, the composition of calories counts. That crazy theory that you yourself support and that I stated in the part you quoted earlier. Go re-read the part about hormones and their impact on weight gain. Calories do count, but it depends on where they come from as you state. 2000 calories primarily from carbs is going to spike your insulin and be stored as fat. Nobody is arguing that the composition of calories is not important. What you seem to be arguing is that they do not matter whatsoever. What he is saying is that strictly accounting for only calories without regard for their impact on insulin levels is not effective for weight loss. This is essentially the entire position of the low-carb movement. You really should read more about it from other perspectives instead of latching onto this book as the solution. Taubes is not a scientist, as you pointed out earlier. And he makes some mistakes in his analysis of thermodynamics and the contention that when you consume more calories you grow, and when you consume fewer and burn more you lose mass. He seems to think that this requires some sort of qualitative explanation for the relationship, and the fact that he cannot see one means that it nullifies the contention. “Not all foods that contain carbohydrates are equally fattening. This is a crucial point. The most fattening foods are the ones that have the greatest effect on our blood sugar and insulin levels. These are concentrated sources of carbohydrates, and particularly those that we can digest quickly: anything made of refined flour (breads, cereals, and pasta) [snip], starches (potatoes, rice, and corn)”. Which is where my criticism of your decision to binge on cornbread came from. You’re holding the information in this book to a high level, and seemingly ignoring it at the same time. If you really felt that the composition of the calories was the only thing that mattered, and that carbs were the enemy, why on earth would you bake cornbread? This will not result in you losing weight, even by his predictions. > [@](#): > > I’m going to guess, based on what other people are saying: that in scenario 2, if I stick with the 2000 calories of cornbread, I won’t gain because of it, but because of the insulin spike I will get hungry again and eat another 2000 calories and THEN gain the extra 8 ounces, is that it? No, that’s not what people are saying. Again, you’ll find a lot of low-carb enthusiasts on this board for many reasons that are backed up by “science” and “data” that you so love. What they are saying is that in scenario 2, if you eat the 2000 calories of cornbread, you will be more likely to experience that spike in insulin and more likely to store those calories as fat. It’s not that you will continue to eat beyond the 2000 calories, but that is actually a reasonable possibility. But no, it’s not just that 2000 calories is 2000 calories is 2000 calories. You’ve just chosen a really dumb 2000 calories to take in if your goal was to stick with his recommendations. I am with you on the low-carb thing. But I don’t think that you totally get that this book is not the be-all end-all of scientific inquiry into the nature of nutrition. ---
**Author:** ![LilyoftheField](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@LilyoftheField](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilyoftheField)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/475 "2011-03-10T02:11:13Z")
> [@Submerged](#): > > If you really knew anything about diet and nutrition you wouldn’t be eating hamburgers for dinner in the first place. > Eww? To _lettuce_? Okaaay. That explains a LOT. > > Of water. It’s common knowledge that low-carbing causes the body to dump large amounts of water weight. That’s all that has happened here. You have not lost any fat. > > I I’m pretty sure that the ‘ew’ referred to the mayo and not the lettuce. And isn’t initial water weight loss common to all diets and not just low carb? 😕 I admit to not having a cite for this, but I thought that this was the usual assumption as to why you lose more weight when you first start a diet and less as your body adjusts. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/476 "2011-03-10T02:11:52Z")
> [@Submerged](#): > > If you really knew anything about diet and nutrition you wouldn’t be eating hamburgers for dinner in the first place. > Eww? To _lettuce_? Okaaay. That explains a LOT. > > Of water. It’s common knowledge that low-carbing causes the body to dump large amounts of water weight. That’s all that has happened here. You have not lost any fat. > > If your nearly 1000-calorie :eek: hamburger is typical of the meals you are eating, you’ve probably actually \*gained \*weight and are actually fatter than ever. :rolleyes: Hey, **Submerged**? _waves politely_ Can you take a break from being a jerk to **Stoid** and talk to me for a minute? I promise it won’t hurt. I eat _very much_ like what **Stoid** just described, minus the cornbread of course, and have been doing it religiously since the beginning of January. Since January 19th, I have lost 2.5 inches on my hips, 2 on my waist, 1.5 on my bust, and 15 pounds. I have done this _without exercising_, so it’s just diet and nothing else. According to my scale, which measures body fat, I’m down about 4% body fat since I started. I’m down a pants size and am well on my way to the next one. Acquaintances are beginning to ask me how much weight I’ve lost and what I’m doing. Am I really just getting fatter and I don’t realize it? Or have I lost a clothing size worth of water weight? You can deny it works all you want. You can disbelieve my single anecdote. So I’ll just point you in the direction of [Dave](http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-unconquerable-dave/). And there’s more where he comes from. Please tell that guy he’s fatter. He’d probably kill you with his bare hands. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/477 "2011-03-10T02:12:58Z")
**Meyer6** , PM me for info on the book if you’re curious to read parts of it. ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/478 "2011-03-10T02:27:51Z")
And one more thing, Taubes does quote studies in the beginning of his book of people being put on calorie-restricted diets and it being effective at weight loss. One included people being put on a 600-calorie a day diet of primarily meat and fish. They lost a ton of weight. What he concludes though is that the calorie restriction is not possible to maintain on a long-term basis. So several of the cites he provides do demonstrate that calorie restriction results in weight loss. Many proponents of the low-carb diet even say that it is also inherently calorie-restrictive, and the high fat content suppresses hunger and does not negatively impact insulin production. ---
**Author:** ![Amasia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Amasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amasia)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/479 "2011-03-10T03:12:54Z")
> [@Labrador\_Deceiver](#): > > No it doesn’t. Dieters don’t quit food cold turkey. True, but someone who’s making fundamental changes to their relationship with food must. That’s why diets fail and permanent behavioral changes succeed. ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543/480 "2011-03-10T03:31:39Z")
> [@Amasia](#): > > True, but someone who’s making fundamental changes to their relationship with food must. > > That’s why diets fail and permanent behavioral changes succeed. Right, which is why occasional cheating is often beneficial when trying to make long term changes to eating habits. It keeps one from giving up all at once. Dessert every now and again is okay. Bread every now and again is okay. On the other hand, 2000 calories of cornbread is rather excessive, if that’s actually how much Stoid knocked back in one sitting. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-unhappily-report-that-i-am-right-about-obesity-and-diet-very-long/571543.md?page=25)