# What's up with poverty and obesity? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 13, 2005, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446 "2005-09-13T17:01:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/141 "2005-09-18T22:06:53Z")
> [@uglybeech](#): > > Most people are unshakably convinced that permanent modest lifestyle changes are the solution. It can’t possibly work. You are wrong; making permanent changes in your lifestyle can have a significant impact on your weight. I find it interesting – even humorous – that people who claim to know so much about weight loss _have never successfully lost weight over the long term themselves_. **Well I’ve done it.** And I did it by following a _ **permanent** _ plan that incorporates a calorie-restrictive diet and daily exercise. I’ve also talked with other people who have permanently lost weight. Guess what? They did the same thing. > [@Garfield226](#): > > I intend to keep eating fewer calories than I burn until I reach a goal weight, then increase my intake slowly until I find (approximately) the number of calories it takes to maintain that weight and try to average that many calories from then on. Through continual monitoring of my weight I will be able to tell whether I am exceeding (or undercutting) the limits and can adjust my intake (or exercise, but primarily intake) accordingly. I believe I’ll keep it off as long as I want to keep it off. Yes, this is exactly what I do. When I sense I have gained a few pounds, I exercise _more_ and consume _fewer_ calories until my weight is back in check (around 150 lbs). It works _ **perfectly** _, assuming you have the discipline to do it, of course. ---
**Author:** ![uglybeech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/82dd89/32.png) [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/142 "2005-09-18T22:17:49Z")
Two questions in that post: > [@](#): > > So tell me, what is your theory on how anyone EVER loses weight, if such a change is so difficult to measure? Answered at length. > [@uglybeech](#): > > And you’re right the calorie counting works - for dieting. When you’re dropping your calorie intake 500 to 1000 calories (or 20 to 50% or so) below your daily requirements, then you can estimate well enough how much you’re eating to make a difference. > > But the fact is those kinds of gross changes in diet can only work short term. Once you enter the “maintenace phase” calorie counting becomes hopeless because of the impossibility of measuring your diet within the small range you need to to maintain a given weight. So you’re forced to wait until your weight ticks up then drastically drop your caloric intake again as you described. > > Because ultimately all a diet is doing is making very short term large changes that add up to a virtually undetectable change in the average energy balance over a lifetime. > [@uglybeech](#): > > The cycle of crash diet, gain, crash diet, gain, crash diet, is the only solution that makes any mathematical sense. This is in fact the solution you’re describing for yourself. And by a crash diet I mean a diet vastly below your daily requirement for a very short period of time with an inevitable return to your usual energy balance for the vast majority of the time. In terms of the thermostat analogy when it gets too hot in the room you very briefly set the temperature on the thermostat down 100s of degrees (to an amount that would certainly freeze you to death if you did it for a long time). When you’re satisfied with the results you turn the heat off altogether until it starts getting uncomfortable again. > [@](#): > > What did I do that is so magical that poor people can’t do it as well? Uh, ok I did ignore that question because I thought it was implicit that I din’t consider a period crash dieting too relevant to the issue of overall laziness or gluttony or whatever. And what you were saying was you were crash dieting and losing weight so far. I really didn’t think it changed the argument. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/143 "2005-09-18T22:19:43Z")
> [@uglybeech](#): > > Answered at length. Excuse me. How does anyone ever lose weight _over the long term_? If it is as impossible as you suggest? Or are you claiming that no one has ever lost weight long-term? ---
**Author:** ![uglybeech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/82dd89/32.png) [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/144 "2005-09-18T22:22:03Z")
> [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > And I did it by following a permanent plan that incorporates a calorie-restrictive diet and daily exercise. I And yet two seconds later you say: > [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > When I sense I have gained a few pounds, I exercise more and consume fewer calories until my weight is back in check (around 150 lbs). It works perfectly, assuming you have the discipline to do it, of course. So you’re really talking about crash dieting too. I don’t disagree that if you occasionally drop your caloric intake by some gigantic amount for a very very short time you can lose weight. What I object to is the counter-factual argument that you’ve massively changed your energy balance permanently. You couldn’t without dying. For a 50 lb weight loss you need to change your lifetime energy balance by about 6 calories a day. Wow what a difference! :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![uglybeech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/82dd89/32.png) [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/145 "2005-09-18T22:25:37Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > Excuse me. > > How does anyone ever lose weight _over the long term_? If it is as impossible as you suggest? > > Or are you claiming that no one has ever lost weight long-term? It’s right in there. Crash diets for extremely brief periods of time do not violate the math. There are biological considerations which I’m ignoring, but there’s nothing mathematically that would prevent you from making the exquisitely small changes you need that way. Like I said, though - I don’t think brief crash diets that change the energy balance imperceptibly over a lifetime really say anything about laziness or gluttony. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/146 "2005-09-18T22:26:09Z")
> [@uglybeech](#): > > But the fact is those kinds of gross changes in diet can only work short term. Once you enter the “maintenace phase” calorie counting becomes hopeless because of the impossibility of measuring your diet within the small range you need to to maintain a given weight. So you’re forced to wait until your weight ticks up then drastically drop your caloric intake again as you described. Utter BS. I was 200+ lbs for many years, which meant I was very much overweight for my height. Now I’m at 150 lbs. And I’ve maintained my weight at 150 lbs. for 10 years by following a rigid diet and exercise program. You say what I have done is impossible. Please explain, then, how I was able to achieve this. ---
**Author:** ![uglybeech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/82dd89/32.png) [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/147 "2005-09-18T22:36:36Z")
> [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > Utter BS. > > I was 200+ lbs for many years, which meant I was very much overweight for my height. Now I’m at 150 lbs. And I’ve maintained my weight at 150 lbs. for 10 years by following a rigid diet and exercise program. You say what I have done is impossible. Please explain, then, how I was able to achieve this. I never said weight loss was impossible. I only said that whatever you did, you can’t have changed your overall energy balance by anything more than an immeasurable fraction. It is possible that you’re eating a lot less, but if you are then I guarantee you that you’re burning way fewer calories than you were too. Or the converse. But not both. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/148 "2005-09-18T22:37:41Z")
> [@uglybeech](#): > > So you’re really talking about crash dieting too. I don’t disagree that if you occasionally drop your caloric intake by some gigantic amount for a very very short time you can lose weight. > > What I object to is the counter-factual argument that you’ve massively changed your energy balance permanently. You couldn’t without dying. For a 50 lb weight loss you need to change your lifetime energy balance by about 6 calories a day. Wow what a difference! :rolleyes: Um, I don’t think you understand, **uglybeech**. When I was 200+ lbs I was not following a diet or exercise program. Since going on the program I have lost 50 lbs., and am now at a nominal 150 lbs. If I gain weight for _any_ reason (e.g. ate too much the week before, didn’t put enough exercise hours in), then I will exercise even _harder_ and restrict even _more_ calories until my weight is at 150 lbs again. Unlike you, **I have done it**. So have others. So what is your argument, now? Are you saying I’m lying? Are you saying that I haven’t really lost any weight? Are you saying that I will fail and will again be 200 lbs? Please tell me. ---
**Author:** ![SlyFrog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a3d4f5/32.png) [@SlyFrog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlyFrog)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/149 "2005-09-18T22:41:37Z")
> [@uglybeech](#): > > I never said weight loss was impossible. I only said that whatever you did, you can’t have changed your overall energy balance by anything more than an immeasurable fraction. It is possible that you’re eating a lot less, but if you are then I guarantee you that you’re burning way fewer calories than you were too. Or the converse. But not both. I’m really not sure where you are getting the theory that people who are obese are consuming one teaspoon of sugar more per day. The people that I know who are obese tend to consume one Big Mac (or equivalent item) more per day. You are factoring in the fact that as you get fatter, you can consume more calories and maintain the same weight, aren’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/150 "2005-09-18T22:47:09Z")
> [@uglybeech](#): > > I never said weight loss was impossible. I only said that whatever you did, you can’t have changed your overall energy balance by anything more than an immeasurable fraction. It is possible that you’re eating a lot less, but if you are then I guarantee you that you’re burning way fewer calories than you were too. Or the converse. But not both. Trust me, I understand the energy balance equation. But the fact remains that I have permanent lost 50 lbs, and am no longer fat. I did this by following a strict and permanent diet & exercise program. Yet people like you and **Wesley Clark** continue to try and convince people that what I have accomplished cannot be done. You tell fat people that “It’s not their fault,” and that diet, exercise, and discipline are not the answer. By perpetuating such nonsense you are doing a huge disservice to fat people who want to lose weight. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/151 "2005-09-18T22:55:26Z")
> [@SlyFrog](#): > > I’m really not sure where you are getting the theory that people who are obese are consuming one teaspoon of sugar more per day. The people that I know who are obese tend to consume one Big Mac (or equivalent item) more per day. You are factoring in the fact that as you get fatter, you can consume more calories and maintain the same weight, aren’t you? It was probaby my rather inept attempt at pointing out that, as **uglybeech** has been saying, crash diets don’t work. Rather, once a healthy weight is reached, relatively small changes in intake can “fine-tune” weight, keeping it within an acceptable range. I’m not sure where **uglybeech** is getting the idea that “crash dieting” is the only way to keep weight off. Once you reach an acceptable weight, you eat the calories needed to maintain that weight (i.e. you’re not “dieting” anymore at all, in the sense that you’re not underfeeding, you’ve balanced your intake with your body’s current needs), and if you start drifting outside your acceptable weight range, small adjustments (not the huge crashes **uglybeech** seems adamant on thrusting upon everyone) are adequate for reining it back in. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/152 "2005-09-18T23:02:48Z")
Agree, **Garfield226**. If dieting and exercising do not work (as **uglybeech** is insinuating), I’m still waiting for an explanation on how I lost weight. ---
**Author:** ![MelCthefirst](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eada6e/32.png) [@MelCthefirst](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MelCthefirst)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/153 "2005-09-18T23:08:46Z")
So, and forgive me if I’m wrong, there a large number of Americans on here who see the problems of obesity and its link to poverty (although there is obesity in rich folk as well), the increasing numbers of obese and the availability, cheapness and somewhat lack of healthy alternatives to fastfood in poor areas, not to mention the lack of time to exercise and the lack of good town planning that would have incorporated exercise/play areas into towns. So why, when I have chimed in to a thread on fast foods and the neccesity for more control over their distribution and offering healthy alternatives etc, was there an outcry over individual rights to eat fastfood when they wanted to? I don’t see this ‘every man for himself’ attitude working too well. We have an obesity problem here too, also amongst the poor but the government has put money into exercise education programmes and eating healthy programmes, on tv, in schools and in communities. If you don’t do this, encouraging the notion that we are responsible for our community and their health, where will it end? ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/154 "2005-09-18T23:11:58Z")
> [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > **Wesley Clark** : > > Indeed, there are successful & educated people who are obese. These people either _want_ to be fat, or they lack the discipline to lose the weight – take your pick. It’s that simple. > > I was fat for a long time. And then I decided I didn’t want to be fat anymore. So I restricted my caloric intake and began exercising. I went from 200 lbs to 150 lbs. That was 10 years ago, ad I’m still at 150 lbs. How was I able to do it? Simple: by _ **remaining** _ on a calorie-restrictive diet and _ **remaining** _ on an exercise program. Most people don’t do this; they _ **quit** _. And then the weight returns. (Big surprise.) > > Muddying this issue with complicated, specious, & politically-correct theories does no one a favor, especially those who are fat and want to lose the weight. And when you strip away all the BS you learn the painful truth: a person is fat because they stuff too much food in their mouth, and/or they don’t get enough exercise. Period. And the formula for losing weight is _ **extremely** _ simple: eat better, eat less, and exercise. This formula has a 100% success rate. Discipline is (obviously) needed to follow the formula over the long term. If a person does not have the discipline to do it, they will _never_ lose the weight. I was heavier a while back too. I started at 302 and about 37% bodyfat in summer of 2003, now I’m at 24% bodyfat and 255 and have managed to stay in that range since around december of 2003. However I really don’t think I did it by willpower because I have a really hard time losing weight beyond this. I still have 60 pounds of fat on my frame but I had an easier time losing the first 50 pounds than I do losing 15 pounds beyond this. Not only that but whatever weight I lose beyond this point comes back easily, while maintaining this lower weight is incredibly easy. The reason is biochemistry, my biochemistry will allow a 50 pound weight loss but not a 70 pound weight loss. So even though I’ve tried to lose 70 pounds total several times, I can’t maintain anything lower than 50 pounds for more than a month or two. We just don’t understand the biochemistry of adipose tissue well enough to offer solutions that work for more than a minority of people. Those people who can’t lose weight aren’t fat because they lack willpower, they are fat because their biochemistries are putting up such a gigantic fight that they cannot win even if they have the willpower to get doctorates, raise families or fight addictions. I lost and maintained my loss not mainly by changing lifestyle (which I did do) but by trying to manipulate my biochemistry. Eating a high fiber breakfast and high fiber diet in general, eating essential fatty acids, getting enough sleep, eating alot of dairy products, taking several supplements, etc all of which subtly change internal signals to promote a lower bodyfat percentage. I have no trouble maintaining this loss by doing that even though I eat alot of junk food in my diet, but I find it very hard to lose weight beyond this point. Again, its biochemistry. Some people can lose 20 pounds and keep it off but 40 is almost impossible for them. I had no trouble losing 40 pounds but 70 is almost impossible for me w/o massive lifestyle changes and dangerous/expensive drugs. Some can lose 70 pounds but can’t lose 100. We don’t know why either, nobody knows why people’s bodies respond differently to different levels of weight loss. I can’t find the article right now but I remember reading/hearing about an article saying that we could make 20% of people lose 10% of their bodyweight. That is not a good sign, that that is the best we can shoot for with today’s technology. The reality is there are people who can eat big macs and whoppers all day and still maintain a bodyfat percentage about 5-10% below where you are at now with your chronic calorie restriction. I would bet that alot of them feel the same way about you that you feel about fatter people, that you just lack the willpower to be as thin as them. Where does it all end? You’ve lost weight, but alot of people are even thinner than you and probably feel the same way about you that you feel about people fatter than you. At the end of the day saying ‘cutting calories and increasing activity has a 100% success rate for weight loss’ is like saying cutting spending and increasing income has a 100% success rate for becoming rich. It does on paper, but when put in practice too many things can come up to screw with that equation. The human body has had alot of time to develop ways to subtly manipulate its ability to regulate fat stores for something as simple as caloric deprivation to work. Hell, if two people crash in the mountains without food sooner or later they will eat each other, so appetite and bodyfat is not some light thing people can just control it is a life or death primal urge. As someone pointed out earlier, the body is pretty efficient to the point that there is only something like a 0.3% error rate in intake/output. Trying to voluntarily control something that efficient and complex that we barely understand anyway isn’t going to work for the majority of people. As I said though, luckily within 20 years medicine will know enough about adipose to create medicines that make dieting success rates climb to 40-50% instead of the 5-10% rates they are at now. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/155 "2005-09-18T23:16:30Z")
> [@Wesley Clark](#): > > The reason is biochemistry, my biochemistry will allow a 50 pound weight loss but not a 70 pound weight loss. > > I had no trouble losing 40 pounds but 70 is almost impossible for me w/o massive lifestyle changes and dangerous/expensive drugs. > > Some can lose 70 pounds but can’t lose 100. Which is it? Will your body chemistry NOT allow it? They CAN’T lose 100? Or it will, but only with lifestyle changes? ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/156 "2005-09-18T23:23:12Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > Which is it? > > Will your body chemistry NOT allow it? They CAN’T lose 100? > > Or it will, but only with lifestyle changes? I can lose 70 pounds and I have, but if losing and keeping off 50 pounds requires a 3 on a 1-10 effort scale then losing 70 requires a 6. I do not have the ability to maintain that kind of effort over a long period of time and if that is what it takes for most people to lose weight then no wonder it has a 90% failure rate. Plus you have to understand that we really dont understand what willpower is. It is not something you can just call upon indefinately, we don’t really know how to grow it. Call it lack of self discipline if you want, but all of you who support using self discipline to lose weight still have fat on your frames. Even if you are 12% or 16% bodyfat there are tons of people who are 5 or 6% bodyfat who feel those in the 12% range are lazy pigs. So where does it end? ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/157 "2005-09-18T23:26:35Z")
> [@Wesley Clark](#): > > I can lose 70 pounds and I have, but if losing and keeping off 50 pounds requires a 3 on a 1-10 effort scale then losing 70 requires a 6. I do not have the ability to maintain that kind of effort over a long period of time and if that is what it takes for most people to lose weight then no wonder it has a 90% failure rate. Plus you have to understand that we really dont understand what willpower is. It is not something you can just call upon indefinately, we don’t really know how to grow it. Call it lack of self discipline if you want, but all of you who support using self discipline to lose weight still have fat on your frames. Even if you are 12% or 16% bodyfat there are tons of people who are 5 or 6% bodyfat who feel those in the 12% range are lazy pigs. So where does it end? So yes, you are saying you have the physical ability to lose 70 pounds, but you are not willing to exert the effort to do so. It ends with a comfortable and healthy weight for the person at hand. I am not advocating that everyone be 5% bodyfat and 150 pounds. I am advocating that people reach and maintain a healthy weight for that person, even if it’s hard. ---
**Author:** ![uglybeech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/82dd89/32.png) [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/158 "2005-09-18T23:35:24Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > I’m not sure where **uglybeech** is getting the idea that “crash dieting” is the only way to keep weight off. Once you reach an acceptable weight, you eat the calories needed to maintain that weight (i.e. you’re not “dieting” anymore at all, in the sense that you’re not underfeeding, you’ve balanced your intake with your body’s current needs), and if you start drifting outside your acceptable weight range, small adjustments (not the huge crashes **uglybeech** seems adamant on thrusting upon everyone) are adequate for reining it back in. I define crash dieting as eating an amount for a brief period of time that is vastly less than your required caloric intake. Maybe you define it differently. That is a mathematical necessity because you simply cannot “fine tune” your energy balance day to day by any other method because of the huge errors in available caloric measurements compared to the \*extreme \* precision the body needs to maintain a stable body weight over time. You simply can’t develop an exercise or diet program that will keep you within a stable body weight range without doing one thing: Crash dieting when you gain weight. That, and only that, provides you with the ability to regulate weight over time. Even \*\*Crafter\_Man \*\* admits that that’s what he does. The operative biological reality is that the body matches energy intake to energy expenditure with ridiculous closeness on its own. Even the fattest of the fat are matching their energy intake to their energy expenditure with a precision that no nutritionist could hope to manage. The error rate which causes overweight is imperceptible as a percentage of total intake over a lifetime or over a day. Nobody could notice it. And the body doesn’t necessarily even think that fat’s an error - there are genetic differences too at work in at what point when the hypothalamus will encourage or discourage eating or uptick or downtick metabolism and thermogenesis. You all think that I’m advocating passivity. I’m not at all. I’m trying to dispel false (and yet tenaciously held) assumptions which are obstructive to getting a handle on the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/159 "2005-09-18T23:36:59Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > So yes, you are saying you have the physical ability to lose 70 pounds, but you are not willing to exert the effort to do so. > > It ends with a comfortable and healthy weight for the person at hand. I am not advocating that everyone be 5% bodyfat and 150 pounds. I am advocating that people reach and maintain a healthy weight for that person, even if it’s hard. Yes, more or less. There are limits to how far I am willing to take weight loss and how much effort I’m willing to put into it. Madonna spends 4 hours a day exercising and eats a very very restrictive diet to maintain her 12% bodyfat levels. Most people aren’t willing to do that, but if they did obesity wouldn’t be a problem in the world. However most people can barely keep themselves out of debt, let alone devote their lives to that kind of behavior. The problem with the willpower argument is that even if it can lead to weight loss, the level of chronic, unending willpower necessary to do that may be out of reach for most people even if those people have the ability to get doctorates, raise families, fight addictions, etc. People have limits on what they are capable of and it is better to wait until medical science creates tools to promote weight loss so that average, everyday people have the ability to lose and maintain large amounts of weight loss. People can also avoid cancer through willpower but I don’t go to the cancer ward at the hospital and rudely point that out to sick people. Most diseases are avoidable through willpower, as is poverty, crime, and most other problems if people just tried hard enough to avoid them. But it doesn’t mean people have the time or the ability to do it. We probably don’t even know what willpower it and I’ve seen too many documentaries about fat people saying they felt ‘out of control’ when they were done dieting and started eating to put the weight back on to believe that willpower alone is effective enough to overcome billions of years of biochemistry. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2005, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446/160 "2005-09-18T23:41:34Z")
> [@Wesley Clark](#): > > I can lose 70 pounds and I have, but if losing and keeping off 50 pounds requires a 3 on a 1-10 effort scale then losing 70 requires a 6. I do not have the ability to maintain that kind of effort over a long period of time and if that is what it takes for most people to lose weight then no wonder it has a 90% failure rate. Plus you have to understand that we really dont understand what willpower is. It is not something you can just call upon indefinately, we don’t really know how to grow it. Call it lack of self discipline if you want, but all of you who support using self discipline to lose weight still have fat on your frames. Even if you are 12% or 16% bodyfat there are tons of people who are 5 or 6% bodyfat who feel those in the 12% range are lazy pigs. So where does it end? Well at least you’re admitting that it ultimately comes down to discipline & willpower. (I’m glad we’re finally getting past the BS.) You can get your weight down to 200 lbs, for example. But it would take more effort, more discipline, and more willpower than you’re willing to endure. Heck, I could get my weight down to 120 lbs. All it would take is more effort, more discipline, and more willpower. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-up-with-poverty-and-obesity/321446.md?page=9)