Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

interestrateripoff

Why Are Men Getting So Tubby?

Recommended Posts

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1343822/Why-men-getting-tubby.html

British men are getting fatter than ever, faster than ever. Last week, Oxford University ­scientists reported that the average man is more than a stone heavier — 17lb — than 20 years ago.

It would be easy to blame this dramatic increase on over-eating and lack of exercise, and leave it that. But the Oxford study showed that the explanation isn’t this simple.

Indeed, scientific research is revealing that a cocktail of unexpected factors is helping to drive the male obesity epidemic. These include genetics, pollution, stress, vanity, insomnia —and flabby friends.

.........

But that did not explain the full 17 lb rise. And lack of exercise could only partly account for the difference, says the study leader, Dr Peter Scarborough.

By contrast, the extra 12lb the average woman gained over the same time is entirely explained by them eating more, according to the study, which was published in the British Journal of Nutrition.

So for men getting fatter there's a whole variety of reasons, for women it's just because they can't stop eating.

How long before we have another study to show it's more complex for females?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny thing is, it is actually more complicated /more possible excuses for women.

Men have 3 overlapping reasons why they might get tubby: Eat too much, exercise too little, everything going slack as they get older.

To which women can add the effects/after effects of pregnancy, that they are biologically conditioned to lay down more fat than men, that they have a far more complicated hormonal 'inner life' which will also affect their body shape etc.

Speaking as a bloke who has put on weight and a slight pot the last few years, my sympathy is entirely with the women on this. We blokes are just pie-scoffing, beer-swilling exercise-dodgers and that's all there is to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worse than the pies and lager I think is all the hidden sugar we consume.

There's a fascinating lecture on YouTube called "Sugar - the bitter truth", well worth 90 minutes of anyone's time. In a nutshell, sugar, in particular fructose is to blame. When we were told to cut the fat from our diet, convenience food manufacturers added more fructose to give it flavour. The doctor giving the lecture describes fructose as "poison" and goes to great lengths to explain why. 

More surprisingly he also advises us to knock smoothies on the head and cut down on fruit juices too. 

It's a real eye opener, and will make you think carefully before eating processed food

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's called middle-aged spread. At least, mine is!

Oh, and as for so-called smoothies, it's a testament to the power of marketing departments that such junk drinks have a better image than, say, coke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you get older you clearly have to put a little more effort into staying in shape. Many people are getting lazier and so just can't be bothered. The reasons behind this ? Probably numerous.

Just eat fairly healthy, you don't have to go overboard, and exercise a lot.

The over complication of this subject is really such a waste of time. Why people are getting lazier is probably the more interesting and more complicated aspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worse than the pies and lager I think is all the hidden sugar we consume.

There's a fascinating lecture on YouTube called "Sugar - the bitter truth", well worth 90 minutes of anyone's time. In a nutshell, sugar, in particular fructose is to blame. When we were told to cut the fat from our diet, convenience food manufacturers added more fructose to give it flavour. The doctor giving the lecture describes fructose as "poison" and goes to great lengths to explain why.

More surprisingly he also advises us to knock smoothies on the head and cut down on fruit juices too.

It's a real eye opener, and will make you think carefully before eating processed food

Yeah, great little vid. Frightener. Makes perfect sense though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stupid body, I have infinite calories to maintain huge muscles, you must keep maintaining them no matter how much energy it costs.

As soon as I stop exercising for a few weeks/months it no longer bothers to take care of all my hard work and instead

starts building moobs and layering fat over my stomach :angry: .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worse than the pies and lager I think is all the hidden sugar we consume.

There's a fascinating lecture on YouTube called "Sugar - the bitter truth", well worth 90 minutes of anyone's time. In a nutshell, sugar, in particular fructose is to blame. When we were told to cut the fat from our diet, convenience food manufacturers added more fructose to give it flavour. The doctor giving the lecture describes fructose as "poison" and goes to great lengths to explain why. 

More surprisingly he also advises us to knock smoothies on the head and cut down on fruit juices too. 

It's a real eye opener, and will make you think carefully before eating processed food

Blaming fructose is as retarded as blaming fat. A diet high in fructose but where total calories meet energy requirements will not make one fat.

The stuff about restricting fruit should tell you all you need to know about these alarmists. It's complete horseshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's called middle-aged spread. At least, mine is!

Oh, and as for so-called smoothies, it's a testament to the power of marketing departments that such junk drinks have a better image than, say, coke.

So Coke is equal or better than a smoothie? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blaming fructose is as retarded as blaming fat. A diet high in fructose but where total calories meet energy requirements will not make one fat.

The stuff about restricting fruit should tell you all you need to know about these alarmists. It's complete horseshit.

Its not as simple as calories in calories out. I think I have got the following right, but feel free to correct me anyone, A high sugar diet leads to a reduced insulin sensitivity which leads to lower energy levels which leads to less exercise which means fewer calories burned, which leads to fatness. I watched the film a while back and it does seem to make sense. The correlation between obesity and the rise of processed foods is quite striking. Have you seen the film?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Coke is equal or better than a smoothie? :rolleyes:

I would say coke is worse for you than a smoothie because it doesn't have the fibre or vitamins, however both a high sugar drinks that should be consumed with caution IMPO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blaming fructose is as retarded as blaming fat. A diet high in fructose but where total calories meet energy requirements will not make one fat.

The stuff about restricting fruit should tell you all you need to know about these alarmists. It's complete horseshit.

Perhaps you should watch the video. It explains the pathways through which carbohydrates are metabolised, where the calories go, and why all carbohydrates are not equal in their effects. It is a lecture at the University of California.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blaming fructose is as retarded as blaming fat. A diet high in fructose but where total calories meet energy requirements will not make one fat.

The stuff about restricting fruit should tell you all you need to know about these alarmists. It's complete horseshit.

They don't tell you to restrict fruit, they tell you to restrict smoothies etc. They say fruit should be eaten whole, with it's fibre. Your body would not be happy if you munched through all the fruit in a large smoothie - you'd have the shits basically or at least be pretty loose. Diabetics know that a smoothie is a dangerous animal for them. Sure a couple of pieces of fruit is a day is fine, having the contents of the fruit bowl per day is clearly not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and as for so-called smoothies, it's a testament to the power of marketing departments that such junk drinks have a better image than, say, coke.

3 carrots, celery, 2 apples and a banana is probably a meal for most people ...

the smoothie is just seen as a drink though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not as simple as calories in calories out. I think I have got the following right, but feel free to correct me anyone, A high sugar diet leads to a reduced insulin sensitivity which leads to lower energy levels which leads to less exercise which means fewer calories burned, which leads to fatness.

So it is as simple as calories in vs calories out then?

Yes I've seen the video and countless other videos and blogs and they don't change the laws of thermodynamics as far as I know.

Maybe this article will help add some perspective if you want to read it. It's grounded in science so it's not just inane ramblings.

The truth about fructose alarmism.

The follow up article is a classic where Dr Lustig himself actually joins the debate and gets bitchslapped again.

Follow up article

Seriously I had more hope for the HPC OT crowd!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the articles quotes above.

So, is fructose really the poison it’s painted to be? The answer is not an absolute yes or no; the evilness of fructose depends completely on dosage and context. A recurrent error in Lustig’s lecture is his omission of specifying the dosage and context of his claims. A point he hammers throughout his talk is that unlike glucose, fructose does not elicit an insulin (& leptin) response, and thus does not blunt appetite. This is why fructose supposedly leads to overeating and obesity.

Hold on a second…Lustig is forgetting that most fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it is as simple as calories in vs calories out then?

Yes I've seen the video and countless other videos and blogs and they don't change the laws of thermodynamics as far as I know.

Maybe this article will help add some perspective if you want to read it. It's grounded in science so it's not just inane ramblings.

The truth about fructose alarmism.

The follow up article is a classic where Dr Lustig himself actually joins the debate and gets bitchslapped again.

Follow up article

Seriously I had more hope for the HPC OT crowd!

I will read the info, thanks for the link.

Do you accept that the calories in on one side of the equation influence the calories out on the other side? If so, its not really quite as simple as indicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will read the info, thanks for the link.

Do you accept that the calories in on one side of the equation influence the calories out on the other side? If so, its not really quite as simple as indicated.

Hey I don't want to come across as someone who doesn't acknowledge the importance of macro-nutrient balance, because I do. My main argument was that to jump on fructose as the direct cause of peoples expanding waistlines was retarded, which it is. The main reason is people are consuming more calories than they're expending, looking for scapegoats to blame instead of looking at peoples gluttony is just irresponsible IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason I suspect is the decline in smoking, which is a major appetite suppressant. Of course, the health police clamped down on that, but it just led to people stuffing their faces with food instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I don't want to come across as someone who doesn't acknowledge the importance of macro-nutrient balance, because I do. My main argument was that to jump on fructose as the direct cause of peoples expanding waistlines was retarded, which it is. The main reason is people are consuming more calories than they're expending, looking for scapegoats to blame instead of looking at peoples gluttony is just irresponsible IMO.

Had a read through those links. Its a while since I saw the video, but from memory the message was not exclusively about fructose, but did include sugars in general. It's a while since I did my biochemistry degree and I don't have the time to review the evidence in detail so I don't feel qualified to comment on whether fructose is more harmful than other sugars.

I think its fair to say that a diet high in carbohydrate and processed food is not what our bodies evolved to eat, so the classic energy pyramid that we got taught (maybe they still do) is quite likely to be wrong.

King Stromba (old poster that seemed to rattle a few cages) did a topic on diet and exercise, and when I followed the general advice, without going to extremes, it really did get results, so that's quite good evidence in my book. Being January I intend to renew my efforts in this regard!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a read through those links. Its a while since I saw the video, but from memory the message was not exclusively about fructose, but did include sugars in general. It's a while since I did my biochemistry degree and I don't have the time to review the evidence in detail so I don't feel qualified to comment on whether fructose is more harmful than other sugars.

I think its fair to say that a diet high in carbohydrate and processed food is not what our bodies evolved to eat, so the classic energy pyramid that we got taught (maybe they still do) is quite likely to be wrong.

King Stromba (old poster that seemed to rattle a few cages) did a topic on diet and exercise, and when I followed the general advice, without going to extremes, it really did get results, so that's quite good evidence in my book. Being January I intend to renew my efforts in this regard!

We don't disagree here, processed food is bad. I think the only reason we have a diet too high in carbohydrates is because for the last 30 years we've had it drummed into us that fat = bad. Look at the way people will look down on you if you say you ate a Big Mac, what they don't realise is that Big Mac is a lot more balanced than most of the meals they eat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not as simple as calories in calories out.

Unless you've found a way to circumvent the first law of thermodynamics, it is that simple.

Of course with respect to your overall health, it isn't. But in terms of your bodyweight it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recent work has indicated our idea of calories is all wrong too...

Aye, Attwater is flawed, and those with a diet high in dairy calcium pass more fat, even when the calcium comes from a low fat source.

It isn't so much 'calories in' as 'calories absorbed'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.