Obesity and Ozempic and more (3 Viewers)

[notoriousbill]

Bottom line, I still got up at 5:30AM and ran my 5 miles in 90+% humidity. Was it fun, no but it is part of my normal now and that is the "lifesyle" change that must occur for most to see the benefits of diet and exercise. I know I may be in the minority, but the felling I have when done is incredible and makes it worth the work put in.

I think you're hitting on some of the real issue. Doing this is not fun. Restricting what one eats is not fun.

Exercise can indeed be fun. And eating healthy food also becomes pleasurable, if you stick with it.

Unfortunately, we know most people never realize how rewarding a healthy lifestyle can be.

^^^^^^THIS!!!^^^^^^^^

 

[Battersbox]

The comparison to smoking is useful in a lot of ways imo. I'm 51, and when I was a kid virtually EVERY adult I knew smoked. Now, nearly nobody does. But bringing the discussion back around to Ozempic and the other current weight loss drugs--I'm curious how much we think drugs like Chantix allowed the U.S. to largely break the smoking addiction society-wide? I know personally I was never a smoker, but I know several folks who smoked for decades who had tried to quit multiple times but were only successful in stopping after getting a Chantix prescription.

 

[Juxtatarot]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

 

[FairWarning]

Think about the difficulty quitting smoking in the 70s, versus today, and the number of new smokers. Nothing has changed about nicotine’s addictiveness in that period.

Yes, think about that. You didn't finish the thought. Nothing has changed about cigarettes addictive-ness. So something has to have changed. What was it?

Like anything else with society overcoming addictions, many things. Education obviously, but frankly, the word was out in the 70s that it was bad for you. We knew soda was bad 40 years ago.

The biggest thing, and this is coming from a former smoker, is how smokers were perceived, and treated. People are quite comfortable going to DEFCON 3 with any smoker in their presence. People are not allowed to walk up to a fat person, and call it a disgusting habit, and tell them about their uncle who died early because he was too heavy.

It was external pressure. Whereas with heavy people, we are trying to lower external pressure. Especially the rude kind.

Which we should be doing. Heavy people feel discrimination all the time, it's hard enough on them. I'm just describing why the changes that led to smoking becoming less of a problem aren't going to fly.

Think I am wrong? Start a thread lambasting smokers, and one lambasting fat people. See which one gets more pushback.

Look at the comments from the Miss Alabama contest last week for proof.

Help me out with a link here

Search on X.

One of the many cesspools of the internet.

It depends on who you follow.

 

[matttyl]

Think about the difficulty quitting smoking in the 70s, versus today, and the number of new smokers. Nothing has changed about nicotine’s addictiveness in that period.

Yes, think about that. You didn't finish the thought. Nothing has changed about cigarettes addictive-ness. So something has to have changed. What was it?

Like anything else with society overcoming addictions, many things. Education obviously, but frankly, the word was out in the 70s that it was bad for you. We knew soda was bad 40 years ago.

The biggest thing, and this is coming from a former smoker, is how smokers were perceived, and treated. People are quite comfortable going to DEFCON 3 with any smoker in their presence. People are not allowed to walk up to a fat person, and call it a disgusting habit, and tell them about their uncle who died early because he was too heavy.

It was external pressure. Whereas with heavy people, we are trying to lower external pressure. Especially the rude kind.

Which we should be doing. Heavy people feel discrimination all the time, it's hard enough on them. I'm just describing why the changes that led to smoking becoming less of a problem aren't going to fly.

Think I am wrong? Start a thread lambasting smokers, and one lambasting fat people. See which one gets more pushback.

I think you're missing a HUGE factor. Government stepped in and made it illegal to smoke almost everywhere indoors. And taxes on smoking jumped significantly as well. And insurance coverage is more expensive for smokers.

Actually, the insurance part isn’t even true anymore. It was at the start of the ACA, but most carriers don’t even bother to ask anymore as they found out so many people were lying. So they just bake that extra cost in for everyone. Is that fair? I’m sure that question will garner some mixed responses.

 

[matttyl]

And, to the above, it's why I think if we offered significant financial incentives to maintain a healthy BMI, then we'd see a drastic improvement in those numbers.

That could be in the form of vastly reduced insurance costs below a certain BMI, subsidized gym memberships, and/or negative penalties for high BMI.

Interesting you say that. It’s kinda how it was before the ACA (and how it still is for life insurance).

 

[Max Power]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

We will absolutely continue the pill approach. We're too lazy as a collective to do it the right way and there is way too much money to be made selling a quick solution. This is big pharma we're talking here. It is king.

 

[RCon]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

We will absolutely continue the pill approach. We're too lazy as a collective to do it the right way and there is way too much money to be made selling a quick solution. This is big pharma we're talking here. It is king.

That's part of it. The other part is that American society doesn't want the government intrusion that would be required for large scale changes. Even proposals like "higher taxes on extra large sodas" raise a public outcry.

We know from decades of data that hoping Americans will just all get healthier isn't going to work. Concrete solutions could conceivably include:
* Taxation on unhealthy behavior - I don't see Americans going for this
* Taxation on unhealthy products - Possible, but this would be a giant reversal of current policy, in which we subsidize things like high fructose corn syrup and sugar. The large corporations currently benefiting from these policies would throw a fit if we reversed them.
* Implementing healthier food in schools, ideally with the idea that it will lead to longer-term habits - We saw Americans freak out the last time we tried this.
* Mass education efforts

What else would help?

 

[Max Power]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

We will absolutely continue the pill approach. We're too lazy as a collective to do it the right way and there is way too much money to be made selling a quick solution. This is big pharma we're talking here. It is king.

That's part of it. The other part is that American society doesn't want the government intrusion that would be required for large scale changes. Even proposals like "higher taxes on extra large sodas" raise a public outcry.

We know from decades of data that hoping Americans will just all get healthier isn't going to work. Concrete solutions could conceivably include:
* Taxation on unhealthy behavior - I don't see Americans going for this
* Taxation on unhealthy products - Possible, but this would be a giant reversal of current policy, in which we subsidize things like high fructose corn syrup and sugar. The large corporations currently benefiting from these policies would throw a fit if we reversed them.
* Implementing healthier food in schools, ideally with the idea that it will lead to longer-term habits - We saw Americans freak out the last time we tried this.
* Mass education efforts

What else would help?

I think we need to move on from the "Beautiful at any weight" message. Body positivity is a great thing... Unhealthy body positivity is not. We can't keep telling people to live their genuine life if that lifestyle is unhealthy for them.

Early childhood education is critical. Teach kids positive eating habits, positive activity habits. Add recess and gym class back into the schools.

I support the idea of making larger people pay for two seats on planes, concerts, shows, entertainment venues or other modes of travel if they overflow their seat. I don't want to necessarily shame people, but it has to be made socially unacceptable. Its sort of a tax related to how big someone gets. Incentivize them to not be so big.

I'd also support massive cuts in healthcare premiums for people who are physically fit. Or job benefits that reward healthy lifestyles.

Granted I'm sure these ideas would get push back as well, but it is what it is at this point. The course needs to be corrected and some people are just going to be unhappy about that.

 

[Chadstroma]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

Probably more so the Contrave than the Ozempic.... if I did not take this pill, I really don't think I could change my lifestyle. I had tried... over and over.... trying all the different tricks and best practices and failure every time. I take an anti-addiction pill and suddenly I am free to make choices consistently that are building a healthy lifestyle. I was thinking about this driving home after dropping my daughter off at camp this morning. Never in a million years would I have said "I have a food addiction". That just would sound laughable and a crutch. A way to make me feel better about just being weak willed. As I outlined before, the only diet I had that worked for me worked because it addressed my addiction cravings in a way that still fit the diet. Even then, I had no idea that was the key for me. It wasn't until finally being defeated and going to the Doctor to talk about the ONE THING I NEVER wanted to do, which was surgery, and talking through all the various failed attempts.... then talking about the success on the low carb. It still didn't dawn on me that this might be an addiction even when my Doctor was talking to me about a pill that they give recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. At that point, all my barriers were broken and I said "sure, give it to me" and when I took it and felt the massive difference of no longer having this overwhelming urge, craving, drive that I needed to fill.... that I saw it was an addiction. This has really helped me understand what alcoholics and drug addicts go through and why it is so hard for them to quit in a way I never understood before.

If anyone takes Ozempic or any other drug to fix their weight problem then they are doomed to end up packing the weight all back on again just like when people go on restrictive diets... whatever the fad is at the time.... and then gain the weight back when they go off of it.

I am using these drugs to make progress now, get healthy and my goal is along that journey build into my life consistent lifestyle choices that are healthy. Without the drugs, I would not be able to do it other than perhaps surgery which I can now avoid thanks to this. But I wonder, with the surgery, the addiction would still be there. Over time you can 'overcome' what the surgery did for you. So.... that seems like it would have failed too for me.

 

[AAABatteries]

At that point, all my barriers were broken and I said "sure, give it to me" and when I took it and felt the massive difference of no longer having this overwhelming urge, craving, drive that I needed to fill.... that I saw it was an addiction. This has really helped me understand what alcoholics and drug addicts go through and why it is so hard for them to quit in a way I never understood before.

Great post - one thing that I think people need to keep in mind if the idea of how an individual’s body processes things and how thing like hormones play such a pivotal role in someone’s weight.

Hormones regulate nearly every bodily process, including metabolism, hunger, and fullness. Lots of people have ruined themselves over the years with poor and sometimes unconscious choices.

The “lazy” and “will power” ideas, while maybe having some validity, do almost nothing for a person who is insulin resistant or has issues with ghrelin or leptin regulation.

It can be massively more complex than many are letting on - especially for a person with genetic disposition or if they’ve wrecked their body. God help us if we (vast majority of us) had to go through what pregnancy does to the body.

 

[culdeus]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

Probably more so the Contrave than the Ozempic.... if I did not take this pill, I really don't think I could change my lifestyle. I had tried... over and over.... trying all the different tricks and best practices and failure every time. I take an anti-addiction pill and suddenly I am free to make choices consistently that are building a healthy lifestyle. I was thinking about this driving home after dropping my daughter off at camp this morning. Never in a million years would I have said "I have a food addiction". That just would sound laughable and a crutch. A way to make me feel better about just being weak willed. As I outlined before, the only diet I had that worked for me worked because it addressed my addiction cravings in a way that still fit the diet. Even then, I had no idea that was the key for me. It wasn't until finally being defeated and going to the Doctor to talk about the ONE THING I NEVER wanted to do, which was surgery, and talking through all the various failed attempts.... then talking about the success on the low carb. It still didn't dawn on my that this might be an addiction even when my Doctor was talking to me about a pill that they give recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. At that point, all my barriers were broken and I said "sure, give it to me" and when I took it and felt the massive difference of no longer having this overwhelming urge, craving, drive that I needed to fill.... that I saw it was an addiction. This has really helped me understand what alcoholics and drug addicts go through and why it is so hard for them to quit in a way I never understood before.

If anyone takes Ozempic or any other drug to fix their weight problem then they are doomed to end up packing the weight all back on again just like when people go on restrictive diets... whatever the fad is at the time.... and then gain the weight back when they go off of it.

I am using these drugs to make progress now, get healthy and my goal is along that journey build into my life consistent lifestyle choices that are healthy. Without the drugs, I would not be able to do it other than perhaps surgery which I can now avoid thanks to this. But I wonder, with the surgery, the addiction would still be there. Over time you can 'overcome' what the surgery did for you. So.... that seems like it would have failed too for me.

There is hope that those that stay at a lower bodyweight for ~2 years eventually can stay there and get a new hormone set point without that intervention. Long term studies haven't nailed down exactly that timeline but oz is going to help in that area.

 

[RCon]

I think we need to move on from the "Beautiful at any weight" message. Body positivity is a great thing... Unhealthy body positivity is not. We can't keep telling people to live their genuine life if that lifestyle is unhealthy for them.

Early childhood education is critical. Teach kids positive eating habits, positive activity habits. Add recess and gym class back into the schools.

I support the idea of making larger people pay for two seats on planes, concerts, shows, entertainment venues or other modes of travel if they overflow their seat. I don't want to necessarily shame people, but it has to be made socially unacceptable. Its sort of a tax related to how big someone gets. Incentivize them to not be so big.

I'd also support massive cuts in healthcare premiums for people who are physically fit. Or job benefits that reward healthy lifestyles.

Granted I'm sure these ideas would get push back as well, but it is what it is at this point. The course needs to be corrected and some people are just going to be unhappy about that.

Drilling into this, I guess I'm looking for actionable items that government could take, as I don't think anything non-government has the scale to create societal level changes. For example, you say "we" need to move on from the "beautiful at any weight" message, but I don't think that message is currently coming from the government (I could be wrong). If not, surely you don't think that government should tell private organizations that they can't promote a "beautiful at any weight" message, right? In that case, such a suggestion isn't actionable in any way other than hoping society just somehow decides on a different course.

Re: recess and gym, these were largely removed/reduced do to the demand for more class instruction in reading, math, etc. I can't imagine a scenario where the public would stand for reducing the amount of math or reading instruction in favor of recess/gym. Similarly, we can't just extend the school day without paying teachers more.

Re: cuts in healthcare premiums, where would those come from? Surely, insurance companies aren't going to do so on their own. Are you suggesting government subsidies?

 

[Chadstroma]

At that point, all my barriers were broken and I said "sure, give it to me" and when I took it and felt the massive difference of no longer having this overwhelming urge, craving, drive that I needed to fill.... that I saw it was an addiction. This has really helped me understand what alcoholics and drug addicts go through and why it is so hard for them to quit in a way I never understood before.

Great post - one thing that I think people need to keep in mind if the idea of how an individual’s body processes things and how thing like hormones play such a pivotal role in someone’s weight.

Hormones regulate nearly every bodily process, including metabolism, hunger, and fullness. Lots of people have ruined themselves over the years with poor and sometimes unconscious choices.

The “lazy” and “will power” ideas, while maybe having some validity, do almost nothing for a person who is insulin resistant or has issues with ghrelin or leptin regulation.

It can be massively more complex than many are letting on - especially for a person with genetic disposition or if they’ve wrecked their body. God help us if we (vast majority of us) had to go through what pregnancy does to the body.

Yea, I don't know anything about Gremlin and Leprechaun regulation but there sure as hell was some chemical driven issue with me that defeated the best and hardest of intentions of "I am going to eat healthy" in all it's shapes and forms. The Contrave addressed that chemical whatever and has given me the opportunity to make decisions without being dragged back into bad choices by an addiction.

All my posts in here have been to really push back this narrative that the answers are 'simple'. And I reject the idea that it may not be simple on an individual level but is at the societal level because society is a collection of individuals and even though Contrave has been what I needed, I have absolutely no doubt that that is not the answer for everyone just as education or gym memberships isn't the answer.

For me, it wasn't laziness or will power that caused me to gain weight and fail to drop it though I absolutely believed it was. A progression of habits built as a very athletic, very lean kid that burned ridiculous amounts of calories daily and thus consumed ridiculous amount of calories that later turned into an addiction AND getting older (both metabolism slowing and not being able to play 6 hours of basketball a day) plus a number of physical ailments that made consistent exercise extremely challenging is what had me gain the weight and the addiction killed all my attempts to get healthy after by changing the lifestyle.

Is everyone that is fat addicted? No. Is laziness and will power a factor to many? Yes. Are there many other factors that aren't about addiction, or laziness and will power at play? Absolutely yes. You can't solve on the societal level without understanding the various components on the individual level.

 

[Chadstroma]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

Probably more so the Contrave than the Ozempic.... if I did not take this pill, I really don't think I could change my lifestyle. I had tried... over and over.... trying all the different tricks and best practices and failure every time. I take an anti-addiction pill and suddenly I am free to make choices consistently that are building a healthy lifestyle. I was thinking about this driving home after dropping my daughter off at camp this morning. Never in a million years would I have said "I have a food addiction". That just would sound laughable and a crutch. A way to make me feel better about just being weak willed. As I outlined before, the only diet I had that worked for me worked because it addressed my addiction cravings in a way that still fit the diet. Even then, I had no idea that was the key for me. It wasn't until finally being defeated and going to the Doctor to talk about the ONE THING I NEVER wanted to do, which was surgery, and talking through all the various failed attempts.... then talking about the success on the low carb. It still didn't dawn on my that this might be an addiction even when my Doctor was talking to me about a pill that they give recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. At that point, all my barriers were broken and I said "sure, give it to me" and when I took it and felt the massive difference of no longer having this overwhelming urge, craving, drive that I needed to fill.... that I saw it was an addiction. This has really helped me understand what alcoholics and drug addicts go through and why it is so hard for them to quit in a way I never understood before.

If anyone takes Ozempic or any other drug to fix their weight problem then they are doomed to end up packing the weight all back on again just like when people go on restrictive diets... whatever the fad is at the time.... and then gain the weight back when they go off of it.

I am using these drugs to make progress now, get healthy and my goal is along that journey build into my life consistent lifestyle choices that are healthy. Without the drugs, I would not be able to do it other than perhaps surgery which I can now avoid thanks to this. But I wonder, with the surgery, the addiction would still be there. Over time you can 'overcome' what the surgery did for you. So.... that seems like it would have failed too for me.

There is hope that those that stay at a lower bodyweight for ~2 years eventually can stay there and get a new hormone set point without that intervention. Long term studies haven't nailed down exactly that timeline but oz is going to help in that area.

I have until the end of the year on Ozempic. Then the family deductible resets and it will cost $950 for 5 weeks. Nope. The bigger aid to me has been the Contrave. I am hoping that after time, coming off the Contrave the cravings will be gone.... or the very least more manageable and then in the meantime building healthy lifestyle choices that reinforce not falling to old habits.

 

[Doug B]

The “lazy” and “will power” ideas, while maybe having some validity ...

While its hard to shed what we've been taught our whole lives ... those ideas don't, in fact, have any validity regarding the obesity fight at the whole-population level.

 

[Joe Bryant]

The “lazy” and “will power” ideas, while maybe having some validity, do almost nothing for a person who is insulin resistant or has issues with ghrelin or leptin regulation.

Completely fair. And understood.

Fortunately, there are still a ton of people who don't have issues with insulin or ghrelin or leptin regulation. For a lot of people, it can be a behavior issue.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Disagree. Some will do that, sure, but you have no idea (nor do I) what % of people will use Ozempic as part of a multi pronged approach to achieve a healthier lifestyle.

I am simply going off my observation of the American eater. People are saying diet and exercise don't work in this very thread, so I am pretty confident in that prediction.

I don’t know anyone who is (openly) on Ozempic for weight loss, but @Joe Bryant has a couple friends who have had success with it. Joe, do you have a sense as to whether your friends are not only eating less but also eating better? Or is it just reduced caloric intake from the same types of foods?

It's pure anecdotal but for the two people I know, they mostly kept about their same (average quality) diet and just ate less.

For Johann Hari in the podcast I linked to in the OP, he mentioned that he ate very poorly while overweight and continued to eat the same unhealthy food but just less of it. I can't remember exactly, but I think he talked about eventually moving toward a more healthy diet.

But the key seems to be consuming fewer calories than you had before. That seems to often be in the form of eating less of whatever food you're currently eating.

But again, for me that is purely anecdotal with a super small sample size.

 

[Joe Bryant]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

Probably more so the Contrave than the Ozempic.... if I did not take this pill, I really don't think I could change my lifestyle. I had tried... over and over.... trying all the different tricks and best practices and failure every time. I take an anti-addiction pill and suddenly I am free to make choices consistently that are building a healthy lifestyle. I was thinking about this driving home after dropping my daughter off at camp this morning. Never in a million years would I have said "I have a food addiction". That just would sound laughable and a crutch. A way to make me feel better about just being weak willed. As I outlined before, the only diet I had that worked for me worked because it addressed my addiction cravings in a way that still fit the diet. Even then, I had no idea that was the key for me. It wasn't until finally being defeated and going to the Doctor to talk about the ONE THING I NEVER wanted to do, which was surgery, and talking through all the various failed attempts.... then talking about the success on the low carb. It still didn't dawn on my that this might be an addiction even when my Doctor was talking to me about a pill that they give recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. At that point, all my barriers were broken and I said "sure, give it to me" and when I took it and felt the massive difference of no longer having this overwhelming urge, craving, drive that I needed to fill.... that I saw it was an addiction. This has really helped me understand what alcoholics and drug addicts go through and why it is so hard for them to quit in a way I never understood before.

If anyone takes Ozempic or any other drug to fix their weight problem then they are doomed to end up packing the weight all back on again just like when people go on restrictive diets... whatever the fad is at the time.... and then gain the weight back when they go off of it.

I am using these drugs to make progress now, get healthy and my goal is along that journey build into my life consistent lifestyle choices that are healthy. Without the drugs, I would not be able to do it other than perhaps surgery which I can now avoid thanks to this. But I wonder, with the surgery, the addiction would still be there. Over time you can 'overcome' what the surgery did for you. So.... that seems like it would have failed too for me.

There is hope that those that stay at a lower bodyweight for ~2 years eventually can stay there and get a new hormone set point without that intervention. Long term studies haven't nailed down exactly that timeline but oz is going to help in that area.

I have until the end of the year on Ozempic. Then the family deductible resets and it will cost $950 for 5 weeks. Nope. The bigger aid to me has been the Contrave. I am hoping that after time, coming off the Contrave the cravings will be gone.... or the very least more manageable and then in the meantime building healthy lifestyle choices that reinforce not falling to old habits.

Thank you. What is Contrave? Can you tell us about that?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Drilling into this, I guess I'm looking for actionable items that government could take, as I don't think anything non-government has the scale to create societal level changes. For example, you say "we" need to move on from the "beautiful at any weight" message, but I don't think that message is currently coming from the government (I could be wrong). If not, surely you don't think that government should tell private organizations that they can't promote a "beautiful at any weight" message, right? In that case, such a suggestion isn't actionable in any way other than hoping society just somehow decides on a different course.

Re: recess and gym, these were largely removed/reduced do to the demand for more class instruction in reading, math, etc. I can't imagine a scenario where the public would stand for reducing the amount of math or reading instruction in favor of recess/gym. Similarly, we can't just extend the school day without paying teachers more.

Re: cuts healthcare premiums, where would those come from? Surely, insurance companies aren't going to do so on their own. Are you suggesting government subsidies?

Good post. For solutions, I'd be interested to continue talking about how Japan can achieve a 4% obesity rate while we have 36%. From the podcast, they talked about some things that would seem insane for the US - like companies weighing their employees and requiring them to maintain a certain weight. The US Military does that of course requiring people to be a certain fitness level. I'm sure other things like police and firemen and paramedics and such do as well. But I don't see other companies being able to do that. But maybe they do. I wonder how it goes over in Japan.

 

[Grahamburn]

How about this case study. I have 2 kids who are now well into adulthood. They both grew up in the same household, raised exactly the same. One is very overweight and one is extremely fit. So in this case it's not genetics, not how they were raised/societal/financial factors. Wife and I were always into exercise and staying in shape. Both of us were working parents though so meals might not have always been the best choices. As adults their diet and exercise choices are night and day different. And the "issue" if you want to call it that began well before either hit adulthood but has become more extreme recently.

Was one into sports and the other not? Were their lifestyles as teens different even while their home environment the same?

Both played sports as kids. The fit one actually played into HS and married a college athlete who is a fitness freak so now the differences are extreme. I blame the Internet/video games. One got sucked into the worst of gaming and the other was always out and about, even as kids.

This is the way.

 

[beer 30]

We know from decades of data that hoping Americans will just all get healthier isn't going to work. Concrete solutions could conceivably include:
* Taxation on unhealthy behavior - I don't see Americans going for this
* Taxation on unhealthy products - Possible, but this would be a giant reversal of current policy, in which we subsidize things like high fructose corn syrup and sugar. The large corporations currently benefiting from these policies would throw a fit if we reversed them.
* Implementing healthier food in schools, ideally with the idea that it will lead to longer-term habits - We saw Americans freak out the last time we tried this.
* Mass education efforts

* Can't tax unhealthy behavior or 95% of the country would be broke, overweight, angry and waving their AR's
* This I like. We sin tax the hell out of other stuff, not hard to take on some for pop, breakfast cereal that has 75% of daily recommended amount of sugar, chips that have a list of ingredients that read like a chemistry 201 class, etc
* Not sure why we don't do this now, take out the pop machines, serve a healthy lunch, buy local produce to support the local economy. More money you say? Take the sin taxes from above and pay for it. Or actually use the "education lottery" for education
* You can do this but I feel like we've tried this and as much as it makes sense & people hear the message, a double cheeseburger loaded still tastes good

 

[belljr]

Doesn't NY have the soda tax an everyone lost their minds on that?

ETA: It was Philadelphia

 

[odin33]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

Probably more so the Contrave than the Ozempic.... if I did not take this pill, I really don't think I could change my lifestyle. I had tried... over and over.... trying all the different tricks and best practices and failure every time. I take an anti-addiction pill and suddenly I am free to make choices consistently that are building a healthy lifestyle. I was thinking about this driving home after dropping my daughter off at camp this morning. Never in a million years would I have said "I have a food addiction". That just would sound laughable and a crutch. A way to make me feel better about just being weak willed. As I outlined before, the only diet I had that worked for me worked because it addressed my addiction cravings in a way that still fit the diet. Even then, I had no idea that was the key for me. It wasn't until finally being defeated and going to the Doctor to talk about the ONE THING I NEVER wanted to do, which was surgery, and talking through all the various failed attempts.... then talking about the success on the low carb. It still didn't dawn on my that this might be an addiction even when my Doctor was talking to me about a pill that they give recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. At that point, all my barriers were broken and I said "sure, give it to me" and when I took it and felt the massive difference of no longer having this overwhelming urge, craving, drive that I needed to fill.... that I saw it was an addiction. This has really helped me understand what alcoholics and drug addicts go through and why it is so hard for them to quit in a way I never understood before.

If anyone takes Ozempic or any other drug to fix their weight problem then they are doomed to end up packing the weight all back on again just like when people go on restrictive diets... whatever the fad is at the time.... and then gain the weight back when they go off of it.

I am using these drugs to make progress now, get healthy and my goal is along that journey build into my life consistent lifestyle choices that are healthy. Without the drugs, I would not be able to do it other than perhaps surgery which I can now avoid thanks to this. But I wonder, with the surgery, the addiction would still be there. Over time you can 'overcome' what the surgery did for you. So.... that seems like it would have failed too for me.

There is hope that those that stay at a lower bodyweight for ~2 years eventually can stay there and get a new hormone set point without that intervention. Long term studies haven't nailed down exactly that timeline but oz is going to help in that area.

I have until the end of the year on Ozempic. Then the family deductible resets and it will cost $950 for 5 weeks. Nope. The bigger aid to me has been the Contrave. I am hoping that after time, coming off the Contrave the cravings will be gone.... or the very least more manageable and then in the meantime building healthy lifestyle choices that reinforce not falling to old habits.

You may want to look into Mounjaro once it resets. Same class of drug. Ozembic was running me >$400 a pop, Mounjaro is only $25 through my insurance. If insurance will cover, it should be easier since you've already 'tried' ozembic which is often a requirement.

 

[Doug B]

Good post. For solutions, I'd be interested to continue talking about how Japan can achieve a 4% obesity rate while we have 36%. From the podcast, they talked about some things that would seem insane for the US - like companies weighing their employees and requiring them to maintain a certain weight. The US Military does that of course requiring people to be a certain fitness level. I'm sure other things like police and firemen and paramedics and such do as well. But I don't see other companies being able to do that. But maybe they do. I wonder how it goes over in Japan.

Wasn't sure if you saw the article below -- posted it in this thread this past Saturday. It's clear to me that to achieve a society-wide reduction in obesity down to Japan's level, the U.S. would have to become, socio-culturally, a lot like Japan. And not just in the obesity-facing aspects ... in almost all aspects: lack of social cynicism, social trust, ready acquiescence to government and to experts, lower expectations of privacy, collectivism over individualism, and many more.

The Land That Doesn't Need Ozempic

Some 43% of Americans are obese, compared with just 4.5% of Japanese people. What explains this gap?

time.com

 

[RCon]

Good post. For solutions, I'd be interested to continue talking about how Japan can achieve a 4% obesity rate while we have 36%. From the podcast, they talked about some things that would seem insane for the US - like companies weighing their employees and requiring them to maintain a certain weight. The US Military does that of course requiring people to be a certain fitness level. I'm sure other things like police and firemen and paramedics and such do as well. But I don't see other companies being able to do that. But maybe they do. I wonder how it goes over in Japan.

Wasn't sure if you saw the article below -- posted it in this thread this past Saturday. It's clear to me that to achieve a society-wide reduction in obesity down to Japan's level, the U.S. would have to become, socio-culturally, a lot like Japan. And not just in the obesity-facing aspects ... in almost all aspects: lack of social cynicism, social trust, ready acquiescence to government and to experts, lower expectations of privacy, collectivism over individualism, and many more.

The Land That Doesn't Need Ozempic

Some 43% of Americans are obese, compared with just 4.5% of Japanese people. What explains this gap?

time.com

And it seems safe to say virtually none of that is going to be OK with the US populace, so we're back to "What actionable steps can our government take that wouldn't cause the population to lose their minds?" and "Are there any actionable steps that any other group can take that would help?" beyond just hoping that society will change.

 

[Max Power]

I think we need to move on from the "Beautiful at any weight" message. Body positivity is a great thing... Unhealthy body positivity is not. We can't keep telling people to live their genuine life if that lifestyle is unhealthy for them.

Early childhood education is critical. Teach kids positive eating habits, positive activity habits. Add recess and gym class back into the schools.

I support the idea of making larger people pay for two seats on planes, concerts, shows, entertainment venues or other modes of travel if they overflow their seat. I don't want to necessarily shame people, but it has to be made socially unacceptable. Its sort of a tax related to how big someone gets. Incentivize them to not be so big.

I'd also support massive cuts in healthcare premiums for people who are physically fit. Or job benefits that reward healthy lifestyles.

Granted I'm sure these ideas would get push back as well, but it is what it is at this point. The course needs to be corrected and some people are just going to be unhappy about that.

Drilling into this, I guess I'm looking for actionable items that government could take, as I don't think anything non-government has the scale to create societal level changes. For example, you say "we" need to move on from the "beautiful at any weight" message, but I don't think that message is currently coming from the government (I could be wrong). If not, surely you don't think that government should tell private organizations that they can't promote a "beautiful at any weight" message, right? In that case, such a suggestion isn't actionable in any way other than hoping society just somehow decides on a different course.

Re: recess and gym, these were largely removed/reduced do to the demand for more class instruction in reading, math, etc. I can't imagine a scenario where the public would stand for reducing the amount of math or reading instruction in favor of recess/gym. Similarly, we can't just extend the school day without paying teachers more.

Re: cuts in healthcare premiums, where would those come from? Surely, insurance companies aren't going to do so on their own. Are you suggesting government subsidies?

I'd like to keep the government out of it as much as possible. You may be right that change may require government action. I say "we" as in American Culture. However... I think our culture is largely driven by money and influence. Like it or not the government and corporate media are peas in a pod. The media narrative would need to shift for real change. So maybe the government does need to step in behind the scenes and make a push, but I don't think it has any interest in that.

The government could clean up the food stamp process if it cared about obesity, but I don't see that happening.

The school issues are probably a different topic. We somehow removed recess/gym and our education system didn't improve. It might be time to look back on that.

Companies should be incentivized to promote a healthier workforce. Less sick days, more production, higher performance... I could potentially get behind the government subsidizing companies that promote wellness.

Ultimately I don't think the government will do anything. They have no motivation to. If people actually want the government to solve the obesity crisis, I think the only way to effectively do it with an iron fist.

 

[Joe Bryant]

This is a great example of what I'm talking about.

I have no idea if it's accurate, but the post claims the companies that make sugar ("Big Sugar") conspired years ago and bought off scientists so they'd ignore the problems with sugar and instead blame other things.

And that's now why everyone is fat.

And especially, "IT'S NOT YOUR FAULT". Some evil corporation is making us fat. It's not us.

x.com

x.com

Even if true, I think it's ridiculous and an example of the victim mentality and thinking choice doesn't matter.

"Big Sugar" doesn't force me to drink Coca Cola or eat Snickers.

I get to choose.

There are more healthy options than ever in a grocery store today.

I have to take some personal responsibility and choose.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Interesting article I saw today that might fit in this thread:
Link

 

[Spartans Rule]

We know from decades of data that hoping Americans will just all get healthier isn't going to work. Concrete solutions could conceivably include:
* Taxation on unhealthy behavior - I don't see Americans going for this
* Taxation on unhealthy products - Possible, but this would be a giant reversal of current policy, in which we subsidize things like high fructose corn syrup and sugar. The large corporations currently benefiting from these policies would throw a fit if we reversed them.
* Implementing healthier food in schools, ideally with the idea that it will lead to longer-term habits - We saw Americans freak out the last time we tried this.
* Mass education efforts

I think it has to start with mass education efforts. I think about how awful my nutritional education was as a child. We learned about the four food groups and that was about it. I honestly thought pizza was super healthy because it covered all four (just make sure you get some pepperoni or sausage on there). It's not exactly a shock my generation is struggling with obesity.

If you start with education, maybe attitudes change to where we're cool with some government involvement in the future. But that's probably at least a generation away.

 

[Chadstroma]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

Probably more so the Contrave than the Ozempic.... if I did not take this pill, I really don't think I could change my lifestyle. I had tried... over and over.... trying all the different tricks and best practices and failure every time. I take an anti-addiction pill and suddenly I am free to make choices consistently that are building a healthy lifestyle. I was thinking about this driving home after dropping my daughter off at camp this morning. Never in a million years would I have said "I have a food addiction". That just would sound laughable and a crutch. A way to make me feel better about just being weak willed. As I outlined before, the only diet I had that worked for me worked because it addressed my addiction cravings in a way that still fit the diet. Even then, I had no idea that was the key for me. It wasn't until finally being defeated and going to the Doctor to talk about the ONE THING I NEVER wanted to do, which was surgery, and talking through all the various failed attempts.... then talking about the success on the low carb. It still didn't dawn on my that this might be an addiction even when my Doctor was talking to me about a pill that they give recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. At that point, all my barriers were broken and I said "sure, give it to me" and when I took it and felt the massive difference of no longer having this overwhelming urge, craving, drive that I needed to fill.... that I saw it was an addiction. This has really helped me understand what alcoholics and drug addicts go through and why it is so hard for them to quit in a way I never understood before.

If anyone takes Ozempic or any other drug to fix their weight problem then they are doomed to end up packing the weight all back on again just like when people go on restrictive diets... whatever the fad is at the time.... and then gain the weight back when they go off of it.

I am using these drugs to make progress now, get healthy and my goal is along that journey build into my life consistent lifestyle choices that are healthy. Without the drugs, I would not be able to do it other than perhaps surgery which I can now avoid thanks to this. But I wonder, with the surgery, the addiction would still be there. Over time you can 'overcome' what the surgery did for you. So.... that seems like it would have failed too for me.

There is hope that those that stay at a lower bodyweight for ~2 years eventually can stay there and get a new hormone set point without that intervention. Long term studies haven't nailed down exactly that timeline but oz is going to help in that area.

I have until the end of the year on Ozempic. Then the family deductible resets and it will cost $950 for 5 weeks. Nope. The bigger aid to me has been the Contrave. I am hoping that after time, coming off the Contrave the cravings will be gone.... or the very least more manageable and then in the meantime building healthy lifestyle choices that reinforce not falling to old habits.

Thank you. What is Contrave? Can you tell us about that?

It is an anti-addiction drug. My doctor offered it in response to me explaining how I kept failing after getting cravings in the evenings to eat. He explained that it is often given to recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. I could be successful in pushing back on it a day or two but eventually would cave. The day I took the first pill, that craving went away. I still get hungry and the hunger pains (thought Ozempic does help with those normal things) but even with Ozempic, the cravings were too much for me.

I never tried to approach it as an addiction so I can't say that I would not be able to overcome it without Contrave but I do know that it was an off/on switch turned to off right away when I started taking it.

 

[matttyl]

Curious, would you be for or against allowing health insurance companies to charge those with a lower BMI less (so by extension charging those with a higher BMI more)?

Same idea with charging smokers more than non smokers.

 

[beer 30]

"Big Sugar" doesn't force me to drink Coca Cola or eat Snickers.

No they sure don't. I'd be curious to know how much things we ingest today has added sugar in them now compared to 50 years ago? It's 5pm and I'm too lazy to fire up the Googles but I'd argue that it isn't all about personal choice. I think there has been some nefarious "slipping in of the sugar" into our diet on the sly to amplify the addiction.

I'll go put on my and sit in the corner now.

 

[Chadstroma]

In the short-term, I get it. Many people won't change their lifestyles and these drugs can improve their lives.

Long-term, we continue to foster this “just take a pill” approach in lieu of natural remedies. As medical “advances” continue, we will see this more and more. Where will it end? Will there be a point of no return?

Japan’s approach is far superior but we don’t have the culture to deal with the problem as effectively.

Probably more so the Contrave than the Ozempic.... if I did not take this pill, I really don't think I could change my lifestyle. I had tried... over and over.... trying all the different tricks and best practices and failure every time. I take an anti-addiction pill and suddenly I am free to make choices consistently that are building a healthy lifestyle. I was thinking about this driving home after dropping my daughter off at camp this morning. Never in a million years would I have said "I have a food addiction". That just would sound laughable and a crutch. A way to make me feel better about just being weak willed. As I outlined before, the only diet I had that worked for me worked because it addressed my addiction cravings in a way that still fit the diet. Even then, I had no idea that was the key for me. It wasn't until finally being defeated and going to the Doctor to talk about the ONE THING I NEVER wanted to do, which was surgery, and talking through all the various failed attempts.... then talking about the success on the low carb. It still didn't dawn on my that this might be an addiction even when my Doctor was talking to me about a pill that they give recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. At that point, all my barriers were broken and I said "sure, give it to me" and when I took it and felt the massive difference of no longer having this overwhelming urge, craving, drive that I needed to fill.... that I saw it was an addiction. This has really helped me understand what alcoholics and drug addicts go through and why it is so hard for them to quit in a way I never understood before.

If anyone takes Ozempic or any other drug to fix their weight problem then they are doomed to end up packing the weight all back on again just like when people go on restrictive diets... whatever the fad is at the time.... and then gain the weight back when they go off of it.

I am using these drugs to make progress now, get healthy and my goal is along that journey build into my life consistent lifestyle choices that are healthy. Without the drugs, I would not be able to do it other than perhaps surgery which I can now avoid thanks to this. But I wonder, with the surgery, the addiction would still be there. Over time you can 'overcome' what the surgery did for you. So.... that seems like it would have failed too for me.

There is hope that those that stay at a lower bodyweight for ~2 years eventually can stay there and get a new hormone set point without that intervention. Long term studies haven't nailed down exactly that timeline but oz is going to help in that area.

I have until the end of the year on Ozempic. Then the family deductible resets and it will cost $950 for 5 weeks. Nope. The bigger aid to me has been the Contrave. I am hoping that after time, coming off the Contrave the cravings will be gone.... or the very least more manageable and then in the meantime building healthy lifestyle choices that reinforce not falling to old habits.

You may want to look into Mounjaro once it resets. Same class of drug. Ozembic was running me >$400 a pop, Mounjaro is only $25 through my insurance. If insurance will cover, it should be easier since you've already 'tried' ozembic which is often a requirement.

I was thinking about asking to switch to WeGovy as my understanding it is the same drug but approved for weight loss and allows a higher dosage. But come Jan 1.... I will take a look at those options. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[notoriousbill]

Wasn't sure if you saw the article below -- posted it in this thread this past Saturday. It's clear to me that to achieve a society-wide reduction in obesity down to Japan's level, the U.S. would have to become, socio-culturally, a lot like Japan. And not just in the obesity-facing aspects ... in almost all aspects: lack of social cynicism, social trust, ready acquiescence to government and to experts, lower expectations of privacy, collectivism over individualism, and many more.

The Land That Doesn't Need Ozempic

Some 43% of Americans are obese, compared with just 4.5% of Japanese people. What explains this gap?

time.com

I found this article interesting. Japan educates kids in school about proper diet. This is government mandated.

Also, youth see their elders exercising at latter ages as well.

Just the entire mindset is different when it comes to food perceptions. Viewed more from a "fuel" perspective instead of a gratification perspective.

 

[Joe Bryant]

"Big Sugar" doesn't force me to drink Coca Cola or eat Snickers.

No they sure don't. I'd be curious to know how much things we ingest today has added sugar in them now compared to 50 years ago? It's 5pm and I'm too lazy to fire up the Googles but I'd argue that it isn't all about personal choice. I think there has been some nefarious "slipping in of the sugar" into our diet on the sly to amplify the addiction.

I'll go put on my and sit in the corner now.

But with food labels, it's so easy now.

I guess I could see someone who couldn't read having trouble with inadvertently getting more sugar than they choose. But that seems like a small number of people.

If the battle was educating people about food, and that there's a lot of bad food out there, that battle is won.

People know the food is bad. Everyone drinking Coca Cola knows sugar is bad for you.

Everyone knows never walking or getting any exercise is bad for you.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I found this article interesting. Japan educates kids in school about proper diet. This is government mandated.

Japan educates their people about proper diet. That lean protein and vegetables and non fast food is good for you, right?

That's not a secret.

I think American people also know this.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I found this article interesting. Japan educates kids in school about proper diet. This is government mandated.

And yes, the article is interesting. It's from Johann Hari, who did the podcast with Bari Weiss I talked about in the original post.

 

[RCon]

This is a great example of what I'm talking about.

I have no idea if it's accurate, but the post claims the companies that make sugar ("Big Sugar") conspired years ago and bought off scientists so they'd ignore the problems with sugar and instead blame other things.

And that's now why everyone is fat.

And especially, "IT'S NOT YOUR FAULT". Some evil corporation is making us fat. It's not us.

x.com

x.com

Even if true, I think it's ridiculous and an example of the victim mentality and thinking choice doesn't matter.

"Big Sugar" doesn't force me to drink Coca Cola or eat Snickers.

I get to choose.

There are more healthy options than ever in a grocery store today.

I have to take some personal responsibility and choose.

Couple things. One, the post is accurate. Big Sugar did, essentially, pay off some scientists to blame something else (fat) instead of sugar for all the things sugar actually causes. That has ramifications to this day. I've heard people tell me Twizzlers are fine because they don't have any fat in them. To this day, "low-fat" is marketed more heavily than "low sugar" in lots of foods.

We all agree that personal responsibility makes a difference for any given individual. Any given individual can make healthier choices and improve their situation. The problem is that's not a societal solution. How can we make meaningful changes at the societal level, recognizing that hoping for more personal responsibility isn't going to work?

 

[Joe Bryant]

The problem is that's not a societal solution. How can we make meaningful changes at the societal level, recognizing that hoping for more personal responsibility isn't going to work?

What exactly do you mean by "changes at the societal level"?

What type of things are a "societal solution"?

 

[RCon]

The problem is that's not a societal solution. How can we make meaningful changes at the societal level, recognizing that hoping for more personal responsibility isn't going to work?

What exactly do you mean by "changes at the societal level"?

What type of things are a "societal solution"?

When I say societal solution or societal level, I'm talking about large changes in the health of the country. For example, we've seen the 36% of Americans are obese stat reported in here. I'm assuming that we/society wants to get that number down. I'll define societal solution as anything that brings that number down in a meaningful way. For example, outlawing sugar would probably do it. That's not to say outlawing sugar is a good idea, but it would likely work.

What we do know, though, is that hoping for millions and millions to just decide they need more personal responsibility to eat healthier and exercise more won't bring that number down. Therefore, it's not a societal solution.

 

[belljr]

Skip the snickers reach for the French fries

 

[3C's]

Curious, would you be for or against allowing health insurance companies to charge those with a lower BMI less (so by extension charging those with a higher BMI more)?

Same idea with charging smokers more than non smokers.

Not BMI, it's a flawed metric.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

If you want societal impact, the fastest, most impactful way is through the pocketbook. You are already starting behind the 8-ball with sugary foods. Those are addicting and those addictions have to be broken. They are also the cheapest to make and have the biggest profit margins. You have to make ordering/buying an apple cheaper than ordering the french fries. Apply that to ALL facets of food and you begin to make progress. The psychology of it all is rather simple in concept. If it comes in a box/package, don't buy it. There a few exceptions in frozen vegetables, but this approach easily fits the 80/20 rule.

 

[bigbottom]

I found this article interesting. Japan educates kids in school about proper diet. This is government mandated.

Japan educates their people about proper diet. That lean protein and vegetables and non fast food is good for you, right?

That's not a secret.

I think American people also know this.

Yeah, we need more than education. We really need indoctrination.

 

[bigbottom]

Curious, would you be for or against allowing health insurance companies to charge those with a lower BMI less (so by extension charging those with a higher BMI more)?

Same idea with charging smokers more than non smokers.

Not BMI, it's a flawed metric.

For the average person (not competitive athletes or muscleheads), why is BMI a flawed metric, at least as a quick diagnostic? Serious question, not taking a position.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Agree

Drilling into this, I guess I'm looking for actionable items that government could take, as I don't think anything non-government has the scale to create societal level changes. For example, you say "we" need to move on from the "beautiful at any weight" message, but I don't think that message is currently coming from the government (I could be wrong). If not, surely you don't think that government should tell private organizations that they can't promote a "beautiful at any weight" message, right? In that case, such a suggestion isn't actionable in any way other than hoping society just somehow decides on a different course.

Re: recess and gym, these were largely removed/reduced do to the demand for more class instruction in reading, math, etc. I can't imagine a scenario where the public would stand for reducing the amount of math or reading instruction in favor of recess/gym. Similarly, we can't just extend the school day without paying teachers more.

Re: cuts healthcare premiums, where would those come from? Surely, insurance companies aren't going to do so on their own. Are you suggesting government subsidies?

Good post. For solutions, I'd be interested to continue talking about how Japan can achieve a 4% obesity rate while we have 36%. From the podcast, they talked about some things that would seem insane for the US - like companies weighing their employees and requiring them to maintain a certain weight. The US Military does that of course requiring people to be a certain fitness level. I'm sure other things like police and firemen and paramedics and such do as well. But I don't see other companies being able to do that. But maybe they do. I wonder how it goes over in Japan.

Japan is interesting, for sure, but I’d be even more interested in a country who reduced their overweight/obese BMI prevalence in the last 50 years. But I don’t think any country has done that, as it’s far easier (though not easy) to prevent weight gain, than lose it once you’re obese.

Lancet article on global obesity trends

 

[belljr]

I found this article interesting. Japan educates kids in school about proper diet. This is government mandated.

Japan educates their people about proper diet. That lean protein and vegetables and non fast food is good for you, right?

That's not a secret.

I think American people also know this.

Yeah, we need more than education. We really need indoctrination.

Just a small example....I've had soda for over 45 years. Started when I was 7 or 8. We made sure neither of my kids drank soda. They both drink water

 

[3C's]

Curious, would you be for or against allowing health insurance companies to charge those with a lower BMI less (so by extension charging those with a higher BMI more)?

Same idea with charging smokers more than non smokers.

Not BMI, it's a flawed metric.

For the average person (not competitive athletes), why is BMI a flawed metric, at least as a quick diagnostic? Serious question, not taking a position.

These are competitive athletes that I'll use as an example.

5'9" 136lbs (weigh in weight). In the normal range

https://dmxg5wxfqgb4u.cloudfront.net/styles/athlete_bio_full_body/s3/2024-02/TURCIOS_RICKY_L_02-24.png

5'11" 185lbs (weigh in weight). Used to fight at 205, likely walks around well over 190. Overweight according to BMI.

https://dmxg5wxfqgb4u.cloudfront.net/styles/athlete_bio_full_body/s3/2022-07/c94750b2-8c3a-4dd7-840c-7bfa0293c244%252FCANNONIER_JARED_L_07-02.png

There are plenty of "average" guys who are not competitive athletes who have considerable muscle mass and BMI does not take that into account.

 

[Chadstroma]

Curious, would you be for or against allowing health insurance companies to charge those with a lower BMI less (so by extension charging those with a higher BMI more)?

Same idea with charging smokers more than non smokers.

Not BMI, it's a flawed metric.

I thought the whole idea of MBI was to taken into account muscle mass vs fat. Goes to show I don't know crap.