top of page


Don't be brainwahsed:

Funny, R.I.P.:


Eh...yes..."“Tight hamstrings and adductors, aka your inner thighs, can contribute to a tight lower back,” Wright explains. " -> I gotta keep working on it. Every day every day...


Interesting read:

Comments I like:

Mostly this:

Jean Fry - PhD, RN

I am a nutrition scientist & registered dietitian. I read both this article and the referenced review in AJCN. For the last couple of decades, Americans have gleaned most of their energy from a dietary pattern that literally no nutrition expert or set of dietary guidelines recommends. The foundational foods in the American diet are sugar-sweetened beverages (e.g. soda), grain-based desserts (e.g. cookies/donuts), alcoholic beverages, and processed combination foods (e.g. pizza, fast food meals). Having personally analyzed diet records from thousands of Americans, I can confirm that "pitchers of beer" are sometimes what's for dinner. While many blame late 90s low-fat guidelines for promoting obesity, Americans never actually followed the recommended dietary pattern. The authors support a low carbohydrate diet while dismissing volumes of research showing that minimally processed, plant-based, high-carbohydrate diets are very effective for reducing chronic disease and promoting a healthy weight. I don't personally like that dietary pattern, but I can't deny it works and may be the most healthful approach to eating for many people. I also don't hate lower carbohydrate diet patterns and can concede that they work well for many people, especially those that have desk jobs and minimal physical activity. The beauty of a healthful diet is that it can be variable based on individual preferences and rigid thinking around specific macronutrients doesn't help people improve their health.

Both this article and the paper largely ignore the extent to which physical activity dramatically affects the metabolism of nutrients and physiological response to carbohydrate ingestion. Healthy & physically fit people usually have low insulin response to a high carbohydrate load even when they are overweight. Many physical activity experts think that diet is irrelevant. I think that's going a little far, but it doesn't make sense to talk about obesity, health and metabolism without also including the role of exercise and other forms of physical activity.

The authors criticize the behavioral approach to weight management while ignoring the fact that following the dietary pattern they recommend would require major behavioral shifts for most people. Additionally, our nutrition and behavioral therapists have never been empowered to make a significant impact on obesity because there is no meaningful reimbursement for behavioral health services for obesity prevention or treatment. Meanwhile, Americans turn to popular nutrition books that contradict each other and promote unhealthful eating patterns. I have a close family member who is on and off Atkins and has redefined bacon as a health food while demonizing blueberries. These associations persist even when they are not actively following the diet- is this really what we are going for? I do get the point of these articles- obesity is cause by complex underlying processes that are driven to some extent the by the metabolic response to the foods we ingest. It is true the calories in-calories out message is too simple to be meaningful. At the same time, let's focus on simple, sustainable shifts that actually help people. I once had a client lose 100lbs just by cutting out sugar and white bread. It doesn't take a full on keto diet. Simple changes can have a big health impact for many obese people.

These are okay:

- I hope your new paper includes the fact that most "food" we are given or consume ourselves is filled with garbage chemicals made to trick our brains in to believing they taste good and get us hooked. Also the fact that we allow foods to be labeled natural and healthy when in no way are they a good choice. I am only using this company as an example but cliff bars are touted as healthy meal replacements with no or little sugar. Then you see the first ingredient is brown rice syrup....that's sugar! People are so mislead to believe there isn't anything wrong with the food they eat. Kids drinking starbucks with tons of sugar and chemical pump flavoring is seen as totally normal. Besides that even when people diet and count calories, they still eat trash food and say well I'm in my point allowance. There is a huge difference between 100 calories of fruit or nuts than in 100 calories of chips or some other sweet snack. People are lied to every day about fad diets, healthy food and what we should really be eating. Don't even get me started on the use of a microwave to destroy any nutritional value the food had before you "nuke" it

- All good arguments except your anti-microwave diatribe.

- I don't think that the two paradigms are necessarily mutually exclusive. Endocrine-metabolic interactions (as well as neurotransmitters) affect appetite which in turn effect calorie intake. Genetics also play a role.

- This article's point that hormonal dysfunction is the root cause of obesity is just the flip side of the coin, the other side being that the overeating paradigm is the cause. If one takes the overeating paradigm and adds the qualification that overeating is relative to the hormonal imbalance, then the two paradigms are united. I suspect that the WHO and most other scientists already understand that overeating is relative to one's hormonal dysfunction. The real reason not enough progress has been made is that the hormonal dysfunction is a very difficult problem and points out just how little science understands body chemistry.

I like this comment because I think a lot of the "alternative" or natural type medicines and knowledge is good and can be useful (gut microbiome, micronutrients).

- I have recently been told I have COPD/emphysema due to smoking. A few years back my general physician said there was something showing on my lungs. Thanks To World Herbs Clinic, Their Emphysema/COPD herbal supplement is nothing less than a miracle, I am fully back on my feet again and strong!

Yeah...: But regarding the atkins and paleo diets: Yeah, sugar is bad and simple carbs along with it but it is also true that we also don't get enough exercise and sunshine; that a lot of the poorer people of the world can live very healthily on healthy complex carb-rich diets (fiber is good). Is also true I believe that some people can handle sugar very well - might not even be healthy even if they are skinny (but seems like they're okay? but maybe it would seem like they have a very high acid body/gut environment). Obviously have learned sugar (diet) can manifest itself as more anxiety in the brain.

-Atkins noted that there must be something else going on beyond the metabolic dysfunction issue, because people lose even more weight on a ketogenic diet than predicted by the theory.

My layman's guess is that a keto diet "starves" and kills off the type of glucose loving, brain signalling gut microbes that have proliferated in human digestive systems over the past 40+ years.

Interesting yes...

What I see though is a lot of kids, even skinny kids, just preferring to eat "junk" type of food. I think we grow up and expand our diets but if makes me wonder how much expansion will ever take place for some individuals within their dietary preferences....dietary preference I think is a huge part of health and knowing more about nutrition and health seems like it should help one start preferring to eat the healthy food(s), but I don't know, not sure about all people... I believe in homeostasis and also our body signaling to us what it needs, triggering what to eat or eat more of as well...I suppose it can get out of balance/wack though.

-The question is really: What causes this abnormal management of fat in obese people, since they have not been genetically or surgically engineered, as have obese lab animals? I believe that the answer is back to energy imbalance in the initial stages, i.e. abnormally high intake of calories along with SOMETHING in the quality/type of calories triggers the semi-permanent abnormal metabolism. We have very few innately obese humans. When I was in elementary school (age 65 now), each class had A fat kid, now each class has a few skinny kids, with most overweight/obese. Undoubtedly the availability of cheap and poor quality calories is the root cause and I certainly agree with the author that calorie mismanagement occurs physiologically, but what's the trigger?

- My anecdotal experience:

At 70 years old, I have been obese most of my life. My mother was an alcoholic, obese and T2 diabetic later in her life. My father was not. As far as I can recall, I was never encouraged to overeat.

Between February and May of this year, I lost 56 pounds using a three-pronged approach consisting of:

1) Intermittent fasting. Eating every day only between 3PM and 4PM, usually one meal (typically meat and a salad) and only until I was no longer hungry. There's no way getting around seeing this as calorie restriction, but it is also as a way of controlling my insulin.

2) A carb-restricted keto diet. No simple carbs, minimal complex carbs, and no artificial sweeteners or alcohol.

3) Additional exercise. We bought a treadmill and I increased my steps from about 1 mile per day to 2-3 miles per day, with no resistance training. Not much of an increase, really, but a real chore and incredibly boring.

At my follow-up appointment, my physician was about to prescribe Metformin ("I'm sorry, but I've never heard of diet and exercise controlling pre-diabetes."). Then he saw the results: weight down, blood sugar down, A1C down. His concluding advice was, "Just keep doing what you're doing." His about-face was pretty dramatic, really. My hope is that he can now offer better advice to his other patients.

I took the summer off from the additional exercise and intermittent fasting, eating only when I was hungry, but sticking with the same restricted diet. Judging by how my clothes fit, I gained minimal weight -- if any -- but the weight loss definitely stopped. I am now a week into my second round of the regimen and plan to lose another 50 pounds before the end of the year.

This is a combined approach using just about everything I've read and learned over the years. It is not easy and it is not fun, but it is effective (for me). If I had to guess, I would give credit to the fasting and diet -- which is good, because these are things I can continue as I age. I don't feel as if the increased exercise contributed very much.

Bunch of vain stuff but hey, could help someone maybe? (sharing is caring)

I think for me (which I've tried the super-restrictive candida diet recently, and generally have loosely followed the Mediterranean diet (principles of) and was octo-lacto-pisco vegetarian (a little bit of meat) for a year and then somewhat followed that more for a bit) -

Would be to - limit lactose (milk sugar) or maybe even cut out a lot of dairy, for the most part, would be healthiest (I do think greek yogurt is fine though and good, maybe because of the way its processed and the sugar in it isn't much from the milk?), very processed oils (this seems really healthy, to eat mostly just healthy good oils - my dandruff improved a lot during the candida diet it felt like maybe it was from eating more healthy oil), and obviously sugar and simple carbs I have to watch out for. I eat a lot. To stick to a keto/candida diet I feel takes way too much of a toll on the environment (meat consumption). I did good on my vegetarian diet and worked out almost daily in the morning, eating a lot of eggs, kale or yogurt and protein shakes in the morning to recover. A lot of brown rice and beans. Lots of spices and spice. Vegetables. Variety. Lot of junk as well especially at night (lots of candy - I think mostly for the fat because that diet lacks in fat) but I've always had a little gut I can't seem to get rid of and that's okay....I think meat quality does seem to matter as well, mostly seems to affect me eating fast food, maybe it's just something in my brain but...going back to my vegetarian diet would be good, is hard though especially in my current environment.

Really good comment:

- This article isn't trying to say that overeating never causes obesity. It's addressing how obesity research deliberately ignores evidence of people remaining obese while being on the same diet restrictions as a lean person, or remaining obese even while being starved, because it's easier to blindly maintain that the cause of the obesity epidemic is a society-wide behavioral failure/eating more calories when you put in. To the people responding to this article about how they know a fat person who lost weight from eating better and therefor every other fat person can do it, do you think there isn't a single lean people out there who is overeating or eating unhealthily? Do you honestly think that no fat person has ever tried to diet before you personally witnessed it? You don't hear about diets failing fat people because people are more likely to report their successes than the fact they've been trying to diet unsuccessfully for decades. If the obesity epidemic is caused by overeating and eating incorrectly, why hasn't the multi-billion dollar dieting industry been able to fix anything for the past few decades? 90% of these comments read like they got through the first two paragraphs and immediately made a comment based on their personal anecdotes. Anecdotes can't be compared to an entire population of hundreds of millions of people, the complexity of which no singular person can understand, myself included. If I based my understanding of society around anecdotes in my life, I wouldn't be able to empathize with people different than me. That being said, it's true that overeating and eating unhealthy foods is the most obvious cause to the epidemic, that doesn't mean there's a society-wide behavioral failure. The obesity epidemic is also a result of people being overworked, living in food deserts, only being able to afford the lowest quality of food, etc. Eating healthy is expensive and inaccessible to a very large population of Americans. Even if they have SNAP, it takes time to prepare healthy meals, which many working-class and impoverished people don't have because they have to work 60 hours a week. It's also about how the very structure and layout of many American cities is very hostile to walking, biking, or using any means of transportation besides dangerous, polluting, expensive, unreliable cars. The obesity epidemic will remain as long as out our truly incomprehensible economic inequalities are never adequately addressed (which our heavily lobbied legislative system will never let happen in our lifetimes). No amount of dietitians PSAs, obesity research paradigm shifts, or fat-shaming will change anything if people don't have the means to eat healthily. And even if they do have the means, as this article addresses, some people will never become lean because their bodies treat fat different on a fundamental level.

(This comment is an amalgamation of a few comments I've previous left, so if you scroll to read more comments you may read duplicates of what I've written)


"The only poet to win both the National Humanities Medal and the National Medal of Arts, her other honors include the W.E.B. Du Bois Medal from Harvard University, the Wallace Stevens Award from the American Academy of Poets, and 28 honorary degrees. She has taught poetry at the University of Virginia for more than 30 years. In Playlist for the Apocalypse, Dove offers her thoughts about the state of global injustice, the United States’s unsteady moral compass, and small moments of grace."


Environment (encompasses all, outside and within) - Science - Politics

3 views0 comments


bottom of page