re: What will it take to reduce the obesity rate in the US?

quote:

---

I get that, I'm just saying that she was trying to make moves in an area where the government actually does have a say, and she got destroyed for it. That wasn't cool at all.

---

In my opinion, while the spirit of what she was doing was admirable, she was focused on something that really isn't the culprit of childhood obesity. In a lot of ways, the changes to school lunches had some unintended consequences: increased food waste and decreased nutrition for kids, furthermore, it didn't achieve its intended goal at all. It was a failure by every metric, but yes, her intentions were good.

quote:

---

Can you imagine the outcry there would have been if she had came out and said "all yall fatasss need to get out and exercise with your fat arse kids, and we're gonna pass a law to make you do it?" LOL

---

I honestly would have preferred if she had made exercise and increasing activity the cornerstone of her initiative. She could have tried partnering with the NFL's Play 60 and really focused on educating parents on nutrition.

School lunches aren't the problem...it's the poor lifestyle choices Americans are making with increased frequency that are the problems.

quote:

---

HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay

---

Thank you for proving my point. Number of meals doesn't matter. Your one study infers that breakfast is important to weight loss but doesn't tell you any scientific reason why. There is zero and I mean zero special about breakfast. The study you linked even proves meal frequency doesnt matter. Calories do. You don't need to eat breakfast to control that nor does it help you control that.

If you would like to get into the nuances of diet, calories control, diet induced thermogensis, etc I would be more than happy to. But don't come in spouting old bullshite about how breakfast is important. Also you might want to read who paid for the studies on breakfast being important before you use them in your argument. All new unbiased studies show intermittent fasting, specfically 16:8, 5:2, 23:1 versions all show meal timing doesn't matter.

Read this article from havard that has mutiple studies linked to it LINK

read this study LINK

quote from Martin Berkham on the study

quote:

---

In one study comparing two meal patterns, which involved one group eating more calories earlier in the day and one group eating most calories later in the day, more favorable results were found in the group eating large evening meals. While those who ate more in the AM lost more weight, the extra weight was in the form of muscle mass. The late evening eaters conserved muscle mass better, which resulted in a larger drop in body fat percentage.

---

READ THAT AGAIN AND AGAIN


From the Study in the article you linked

quote:

---

ubjects who ate 1 or 2 meals/d had a reduction in BMI per year (in kg · m-2 · y-1) (-0.035; 95% CI: -0.065, -0.004 and -0.029; 95% CI: -0.041, -0.017, respectively) compared with those who ate 3 meals/d.

---

quote:

---

On the other hand, eating >3 meals/d (snacking) was associated with a relative increase in BMI (P < 0.001). Correspondingly, the BMI of subjects who had a long overnight fast (=18 h) decreased compared with those who had a medium overnight fast (12-17 h) (P < 0.001).

---

From this study LINK

quote:

---

ncreased meal frequency does not promote greater weight loss in subjects who were prescribed an 8-week equi-energetic energy-restricted diet. Cameron JD1, Cyr MJ, Doucet E. Author information Abstract There have been reports of an inverse relationship between meal frequency (MF) and adiposity. It has been postulated that this may be explained by favourable effects of increased MF on appetite control and possibly on gut peptides as well. The main goal of the present study was to investigate whether using a high MF could lead to a greater weight loss than that obtained with a low MF under conditions of similar energy restriction. Subjects were randomised into two treatment arms (high MF = 3 meals+3 snacks/d or low MF = 3 meals/d) and subjected to the same dietary energy restriction of - 2931 kJ/d for 8 weeks. Sixteen obese adults (n 8 women and 8 men; age 34.6 (sd 9.5); BMI 37.1 (sd 4.5) kg/m2) completed the study. Overall, there was a 4.7 % decrease in body weight (P < 0.01); similarly, significant decreases were noted in fat mass ( - 3.1 (sd 2.9) kg; P < 0.01), lean body mass ( - 2.0 (sd 3.1) kg; P < 0.05) and BMI ( - 1.7 (sd 0.8) kg/m2; P < 0.01). However, there were NS differences between the low- and high-MF groups for adiposity indices, appetite measurements or gut peptides (peptide YY and ghrelin) either before or after the intervention. We conclude that increasing MF does not promote greater body weight loss under the conditions described in the present study.

---

another study shoring meal frequency doesn't promote fatloss
LINK

The complete destruction of the fast food industry

Download the Myfitnesspal app to track calories.

Figure out how many calories you need to maintain current weight (via TDEE calculator).

Eat 200-500 calories less than this number.

Exercise.

quote:

---

That's true, the healthy part of "healthy breakfast" seems to confuse people.

---

quote:

---

I like good old fashioned oatmeal with a seasonal fruit for breakfast myself.

---

So you like to eat a meal that consists of almost all sugar as a "healthy breakfast?"

quote:

---

DisplacedBuckeye

---

The sooner you admit you're an idiot this sooner this will be over for you

quote:

---

Mingo Was His NameO

---

you post like a classic reformed fatty

quote:

---

Of course that is the case, but it is also true that a fat frick who weighs 400 lbs isn't going to fast from dinner to lunch. They won't be able to

---

They absolutely can.

quote:

---

even if they had the willpower their body is conditioned to the calories and so they WILL eat, and so they are better off eating a healthy breakfast.

---

This statement does not compute.

quote:

---

Encouraging 3 healthy meals a day absolutely is essential to doing so.

---

It's absolutely not essential at all. It's a method that may work but it's the farthest thing from essential as it is less effective.

You have a very poor understanding of the English language, you're stupid, or most likely, both.

quote:

---

you post like a classic reformed fatty

---

quote:

---

by Rouge

---

And you post like a current fatty.

Which one has a higher likelihood of being true?

quote:

---

And you post like a current fatty.

Which one has a higher likelihood of being true?

---

both, Mingo

Or should i call you.....Casty McBoozer?