[zamfi]

Obviously you [0] didn't read the article, but that is not their conclusion.

There seems to be some kind of unfortunate "shame brigade" out on the Internet that comes out of the woodwork to overrun any conversation around obesity that even hints that there might be reasons for the obesity epidemic other than individual people's poor choices.

The lab rats whose rate of obesity has increased over the last 30 years, despite consuming the exact same controlled diets, are certainly not "changing their eating habits" -- there must be more to the picture than merely eating habits.

This set of articles explores that. We don't have answers yet, but these folks make a strong argument that the question is worth asking.

[0] It's an unfortunate fact of scientific progress that ideologues have, in other fields, at other times, held back that scientific progress for decades through their inability to consider disconfirming evidence against a favored theory. This kind of comment should be ignored by anyone who values truth over consensus.

[gilmore606]

When I was obese and I thought about my own obesity, I decided it was under my control and I changed my habits (this was hard!) and I lost 110lbs. There was no more to the picture than my eating habits. Perhaps I was a strange outlier; lucky for me.

But when I think about other people's obesity, I am not allowed to think that, because I would be part of a shame brigade.

I wish the shame brigade had gotten to me years earlier.

[lanstin]

The question "what can I do about this thing affecting me personally?" and the question "what can the group do about this thing that is affecting the group in large numbers?" are going to have quite different answers. I'm glad you've found a solution that works for you, but there's a good deal of data to support that telling this story to more people will not fix the group problem.

Even if your obesity was helped along by plastic based endocrine disruptors or micro-biome based issues or weird viruses, you found a solution for you.

[john567]

This is exactly their conclusion.

> Our suggestions are very prosaic: Be nice to yourself. Eat mostly what you want. Trust your instincts. > > Diet and exercise won’t cure obesity, but this is actually good news for diet and exercise. You don’t need to put the dream of losing weight on their shoulders, and you can focus on their actual benefits instead

I haven't read it all but I have read a lot and I have been doing this for a long time.

To give people an excuse that diet and exercise is not the answer, it's irresponsible.

Our world makes it incredibly difficult to be healthy. My opinion is simply that you should still try everything you can to be healthy. The problem as I see it is that people have no clue what to eat and what not to. Most people just eat what their parents ate and think nothing of it. We buy food at a grocerie store thinking this is food because it came from a grocerie store. Most stuff in a grocerie store will slowly kill you.

And about those lab rats. They are inbred clones. Maybe suitable for some lab work but the fact that they are getting fatter has to do with their awful genetics. And yes, there's obviously some variability there.

I've been thinking about what this blog series for the past days and they don't seem to understand that muscle gain and weight loss happens slowly over years. If you're fat and you don't want to be fat anymore you have a really difficult job a head of you.

To make up excuse to pretend and act as if reality isn't exactly this is disingenuous and it's going to lure people into false sense of security. Not good.

[antisthenes]

> This kind of comment should be ignored by anyone who values truth over consensus.

I hope you're talking about your own comment, because consensus is truth, for all practical purposes.

What's really toxic is taking a fringe theory and pretending it has equivalence and/or equal weight with scientific consensus, when it doesn't have even 1% of the rigor and reproducible evidence behind it. That kind of attitude is absolutely glorifying ignorance and is utterly toxic to actual progress.

[zamfi]

> consensus is truth, for all practical purposes

Oof, you are definitely right about this. Very few people are able to distinguish truth where it deviates from consensus, and basically no one can do it in domains where they lack expertise.

That said, there is no scientific consensus about the causes of the obesity epidemic, so I'm not sure what criticism you're directing at me, exactly -- though I deduce from your tone that I triggered you in some way.

I'm not putting forth any fringe theory about the causes of the obesity epidemic; the link I posted examines common explanations for the epidemic and tries to figure out whether they're valid, and if not, what other causes there might be. They don't claim anything definitive, in the end, because it would take actual studies to prove any real connection. They're pretty clear about what they can and can't claim.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean:

> it doesn't have even 1% of the rigor and reproducible evidence behind it. That kind of attitude is absolutely glorifying ignorance and is utterly toxic to actual progress.