See below.ILikeEggs said:Only your initial point was that obesity was "uncurable". Also, that link you're citing isn't exactly doing a good job proving your point. It's not a study in and of itself, simply an analysis of a number of studies, none of which are cited, which could have been conducted without appropriate standards, and don't even bother to distinguish between types of diets.
Also, it doesn't distinguish, because it doesn't really matter. The different studies all end up with the same or similar results.
Actually, it refers to the restriction of calories in order to lose weight. And its conclusion is that in many cases, not going on a diet is actually healthier for you than going on a diet. Some of which including studies and programs including exercise, even though they didn't look at that particular thing.Colour Scientist said:That study refers to "diets" in the sense of commercial diets like the Atkins or the Zone, non-sustainable crash diets intended to make the person lose a lot of weight quickly. it's not about losing weight in general through exercise, healthy lifestyle changes and healthy diet. It's the slower path but it's more sustainable in the long term.
Here's the whole thing.
Oh, and here's another thing.
One more thing!
It's completetly possible to keep off a small amount of weight for an extended period of time, but people who actually get to and maintain a healthy weight are like unicorns. Thin, sexy unicorns.
So, she doesn't know. What's your point?
No, the problem is that your body is going to tell you that it's starving until it regains all the lost weight. At that point, all you can do is develop a crippling fear of unhealthy foods to scare yourself out of eating.ILikeEggs said:The problem therein is you're assuming you need to be on some masochistic vegan "diet" to lose weight. Or assuming that you have to starve yourself and eat only lettuce and celery three meals a day.