An Oprah threat to your health and the health of your children? Have you been misled?

Find out at or

See FTC complaints about Oprah and her diet experts at

Monday, July 30, 2007

Here's the skinny at work: Either shape up or pay up

An idea whose time came a long while ago.
"Looking for new ways to trim the fat and boost workers' health, some employers are starting to make overweight employees pay if they don't slim down...

"'It's reprehensible to punish and emasculate someone for having a disease like obesity,' said Walter Lindstrom, director of the Obesity Law and Advocacy Center in Chula Vista. "'Anyone who penalizes workers for being overweight should brace themselves for a backlash.'"

It is reprehensible for fat people to siphon resources from the rest of us, Walter. And emasculate? Don't worry. Who could tell anyway with your bellies hanging over your...

BTW, Walter, fat is not just for men anymore. It is the 21st century. There are two genders, Walter, you male chauvinist pig.

"Lewis Maltby, president of the National Workrights Institute, a Princeton, N.J.-based employee rights group, called the trend 'a very dangerous road that could lead to employers controlling everything we do in our private lives.'"

No control here, Lewis. Eat all you want, just don't expect the rest of us to subsidize you. BTW, being fat is a "very dangerous road" to travel, if you are not too fat to travel, that is.

"'To penalize for things that are beyond some people's control is just wrong,' he said. 'Some people are fat because that's how God made them.'"

Fat-headed theology. Leave God out of it. Overeating made them fat.

Researchers find virus causes weight gain

You cannot make this stuff up, folks.

Or maybe it is all being made up.
"Researchers say some contagious pathogens make fat cells grow larger and multiply faster -- and some packing on the pounds could be oblivious victims of 'infectobesity.'"
It is not infectobesity.

It is, in fact obesity.

Evidence Review: Low Glycemic Index Diets Better For Weight Loss

More stupidity from the Cochrane Cuckoos.
"Six trials, involving 202 adults from Australia, France, South Africa, Denmark and the United States were included in the review. The diets lasted from five weeks to six months...

The review found that dieters focused on eating low GI foods dropped significantly more weight about 2.2 pounds more than participants on other diets."
Ooh. A whole 2.2 pounds in up to 6 months.

Now there is success for you.

The Cochrane Cuckoos advertise themselves as "The reliable source of evidence in health care."

You can apparently rely upon them - to be wrong, misleading, etc.

Sunday, July 29, 2007

Obesity epidemic leads to the he-cup

An idea whose time has apparently come.
"As foreshadowed in television's Seinfeld, the obesity epidemic is fuelling a storm in a he-cup with the arrival of a compression bra for males suffering the indignity of man boobs.

The creators of the Male Support Vest promise it will flatten the chest, make breasts less noticeable and reduce bounce during physical activity...

The crisis has generated a rise in the number of males with enlarged breast tissue, which are often the subject of ridicule and dubbed "moobs".

Celebrities who have been spotted with wobbly pectorals have included Mark Latham, James Packer and Tom Cruise.

The Male Support Vest, manufactured by bra company Enell, is reminiscent of an episode of the US sitcom Seinfeld in which Kramer and Frank Costanza try to establish a business selling bras for men."

At last, men are finally allowing their more feminine sides to emerge.

Time for subscriptions to Manity Fair, Cosmopolitman, Wo-Man Today, Gentleman's Home Journal, Man's Day, Marty Claire and M.

Nice teats, bro.

Revealed: why slim people dislike the overweight

Not really.

Still a possibly interesting read.

Friday, July 27, 2007

Female Obesity Affects College Attendance

At last, the question is answered.

It is not the chicken OR the egg, it is the chicken AND the egg.

You are stupid for getting fat and you remain stupid because you are fat.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Nutrition Myths: Test Your Knowledge

More stupidity from the experts.

eDiets together with Harvard are on a killing rampage.

They clearly advocate impossible starvation dieting to cure what ails you.

Here is additional proof of their ignorance.

This is Question 12 and its answer from the "Test Your Knowledge" quiz at eDiets.
"12. To lose a pound of weight, you need to create a deficit of about 3,500 calories with diet and exercise.
Truth. To lose a pound of fat, you need to balance your personal body scale by taking in fewer calories and doing more activity. The best weight-loss program will show you how to do both. At eDiets, we help you lose the weight by adopting a healthy lifestyle, so you can maintain your weight loss permanently. Aim for one to two pounds of weight loss weekly. You may lose more in the initial weeks as your body adjusts to your new meal plan and activity. Your scale is not always the best indicator of your progress -- if you add weights to your workout, you can actually transform your body to a more muscular and fit you."
This is a physical, physiological, biological and mathematical impossibility. The proof is available here and here.

Yet, the myth persists. Like the spinach and iron thing. See here, here and here.

And so does the killing.

Do NOT believe a diet expert unless you have a death wish.

BTW, you cannot add muscle while losing weight.

eDiet morons.

Interleukin Genetics Initiates Program To Develop Genetic Test To Guide More Effective Weight Control In Obese Patients

Welcome to the Brave New World of weight loss.

This is where lies, technobabble and hope intersect with hype.

Here are lies and technobabble:
"Obesity is basically an excessive storage of triglycerides in fat (adipose) tissue. Although the biological mechanisms involved in storage and release of triglycerides in adipose tissue are poorly understood, a family of proteins, including the perilipin protein, regulate triglyceride release under certain conditions. If the perilipin protein is eliminated in mice, i.e. the "knockout model," the mice have altered fat metabolism, a lean body type, and are resistant to weight gain even in the presence of over-feeding a high-fat diet...

Studies indicate that 20-70% of the weight differences among people are due to genetics, and more than 60% of the weight gain during middle age is attributable to genetic factors. Most importantly, the amount of weight gain that results from over-eating has a major genetic component."

Obesity is NOT "basically an excessive storage of triglycerides in fat (adipose) tissue." It is storage of excessive Calories that are consumed. There is no excessive storage, you simply store the Calories that you do not burn.


"...the amount of weight gain that results from over-eating has" NO "major genetic component." All overeaten Calories must be stored, they have nowhere else to go.

There are more.

How do you know that their assertions are bull and hype? Here is their disclaimer:
"Certain statements contained herein are "forward-looking" statements including statements regarding our ability to develop genetic tests based upon our perilipin genetic technology , develop diagnostic, personalized nutritional and therapeutic products to prevent or treat diseases of inflammation and other genetic variations, our ability to screen nutritional compounds for their effects on inflammatory responses and other genetic variations, given specific genetic patterns and our ability to make progress in advancing our core technologies. Because such statements include risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward- looking statements include, but are not limited to, the risk of market acceptance of our products, the risk of technology and product obsolescence, delays in product development, our ability to identify appropriate commercial partners and enter into favorable arrangements with them, the performance of our commercial partners, the availability of adequate capital, the actions of our competitors and other competitive risks, and those risks and uncertainties described in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, as amended, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and other filings made by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We disclaim any obligation or intention to update these forward-looking statements."

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Study: Obesity is 'socially contagious'


Another useless study to prove the obvious.

Here is the gist of the article:

Fat people eat and they eat socially and this reinforces being fat. Fat people do not burn off enough Calories through activity and do not burn off enough Calories socially through activity and this reinforces being fat.


This study was published by the same people who support starvation dieting as the norm.


Sunday, July 22, 2007

How And Why To Sue Oprah, The Bovine Billionaire

A fitness rant for your consideration.

Maybe you can get back some of the money you lost following Oprah's expert's weight loss advice, and then some.

After all, she likely made money off of you.

Americans Getting Heavier And Heavier

No news here.

Just a reminder.

We're fat.

You're probably fat.

Oprah is fat. And she is rich.

Part of her wealth comes from keeping you fat and getting you fatter.

This is what being fat does:
"Health consequences of being obese/overweight:
(Source: The Surgeon General)

-- Premature death. It is estimated that 300,000 deaths per year in the USA are attributable to obesity. The more you weigh, the greater the risk. If your BMI is greater than 30 you have a 50-100% higher risk of premature death compared to a person with a healthy weight.

-- Heart disease. The incidence of heart attack, congestive heart failure, sudden cardiac death, angina and abnormal heart rhythm is greater for people whose BMI is above 25.

-- Hypertension. An obese person has twice the risk of having high blood pressure compared to someone of normal weight.

-- Cholesterol/Blood fat. If you are obese your levels of blood fat will be higher and your levels of HDL (good cholesterol) will be lower than those of a person of normal weight.

-- Diabetes. If you put on 11-18 pounds your risk of developing diabetes type 2 are double, compared to a person who has not gained weight. More than 80% of people with diabetes are overweight/obese.

-- Cancer. A person who is overweight/obese has a higher risk of developing the following cancers: colon, gall bladder, kidney, prostate, post-menopausal breast cancer.

-- Sleep apnea. A much higher percentage of obese people suffer from interrupted breathing while sleeping than people of normal weight.

-- Arthritis. Your risk of developing arthritis goes up 9-13% for every 2-pounds extra weight you put on.

-- Pregnancy. If the pregnant mother is obese the risk of her or her baby dying is much greater, compared to a pregnant mother whose weight is normal - the risk of maternal high blood pressure is ten times higher. Obese mothers are more likely to have problems with labor and delivery. The risk of developing gestational diabetes is much higher if the woman is obese. Obese pregnant women are at a higher risk of giving birth to babies with birth defects, such as spina bifida. "
Stay fat if the above and more problems are worth it to you.

Just don't ask me to pay for your self-inflicted problems.

Or the problems you inflicted on your fat children.

But if you want to stop being fat, go here, here, here, here and here.

Buy the books. (Yes, I wrote them.)

Read them.

Follow the recommendations.

vote the scummy, unctuous, do-nothing, hand-wringing, all talk politicians out of office (especially those liars who are going to "fix" the sick care system)

sue Oprah, David Katz, Jorge Cruise, Ian Smith, Art Agatston, Barry Sears, Phil McGraw, Mehmet Oz, Michael Roizen and Bob Greene, their publishers and media promoters

report teachers, doctors, parents of fat children, clergy, politicians, school officials, nurses and hospital staff members to your state child welfare agencies for failing to report child abuse under CAPTA

insist that the AMA, NIH, medical and specialty societies, child advocacy groups, patient advocacy organizations, politicians, Medicare/Medicaid, HHS demand a halt to bariatric surgeries, except as an emergency
and with the time you have left, relax.

Don't worry, be happy.

Don't overeat.

Friday, July 20, 2007

Low Glycaemic Index Diets The Most Successful In Fighting Obesity


Junk science and meaningless data.
"You have a greater possibility of losing weight if you eat a diet that is high in foods like lentils that release energy slowly once they have been consumed, rather than one that is high in foods that rapidly release sugar into the blood stream such as white bread, a Cochrane Systematic Review has concluded. "
Here is the technobabble to make you think that these experts know squat:
"When foods are eaten the body breaks them down into their components, and one component will be sugar. Different foods break down at different rates. Lentils, for instance, generate a long, gentle release of sugars, while foods like white bread send a sudden rush of sugar into the blood stream. Foods that release sugars rapidly are said to have a high glycaemic index -- those that release it slowly have a low glycaemic index. "
Here is the attempt to make you think they did due diligence:
"A team of Cochrane Researchers set out to search for carefully conducted research trials that looked at the effects of eating high and low glycaemic index foods. They found six randomised controlled trials that involved a total of 202 participants. The trials ran for between five weeks and six months."
Here is the crap:
"Their conclusion was that people eating low glycaemic index diets lost a mean of one kilogram more than those on similar energy high glycaemic index diets."
How much more weight according to these "researchers," assuming any?

Over 5 weeks to six months this amounts to between 1.3 and 7 ounces per week.

Do not believe the 7 ounces per week number. If this were true, then, in six months, dieters would have lost 11.375 pounds or 5.2 kilograms or 5.2 times more weight than the mean weight loss mentioned in the article.

Also, 5 weeks is way too short a time to evaluate a diet and there is no follow-up to determine when these low glycemic dieters quit and regained their weight.

Here is more crap:
"'Low glycaemic index diets appear to be particularly effective for people who are obese,' says lead author Dr Diana Thomas, the Scientific Director of the Centre for Evidence Based Paediatrics Gastroenterology and Nutrition, in Westmead, Australia."
"Particularly effective"?

Do not believe what you read from the experts at Caca-rane Systematic Review, or the others for that matter.

This garbage is from a press release from someone with something to sell, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Food Industry Pledge To Market Only Healthy Foods To Children May Have Little Effect On The Diet Of US Children

Of course it won't.
"The pledge on Wednesday by a group of major food companies to market only healthy foods to children may have little effect on the diet of the nation's children, says Kelly Brownell, director of Yale University's Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. "
Neither does Kelly Brownell. At least no positive effect.
According to Brownell, "The danger is that the progress stops here and that the public and legislators feel the industry has fully discharged its civic responsibility."
According to Applebaum, "The danger is that big, fat out of control experts are offering advice on which others might act."

This is Brownell as he appears on his website where he sells diet advice:

This is how Brownell really looks now:

Can anyone say "Oink"?

Now, can anyone say "Oink" like a diet expert?

Shut up, Kelly and the whole Yale lot as well. See here, here and here.

Monday, July 16, 2007

Spain wants diet on U.N. treasures list

They cannot be serious, can they?
"Spain launched a drive Monday to win European support for a bid to include the traditional Mediterranean diet on a U.N. list of protected world cultural treasures...
'We have high hopes for this endeavor and believe that the characteristics of this exemplary diet will make it clearly deserving of the distinction, which is why we will spare no effort in championing it,' said a document presented by Spain to a meeting of EU agriculture ministers."
Obviously this diet causes either severe brain damage or a really great sense of humor.

Food label warnings seen as confusing

Another attempt at protecting people from their own stupidity.
"Consumers see the label 'on so many products, they say, 'Oh heck, I'm going to ignore it,' laments Dr. Steve Taylor, a food scientist at the University of Nebraska who co-authored a recent study about the confusion."
No hope of succeeding.

Grapefruit link to breast cancer

"A study of 50,000 post-menopausal women found eating just a quarter of a grapefruit daily raised the risk by up to 30%."
So much for the "five a day" campaign.

Oranges, lemons, limes, etc., beware.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Inhibition Of A Chemical In The Brain Could Result In A Novel Therapeutic Strategy For Obesity

You know, maybe, just maybe, "Inhibition Of A Chemical In The Brain Could Result In A Novel Therapeutic Strategy For Obesity."

But you can bet, with certainty, that "Inhibition Of A Chemical In The Brain (that) Could Result In A Novel Therapeutic Strategy For Obesity" will result in unforeseen side effects.

And you can bet, with certainty, that since it affects the brain, whatever the side effects are, new and interesting theories will be developed by defense attorneys to justify their client's behavior to get them out of jail.

Cane Sugar, Corn Sweeteners Have Similar Effects On Appetite, Study Shows

Oops. Maybe Mehmet Oz, Michael Roizen and Oprah got yet another thing wrong.

(Oz and Roizen bash corn sweeteners in their crappy, dangerous, inaccurate and misleading book You: On A Diet. But for these few "minor" things, it might otherwise have some value. Nah.)

Well, not really "maybe," more likely "likely."

They are such dangerous morons.

Well, not really "dangerous morons," more likely "dangerous killers," IMHO.

Bottom line: the nutritional data sucks. It is almost always contradicting itself as "new studies" come out.

(It may even be that murderers (IMHO) Oz and Roizen and Winfrey will be proven "right" on corn sweeteners. They are still wrong on what really counts. And see here and here.)

If you think that any of it is "true," think again.

Remember as we say at Fitness Watch, "truth has a shelf life."

In fitness, the shelf life of what you, the public, is fed by the experts, is usually between very short and even shorter.

But, there is one nutritional truth whose shelf life is, so far, perpetual: Calories In, Calories Out rule weight gain and weight loss.

Plug your ears, avert your eyes from the ads and follow the proven path if you want to succeed at fitness.

Saturday, July 14, 2007

Preventing Obesity And Raising Fit Children Is A Family Affair

From the article:
"The good news is that parents can help their children live healthy, active lives."
You'll notice that this is the same moronic source as the stupid "Lifestyle Changes" article below.

Of course it's "news" to these fools.
"'Sometimes it's best to change your vocabulary.' That's what pediatrician Peggy Supple, M.D., of Advocate Good Samaritan Hospital in Downers Grove often has to remind the parents of children struggling with obesity."
It is not "vocabulary" that makes you or your kids fat - it's Calories.

It is "best" to stop overfeeding your little ones.

It is "best" for you not to be overweight/obese, as you likely are.

It is "best" for you to set a good example.

It is "best" for Dr. Supple and the idiots at Advocate to shut their pie-holes.

It is "best" for you to ignore all weight loss experts.

Lifestyle Changes, Not Diets, Are Key To Losing Weight

Not even close.

In fact, any time someone says "lifestyle change" in the same sentence as "weight loss" (or a variant), check to see whose hand is reaching for your money.

Lifestyle change advocates are weight loss expert predators with a pecuniary interest in making your life miserable and helping you do it.

For a fee.

Lifestyle changes are big deals. They are daunting.

I mean, you are changing your LIFESTYLE.

Cutting back a few Calories per day in order to lose weight is NOT a lifestyle change.

The following are lifestyle changes. See if you can tell the difference:

1. Going from being single to the married parent of triplets.
2. Relocating from rural Kansas to downtown Tokyo.
3. Leaving free society and becoming the love slave of a convicted felon (at least I hope this is a change for you).

If you want to observe the results of "lifestyle changes," go to a "health foods" store, "natural grocery," Whole Foods Market, etc., where people spend huge dollars on "healthy foods."

Most of them are fat, just like the general population.

Face it, being organically and non-GMO fat, is still being fat.

Lifestyle changes - NO. Cutting back a few Calories per day - YES.

Get it?

Friday, July 13, 2007

New Kasier Study Confirms The "Poveresity" Epidemic

Just as I wrote a while ago, obesity and overweight cause poverty.

The Kaiser Family Foundation, late to the table, has confirmed this in a report entitled, "Kaiser Health Disparities Report: A Weekly Look At Race, Ethnicity And Health."
"The rate of obesity in the U.S. increased from 13% to 32% of the population between the 1960s and 2004, and minorities and those in low socioeconomic status groups make up a disproportionate number of those affected, according to a study published in the journal Epidemiologic Reviews, United Press International reports (United Press International, 7/11)."
For more information, click here to get MASSematics (tm): How To Get Rich By Not Dieting.

It contains a lot more info that Kasier might get to before the fin de siecle.

You can beat them to the punch.

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Overweight kids face widespread stigma

More uber-crap from the uber-morons and, IMHO, the uber-killers at Yale. For examples, see here, here and here.
"Youngsters who report teasing, rejection, bullying and other types of abuse because of their weight are two to three times more likely to report suicidal thoughts as well as to suffer from other health issues such as high blood pressure and eating disorders, researchers said...

While programs to prevent childhood obesity are growing, more efforts are needed to protect overweight children from abuse, Puhl said.

'The quality of life for kids who are obese is comparable to the quality of life of kids who have cancer,' Puhl said, citing one study. 'These kids are facing stigma from everywhere they look in society, whether it's media, school or at home...'"

This is plainly and simply child abuse by negligent parents.

From the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA):
"(2) the term “child abuse and neglect” means, at a minimum, any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation, or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm;" (emphasis added)
From the mouths of babes:
"The stigmatization of overweight children has been documented for decades. When children were asked to rank photos of children as friends in a 1961 study, the overweight child was ranked last.

Children as young as 3 are more likely to consider overweight peers to be mean, stupid, ugly and sloppy..."

Perhaps this indicates that is it unnatural for people (kids) to be abusively fattened as even 3 year olds find it "odd."
"A study in 2003 found that obese children had much lower quality of life scores on issues such as health, emotional and social well-being, and school functioning..."

Of course, rather than deal with abusive parents...

"The Yale-Hawaii research report recommends more research to determine whether negative stereotypes lead to discriminatory behavior, citing evidence that overweight adults face discrimination. It also calls for studying ways to reduce stigma and negative attitudes toward overweight children.

'Weight-based discrimination is as important a problem as racial discrimination or discrimination against children with physical disabilities,' the report concludes. "Remedying it needs to be taken equally seriously..."

Shut up.

However, there is a silver lining. Patience is the key.
By 2010, almost 50 percent of children in North America and 38 percent of children in the European Union will be overweight, the researchers said.
By 2011, fat, porcine people pups will be in the majority. And there will be even more fat adults. This might reverse the trend as "healthy weight" discrimination will likely dominate.

Problem solved.

Instead of gearing up to deal with the non- and soon to be solved "problem" of overweight discrimination, these idiots should get ahead of the curve and begin discussing ways to protect people who succeed at "healthy living" from the fatsos.

(Really these very dangerous people should shrivel-up and/or slither away, but they won't.)

Fat taxes 'could save thousands'

Though from the UK, this idea is so stupid, that it will likely cross the Pond and generate (more) consideration here.

The importance of taxing "fatty, sugary or salty" foods cannot be understated.
"A 17.5% rise on fatty, sugary or salty food would cut heart and stroke deaths by 1.7%, the study in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health said."
Rather than penalize the clearly identifiable food abusers, it is critically important that everybody get penalized, including those who consume in moderation whatever "fatty, sugary or salty" foods are.

Heaven forbid that food abusers say, contribute 17.5% more towards their sick care.

Or that Gram Shop Acts are passed.

Or that any targeted approach is implemented.

I mean, why attack the problem by attacking the problem-makers when you can avoid the issue and make it appear as if you are doing something?

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

International Irony: China Investigates U.S. Diet Patch

Gotta love them Chinese.

They appear to be serious house cleaners.

They kill off corrupt politicos execution-style and now they are taking on some of the lying, slithering reptiles populating the US diet industry.

Their target is hoodia.

Goodia for them.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Fat switch may offer new obesity approach: study

Wrong. It is a new approach to killing you.

Really, do you think that all these years of human development and the loss of brown fat was for no good reason?
'"Brown fat is present in mice and in human infants, where it keeps them warm by dissipating food energy as heat, instead of storing it as white fat,' said Dr. Bruce Spiegelman of Harvard's Dana Farber Cancer Center.

In humans, it all but disappears by adulthood, the researchers wrote in their report, published in the journal Cell Metabolism.

The question is whether humans can be taken back to an infantile state in which brown fat counteracts the buildup of white fat."

As if some guy at Harvard knows better than biology.

Manipulate this and what will be the fallout? No one knows and I do not want to be the one on whom they find out.

I smell the law of unintended consequences strong here.

To quote Tony Blair, this is "loopy-loo."

Monday, July 09, 2007

Obesity impacting US health system

The diet expert's chickens have come home to roost.

These are among the results of their flawed diet advice.

Save the chickens.

Fry the experts.

"Overweight and obesity and their associated health problems have a significant economic impact on the US health care system...

More than 155 million Americans receive their health care through an employee-sponsored plan.

Acording to a survey from the national business group on health, two out of three respondents found their health plan excellent.

And nearly 75 percent saw it as their most important benefit.

But with the private sector picking up more than half of the money spent on medical care, businesses are looking for ways to reduce costs.

One area of concern is overweight and obese employees. Thirty-two percent of adults are overweight and 34 percent obese according to the Centers for Disease Control.

Overweight workers are more likely to suffer from diseases like high blood pressure and diabetes.

These illnesses cost employees and employers more.

A recent analysis by Thomson Healthcare found that severely obese employees can cost on average $5,695 a year in medical and prescription drug expenses.

That's 75 percent more compared to an employee of normal weight, but charging obese employees more for health care is not a popular option.

The National Business Group found that 51 percent of employees oppose employers' doing just that."

Electronic health records don't lift care: study

Of course they don't and anyone who expected them to is an idiot.

What will improve sick care is fitness.


The sicker the person entering the system, the less likely it will be that the system can fix their problem.

Garbage in, garbage out.

Fitness is the only real preventive medicine. (tm)

Becoming fit is the only thing a person can do to improve their health.


Because the state of your health is unknowable to you and when it comes to your attention, it is too late. You are sick.

But you can and do know if you are fit. Fitness is more subjective. And fitness is related to health, even though they are not one and the same thing.

The sick care system and the doctors and the politicians and the drug companies and the government and the medical centers and the academics will kill you with their promises of "health care reform" and other such nonsense.

It is all a lie.

Wake up! Take back your body. Get fit.

As a side effect, sick care will improve, too.

Readers share drastic attempts to lose weight

MSN readers, that is.
"In response to an story about a new over-the-counter diet pill with some icky side effects, readers shared the most extreme measures they've taken to lose weight, such as an all-grapefruit diet, an all-liquid diet and gastric bypass surgery."
By and large a forum for the people who failed at conventional diet advice.

No surprise, right?

By now you should all know that diets fail because of expert diet advice, not in spite of it.

Obesity Causes Poverty – The "Poveresity" Epidemic

Thought I would post a press release that appeared late last month about MASSematics tm.

To me, it is unquestionable that there is a poveresity epidemic and it really amounts to hundreds of trillions of wasted dollars (see below), in addition to the human costs.

A few simple alterations in how a person lives and prioritizes can make a huge difference to them, their family and future generations.

If the individuals in a nation made these changes, many problems would disappear and others would get fixed.

The sad part is the unwillingness (of many individuals) and ignorance (perpetrated and perpetuated by diet experts) preventing change.

Here is the text of the press release:

“Clearly, minor changes in a person’s eating habits can add millions of dollars to their net worth,” says fitness authority Michael Applebaum, MD. "For an entire family, this can amount to tens of millions."

Using industry and government data, Dr. Applebaum, President of FitnessMed, Inc. has determined the personal costs of being overweight.

“These are the dollars and cents that affect a bank account, wallet and purse directly.”

The information is found in Dr. Applebaum’s book MASSematics™: How To Get Rich By Not Dieting.

MASSematics ™ is available at

The new study demonstrates that being overweight is a cause of poverty.

“If the average overweight person invested the money spent on maintaining their extra pounds, they could accumulate a personal fortune exceeding $3 million over an average lifetime.”

With over one hundred million adults and tens of million of children overweight or obese, the personal financial costs of the “poveresity” epidemic are in the hundreds of trillions of dollars, in the United States alone.

“Virtually all overweight people have chosen to invest in food energy. Body fat is the ultimate buy-and-hold energy investment. It is also the ultimate losing investment. It cannot be sold and it must be taken to the grave.”

Says Applebaum, “Your body shows the world your nutritional profit and loss statement. It is easy to recognize whether you are a smart nutritional energy investor or a stupid one.”

About Dr. Applebaum and FitnessMed, Inc.

Michael Applebaum, MD, JD, FCLM is a medical doctor and lawyer practicing in Chicago. “The Fitness Doc” has earned more fitness certifications than any other medical doctor. He is the author of Why Diets Fail: The Simple Mistake That Ruins Millions of Lives, MASSematics™: How to Get Rich By Not Dieting, Be Your Own Personal Trainer (“BYOPT™”) and The FitnessMed™ Guide To Healthy Eating. FitnessMed, Inc. provides fitness consulting services to businesses and individuals.

Sunday, July 08, 2007

Dietary Counseling For Weight Loss More Successful With Frequent Meetings And Greater Calorie Restrictions

Nope. Just more trash from the medical establishment.

The title of the article should have been "Dietary Counseling For Weight Loss With Frequent Meetings And Greater Calorie Restrictions Is UNSUCCESSFUL."

The results clearly prove how terrible dieting advice and programs are. It is the spin of the article's title that misleads.

This study:
"analyzed 46 trials that included 6,386 people who were participating in dietary counseling-based weight loss programs and 5,467 people not involved in formal weight loss programs."
Dieters who underwent the expensive and labor intensive counseling lost about 11 pounds in one year. Or a mere less than one pound per month.
"Approximately half the weight loss remained at three years, but almost none of the weight loss remained at five years."
Embarrassingly bad.

Yet the experts refuse to recognize it is their advice that prevents weight loss.

Friday, July 06, 2007

Diet pill’s icky side effects keep users honest

Not. It keeps users messy.

Alli works! It really does make you poop your pants.

Here are some endorsements.
“(I)’ve pooped my pants 3 times today, and sorry to get descriptive but it even leaked onto the couch at one point!” writes one user.

It can strike any time — even in the early hours of the morning. One user writes: “(Y)a know how when you start moving around in the morning ya pass a little gas. Well, I did and then went into the bathroom and to my horror I had an orange river of grease running down my leg.”

Fellow cheaters advise each other on the best clean-up methods, and some even suggest using panty liners or Depends. One frugal user noted, “I’m thinking that infant diapers might be a cheaper way to go, just use them as a large pad.”

It appears as if Alli is best used just before going to a dark theater where you can decorate someone else's furniture and play a practical joke on the next person to sit in your seat.

Have fun!

New Diet Pill You Can't Buy This Publicity

Fire this stupid professor.
"'We have an obesity epidemic with people screaming for a solution,' stated Bill Trombettta, Ph.D., professor of pharmaceutical marketing at Saint Joseph's University. 'Alli is on everyone's lips because it's the only new diet drug available to address this unmet need.'"
Stop "screaming." There is no "unmet need."

The "solution" is and always has been and always will be fewer Calories in than out. Alli or not.
"Alli, which is available at drug and vitamin stores nationwide, works by decreasing the amount of fat absorbed by the body. The drug's manufacturers recommend following a low-fat diet while using the pill."
That's more stupidity.

If Alli "works by decreasing the amount of fat absorbed by the body," then "following a low-fat diet while using the pill" will make it LESS effective since fewer Calories will be blocked given the same total number of Calories consumed.

In other words, you will either lose less weight or gain weight.

The advice, the pill and the approach are all wrong.

These people don't know crap - except the stuff in your clothes after you take Alli.

Save you life and money, Alli is not your ally.

Avoid it.

Thursday, July 05, 2007

94 die in Panama from tainted medicine

Fitness is the only real preventive medicine. (tm)

Why do you want to take medicine? Why put yourself in a position where medications can kill you?

Stay away from the deadly substances my colleagues offer up in the struggle to earn a living from your suffering.

Unemploy them.

Use their drugs only when necessary and make "when necessary" as infrequent as possible.

Get fit and minimize your chances of death by doctor.

Sandwiches 'rival crisps on salt'

"The British Sandwich Association said it had been working hard to reduce salt levels and the study was misleading."
By now we should all know that too much salt is a problem.

Just put up the post because I enjoy knowing that there is a
British Sandwich Association.

Thought you might, too.

Wednesday, July 04, 2007

Review finds nutrition education failing

More, duh...
"The federal government will spend more than $1 billion this year on nutrition education — fresh carrot and celery snacks, videos of dancing fruit, hundreds of hours of lively lessons about how great you will feel if you eat well.

But an Associated Press review of scientific studies examining 57 such programs found mostly failure. Just four showed any real success in changing the way kids eat — or any promise as weapons against the growing epidemic of childhood obesity.

'Any person looking at the published literature about these programs would have to conclude that they are generally not working,' said Dr. Tom Baranowski, a pediatrics professor at Houston's Baylor College of Medicine who studies behavioral nutrition.

The results have been disappointing, to say the least:

_Last year a major federal pilot program offering free fruits and vegetables to school children showed fifth graders became less willing to eat them than they had been at the start. Apparently they didn't like the taste.

_In Pennsylvania, researchers went so far as to give prizes to school children who ate fruits and vegetables. That worked while the prizes were offered, but when the researchers came back seven months later the kids had reverted to their original eating habits: soda and chips.

_In studies where children tell researchers they are eating better or exercising more, there is usually no change in blood pressure, body size or cholesterol measures; they want to eat better, they might even think they are, but they're not."

When the whole system is based on false assumptions, what do you expect?

CYA, because when the going gets tough, the tough go political:
"Kate Houston, deputy under secretary of the USDA's Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services, oversees most federal funds, $696 million this year, spent on childhood nutrition education in this country. Funding has steadily increased in recent years, up from $535 million in 2003. Houston insists the programs are successful.

'I think the question here is how are we measuring success and there are certainly many ways in which you can do so and the ways in which we've been able to measure have shown success,' she said.

But isn't the goal of these programs to change the way kids eat?

'Absolutely that's the goal,' she said.

And they're successfully reaching that goal?

'We're finding success in things in which we have been able to measure, which are more related to knowledge and skill. It is more difficult for us to identify success in changing children's eating patterns.'

When asked about the many studies that don't show improvement, Houston asked for copies of the research. And she said the USDA doesn't have the resources to undertake "long term, controlled, medical modeled studies" necessary to determine the impact of its programs."

Until sense is introduced into the equation, we are screwed.

Throw out the old system and its proponents. They are failing us.

Monday, July 02, 2007

Many diets work about the same, U.S. study finds

Imagine that.

Can you spell "Duh!"?

Since all diets are basically the same and based on the same mistake, they should fail about the same.

Apparently, they do.
"Looking for that perfect diet? Researchers have bad news -- all diets have just about the same result, and none of them are great, U.S. researchers reported on Monday...

Dansinger and colleagues looked at the results of 46 trials that included nearly 12,000 people...
'It's disappointing but I am optimistic that we can do better in the future. We are learning some of the factors that improve the effectiveness (of diets),' said Dansinger, whose study is published in the Annals of Internal Medicine."
Was bad diet advice a "factor."


It is more important to kill you than for the experts to admit their mistakes.

Also more lucrative.

Sunday, July 01, 2007

Beijing bans 10 types of medications

Radical concept: banning things that don't work as claimed.
"China's capital banned ten types of drugs for exaggerated effectiveness, a newspaper reported Friday, amid rising concerns of fake and tainted products in China's food and drug supply chains.

While the drugs were genuine, the results they claimed to produce in fighting high blood pressure, diabetes, and other ailments couldn't be supported in clinical testing, the Beijing News reported.

Stores in the city have been told to stop selling them and media outlets that carried their advertising were told to print retractions, the paper said. The orders were the first application of a new law on drug advertising, it said."

If the Communist Chinese are doing it, perhaps this will shame us Democratic Westerners into doing the same.


Summer Is Here - Get Up, Get Active: Helping Your Child Battle Obesity

God save the children from these experts.
"Episcopal Social Service (ESS), one of the leading foster care, group home and preventative services providers in New York City, offers six constructive tips to guide parents as they help their children safely attain their dieting goals, and maintain a healthy and active lifestyle...
There are many mistakes that are made when trying to lose weight. Below are some of the most common misconceptions."
Apparently, simple, logical writing is not a strong suit of the ESS-es. Are the six supposed to be "tips" or "misconceptions"?
"1. The key to weight loss is eating right and exercising. One without the other will not produce results. Making sure your child gets adequate physical exercise - a necessary, calorie-burning component of a healthy lifestyle - is not always easy. Some suggestions might be to limit television and video game time, to join them outdoors in calorie burning activities or research local recreational activity that might interest your child. The body uses more energy to maintain lean tissue. A healthy physique will burn calories even when you are not moving."
Absolutely wrong. "The key to weight loss is" fewer Calories in, than out. How you do it makes not a whit of difference. Period.

"One without the other" WILL "produce results." But exercise is a seriously inefficient path to weight loss.

That these fools think it is necessary to advocate what "is not always easy" shows a complete lack of understanding.

Why mention that the "body uses more energy to maintain lean tissue"? Have they discussed how to add lean tissue? Or anything else about lean tissue for that matter?

BTW, a SICK "physique will burn calories even when (it is) not moving." In fact, ANY "physique will burn calories even when (it is) not moving," except a dead physique.

Even a brain-dead Episcopal physique will burn Calories when it is not moving.
"3. Don't be fooled by the 'miracle diet' you see on television as it is most likely not appropriate for children. While we would love to see instant results for our child's welfare, weight loss is neither quick nor easy..."
Is a "miracle diet" likely "appropriate" for anyone?

"Most likely not appropriate"? AS if there is one that is.

By definition, NO "miracle diet" is appropriate for anyone and will not work for anyone.

Here is another example of Episcopal wisdom. Put these two tips together to double the idiocy. (Or are they misconceptions?)
"2. Simply eating the right foods is not all it takes to successfully diet. That's only half the battle. Portion control is extremely important when trying to help your child lose weight...
5. A common misconception is reducing the amount of food we serve our children. Eating too little may slow metabolism, the process by which cells burn food and create energy. Researchers vary on how few calories it takes before the human body slips into starvation mode and begins conserving calories leading to an increase in weight."
Huh? "Portion control is extremely important when trying to help your child lose weight" and "A common misconception is reducing the amount of food we serve our children."

Is it me, or are these self-contradictory?

BTW, there is no such thing as "starvation mode" in the short-term sense in which the term is used here. This is another lie of the experts and mantra of the morons.

This whole press release is full of misinformation. It is a primer on diet foolishness.
"Episcopal Social Services (ESS) is a non-sectarian organization committed to creating permanent improvement in the lives of children and adults as they battle the effects of poverty. ESS also seeks to strengthen New York's most vulnerable so that they can live up to their full potential."
The ESS-es are not helping the "most vulnerable."

They are harming the "most vulnerable."