"Survival Of The Fattest": It's A Fat, Fat World After All

Tyler Durden's picture

Back in March, we first presented a rather stunning finding: by 2020 75% of Americans will be obese or overweight. This was promptly followed up with a post showing just how it is transpired that America became the fattest nation in the world in less than 20 years. What however may not be known, is that America's fatness epidemic is not localized to the country that gave the world the McDonalds burger (and the McMansion): it really is a fat, fat world, after all. 

Behold - survival of the fattest:

It is hardly surprising in this light, then, that the estimate for number of people living with diabetes has been increased, to 371 million - an increase of 11% over 2011.

So with the sensitive issue of what one stuffs in their mouth becoming of paramount importance, primarily due to the avalanche in social costs as a result of escalating morbid obesity, here is a primer on the key facts and figures relating to obesity, domestic as well as foreign, and impacting not just the developed world but also emerging economies, from GS' Mick Ready and Keyur Parekh.

Obesity is a unique phenomenon affecting almost all countries. It is defined as excessively high amount of body fat in relation to lean tissue, and individuals are generally considered overweight if their BMI is over 25, and clinically obese if their body mass index (BMI) is greater than 30.

The 1980s saw a sharp acceleration in BMI in OECD countries. Before 1980, global obesity rates were generally below 10% but today, in almost half of OECD countries, 50% of the population is overweight. Interestingly, data suggests that obesity is a pandemic that is now impacting not just the developed western countries, but also the emerging economies. In BRIC economies, obesity rates are somewhat lower than in their OECD counterparts, but urbanisation and lifestyle changes are driving a significant increase in average BMI. In China, the proportion of the population considered overweight increased from 13.5% in 1991 to 26.7% in 2006; in Brazil between 1975 and 2003, the obesity rate tripled in men and doubled in women; and in Russia 25% of women and 10% of men are now considered obese.

  • Data suggest that at levels of GDP below US$5,000 per capita there is a linear relationship between GDP and mean BMI, and that the only pre-condition for developing an obese population is the ability to afford food.
  • In low income countries, obese individuals are typically middle-aged women from wealthy, urban settings.
  • In countries with GDP of more than US$5,000 per capita pa, obesity is not characterized by gender, or age, but disadvantaged groups typically are at greater risk of becoming obese;
    • 33% of US adults earning over US$15,000 pa are obese, compared with 25% of those earning over US$50,000 pa.
    • 33% of adults who did not graduate high school were obese, compared with 21.5% who graduated from college.

What’s causing this increase?

Obesity is a complex problem, with multiple factors influencing its development within a population. These factors include systemic and environmental drivers, which provide an infrastructure to promote high growth, consumption of transport and recreational factors, which limit the physical activity within a population, and behavioral patterns, where individuals consume high-energy foods and lead sedentary lifestyles.

For an individual, obesity is caused by an energy imbalance: simply put, obese individuals consume more energy than they use. Energy intake is a clear factor in the rise of obesity, and dietary intake is strongly influenced by the kinds of food we eat. Changes in the food system to more mass-produced, processed foods with added salt, fats and sugars, coupled with more effective marketing of these products, especially targeting young children has changed the kind of food we eat which contributes to this energy imbalance.

To summarize, changes in the global food system, which produces readily available, inexpensive, highly processed and well marketed foods, coupled with changes in working patterns, has created an energy imbalance resulting in increased levels of obesity.

Sugary drinks: The choice of a heavy generation

There are multiple factors which are linked to the development of obesity globally, but sugar-sweetened drinks have attracted particular attention in the US. Sugar intake from sugar-sweetened drinks is thought to be the largest single caloric food source in the US, approaching 15% of the daily calorific intake in several population groups.

High-sugar drinks are effectively marketed to children and young adults, and their consumption is often linked to fast food, which is likely to exacerbate the obesity problem. Many sugar-sweetened drinks contain high-fructose corn syrup, and there is evidence to suggest a link between high-fructose corn syrup and the development of insulin resistance (think diabetes). Multiple studies have shown that replacing a sugar-containing drink with a sugar-free equivalent significantly reduced weight gain and fat accumulation in normal weight children, prompting calls from the American Heart Association, the Institute of Medicine, and the Obesity society to reduce consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages.

The consequences of being obese: Shorter, less healthy lives The life expectancy of a person with a BMI of 40-45 is reduced by around 8-10 years, which is similar to the reduction in life expectancy suffered by smokers. An  overweight person of average height increases their risk of death by around 30% for every 15kg of weight. Obesity is a key risk factor in the development of multiple diseases, including diabetes, heart disease, osteoarthritis and
cancer.

The most direct and obvious impact of obesity is on incidence of diabetes - a severely obese person is around 60 times more likely to develop diabetes than someone with normal weight. High blood pressure and high cholesterol levels are also linked to high BMI.

These combined risk factors make an obese individual more likely to die from heart disease or stroke.

But perhaps a less intuitive link is the one between obesity, physical inactivity and cancer. Obesity and physical inactivity are also a key risk factor in the development of certain cancers; around 9% of colorectal cancers, and 11% of postmenopausal breast cancer in women is linked to obesity. An additional 5kg/m2 in BMI is thought to increase the risk of colorectal cancer by 24% in males, and to increase the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer in women by 12%.

Obesity and cancer – the not so obvious link

According to the American Cancer Society, one-third of cancer deaths are linked to obesity and/or lack of physical activity.

Improvements in cancer diagnosis, treatment and prevention has seen an improvement in death rates for cancer in the US over recent years, but the obesity epidemic within the US puts this trend at risk. Obesity is a known risk factor for multiple different tumour types, including oesophageal, colorectal, endometrial, kidney and certain breast cancers. In addition to increasing the risk of developing certain cancers, obese individuals are less likely to survive their cancer diagnosis; individuals with a BMI above 40 had death rates 52% higher for men and 62% higher for  women when compared to people of normal weigh.

Obese men are at significantly higher risk of developing colorectal cancer; the distribution of body fat appears to be an important fact, with abdominal obesity measured by waist circumference demonstrating a strong correlation with colon cancer risk. Obesity also modestly increases the risk of women developing postmenopausal breast cancer.

The costs of an obese population – direct, but also indirect Obese populations place greater stress upon healthcare systems already struggling to cope with rising expectation on what healthcare systems can deliver, more expensive medical interventions and an increasingly elderly population. The chronic nature of the condition means that obese people consume a greater share of healthcare resources, over a longer period of time.

Medical costs for obese individuals are as much as 30% to 40% higher than those with normal weight. An obese individual will on average visit a physician 27% more frequently than someone with a normal weight, and the annual extra medical costs of obesity in the US were estimated to be US$75 bn in 2003 (BMJ Wang). If current demographic trends continue, obesity-related costs are set to double every ten years, and could account for 16%-18% of US Healthcare expenditure by 2030. In the UK, data point to a similar trend, with £650 mn increased annual costs by 2020, and £2 bn higher costs by 2030 (Wang).

In addition to the direct medical costs for treating obesity, there are indirect costs to society and economies, which include early retirement and lost or lower productivity. US data suggest a direct correlation between obesity and missed work days in men, with males with a BMI above 40 taking almost six additional sick days each year. Swedish data suggest obese individuals are 1.5-1.9 times more likely to take sick leave than their peers with normal weight.

Who provides the solutions?

Before we get to the investing implication of this pandemic, we believe it’s worth spending a minute on the impact that reversal of current trends might have, and the role that various parties have played thus far to resolve this. Perhaps slightly depressingly, we believe that pharma companies alone are unlikely to be able to resolve this. Indeed we believe that a majority of this change message needs to come from government policy and social change (as we saw in the 1970s-80s with smoking).

What are the benefits if trends reverse?

Modest changes can have a dramatic impact on both an individual’s risk profile and society as a whole. A 1% reduction in BMI (approximately losing 1kg of body weight) is estimated to reduce cases of diabetes by around 2 million, and cases of cancer by around 100. However, implementation of these changes will require behavioural changes through health promotion campaigns and policy interventions to address healthy public sector food service policies. But policy and behavioural changes are not easy to implement and take time to take effect.

Pharma industry response – encouraging, but not adequate

Despite numerous attempts, the pharmaceutical industry has had limited success in addressing the primary cause of obesity (energy imbalance). Current treatments combat the consequences of obesity, e.g., through the management of hypertension, or diabetes. [ZH: perhaps the profit potential is far greater in perpetuating the underlying cause and merely treating the symptoms which have a duration that expires with the expiration of the patient?] A large number of companies have tried to develop pharmaceuticals to target energy imbalance, but the vast majority have failed owing to serious toxic effects. For example, Sanofi’s Accomplia was abandoned for suicidal ideation, Fen-Phen was withdrawn for serious cardiovascular concerns, and sibutramine was recently withdrawn following cardiovascular safety concerns.

2012 has seen the FDA approval of two new treatments for obesity, when used in conjunction with reduced calorie diets. Both Belviq (Arena Pharmaceuticals) and Qsymia (Vivus) reduce appetite and in some people can induce a negative energy balance. Both products have demonstrated safety signals which are a cause for concern, and patients receiving these products will require careful monitoring by clinicians. But, the FDA’s willingness to approve agents with clear safety signals illustrates the need for effective intervention for obesity.

One of the more serious efforts to this end was recently demonstrated by the Australian government, which evaluated several measures aimed at combating this epidemic (see exhibit below). Not surprisingly,  nonpharmacological options were found to be more cost-effective in the long term, but are obviously more difficult to implement at a society level.

* * *

Another, even more dramatic health-related recent intervention was that on behalf of Mike Bloomberg and the city of New York banning sugary drinks in 16 oz containers or more.

The problem with government intervention in individual and social level consumption, is that it never works without a proper incentive system. If instead of using negative reinforcement, the government were to use positive reinforcement techniques, and for example offer each American $100/year for every pound kept below the overweight threshold every year, the results would be far more encouraging, and the costs saved in the long run would more than offset initial outlays.

Of course, this being the government, it is absolutely certain that corruption and "unintended side-effects" will intervene, that incentives will be perverted by special interests and lobby groups, and the final outcome would be a far worse one than the base case.

Which is why, sadly, the obesity epidemic will not be "fixed" in any conventional sense, but like so many other aspects of the current unsustainable socio-economic system, will merely go away on its own once the "weakest links" are eliminated by the various forces of natural (and man-made) selection in play today.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Ginsengbull's picture

Black market Mormon and Muslim organs are top-notch.

ajax's picture

 

 

Thanks for that autofixer. One of the very best Twilight Zone episodes.

Maos Dog's picture

Man I am sick of these bullshit Obesity articles.

NONE of the articles I have ever seen about this issue ever address the following:

Control for race
Control for age (we have a aging population, older people get Type II more often)
Control for the "change" in the BMI definition in the late 90's or early 2000's

If the study does not take these HUGE influencing factors into account, the study is just bullshit.

IF there is a REAL study on this problem covering the above control factors, someone please post the link I would love to see the real story here.

Bear's picture

'race'? ... Are you kidding we are all the same.

Rat Patrol's picture

You know, fuck all y'all.

 

Like there aren't fat fuckers in every god damned nation on earth. When did being fat become evil? Fuck you.

 

Here's an idea. Mind your own fucking business and leave people alone you statist food nazi fucks.

Aurora Ex Machina's picture

That's a great theory until the fat-fucks take out more of their fair share of the community pie when it comes to health care, community care and so on. That's why Nicotine and Booze get so wildly taxed ~ not only are they paying for their own treatment, but another 29 persons (for ciggies) and 7 (for booze) each!

Serious question: ask any smoker who willingly pays said tax if they're bitter about it. A good majority (74%) don't mind, and actually see it as an ironic badge of honour. "Those who castigate us for destroying health, depend on our tax to have good health!"... "Every packet I smoke gives 5 other people free health care!".

Would the same be true if there was a tax on high-fat / high corn fructrose products?

 

 

Don't make me laugh ~ that's why they're ridiculed. Because they're in denial. And yes: diabeeetus is more expensive than lung cancer to the community.

Dr. Sandi's picture

How about just eliminating the fat subsidy on corn?

But now we're talking entitlements.

Aurora Ex Machina's picture

Ahh, thank-you! Made those ignorant junks worth it, just to see someone knows their stuff.

The scale of agri-business subsidies within America is huge, and yet... no-one is willing to talk about it. For instance: why are there ~$2billion subsidies on cotton so that America can send the raw material to India / Pakistan to be processed for peanuts, to ship back to Walmart to sell for $2 t-shirts?

 

And so on. The list is endless; the list is huge; the list totally fucks Africa and most developing world countries into an artifical market that they struggle to compete in, because their Governments can't shove them the odd $2-15 billion. And then, after this, Wall Street Futures Market is poised to screw everyone (including Mr Corzine's clients who were hedging against the drought... what a coincidence that was, eh?) who is in the area from even playing on those badly weighted odds!

 

Thank-you, Madam or Sir. At least some of you are thinking.

 

[Edit, and again ~ Rat Patrol, a whiny scoteena, junking everything that's not even to him. Grow up, little man]

Rat Patrol's picture

Fuck the community. If they absolutely had to have the welfare state to bring on the police state let those statist bastards pay for it.

 

I voted against state run medical shit care.

 

You break it, you buy it.

 

Why can't people see that state run helthcare is the end of all freedom?

 

Enjoy your bunny food, tovarich.

Aurora Ex Machina's picture

Meine Freunde.

The Wall came down over 30 years ago now. There are no Communists left.

 

 

>Upgrade your firmware, nadsat mozg.

 

 

[edit - tsk tsk, bitchy ratty ~ a junk moments after posting, and nary a word for why. Stop being a little prestoopnik, and put your money where your finger is]

Rat Patrol's picture

Lots of communists left. Have you not been to college?

 

All it takes for evil to win is for good men to do nothing. Lot of that going on too.

 

I will not comply with your fascist utopian state.

Aurora Ex Machina's picture

If you're not a Fascist, stop junking anything you don't agree with, eh?

And because you missed it, Mr Ratfink ~ I was using words from "A Clockwork Orange", you muppet. Or was Burgess a Fascist or Communist?

 

 

>Whelp!

Rat Patrol's picture

I didn't junk you, comrade.

 

Any other invalid assumptions I can help you with?

Aurora Ex Machina's picture

...well, you're really not going to enjoy learning exactly how medical care in the USA has been distorted (by all actors) to maximise profits at every turn, when you could have universal health care for less than 50% of the cost.

Before you blow a gasket, that's not my opinion. It's not Obama's. It's not the UN's. It's not the LGTBTA alliance.

 

 

That's the view of the major banks. Tee-fucking-hee.

 

>If you want the papers, I'm happy to provide them. Suffice to say ~ most, if not all, of your major assumptions on "how the world works" are wrong. Including imagining that there's "Communists" around. Trust me, spent enough time in Russia to know, everyone there is no longer a "Communist". Even the ex-hardline Military back-bone that hates the "globalist" forces that drove Russia into the Oligarchs' hands. Even they are no longer Communists.

Want the real punch-line?

"Communists" never existed. Even back in the 60's, they were desperately projecting the illusion of a working state against the American Hegemony. Even while factories failed, food rotted and left-hand shoes didn't get delivered. Even in the last moments of attempting to subdue Afganistan. You're living in a world of illusion, created by your own State. And that State, as we've seen, has far more power and dominion than the CCCP.

 

 

Ironic, no? I find it fucking hilarious when an old-school deluded soul like you comes out of the wood-work.

Rat Patrol's picture

Gosh, you are smart.

 

Communism is the vehicle of the kleptocrats. All societies produce them, but biggie sized goverments are the best at robbing their citizens. And now we get our turn in the barrel as the proles rush headlong to the glories of socialism.

 

Big government is big raping. National healthcare is big government.

 

But, by all means, keep trying to tell me I didn't see what my lying eyes saw all too well.

Aurora Ex Machina's picture

Please, illuminate me on what your eyes saw.

Given you're American, I'm guessing it's not the Soviet economy (or even satellite states). If you witnessed the American Military Machine, then, of course... you've experienced communism.

Watch Stalker, you might learn something.

 

Head's up: "Government" is never a monolithic entity; in the American model, it always has financiers. Might want to ask who provides the weapons for war, and so on. And, my little pickle, they're rarely "Communists". Even when they do share their share dividens, they're not sharing the ownership of production.

 

And now, I'm bored. Go learn something. Or masturbate. Or whatever.

Ginsengbull's picture

Like hell there are no communists.

 

The wall used to keep them in.

 

Then they all came to the west pushing an environmentalist agenda.

slackrabbit's picture

of course they take more out of the pie....that why they're fat! ;-)

BlackholeDivestment's picture

Bad news for you Rat, socialism is the 666 Hell on Earth Tax an individual does not escape in this NWO borderless global market. America is no escape from the wrath of Skinny Patrol, lol. If you are a fat Rat, under socialism Skinny has cause to tax your ass for being costly. Fat is for free people.

Rat Patrol's picture

No shit. I'm not fat, but I hate the self-righteous tools of the nazi food state.

 

What's next? Is the IRS gonna fine...er tax... me for not spending my state mandated time at the gym which they also won't pay for?

 

Fashion police is the next gestapo? People are stupid.

BlackholeDivestment's picture

U.N. Rat Patrol is looking for Skinny. Skinny refuses to pay for Fat Socialist Bastard Burial, he's making soap without paying for permission. LMAO. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i1Mg8u-5k0LNqU8qxGUHV...

Ginsengbull's picture

Doing push-ups and sit-ups is free, and not taxable.

css1971's picture

Socialised medicine means everyone gets a say in how you should live your life. Didn't the British mention that when they were telling you how great the NHS is?

Everyone and his dog now has a right to tell you how to live, cos he's paying your insurance bill.

pan's picture

Go paleo Bitchez!

 

Freewheelin Franklin's picture

Wrote a song about it. Wanna hear it? Here it goes.

 

"Fat"

Your butt is wide, well mine is too
Just watch your mouth or I'll sit on you
The word is out, better treat me right
'Cause I'm the king of cellulite
Ham on, ham on, ham on whole wheat, all right

My zippers bust, my buckles break
I'm too much man for you to take
The pavement cracks when I fall down
I've got more chins than chinatown

Well, I've never used a phone booth
And I've never seen my toes
When I'm going to the movies
I take up seven rows

Because I'm fat, I'm fat, (really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it
( really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, come on you know
( really really fat)
Dont you call me pudgy, portly or stout
Just now tell me once again who’s fat ahhhhhh!ahhhh!

When I walk out to get my mail
It measures on the Richter scale
Down at the beach I'm a lucky man
I'm the only one who gets a tan
If I have one more pie a la mode
I'm gonna need my own ZIP code

When you're only having seconds
I'm having twenty-thirds
When I go to get my shoes shined
I gotta take their word

Because I'm fat, I'm fat, shamun
(really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it
(really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it you knowa
(really really fat)
And my shadow weighs forty-two pounds
Let me tell you once again - who's fat?

If you see me coming your way
Better give me plenty space
If I tell you that I'm hungry
Then won't you feed my face

Because I'm fat, I'm fat, shamun
( really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it
( really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it, you know
( really really fat)
Woo! woo! woo!
(when I sit around the house
I really sit around the house)

You know I'm fat, I'm fat, shamun
( really really fat)
You know I'm fat, I'm fat, you know it, you know it
( really really fat)
You know, you know, you know, come on,
(really really fat)
And you know all by myself I’m a crowd
Lemme tell you once again

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2mU6USTBRE

magpie's picture

"Let me have men about me that are fat,
Sleek-headed men and such as sleep a-nights.
Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look.
He thinks too much. Such men are dangerous."

falak pema's picture

the fall of the roman republic in one phrase; from then on we all lay in orgy and got drowned in the food we retched out so that we could eat again. The age of waste and affluence. 

Not that Cassius was an icon, but the bad beckon the worse. Its a spiral.

malek's picture

So many bullshit points in an otherwise good article.
Examples:

Sugary drinks: As a kid, my main beverage was apple juice. Nowadays I know that was very unhealthy, as unsweetened pure juices have the same or more sugar in them than soda. Right.

HFCS: "there is evidence to suggest a link" - now which is it, evidence or a suggestion? Please point us to the evidence. And no, 5 out of 100 studies believing to have found evidence, while no one mentions how many have searched but found no evidence at all, is not proof.

"An overweight person of average height increases their risk of death by around 30% for every 15kg of weight." The non-statement. 30% higher risk within what period??

Rustysilver's picture

So, let's separate smokers and overweight people (say 20 or 30 lbs) into different insurance pools.  Set rates accordantly .

kalum's picture

I dongt think that would be permissable under Obamacare

knukles's picture

And another for alkies and druggies

nmewn's picture

Fuckin A...get me away from the little statist bots trying to control and conform everyones life, to theirs.

Joggers...next chance I get, I'm replacing my passenger side mirror...or maybe I'll just wait for the next Cash for Clunkers ;-)

css1971's picture

Joggers get a lot of foot, ankle and knee problems. Then there's the obligatory running in front of a bus.

Bear's picture

"health promotion campaigns and policy interventions" ... won't need them hyperinflation will make eating too expensive ... weight shrinks as the dollar shrinks

azengrcat's picture

Mmmmm... Fat Wreck Chords

magpie's picture

The Old European cynic in me says whatever go ahead promote Junk Food, Bloomberg's cup quotas, the First Lady's gardening tips and Beth Ditto's girth. Simultaneously and with a straight face, it's the American way. All costs wil be socialized, nonetheless the insurance industry zombifies with ZIRP. 

kalum's picture

I am female in my 70's, height 5 7 and weigh 115. I eat one egg, a lot of broccoli, asparagus, lettuce , tomatoes etc, as well as a small steak or piece of chichen or salmon at night. In other words borderline starvation to maintain my weight. mI also am fortunate enough to be able to hit the gym 5 days a w eek for elyptical 20 minutes and  3 days at 20 mins of weights I also consume a martini every nite.

 

This is what you need to do to fight obesity and it aint easy when surrounded by pizza , french fries, pasta(which I love)  etc

 

Thanksgiving I broke my usual diet be eating a lot of stuffing, but nothing  else, no pecan pie , sweet potatoes etc.

 

As a result of the above I feel and look pretty good, but how many  people young and old are willing to do this?

 

Just how ma

Grassfed's picture

Forget the borderline starvation stuff.  Eat this way . . . http://www.texasgrassfedbeef.com/the_real_diet_of_man.htm

Which is about what you are doing.

monad's picture

Don't fat people have the same rights as homos? Besides being as fake an issue as global warming, in the same way by the same people for the same reason this is slave engineering.

andrewp111's picture

No they don't. And since they are a drain on the public treasury in a manner contrary to public policy, they have no rights at all.  The best solution to obesity is to change the incentive system, and the best may to do this is to give the police departments ownership of all body fat for use as fuel in their police cars. The cops would be cruising neighborhoods with liposuction tankers and using radar cameras to see inside the houses. When they spot fat people, the would break down the door, taser them, and liposuction them. The police would have absolute sovereign immunity for any injuries, and could not be sued under any circumstances.  They would also never use anesthetics and rarely bother to sterilize the liposuction needles. Somehow, I think the obesity problem would go away very quickly.

stocktivity's picture

Actually, I notice a lot of fat cops lately.

Mediocritas's picture

[ZH: perhaps the profit potential is far greater in perpetuating the underlying cause and merely treating the symptoms which have a duration that expires with the expiration of the patient?] 

Correct. Treating is far more profitable than curing or preventing.

Grin Bagel's picture

check out the effecfts of transgenetic corn on the immune systems of the organisms being fed and you will find that they are triggering immune inflamation responses . This added into the already complex of mix of counter-productive behaviors in diet and activity would trip a train.

Running away carrying as much gold as you can afford is a good way to start a personal change.

notadouche's picture

Haven't the last 5 years been all about prescription drug use or overuse I should say.  Then the  CEO of a leading pharma came out this past quarter and saw some "alarming" trends in the downturn of prescription use.  Hmmm...   This is just another canard that will be used to find a way to extract more money from some group of folks in the name of the "good of the people"  

Maybe people are getting fat from overreating as it's the only pleasure in life in a world of governments that are sucking the life out of the people due to wars, taxes, rules and regulations out the ying yang, loss of jobs purchasing power and nothing that is happening is in their control but they can control how many ho ho's or sodas they can consume.  Could be a whole host of issues here that have nothing to do with fructose, corn, organics etc...   People are just fed up with government but yet the governemnt would never look in the mirror, the blame must lie with the people themselves.    

 

 

TahoeBilly2012's picture

White flour is the culprit. Can't even find a pizza with half whole wheat dough, or some rice flour in eat, what have you. I can't stand white flour and quite like whole grains, so I don't get it.

TBT or not TBT's picture

Both white and whole wheat flour have a VERY high glycemic index.   Higher than a calorie equivalent amount of TABLE SUGAR.

The reason is that the starches in wheat break down VERY quickly in the small intestine to glucose, which gets taken up very quickly, causing blood sugar and insulin spikes, ergo fat storage and all sorts of other damage on top of that.   Stop eating anything with wheat in it.

falak pema's picture

you selling rice n whole wheat pasta? 

SOME nutritionists will tell u that the important thing is to eat other foods that DESTROY GLUTEN INTAKE when u eat wheat; ITS A QUESTION OF DYNAMIC DIET BALANCE.

Understandiing transient bio dynamics. Like eating cyanide with whole wheat. That ensures you no weight increase. 

Just stretching the analogy to absurd to prove point. Eg : some types of salads decrease cholesterol intake with eggs etc. Fast Intestinal passage.

I wonder if its true. 

q99x2's picture

Die, die, die you fat stinkin bitchez, die.