Why would the army pay for your lunch? What do they have to do with a random American teenager that's not involved with the army. I don't get it. I feel stupid, haha. <_<

It's just a program they set up. I'm not sure how one applies, but I know it exists. The National School Lunch Program is more common and universal, though.

hm, okay. Strange. :razz: So, a lot of people use this army thing? What about the people that have a little more to spend, though. They can save money, and have a better lunch if they bring their own food. Is it the effort to get out of bed five minutes earlier?

Hoo ha....

 

Next year I'm attending a private high school. Each kid is required to be a 3 sport athlete, so no obesity for me :D

 

Obesity and physical activity actually has quite a limited link.

Obesity and physical activity actually has quite a limited link.

 

How often do you see fat kids playing a sport that requires a lot of running.

That's why curling/golf/badminton were invented.

 

(no offense to anyone, i play all 3)

Obesity and physical activity actually has quite a limited link.

 

How often do you see fat kids playing a sport that requires a lot of running.

 

Correlation not causation.

 

A fallacy that most people fall into over and over, and yet make surprisingly little effort to avoid.

Correlation->Relation->link.

 

You could reiterate or change your word choice. Or we could pretend we are great intellectuals and discuss fallacies.

uh, we fight with guns, not hands.

 

^Ha, it's funny because he's fat.

 

Obesity and physical activity actually has quite a limited link.

 

How often do you see fat kids playing a sport that requires a lot of running.

 

Correlation not causation.

 

A fallacy that most people fall into over and over, and yet make surprisingly little effort to avoid.

Y'see, 'round these parts, if you're going to claim the fish was this big, you need a picture of the fish before anyone will believe you.

^Ha, it's funny because he's fat.

 

Obesity and physical activity actually has quite a limited link.

 

How often do you see fat kids playing a sport that requires a lot of running.

 

Correlation not causation.

 

A fallacy that most people fall into over and over, and yet make surprisingly little effort to avoid.

Y'see, 'round these parts, if you're going to claim the fish was this big, you need a picture of the fish before anyone will believe you.

 

I never made any allusion, overt or otherwise, to any member of TIF being slow, if that indeed is what you are implying.

 

I am however, sorry to say that I did not include my source. I apologize, I was tired and didn't have a digital copy at the time. I've turned up a collection of noted from the section concerning it, from Gary Taube's [Good Calories, Bad Calories If his credentials are to be called into question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_TaubesWikipedia is in itself not a valid source, but it provides links to sources that are.

 

• Hirsch did a similar experiment in 1995 on obese subjects

◦ concluded that calorie restriction resulted in a disproportionate decrease in energy

expenditure and metabolism/orum.tip.it ▪ the body resists changes in adiposity

• Positive energy balance hypothesis: weight gain is a result of energy intake exceeding expenditure

◦ just doesn't work that way; calorie restriction has been remarkably ineffective for weight

loss in obese patients

◦ low-fat, calorie-restricted diets are no better than balanced calorie-restricted diets

◦ long-term calorie-restriction studies even show slight fat gain

• Conventional wisdom sticks with calorie restriction, despite the evidence

• Exercise: the other side of the equation

◦ since calorie restrforum.tip.itive, then by the process of isolation, energy expenditure

must be the key to weight control

◦ problem: exercise burns insignificant amounts of energy and increases appetite

▪ e.g., lumberjacks eat 5000 cal/day vs tailors at 2500 cal/day

◦ Mayer's evangelism overcame the prevailing attitude that exercise was ineffective or

counterproductive

▪ he noticed that obesity correlates with inactivity, then assumed that inactivity

causes obesity (it's really obesity that causes inactivity)

▪ problem: obesity correlates with poverty — more likely physical laborers

▪ Mayer's hypothesis: there is a loophole in the relation between appetite and

activity; hunger and activity are proportional only to a certain point — below that,

hunger remains even if you don't exercise

▪ based on two of his own studies, both of which are prime examples of bad

science

▪ public figure: wrote in NYT and had a syndicated column

◦ ultimately, the evidence has shown that exercise is ineffective for weight loss

▪ "underwhelming" support of Mayer's hypothesis in the scientific literature

• Flawed assumption: hunger is a psychological phenomenon, a question of will power

◦ No, it's a physiological drive to get enough calories; that's why we get hungrier after

exercise (or after not eating for a few

Rude am I in my speech, but yes, a source was my only request. My previous comment was not implying anyone to be slow, but was a response to the image Das posted of the rotund fellow with the M16.