Based on 20 years of investigative reporting and interviews with 100 practicing physicians who embrace the keto lifetstyle as the best prescription for their patients' health, Taubes' book puts the ketogenic diet movement in the necessary historical and scientific perspective. It makes clear the vital misconceptions in how we've come to think about obesity and diet (no, people do not become fat simply because they eat too much; hormones play the critical role) and uses the collected clinical experience of the medical community to provide essential practical advice.
Why We Get Fat And What To Do About It Pdf Download
In his New York Times best seller, Good Calories, Bad Calories, Taubes argued that our diet's overemphasis on certain kinds of carbohydrates - not fats and not simply excess calories - has led directly to the obesity epidemic we face today. The result of thorough research, keen insight, and unassailable common sense, Good Calories, Bad Calories immediately stirred controversy and acclaim among academics, journalists, and writers alike. Michael Pollan heralded it as "a vitally important book, destined to change the way we think about food."
Building upon this critical work in Good Calories, Bad Calories and presenting fresh evidence for his claim, Taubes now revisits the urgent question of what's making us fat - and how we can change - in this exciting new book. Persuasive, straightforward, and practical, Why We Get Fat makes Taubes' crucial argument newly accessible to a wider audience.
Taubes reveals the bad nutritional science of the last century, none more damaging or misguided than the "calories in, calories out" model of why we get fat, and the good science that has been ignored, especially regarding insulin's regulation of our fat tissue. He also answers the most persistent questions: Why are some people thin and others fat? What roles do exercise and genetics play in our weight? What foods should we eat, and what foods should we avoid?
Packed with essential information and concluding with an easy-to-follow diet, Why We Get Fat is an invaluable key in our understanding of an international epidemic and a guide to what each of us can do about it.
Taubes' book is a primer on how the hormones and enzymes that control the body's fat storage really work, how what we've been eating has mucked up our systems, and how we got on a such a faulty dieting path. Finally, he helps us see why we need to run the other way as fast as our portly legs can carry us if we truly want to live longer, slimmer lives.
A. Also false. These kinds of "facts" are why I got into writing about this subject. I was researching a piece about the cause of the obesity epidemic, when I came upon the results of five clinical trials that tried to prove if we eat low-fat diets and eat less overall, we will have good heart disease numbers, good risk-factor profiles, and we will lose weight.
A. The people on a high-fat diet eating more overall lost more weight, had a drop in blood pressure and triglycerides, and their good cholesterol went up. What the trials really showed was that if we tell people to do precisely what the conventional wisdom suggests should kill them, they actually lose weight and their heart disease risk-factor profiles improve.
A. Once all the work was done, the money spent, the scientists needed to convince us they were right. Soon, the idea took on a life of its own. One report after another came out about how dietary fat is killing people. Big front-page headlines in all the big papers. After a while we believed it because it seemed crazy not to.
A. It has to do with the hormone insulin. Insulin works to make you store calories as fat in fat tissue. Insulin, in concert with higher blood sugar, is what makes a fat cell fat. And the more refined, easier to digest, sweeter the food you take in, the higher the insulin goes.
A. It scares me to see how carb-obsessed children are. In the book I talk about a vicious cycle: As women get heavier during pregnancy, if they're obese or diabetic to begin with, or develop what's called gestational diabetes, they give birth to children who are more likely to become obese or diabetic when they become adults. Generation after generation. Fatter and more diabetic means higher insulin levels. So bodies learn to perceive carbs instead of fat as the best nutrients to burn much of the day. Are we giving birth to children who, each generation, are more carb-needy, dooming them to problems down the line? It's possible.
A. I try to keep them off sugar without being a zealot and keep refined sugars and carbs and starches to minimum. But given a choice, that's what they want. I hate seeing overweight kids whose parents are forcing them to run or reduce the size of their meals. They can't run because they're storing energy as fat. They're hungry because they're eating the wrong foods. The effort to slim them down by starving them or making them exercise is misguided. The problem isn't that they are sedentary. That's a side effect of the disregulation of their fat.
A. Not everyone should be on the Atkins diet, that's not my argument. I want to get across the simple fact that certain foods are fattening and other aren't. Quantity and quality of carbs is what determines how fattening your meal is. Foods without carbs are not fattening, so you can eat as much as you want. You don't have to be a glutton, but you don't have to worry about it. They simply aren't fattening.
A. I'm writing both to people concerned about weight and also doctors who are treating obese people. If you want to lose 10 pounds, maybe you just give up refined sugar, or have pasta less often. For someone 100 pounds overweight who wants to be lean as possible, they have to do more. It's about dose. What you can handle depends on your body and the extent of the problem. For someone who weighs 300 pounds, moderation probably won't make a bit of difference. For someone who put on 20 pounds since college, maybe moderation is the answer and the occasional cupcake is not a problem.
Something about being poor makes people fat. Though there are many possible explanations for the income-body weight gradient, we investigate a promising but little-studied hypothesis: that economic insecurity acts as an independent cause of weight gain. We use data on working age men from the 1979 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY79) to identify the effect of various measures of economic insecurity on weight gain. We find in particular that over the 12-year period between 1988 and 2000, a one point (0.01) increase in the probability of becoming unemployed causes weight gain over this period to increase by about one pound, and each realized drop in annual income results in an increase of about 5.5 pounds. The mechanism also appears to work in reverse, with health insurance and government "social safety net" payments leading to smaller weight gains.
Fat-soluble vitamins are essential for overall health. Most people can obtain enough of each vitamin from a varied and healthful diet. Anyone who has concerns about their vitamin intake should speak to a doctor.
NAFLD affects about 25% of people in the world. As the rates of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and high cholesterol are rising in the United States, so is the rate of NAFLD. NAFLD is the most common chronic liver disorder in the United States.
As part of the medical history, your doctor will ask about your alcohol use, to find out whether fat in your liver is a sign of alcoholic fatty liver disease or nonalcoholic fatty liver (NAFLD). He or she will also ask which medicines you take, to try to determine whether a medicine is causing your NAFLD.
We (1) confirmed that heavier people have a higher fat-free mass compared to normal-weight people. This is in line with biological insights [7]. Additionally, (2) we have shown that people with a higher fat-free mass are stronger (in absolute sense) and are better in strength exercises than in aerobic exercises. We have also confirmed that (3) mastery experiences (in this case, resulting from successfully engaging in strength exercises as opposed to aerobic exercises) are related to more positive psychological outcomes. This observation is in line with psychological insights [20,21,22,23]. As hypothesized, we (4) have shown that heavier people are more positive about strength exercises compared to normal-weight people, via fat-free mass and muscle strength. Moreover, (5) heavier people are better in strength exercises and are more positive about strength exercises compared to aerobic exercises.
There are some limitations that should nuance the drawn conclusions. Most of the study participants are university students who volunteered to participate which might limit the generalizability of our study results. The self-reported physical activity level was higher than 45-year-old parents (2.8 h/week) but lower than 13-year-old children (5.3 h/week) [25]. The sample size is relatively small, but the used measures were accurate. The BMI range was limited, making more research necessary among a broader BMI range. Cross-sectional data instead of longitudinal data was gathered. With that, we were not able to show causality. Two additional questions might be (1) whether the exercise protocols adequately encompass what strength and aerobic exercises are and (2) whether the (possibly different) training loads of the two different exercises might have influenced the results. 2ff7e9595c
Comments