Bad diet is a lifestyle cause of obesity, but a lack of exercise is not, says an editorial reviewing controversial questions about this established health risk. The article published in a journal from The BMJ says the problem "cannot be outrun by exercise."
Even the exercise done by athletes cannot counter a bad diet, say the authors, who cite evidence that while obesity has rocketed in the past 30 years, "there has been little change in physical activity levels in the western population."

Excess sugar and carbohydrates, not physical inactivity, are to blame for the obesity epidemic, says the editorial.

The review, which aims to lead the opinion of sports medicine researchers and clinicians, is written by Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a UK cardiologist and consultant to the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges in London, with Prof. Tim Noakes of the Sports Science Institute of South Africa in Cape Town, and Dr. Stephen Phinney, professor emeritus of medicine at the University of California Davis.

Food and beverage industry 'lies'

The concluding remark of the editorial reads: "It is time to wind back the harms caused by the junk food industry's public relations machinery."

As an industry example of providing "misleading" information, the authors say that Coca-Cola spent 3.3 billion US dollars on advertising in 2013, and that the company "pushes a message that 'all calories count;' they associate their products with sport, suggesting it is OK to consume their drinks as long as you exercise."

"However, science tells us this is misleading and wrong," says the article, adding:

"It is where the calories come from that is crucial. Sugar calories promote fat storage and hunger. Fat calories induce fullness or 'satiation.'"

The authors further lambaste the food industry by blaming it for creating a public perception that "obesity is entirely due to lack of exercise."

Malhotra, Noakes and Phinney argue: "This false perception is rooted in the food industry's public relations machinery, which uses tactics chillingly similar to those of big tobacco."

Scot Dutchy wrote:Any sane person would realise this surely. Mind you in some places sanity is hard to find.

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:I think ingesting more calories than one burns is what's actually responsible for obesity.

That said, where most of those excess calories come from has been a matter of contention since obesity first became a thing, not something obvious to everyone sound of mind.

Bad diet is a lifestyle cause of obesity, but a lack of exercise is not, says an editorial reviewing controversial questions about this established health risk. The article published in a journal from The BMJ says the problem "cannot be outrun by exercise."

"It is where the calories come from that is crucial. Sugar calories promote fat storage and hunger. Fat calories induce fullness or 'satiation.'"

Briton wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:Any sane person would realise this surely. Mind you in some places sanity is hard to find.

Why would they? People have been told for decades that fat is the main culprit when actually it is carbs (sugar).

Scot Dutchy wrote:

"It is where the calories come from that is crucial. Sugar calories promote fat storage and hunger. Fat calories induce fullness or 'satiation.'"

Alan B wrote:

Briton wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:Any sane person would realise this surely. Mind you in some places sanity is hard to find.

Why would they? People have been told for decades that fat is the main culprit when actually it is carbs (sugar).

Agreed. I have T2DM diagnosed in 1995. At that time the public were not generally aware of any connection between obesity and diabetes - we happily consumed less fats and more carbohydrates. After all, fats make you fat, don't they, was the message - and, wow! carbohydrates (i.e. sugar) gave you 'energy'. The relationship between diabetes and obesity was probably known in the medical profession then, but it was not generally in the public conscience.

Scot Dutchy wrote:I was told as young kid. Too much of anything was wrong. It was known when my father developed diabetes in the 60's.

Alan B wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:I was told as young kid. Too much of anything was wrong. It was known when my father developed diabetes in the 60's.

True. But when you have the F&D industry pushing their messages as 'fact', it isn't surprising that many people ignored the teachings of their forefathers. I, too, was told that 'too much of anything is bad for you'. But the problem was, not knowing what was considered to be 'too much' of any particular food item when the consumer relied upon what was being told them by the F&D industry through their pernicious and pervasive advertising.
Like I said above, we were persuaded by 'fat makes you 'fat' and sugar gives you 'energy' bollocks.

Briton wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

"It is where the calories come from that is crucial. Sugar calories promote fat storage and hunger. Fat calories induce fullness or 'satiation.'"

Those of us that have been on low carb diets appreciate that.

Blackadder wrote:

Briton wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

"It is where the calories come from that is crucial. Sugar calories promote fat storage and hunger. Fat calories induce fullness or 'satiation.'"

Those of us that have been on low carb diets appreciate that.

I tried one of those diets a few years ago. I kept my fat intake constant (if anything I consumed more) but dropped my carb intake significantly. The weight loss was rapid and quite dramatic.

igorfrankensteen wrote:

That, and the simple recognition that what the "experts" have said has changed every few years, made me decide long ago to stick to simple things, like eating when I'm actually hungry, and paying attention to the difference between actual hunger, and taste-bud-illusion hunger. So far so good.

Scot Dutchy wrote:Prednisone by any chance? Bloody horse treatment that stuff. My wife was on it.

Briton wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:Prednisone by any chance? Bloody horse treatment that stuff. My wife was on it.

Yes it was.