Cellulite Fat - Forever or can it be dieted/exercised off?

[thaiboxerken]

While that is the bottom line, it is hardly all that matters.

It does, if one's only goal is to lose weight.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Americans are fat because they eat too much:

http://www.scientificblogging.com/n...hey_eat_too_much_not_because_no_time_exercise

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Who said it was a failing? I think your prejudices are showing.

Feel free to paraphrase how one can be responsible for lacking willpower that is not synonymous with failing.

The laws of physics provide the framework for the mass we accumulate. An infant doesn't become an adult if it doesn't eat because it will die. Beyond that genetics will play a huge role in the size and shape we end up. However, our energy intake will also be a major factor.

To the best of my knowledge experiments where the subjects are not given control over how much energy they consume have shown predictable effects of weight gain and weight loss. While there appear to be some variations in metabolism and genetic factors for fat retention and distribution, it has not been established that humans are able to convert air and light into energy. Therefore, whatever mass the body accumulates is directly related energy consumption and energy use.

The natural extension is that humans have a choice about how much they do not eat. I say "not" because for many people there's a limit to how much food they have access to. For those of us in affluent countries like the USA, cheap calories abound, and most people have realistic access to more food than they could possibly need in a day. Likewise, in developed countries, humans use other forms of energy (coal, oil, natural gas) to do things that our ancestors needed food to accomplish. This lack of energy consumption is also a choice.

So, based on this, I argue that body composition is largely a matter of personal choices. Why people seem to have difficulty making the choices that would result in the body composition they prefer is an entirely different matter and one worthy of discussion. You can call it a "failing" if you want to. To me, it just is what it is.

It's hard to comment on "the best of your knowledge" when you don't cite anything one can evaluate. I've read extensively on weight loss science. Your recollection is unsupportable in terms of actual research. You make one of the most common mistakes. You conclude people simply lack willpower.

The evidence suggests this is not the case. Look at the links I posted earlier.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What do you mean that a small proportion of the population has succeeded? Succeeded in what? Getting fat and then becoming fit again? Please be more specific.

Interesting you would try to insult overweight people by asking a question with an obvious answer.

Yes, very few overweight people succeed in attaining long term weight loss. Your attempt to include the poorly disguised insult that these same people succeeded "getting fat" is duly noted.

People gain weight under a variety of circumstances, most are significantly influenced by biology.

 

[thaiboxerken]

People gain weight under a variety of circumstances, most are significantly influenced by biology.

Evidence? I would think if biology was such a major factor, we'd see large populations of overweight people in impoverished countries.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

How does he know that eating right and exercising is possible? Are you seriously asking that?

Having examples of things tends to make me believe that they are possible. What makes you think that they are impossible?

It's possible for someone to win a gold medal in the Olympics. Do you believe that means every individual could do this if they tried?

Some people get disease from TB infection. 90% of the people infected never experience illness. What does that mean?


The fact only about 5% of the overweight people who attempt weight loss succeed suggests it is not about will power for most people. Because 5% do succeed supports the conclusion a small number of overweight people can reset their body weight thermostat with will power alone.

To determine how many people could succeed one can look at other health problems people have corrected. For example, the number of smokers who succeed in quitting could be compared. Because the example is not a perfect analogy you need to look at other similar behavior problems people succeed in changing. How successful is anger management? How successful is just increasing exercise?

If you look at these behavior changes you find much higher success rates than sustained weight loss. The conclusion is something else is going on than simple motivation and will power.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

LOL.. take it easy skipper... I know this is a skeptics web site, but damn. You asked for my hypotheses and I gave it. I prefaced it with "I imagine". I also said initially that genetics and age are a factor, so I did not outright dismiss a biological factor.



You are twisting what I said to have an argument.

I purposefully refrained from saying you did not know you were stating an hypothesis. I said, "You have posted your hypotheses. You have not posted conclusions supported by evidence. Lots of people don't understand the difference."

But in reviewing your post, the words, "I imagine" are not in it. While a number of declarations are. Here is the full post:

Yes, you can lose the fat you want. Your success (or rate thereof) will depend partly on your genetics/age and partly on your effort.

You cannot control your genetics/age, but you can control your Diet and Exercise.

Diet: Eat smaller meals and more of them. Eat the right food in the right combination (ie; each meal should contain the appropriate amount of protein, carbs and fat -- stay away from processed foods, sugar and foods that contain saturated and trans fats)

Exercise: If you have time, do both cardio and weight training (aerobic and anaerobic). Lean muscle mass is your friend.

Finally, it is a difficult balance so you may also want to see a Dr. who can tell you your metabolic rate (how many calories you burn naturally), check you for nutrient balance, etc. Once you have that data you can then measure your caloric intake vs. expenditure and design a diet and exercise program that will give you the desired caloric deficit that you can maintain until you get the desired results.

Then you can up your caloric intake to maintain your results.

(emphasis mine) I recognize you noted there is biology involved. I'm not condemning everything you've said. I'm trying to call attention to all the declarations in this thread telling people all they need to do is [xyz] while those declarations are not supported by any scientific evidence.

We tend to recognize one needs science to draw conclusions about astronomy or geology. But when it comes to the things more common in our daily lives people are more likely to draw conclusions based on "common sense". The problem arises when that common sense is wrong. It isn't always wrong, but when it comes to matters of health, there are a lot of common sense conclusions floating around and people are often very quick to make declarations of fact when the evidence doesn't actually support the facts.

Relevance?

I'm trying to get people to make a paradigm shift in how they view willpower when it comes to the biological drive to maintain one's weight. This is what the evidence supports in weight loss science. The evidence supports that when your body senses weight loss it craves calories just as you crave oxygen when you hold your breath. This biological drive to increase your calorie intake and decrease your metabolic rate (also not totally under conscious control) is much more than just want, desire, will power, or however you want to describe it.

Good for you. The OP clearly would like to "get in shape". Now, taking into consideration that I provided the caveat that one cannot control genetics and age, the suggestions I offered are sound.

I've not objected to your advice. I just point out that there were a couple unsupported declarations in it that would be best if you could cite some data these methods were effective.

It turns out with weight loss diets, be it more fat, less carbs, balanced, small meals, water before meals... you name it, none of these diets have been shown to be consistently better than one another. You can find some research to support each, but that is likely the placebo effect of being in the study, not the diet itself. And none of the diets result in many people obtaining sustained weight loss. In fact, lots of people who do lose weight gain more back when that biological drive to consume calories kicks in. It is not a myth that one risks gaining more weight than one loses with dieting.

If it were the diet which resulted in effective weight loss, one would expect to see one working better than the others. Now health wise, smaller portions and a balanced diet are supportable suggestions. As is increasing one's exercise in most cases. But whether these actions result in sustained weight loss is another matter.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Skeptic Ginger is trying to be argumentative. I can only guess why.

Wrong. I'm trying to get people to consider what they believe based on common sense is not always what the evidence actually shows when we evaluate that evidence scientifically and systematically.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It is a personal failing, if it's a goal you want but fail to achieve. Societal and genetic factors can be overcome with enough persistence and training.

So you can hold your breath until you pass out then?

And you fully understand the biology associated with appetite so you know for a fact the drive to consume excess calories in some situations couldn't possibly be as strong as the drive to breathe?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Americans are fat because they eat too much:

http://www.scientificblogging.com/n...hey_eat_too_much_not_because_no_time_exercise

And you are alive because you breathe.

What you haven't addressed is why people eat too much.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Evidence? I would think if biology was such a major factor, we'd see large populations of overweight people in impoverished countries.

Why in impoverished countries?

But actually, there are plenty of obese people in many impoverished countries. Look at the Eskimo and many of the Pacific Island populations.

 

[thaiboxerken]

So you can hold your breath until you pass out then?

No. What's your point?

And you fully understand the biology associated with appetite so you know for a fact the drive to consume excess calories in some situations couldn't possibly be as strong as the drive to breathe?

Consuming excess calories is probably about as strong as the drive to inhale excess oxygen.

 

[ponderingturtle]

And you are alive because you breathe.

What you haven't addressed is why people eat too much.

Of course the answer is simple, you just tell them not to do it. Problem solved.

This works great with compulsives, is compulsively doing X ruining your life? Just stop doing X. Simple easy and direct. Then you get to feel superior to them when they don't stop doing X, you blame them for lack of will power.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Why in impoverished countries?

Because if biology played such a huge factor, then the consumption of food wouldn't play much of a role. Where there is less food, there is less obesity.

I highly doubt that biological factors play as large of a role as you assert.

The Obesity rate has dramatically increased in the last 20 yrs. http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html

I also wonder about your intention in the thread. Are you trying to eliminate personal resposibility as a factor here?

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Not all women have cellulite as you've noted do to variability of the connective tissue structure among women. I will stand corrected that it appears not to be possible to rid ones self of cellulite with dieting.
A quote from this site
Medical News Today medicalnewstoday.com/articles/149465.php

Excuse me and please forgive the dangerously inappropriate, pun but hasn't Steve indentified the elephant in the room and the rest of this thread is basically off-topic?

Cellulite is pretty obviously an appearance of fat and does not have that much to do with the quantity of fat. Unfortunately we all seem to find cellulite unattractive, regardless of actual body weight. So, what Debaroo's actual question is less to do with how to lose weight than it is to do with how to lose that unaesthetic appearance?

As a man, I shall now leave the room hurriedly.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Interesting you would try to insult overweight people by asking a question with an obvious answer.

Whoa. Where's the insult? Is the mere mention of the descriptor fat an insult? It's not in my book.

Yes, very few overweight people succeed in attaining long term weight loss.

The majority of the world population is able to avoid becoming overweight in the first place and should not be ignored when examining this problem. Those who become overweight and fail to achieve "long term weight loss" all share the same behavior pattern, which is they consume more energy than they expend for extended periods of time.

Like it or not, this is a behavior issue. If you want to use your breathing analogy, a better comparison would be hyperventilating. People who succeed in maintaining their weight, with or without having had a period of being overweight, are able to "breathe normally" to use your metaphor. Putting on weight is equivalent to panting or breathing heavily when the body doesn't need that much oxygen.

Your attempt to include the poorly disguised insult that these same people succeeded "getting fat" is duly noted.

Who said anything about "succeeding" in getting fat? Once again, you need to double the time you spend reading what other people have to say and halve the time spent responding.

People gain weight under a variety of circumstances, most are significantly influenced by biology.

Evidence? The issue of energy consumption and energy use cannot be ignored. Where is your evidence that this behavior is biological in nature? Furthermore, even if it is biological in nature, that doesn't mean people cannot alter their behavior accordingly. There are numerous biological urges we learn to control, so why do you consider eating and exercise to be something special?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No. What's your point?



Consuming excess calories is probably about as strong as the drive to inhale excess oxygen.

Actually, CO2 regulates over breathing, not 02. If you over breathe your blood pH changes, not conducive to electrical conductivity. The heart stops.
carbon dioxide

Carbon dioxide is essential for internal respiration in a human body. Internal respiration is a process, by which oxygen is transported to body tissues and carbon dioxide is carried away from them.
Carbon dioxide is a guardian of the pH of the blood, which is essential for survival.
The buffer system in which carbon dioxide plays an important role is called the carbonate buffer. It is made up of bicarbonate ions and dissolved carbon dioxide, with carbonic acid. The carbonic acid can neutralize hydroxide ions, which would increase the pH of the blood when added. The bicarbonate ion can neutralize hydrogen ions, which would cause a decrease in the pH of the blood when added. Both increasing and decreasing pH is life threatening.


Read more: http://www.lenntech.com/carbon-dioxide.htm#ixzz0gaCeeabF

But you are really just ignoring the facts here. The biological drive is to maintain one's weight. There are multiple causes of getting overweight in the first place.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I'm having a hard time believing the above, because the googling I did says that cellulite is also on thin women (and some men). It's a different kind of fat and being thin does not mean that one doesn't have cellulite. I've seen pictures of obese women that do not have cellulite fat - they are fat, but their skin is not dimpled. I am not concerned about what I weigh. It would appear that being thin is not the solution to ridding oneself of cellulite. Very frustrating.

I think it depends on your definition of words like "fat" and "thin" and "have cellulite".

As mentioned, you can't lose weight in specific places by intention. You lose it in the first-on last-off--basically where your body stores extra weight first is the most difficult to lose.

The differences you see (an "obese" person without cellulite and a "thin" person without cellulite) is the result of genetics and maybe age. (I suspect that "obese" woman without cellulite will eventually show the appearance of cellulite even if she maintains a pretty constant weight as she gets older.)

But, if you lose enough weight, you will eventually lose the cellulite. But for a "thin" person whose body tends to store fat in a way that makes the appearance of cellulite, it will be very difficult.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Actually, CO2 regulates over breathing, not 02.

This is irrelevant to the analogy. The body does not have a biological drive to over breathe.

But you are really just ignoring the facts here. The biological drive is to maintain one's weight. There are multiple causes of getting overweight in the first place.

The biological drive is to maintain weight? I doubt it. At any rate, behavior is the key factor to losing weight. This doesn't mean it's simply just a matter of willpower any more than to stop drinking alcohol is just a matter of willpower to alcoholics.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Because if biology played such a huge factor, then the consumption of food wouldn't play much of a role. Where there is less food, there is less obesity.

And when we were hunter-gatherers obesity was probably not a problem either. However, poverty does no always equal lack of food. But this is a side track.

As I said above, gaining weight in the first place has multiple causes.

I highly doubt that biological factors play as large of a role as you assert.

You can doubt it all you want. It doesn't change the fact this is what the evidence supports.

The Obesity rate has dramatically increased in the last 20 yrs. http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html

Once again, the reasons people become overweight in the first place are multiple. It's a separate issue. I strongly advise people to prevent becoming overweight in the first place because losing weight is difficult.

I also wonder about your intention in the thread. Are you trying to eliminate personal resposibility as a factor here?

Sounds like you've given up addressing the actual evidence and prefer to cling to your preexisting belief instead.