Resize Font Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Reset Font Size

Home / Big Fat Lies / Headlines

November 20, 2008
printable version email to a friend join our e-mail list


Weight Control Is Second-Grade Math, Not Calculus.

Weight Control Is Second-Grade Math, Not Calculus.

There is a buffet of bad information in the news today about what causes obesity. (The economy. Fast food. Television commercials.) Take a deep breath, folks: The truth hasn't changed with the news cycle. Weight loss, gain, and maintenance have always been about the balance between "calories in" and "calories out." Unfortunately, simple addition and subtraction haven't stopped some of the generals in today's food wars from trying to convince you otherwise.

"If your bank account has just tanked, you've lost your job, and you are worried about keeping your house, you're not going to be spending a lot of money on food if you can avoid it," says notorious food cop and NYU professor Marion Nestle. "McDonald's is doing really well now as people have flocked to it, because the cost is low, they know what they're going to be eating, they like the taste of the food, and they're not concerned about whether it's too high in fat sugars and salt."

The problem is that she's blaming so-called fast food when rice, beans, potatoes, and fresh produce are some of the cheapest items at the grocery store. These items are not exorbitantly priced, and they're not inaccessible. They also don't fit Nestle's argument -- so she ignores them completely.

And elsewhere online, the author of a study that erroneously suggests banning food ads will cure childhood obesity even admits that " a lot of people consume fast food in moderate amounts and it doesn't harm their health."

The food police should quit pinning the blame on burger joints and start noticing other factors in our daily calorie math. Dr. James Levine, a professor at the Mayo Clinic, once remarked that relying on modern conveniences, such as washing machines and remote controls, creates a daily calorie surplus of 100 to 200 calories per day. That alone could account for the entire national obesity problem.

"To reverse obesity, we need to develop individual strategies to promote standing and ambulating time by 2.5 hours per day and also re-engineer our work, school and home environments to render active living the option of choice," Dr. Levine now advises.

That's pretty much the same common sense we've been doling out for years. It may not make the same sensational headlines as blaming the economy or fast food for the extra weight around our middles. But then again, since when is the truth so flashy?

email us comments



printable version email to a friend join our e-mail list
Headlines


Are Restaurants Really Supersizing America? Nope.
Posted On: Tuesday 1/6/2009

Ringing Out 2008: A Look Back
Posted On: Wednesday 12/31/2008

CCF In The News: New Year’s Edition
Posted On: Tuesday 12/30/2008

The FDA Loves Stevia. Guess Who's Panicking?
Posted On: Monday 12/22/2008

List Of Holiday “Health Myths” Comes Up Short. Here’s A Better One.
Posted On: Thursday 12/18/2008

Public Health Triumphs Over Fishy Activism
Posted On: Friday 12/12/2008

HFCS Hype Debunked by Hype Creators
Posted On: Tuesday 12/9/2008

All Together Now: "It's The Exercise, Stupid!"
Posted On: Monday 12/8/2008

The Sweet Sound Of Being Right About Soda Bans
Posted On: Thursday 12/4/2008


ActivistCash.com

Center for Science in the Public Interest
Background | Quotes | Financials
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is the undisputed leader among America’s “food police.” CSPI’s joyless eating club has issued hundreds of high-profile — and highly questionable — reports condemning soft drinks, fat substitutes, irradiated meat, biotech food crops, French fries, and just about anything that tastes good. read more here »

Op-Eds

Food only part of obesity problem
The cause of obesity isn't what you think. read more here »

Leave calorie counts off the menu; Nutrition is more complex than a few figures can convey.
Although The Times’ editorial was right that "laws that protect consumers from their own unhealthful habits have more than a whiff of the nanny state about them," its support for menu labeling is wrong. read more here »


About Us | Contact Us | Please Help Us | Site Map
Ad Campaigns | Press Center | Daily News Archive | Email Subscription | Op-Eds | Cartoons | Games | Link To Us
Copyright © 1997-2009 Center for Consumer Freedom. Tel: 202-463-7112.