> One of the biggest health problems in America is...

> I disagree. The biggest health problem is...

You aren't disagreeing, you're making a claim about _the biggest health problem_, while I'm making a claim about _one of the biggest health problems_.

Perhaps they are asserting that America only has one health problem?

To be fair saying "One of... is..." is a tautology and doesn't make sense to disagree with.

> To be fair saying "One of... is..." is a tautology and doesn't make sense to disagree with.

I disagree pretty strongly and can provide as many examples as you would like:

- One of the biggest health problems in America is too much bicycling

- One of the biggest health problems in America is too little automobile travel

- One of the biggest health problems in America is too much space travel

- One of the most nutritious foods is rocks.

I think instead what you mean can be best explained by reading the wikipedia article on weasel words. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word

I was being facetious :)

Lack of exercise is also a problem, regardless of overall weight. There are heart, lung, and joint health improvements.

Lots of skinny people in terrible shape out there.

I think for general health/longevity its preferable to be out of shape but slim rather than heavier but fit.

Mark Rippletoe of Starting Strength has some counterarguments to this. E.g. being fit and heavy is better for bone density than out of shape and slim so in older age one is less likely to break something.

Built is not the same as fat, though. I’m guessing Mark is arguing for building strength not for being overweight.

  BUT, you say, look at his gut. A fat slob, obviously. Can’t be healthy. Healthy is slim. I am 5’8” and weigh 225. At 5’8”, “normal” is considered to be – incredibly enough – 125-163 pounds. Overweight is 164-196, and I am “obese” at 225. In reality, my bodyfat percentage is about 24%, and a 60-year-old guy who deadlifts 500 is an anomaly in terms of muscle mass anyway.  So I’m not worried about my body composition. [1]

Mark Rippetoe argues you should build strength to be healthy, not obsess about bodyfat% for health. If you want to look good, then by all means you should try to reduce your body fat. If you want to feel good, focus on strength.

[1] https://startingstrength.com/article/your-gut-your-health-an...

This guy is certainly strong, but he is definitely overweight. He may feel fit, but his weight will make him high risk for heart attack, stroke, or diabetes.

There's no amount of training that can fix a bad diet.

Why not do both?

His philosophy is that Strength is Everything, so cutting weight or limiting calorie intake for "lean gains" limits the muscle mass (and strength) you could be gaining.

It all depends on your goals.

It's certainly valid for him to value strength above everthing else. But most of us don't, most are more interested in longevity and quality of life during those years. And so it raises the question if his lifestyle is good in those aspects or not.

That's not really true for older people. Muscle weakness is a critical risk for falls. Once a person falls and breaks a hip or something the lack of mobility typically kills them within a couple years.

> Even the dumbest among us are clever, particularly when it comes to reducing work loads. It's not gonna be long before somebody figures out an alternative way to power that washer.

The dean of the EE faculty when I got my MSc liked to quip that the best engineers were the lazy ones - lazy, yet bright enough to realise that if they expended some effort today, they'd be able to slack off tomorrow...

American kids don't have a chance. Example: High School in Arkansas with a Sonic drive-in across the street and nothing else around it. A SLIM chance of success for a kid born into an environment like that I'd venture to guess.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3798403,-92.2227848,3a,75y,8...

Also, I am a huge fan of Wendell Berry and this topic has so many implications that are worth exploring IMO.

They don't have food at home?

As a kid, eating at McDonald's was like a once-every-other-month treat.

McDonald’s has had the $1 menu for how many years? Even the brokest of the broke can manage to splurge on a $1 cheeseburger, $1 small fry, $1 Coke. Compared to $2.50 for a USDA subsidized school lunch which has none of the chemicals that make McDonald’s addictive.

Access to fast food, even for children, has never been easier.

What addictive chemicals are you referencing here? Sugar? Salt?

I still can’t believe they limited salt for school lunches. If you want kids to eat the meals they need to taste good, and for 99.9% of kids and teenagers the amount of salt they eat has basically no effect on their health.

I wish I could get USDA Dominos at home.

Never had it, maybe it does taste terrible.

That's the correct answer. You can't exercise your way out of a high calorie, high sugar diet, unless you're willing to dedicate several hours per day to intense exercise. Normal exercise is an atrocious approach to countering high calorie intake, it simply can't work. You can work out for an hour, and one soda wipes it out entirely, or a couple slices of pizza.

No, the problem is and will remain dietary in nature. Americans could stop all exercise across the board, change their diets, and lose massive amounts of weight trivially, just by cutting out a few common items that nearly all obese Americans over-consume. I've yet to meet an obese American whose diet I couldn't trivially radically alter by just removing a few particularly horrible things (eg sugary drinks, ice cream, pasta/pizza, high sugar snack goods). People think they have to change everything about what they eat and go to the gym five times per week to drop weight, and that's entirely false, all they have to do is eliminate or dramatically reduce the couple worst items in their diet and that's usually enough (it's rare that there are dozens of villains in their diet that matter, it's almost always just a few items that are doing 3/4+ of the damage).

> Americans could stop all exercise across the board, change their diets, and lose massive amounts of weight trivially, just by cutting out a few common items that nearly all obese Americans over-consume

To be fair, the yanks don't even need to change their diets to loose weight .... they just need to eradicate those stupid portion sizes.

A steak doesn't mean half the cow on your plate, a sandwich doesn't mean putting everything you can find in the shop (including the kitchen sink, if you could !) in between two slices of bread ... etc..etc..etc

Its simply grotesque.

Labor and rent are more expensive than the food. The large portions are intended to distract the consumer with the illusion they are paying primarily for food rather than a massive markup.

Free refills on sodas with waiters waiting to pounce and refill your cup every time it's 1/3 down from full, can be added to the list.

Also, soda servings in excess of 20oz (already huge!) to begin with, regardless of refills.

I upvoted this comment, but people are not so dumb to only eat junk food. There are environmental/psychological factors why people overeat. Other research shows that people will overeat "healthy food" i.e. huge dollops of olive oil, or fruit juice, because it's "healthy."

I agree that reducing bad food and portion control is the answer, but it's very hard to drive behavioral change in people. And the health industry has done a "good" job of creating medication to enable bad lifestyles i.e. metformin for Type2 Diabetes, other drugs to manage cholesterol, etc.

There's no evidence that a diet high in olive oil increases obesity or all-cause mortality.

There's plenty of evidence that eating too many calories increases obesity.

GP's point is that calories coming from a "healthy" source doesn't mean they don't count. Drenching one's salad in olive oil rather than canola oil won't help someone lose weight, nor will switching from soda to a fruit juice with the same amount of sugar in it (ancillary benefits of e.g. vitamins notwithstanding)

>> You can work out for an hour, and one soda wipes it out entirely, or a couple slices of pizza.

Not exactly, just because you've replaced those calories doesn't mean that your body didn't gain muscle mass which itself requires calories just for your body to maintain. This leads to a higher basal metabolic rate, which ends up burning calories even while you rest.

That’s overstated, look at say elite marathon runners who do incredible amounts of daily exercise without bulking up.

A 500 calorie workout might only be 400 extra over spending that time sitting on that couch. Similarly extra muscle on it’s own takes energy but fat also burns energy so even modest weight loss balances that out.

Having lots of muscle mass isn't healthier than being slim. It's healthier than being fat, but being slim is going to be a lot easier on your heart, joints, and other organs.

(Have a look at people who are 80+ and fit. Most of them are slim. You don't see a lot of bulked up old people)

Your overall point might be correct, but your old people one is just wrong.

Old people aren't super muscular because you need high levels of testosterone to support musculature, and it naturally declines with age and particularly tanks when you are elderly.

The digestive system also gradually loses the ability to absorb protein with age. Elderly people actually need more protein just to maintain muscle mass, but most of them fail to adjust their diets accordingly.

Being overweight also raises your metabolism. Focus on the mass, not so much the rate.

Lean muscle at rest only burns about 8 kcal/day/kg more than fat. So the metabolic effect is pretty small.

At rest sure, but you gotta carry all that extra weight around when you do anything else.

Carrying around an extra kg of weight takes roughly the same energy regardless of tissue type.

This is correct. I do cardio 10-15 hours/week and have to count my calories so I don't gain weight.

I read some research recently that showed that when you exercise you tend to be less active through the rest of the day. You balance it out without thinking about it.

I've seen that myself, a long bike ride will often be followed by an evening on the sofa.