What Can We Do About Rising Obesity?
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 07. 2024
- Chris Whitty is giving a series of three lectures on 'Diseases of the Heart'.
Register to watch these lectures here: www.gresham.ac.uk/watch-now/s...
------------------------------
The rising prevalence of obesity is a major threat to current and future health of individuals, the public, and the NHS. It is sometimes seen as too difficult to tackle but there is now progress in this multi-system health problem.
In this lecture by Professor Chris Whitty, he will lay out the health effects of the rising prevalence if we do not address it. Obesity arises from a complex interaction of genetics and environment. Medical management of obesity is improving. We can reverse the rising trend in society, but only if we understand the reasons for obesity, what can be changed, and what cannot.
A lecture by Chris Whitty
The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:
www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and...
Gresham College has offered free public lectures for over 400 years, thanks to the generosity of our supporters. There are currently over 2,500 lectures free to access. We believe that everyone should have the opportunity to learn from some of the greatest minds. To support Gresham's mission, please consider making a donation: gresham.ac.uk/support/
Hello, thank you for this talk and all you continue to do. I am an immunisations nurse working in schools. I agree children's and thus adult's health is affected by socio- economic factors, amongst others. The Government stopped the FREE child aged swimming leisure activities funding some years ago which was of great benefit to children's holistic health. They need to provide local government and health providers with funds to re instate these and other free sporting activities during weekends and holidays along with a range of other activities such as music and performance arts. Funding for these have been depleted by ratio over the years to no long term cost benefit in my opinion. This is not a political statement just what I see and hear on the ' coal face' as it were. A penny spent now is a pound saved later but it needs that long term view. This is needed now more than ever. Thank you for all you are doing.
Three meals a day intermitting fasting no snacks especially at bedtime sorted
Food rationing worked in the UK, not only during the war, but well into the 1950's.
No need for it but thanks for your brilliant idea. 👎
@@ladybird761 How much do you weigh? how much heavier are you now than when you posted this?
Key knowledge - drink tea when hungry/ sleep longer
- learn how to treat yourself
- visit - wattpad - book title; what doctors dont know about cancer/obesity....
How about tackling the sugar companies with all their junk food! No thought not . This is directed at the Government though not this lecture
And I don't believe that it's "easier to do more exercise in affluent areas', surely it's more that those living in affluent areas tend to be more intelligent and so take more care of their health. Anyone can exercise anywhere.
Obesity is not about not enough exercise. It’s about too much food. Overconsumption of processed food is too easy.
There is also the elephant in the room: the link between obesity and alcohol consumption, which has increased exponentially in the UK. Indirectly too: when a parent drinks the home becomes stressful, a child will often take refuge in food. So sad, and now compounded by the pandemic...
Interesting lecture. I'm impressed by the gently gently process suggested, but have to say I'm doubtful it will work. Absent any government sponsored programs that would promote physical activity, and no doubt be labelled as Fascism, and given the unwillingness of any government to put stick about amongst the purveyors of the offending food classes, I'm bound to say the only realistic way of promoting obesity reduction on a meaningful timescale would be to pay the obese to lose weight. Given the potential costs to the NHS in dealing with the damage wrought whilst some have profited, paying the victims may well be cheaper than dealing with the tsunami that is still in its early stages.
Obesity has almost nothing to do with physical activity. Also, the calories in/out mentioned in this talk is oversimplified to a rediculous extent. What matters is avoiding hyperprocessed foods; that's it.
@@alquinn8576 A program of Resistance based activity will shift weight fast. Running and movement not so much. But I'd agree rubbish foods play a big part in the problem.
You'd be better off taxing the people that sell food with added sugar.
@@alquinn8576 the fact that hyperprocessed foods are allowed on the supermarket shelves is criminal already.
@@Fanakapan222 Exercise makes you hungry. The key to weight loss is controlling hunger, and that is a dietary solution. You cannot outrun and bad diet.
Pay people when lower their bmi. Do quarterly police tests. Pass is $300
It's down to eating compulsively, instead of consciously. People are not in control of their addictions, and should be taught in school how to control their mind so it benefits instead of harming themselves. The best method to live consciously I've come across is from Sadhguru, a yogi expounding spirituality logically.
He starts by telling us that there is no shame or negativity slant on an individual level, though the exceptional HBO docs on this make it clear: mass food production high in calories and cheap in cost eaten by a poor population living a sedentary lifestyle is a depressing algorithm. And costly.....
Have not watched this, but since you asked.
1 Ban television and restrict internet use starting with a particular focus on "social media: and gaming".
2 Decentralize food production.
3 Restrict the tendency toward fast food, highly processed food, factory food, laboratory food.
4 promote healthy philosophies of food such as "slow food" and "holistic" farming practices.
5 Divest from the multinational globalist corporate food financial predators and get your wellies on.
You make some controversial points, but actually are more on subject than most of this lecture which spends most of its time discussing the problem rather than what we can do about it.
My grandparents were poor farmers; their diet was basic and monotonous, lacking in sugar and vitamins (they and their children were probably seriously malnourished by our standards), they were skinny all their lives and died in their 80s. I am middle-aged, slim and fit; I do not need anybody to decentralise the food production, ban television, limit my internet use or restrict the amount of fast food I see everywhere (and eat sporadically). I eat when I am hungry, I love the occasional slice of factory-made cake or mass-produced ice-cream and a glass of (cheap)wine but I never over-eat. I do not understand why some people, such as Jennifer above, want centralised decisions made on their behalf. One should be responsible for one's health.
Many gamers are very skinny. Some people get so obsessed with gaming they forget to eat so gaming isn’t why obesity is rising. It’s because people are going out having more takeaways. Scoffing their face at the slightest inconvenience to feel better again. People also eat every time they watch soaps like coronation street and eastenders. It all boils down to stop eating. Doesn’t matter if you’re stressed, sad or anxious, you mustn’t eat whenever you don’t feel happy
I have to comment on 22:11. I've already let a few of his interpretations of the evidence not really fully agreeing with his choice of statistics slide but enough's enough.
22:11 shows the lowest mortality rates are at around 24 BMI, i.e. just on the verge of being medically "overweight". They are higher once you go above 25, but the mortality rates in the 18.5-25 BMI range ("normal weight") are actually higher than in the 25-32 BMI range ("overweight to stage 1 obesity" weights).
This chart does NOT support his interpretation that 'the lowest risk is when people are what in medical terms would be considered to be "normal weight" and once people get to being overweight, having obesity, and then having very severe obesity, then the risk of dying early is very substantially increased'. What the chart actually suggests is that people at the lowest risk are those at the _very_ high end of normal weight (i.e. nearly overweight) and that (while with severe obesity the risk increases), they are actually at an equal risk by being on the low end of the normal range (BMI 18.5) as they would be were they on the verge of stage 2 obesity (BMI 35 - which is fairly severe).
Put in simple terms, this chart suggests that it is better to be slightly overweight than to be on the slim (not even underweight) side. Which may not be a fair interpretation of the bigger picture, but it is very poor academic practice to use this chart to illustrate a point it quite clearly does not support unambiguously.
Thanks John, the random bloke on CZcams. I’ll definitely listen to your view over the expert opinion of one the worlds most eminently qualified public health professionals.
@@HomemadeBrownies1 Hi Jack. I'm not even saying the lecturer is wrong in general, so not quite sure I agree it's a question of my view vs. that of Chris Whitty. But he is using the chart as if it proves a point that it doesn't really prove. I may be a random bloke on the internet, but either what I am saying is proveably true, or it's proveably false. In any case, this is the CZcams comment section that any one can use and Chris Whitty is equally able to use to disagree with me. In fact, I'd love to hear his reply to be honest.
All I'm saying is look at the chart. You'll see (unless I'm reading it completely wrong and if I am, please tell me so), that it supports my previous comment.
If we are to ignore the evidence he himself is showing us in favour of his interpretation because he's an "expert" and just switch off our critical thinking, then this lecture would be better without the evidence being shown at all. By bringing it in, he's saying look - this is happening and I can show you the proof! - flashing the evidence up without giving us a chance to look at it properly, and we trust his judgement. But if the evidence, when the video is paused, does not quite prove his point, it could be seen as academically dishonest to use it in that way and I feel it is academically dishonest, to be frank.
Probably what is going on is he's having to simplify a very complex issue and information to bring it to a level that is acceptable to the general public, but essentially, the problem is that he'd never get away with this level of simplification in a true academic setting and the fact that he's having to do it here (and that a random bloke on the internet has spotted it) means that, while he may be one the world's most eminently qualified public health professionals, this is not a great lecture. In my opinion, granted!
John Bull, great observation!
I think that as people get sick they lose weight, chronic alcoholics are often very thin, also terminal cancer is often gear for weight loss. So it's easy for results to be misleading, epidemiology is the worst form of evidence.
You need to contr for age as well. A lot of elderly people who are frail are in the "healthy" BMI range but are otherwise not healthy. Control for that confounder and get back to us.
Eat well plate - not the picture of health. Lower carbohydrates
Carbs themselves don't matter. What matters is ultraprocessed food intake. Many ultraprocessed foods have high carbs it's not the carbs themselves that have been demonstrated to be unhealthy.
Government could intervene more effectively through land use and transport planning.
The state could do all manner of things. There was a lack of original ideas for solutions shown in this lecture. Too much subject material covered in too little time: it is what it is.
Not once during his talk did he mention the main cause of obesity which is high insulin levels and insulin resistance. No wonder they have no clue how to fix it. They keep regurgitating the same old advice that doesn't work: calories in, calories out; eat less and exercise more.Wake up people!! It's not about calories, it's about hormones and mainly INSULIN. When you lower your insulin, you lose weight, reverse insulin resistance, and you lower your set point so you don't gain the weight back, it's that simple. How to lower insulin? First, ignore the nutritional guidelines that got us in this big mess in the first place. Cut down on carbs, no sugar, skip meals (do intermittent fasting) skip breakfast or dinner (yes breakfast, because it is NOT the most important meal of the day)
We've been given the wrong advice for soooo long and these agencies won't admit that they made a mistake. Eat less and move more never worked and it never will, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results - Albert Einstein
Absolutely right. And him harping on genetics when virtually no one was obese 100 years ago is also insane.
It's hyperprocessed foods! He mentions this briefly but almost as an aside.
High Insulin levels come from overconsumption of mostly ultraprocessed foods and sugar hence why the interventions listed were more focused on reducing calorie and sugar intake.
Also Albert Einstein probably didn't say that.
Reason of obesity: fast food, junk food, sweets, sugary drinks. There you go. Short and simple. Solution: stop eating/drinking the stuff mentioned above and move around a bit.
Simple and elegant. I can't help thinking though, that if it were that simple to do in practice, obesity wouldn't be an issue.
Short, simple and completely wrong. Did you even watch the lecture?
Also, have children go to BED at a decent hour..with NO SCREENS..sleeping also plays a role for children not getting obese
Ah, found the person who was watching this with the sound off and the screen locked. How do you do it.
This man has been sipping at a poisoned chalice for more than a year. I suspect that he is more highly appreciated by the many whose lives he has saved in Africa, than by some of his fellow countrymen.
A very intelligent man who as advised the most abhorrent strategy in dealing with a flu, the human cost of Lockdowns( no efficacy when a pathogen is spread throughout a country) is immense when you extrapolate the relevant data.
There's a lot of controversy out there about BMI (Body Mass Index). Taking into account all of the literature and articles, hasn't it all been basically debunked as totally non-scientific?
It isn’t a theory. BMI is a calculation. It exists. Don’t be silly.
See my comment on 22:11...
The elephant in the room is carbohydrates. Did the esteemed Professor even mention the word? 4.5 years ago I stopped eating carbs regularly, reduced my weight by 20 kg in 6 weeks and have kept it off, without losing enjoyment of food, in fact the reverse. It is the toxic dietary guidelines that are condemning the population to obesity. Yes, reducing calories is a part of this, but because carbs trigger insulin, it is almost impossible to manage your weight if you eat that stuff to a significant degree.
I think he missed the goal completely, must be omega 6 and sugar that is the problem.
He has not done his homework.
Eat less move more……….did the whole lecture in four words ffs 😭
The only long term intervention is bariatric surgery. All other methods are brief. They are all failing strategies.
The other choice is emigrate to a country where the prevalence of obesity is very low.
Emigrate? 😂 😂 🤦🏻♀️ you don’t lose weight if you emigrate.
Eat less and exercise more- Next.