Cycling UK Forum

I watched the programme (last night's, I mean: 13 Jan). Lots of science, certainly much more informative than anything I've picked up from the weight loss group so far! The bit I found a bit disappointing, was where one of the groups was fed a meal entirely of vegetables and collectively pronounced that they didn't like it. As a partial vegetarian myself, I find that a bit of a let-down. But it's hard to dictate to people what they should and shouldn't like, as opposed to what they should and shouldn't eat!

The programme - along with the first episode - is on iPlayer, in case anyone missed and is interested.

They were about weight loss more than diet in general, which was a shame IMO.

The programmes were not "about diets". They were about a group of morbidly obese people who - because of their condition - are at serious risk of premature death. They presented a scientific study into possible ways for them to address their problem - whether by diet management or exercise or both - and, if possible, avert that fate.

I have two colleagues who are, visibly, morbidly obese. Both of them are little more than half my age. The thought that I might outlive them, if they don't 'do something about it', is horrifying.

Sorry if the Beeb doesn't appeal to everyone. Most of the Beeb doesn't appeal to me anyway - when you consider such rubbish as 'strictly' or whatever it's called now. But these Horizon programmes were a real eye-opener and I'm grateful for the heads-up.

[edit] removed reference to post which has since been deleted.

Watched it on iPlayer. Some scientific bloke reckoned exercise wasnt an effective way of losing weight. He warned that you are prone to flop after exercise and thus negate the effect. I found that exercise supercharged my weight loss and was worth about 0.3 lbs a week, about 15 lbs extra over the year , worth having. On the news today they were plugging a daily 20 minute walk was healthier than just loosing weight. You have to watch and listen to all these programmes and then make up your own mind what to do for yourself.

Al

Some scientific bloke reckoned exercise wasnt an effective way of losing weight.

and some other science bloke elsewhere will reckon that dieting isnt an effective way to lose weight because you will just cave in and eat things.

Some how people are expecting to lose weight without having to get off their backsides or restrict the intake. Hard facts are not very palatable. I could eat as I do, if I was still riding as much as I did or I could cut the eating to match the amount of riding that I now do.

Like a few others, I am beginning to consider that it is likely that the ill health effects of obesity may be the ill effects of inactivity and the obesity is merely an indicator of inactivity. It may yet be shown that losing weight through dieting alone could make you more attractive but not healthier.

661-Pete wrote:The programmes were not "about diets". They were about a group of morbidly obese people who - because of their condition - are at serious risk of premature death.

That wasn't how it was advertised, though. It was advertised as a scientific way to find the right diet for you. I tuned in, hoping for something useful for me and all other people with diet-affected chronic illnesses and saw yet another weight loss show.

I don't have a problem with the BBC in general, but I don't like its coverage of cycling (news or sport) or its choice of partners (TV licensing and iplayer).

I can not be bothered watching it either, these programmes tend to take 5 minutes worth and drag it out for (in this case) three hours.

iPlayer does have a small write up along with a quiz to determine your type. So for the obese they have chosen three classifications of eating types. feasters, cravers and emotional. Doing the quiz showed that I have no "emotional" part to my eating habits, the quiz had me fifty-fifty as a craver and feaster but I think, I am just a craver who is used to large portions.

I dont know how valid it is but it suggests you need different strategies for the different types of behaviour and that seems reasonable to me.

If you are a craver you have a deficiency in the hormone that tells your brain to stop eating when you are full. And they actually measured this. As you get lighter your metabolism gets slower and you have to eat less. They measured the groups metabolism before and after and it did indeed go down. They did an experiment regarding the speed of eating. Eating fast is not good. One bloke ate a burger in 2 1/2 minutes. They repeated it another day and made everyone eat their burger over 30 minutes. They found that after the 30 minutes they werent hungry. There were some very good experiments and what the scientists said was bourne out. So IMO it was worthwhile in that it showed the slow metabolism excuses are bunk, exercise is a useful adjunct to diet, eating slowly will probably mean you eat less, as you get lighter you must eat less. And, the different diet regimes suit particular groups and its worth identifying the group you belong to.

Al

661-Pete wrote:[edit] removed reference to post which has since been deleted.

So it has been! What's the problem, moderators, were my comments too vacuous for this tread? If you'd have sent a message telling me why I'd have been happy to delete them myself without he need for any censorship on your part.

I apologise in advance if this ramble also breaks any rules but I am not anti-Beeb per se. As an employee of Auntie for over 16 years until the turn of the millennium I have an inside knowledge of how the BBC works and a consequential view that a large institution like that has a few negatives to go with the many positives. I still have friends inside the BBC who keep me updated on the current culture there. The issue for me about these types of programmes, to use a broad brush stroke, is that there is too much scientific fact to be included into TV programmes while still making them watchable. TV programmes are designed to be entertaining. Back in the days of the OU, you could get informative, "dry" and scientifically-thorough programming if you wanted to watch them, all packed away in their own slots during the mornings and early afternoons. Nowadays, science has a place on the BBC during early evening scheduling where they have to be able to hold the view for the full duration of the programme. If the BBC were to commission a series of ten one-hour long programmes looking at how obesity is linked to how we eat then I'd be more willing to believe that such programmes would make a difference in how the public think about food in general. Instead programmes like Horizon and many others, simply provide "water-cooler" factoids which are easily assimilated and just as easily forgotten.

Well, that's what I think, anyway.

Yes, but even some of the factoids are useful information and if you tuned in would have made you think about how you eat. For instance:-

Why am I failing to control my diet, am I just greedy or could there be some other reason such as insufficient fullness hormone, anxiety or what?

I scoff my meals fast and always feel hungry afterwards, would it help if I ate more slowly?

What sort of diet would suit me best?

There are so many daft diets about. I think this programme would have made you think a bit and possibly get some answers. When tbey asked all 75 what they thought about their recommended diet 95 % thought it was good stuff, which says a lot.

Al