Hello Sebastien! I love this post, thanks for sharing with us!

How about walking for an hour everyday

Doing anything that keeps you standing is great.  We were not built for long periods of sitting, which is why according to recent studies, we should be getting up and taking a stroll (if your in the office take ten minutes to walk outside) at least once an hour. And this is where most of us are probably sitting the most, limit our time in front of the TV. 

So yes, all that to say walking an hour a day is an excellent idea.

*** log/record what you eat and drink over a 2 week period

people fool themselves they are not eating much when they can be snacking like crazy - it will also highlight any areas you can easily address

*** brush your teeth after each meal asap so you are not tempted to eat more

this might have something to do with it...

The above can be found in Europe AND the US

Aah buzzcocks, always have to drop the male equivalent in there dont you haha.

Eating alone is a false indicator of health. Its equally important to exercise, i'd say almost more so than what you put in to the body. 

Eating well alone will just mean you get a little healthier and your weight may move slightly in one direction or the other, but without exercise, you will be back to where you started. Exercise tends to build re-wire the brain slightly, you tend to want to eat better and do more active things.

Good post sebastian but i would be pushing exercise first, diet second. As people will always slip on what they eat.

I think we are saying the same thing, but with minor differences. For those who only exercise, lets say three times a week, even if its a High Intensity work out, will find that they will lose whatever gains they make in the gym behind a gut if they do not eat correctly.

But I definitely agree that exercise has to be a part of it. It is just that the problem I encounter often is that when people start going to the gym or working out regularly, sometimes they feel like they can eat more than they should, or treat themselves to seconds on desert, subsequently sabotaging all their efforts to lose fat. Its just a matter of simple math, more calories eaten vs burned and you will store fat.

Studies are showing that it is actually worse for your health to be overweight than to be out of shape with little body fat. And only eating right will ensure proper BMI in the long run.

But if you don't eat right and don't work out and you are lacking the discipline to change your diet, then definitely start exercising because something is always better than nothing, and I do agree Farzam, that exercising does rewire your brain (as does any change in habit after about 2 weeks).

I'm with Sebastien on this one.  We've been locking test subjects into metabolic wards over and over again for decades in an effort to demonstrate the importance of exercise with regard to weight loss and we've failed every time.  The results just aren't there but we keep doing what doesn't work for some reason...

Its a false positive though, because without exercise you are just putting in less energy and therefore you will lose some weight but your body will adjust and when you have a blip, you will fall harder. Exercise works a treat, the problem i find is that people just think its some miracle cure. That jogging 20mins on a treadmill means that they can take liberties elsewhere. Just as Sebastien said, people assume that because they exercised that day it means they can eat much more or unhealthily. I remember hearing people mention that after a work out, 20 mins after, you can pretty much eat anything (!) . If you want to lose weight, cut your meals in half and replace with salad, and do at least 30mins of intense workout 4 times a week (focus on specific areas if that is what you want). You are basically starving your body while beating it into shape. I have a fair few 'fitness' types in my office, either they exercise like mad and eat anything and everyhting bad under the sun or they assume because of some light weekly exercise that macdonalds is an acceptable lunch choice when trying to lose weight. 

I would say Seb is definitely right that diet is fundamental, but diet alone will not help you long term or quickly, as the same can be said for exercise, what happens if you get a long term injury? both should be mandatory. I have never understood people whp 'don't do exercise'...

I just took 4 months out after minor knee surgery. Before this I played football 3 times a week and went to the gym 3 times a week. I did literally nothing for 4 months to allow a bunch of injuries to heal. I adjusted my diet to take into account the lack of exercise and so I didnt put on any weight (but lost a fair bit of muscle). Now i'm back in training (thank god, I was going nuts)

I have a fair few 'fitness' types in my office, either they exercise like mad and eat anything and everyhting bad under the sun or they assume because of some light weekly exercise that macdonalds is an acceptable lunch choice when trying to lose weight. 

I shake my head at the cupcake-addicted marathoners too.  Chronic cardio to burn off the glycogen; refined carbs and sugar to replenish it.  Lather, rinse, repeat.

Why the emphasis on the one over the other? It seems that many studies are showing that most people need to exercise more and to pay better attention to what they eat. And as mentioned above, exercise brings many other benefits especially for mental health.

One aspect that sometimes tends to be ignored is muscle building activities, especially for older individuals.

Hello people! 

The process I followed to loose the extra weight was run alot, swim in between and rest a couple of days on a weekly basis (I lost around 15kilos in 2013 - i think i got a couple kilos this january due to trips).

Diet was no breakfast midweek, big omelets on weekends, early lunch (meet and vegies only) at 11:30 and 500g bio yogurt with 250g dry fruits and seeds the rest of the day. I would weasel in a couple of dark chockolates during the week and drink lots of coffee per day (3 cups due to addiction)

Also try to avoid processed sugar and keep away from the rice-pasta-jelly candy lanes in coop.

I dont know if it was optimal, but it still works for me and you get addicted to running as well!

Dont expect instant changes and be patient.

For those working out a lot and seeing results all over the body except the belly, I would suggest try checking for lactose intolerance (took me years to figure out that it gives me bloating). Yes, boot camp is an amazing way to get fit.

Exercise brings a ton of health benefits and it does assist with weight loss.  But the science is telling us that it's not the cure, nor is it even 50/50.  It's a distant second behind dietary modification.  I'll see if I can dig up some of the studies on this...

It may or may not be a distant second, but if you want to lose weight in a healthy manner and for it to be a long term choice, then diet is not really the way. Exercise will do what diet changing wont, which is the mental side of things. When you consider it is a balance of energy expended versus energy consumed, so some combination of diet and exercise will always exist. If changing your diet is the only thing you are doing, then you are essentially constantly dieting, rather than expending more energy than you are ingesting. If you exercise, it gives you the ability to maybe even eat at the same level but since you are burning more, you will have a deficit and end up losing weight.

I personally cut out all sweets, replaced 50% of my meals with salad and worked out 5 times a week, with 2 spin classes, and that did the job. 

If you dont exercise much, (withouth a crazy metabolism) you will always be eating less and have less freedom to eat what you want. Its not how i like to live, but i suppose for some it is easier to change the easy stuff like diet rather than going for a run.

Great Contributions hope it gets you thinking....

I believe we can safely sum this up to 

Exercise is a great way to motivate yourself to lay off the fatty cakes (just imagine how long you have to run in order to eat your favorite dessert)

Diet is important for a long healthy life, and as mentioned above important to keep tabs on so you dont sabotage all your efforts in the gym or on the pavement. 

Diet (and I really just mean healthy eating not a fad diet) + Exercise are two great things that go together.

A study conducted by the International Journal of Obesity cited a 20% greater initial loss of weight than someone who only dieted or exercised. The real challenge is keeping it off, of course I would be remiss not to point out that is my expertise, but as long as you keeping active and eating correctly, you are on the right path. 

If you have any questions feel free to shoot me an email, or you can visit genevabootcamp.ch and yes there is a Boot Camp this Sunday if you want to try it out, I promise to keep you warm! 

"(just imagine how long you have to run in order to eat your favorite dessert)"

Don't want to be rude but this seems to sum up the kind of wrong thinking that's gets people into an unbalanced attitude to nourishing their bodies.

It shouldn't be about reward and punishment .

it should be about listening - really listening - to your body and feeding it when it needs feeding.

Most people I know who focus so much on diet and exercise either fail miserably and are yo yo dieters or become so fixated on fitness that they bleach all the colour out of the rest of life.

I think the point on 'time taken to burn off something eaten' is pertinent if only because people dont seem to realise how bad the normal things they eat are for them. If you have ever baked something yourself, then you would know the sickening amount of salt/sugar/butter that goes into most baked goods. 

The combination of salt/sugar and fat can pretty much hide the high levels of each other. Google a pizza hut pizza ingredients to see that little gem.

You will be running for hours to burn it off. So realistically if you are someone who has an issue with your weight, then you shouldnt even be touching those things, because for each one you eat, you are putting yourself back several sessions of exercise, which will mean you will not achieve the results you want and which will dent your confidence and resolve and hence the yo-yoing. I think what is more where the point was going is that you could replace bad snacks with at least something healthier if not cutting them out.

I see it in my office, people eating any sugary snack imaginable/8 coffees a day with sugar/huge lunch portions, and then mulling over the reasons why they seem to be keep their weight static despite a lot of exercise. 

Really it comes down to how badly you love certain foods. If you love them that much, then you probably have a bit of an addiction. 

Its a classic: eat badly/too much, feel guilty, probably eat more due to down mood, realise results are not going your way despite light exercise, feel more down. Repeat.

'Dieting' is an absolute failed solution, because we're not talking about healthy eating, we are talking about starvation in the eyes of the body. Because if you eat 3000 calories a day one week and 1000 calories a day the next week, your body will think there is no food coming and change things up.

I would say that listening your body is a good-ish idea only because most of the time, if you feel it, its too late. 

I agree with:

*Cut out processed foods from your diet as much as possible
*Snack on fresh fruit if your hungry

Plus exercising (a running season works wonders).

Well, I didn't specify any percentage for one or the other although I've seen the 80% diet to 20% exercise ratio mentioned...

My point is that it's not necessarily productive to emphasize diet over exercise, even in weight loss. Its important to have an integrated approach otherwise you can easily push yourself into starvation mode and then lapse, relapse, collapse as others have mentioned. 

Many people lose weight but then put it back on and more. Consistent exercise appears to be the most important factor in maintaining weight loss. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/magazine/18exercise-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

And don't forget, exercise has been shown to be essential in combatting stress which can be a main source of overeating, not to mention all other kinds of stress-related diseases.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/exercise/art-20048389

Of course, many have mentioned, cutting out processed foods is essential in large part because many of these foods are scientifically designed to keep consumers in a state of constant craving.

Surely the main question here is.......why are we eating so much more than our bodies need?Isn't this the issue we need to address?

why do we need " snacks" ( a concept introduced in the 50's if I am not wrong) now introduced into the pet food area( and how many overweight cats and dogs do we now see?)

if our f ood producers ( like nestle with their confectionary snacks and sugary cereals aimed at kids) were more responsible, people might not get so hooked on the high fat, high sugar tastes that we are getting used to- to our detriment

"why are we eating so much more than our bodies need?  Isn't this the issue we need to address?"

Appetite dysregulation.  Our hunger signals aren't trustworthy.  Get to the bottom of that one and you'll have your answer.

and how many overweight cats and dogs do we now see

Many.  The primordial canine and feline diets were 15% carbohydrate tops.  Probably more like 7-10%.  Check out the label on the nearest bag of pet food and see if it matches up.

Buzz, here's another one: Explain the surge in pediatric obesity.  Not just six year olds in front of the TV who are developing pre-diabetes and metabolic syndrome but two year olds who on average have substantially more adipose tissue than toddlers 40 years ago.  Or even newborns who are averaging around 200g heavier, nearly all of it from fat.  Will someone tell me that modern neonates should have put down their uterine Xbox and been moving around more?

I come back to the snack market and it's effect on us - and of course the responsibility of the industrial food giants( one of which is very comfortably installed in this country!)

why on earth do cats or dogs need "snacks" ? Why force our bad habits onto them? I saw two women the other day giving " treats" to an overweight dog who was begging as he waddled his fat body and stared fixedly at them. This is criminal - just like the food giants encouraging us to eat high fat sugary snacks we simply DO NOT need!( and then acting as sponsors for sporting events!!!!)

Just look at what is offered as baby food. " chocolate pudding" was one quoted in a recent report. how many babies NEED to eat bloody CHOCOLATE  PUDDING ??!!!!!

I come back to the snack market and it's effect on us - and of course the responsibility of the industrial food giants

"Bullshit in a box" and the health authorities will happily slap their seals of approval on this stuff. 

Well, I lost about 12 kg in the last 12 months and now admire my abs in the mirror without the big layer of lard that used to hang over my belt... (yeah, a bit vain, but not seen them in years!)  How? Well, I decided to eat a lot more and enjoy food with lots of calories.  And snacks too!

Oh... better point out that I took up swimming, cycling and running and did at least one almost every day, anywhere from 15 mins to 3 hours depending on the day - and now enjoy my new hobby of triathlon and Ironman events.  I'm in full-time employment, with two young children and my wife enjoys family time too... so I don't really have time for people who say they don't have time... get up a bit earlier, or go for a quick jog before jumping in the shower after a day in the office.  THAT's how you lose fat... diets are temporary, activity is a lifestyle.... say hello again to those abs that went missing the week you started college and were never seen again!

Well I don't want to boast, brag or appear too smug, but I can still wear the same pair of earrings I wore in high school.....

If someone could tell me how to GAIN weight!!!!???  seriously though....

You can actually gain weight without gaining fat. There are various exercises you can do with less cardio, so you would have a higer muscle mass....nice lean mean machine...

I weight more than most of my friends on a scale but i am more fit...I do a ton of weight training.

I would say any blame put on the the food industry is just as bad as any other kind of blame. Whoever eats their products, chose to eat their products and therefore has no complaints really. You choose what you put in to your body. 

Having said that of course they are being irresponsible, but in reality theyare giving the people what they want (as shown by sales). It is the regulatory bodies who are screwing the pooch on this one,

Me too - but I don't think I should inflict that on other people

It's great that people are debating this topic with such enthusiam. Of course we need to consider both elements. Eating well and exercising regularly to increase of chances of feeling good, and living a long and healthy life. I don't have any scientific evidence to quote, but anecdotally I know that my own body weight is most affected by dietery modification. In my clients, the initial weight loss through exercise reaches a plateau after a few months, which is only overcome with dietary modification. I think less about 'dieting', and agree that this is not a healthy mindset, think more about modifying and moderating your eating habits.

I agree that in the long term, listening to your body is vital, (Buzzcocks). But what if you listen to your body and you hear it telling you to sit on the sofa and eat pizza? As RichardM says, sometimes our body's messages aren't trustworthy. The damage done by years of processed food consumption and sedentary living can take a while to undo. So for some it is useful to seek external guidance, at least to start with. Just make sure that your guidance doesn't come from corporate food giants, check out the ingredients label on a popular Swiss cereal box, 'Fitness' is the name, if I remember rightly.

On this thread I read some inspiring stories, coming from healthy young men who shed lots of weight with a combo of healthy eating and vigorous exercise. Well done to you, sincerely. But vigorous exercise is not an option for everone, this strategy is not good for some folk. Older people, anyone with cardiovascular issue or joint injuries might need a slower start. Yoga and Pilates students sometimes ask if these classes will help them to lose weight. In the conventional sense that you'll burn lots of energy, creating an energy deficit - maybe not. In that you gradually develop awareness and learn to listen, gaining understanding of your appetite - yes. in remobilising and stiumlating your system to restore balance to your body - yes.

i'm not knocking vigorous exercise, in fact I love it. Running, Nordic skiing, martial arts - all of it! But a balance of hard and soft training will give you more longevity, that's all.

The best way to lose fat is to contact me... And I will train you....!!!!!

I will get your butt into shape.... Or your money back !!!!!

Reuben

marry an italian guy and let his mom do the daily cooking for you :-)

gain weight in which sense ,muscular mass or just weight . If you really need help i can . I gives personal trainning apart from my job(as my leasure and its free of charge ) . so don't hesitate to contact me !! 

Suhas

P.s I will send you the photo of my trasformation .in 6 months .

(before i was 72 kgs 17% body fat , but now 75 kgs with 10% bodyfat) that means i gain weight but now fat. its no that dificult to gain weight !)

I have never heard of the fist measurement for foods before now. It seems to be a good indicator though.

----------------------

woman gym

Maybe you won’t believe this, but my hairband still fits.

R.

Sorry to say that Sebastien is right on the money here. Diet first, then exercise.

Ideally both.

I have always played lots of sport but have only ever managed to lose weight and stay trim by watching what I eat.

(I'll caveat this by saying i'm talking about most people, not special. And that in no way am i saying that diet is not important, quite the opposite but just not a stand alone option)

In fact what you have just said backs up my point of view (though it might be in your case that diet was all it took). Dieting without exercise is completely devoid of logic. You dont't change anything long term, you have just made a short term adjustment, to which your body will react to and counter balance. You start dieting, your body starts holding onto each calories with extra fervor. Plus unless you keep this 'diet only' regime up forever you will return to your original weight in almost as much time as it took to lose, and most likely go past where you were. Exercise alone will cause other problems like injuries and exhaustion, which are temporary problems. 

So temp problem or temp solution?

Also having played sport for I assume your whole life, you've most likely self corrected towards healthier eating the older you get. If you took a normal individual who probably does a little exercise here and there every other week, and eats a somewhat subpar diet, then diet alone will not make a big improvement, they need to essentially 'wake up' their body. 

'Crap' (fat/toxins) in the body tends to accumulate in hard to reach areas, and no diet will get there (hence why you have exercises for specific zones.)

The fact that you had played lots of sport means you have a compeltely different metabolism and body to those who dont. They can only get to where you are by exercise. No diet in the world will redesign your body and brain like exercise.

Diet is very very important, but nothing is more important than being active. 

Damn, how in 2014 are we still extoling the virtues of stand alone diets. Eat well and in moderation and exercise at least a couple of hours a week. Not so tough... in my eyes anyway!

Interesting to hear different view points though!

You lost me Farzam.  First, there's no such thing as "spot reduction".  Second, you're ignoring the metabolic and hormonal impact of various foods and macronutrient balances.  Heck, even within a single macronutrient category (fat) there are significant differences in how various substances impact human metabolism.  I'll get you started: Look at Omega-6 polyunsaturates versus medium chain saturates and their impact on basic metabolic rate. Look at the role of insulin in de novo lipogenesis and study how various macronutrients (fat/protein/carbs) stimulate/do not stimulate the production of insulin.  Look at the interaction between insulin and another hormone called leptin and their role in appetite and hunger regulation.  Within carbohydrates, look at fructose vs glucose metabolism; which one suppresses ghrelin (another hunger hormone) and which one doesn't? 

It's clear that you're wrapped up in the CICO (calories-in/calories-out) model.  Humans are not bomb calorimeters.  At least I've never met a person who looks like one:

I can only talk in terms of personal experience, educated experience and the general population.

Working on certain zones and spot reduction are not the same thing, but I also never said 'spot reduction' existed, just that the exercises exist; An attempt at a short cut, like most diets. Working on a particular muscle group will tone and aid in reducing the general amount of toxins down there, but it doesnt mean exercising one way will only remove fat from that place, 'spot reduction' comes from people mistaking the temporary compression of the fat by the newly built muscle.

All very impressive (and somewhat condescending) with the random metabolic processes but unless you are only eating fructose & switch to glucose or (any other variable in absolute terms), then these will not have massive effects and not easy to pin the positive on one small change, unless you have a very specific problem (a deficiency or one very severe process you keep forcing on your body - like eating something is particular harmful to you as an individual). 

I didnt go into the macro because then there are 1000 variables which makes it impossible to speak in terms of the gen pop. What if the person grew up eating a crazy amount of processed sugar or no processed sugar or no wheat. What if they have an iron deficiency? (common but undiagnosed) What if they have a particular high or low metabolism? Hence the general terms.

But then we could also talk of the positive side effects of exercise too, which are far more tangible with regards to the gen pop. (it also suppresses ghrelin and peptide YY and you didnt even have to eat anything!)

You can do a lot on a very poor diet, but you will do even less with little to no exercise. It's short term versus long term. You exercise well for a month and separately eat better for a month, if you were you were to suddenly stop, which would have the greater & lasting positive effects?

{Biomedical scientist, worked in cancer research and clinical trials too. Plus I have 2 family members who have had to have very special diets/exercise regimes, and one ex who went through one hell of an ordeal trying to figure out what was wrong with her. Nothing works better than both exercise and diet, but diet alone never helped any of them as much as exercise alone (including patients) }

but diet alone never helped any of them as much as exercise alone

Which diet(s) did they try?

( If I were you i'd be taking umbrage with "and unfortunately (or not) even being physically fit with some spare change around the hips can detrimental health implications." from Sebastien's initial post. The opposite is considered to be true, people who carry a little 'spare change' tend to be a little healthier. I'll put this down to him trying to drum up business)

Ya, that statement had problems too.  From a "health implications" perspective we really need to be looking at the constellation of symptoms known as metabolic syndrome (central/visceral adiposity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, impaired glucose metabolism, hypertriglyceridemia, etc).  Spare change around the hips isn't the problem; santa claus belly certainly is.  In some demographics a bit of extra adipose tissue is correlated with better health and robustness (elderly women in particular).

Between all of them, they covered a lot. Removal of different sugars, removal of specific fats or proteins, addition of a multitude of things from mainstream to more... 'alternative' therapies (I personally couldnt stand this side of things). My ex went through all manner of tests, as she had become partially allergic to so many things. She was on a pretty specific diet of a few specific vegetables and salmon for quite some time. No idea how she managed to maintain it for so long, credit to her especially as she had been on a really predominantly-vegetable liquid diet for a while before.

Between the patients and friends & family, a few quirkier ones were in there too. Like the Edenic diet, or an almost entirely meat base diet (some grains and fruits to make up for deficiencies). Of course the close to complete removal of carbohydrates were in there too.

At one point, I had a doctor telling my mother who was on a diet of:

1 slice brown toast with honey and maybe a piece of fruit
1 cup of green tea (no sugar)
a very small lunch (little to no meat)
a very small dinner (little to no meat)

to eat less if she wants to lose weight... beggars belief. She was eating so little and not exercising so her metabolism was going at a glacial pace (pre global warming glaciers!)

She started going to the gym a little and swimming each day as well as trying some alternate meal plans and it worked wonders. It took me a while to convince her that she could eat a lot more and better, especially if she exercised more.

The offer of her being able to eat more had her running for the gym bless her cotton socks.

But she tried the diet first, and in most cases they tend to go for the diet first as it seems easier (exercise requires you to do something, dieting tends to be you not doing something - eating). It helped a bit, no doubt, but once they started exercising, the person gets a new lease on life. Everything becomes a little more positive, they feel better about themselves  (initially mostly due to the serotonin and dopamine), it helps with depression and the start looking at things differently, like simple things like taking the stairs.

Though the diet that is one of my pet peevs is gluten free... 99% of people think it will help them, when in fact it's probably closer to 1% who get the benefits. Great money making venture though!

I lost 10 kilos in 6 months just by cutting out biscuits, chocolate and anything with sugar. I did not feel tired at all but had to buy a new wardrobe-oh well!

I lost weight without exercising, I mean I move... but not working out.
I walk to work almost everyday and even though at work I spend a lot of time sitting, I'm not sitting for 8hs.
Lost more than 5 Kgs by simply cutting on carbs from my diet after 6p. Just that was enough to make me lose weight and volume.
I divide the quantity of food over my meals; I never skip breakfast, snack in the morning, lunch, snack on the afternoon and light dinner.
Never cut anything from my diet (stopped eating carbs after 6pm but will have them during the day).
During the summer I started to exercise and lifting weights to increase my strenght, I did gain some weight but continue to lose volume.
So yeah, I strongly believe, from my personal experience, that the weight lost starts in the kitchen! 

Hi Cat & Brighteye, thats great! Good for you both.

Bright - No biscuits/choc/sugar is an obvious one. It's like me saying i stopped having a stick of butter each night before bed and I lost weight! (still dont think i'm taking anything away from your effort, very much good for you!)

Cat - I would say that walking to work each day adds up to more exercise than most people do in a week! Sad but true ( i think it's something like 2 hours averagely!)

I think i applaud the fact that you dont consider walking to work exercise, more than the other stuff!

Also the no carbs after 6 is a big difference. You say you dont cut anything from your diet? Wouldnt that mean that you are not really dieting, but changing your habits (timings, portions at timings etc) or did you also lower portions?

In the end some kind of mixture of the 2 (10/90% - 33/66% - 50/50%) will be found to work best for each individual so with that in mind, I cant stand so firm on the exercise front. I suppose I just want to bash the idea of exercise so firmly into peoples head that at the very least they will do something :)

It's a 15/20 minutes walk, occasionally I will take the bus, because it's raining or snowing or just because the bed felt so nice on that day... I never really thought of it as a work out, just because it's something that I need to do to get to work, because most times I'm in auto pilot and I don't even remember the walk. To be honest I can't really explain you why, I just don't feel it's a work out, but I understand your point of view on that one...
I definatly changed my eating habits... and now I'm actually trying to increase the amount of meat that I normally have (which before would be only fish). Making an effort to introduce more red meat in my diet because I was advised by the the doctor, since my iron levels were too low.
I would like to say that I think exercising is important, I just meant to say that losing weight should start by making a proper diet along with the specific exercise (which will depend on what the goals are).

Has anyone tried the 5:2 diet? fad? good? how hard? effective? thanks for sharing

Buy "the four hour body" by Tim Ferris. DONE!

http://fourhourbody.com/

What a load of tosh and marketing bollocks spouted in this thread. In short Eat less move more... Not rocket science!!!

Precisely the advice that we've been handed for three decades.  What has it done for us?

Well on the basis that calories are no even more accesible and cheaper than ever before its no surprise that obesity is on the rise however.So that graph is fairly pointless to be honest, espeically as it does not give an indication as to how the "overwight" are classed, was it BMI,was it weight compared to the similar height child in the 60s etc etc.

The simple undeniable fact is that to lose fat you need to be in a calorific deficiet therefore eating less of the correct calories and burning more will result in fat lost. How you go about it is up to you.

How you go about it is up to you.

The ultimate question.  If 1200 daily low-fat calories combined with an hour of daily cardio were the answer, we wouldn't be having this debate.  We'd just eat less and move more and poof, we're all skinny and happy ever after.  In the real world, people try caloric restriction plus chronic cardio and they get cranky, irratable, sick, weak, lose muscle mass, lose hair, lose bone density, lose fertility, and so on.  Sure, they lose weight but is that a life worth living?  I don't blame them for giving up and becoming a social justice warrior for a fat acceptance movement (read: trying to move the goal posts).

I don't know your personal situation but I'll guess that it's like mine and that we both do not gain weight easily.  It's easy to cling to CICO because it works for us.  I can eat a bit less every day and I will reliably lose weight without any side effects.  But I had to let go of CICO; it's disingenuous and just doesn't work for people who are struggling.  There's a lot of them around.

Of course it works for 95% of people, the other 5% who have some form of genetic condidion or Thyroid problem it wont work but the 95% are just to lazy or ill disciplined to follow it through to completetion. If anyone is stupid enough to jump straight onto 1200 a day intake from a full blown excess  then that is a problem for being ignorant and not researching how to lose weight correctly.

Fundamentally the biologiy is sound and cannot be argued with its the application that is lacking for most people.

Education and motivation are the two biggest tools in losing weight outside of CICO.

Am reprinting this picture from above . . .  have we overlooked the phsycological impact that in the USA it now seems completely normal, on top of which its gaining popularity, to be grotesquely overweight . . .  so if you are "just fat" in comparison, well you feel "that's OK" in comparison . . . and the peer presure is off. 

Now imagine being grotesquely overweight in Europe . . . . you will feel the heat . . .  and so even those that are "just fat" feel rather out of place.

So its good that Europe has resisted the temptation to enlarge cinema, airline and bus seats !  Ever wonder why they drive so many pickup trucks in America ? . . . cause they can't fit into cars and pickup trucks come with "bench" seats !

All that to say . . . facilitating obesity has made it seem like its normal and the national standard in some places.

Unfortunately that image does not correspond to the reality... even though that's the image most have in our minds.
Based on latest available data, more than half (52%) of the adult population in the European Union are overweight or obese. The prevalence of overweight and obesity among adults exceeds 50% in no less than 18 of 27 EU member states. Obesity - which presents even greater health risks than overweight - varies threefold among countries, from a low of around 8% in Romania (and Switzerland) to over 25% in Hungary and the United Kingdom. On average across EU member states, 17% of the adult population is obese.
Child obesity is increasing fairly quickly also, studies show that obesity rates among 11-year-old boys and girls were highest in Greece, Portugal, Ireland and Spain, (lowest in the Netherlands and Switzerland).
Lack of exercise is a key part of the problem.
In 23 out of 36 countries, more than 30 percent of boys and girls aged 15 and over are not getting enough exercise.