CAP, the people who write and maintain the United Kingdom’s advertising code
just published new guidelines regarding the advertising of weight loss products and services.

 No longer allowed is:  

• Claiming that people can lose a precise amount of weight in a specific period of time.

• Claiming that spot reduction exists.

• Advertising weight loss products or services to minors.

• Implying that weight loss will be permanent.

• Implying that weight loss will be easy.

• Implying that a person can eat whatever they want and still lose.

• Suggesting certain foods can help you lose specific amounts of weight.

• Making claims about services or products not supportable by means of evidence.

• Utilizing testimonials that suggest more than 2lb/wk weight loss.

• Utilizing products that purport to "bind fat".

• Implying vitamin or mineral formulations are beneficial to weight loss.

• Implying that a product or procedure will remove "toxins" from the body.

Included is this amazing statement:

"Obesity is frequently associated with a medical condition
and a treatment for it must not be advertised to the public
unless it is to be used under suitably qualified supervision."

Will United Kingdom advertisers actually FOLLOW those guidelines?
I don’t know, but -- Don’t hold your breath waiting for any similar Guidelines to ever ever show up here in the USA.

 

You can't reason a person
out of a belief
that was not based on reason
in the first place.

 

Should we be afraid for our health
because we're fat?

Or is the "Obesity Epidemic" a Myth,
and losing weight to get "healthy" 
just another Anti-fat Biased Hype?

Our Absurd Fear of Fat
                     By Paul Campos: January 3, 2013 New York Times

ACCORDING to the United States government, nearly 7 out of 10 American adults weigh too much. (In 2010, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention categorized 74 percent of men and 65 percent of women as either overweight or obese.)

But a new meta-analysis of the relationship between weight and mortality risk, involving nearly three million subjects from more than a dozen countries, illustrates just how exaggerated and unscientific that claim is.

The meta-analysis, published this week in The Journal of the American Medical Association, reviewed data from nearly a hundred large epidemiological studies to determine the correlation between body mass and mortality risk. The results ought to stun anyone who assumes the definition of “normal” or “healthy” weight used by our public health authorities is actually supported by the medical literature.

The study, by Katherine M. Flegal and her associates at the C.D.C. and the National Institutes of Health, found that all adults categorized as overweight and most of those categorized as obese have a lower mortality risk than so-called normal-weight individuals. If the government were to redefine normal weight as one that doesn’t increase the risk of death, then about 130 million of the 165 million American adults currently categorized as overweight and obese would be re-categorized as normal weight instead.

To put some flesh on these statistical bones, the study found a 6 percent decrease in mortality risk among people classified as overweight and a 5 percent decrease in people classified as Grade 1 obese, the lowest level (most of the obese fall in this category). This means that average-height women — 5 feet 4 inches — who weigh between 108 and 145 pounds have a higher mortality risk than average-height women who weigh between 146 and 203 pounds. For average-height men — 5 feet 10 inches — those who weigh between 129 and 174 pounds have a higher mortality risk than those who weigh between 175 and 243 pounds.

Now, if we were to employ the logic of our public health authorities, who treat any correlation between weight and increased mortality risk as a good reason to encourage people to try to modify their weight, we ought to be telling the 75 million American adults currently occupying the government’s “healthy weight” category to put on some pounds, so they can move into the lower risk, higher-weight categories.

In reality, of course, it would be nonsensical to tell so-called normal-weight people to try to become heavier to lower their mortality risk. Such advice would ignore the fact that tiny variations in relative risk in observational studies provide no scientific basis for concluding either that those variations are causally related to the variable in question or that this risk would change if the variable were altered.

This is because observational studies merely record statistical correlations: we don’t know to what extent, if any, the slight decrease in mortality risk observed among people defined as overweight or moderately obese is caused by higher weight or by other factors. Similarly, we don’t know whether the small increase in mortality risk observed among very obese people is caused by their weight or by any number of other factors, including lower socioeconomic status, dieting and the weight cycling that accompanies it, social discrimination and stigma, or stress.

In other words, there is no reason to believe that the trivial variations in mortality risk observed across an enormous weight range actually have anything to do with weight or that intentional weight gain or loss would affect that risk in a predictable way.

How did we get into this absurd situation? That is a long and complex story. Over the past century, Americans have become increasingly obsessed with the supposed desirability of thinness, as thinness has become both a marker for upper-class status and a reflection of beauty ideals that bring a kind of privilege.

In addition, baselessly categorizing at least 130 million Americans — and hundreds of millions in the rest of the world — as people in need of “treatment” for their “condition” serves the economic interests of, among others, the multibillion-dollar weight-loss industry and large pharmaceutical companies, which have invested a great deal of money in winning the good will of those who will determine the regulatory fate of the next generation of diet drugs.

Anyone familiar with history will not be surprised to learn that “facts” have been enlisted before to confirm the legitimacy of a cultural obsession and to advance the economic interests of those who profit from that obsession.

Don’t expect those who have made their careers on fomenting panic to understand that our current definition of “normal weight” makes absolutely no sense.

Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and the author of “The Obesity Myth: Why America’s Obsession With Weight Is Hazardous to Your Health.” (2004)

What’s this?
… you promise I'll lose “Up to 8%" of my body weight.

"UP" to?
No, I want the promise to read lose “at least” 8% or more.

False promises, should at least be really GOOD ones,
what’s with these half-ass, psuedo promises…

If you’re going to fool me, then REALLY fool me.

There's a very common Theme here at DietHobby.

It is: 

When it comes to diets, 
I believe there is NO "one size fits all".
What works for me may not work for you.

Diets are like perfume;
you keep sniffing until
you find the one that's right for you.