<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why We&#8217;re So Damned Fat</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 04:56:28 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-117552</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:57:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-117552</guid>
		<description>My problem is the &quot;but it costs only 10% more for twice as large a portion&quot; conundrum.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My problem is the "but it costs only 10% more for twice as large a portion" conundrum.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bandit</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-117551</link>
		<dc:creator>Bandit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-117551</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m with Spencer and I&#039;m not over it - I eat food all the time so it doesn&#039;t go to waste</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I'm with Spencer and I'm not over it - I eat food all the time so it doesn't go to waste</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C.Wagener</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-117534</link>
		<dc:creator>C.Wagener</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 17:12:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-117534</guid>
		<description>Armed with a life science education that peaked with a 100 level botany class, here&#039;s my theory.  While the stomach can&#039;t count calaries, the brain can do a reasonable job of guessing unless you try to fake it out.  

A person never having artificial sweetners will associate sweetness with calories and becomes sated. If instead you consume no calorie sweeetners, the brain is tricked perhaps a few times but learns that sweetness may or may not contain calories.  Consequently, the sated feeling goes away for both real and artificial sweetners.

If you become dehydrated and guzzle a glass or two of water in front of your kitchen sink, your brain quickly tells you everything&#039;s fine, put the glass down.  The thing is, the water hasn&#039;t had time to enter your blood stream or cells.  Your still dehydrated, but your brain says you&#039;ve done what you needed to do and you soon won&#039;t be.  I think that tends to happen the same way with food.  It&#039;s not so much the volume of what&#039;s in your stomach, but the calories your brain thinks are there.

Does this sound valid to anyone?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Armed with a life science education that peaked with a 100 level botany class, here's my theory.  While the stomach can't count calaries, the brain can do a reasonable job of guessing unless you try to fake it out.  </p>
<p>A person never having artificial sweetners will associate sweetness with calories and becomes sated. If instead you consume no calorie sweeetners, the brain is tricked perhaps a few times but learns that sweetness may or may not contain calories.  Consequently, the sated feeling goes away for both real and artificial sweetners.</p>
<p>If you become dehydrated and guzzle a glass or two of water in front of your kitchen sink, your brain quickly tells you everything's fine, put the glass down.  The thing is, the water hasn't had time to enter your blood stream or cells.  Your still dehydrated, but your brain says you've done what you needed to do and you soon won't be.  I think that tends to happen the same way with food.  It's not so much the volume of what's in your stomach, but the calories your brain thinks are there.</p>
<p>Does this sound valid to anyone?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: spencer</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-117511</link>
		<dc:creator>spencer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:54:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-117511</guid>
		<description>It took me years and years to get over my mother&#039;s instructions to clean my plate and leave food on my plate without feeling guilty.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It took me years and years to get over my mother's instructions to clean my plate and leave food on my plate without feeling guilty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: spacemonkey</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-117473</link>
		<dc:creator>spacemonkey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 02:44:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-117473</guid>
		<description>Mmmmm tomato soap. 
It stains as it cleans.
It cleans as it stains.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mmmmm tomato soap.<br />
It stains as it cleans.<br />
It cleans as it stains.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hln</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-117467</link>
		<dc:creator>hln</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 01:14:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-117467</guid>
		<description>I think a lot of it is how we, as a culture, devalue meals, too.  Meals take time and thought to prepare, and there are valuable minutes/hours &quot;wasted&quot; at the breakfast, lunch, and dinner table. I&#039;m guilty of taking lunch while working at the computer and then forgetting several hours later what I actually ate (and how much).

hln</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think a lot of it is how we, as a culture, devalue meals, too.  Meals take time and thought to prepare, and there are valuable minutes/hours "wasted" at the breakfast, lunch, and dinner table. I'm guilty of taking lunch while working at the computer and then forgetting several hours later what I actually ate (and how much).</p>
<p>hln</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vnjagvet</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-117466</link>
		<dc:creator>vnjagvet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 01:07:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-117466</guid>
		<description>YAJ has the weight control thing well thought out. The body is as good a computer as there is.  If more calories go in than go out, an increase in weight is sure to follow.  Fat, lean, carbs, non-carbs, veggies, meat -- it matters not. Calories are calories.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>YAJ has the weight control thing well thought out. The body is as good a computer as there is.  If more calories go in than go out, an increase in weight is sure to follow.  Fat, lean, carbs, non-carbs, veggies, meat -- it matters not. Calories are calories.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-117459</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:52:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-117459</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;I bet your taste rankings wouldn’t match your pre-test rankings based solely on the unopened bottle.&lt;/em&gt;

I&#039;ll have to give it a whirl sometime.  Still, I often like fairly inexpensive pinor noirs (they&#039;re hard to find these days, as demand is high) and find very expensive ones dreadful (or not tasting like a pinot).  Often, a change in vintage for a wine I expect to like makes a world of difference.

Now, I doubt whether I&#039;d consistently differentiate a pinot from a shiraz, since the range of both is fairly wide, but I think I&#039;d be fairly consistent in a bimodal &quot;like&quot; versus &quot;don&#039;t like&quot; system.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>I bet your taste rankings wouldn&rsquo;t match your pre-test rankings based solely on the unopened bottle.</em></p>
<p>I'll have to give it a whirl sometime.  Still, I often like fairly inexpensive pinor noirs (they're hard to find these days, as demand is high) and find very expensive ones dreadful (or not tasting like a pinot).  Often, a change in vintage for a wine I expect to like makes a world of difference.</p>
<p>Now, I doubt whether I'd consistently differentiate a pinot from a shiraz, since the range of both is fairly wide, but I think I'd be fairly consistent in a bimodal "like" versus "don't like" system.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: yetanotherjohn</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-117450</link>
		<dc:creator>yetanotherjohn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 22:43:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-117450</guid>
		<description>I weigh myself every day as part of a routine (just before I shower). I look to be in a 10 pound range. If I am, I don&#039;t change. If I am low, I am more likely to get an after dinner dessert. If I am high, I am more likely to get myself a between meal snack. Result, I have only been out of this ten pound range once in the last two years (after a week long cruise where I wasn&#039;t weighing myself daily). 

Its like finance. Spend less than you earn and you will keep yourself out of financial troubles. If you make a million a year and are spending more than a million, it will catch up to you. If you are making 25K a year and spend less than 25K, you will keep your head above water. Likewise with food, eat as much as your body uses up. If you eat more, cut back. If you eat less, have a second helping. It really isn&#039;t rocket science, but it does take a bit of self discipline.

As far as taste, I remember a blind taste test of beers we conducted in college using 6 brands we happened to have around the apartment. The only beer that was consistently ranked was the generic beer at #6. All the rest were all over the place and no one put their favorite beer at the top. Before you pat yourself on the back to much about your discriminating palate for wine, try doing a blind taste test. Maybe you will pick each wine, but I bet you are surprised. How surprised (e.g. Merlot for Chardonnay) I&#039;m not sure, but I bet your taste rankings wouldn&#039;t match your pre-test rankings based solely on the unopened bottle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I weigh myself every day as part of a routine (just before I shower). I look to be in a 10 pound range. If I am, I don't change. If I am low, I am more likely to get an after dinner dessert. If I am high, I am more likely to get myself a between meal snack. Result, I have only been out of this ten pound range once in the last two years (after a week long cruise where I wasn't weighing myself daily). </p>
<p>Its like finance. Spend less than you earn and you will keep yourself out of financial troubles. If you make a million a year and are spending more than a million, it will catch up to you. If you are making 25K a year and spend less than 25K, you will keep your head above water. Likewise with food, eat as much as your body uses up. If you eat more, cut back. If you eat less, have a second helping. It really isn't rocket science, but it does take a bit of self discipline.</p>
<p>As far as taste, I remember a blind taste test of beers we conducted in college using 6 brands we happened to have around the apartment. The only beer that was consistently ranked was the generic beer at #6. All the rest were all over the place and no one put their favorite beer at the top. Before you pat yourself on the back to much about your discriminating palate for wine, try doing a blind taste test. Maybe you will pick each wine, but I bet you are surprised. How surprised (e.g. Merlot for Chardonnay) I'm not sure, but I bet your taste rankings wouldn't match your pre-test rankings based solely on the unopened bottle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aTypical Joe: a gay New Yorker living in the rural South</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_were_so_damned_fat/comment-page-1/#comment-122631</link>
		<dc:creator>aTypical Joe: a gay New Yorker living in the rural South</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/03/why_were_so_damned_fat/#comment-122631</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-pre%--&gt; The central idea behind libertarian paternalism is that it is often possible for decision architects to steer people toward better decisions (as judged by the decision-makers themselves, not the architects) without restricting freedom of choice.   Via James Joyner, “This is interesting stuff, which undermines the notion that people always make informed choices. Sometimes, we operate on auto-pilot.”    I hope that comment suggests some sympathy for the Libertarian Paternalism argument&lt;!--%kramer-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--%kramer-pre%--> The central idea behind libertarian paternalism is that it is often possible for decision architects to steer people toward better decisions (as judged by the decision-makers themselves, not the architects) without restricting freedom of choice.   Via James Joyner, “This is interesting stuff, which undermines the notion that people always make informed choices. Sometimes, we operate on auto-pilot.”    I hope that comment suggests some sympathy for the Libertarian Paternalism argument<!--%kramer-post%--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
