Responses

PDF
Why diets fail: eating more, moving less
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]
Publication Date - String

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Philip D Welsby
    Published on:
  • Published on:
    Response

    I was disappointed by this attempt to rebut my hypothesis.

    My hypothesis was not inchoate (OED “confused or incoherent”) as they obviously understood exactly what I wished to suggest – the conventional wisdom might be wrong or at least need some modification and that Carbon dioxide excretion may play a part in weight regulation.1

    We agree that the general public and health professionals are bewildered about weight regulation. That is not a reason to stop thinking and restate conventional wisdoms.

    We agree that “the majority of people they surveyed believed that that ”fat shed during weight loss was converted to energy rather than excreted as carbon dioxide and water.” That is not a reason to stop thinking and rely upon conventional wisdoms. I recall a paper that made the point that exhaled Carbon Dioxide might be relevant to fat loss.2 Indeed most people seem to assume that weight can be lost purely by energy production “raised metabolic rates” without a net excretion of heavy atoms but this is a conventional wisdom that is only correct in nuclear reactors in which E=mc2.

    Of course self –reporting of food intake is notoriously unreliable. But do we condemn as recidivists3 all those whose weigh loss plateaus on a diet? The same paper suggested a metabolic resistance to the maintenance of a reduced body weight. I merely provided a possible mechanism for this.

    We agree that “diets only succeed when the age-old advice to eat less and mov...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.