Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss--And the Myths and Realities of Dieting by Gina Kolata

Sep 19, 2007 Sariah rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: science

First off, this is not a diet book and offers no advice on how to loose weight. Instead it is an investigation into the science of weight loss, or as Kolata describes:

It is about the nature of the current fixation with obesity, where it came from, and why it persists. It is about personal obsession and social obsession with body weight. And it is, in the end, about obesity—a scientific and social phenomenon that has defined our time, made some rich and others miserable, led to the elation of dis...more First off, this is not a diet book and offers no advice on how to loose weight. Instead it is an investigation into the science of weight loss, or as Kolata describes:

It is about the nature of the current fixation with obesity, where it came from, and why it persists. It is about personal obsession and social obsession with body weight. And it is, in the end, about obesity—a scientific and social phenomenon that has defined our time, made some rich and others miserable, led to the elation of discover and the despair of dashed hopes when easy answers did not arise. (p.7)

Fairly ambitious, and for the most part Kolata delivers. She begins by describing a study into weight loss at the University of Pennsylvania, and introduces some of the 360 obese subjects recruited to participate. The study will take two years and will compare two different diets to determine if one diet is better than another. The diets to be studied are the Atkins diet vs. the LEARN diet (which is basically a low-calorie diet). The book is divided into 8 chapters, and in between each chapter is an update of the Penn study culminating in the end of the two-year study.

One of Kolata’s most interesting chapters is a history of dieting in America from the early 1800s to the present. She explains that practically every diet on the market today is just an updated version of a diet that has existed since the 19th century; this includes the Atkins diet whose early incarnation was known as “banting.” There was also a 19th century version of the Slim Fast Diet, although back then they left potassium out of the diet drink leading to the death of more than a couple people.

Kolata also devotes a chapter to how the perception of fat has altered over the years. In the late 1800s/early 1900s the performer Lillian Russell was described as the “airy, fairy Lillian, the American Beauty (p.33),” while weighing in at 200 pounds. Societies standards shifted and today the standard of beauty is for much thinner women. But Kolata asks, how realistic are those standards? As an example she uses Jennifer Aniston, who at 5 feet 5 inches and weighing 110 pounds has a body mass index of 18.3, “making her officially underweight and so thin that less than 3.5 percent of American women meet the standard (p.65).”

Kolata’s chapter on the scientific research that has been conducted on obesity is fascinating (even if I had to read a couple paragraphs more than once to fully comprehend what she was describing). Kolata describes research done into leptin’s role in appetite; and how leptin treatment has had success in treating some morbidly obese children whose bodies do not produce leptin.

This is a well researched book, and Kolata discusses many important issues, such as how a persons income affects their diet and thus their weight (one of the few studies into obesity I’ve read that have actually mentioned this); the many various reason why people who loose weight almost always regain some if not all of it; and the impact of discrimination against obese people.

One of the few criticisms I have is that Kolata never defines what she means by the terms “overweight” “obese” and “morbidly obese.” And almost everyone has their own idea about what these words mean. When I hear the term overweight I’m thinking 20-50 pounds over the recommend weight for a certain height; when hearing obese I’m thinking anywhere from 60-150 pounds; and when I hear morbidly obese I think of the people who can’t get out of bed because of excess body fat. Without Kolata explaining what she means by these terms I was forced to wonder if I was accurately understand the information she was relating.

I would recommend this book for anyone who has ever tried to loose weight, has ever thought about loosing weight, or who has ever offered up a comment on someone else’s weight.

(less)

like 10 likes · see review

Sep 15, 2007 Erin rated it 4 of 5 stars

Kolota, a science writer for the NYT, confirms what I always suspected, that fat people aren't fat because they have no willpower or because they are somehow morally inferior to skinny people. They are fat because their weight, like their height, is genetically predetermined. The author follows a research group for two years who are ostensibly comparing an Atkins-type diet to another group with the calorie-counting diet. Both groups get support groups and counseling and the end result is the sam...more

like 11 likes · see review

Mar 02, 2009 Skylar Burris rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: sociology, health

Abandon hope, all ye dieters who crack the cover of this book. If you have an arminian bone in your body, this book may well depress you. The gist of it is: if you are overweight or obese, you will always be overweight or obese; no matter how hard you struggle, and no matter how successfully you diet over the short term, you will always revert to being fat. It’s no use trying. Your weight is predestined. And the rest of the world will probably never accept that and will always think of you as a...more Abandon hope, all ye dieters who crack the cover of this book. If you have an arminian bone in your body, this book may well depress you. The gist of it is: if you are overweight or obese, you will always be overweight or obese; no matter how hard you struggle, and no matter how successfully you diet over the short term, you will always revert to being fat. It’s no use trying. Your weight is predestined. And the rest of the world will probably never accept that and will always think of you as a lazy slob. Cheery, no?

I give this book three stars because it really was a fascinating history of dieting, of the changing standards of “ideal” weight, and of recent medical discoveries in the field of obesity. I also liked it because it leveled a blow at the "do something" mentality of Americans when it comes to fashionable crises, reminding us that just because chicken little is screaming for a multi-million dollar grant, the sky is not therefore necessarily falling. However, I did find the book too fatalistic and ultimately too simplistic in its biology-only explanation for obesity.

It’s not because I am a naturally thin person that I say this; I have struggled with my weight all my life, and I have been my supposedly “ideal” weight for only one year of my life, when I maintained a strict, 1,300-calorie-a-day diet and did 20 minutes of aerobic exercise daily without alteration. Once I stopped the exercise and diet, of course, I gradually gained it all back. But there WAS a choice involved. I chose to lose the weight, and I chose to stop living like a soldier on rations. My brother and I are both genetically inclined to be overweight, but I am borderline obese and he is not. Why? Because he has consistently exercised for several hours a week every week of every year of his life, and I haven’t. Quite simple, really. But the author speaks as though behavior has nothing AT ALL to do with weight. I certainly don’t assume every obese person I see is a lazy slob, but nor do I, as the author seems to do, assume that every normal-weight person I see is simply a lucky dog who hit the biological jackpot. In fact, most normal weight people I know work hard to maintain a normal weight; they exercise much more often than I do, they eschew sweets much more often than I do, and when they see themselves creeping up out of the “normal” range, they go on a diet until they are back down in the normal range. For these people, consistent, prolonged exercise has become a way of life. Periodically limiting what they eat has become a way of life.

Diets and exercise, the author says, don’t “work” to enable people to lose weight and keep it off. To prove that they don’t “work,” she relates case after case in which a person lost weight and maintained a lower weight on a diet, but then gained it back after he stopped sticking to the diet and started eating more or exercising less. This is a strange definition of “work.” Isn't it somewhat absurd to expect that you only need to diet once, and as soon as you reach a lower weight, you can go back to living as you lived before and yet remain at that weight? It would be rather like a student who studies for a geometry test, manages to pull his grade up from a C to a B+, stops studying, and then is frustrated and disappointed when he doesn’t get a B+ on the Trigonometry test next year. He then concludes, “Studying doesn’t work.” No, studying “works”; you just can’t stop studying after a single test. You have to study your entire academic life if you expect to continue to excel. The studying metaphor has another parallel. Just as some people are naturally smarter than others, some people are naturally thinner than others. For some, just a little effort at study can pull a grade from a B to an A+; for another, a great deal of effort may only manage to pull a D to a C. Nevertheless, that doesn’t mean “studying doesn’t work.” And it doesn’t mean the D student has no choice but to be a D student. (It does mean not everyone can be an A student, but, in our society, it isn't just in the realm of weight that we expect no one ever to be left behind. We Americans, after all, are entitled to perfection. There are no natural limitations, only inadequate programs.)

Virtually all diets work to enable a person to lose some weight (or maintain his current weight) FOR AS LONG AS that person actually sticks to the diet. The author never defines what she means by "will power" when she says lack of will power has nothing at all to do with obesity, but what is will power if not sticking to something? The problem, of course, is simply that most people, myself included, do not WANT to diet their entire lives (or, as is more fashionably said, make a "lifestyle change."). And the problem for overweight people, who are, it turns out, simply born hungrier than thinner people, is that sticking to a diet is very, very difficult, much more difficult than it is for a thin or normal weight person. You are, as I know from experience, basically in a constant state of hunger. So your choice is between (A) Always feeling hungry and never really enjoying the social function of food or (B) Being overweight or obese. Given the choice, many people choose B. It’s not a pleasant choice, but just because you don’t much like either option doesn’t mean you don’t have a choice.

Everything in this book is calculated to make the overweight or obese person throw in the towel. Not only is the gospel of doom preached (No obese person is capable of sticking to a diet for life. Not one! And loosing weight and keeping it off for two or three years is meaningless if ever you gain it back!), but the author also insists that, really, being overweight or even obese isn’t unhealthy at all. In fact, it may be healthier than being a normal weight. She cites a study where overweight people had a slightly lower mortality rate than normal weight people. Of course, this is just one study weighted against others that suggest all manner of health complications related to obesity. But those who have criticized this study (for instance, those who have pointed out that the study includes smokers, who are more likely dying early from smoking than from being a normal weight), she reasons, are just practicing “attack science” because they have a vested monetary interest in promoting the idea that obesity is unhealthy. And while I can certainly be persuaded that a few extra pounds won't hurt a person and may provide a buffer for lean times, she never really defines what she mean by "obese" or "overweight" or "very obese," and throughout the book she tends to lump together degrees of heaviness as though they were all the same level of issue (or non-issue), when in fact they are quite different things possibly with different causes and certainly with different associated risks. It's one thing to say to the woman who is 80 pounds overweight that she really needs to lose weight to improve her health and quite another to say it to the woman who is 15 pounds overweight.

I certainly do think it is time for more people to say that our ideas of “ideal weight” are ridiculously unrealistic and that not everyone can be thin. But we don't need to say that obesity is healthy or inevitable. We just need to revise how we define "ideal weight" and encourage people to be more concerned with living healthy lives, eating healthy foods, and exercising regularly than they are with the number they see on a scale. This book would not have been so overwhelmingly bleak if the author had simply taken a different track. If she had not been so fatalistic, but had said instead, “Look, some people are naturally thinner or heavier than others. If you’re overweight, you do have a limited, but not an absolute, range of control over what you weigh. You probably aren't ever going to be thin, but if you eat better and exercise more, you will be healthier and you will weigh less than you weigh at this moment. Don’t worry if you’re not your ideal weight; just try to live a fairly healthy life. Most of all, exercise. After all, physical activity is a better indicator of overall health than body size.” To return to my previous metaphor, you may not be able to ace the test, but that doesn't mean you shouldn’t study hard for it and at least improve your grade. But that’s not really what she says. What she says sounds more like, “Don’t bother trying to do anything. You’re doomed by biology and by a prejudiced society.”

I'm back to this again, but when people say that “diets don’t work” to keep weight off, it is somewhat like people saying “abstinence doesn’t work” to prevent STDs. They don’t really mean “abstinence doesn’t work.” They mean, rather, that “abstinence is hard and we can’t realistically expect people to remain abstinent for life.” Likewise, dieting is hard, only more so. I know that. But, please, can we stop pretending that people are utterly controlled by their biology? That they go through life as biological zombies guided by chemicals and never by choice or personal desire or personal priorities or even their surrounding environment? Can we stop saying that just because something is very hard to do, it doesn't "work"?

Some people do value their physical appearance more than others, just as some people value saving sex for marriage more than others. Take Kolata’s example of the puzzled dieter who doesn’t understand that, while he would never touch food that wasn’t kosher, he can’t manage just to restrict himself to the foods that are on his Atkins diet. How can this be? It never enters his mind, or Kolata’s mind, that perhaps his religion is a more serious priority for him than either his appearance or his health, that he believes in his God more than he believes in the medical opinion of his doctor. The very idea that people have different values, different priorities, and therefore different drives to work more or less for different things nowhere enters Kolata’s picture. In fact, NOTHING but biology enters her picture of why people eat as much or as little as they do—no environmental factor, no psychological factor, nothing but chemicals.

But human beings are not animals (at least not metaphysically speaking) who eat only to survive. They are complex, spiritual beings living in community with one another, motivated by a tangled web of biological, psychological, communal, and religious urges. To take all of this off the table when it comes to something like eating, which is itself very often a communal activity, is to be extremely simplistic. Well, the average rise in American weight can’t possibly have anything to do with environment, because we had McDonald’s 50 years ago. So let’s take environment off the table. It can’t possibly have anything to do with psychology, because overweight people are no more likely to be neurotic than normal-weight people, so let’s conclude that there is NO psychological element WHATSOEVER involved in eating at any time. We must just be more obese, on average, as a people, because we (we Americans, not necessarily we humans) have evolved genetically as a species over the past 50 years. Isn't that rather simplistic logic? (I do wonder why it didn’t occur to her to ask whether fat people simply have more children than skinny people. That would be a very simple biological explanation for the societal rise in obesity over the past 50 years.)

So, in the end, I’m conflicted about this book. I think someone had to say that our ideas of “ideal weight” are too low, and that the obesity industry has a vested interest in maintaining these unrealistic perceptions, and that good health has more to do with how fit you are than how thin you are, and that our country has become too obsessed with obesity as the fashionable cause di rigour. While it’s nice to hear what I’ve always suspected—that being overweight is not as deadly as the histrionics imply, and that most people who are thin are thin because they naturally tend that way—I’m not quite ready to jump on the Calvinistic bandwagon with both feet and say that nothing I do matters or that I wouldn't be better off if I at least lost 15 pounds. I’m borderline obese. This book could either make me throw in the towel in despair, or roll up my sleeves in defiance. Either way, yes, she’s right, I won’t be slim five years from now, because there's no way that I, personally, am going to stick to a 1,200 calorie diet for life or exercise six hours a week. But I might very well be on the low end of overweight, instead of on the low end of obese, and I might very well have more energy and better health, if I don't take the defeatist attitude that nothing I do matters, that I will always be obese because I happen to be right now. Kolata may be right. I may only have “some control” over a certain “range” of weight that is “20-30 pounds” above or below my natural weight. But that still means I can weigh anywhere from 105 to 165 pounds (and, as a matter of fact, I’ve hit both that low end and high end in my adult life). That still means that, depending on how I choose to live and how much effort I choose to expend and how much hunger I choose to endure, I can be slightly underweight, normal weight, overweight, or obese! Some people may not have this wide a range if they are starting from a higher biological middle point, but they probably still have a choice between being obese and overweight, or between being morbidly obese and obese. I wish Kolata had not so casually dismissed the importance of that range of limited choice. Her attitude is very negative: “You can only choose B or C, and you want A. Therefore you might as well have no choice.”
(less)

like 9 likes · see review

Sep 03, 2007 Andie rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: anyone struggling with weight, others who want to understand what others go through

As an overweight woman who most of the time still feels good about her looks and her body, this book was an affirmation and was reassuring. The author looks at research projects that have gotten little press because these study go against the notion that overweight/obesity is a character flaw and always unhealthy. The author makes a good case that we have a weight range that we are going to remain unless we do drastic things like starve or force ourselves to eat more than feels right. Overweight...more

like 2 likes · see review

Mar 23, 2009 Kate rated it 5 of 5 stars

So, apparently your body weight, or at least your body weight range, is genetically determined. But this news doesn't get out, because absolutely no one likes the idea that weight is genetic -- not the diet industry, not the health industry, not the media, and least of all dieters themselves. Genetic weight invalidates centuries of diet fads and fat obsessing, puts a whole industry out of business, and robs people who don't like their weight of the hope that their next diet will be the one to ch...more

like 4 likes · see review

Nov 27, 2008 Judith rated it 5 of 5 stars

This was written by the science editor for the New York Times, and it tells the history of dieting, including current research. It never occurred to me how much dieting research is going on, and how much of it is so highly political, involving the drug companies, governmental agencies, and the back-stabbing infighting of academics and other scientists, and lots of money. The bottom line, as I read it, is that no diet has ever worked or will ever work. Our genes pretty much define our weight and...more

like 2 likes · see review

Jan 18, 2012 Cindy Marsch rated it 2 of 5 stars

Slow-moving getting through the history of the research, and the conclusions are less than inspiring, but it's not news to me. Bottom line: good nutrition and exercise will do everyone a lot of good, but apart from heroically-sustained efforts (see justmaintaining.com ) it is pretty much impossible for the heavy to become thin and stay there. I've lost as much as 20% of my top weight and am able to sustain keeping off 15% of it over the last five years, but I keep edging back up. And I need to l...more

like 1 like · see review

Apr 22, 2008 Kit rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: sushi

Kolata sets this up wonderfully. The book moves between chapters on 'diets'or the 'science of diets' and chapters following a group of people who are participating in a two-year diet study (Atkins vs low-cal) at Penn. Readily-consumed pop nonfiction.

The history of dieting is interesting -- lots of stuff I didn't know. The pain of being 'overweight' crosses the centuries.

And then the zapper, in one of the last chapters: the studies that show not only that dieting doesn't work but that being 'ove...more

like 1 like · see review

Apr 05, 2008 Julie rated it 3 of 5 stars

This was interesting. The author is the science writer for the NY Times and I read one of her other books (Flu: The Story of the Great Influenza Pandemic of 1918 and the Search for the Virus That Caused It.) When I saw this one in my library I picked it up.

It's a factual account of the industry and science of weight loss here in the U.S. I gave it three stars instead of four only because one of the middle sections was so science-intensive that my eyes glazed over. (Sample sentence: "But PYY, the...more

like 2 likes · see review

Jul 15, 2012 Kelly Junno added it

This book is a strange mix of the illuminating and the misleading. The research is full of holes and blind spots. Based on the extensive study on two out-of-fasion and long-disproven fad diets, the low calorie diet and the high-protein diet, Kolata asserts that we should stop looking at our pandemic of obesity as caused by eating too much and start too look at biological evolutionary factors; after all, people a hundred years ago were on an average three inches shorter, so it should naturally fo...more

like 1 like · see review

Feb 20, 2008 Erica rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: nerdy-nonfiction

Not a diet book--which is why I read it. Instead, it's an amazingly well-written overview of obesity research, and how even though all solid evidence points to the fact that a) weight is mostly genetic, like height; b) no scientific study has ever been able to find a diet that actually works long-term; c) average weight in a culture increases along with life span and overall heath; and d) increased health and longevity are actually correlated with being slightly overweight, culturally we still b...more

like 1 like · see review

Feb 07, 2009 Jen rated it 4 of 5 stars

What an example of misrepresentation by cover/title! This is not a diet book or a self-help book. I never would have picked it up based on the cover.

In Rethinking Thin, Kolata weaves together the stories of a group participating in a diet comparison study (atkins v. calorie counting) with a history of popular opinion, medical research and treatment of obesity. She elegantly brings it all together at the end. The best chapters reminded me of my favorite medical histories (The Ghost Map, for examp...more

like 2 likes · see review

Jan 25, 2009 Tammy rated it 2 of 5 stars

I appreciated the basis in current scientific studies; however, I found that there was a selection bias in which studies she chose to cite. She chooses to buttress her argument that it's all genetic and that there is nothing you can do about your weight by using studies with negative results. While it is true that losing weight and keeping it off is not easy, the National Weight Control Registry has published data on successful weight loss maintainers, and shows that there IS another way.

As som...more

like 2 likes · see review

Dec 05, 2012 Jim rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: reviewed

Gina Kolata, science reporter for the New York Times, has the unusual journalistic integrity to state something that no one wants to hear: that it is almost impossible for most fat people to lose significant amounts of weight. She takes us through one specific study, and mentions scores of others, as she decimates the claims of the diet industry and so many health professionals. The hard truths she demonstrates are that the great majority of people who do lose a fair amount of weight at some poi...more

like · see review

Nov 21, 2011 Julie rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction-general

We all know the common advice for weight loss: eat less (or less of the wrong things), exercise more, exert willpower. Anyone who wants to be thin, really wants it, can be.

But what if all that advice is wrong?

Gina Kolata comes to the conclusion that a lot of the common dieting and weight loss advice is bunk. Nominally a book tracking a huge two-year study which compared the Atkins diet to a traditional low-calorie diet, every other chapter is a looks at the history or science behind losing weig...more We all know the common advice for weight loss: eat less (or less of the wrong things), exercise more, exert willpower. Anyone who wants to be thin, really wants it, can be.

But what if all that advice is wrong?

Gina Kolata comes to the conclusion that a lot of the common dieting and weight loss advice is bunk. Nominally a book tracking a huge two-year study which compared the Atkins diet to a traditional low-calorie diet, every other chapter is a looks at the history or science behind losing weight. She notes that people who go on very low-calorie diets tend to respond, physiologically and psychologically, like prisoners of war who have been starved: they can't stop thinking about food, and their bodies no longer can tell when they are sated. (Sound like anyone you know?)

Moreover, based on studies of twins and adoption, Kolata shows that heredity plays a much larger role in determining body size than environment. The children of obese parents will much more likely become obese, even if they have lived with thin adoptive parents since birth. (80% of children of two obese parents become obese, compared to 14% of children of two normal-weight parents.)

Through these and other studies, Kolata suggests that people have control over their weight, but within a surprisingly narrow range (20-30 pounds). Dip too far below that range, and you'll gain the weight back. Surprisingly, however, it's actually quite difficult to go too far above that range as well, and fairly easy to lose weight back down to it.

Kolata ends with a particularly controversial chapter, speaking about some very large-scale studies that asked whether being overweight is actually as big a health risk as the medical community (and society at large) believes. The answer was generally no. A massive (pardon the pun) study by Katherine Flegal, David Williamson, Barry Graubard, and Mitchell Gail, for example, showed that mortality rates are highest among the very thin and the very fat -- being merely "overweight" is not actually that bad. The study, and others like it, naturally produced a firestorm of controversy which has still not abated.

I can't say whether I agree with Kolata or not, having not seen most of the studies myself. I should note that over the few weeks I read this book, I actually gained a pound or two, though whether the "relax, it's not that bad" message of Rethinking Thin had anything to do with it, I can't say. (For the record, results of the study comparing the Atkins diet and the low-calorie diet had not yet been published at the time of the book's publication.)

Final verdict: thought-provoking, but doesn't actual provide any actionable items. (less)

like · see review

May 25, 2011 Lauren rated it 5 of 5 stars

In this accessible and well-written book, New York Times science reporter Gina Kolata gives a tour of the history of obesity research. She highlights contributions of major obesity researchers, and discusses the evidence for genetic, evolutionary and infectious causes of obesity. She also discusses the lack of evidence that calorie restriction leads to lasting weight loss. She basically concludes that it may not be possible to lose weight below a certain set-point, which is genetically determine...more

like 1 like · see review

Dec 26, 2009 Karin rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction, diet-nutrition, fattitude, science, dieting, borrowed-from-the-library

Fat people have a bad image. So-called normal and thin people assume that fat people are responsible for how they look, that they are lacking in will-power, that they’re lazy, smelly, stupid, and they have made a choice to *be* fat. Being fat seems to give people license to criticize and ridicule one. Gina Kolata delves a little bit deeper into the current diet research – looking at what, if any, diets really work for fat people, how genetics play into a person’s weight, and whether it’s really...more Fat people have a bad image. So-called normal and thin people assume that fat people are responsible for how they look, that they are lacking in will-power, that they’re lazy, smelly, stupid, and they have made a choice to *be* fat. Being fat seems to give people license to criticize and ridicule one. Gina Kolata delves a little bit deeper into the current diet research – looking at what, if any, diets really work for fat people, how genetics play into a person’s weight, and whether it’s really unhealthy to be overweight.

She discovers some surprising things. Fat people often do eat more than their thin counterparts, but they’re also hungrier – especially when they diet (they can’t think of anything but food, whereas naturally thin people rarely think about food). Genetics more than anything else determine what a person’s weight range will be (so environment, psychological factors are not really all that important), and maintaining a weight outside of this range requires nearly constant vigilance. There may be hope, though. Scientists have discovered a number of chemicals produced by the body that may be able to help people be slimmer. These work together to influence appetite and how (and how much) fat is deposited in the body. Finally, Kolata examines studies that indicate that being overweight might actually help one live longer.

This was a well-written inquiry into a topic that’s certainly on the minds of most Americans. We are obsessed with weight and have such unrealistic standards for thinness that our ideals are unreachable by most men and women. After having learned a bit about how our bodies regulate weight, and how much researchers know (and drug companies), I’m really surprised that no one has yet developed a drug (or drugs) to help control obesity. There must be some kind of stumbling block – they can’t produce the same chemicals/hormones easily, or there’d be a huge outcry from the dieting *industry*. People will probably continue to feel inadequate and will continue to diet regardless of these discoveries. It would be nice if everyone could focus more on being healthy and less on unattainable appearances.(less)

like 1 like · see review

Nov 30, 2009 April Hochstrasser rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is the book all dieters have been waiting for. It follows the trials of the Atkins Diet as compared with a low fat- low cal diet. And the winner is...... none. This book made it clear that all diets work in the short run, but put pounds on in the long run. The few scientific studies that have been done prove that after 2 years, results with any diet are always the same. Weight is lost the first few weeks, then gradually comes back on. The only permanent solution is a change in eating habits...more

like 2 likes · see review

Sep 08, 2009 Irene rated it 5 of 5 stars

I picked this book up at the $1 store, read it, and liked it so much I went back and bought three more copies to give away. It's a very well-written book that covers the theories and practices of dieting beginning in the 1800's and continuing through to 2007. The latest information summarizes a lot of recent scientific studies, involving genetics and brain imaging. It seems that science is slowly unravelling the complicated processes behind why we feel hungry and why we feel full. I don't want t...more

like · see review

Oct 04, 2011 Matt rated it 5 of 5 stars

Enlightening. I've lost 50 lbs twice... first time gained it all back and then some, second time I've gained about 25 back. I don't regret the weight loss experience, but I have been feeling awfully guilty since gaining back some of the second loss, especially since I had hoped it would eventually turn into a permanent loss of 100 or so pounds.

It was REALLY good to hear the honest experiences of people who have been through the same highs and lows as me. The elation of the first weeks' loss, the...more

like · see review

Feb 16, 2009 Katie rated it 3 of 5 stars

I'm not sure how I feel about this book. I was familiar with the premise from having read other sources such as the blog "Junkfood Science." Many of the studies she reviewed I had read of before from such sources. I think the message needs to be heard: that the genetic correlation with weight/body size/shape is higher than that with many other things we think of as "genetic" such as mental illness or cancer. And that most diets don't work, especially in the long term, and that by and large, fatn...more I'm not sure how I feel about this book. I was familiar with the premise from having read other sources such as the blog "Junkfood Science." Many of the studies she reviewed I had read of before from such sources. I think the message needs to be heard: that the genetic correlation with weight/body size/shape is higher than that with many other things we think of as "genetic" such as mental illness or cancer. And that most diets don't work, especially in the long term, and that by and large, fatness or thinness has nothing to do with your psychological state of mind or "self-discipline" or morals. In the current climate of hysteria about weight and obesity, that message needs to be heard. My issue with this book is how Kolata conveys the message.

The overall tone of the book is extremely glum and dreary and depressing. It doesn't have to be. We could rejoice and say "this is just one more of those things I don't have much control over, like my skin tone or height or ethnic background, and while there are sensible precautions one can take based on those factors (ie as a redhead I need to wear a hat outdoors) it's not an indictment of me as a person and I don't need to feel guilt or shame about it." But that's not the tone of the book. It hasn't moved away entirely from the paradigm of fat as failure, so when the message comes through that if you're fat, there's really not much you can do to change it no matter how you obsess over it, the tone is of despair and not relief.

There's also the issue of Kolata's science writing, which is supposed to be so excellent but left me cold in this particular book. She falls into the familiar trap of vomiting up numbers and rehashing statistics as though writing an abstract, rather than trying to help the reader stay engaged and comprehend the complexities in better detail. This was particularly true in the "Girl with No Leptin" chapter, which I confess I mostly skimmed because it was so dreary and dry to read.

I wish she had written more in this book that is like the final chapter, which systematically exposes and demolishes the current moral panic over obesity in all its shallow hypocrisy. That would have been a more compelling read. And frankly I was most disheartened and dismayed by the sections following individual dieters. All I took away from their stories (and I am not sure if this was the message Kolata meant to send) was that I'd rather die fat and happy with a cheeseburger in one hand and a vat of bacon grease in the other than become the kind of dreary, boring, self-loathing obsessive that these poor folks seemed to be, all in the pursuit of losing 20 pounds they gained right back.

I also wish she had done a little more of a strenuous job debunking the psychopathologizing of the obese. As a fat woman who has never binged nor purged, who does not have a "compulsion" to eat, and who in fact eats rather moderately, but who has been lectured time and time again about "emotional eating," I would have loved to see that hoary old myth totally demolished--as science has shown it to be a hollow misogynist fable.(less)

like 2 likes · see review

Jan 13, 2009 Rachel rated it 4 of 5 stars

Gina Kolata, a science writer for the New York Times follows a study conducted by several scientists which was conducted in order to determine which is the better weight-loss program—Atkins or low-calorie diet. Many if not all of the participants are medically obese and have succeeded to lose weight, only to gain in back, in a number of prior diet efforts. Interspersed between chronicling the current study, Gina provides a historical look at diets and a number of studies that have not received f...more Gina Kolata, a science writer for the New York Times follows a study conducted by several scientists which was conducted in order to determine which is the better weight-loss program—Atkins or low-calorie diet. Many if not all of the participants are medically obese and have succeeded to lose weight, only to gain in back, in a number of prior diet efforts. Interspersed between chronicling the current study, Gina provides a historical look at diets and a number of studies that have not received full media attention. What do these studies reveal? Weight is very much determined by genes. And although most people’s weight can fluctuate plus or minus twenty or so pounds, outside of that, it is pretty much out of their control. The reason so many lose weight only to gain it back is that their bodies are wired a certain way due to varying factors, and will not allow them to go much beyond their normal range. The reason the media and health interest groups play these studies down is obvious. And it’s a shame more attention is not given to them because the discussed studies were very insightful and do give you tremendous sympathy for those that must constantly battle weight. However, I do find fault with Gina’s very bleak outlook on this. And it’s not all because her view is so bleak. It’s because of those few that she mentions do actually keep the weight loss off (oh, but she doesn’t go into these cases, naturally). It’s because I can’t say “well, if my weight is predetermined, I might as well eat McDonalds and Cinnabons every night and it’s won’t affect me at all, it’ll be the same if I go to the gym or not.” Oh, and she hastily mentions that obesity doesn’t have any proven ill effects when it comes to health because all of those studies are flawed. I doubt that. Yes, genes play a large role in weight, perhaps more than we want to be the case, but for many, the individual still has some control. Can anyone who works hard enough be skinny? No. But can a lifetime commitment to a healthy diet and exercise improve one’s health, if not one’s weight? Yes, Gina, I would argue it can.(less)

like · see review

Jul 27, 2010 Marie rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction

Rethinking Thin is not a diet book, despite the title. Gina Kolata is a science writer for the New York Times, and she set out to study the science and history of dieting.

She follows a group of dieters who were recruited for a research study by three universities. The study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the Atkins diet to a low-fat diet.

Kolata intersperses chapters containing anecdotes of the dieters' experience with reports of previous dieting studies and the history of diets through th...more

like 2 likes · see review

Feb 24, 2009 Ms. Phinnia rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: books-2009

Lots of history on various diets through out the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries (this whole high protein/low protein/calorie counting dance we've got going on has been popular for a LONG time, and there were quaint idiotic trends, like drinking a cup of vinegar before every meal.) Excellent historical section, with emphasis given that the Gibson Girl and the Flapper "types" were based on DRAWINGS, not on real people. Gives lots of evidence that diets do NOT work (following a group of study partic...more

like 1 like · see review

Aug 15, 2011 Joyce rated it 2 of 5 stars

The most depressing book I've ever read! Bottom line to me: Give up trying to lose weight, because you'll just gain it back. (WHY should that be a surprise to me? It's MY LIFE!!) Duh. The same day I got this book, I also got "The last diet I will try....." book. Again. I exercise, I eat healthy foods. I've tried plenty of diets and lost 10, 20, 40 pounds...over and over.
Quote from book:
'In the end, though, the lesson is, once again, that no matter what the diet and no matter how hard they try...more

like · see review

Nov 19, 2009 Mdraeger rated it 3 of 5 stars

This is a very interesting book, but not necessarily because of it's ostensible thesis - reporting on a two year study of Atkins vs. low fat/low cal diets. What was far more interesting was the history of obesity research that filled the gaps between reporting on the study participants progress. There were big gaps I would have like to see addressed (such as the weight loss success of people who didn't diet per se as just "ate less and moved more")

My only real beef with the book is that toward...more

like · see review

Oct 20, 2009 Mary rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Everybody who worries about their weight or makes jokes about fat people

Shelves: nonfiction

Man, I feel like such a chump. I've been swallowing the line on dieting for years without question, and this book really blows it up. The author reviews the past several decades of research on obesity and dieting and lets us in on the results -- diets don't work and your weight in genetically predetermined. You heard me. All that fat shaming and blathering about lack of personal responsibility that is done by public health folks, diet gurus, and Dr. Phil? Not relevant. The reason the vast majori...more

like 1 like · see review

Oct 18, 2010 Suzanne rated it 4 of 5 stars

Recommended to Suzanne by: Cincinnati Public Library

Shelves: non-fiction, weight-body-image

In a word, depressing. Not the writing, the message. Actually the writing is superb. The research is remarkably well done with a thorough history of dieting and body image starting the book. The key researchers in the obesity field were given ample space and an understandable explanation of the reserach was presented.

I very much liked the 2 year following of individulas going through a weight loss study. The dieters added a genuine perspective to the science being discussed.

I was a tiny bit dis...more

like · see review

Dec 22, 2010 Mark rated it 4 of 5 stars

This book is much less angry and lyrical than Paul Campos' The Obesity Myth, but it is just as powerful, partly because it takes the reader by surprise. Even the title, "Rethinking Thin," seems designed to lull the complacent who are going to be confronted with the need to rethink fat. And, it saves its best ammo for the end. Not only is weight loss rarely possible in the way it is advertised, not only are the causes unknown, but the best evidence is that heftier people are healthier than the sk...more This book is much less angry and lyrical than Paul Campos' The Obesity Myth, but it is just as powerful, partly because it takes the reader by surprise. Even the title, "Rethinking Thin," seems designed to lull the complacent who are going to be confronted with the need to rethink fat. And, it saves its best ammo for the end. Not only is weight loss rarely possible in the way it is advertised, not only are the causes unknown, but the best evidence is that heftier people are healthier than the skinny. The mortality rates are U shaped with overweight in the middle of the valley and the thin and extreme obese at the higher ends (where a rise indicates greater mortality).

This book is never boring, but if you at all know that you like human interest stories, you can be confident that you will find Kolata's writing fascinating. Also, this is the first book I've found that gives some historical/cultural information about when and how views of fat changed in American life. It is all fascinating.

I didn't give this book five stars because I wasn't happy with some aspects of Kolata's happy ending. I think the people who learned to exercise more, eat more healthy, snack less between meals, and accept the results without trying to become skinny, were inspiring. But in that mix Kolata included people obsessed with calorie counts who instinctively interpreted food as caloric numbers. I don't think that is mentally healthy. (I'd only take off a fraction of a star if that were possible.)

Kolata's book is short, engaging, and disruptive to the superstitious world in which she lives. One of her stories involved a statistician in the 1800s who discovered that bleeding did not help the diseases it was supposed to help. He immediately reported that this proved people weren't being bled soon enough or as much as they needed to be. That is the world we live in today regarding health and fat. All the best evidence is that we are actually hurting ourselves but the thin-regime will never give up the political and economic power they have.

Take it away from them.(less)

like 1 like · see review

Jan 16, 2013 Jennifer rated it 4 of 5 stars

So this is pretty much that Tara Parker-Pope longread published last year in the NYT Magazine in macro form (not surprising because they're probably buds in real life), but what I found most provocative in this book is the disclosure she managed to obtain from the dieters in the Penn study. Many of them opened a very intimate part of themselves to her and as a result, it humanized the chapters about ob/db/leptin/NPY/etc., which were in themselves fascinating but eerily people-less. (Also: not re...more

like 1 like · see review

title link	preview: Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss--And the Myths and Realities of Dieting
avg rating	preview: Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss--And the Myths and Realities of Dieting Goodreads rating: 3.78 (576 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/315487.Rethinking_Thin?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1312010613l/315487.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/315487.Rethinking_Thin?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss--And the Myths and Realities of Dieting by Gina Kolata[/url]

Rethinking Thin: The New Science of Weight Loss--And the Myths and Realities of Dieting

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (10)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Gina Kolata

Books by Gina Kolata

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Rethinking Thin: ...