OK I am one of those hundreds of thousands of women who bought Alli - not on day 1 but day -1. No I did not buy it because of the hype. I bought is because I need to lose over 45lbs. I am as my Dr. calls it obese. He recommended a pill, to help me lose weight, that would affect my sleeping patterns, might give me palpitations, make me nervous and affect me in so many ways - probably even heart attack, but would control my appetite. Then I read about Alli - side effect, if you did not eat correctly you would poop on your pants. Well guess what - it is possible psychological, because since I don't want to poop in my pants, I am careful with what I eat. I am going on to my second week on Alli - I HAVE NOT HAD ANY TREATMENT EFFECTS, and YES I have already lost 4lb. You might not see is as much but for me that is almost 10% of the weight I need to lose.

So unless you try it don't knock it.

I already stated in an earlier post that I enjoy "yanking chains," as the kids call it. So, you are incorrect--I have been more than willing to admit it. However, I haven't called anyone a dick or a troll or "journalism boy" and unlike KitchenGirl, I didn't claim that 75% of Americans can't comprehend the concept of a ratio. Furthermore, I haven't recklessly accused any other poster of being a racist or a homophobic dilettante by virtue of not agreeing with me. All that I have done is to advance the proposition, and my perspective is hardly original, that the majority of people who find themselves overweight are in that situation because they eat too much and exercise too little. Yet you, anonymous, after swimming through the posts made in response to Catherine Price's article, single me out and call me catty and smug. Bravo.

I have to tell you, you really do come off as pretty smug and catty, at least online. It has nothing to do with the content of your argument, and is all about the tone you use to express it. And I suspect you enjoy digging at people more than you're willing to admit.

who don't get it:

Caloric Food intake per day < Caloric energy expenditure per day = weight loss.

Very simple formula. Try it, rather than wolfing down that krispy kreme or binging.

You asked me about my level of education and I answered. I would hardly call that "advertising"--I would call that a reply. It's a shame that you would ask a question, received an answer and then try to play it off in such a way. I did not reveal what I studied in college in an attempt to establish myself as superior to any other posters. Indeed, there are people with law degrees that don't pass the bar, certified mechanics who are lousy at car repair, etc.

On the numbers tip, I provided you with statistics to refute your claim that severe obesity levels in this country are a relatively recent phenomenon and added that, for me, it has a lot to do with the rise of time killers (specifically the Internet) that contribute to a sedentary lifestyle, which, in turn, doesn't burn many calories and, by extension, leads to weight gain. You rejected my thesis, which you are entitled to do. However, there have been plenty of numbers in my posts. I wish I could say the same about yours.

Originally, I enjoyed our exchange, but now you have reduced your input to just a bunch of carping. I am a little disappointed in you but I am sure you are used to hearing that from people.

the fatties merely because you have a weight problem. It is so funny that whenever the wingnut militant feminists get the panties in a bunch they yell "Rapist!", "Bigot!", "Racist!" etc on any issue where positions are based upon empirical, statistical, proveable data and they don't like it. Most people are fat by choice and bad health, eating & exercise habits. It is nothing to do with their thyroid, their metabolism, etc. It has to do with simple math. When a person becomes obese it actually takes less food to sustain their jabba like shape. The fact that they put themselves in that position is disgusting. PS: The Duke Lacrosse players are innocent and did nothing wrong and we need to build a border fence and enforce existing immigration law rather than "reform" it. Those are a couple of other unpopular positions.

Oh, and I do feel gays have the right to be as miserable as heterosexuals so let them get married. I support the right to choose (in re abortion). I didn't vote for GW. There, so everyone who disagrees with your stupid positions is not a neocon, a racist, a bigot, a mysognist. Get the fuck over it and grow up.

KitchenGirl, in an earlier post you misspelled "acknowledge." In later posts you misspelled "interesting" and "therein" and wrote "probram" when you probably meant "program"--but I let it go. I use "result" when I meant "resort" and you point that out as a way to insult me (in the same post, inexplicably, where you misspell "marvelously" and "ownership"). What a stupid "cunt" you are.

Hahaha! Touche, although I'm not the one advertising a writing degree online (at least not in this thread, I probably posted my degree elsewhere!)

You still haven't provided evidence to support your thesis, though. Better luck next time.

I never claimed that anyone's mother is inadequate, Laurel962. I can only speak for myself. I simply said that my mom is a wonderful mom and that one of the many things that she did well for her kids was to teach us how to eat responsibly and take care of our bodies. I would hope that everyone loves their mom.

As far as sitting in front of the computer is concerned, I only suggested that someone with Internet access and a weight problem and would like to do something about it could maybe make better use of their time by logging off once in a while and exercising. I don't have a weight problem.

Regarding your comment on "bariatrics"--the researchers you mentioned have only failed to find a way to control weight without the traditional remedy of a sensible diet and exercise. It works for me. I didn't invent the concept. I merely follow it.

I never said "eating a lot lowers your metabolism but that restrictive eating will raise it." I have heard that heavy meals slow the metabolism while eating smaller meals more frequently raise metabolism. If your diet consists of X number of calories, your metabolism will be better served by eating five meals over the course of the day rather than two big meals. My diet cannot be considered restrictive except that I avoid foods that are bad for you. I even said that I don't care for low-fat or diet food. I eat what I want and I want to eat food that is good for you (a baked potato rather than potato chips, as I mentioned in an earlier post as an example).

I don't spend much time in malls. However, if one observes a fat person eating high-calorie crap--and a lot of it--than one can deduce that the observed behavior contributes to their weight problem. You can make the same deduction when you see an alcoholic drinking alcohol.

Finally, Laurel962, I support gay marriage and gay adoption and I am proud to have been born in the same city as Martin Luther King, Jr.. I have to wonder what makes you so bitter. You should consider counseling.

KitchenGirl, in an earlier post you misspelled "acknowledge." In later posts you misspelled "interesting" and "therein" and wrote "probram" when you probably meant "program"--but I let it go. I use "result" when I meant "resort" and you point that out as a way to insult me (in the same post, inexplicably, where you misspell "marvelously" and "ownership"). What a stupid "cunt" you are.