Tamsin O'Connell said:
>
> I am afraid that yes for a lot of people, it really is that simple. In a
> world where 200million people are obese, with all the consequent health
> risks that this entails, and with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle in
> the developed world, taking in any amount of essential fatty acids and
> fish oils is not going to do as much for you as adjusting one's energy
> balance: eating less or exercising more as a first step to improving
> health will do more good as a whole for individuals AND for society than
> specific dietary changes.
>

I have to disagree with Tamsin as weight isn't about calories and energy
balance; it is far more about constituents of diet. For example: In a trial
of different diets in 1932 by Drs Lyon and Dunlop in the Edinburgh Hospital,
Scotland, overweight patients on 1,000 calorie diets lost an average of 49g
a day on a high carb, low fat diet, but over 4 times that amount, 205g, on a
low-carb, high-fat diet. Kekwick and Pawan also showed that a diet high in
fats and low in carbs was better for weight loss at the Middlesex Hospital,
London, England, in 1956. Some patients on a 1,000 calorie low fat diet
composed mainly of carbs, actually put weight on, while on a 2,600 calorie,
low carb, high fat diet, the same patients lost weight.

Lyon D M, Dunlop D M. The treatment of obesity: a comparison of the effects
of diet and of thyroid extract. Quart J Med. 1932; 1: 331.
Kekwick A, Pawan G L S. Calorie intake in relation to body-weight changes in
the obese. Lancet. 1956; ii: 155.

Think about lions. How many do you see rushing all over the veldt getting
lots of exercise? They don't count calories either. Yet you will never see
an overweight lion in its natural habitat, no matter how abundant its food
supply. Why? Because they eat what is natural to them. We don't -- for we
too are a carnivorous species. And therein lies the problem.

Barry Groves, PhD
Author of "Eat Fat, Get Thin!"
http://www.second-opinions.co.uk