Reply #82: Here's the problem with the "don't drink" argument:

[distantearlywarning]

As the grandchild of alcoholics, I can choose to avoid alcohol on a regular basis (and I do). I do not need alcohol to survive, nor does my body prompt me to drink or make me feel sick if I don't. Now, if I were an alcoholic, that might be true, but I never drank enough to have that be a problem.

On the other hand, I was born with the strong biological urge to eat, like every other human on this planet. From day one, my body made me feel sick and weak if I went more than 6-8 hours without consuming food. If I give up food entirely I die. It is not possible for me to avoid eating, just like everyone else out there.

Instead, to compensate for a slow metabolism, according to you I must simply eat portions and food appropriate for that metabolism. In other words, eat a little, while other, luckier people all around me are eating a lot.

How well do you think an alcoholic would survive with that advice - a real alcoholic who has a strong biological urge to drink? You tell them, you have to go into the bar every single day 3 times a day, and sit next to people having 18 drinks at a time, and you must only have 1. Because that is your lot in life, and if you fail to have the willpower to do that, we will all judge you and stigmatize you and say that you are a worthless lazy person. And no, you can't just not drink at all, you have to drink but only have 1 drink every time. Good luck (sucker)!

Because that's what it's like for someone with a slow metabolism. They have to eat 1200 calories a day (which believe me, for them doesn't feel any less like starvation than it would for a person with a faster metabolism), while simultaneously overcoming both social pressure to eat more and their body's own biological pressure to keep from starving. Some people can do it. Most people can't. And that's why most dieters eventually fail. Most of us are not biologically built to have the willpower to starve ourselves forever, and for good reason. For most of human history, it was a bonus to have a metabolism that was extremely efficient at turning food into fat, and it wasn't beneficial at all to be the sort of person who could deliberately starve themselves without suffering major consequences.

I used to be a smoker, and 7 years ago I quit for good after several failed attempts. Some people say that addiction to nicotine is worse than addiction to heroin. But I have to say, I could quit smoking 100 times for every pound that I have ever lost. And the reason is because I was able to quit smoking cold turkey. After the first month or so, the cravings were mainly psychological, so I was able to get through it. If I had to quit smoking the way people diet in this country I'd probably be up to 3 packs a day at this point - still having a strong biological urge to smoke every 4-5 hours, and being forced to smoke, but only allowed one cigarette, or half a cigarette, and feeling intensely guilty and worthless every time I took a drag. That would never, ever work for me. But that's what dieting is like.