December
2007
The Biggest Loser Sponsors
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
There are many good things that could be said about NBC’s The Biggest Loser. I can give it accolades for its goal to help people lose weight through exercise and, more importantly, by completely re-thinking their diets. And I can praise it for the inspiration it has instilled in many people around the country to follow in the footsteps of the contestants on their own weight loss journeys.
But nobody’s perfect.
Some have pointed out that the show may push the contestants to unhealthy limits. Others have noted that the show sets unrealistic expectations for your average over-weight American leading to frustration, discouragement and no weight loss at all.
I just want to point out something I find comical. The Biggest Loser finale was viewed by 8.6 million people last night and many millions more have followed the show over the past four seasons. Throughout each show they offer tips, advice and what amounts to their own version of health education. Due to its widespread popularity their advice is regarded as having some level of authority. We all know they have a business to run and that the show is first and foremost about making money, but because they offer what comes across as genuine and heart-felt health advice they should be held responsible for what they promote.
This gets me to the issue of contention I have with the show, however minor. Has anyone else noted their sponsors?
Do you think Jillian Michaels, Bob Harper, or Kim Lyons actually eat this stuff? I doubt it. Would you?
Further Reading:
Many “vices” aren’t vices at all
Whose food pyramid is it anyway?
Technorati Tags: The Biggest Loser, Jillian Michaels, Bob Harper, Kim Lyons, Nabisco, 100 Calorie Packs, Quaker Weight Control Oatmeal, Subway, Jell-O
How’s it possible to have a 100 calorie pack of chocolate chip cookies. Isn’t that like .42% of a cookie? Ah well, it would have been funny if Dominos Pizza was a sponser.
Apparently Diet Coke is not even a safer alternative to regular Coke. Studies have shown that our bodies mistake the replacement ingredient in the Diet Cola for sugar, and stores it as such. So to all of you that have been suffering through Diet Cola, Merry Christmas!
So you’re saying it’s possible to gain weight from something that has zero calories??? Hardly seems possible unless it increases your desire to eat.
@Bob Biggles: Source?
I’m a rare soda drinker, so it makes no difference to me personally…
@Kevin Burnett: It’s possible for an ingredient to have a metabolic effect; consider ephedrine or caffeine. There are certainly compounds with the opposite effect out there. I’m not so sure about this claim that the sweeteners in Diet Coke are utilized as sugars by the body, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there were other effects.
Some people have hypothesized that diet soda is that the sensation of sweetness instructs your brain to instruct your pancreas to pump out insulin. (This is just someone’s hypothesis, but truthfully I don’t remember where I read it and I don’t know if it’s ever been tested.) And although we think of insulin as the hormone that causes carbohydrate to be stored as fat, an excess of insulin can also cause triglycerides to be stored as fat, too. (This much is standard biochemistry you can find in any biochemistry textbook.) So, if the hypothesis is correct, that artificial sweeteners can cause an insulin release, it would mean that this would cause your body to store fat. But it’s not that artificial sweeteners are utilized or stored as fat like sugar, but that they promote the storage of other nutrients as fat.
My husband has, lately, decided that he might cut back on sugar in his diet. But he said, “I can’t bring myself to drink diet soda.” I told him, “You know, you could just switch to water or unsweetened tea.”