Responses

It is time to bust the myth of physical inactivity and obesity: you cannot outrun a bad diet
Free
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses [https://authors.bmj.com/after-submitting/rapid-responses/].
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses [https://www.bmj.com/company/journals-terms-and-conditions-for-rapid-responses/] and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice [https://www.bmj.com/company/your-privacy/].
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

  • Published on:
    Time to bust the myth?

    Recent editorials have renewed the debate on the role of physical inactivity in the current obesity epidemic. [1, 2] Malhotra and colleagues cite an opinion piece suggesting "little change of physical activity levels in the past 30 years," while Blair counters that U.S. Dept. of Labor statistics show "mining, agriculture and agricultural jobs declined substantially."

    Both statements have some truth, but they neg...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Re:Re:12 Reasons why the "Physical Activity Myth" paper should not have been published; Request for retraction or modification based on open external peer-review
    • Paul Kelly, University Lecturer
    • Other Contributors:
      • Dr Graham Baker, Dr Chloe McAdam, Dr Karen Milton, Dr Justin Richards, Prof Marie Murphy, Prof Charlie Foster and Prof Nanette Mutrie

    In response to Professor Cooper:

    We thank Prof Cooper for his comments (15th June 2015) on our Letter to the Editor, and in particular his critique of our Point 3. We stated in our original letter that "we invite discussion and criticism of our review, and will gladly amend any sections that can...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Re:12 Reasons why the "Physical Activity Myth" paper should not have been published; Request for retraction or modification based on open external peer-review

    Kelly et al make a number of useful comments about the unfortunate editirial by Malhotra et al. However they too obscure the main point. They use a 2008 NIH document as the key reference to refute the editorialists' claim that exercise does not lead to weight loss.

    What the NIH document actually says -

    The magnitude of weight loss due to physical activity is additive to caloric restriction, but physi...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    If you can click through to this Google+ Community I hope it will help...

    It seems very clear that there are two different ways of interpreting the tile of this editorial. BJSM is grateful for the terrific engagement in this important debate - we revel in debate.

    But it's not helpful to have two soliloquys going on so I respectfully suggest there are two basic interpretations of the title.

    Please click through to this Google Community http://ow.ly/PaHbz to see the two inte...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    It is time to bust the myth of a catchy title.

    Dear Editor,

    It was disappointing to read the recent Editorial by Malhotra et al (1). Whilst the sentiment of the article was perhaps well placed, the desire for a headline grabbing title and catchphrase seems to have taken precedence over clear and honest content. A better title would have been "Three individuals are disgruntled with the marketing campaigns of soft drinks companies", but of course this would...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Response to paper: It is time to bust the myth of physical inactivity and obesity: you cannot outrun a bad diet

    Dear A Malhotra, T Noakes, and S Phinney,

    Please find below my thoughts on your paper.

    Having read your submission thoroughly I have great praise for its contents. The assessment of the food industry and advertisement is a thorough one. The food industry markets and targets in a morally reprehensible way that has no consideration for people's health at all and is a profit driven machine that needs addr...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    12 Reasons why the "Physical Activity Myth" paper should not have been published; Request for retraction or modification based on open external peer-review
    • Paul Kelly, University Lecturer
    • Other Contributors:
      • Dr Graham Baker, Dr Chloe McAdam, Dr Karen Milton, Dr Justin Richards, Prof Marie Murphy, Prof Charlie Foster and Prof Nanette Mutrie

    To The Editor,

    We read your recent editorial "It is time to bust the myth of physical inactivity and obesity: you cannot outrun a bad diet" (Br J Sports Med doi:10.1136/bjsports-2015-094911) with interest. While we agree that discussion about the prevention and treatment of obesity is vital for scientific progress, we feel this article in its current state did not make a positive contribution to ongoing scientific debate....

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    LCHF LIfestyle

    I have been on the LCHF lifestyle for about 18 months and have experienced huge improvements to my health. I am no longer obese, my blood pressure has normalised, my lipid and glucose profiles have improved, sleep apnoea has ceased, no more heartburn and energy levels have improved.

    This has all been possible using the guidance contained in the books of the two authors and also gary taubes, robert lustig and nin...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    The need to think twice before making a press release

    I write as an academic health psychologist, whose main interest is changing behaviour toward healthier living. A BBC News article entitled "Exercise 'not key to obesity fight'" drew my attention to this editorial.

    On reading the full text, I discovered that the authors were mainly writing about the causes of obesity, rather than about change. No doubt the one controversial statement in the editorial (unsupporte...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.