I don&#x27;t really disagree with a lot of what you are saying.  Note that you&#x27;ve backed down from low calorie diets cause metabolic damage to low calorie diets are mentally difficult to sustain which I agree with.<p>You&#x27;ve offered introducing fats as a way to stave off hunger (aka increasing satiety) but introducing fats are far from the only way to increase satiety.  Introducing fiber, for instance, is another way.<p>You also seem to be in favor of a ketogenic diet.  Let me say that I totally believe that a keto diet is a great way to eat healthily and boost compliance for some people.  Others have a really hard time tolerating large amounts of fat, and so we still need to find alternative solutions for them.<p>I agree that simply telling people to have more willpower is not the solution, but I think it&#x27;s important to recognize that the diet is not causing physiological damage to the vast majority of people (it&#x27;s not the insulin spike in and of itself that causes damage, it&#x27;s what happens after that, ie: more food intake).  So maybe we can attack this from the pure will power front and leave the diet alone (or maybe not, but let&#x27;s be deliberate about what we are doing).<p>Regardless, the UofM study is <i>heavily</i> discredited and I still maintain that it is not relevant to what you are arguing either way: the study is designed to study extreme starvation and famine.  Brink of death type stuff.  Obese people who feel hungry are not that.  We know this because if you don&#x27;t feed them they don&#x27;t die.<p>FWIW I actually have read&#x2F;watched all the links you&#x27;ve posted (I had before this conversation as they are all relatively well known), and I still hold by all my points.