Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Glass Could Be the Virtual Dieting Pill of the Future

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the what-you-see-is-not-what-you-get dept.

Displays 159

MrSeb writes "In a year or two, augmented reality (AR) headsets such as Google Glass may double up as a virtual dieting pill. New research from the University of Tokyo shows that a very simple AR trick can reduce the amount that you eat by 10% — and yes, the same trick, used in the inverse, can be used to increase food consumption by 15%, too. The AR trick is very simple: By donning the glasses, the University of Tokyo's special software 'seamlessly' scales up the size of your food. You pick up an Oreo cookie, and then the software automatically scales it up to 1.5 times its natural size. Using a deformation algorithm, the person's hand is manipulated so that the giant Oreo appears (somewhat) natural. In testing, this simple trick was enough to reduce the amount of food eaten by 10%. The inverse is also true: shrinking the Oreo down to two-thirds its natural size increased food consumption by 15%. This new research dovetails neatly with an area of nutritional science that has received a lot of attention in the United States of Obesity recently: That the size of the serving/plate/cup/receptacle directly affects your intake. The fact is, there's a lot more to dieting than simply reducing your calorific intake and exercising regularly. Your state of mind as you sit down to eat, and your perception of what you're eating, are just as important — which is exciting news, because both of those factors can be hacked."

cancel ×

159 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I never thought I'd see the day (5, Funny)

Ukab the Great (87152) | about a year ago | (#42047587)

Where Google would be peddling pills that increase size.

Re:I never thought I'd see the day (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 2 years ago | (#42049225)

Where Google would be peddling pills that increase size.

Warning: doesn't matter it looks great if it does/feels like nothing.

Ha ha... (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#42047597)

It's funny because we believe in "free will" and yet all it takes is a dash of photoshop to make us feel full faster or more slowly. Next up! Humans are a 'blank slate' and behavior is socially determined and has no genetic component!

(In other matters, how long before the malware attached to diet pill spam will start manipulating our perceptions in order to fatten us up and increase demand?)

Re:Ha ha... (5, Interesting)

somersault (912633) | about a year ago | (#42047895)

I don't know about others, but I always decide what I'm going to eat beforehand. Then I always finish what's on my plate. Maybe a couple of times a year if I'm feeling ill or something, I will take a break and finish my food later.

The last couple of nights I've had 14" stuffed crust plain pizza with extra meat toppings that I added myself. I'm 6'1" and 168lbs (185cm, 76kg). I get regular light to moderate exercise, and eat whatever I want. The key being that I don't want to eat sugary snacks and drinks. I actually find it hard to keep my weight on unless I eat a lot - whereas when I was eating donuts and drinking fizzy pop type drinks every day, I was slowly gaining weight.

Re:Ha ha... (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about a year ago | (#42048569)

IOW, you're a natural ectomorph. Nothing wrong with that, but obesity isn't your issue. You're therefore not really the target market.

Re:Ha ha... (1)

somersault (912633) | about a year ago | (#42048947)

I would definitely be heading towards obese if I hadn't changed how I eat. My dad was always in good shape in his 20s, but got up to 266lbs during his 30s when he started studying Computer Science. He died in his early 40s. My brother got close to that weight too, but started changing his eating habits. One of my sisters is getting pretty fat. The other is no supermodel, but is a bit more careful. I was 189lbs before I realised I was getting out of shape.

There are definitely different body types out there, but to get truly obese, you have to be eating serious amounts of crap food, and to keep eating it even after you notice that you're putting on weight.

Re:Ha ha... (1)

JoosepN (1847126) | about a year ago | (#42049063)

Same here, and I hate when people say that I am lucky (that I get to eat whatever I want) because I have to eat a lot all the time to be in normal weight even with low to moderate exercise. (or EVEN no exercise)

Even if the food tastes good, it still feels like a chore in the end :p

Re:Ha ha... (1)

Ravaldy (2621787) | about 2 years ago | (#42049699)

How old are you? I'm assuming less than 35. Wait until you get there. I'm 6' 4" and was 170 for as long as I could remember no matter what I consummed. Yeah, I was a tall skinny geek. Now I play intensive sports 3 times a week and I'm 220 and it's a good weight for me. If I don't control my food intake (quantity and quality) then I go up to 235 fairly quickly.

Re:Ha ha... (1)

jxander (2605655) | about 2 years ago | (#42049751)

I'm much the same. Just turned 31. 6'2" 172 lbs (188cm and 78kg).

The only time I started to get a bit chubby was around 7-8 years ago, when I developed a taste for Pepsi (I blame my GF at the time). Drank 2 or 3 cans a day, plus a big glass with dinner. Ballooned up to just over 200 pounds in about 6 months. Swore off the soda, switched to unsweetened teas, fruit juice on occasion, and a ton of water (plus beer, and bourbon or scotch). All the while my food and exercise remained relatively constant. Took over year for the extra pounds to fall off ... but the cause and effect were clear as day in my mind.

Re:Ha ha... (1)

metlin (258108) | about 2 years ago | (#42050197)

The key to staying in shape is basically calories in vs. calories out. No matter what people's excuse, you cannot violate the laws of thermodynamics. Your body isn't going to magically add "fat" from the air.

I eat a lot. However, I monitor whatever I eat very closely -- tracking every morsel and every calorie (I personally use LiveStrong MyPlate, but MyFitnessPal is also good). As long as I am within my calorie intake on a weekly basis and hit macros (ratio of protein, fat, and carbs), I am happy.

I also work out regularly -- on average, lift 3 days a week and do some kind of cardio the 3 days a week (running, rowing, climbing etc). If I eat more, I burn more. If I eat less, well, I make it a point to eat more.

My body fat percentage fluctuates, anywhere from 12% to 18%, depending on the time of the year and if I am trying to add muscle or cut fat. But ultimately, gaining weight comes down to eating more and losing it comes down to eating less. There's a reason people say that six pack abs are made in the kitchen.

Re:Ha ha... (2)

Hatta (162192) | about a year ago | (#42047973)

What you mean "we"? Free will is wishful thinking. There is only the laws of physics. The laws of physics are either deterministic or probabilistic(statistically deterministic). There's no room for anything to be "free", it would violate f=ma.

Re:Ha ha... (2)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about a year ago | (#42048299)

Don't confuse philosophy with physics. The latter in particular has moved somewhat beyond Newton.

Re:Ha ha... (1)

Hentes (2461350) | about a year ago | (#42048013)

This is a trick that only works once or twice. You can only fool your subconscious that long.

Re:Ha ha... (1)

rwa2 (4391) | about a year ago | (#42048055)

drat... and all this time, I thought I had high metabolism or something, but it was really just my skinny glasses :/

Well, actually, I'm myopic, so it should probably work in reverse.

I don't actually believe in dieting, I think it just triggers your body to go into anti-starvation mass-storage mode. Just eat well and exercise well and let your gut sort it out.

Re:Ha ha... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048905)

free will still wins here. most nerd don't look at their food, they are fixated on the laptop and food goes in mouth no eyes needed!

Re:Ha ha... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42050109)

What does this have to do with free will? The visual data you receive is telling you that the food you are eating is larger (than in reality). If they intercepted the sensations going into your brain from your stomach, and made it feel fuller, it would be even more convincing to you. But that would not interfere with free will either.

AWESOME (1)

Mephistophocles (930357) | about a year ago | (#42047603)

Your state of mind as you sit down to eat, and your perception of what you're eating, are just as important

Sweet. So the secret to losing weight is just to make everything you pick up look like a giant dog turd...

Re:AWESOME (2)

Teppy (105859) | about a year ago | (#42047699)

Actually, that's more or less true - a number of studies [getbetterhealth.com] have found that blue (color of food, color of room, etc.) suppresses appetite. Some molds are blue, so it's plausible that there's an evolutionary advantage to being disgusted by blue food.

Re:AWESOME (1)

miltonw (892065) | about a year ago | (#42047843)

So... make everything you pick up to eat look like a giant blue dog turd???

brackets, dude (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42049079)

Blue dogs still do brown turds.

Lending credence to the old saying... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047617)

"My eyes were bigger than my stomach"

Fatty fatty 2 by 4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047625)

But how will the Earth cope with the loss of billions of pounds of fat shed from the asses of all the obese 'Murkans?

How about (1)

geekoid (135745) | about a year ago | (#42047631)

Just display calories, equivalent distant need to run to burn calories, and total calorie for the day?
Ore:
100 calories.
Walk 1 mile
800 calories daily total.

Or have it tell the bank to not allow any more prepackaged food purchase for the day? In fact, you could have it only allow food purchases during certain time.
That could be a great diet aid.

Just enough of a road block to make getting food for snacking a pain in the ass to get.

Probably not as good as the mechanism in TFA (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about a year ago | (#42047847)

Just display calories, equivalent distant need to run to burn calories, and total calorie for the day?

I suspect it wouldn't work as well as what is being discussed here because it attempts to operate on a rational level, and eating decisions are usually not reasoned, and rational feedback often is not as effective as mechanisms that hook into visceral, subconscious responses.

Though, of course, if you know of research that shows that that kind of approach works as well as the research shown here, great, please post it.

Or have it tell the bank to not allow any more prepackaged food purchase for the day? In fact, you could have it only allow food purchases during certain time. That could be a great diet aid.

Well, it would be a useful diet aid if there was a necessary close relationship between time of purchase and time of consumption of prepackaged food, and if you couldn't purchase prepackaged food with cash.

Re:How about (2)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#42047877)

Just display calories, equivalent distant need to run to burn calories, and total calorie for the day?
Ore:
100 calories.
Walk 1 mile
800 calories daily total.

What do you mean? Copper ore? Tin ore? Iron ore?

Re:How about (1)

kurzweilfreak (829276) | about a year ago | (#42048971)

Redstone ore, duh. It's the only one that provides energy.

Re:How about (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 2 years ago | (#42049119)

ur mom.

Re:How about (1)

eugene ts wong (231154) | about a year ago | (#42048237)

Or how about making eating less appetizing, instead of relying on will power?

You write as if lack of knowledge were the problem. Can you imagine obese people walking, after reading statistics? If we put warning signs on cigarette packages, then will people stop and never start to begin with?

Re:How about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42049463)

Can you imagine obese people walking, after reading statistics?

I tried that once, I went about 15 minutes then my knees hurt and I had trouble breathing so I quit before I hurt myself.

Re:How about (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about a year ago | (#42049049)

Great, then we can have people feeling emotionally good about eating the right number of calories in chocolate cake, while still suffering from horrible nutrition related illnesses. The ELEM (Eat Less Exercise More) diet experiment has been tried. We have overwhelming evidence of it's catastrophic failure.

Do You Wear Glasses? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047669)

As a wearer of bifocals, I've seen the effects of objects being magnified and its dimensions being distorted form reality. But, I've also seen that the brain learns to compensate for this within a day or two and everything returns to normal.

I suspect that if one was to experience this distortion only when eating that it might take a while longer for the brain to compensate. But, compensate it will.

If you want to lose weight, eat less! You fat bastard!

Re:Do You Wear Glasses? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048115)

Does the brain compensate? Someone should do a study to see if near-sighted folks tend to eat more than far-sighted people.

Re:Do You Wear Glasses? (1)

Keith111 (1862190) | about a year ago | (#42048515)

It totally depends how often you wear the glasses. I wear contacts 5 days of the week and on weekends I wear glasses, but it always takes me a whole day to get accustomed to it and I'm still constantly a little dizzy while wearing them... its awful.

Re:Do You Wear Glasses? (1)

Fned (43219) | about a year ago | (#42048219)

If you want to lose weight, eat less!

Except to have the willpower to decide to eat less, you need to eat more! Oh, shit! [nytimes.com]

Re:Do You Wear Glasses? (1)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | about a year ago | (#42048809)

I'm not FAT, I'm just big-boned.

My Obesity is DRUG INDUCED, you insensitive clod!

My Obesity is due to a HORMONAL IMBALANCE, you insensitive clod.

and, for extra points....

My Obesity is a LIFESTYLE CHOICE, you politically-insensitive clod.

Re:Do You Wear Glasses? (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42049467)

When I initially read the bit "the same trick, used in the inverse, can be used to increase food consumption", I admit it got my attention. Although speaking as someone with extreme digestive problems, I seriously doubt this little visual "trick" would have any effect on me what so ever.

However your advice of "If you want to lose weight, eat less! You fat bastard!" pretty much struck a nerve.

My problem is the exact reverse, an almost total lack of any form of appetite.
I will, if I'm lucky at the best of times, feel hungry once a week. The rest of the time it feels as if I have just eaten a large meal a few moments ago, except that it lasts pretty much 24/7.

I'm 6'0, over 30, and have to fight to stay over 100lb.
For me it's a daily (sometimes bi-daily) struggle to literally force myself to eat while feeling full, all the while fighting back nausea at the very thought of it.
The most I've ever weighed was 130lb while on a heavy steroid treatment for six months. Specifically Megestrol, which is generally prescribed to cancer patients in their last stages.

All too often, people such as yourself will completely dismiss any potential medical reason that affects body weight, simply because for a large number of people it is a self-induced condition.
I however can't help but realize some overweight people who DO starve themselves would feel similar to me, of course in reverse.

Perhaps if you had qualified your statements, they might not be so enraging, but alas you did not. Some people quite literally can not help it, be it for physical medical reasons, or even just mental problems which I might add can feel just as real as the physical ones. All because a few people can not control themselves.
Not only would your advice simply Not Work for everyone, but in some cases could be quite damaging and unhealthy. Worse, you seem to completely dismiss away the fact the root of a single persons problem is what needs addressed, and it is not always eating unhealthy.

I'm sorry for the rant here, but it's these such attitudes that cause even further damage, not to mention the psychological abuse that results whether
you intended it or not.

Re:Do You Wear Glasses? (2)

Guru2Newbie (536637) | about 2 years ago | (#42050313)

Sounds like you should move to Colorado or Washington state [npr.org] , and take up on the now-legal pastime of vaporizing the local herb. That will definitely increase your appetite.

Re:Do You Wear Glasses? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42050351)

As a wearer of bifocals, I've seen the effects of objects being magnified and its dimensions being distorted form reality. But, I've also seen that the brain learns to compensate for this within a day or two and everything returns to normal.

I suspect that if one was to experience this distortion only when eating that it might take a while longer for the brain to compensate. But, compensate it will.

If you want to lose weight, eat less! You fat bastard!

Or tell the US companies to stop putting in so much damn sugar/corn syrup/fructose into all foods.

Corporate USA are killing their own customers.

haxxored? (1)

cultiv8 (1660093) | about a year ago | (#42047681)

because both of those factors can be hacked.

I prefer the term "augmented real-time photoshopped derivatives of life apparatuses and symbols", but I digress. Somehow I get the feeling marketing people have known how to "hack" this for years.

You didn't know? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047697)

Come one, please don't tell me you didn't know that the plate size affects the amount you are eating? I have been to countless dinners/lunches where someone would complain about the portion when the food arrived (on a large plate) and later not finish the plate because it was actually quite a lot.

Yes but the effect was negated (0)

Spy Handler (822350) | about a year ago | (#42047721)

by the act of simply wearing Google Glasses, which made social contact with females impossible, which led to lack of burned of calories while engaging in sexual intercourse.

Re:Yes but the effect was negated (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | about 2 years ago | (#42050117)

Also, of course, giant and muscular hands.

Hmm.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047729)

Challenge accepted.

best use of aug. reality, mask ugly people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047739)

in addition to adblock in real life the next thing I would program into my augmented reality is replacement of old and fat people with less visually offensive equivalents

fat people could become the michelin man and old people would become ents or something

man im looking forward to the future when I can just have an ignore button to wipe out everything that annoys me

Re:best use of aug. reality, mask ugly people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047971)

Silly nerd. That's what beer is for. At least as far as making the ugly "acceptable". If you want them to look like the Michelin Man, try acid.

Re:best use of aug. reality, mask ugly people (1)

jxander (2605655) | about 2 years ago | (#42049797)

On the down side, when you wake up the next morning without your glasses ... you'll realize that not only did you shag a humpback whale, but SHE was wearing google glasses, to make your appearance palatable too.

I wonder.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047757)

What else can it make look 15% bigger?

Uhhh.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047787)

"The fact is, there's a lot more to dieting than simply reducing your calorific intake and exercising regularly."

No, that's all there is to it.

Now, the psychological and physiological issues entailed in actually accomplishing that take a lot for some people, but reducing intake and increasing exercise is -- literally -- all there is to dieting.

Re:Uhhh.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048053)

no, it actually isn't. It's LARGELY based on your caloric intake, just like how far you can go in your car is MOSTLY a function of how much fuel you have in your tank... but it's also going to depend on the type of fuel, proper operation of your cooling system, tires, exhaust system, steering system, and other components that are required for proper function of the vehicle.

Understanding the digestive system is not as simple as "eat less, fatass." What you eat matters, and can matter a lot. Carbs versus proteins versus fats all are metabolized differently, and have different effects on your body.

Send us a postcard from Stockholm. (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 2 years ago | (#42049189)

Whatever. You wouldn't be a bleb if all you ate was lettuce.

Re:Send us a postcard from Stockholm. (1)

myowntrueself (607117) | about 2 years ago | (#42050373)

Whatever. You wouldn't be a bleb if all you ate was lettuce.

also wouldn't be a bleb if all they ate was meat and animal fat.

A better idea... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047839)

How about overlaying the food with maggots or cockroaches? Posting as a person "of size," who thinks it might actually work.

Yes same price. No not 20% less. Put on glasses! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047851)

You put on glass or you no order here scumbag.

Imagine what this can do for your sex life (1)

TheAngryMob (49125) | about a year ago | (#42047865)

Make certain things bigger and certain things smaller. Maker her a redhead. Make him Brad Pitt.

Self-delusion is a grand thing.

Re:Imagine what this can do for your sex life (1)

Hentes (2461350) | about a year ago | (#42048073)

Or spam mails that hack into your glass and make it seem like the pills have actually worked.

Re:Imagine what this can do for your sex life (1)

cfalcon (779563) | about a year ago | (#42048699)

Is it delusion to modify the appearance of something, if only the appearance is reality? If everyone wants to, of their own free will, opt into a reality where I'm model-hot, sign me up. You all have my permission to view me as something about as hot as Brad Pitt in his prime, if that technology exists and people want to use it that would be fantastic.

Linux users will love this (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047869)

It'll make the size of their boyfriends dicks bigger.

Short term gain only? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42047881)

I think the real question is, do we take visual indicators of food intake based on experience, or is it hard wired? If the former, this trick will only work for a while until your brain finally realizes "hey, I'm not getting as much food as I used to, maybe I should adjust portion sizes up", and now all of a sudden you are used to eating portions that "look" much bigger, and the gain from such trickery is lost.

Not to mention what might happen when you stop using the glasses - all of a sudden all the food appears much smaller, and you think you can eat more of it.

Nice demo (1)

Vasheron (1750022) | about a year ago | (#42047885)

Nice demo. However, based upon my experience in computer vision, moving this into the real world will be extremely challenging.

Other uses (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#42047917)

Turn all woman into anime cat-girls with D cup sizes.

Hey, the research is done in Japan, you know there's at least one guy in the research team who thought about it!

this reminds me of something (1)

jjeffries (17675) | about a year ago | (#42048001)

Yeah, I know, an animated gif is a low-brow post, but this is how I see trying to eat food that's something like an optical illusion... I can't help that it's best described visually... so here:

http://gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs7/2953647_o.gif [gifsoup.com]

Re:this reminds me of something (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42049141)

Yeah, I think this article is BS. Everyone involved knew what they were going for so they augmented their eating habits themselves.
At least I know I eat by feeling, never was any good at looking at my own mouth.

Google Glass != Full HUD (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048051)

Google Glass has a display in the top right corner of your view - the majority of your vision is unobstructed. Look at the photos of the product being worn (not the "one day" concept reel) and think about where in your view-space the screen will exist.

Something like the Oculus Rift + head mounted cameras? Sure. Google Glass in it's current form? No chance.

Just put down the damn cookies, tubby (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#42048103)

That is all.

There is no oreo... (1)

cvtan (752695) | about a year ago | (#42048111)

Spoon boy: Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Spoon boy: There is no spoon.
Neo: There is no spoon?
Spoon boy: Then you'll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

Who needs plastic surgery (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048121)

I see big tits, big tits everywhere!

Re:Who needs plastic surgery (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048327)

You work in a maternity ward?

Re:Who needs plastic surgery (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year ago | (#42049009)

No, he works for a printer that specializes in anime.

This one simple trick? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048205)

Wow, I never through all those annoying fake articles on sites talking about "This one simple trick" would show up on slashdot ;)

That won't work, but this will: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048221)

What I need is for Google Glass to administer electric shocks that cause my jaws to seize shut when it detects food approaching my mouth. Then maybe, just maybe it might work.

...but does this work over the long term? (2)

Sanians (2738917) | about a year ago | (#42048305)

One important factor to consider is that how much you eat in a single sitting is just your brain's estimate of how much food you need at the moment to maintain your metabolism. ...and, since foods vary in calorie density, it's often wrong.

It makes up for this the next day. If it consumed more energy then it thought, you'll be less hungry. If it consumed less, you'll be more hungry.

So that this might work for a single meal isn't much of a surprise. I'd expect it to fail for any long-term use, however.

To lose weight, one would do much better to simply stop eating Oreos. See Sugar: The Bitter Truth [youtube.com] for more information. After simply cutting sugar from my diet, but otherwise eating as much as I wanted to, I lost 75 pounds over 6 months. The only difficult part is the first two weeks, over which it becomes painfully obvious that sugar is addictive since, no matter how much you eat, you're still hungry until you eat something with sugar in it. Once you break that addiction, however, losing weight isn't hard at all. So just stock up on jalapeno poppers and other tasty sugar-free foods and over-consume them for the first two weeks so that you aren't tempted to consume any sugar. Once the addiction is broken, your brain will start regulating your appetite in response to your leptin levels exactly the way nature intended, and you'll just naturally no longer want to overeat.

Re:...but does this work over the long term? (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 2 years ago | (#42049289)

At the risk of making her angry - she hates being anthropomorphised [shouldn't that be feminomorphised - Ed] - nature probably did intend you to pig yourself silly whenever the opportunity arises.

This is because it's only in the last hundred years, which is a blink on her timescales, that such opportunities regularly occur.

What a load of crap. (1)

ewhenn (647989) | about a year ago | (#42048411)

The idea that, "there's a lot more to dieting than simply reducing your calorific intake and exercising regularly", is garbage. That's all that controlling your weight boils down to. You could stick me in a room full of ice cream and pizza, as long as I don't eat excess calories I won't gain weight. All I see is an article essentially shifting the blame off of the person in control with the good-ole, "it's not your fault", line. Bull-crap. If you're overweight it IS your fault.

If you lack the will power to control your eating, that's on you. Quit with the excuses, accept reality, and do something about it... Or don't... I don't have a personal stake in your health either way. You'll be the one on the autopsy slab at 55 from a heart attack, not me.

Re:What a load of crap. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048573)

Do you live in the US? You know that Obamacare thing they passed? Guess what - you have a personal stake in everyone else's health now, because you're the one who is going to be paying to treat fat assholes for their hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, depression, colon cancers, and all the other bullshit diseases these people choose to get because they are mentally incapable of making good decisions.

Re:What a load of crap. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42048919)

That's not at all how Obamacare works, and you know it. And this is coming from someone who HATES the law.

Re:What a load of crap. (1)

retchdog (1319261) | about a year ago | (#42048855)

it's not an excuse, it's more like an elaboration, or an insight into what losing weight (and maintaining a lower weight) will feel like.

there are many recent studies indicating that maintaining a lower weight after having had a higher weight is really more difficult than maintaining the same low weight without having been heavier. it seems that the body has a set point for how much to eat which is either impossible or very difficult to reset once a high caloric intake has been achieved.

assuming for the moment that these studies are correct, this isn't an excuse unless you want to interpret it as one; rather, it can be very useful to keep in mind so as to not get discouraged. more importantly, it informs you that even once you achieve the lower weight, you're not done; for many years or the rest of your life, you will still need to maintain a greater level of discipline than some others. it's unfortunate, but knowing that in advance can really only help.

Is this a temporary effect, though? (2)

brit74 (831798) | about a year ago | (#42048425)

Is this only a temporary effect, though? I could imagine that your mind creates an association between the size of the food you see and the amount of fullness you feel, but if you start changing your visual perception, I could imagine that this visual/feeling-of-fullness connection could be changed. If true, then you'd reduce your consumption for a short period of time (maybe weeks or months), but then your perception would change, you'd begin eating normally (despite the larger appearance of food), and if you stop using the glasses, maybe you'd continue eating larger portions until your mind re-adjusted itself in the reverse direction.

(A slightly bizarre effect would be that you'd become dependent on the glasses to maintain your weight. If you stop using the glasses, you'd go through a short-phase of gaining weight again.)

On an entirely unrelated note... (1)

Translation Error (1176675) | about a year ago | (#42048463)

Magnifying the food also caused the subject to miss when trying to pick it up 10% of the time.

Increase size of other things... (1)

Keith111 (1862190) | about a year ago | (#42048499)

I can think of a few things japanese programmers would probably increase the size of by a factor of 1.5 lol

Might work for some people. (1)

EmagGeek (574360) | about a year ago | (#42048507)

But, not for people who know how big a fucking Oreo is.

Re:Might work for some people. (1)

Guru2Newbie (536637) | about 2 years ago | (#42050345)

But, not for people who know how big a fucking Oreo is.

That would have to be a pretty big Oreo. And have special attachments or plug-ins.

In time people would adjust (1)

Iamthecheese (1264298) | about a year ago | (#42048561)

When that amount of food doesn't keep you from being hungry you'll adjust to eating larger-looking portions, I would bet my left testicle on it.

perceptions of size and norm (3, Insightful)

Onymous Coward (97719) | about a year ago | (#42048637)

Does the constant advertising of overly large portions of food also train us to think that such portion sizes are normal? And if we eat a healthy size instead, do we feel like we're not having enough?

Re:perceptions of size and norm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42050033)

Yes, this was already exploited to sell us larger and larger cups of liquid sugar. A lot of places I've eaten at (though I only go out 1-2 times a month) no longer have a small size of anything.

Prior Art (2)

theswimmingbird (1746180) | about a year ago | (#42048771)

Doesn't Apple already has a patent on the Reality Distortion Field?

I would say so... (1)

Press2ToContinue (2424598) | about 2 years ago | (#42049429)

I would posit that they have a defacto patent on it, since they have distorted the reality of so many people.

This is Well Known Research (1)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | about a year ago | (#42048891)

It's essentially the same concept as The Small Plate Movement [wikipedia.org] but implemented using "sufficiently advanced technology".

How long till we Adapt? (2)

zafayar (926271) | about a year ago | (#42048923)

The real question here is, how long will it be before the brain adapts to this trickery? Not like we eat less of "large" food like popcorns, we just eat a bucket full of them.

And so the cyclic action continues... (0)

MakersDirector (2767101) | about a year ago | (#42048993)

Hello.... Mcfly... E=MC^2,

This google article outlines precisely the problem with matters of scale and relationships with time...

use w=mg, e=Mc^2, and f=mg

Mass s is an independent measure of weight. Yet companies like Google arent comprehending - been here, done this, with this whole nonsense concerning 'scaling' things up or down in size, technologically..

Really, do you think you're being that brilliant, outlining the plans to construct a wheel when the people here already know how to construct it?

McFly... Err.. AI, AI, we already know this.... Try something.. ermm. new...

w (is weight in a dependent system) = mass (independent of system) * gravity ( constant of dependent system per second ) * time (in dependent system)

f (energy in dependent system) = mass ( constant of independent system ) * gravity ( variable of dependent system ) * time (in dependent system)

e (energy in newtons or joules in dependent system ) = mass * ( speed of light in dependent system * time (in dependent system)) ^ 2

So what's scale and how's it related to this? Density, what you just stated was a principle of density of matter....

Isnt this common sense by now?

Beer Glasses Ver 2.0? (1)

Eddy_D (557002) | about a year ago | (#42049013)

Kinda makes the whole "bigger oreo" example moot.

Sure its good if you're wearing the glasses (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#42049041)

What happens when you become accustomed to eating virtual super sized food and you suddenly turn it off? Do you eat more because everything is normal sized now? Probably. Don't take off your Google Glass or you'll put the pounds back on.

Does anybody else see a problem coming from this? (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#42049329)

I've heard that to combat obesity, several states in the next year are going to impose strict upper caps on junk food and sugary soft drink sizes, under the premise that if the size is smaller, then people will not eat as much, but this study appears to confirm the opposite.

VR Causes Nausea:the ultimate weightloss "pill" (1)

Press2ToContinue (2424598) | about 2 years ago | (#42049377)

WAY back in 1994 it was already known that 20 percent of VR users experience nausea after 30 minutes or more of immersion. This is due to the discrepecies between visual input and other motor-sensory input. The effect was so consistent that the surgeon general actually issued a warning about it: washingtontechnology.com/articles/1994/07/28/could-the-surgeon-general-warn-vr-is-hazardous-to-your-health.aspx?m=1 Hence, I think people will be much more likely to lose weight due to vomiting and nasea than some artifical size trick-of-the-eye.

Dubious (1)

pubwvj (1045960) | about 2 years ago | (#42049399)

I'm very dubious about this. I don't spend much time looking at my food. I'm looking at what I'm reading or my fellow diners, generally family, whom I'm conversing with. My eyes spend very little time on my food.

More effective measures (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#42049441)

I bullshit you not, there was an actual study that proved that following around fat people and yelling at them, insulting their weight, and calling them names when they ate something unhealthy, it reduced their calorie intake significantly. So it'd be pretty easy for Google glasses to do the same thing.

Re:More effective measures (1)

jxander (2605655) | about 2 years ago | (#42049847)

*Google glasses have detected pizza in view*

"Move along, fatty. That alone will add 5 pounds to your fat ass."

*Google glasses have detected an attractive member of your preferred gender*

"Remember that pizza you turned down earlier? Keep up the good work and (s)he is all yours."

Re:More effective measures (1)

VAElynx (2001046) | about 2 years ago | (#42049881)

Did it also reduce the amount of teeth in the yelling person's mouth?

Nature already invented this (1)

GODISNOWHERE (2741453) | about 2 years ago | (#42050217)

I believe that there is a long historical precedent for a "device, or mechanism" that "seamlessly scales" objects. They are called beer goggles, and can often be "rented" for free, worldwide.

A flaw in this plan... (1)

jockm (233372) | about 2 years ago | (#42050387)

Google Glass is only an overlay on your vision, not a replacement for your vision. So glass can make an overlay that looks bigger, but it won't replace and scale everything. Oh and it only works when you look up into the hud, it isn't there all the time...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?