Clearly the current culture in the US is not healthy, but the reason for healthy scientific and rational skepticism in this case was succinctly laid out in previous comments. It seems to me a tautology to suggest to that going for a walk is less complex than purchasing a specialized device in order to to a specialized exercise in an attempt to fend off obesity (when we already know that walking alone will probably not do any such thing).

I'm much more optimistic about pharmaceutical approaches to combating the obesity epidemic at this point. The current cultural direction on this may shift at some point however.

> It seems to me a tautology to suggest to that going for a walk is less complex than purchasing a specialized device in order to to a specialized exercise in an attempt to fend off obesity (when we already know that walking alone will probably not do any such thing).

Fair point, and I do agree that pharmaceutical approaches seem more likely to reach more people affected by this problem. My broader point was that the simplistic "just be more active" seem ineffective... and in my experience in some cases even counterproductive, so providing more alternative routes to healthier lifestyles makes sense to me, as complicated as they may seem, maybe they will be more convincing/enticing than what we currently do.

The failure is a failure of adherence which is always the root issue with obesity. Walking probably actually does work well too. The relevant question is "which one are people more likely to actually do?" And this does seem promising in that regard.

Is it about obesity? The technique is about increasing oxidative capacity, which has wonderful benefits. Although it metabolizes fat, that doesn't mean it needs to lower weight to gain benefits.