This is all correct. I think it’s unfortunate, because Sandra really is a good editor, she’s seen a lot of good neuroscience come and go, and my best guess is that she means well. You’d think that, working at NPG for so long, she’d have taken notice of the things besides neuroscience that affect weight, like gut bacteria, the increasing prevalence of processed carbohydrates and seed oils, and the proliferation of endocrine disrupting chemicals as food additives and environmental pollutants. You’d think she’d be above the simplistic thinking that dieting is equivalent to forcing yourself to eat less of the same crap. Different foods will create different set points for body weight, and this is well-supported by science! I’d go one step further, and say that the food industry is actively muddling these issues. Their playbook of big-tobacco-style techniques is well known. They support crap science. They suppress good scientists (this week it was Nina Teicholz getting kicked off the National Food Policy Conference panel). It’s sad that someone in her position doesn’t see this, and instead goes about convincing people to accept poor health as something inevitable.