It struck me as a story analogous to a dieter's relationship to the diet industry. Here, our poor doctor is worried about sea-sickness, and is offered a 'cure'. The cure's effectiveness depends entirely on his own ability to not be sea-sick.There was a cunning Doctor at his first going to sea, being doubtful that he should be sea sick, an old woman perceiving the same, said unto him: "Sir, I pray, be of good comfort, I will teach you a trick to avoid that doubt. Here is a fine pebble stone, if you please to accept it, take it with you, and when you are on ship board, put it in your mouth, and as long you shall keep the same in your mouth, upon my credit you shall never vomit." The Doctor believed her, and took it thankfully at her hands, and when he was at sea, he began to be sick, whereupon he presently put the stone in his mouth, & there kept it so long as he possibly could, but through his extreme sickness the stone with vomit was cast out of his mouth. Then presently he remembered how the woman had mocked him, and yet her words were true. -- George Silver's 'Paradoxes of Defence'
What about us? As dieters, we are people who recognise that our problem is the moderation of food. We come looking for a cure, and are offered plans which rely on our ability to moderate food. The result? Diets look plausible but almost always fail. They fail because they rely on the dieter's ability to moderate food. Which is the very source of the problem.
It's a terrible knot, but it does suggest what is most important in dieting. It's the innate ability to moderate eating. Just something akin to willpower, or habit, or instinctive reaction. Without that, no diet will work. With it, any diet will work.
That's what I like about no-s; the habit-forming part attempts to do what needs to be done; turning people into those who can moderate their eating.