New Thread: Weight issues in psychology

[AcronymAllergy]

---

Members don't see this ad.

This is a bit off topic, but have you done bariatric surgery evals, or worked in a setting where they were done?

I'm not trying to be snarky or argumentative, but I would like to provide some information from the standpoint of someone who has worked in such a setting. Granted, this was several years ago, but I can speak to my own experience.

Gastric bypass surgery is not an "easy fix." Not by any stretch of the imagination. It requires major, lifelong modifications in eating behaviors. Any reputable surgical center provides extensive education about this (at my center, this included several months of weekly classes), and does not allow surgery to be scheduled until it is clear that the patient is willing and able to make these changes, both before and after surgery.

I have to disagree with your assumption that patients just up and decide to pursue bariatric surgery without having tried to lose weight by any other means. In my experience, this just doesn't happen - ever. The overhwhelming majority of patients seen at my center had tried every weight loss strategy imaginable, often multiple times, over the course of years or even decades. Diets, exercise programs, pills, herbal supplements, self-help books, support groups, hypnosis...you name it, they'd tried it. Did our patients sometimes benefit from some basic education about nutrition and physical activity? Yes. Were they lazy individuals who'd just never bothered to try losing weight before? No. Like I said, that just didn't happen. In fact, insurance companies generally won't approve surgery unless the patient has made serious, long-term attempts to lose weight in the past under medical supervision.

Contrary to popular belief, people do not just sit around getting fat for years under the assumption that they'll just pop into surgery when they hit a certain point.

As it likely was in your case, that was a big part of what our evals were supposed to help the physicians figure out (e.g., has this person tried other methods first, are they educated about the surgery, are they actually able to handle and adhere to the aftercare requirements, and even in some cases, are they ok with actually losing as much weight as they stand to lose, etc.). I believe our patients were actually required to go through a hospital weight management program beforehand, at least in many cases, before being considered for surgery. If it wasn't the hospital requiring it, I believe insurance companies may require something similar prior to authorizing it.

 

[paramour]

This is a bit off topic, but have you done bariatric surgery evals, or worked in a setting where they were done?

I'm not trying to be snarky or argumentative, but I would like to provide some information from the standpoint of someone who has worked in such a setting. Granted, this was several years ago, but I can speak to my own experience.

Gastric bypass surgery is not an "easy fix." Not by any stretch of the imagination. It requires major, lifelong modifications in eating behaviors. Any reputable surgical center provides extensive education about this (at my center, this included several months of weekly classes), and does not allow surgery to be scheduled until it is clear that the patient is willing and able to make these changes, both before and after surgery.

I have to disagree with your assumption that patients just up and decide to pursue bariatric surgery without having tried to lose weight by any other means. In my experience, this just doesn't happen - ever. The overhwhelming majority of patients seen at my center had tried every weight loss strategy imaginable, often multiple times, over the course of years or even decades. Diets, exercise programs, pills, herbal supplements, self-help books, support groups, hypnosis...you name it, they'd tried it. Did our patients sometimes benefit from some basic education about nutrition and physical activity? Yes. Were they lazy individuals who'd just never bothered to try losing weight before? No. Like I said, that just didn't happen. In fact, insurance companies generally won't approve surgery unless the patient has made serious, long-term attempts to lose weight in the past under medical supervision.

Contrary to popular belief, people do not just sit around getting fat for years under the assumption that they'll just pop into surgery when they hit a certain point.

I don't think the procedure is an easy fix at all, and I do believe that there are people who benefit immensely from the procedure. However, I tell you that there are people exactly as I described. I have a recent client exactly as described who's complaining up a storm right this moment because they're required to go through an evaluation at all. Upon some initial concerns, the client was called back for an additional session. The client adamantly refused. The client was informed that they could go elsewhere as we could not make a recommendation without complete information. The client eventually returned ... complaining the entire time. And I am not exaggerating when I say there has been absolutely no motivation on this individual's part prior to going to their surgeon to request the procedure. They want an easy fix and "then maybe I'll get the motivation to change my life."

 

[paramour]

As it likely was in your case, that was a big part of what our evals were supposed to help the physicians figure out (e.g., has this person tried other methods first, are they educated about the surgery, are they actually able to handle and adhere to the aftercare requirements, and even in some cases, are they ok with actually losing as much weight as they stand to lose, etc.). I believe our patients were actually required to go through a hospital weight management program beforehand, at least in many cases, before being considered for surgery. If it wasn't the hospital requiring it, I believe insurance companies may require something similar prior to authorizing it.

I've also worked for an insurance company in the past that required evals prior to authorizing these procedures. As mentioned, patients had to be 'x' % overweight and had to have tried umpteen million things unsuccessfully to lose weight before they'd be considered. We would receive calls from folks who had done slim to nothing... or were only a few lbs overweight... or, again, considered it an easy fix... but most docs would do a pretty good job of screening them out. 👍

Regardless of whether people believe these types of folks exist, they're unfortunately out there. 👎

 

[SingingCow]

I don't think the procedure is an easy fix at all, and I do believe that there are people who benefit immensely from the procedure. However, I tell you that there are people exactly as I described. I have a recent client exactly as described who's complaining up a storm right this moment because they're required to go through an evaluation at all. Upon some initial concerns, the client was called back for an additional session. The client adamantly refused. The client was informed that they could go elsewhere as we could not make a recommendation without complete information. The client eventually returned ... complaining the entire time. And I am not exaggerating when I say there has been absolutely no motivation on this individual's part prior to going to their surgeon to request the procedure. They want an easy fix and "then maybe I'll get the motivation to change my life."

These individuals should therefore be turned down for such procedures until there is sufficient proof that they ARE and will remain motivated in leading a healthier lifestyle. The challenge is that not all surgeons and/or centers listen to the psychologists...

Back to the benefits of physical exercise: Of course it is great. But it may be a challenge for individuals who are already missing a limp or two, paraplegic, on specific medications for other preexisting medical or mental health conditions, or have underlying medical comorbidities that won't allow them to exercise (Granted, some of these medical conditions may have been a "result" of a sedantary lifestyle.) Sometimes, there really is such a thing called "too late." Even the best diet will not help. Besides, when you limit your intake too much, you risk becoming malnourished.

So, what do you do with these highly motivated but very sick individuals? Even when the endocrinologist, cardiologist, psychiatrist, physical therapist, nutritionist, family, and the individual are all working together, the possibility of them reaching a healthier weight seems pretty slim (no pun intended) to me. Just wondering...

 

[wigflip]

I've been away for awhile, so I missed when this became it's own thread. Can't say that I'm thrilled that I now appear to be the OP, especially given that the stigmatizing term "obesity" is in the title.

You're all going to think I've jumped off the deep end for knowing this, but there are actually people who set out to become obese.

Why would we think you've "jumped off the deep end " for claiming to know something about fat people? Are social workers supposed to serve the marginalized only as long as they're thin?

Some are the BBW (Big, Beautiful, Women) fetish community and some call themselves feeders/feedees, where they have a partner who (literally) spoon-feeds them until they reach gargantuan sizes.

Granted, these folks seem to be the extreme minority, but they do exist. For them, giant sizes in the range of 600-800 pounds are the desired goal.

But in fact, you actually have "jumped off the deep end." You're conflating different things.
First, I doubt you'd find anyone identifying as "BBW" who embraces the term "obese" (or "overweight"). These are considered stigmatizing terms in politicized fat communities. Identifying as "BBW" or "BHM" does not imply "deliberate" weight gain or weight gain as a goal. It's an identity which embraces and celebrates one's size. Self-acceptance is not the same as aiming to change one's body size (in either direction). BBWs do not aspire to "giant" sizes.

You also describe "feederism." NAAFA opposes the practice of "feeders" just as it opposes the practice of partners who harass their lovers to lose weight:
http://www.naafaonline.com/dev2/about/Policies/FEEDERISM.pdf

A little more accuracy and sensitivity would be appreciated.

 

[mewtoo]

As for way back in the thread, I know of a health psychologist who has a studio/gym like thing in my town where people who are overweight/obese/have other health problems can come and get instructed about how to live a healthy lifestyle and his wife (who is a certified personal trainer) can create personal workouts that they can take home and do everyday. Their aim is to give the client all the help and information they can in order to facilitate them getting to healthier weight or just simply having a healthier lifestyle.

As for the people who say the obese or morbidly obese are pathological, you have obviously had your views skewed by only interacting with clinical or sub-clinical populations of these people. I also think most people think of a 400 or 500 pound person when they hear "morbidly obese" and this is simply not the case. My BMI is in the morbidly obese category and my weight is closer to the 100's than the 300's and I wear clothes from the misses section in department stores and the smallest size in plus size stores. I also in no way have any psychological problems or any type of eating disorder. I've just simply been chubby/overweight all my life and when I quit growing taller but still gained a pound or two each year it added up. Add to this medical problems (that are in no way tied to my weight) which inhibit me from exercising even mildly (let alone enough to be burning fat!) and a horrible metabolism. I often find the negative stereotypes about fat people as hurtful, especially since I'm usually the opposite of these stereotypes and want to lose weight but am not able to. What are you supposed to do when your doctor says you aren't allowed to exercise and you've lost as much as you can by diet alone? Unfortunately people often don't think of why someone may be fat besides the ubiquitous they are just lazy/unmotivated, don't care, or have some psychological issues. People should not be judged or persecuted about their weight (whether they are extremely thin or extremely obese) because you have no idea of why they are this way. I'm not saying you should just accept people's weights and be all warm and fuzzy if someone's weight is extremely unhealthy, but you shouldn't be persecuting or making assumptions about them either. How do you know that the stick-thin "anorexic chick" doesn't have hyperthyroidism or that the extremely morbidly obese "fat-ass" has Prader-willi syndrome?

 

[MCParent]

As for way back in the thread, I know of a health psychologist who has a studio/gym like thing in my town where people who are overweight/obese/have other health problems can come and get instructed about how to live a healthy lifestyle and his wife (who is a certified personal trainer) can create personal workouts that they can take home and do everyday. ...

This is ESSENTIAL. There's some talk of obesity/diabetes etc in some professional spheres from people who have NO training in nutrition, dietetics, training, etc., as though having a PhD in psych magically makes you qualified and competent to give fitness or nutrition advice. Both of those areas are things people get entire degrees in (let alone their own huge complex controversies about dietary standards and corporate influence, size acceptance movement, etc.), and psychologists should be REAL careful about scope of practice and competency in these areas. Most psychs have a level of knowledge of these things that seems to me to be at layperson level only, yet some seem to feel qualified to make specific recommendations.

 

[Pragma]

lot of people cause metabolic issues by their health habits) and not stop (barring psychiatric issues) and change your lifestyle? Hard to comprehend.

This is a very important point and I believe one of the key issues facing our society as we move forward. Without adequate education, many people often live their way into these without even knowing it. At least that was the case for me when I saw lots of patient's with type II DM/amputations.

I think it is fair to say that some people "blame" the victim for other health problems these days. For example, lung cancer - people made a choice to smoke. But the fact that some people get it without smoking at all is not enough to offset public health campaigns against smoking.

 

[mewtoo]

This is a very important point and I believe one of the key issues facing our society as we move forward. Without adequate education, many people often live their way into these without even knowing it. At least that was the case for me when I saw lots of patient's with type II DM/amputations.

I think it is fair to say that some people "blame" the victim for other health problems these days. For example, lung cancer - people made a choice to smoke. But the fact that some people get it without smoking at all is not enough to offset public health campaigns against smoking.

I totally can relate to that as my grandmother has COPD/Emphysema and she never smoked a day in her life. She's always had very, very severe asthma (like hospitalized at least 2 times a year all through her life because of it) and its basically destroyed her lungs. When she says her diagnosis to people or new doctors they always start in by saying things like, "How long did you smoke?" or "Are you sure you never smoked? I thought the only people who got things like that were smokers." 🙄

 

[mewtoo]

You pack on a few pounds, ok. But, how do you get 50, 60, 70+ pounds overweight (without thyroid/metabolic issues before you get heavy . . .lot of people cause metabolic issues by their health habits) and not stop (barring psychiatric issues) and change your lifestyle? Hard to comprehend. I do observe that there are body perception issues in this.

You have to remember, however, how much faster you can gain weight in comparison to losing weight. I've heard (and saw in one case) people who gained 30+ pounds in one month. And you wouldn't have to be gorging on cupcakes and hamburgers in order to do that. As you mentioned the 1500+ calorie salads, if someone ate that for two meals every day thats at least 3000 calories in the salads. I know for me I'm supposed to eat 1700 calories a day. That would already be 1300 calories more and thats not even counting any snacks and breakfast. Even if you ate extremely healthy snacks and breakfasts your still way outta luck because all those excess calories end up in weight gain. Do that everyday for a month or two because your extra busy for some reason- BAM all of a sudden you can't fit in your clothes anymore.

Also, and I believe there may be a specific term for this but I can't remember it right now, they've done studies and just like some ex-morbidly obese only see their former fat self even though they may be in the normal range now, many people who gain weight rapidly only see their thin self and don't see that they've gained so much until things like needing new clothes start to happen (and sometimes not even then). The reasons they don't do a lifestyle change could be denial, fear of change, apathy, they are content with themselves, they are waiting for "motivation", like I just mentioned above, or a myriad of other things that an average Joe will run into. Many people just think its too hard or aren't equipped with the info in order to change their lifestyle. Some people just have to have a "straw that broke the camel's back" moment before they are able to muster up the confidence or motivation. I believe its a complex process that leads to this kind of thing happening in each person and it should be treated uniquely for each person.

 

[mewtoo]

On paper perhaps it could be viewed as equal.

You have to keep in mind that your body can only burn so many fat calories in a day before it turns to your muscle and you are damaging your body. Your body can (while it has a certain percentage of calories it can absorb from the food you eat) potentially take in an infinite amount of calories. You also have to keep in mind your body is set up to not lose calories so it can last through famine and also to absorb as many calories as possible in order to prepare for famine. People that are out of shape and fat don't have much muscle mass so that means they can not burn as many fat calories as, in comparison, someone who is in shape and also weighs the same.

And of course, the most obvious thing, how long does it take to eat 3000 calories? 5 donuts in 5 minutes. Compare that to how long you would have to work out in order to burn those calories. "People who weigh 185 lbs... need to bicycle vigorously for about 64 minutes to burn 1,000 calories and bicycle moderately for about 96 minutes to burn 1,000 calories." Someone who is new to exercising we assume to not be able to exercise vigorously for 64 minutes, so it would thus take them 288 minutes (almost 5 hours) to burn off those 5 donuts... and that's just to come out even, let alone put them in a calorie deficit (assuming they ate normal meals).

Source for calories burned: http://www.livestrong.com/article/4...ou-need-to-burn-1-000-calories/#ixzz21K2x6y2Q

So yes, on paper it may be just as easy to lose as to gain, but in reality its much easier to gain than lose.

 

[wigflip]

Is it really faster to gain weight than lose it?

I realize that you're probably posing this question rhetorically, but honestly, you don't know this and you're contributing to this thread as if you're informed about issues related to weight and size?

At this point, this thread's value is in reminding those of us who are (currently) affected how biased and ill-informed highly educated people can be. It's really disappointing, though not particularly surprising, to see some of the same folks who regularly extoll the virtues of scientific rigor uncritically embrace popular discourses which are founded on misinformation and prejudice.

I'm really embarrassed that I appear to be the OP on this moderator-created breakout thread. I know better.

 

[roubs]

I realize that you're probably posing this question rhetorically, but honestly, you don't know this and you're contributing to this thread as if you're informed about issues related to weight and size?

At this point, this thread's value is in reminding those of us who are (currently) affected how biased and ill-informed highly educated people can be. It's really disappointing, though not particularly surprising, to see some of the same folks who regularly extoll the virtues of scientific rigor uncritically embrace popular discourses which are founded on misinformation and prejudice.

I'm really embarrassed that I appear to be the OP on this moderator-created breakout thread. I know better.

wig, I look forward to your contribution to threads on a variety of topics but your posts here come off as really defensive and dismissive. No doubt there is a perception that weight is much easier to put on than to lose. But I have read articles on just how much the body wants to maintain a set point at any weight and nudging that needle is actually really difficult. The "ease" of putting on weight is partially a perception based on the fact that it can happen over a long period of time and then we desire to push weight loss into a 6-month timeframe.

Now, I grant that you may be decisively correct about taking off weight being more difficult but it still requires investigation and citation to establish this as a fact. If people ask about it, it may be because we want to know how it was established empirically.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Actually, I was seriously asking the question. Fitness is something I am very interested in, both personally and also as a researcher. I used to think it was faster to gain than lose, but it appears to depend on a number of factors. One of which is the amount someone is overweight. It takes a lot of calories to maintain heavier weight. Now, as you get closer to smaller body fat percentages, losing weight is tougher. In any case, it is possible for people that are very overweight to lose a lot of weight quickly. Do you deny this Wigiflp? I understand you're very sensitive about these issues, but rebut them instead of walking away and claiming ignorance and disappointment. I'm having trouble even seeing my alleged bias. Show it to me.

It seems to be a very complex (and interesting) question that's no doubt determined by a variety of factors. Genetics will obviously play a role on both sides of the equation (i.e., gaining and losing). RE: weight loss, as mewtoo pointed out, there are questions about metabolism and metabolic tendencies in the presence of significant weight change (e.g., after very fast and very significant weight loss, does the body preserve fat at the expense of muscle and water weight, and at what point does this change occur, etc.). Also, we definitely don't want to conflate speed of weight loss/gain with ease of weight loss/gain (not that anyone in this thread has done so).

Edit: As roubs pointed out, the tendency is to think that weight gain happens both more quickly and more easily than weight loss, perhaps owing in part to how seemingly-insidious the former can be. I honestly don't know whether data support this view or not.

 

[wigflip]

wig, I look forward to your contribution to threads on a variety of topics but your posts here come off as really defensive and dismissive.

Fair enough. That may be because evidence that had been posted, or alluded to previously, seems to get "refuted" by reiteration of the same tired misinformation. At some point, it's counterproductive to keep tangling with regressive arguments. If I've been dubbed "sensitive" on this issue, I'd like to counter that a lot of the discussion here on this issue has been pretty "insensitive."

I'll try one more time:
If you are reading this and are thin, and aren't close to anyone who isn't, and don't study these issues, you may be unaware that fat people are not only targeted for discrimination in a variety of settings (hiring, housing, healthcare), but also for stranger harassment. That means that I don't have to log on to a website to be reminded that the opinion at large (pun intended) is that fat people's bodies are the result of gluttony and sloth. (Because we could just lose weight if we pushed away from the table and exercised, right? It's just calories in and calories burned--no intervening contribution of genetics, medications, metabolism, cortisol levels, etc.) Strangers feel free to come up and tell you this, in a variety of ways,both apparently well-meaning and overtly nasty (though both are equally unwelcome). They will happily tell you just what they think about your body, and how you can "fix" it. This is part of why it's so saddening to hear educated professionals embrace these same ill-founded prejudices.

So now, I'll post this link to an article in the International J of Epi, and bow out again for the time being. It discusses the actual numbers involved in the alleged "obesity epidemic," the purported links to health and mortality, weight loss, etc. Some of the same folks who were on a previous thread "debating" these issues (i.e. essentially debating fat people's moral character) some time back either didn't read this when I posted it last time, or weren't convinced, because this thread evinces the exact same prejudices. It's basically a giant do-over. Which is why I'm gonna go do something productive and not hold myself accountable for taking the time to explain in minute detail why many of the claims above are unsupported. If folks are semi-interested but short on time, I'd read the authors' response to claims #1 and especially #3:

http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/35/1/55.full.pdf

 

[AcronymAllergy]

....http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/35/1/55.full.pdf

Thank you for the link. I'd heard various points from that article (and from the studies it cites) raised elsewhere, but until now hadn't seen the article itself.

 

[wigflip]

Thank you for the link. I'd heard various points from that article (and from the studies it cites) raised elsewhere, but until now hadn't seen the article itself.

Glad to hear you found it helpful. Thanks for the positive feedback, Acronym.

 

[wigflip]

The authors of that article, focusing on psychosocial perceptions related to overweight/obesity also manage to pin such views to racism. Quite inflammatory.

I don't know precisely what you mean by the first bolded section. Presumably you are referencing the authors' review of the content analysis of 221 press articles, which found that articles reporting on Blacks and Latinos were more likely than other articles to invoke "bad food choices" and "sedentary lifestyles," and the authors' subsequent statement that:

"Public opinion studies also show that negative attitudes towards the obese are highly correlated with negative attitudes towards minorities and the poor, such as the belief that all these groups are lazy and lack self-control and will power. This suggests that anxieties about racial integration and immigration may be an underlying cause of some of the concern over obesity."

You might argue that the final sentence is overreaching, despite its many hedges ("suggests," "may," "some of the"). I don't see how it's inflammatory, and certainly is not more so than suggestions that workplace discrimination is justified.

And just a reminder: it's still "wigflip," or "wig" if you prefer. Same as the last time you called me "wigi," when we were having this dreadful, pointless discussion previously.

Edit: Ah! You fixed it! Looks like you corrected my name when you logged back on to take that swipe at Campos. Thanks, Jon. I notice you didn't attempt to denigrate Saguy's Princeton/UCLA pedigree though.

Edit #2: First version of the above sentence: "Looks like you corrected my name when you logged bacon." So much for trying to refute the gluttony hypothesis.

 

[roubs]

Ha, of course this is the one part of the article that I agreed with 😛 I think saying it's inflammatory is just another way of ignoring that stereotypes exist. No one is saying that journalists are racist people, but the measurement of a large number of articles can reveal the subtle influence of stereotypes.

Journalists are either more likely to use the phrase 'sedentary lifestyle' and 'bad food choices" with Black and Latino people or they aren't. This seems to suggest that they do. I think people can debate the implications of that finding, but it deserves more than being labelled inflammatory and shelved.

 

[wigflip]

Ha, of course this is the one part of the article that I agreed with 😛 I think saying it's inflammatory is just another way of ignoring that stereotypes exist. No one is saying that journalists are racist people, but the measurement of a large number of articles can reveal the subtle influence of stereotypes.

Journalists are either more likely to use the phrase 'sedentary lifestyle' and 'bad food choices" with Black and Latino people or they aren't. This seems to suggest that they do. I think people can debate the implications of that finding, but it deserves more than being labelled inflammatory and shelved.

Reminds me of how, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, white people were apparently resourceful enough to "find" food at local grocery stores, while Blacks resorted to "looting";
http://o-dub.com/images/looter.jpg

 

[wigflip]

Jon, I am totally resisting a sassy retort.

But I honestly can't tell whether you are simply being flip and are deliberately distorting the authors' argument for comic effect (particularly parts 3 & 4). If the answer is "no," or "not really," then it really is true: it's simply too labor-intensive to try to hash this out online. We could be at this forever, reading the same material with vastly divergent interpretations of even the most simple prose.

While it may or may not have some grain of truth, it reads like this to me:

- Obesity/overweight emphasis is overblown
- Obesity/overweight is actually healthy in many circumstances
- People that don't think so are racists
- The motivation for the obesity scare is unfair discrimination.

 

[roubs]

It's flippant, but, as is often the case, there is some truth to it. I actually mirrored the author's style of selective interpretation of data, which a couple of scientists pointed out even within the same journal in which the article was published. But, yes, the guy's thesis appears to be that the obesity/overweight health emphasis is about discrimination and is like racism, in fact, he argues it's the same people. To me, that's an inflammatory argument and I think he has severely misinterpreted the data out there to bend it into a victimization argument (or. . . the fat acceptance movement platform).

You are equating media stereotyping to discrimination and blatant racism because obviously that is more inflammatory than the author's actual contention that media articles seem to reinforce the stereotype of lazy fat minorities.

 

[wigflip]

Seems like a distraction to me. Is it or is it not healthy? My readings is, it is not healthy. This lawyer thinks its trumped up garbage and it's because people are racist bastards. Wig seems to agree as she has repeatedly asserted that people here are reinforcing untrue stereotypes despite being shown these data to the contrary.

No now it's my turn to summarize:

--You're angry with the first author only ("this lawyer" really?), apparently because he didn't write a simplistic, reductive article merely addressing your single question, although, of course he and his co-authors do address that question (though not to your satisfaction)

--You're going to continue to willingly misread the sociological aspects of the article because... it's fun?

--You're going to deliberately distort my position because I've rejected the kind of "data" you and others have presented (uninformed judgements about people at the hospital, the repeated conflation of fatness with unfitness, travel anecdotes)

What have I missed?

A partial list: compassion, sensitivity, a nuanced reading worthy of someone of your intellect, the source of my headache.

Here's to hoping that this thread finally dies a natural death. Better yet...hey moderators! I think we're done here...

 

[Pragma]

I am going to admit that i did not read the article, because I really haven't got that much time in between what i am currently doing. Will check it out later though.

My response to this back-and-forth is "can't it be both?"

Yes obesity is probably unhealthy in most cases. There are exceptions. Yes "fatness" is discriminated against. Yes people do sometimes apply these stereotypes to minorities. Yes, some people would prefer victimization rather than maintaining a responsible weight.

Yes, two opposing things can be true at the same time?

I did draw a comparison earlier between smoking and unhealthy eating, as two "unhealthy behaviors." I still think it is a fair comparison, although obviously eating/weight are more visible and more tied to self-image. Smoking can be concealed.

 

[wigflip]

I am going to admit that i did not read the article, because I really haven't got that much time in between what i am currently doing. Will check it out later though.

My response to this back-and-forth is "can't it be both?"

Yes obesity is probably unhealthy in most cases. There are exceptions. Yes "fatness" is discriminated against. Yes people do sometimes apply these stereotypes to minorities. Yes, some people would prefer victimization rather than maintaining a responsible weight.

Yes, two opposing things can be true at the same time?

I did draw a comparison earlier between smoking and unhealthy eating, as two "unhealthy behaviors." I still think it is a fair comparison, although obviously eating/weight are more visible and more tied to self-image. Smoking can be concealed.

I appreciate your attempts at conciliation, even if I don't agree with all of the above.

With regards to your bolded passage above: the problem is that in popular discourse, (poor) eating, (lack of) fitness, (ill) health, and ("high") weight can get conflated in very problematic ways. Like smoking, eating and exercising are behaviors. Body size/weight is not. The authors of the article I posted address your smoking analogy (though I have to say I appreciate your allusion above to concealable stigmas):

"[D]iscussions about obesity and overweight as a health risk tend to treat weight as a health behavior, akin to smoking. Thus overweight and obesity are commonly referred to as 'preventable causes of illness.' Yet the relationship between behavior and weight is complex, and intertwined with immutable factors such as genetics, and body build and shape. The average individual's control over his or her weight is limited at best" (p. 57, second column).

And interestingly, on page 59, first column:

"[O]ther works suggest that some portion of the population's weight gain can be attributed to smoking cessation, which runs counter to the assumption that the country's weight gain is evidence of both moral laxity and a harbinger of declining overall health."

 

[psychRA]

I've read this thread a couple of times now, and I'm still not sure what's causing you to be so combative/dismissive, wigflip. I'm not trying to launch a personal attack, but I think this is a really interesting topic, and I don't get why it has to devolve into accusations that none of us are sensitive, informed, or experienced enough to have opinions. And I say this as someone who has worked in an obesity treatment center, who has always been very much interested in the social and medical aspects of body and weight, is fiercely opposed to the stigma than can accompany body size, and who has in fact been overweight at one point in my life.

Like smoking, eating and exercising are behaviors. Body size/weight is not.

Something I find problematic is the tendency to reduce this to an all or nothing relationship. On one side (of the argument - not this thread) is the idea that every overweight person is like that because they eat junk food and sit on their lazy butts all day. That idea is clearly wrong, and also offensive. But on the other side of the spectrum is the idea that nobody who is overweight has any control over their body weight, regardless of what they eat or how often they exercise. And that idea is wrong, too.

There are certainly lots of factors that complicate the relationship between eating/exercising behaviors and body size/weight. It's definitely not a 1 to 1 correlation for the majority of the population. But it's also not an absolute zero correlation, at least for most people. For example, there are medical conditions that can make it difficult to maintain a "normal" weight, like PCOS and Hashimoto's thyroiditis. But those disorders affect only a small slice of the popluation, and not everyone who has one of those disorders has a weight problem (I have Hashimoto's and have been on the normal/underweight cusp for years). Like I said earlier in this thread, it's not as simple as "just eat fewer calories than you burn" because individual factors (metabolism, genetics, etc.) affect your body's ability to burn fuel. But it's also not as simple as saying that the number of calories we consume has absolutely nothing to do with body weight. There are varying degrees to which individuals can control their weight, but it's reductive to say that weight cannot be controlled. The organization formerly known as NAASO (www.obesity.org) puts on a really excellent annual meeting that addresses a wide range of research interests for those who'd like to learn more.

 

[futureapppsy2]

I honestly think many people oversell the power of prevention--it's almost like a form of the "just world"/blame the victim fallacy (i.e., "these people got sick because they did Y, but I never do Y, so I'll never get sick."). Don't get me wrong--I'm all for health promotion, doing the best one can to live a healthy lifestyle, etc. But it's also true that you can do everything "right" and nothing "wrong" and still get sick. Maybe I'm just hypersensitive towards this issue, having a congenital disability and knowing a lot of people who lived "healthy lives" and still had cancer, disabilities, or serious health issues as children/adolescents/young adults. There's honestly a limit to how much you can guard yourself against illness--even the "healthiest" people, although bettering their odds, can still end up on the losing side of chance.

 

[mewtoo]

I honestly think many people oversell the power of prevention--it's almost like a form of the "just world"/blame the victim fallacy (i.e., "these people got sick because they did Y, but I never do Y, so I'll never get sick."). Don't get me wrong--I'm all for health promotion, doing the best one can to live a healthy lifestyle, etc. But it's also true that you can do everything "right" and nothing "wrong" and still get sick. Maybe I'm just hypersensitive towards this issue, having a congential disability and knowing a lot of people who lived "healthy lives" and still had cancer, disabilities, or serious health issues as children/adolescents/young adults. There's honestly a limit to how much you can guard yourself against illness--even the "healthiest" people, although bettering their odds, can still end up on the losing side of chace.

Through networking with others that have autoimmune disorders like me I've come to find that quite a large portion of these people were doing everything "right" (i.e., eating healthy more than not, healthy weight, etc.) and they come from all age ranges, creeds, and races. You can't prevent something like an autoimmune disorder; its all up to genetics and is triggered by even normal stress.

On a side note since I was thinking of autoimmune disorders and diabetes keeps being brought up, type 2 diabetes is starting to be considered an autoimmune disorder rather than a metabolic one. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/222766.php They are starting to think that diabetes is more genetic and with the right stressor (obesity) it can be triggered. I think its a very interesting development, especially since it would be the only (that I know of) autoimmune disorder that is directly affected by behavior. I wonder if re-labeling it would change people's perceptions about diabetes or obesity in any way, though I'm not sure it would considering the amount of blank stares I get from people when I talk about autoimmune disorders (and the complete and utter lack of understanding by even friends and family who I explained them to).

 

[Pragma]

I appreciate your attempts at conciliation, even if I don't agree with all of the above.

With regards to your bolded passage above: the problem is that in popular discourse, (poor) eating, (lack of) fitness, (ill) health, and ("high") weight can get conflated in very problematic ways. Like smoking, eating and exercising are behaviors. Body size/weight is not. The authors of the article I posted address your smoking analogy (though I have to say I appreciate your allusion above to concealable stigmas):

"[D]iscussions about obesity and overweight as a health risk tend to treat weight as a health behavior, akin to smoking. Thus overweight and obesity are commonly referred to as 'preventable causes of illness.' Yet the relationship between behavior and weight is complex, and intertwined with immutable factors such as genetics, and body build and shape. The average individual's control over his or her weight is limited at best" (p. 57, second column).

And interestingly, on page 59, first column:

"[O]ther works suggest that some portion of the population's weight gain can be attributed to smoking cessation, which runs counter to the assumption that the country's weight gain is evidence of both moral laxity and a harbinger of declining overall health."

Wigflip, the authors address the point in that quote, but not to my satisfaction. Just because multiple factors are involved in weight does not mean that how one chooses to eat is not a health behavior. As for blaming our society's weight gain issues on smoking cessation....please. from what I recall from my smoking cessation training awhile back, the average gain is perhaps 5-7 pounds, and is temporary and preventible with other lifestyle adjustments.

This issue seems near and dear to your heart. I think you are a great poster. But what's your point here? Aside from the fact that discrimination against people who are overweight exists and is a problem, that weight is not SOLELY due to behavior, do you deny that a large proportion of the US population is overweight because of their diet and activity levels (primarily)? Should we end all public health initiatives focused on healthy eating because the issue can be complicated?

As for folks saying "well, some people get sick when they did everything right"...do you hear yourselves right now? That's a rationalization I hear whenever someone wants to do something unhealthy.

I feel that by taking too many steps back sometimes, we fail to acknowledge the role of personal responsibility in maintaining health. Ask anyone in a 12 step program for substance use issues who's responsibility their recovery is, and they will tell you it is theirs, despite acknowledging disease and genetic susceptibility.

 

[Pragma]

The line that's being danced with here is locus of control. As we know, locus of control is a factor in much of our behavior. It is a powerful tool, but it is a dangerous one. If you assume control of factors outside of your control, what happens? Self-blame. Then what happens? Reduced self-efficacy in whatever domain. Depression. Stress. Loathing.

I think that's a good characterization. It seems that the overall issue of weight can involve both things within your control (such as diet and in many cases activity level) and things outside of your control (genetics, acquired or congenital physical limitations, etc).

I agree with wigflip that stigma and discrimination are problems. It isn't helpful to just assume that all people with weight issues are lazy and slothful, and as a society this is certainly a trend, as such "moral" characterizations are common for many negative health behaviors (e.g., substance abuse). On the same token, so many people who are overweight do nothing/very little about the behaviors that are within their control (even if they are difficult to change). Wigflip's point that weight is not a behavior is an important one - but I also don't recall ever suggesting that it was.

IMO, our public health initiatives focused on healthy behaviors should include education about these various factors. Such education may help to combat stigma. However, overemphasis on external factors associated with an unhealthy outcome tends to minimize personal responsibility. Based on my experiences as a therapist (which led me to eventually stop doing therapy), there is a shortage of personal responsibility out there for many folks.

As you mention Jon, there is the danger of people self-blaming. But this is why education about what things are (and aren't) in someone's control are important.

 

[Pragma]

Yes, and when I operated as a therapist (not something I do anymore), a core emphasis for me was locus of control. "What can you control?" was a question that I often asked. A shortage of personal responsibility, a shortage of knowledge of how things work, a shortage of theory of mind.

Haha, sounds like we had a similar style. I didn't work well with people who wanted "supportive counseling" AKA "I want to vent and you to listen, and I don't want to do anything but that." But when people had a defined goal, getting from A to B was pretty cool via intervention.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

IMO, our public health initiatives focused on healthy behaviors should include education about these various factors. Such education may help to combat stigma. However, overemphasis on external factors associated with an unhealthy outcome tends to minimize personal responsibility. Based on my experiences as a therapist (which led me to eventually stop doing therapy), there is a shortage of personal responsibility out there for many folks.

I agree with the above 1000%. If you ran for office I'd vote for you. 😀 Personal responsibility is quite the political handgrenade, but I think that is at the crux of the issue. Acknowledgement of the multi-factorial nature of obesity (and personal health in general) is not an edict of individual blamelessness, but instead it is an assertion that personal responsibility should be more of a focus because we need to leverage the factors we can positively influence. Each person needs to be more responsible for what they contribute/consume on a daily basis. *insert additional Libertarian principles here*.

With that being said, a call for more personal responsibility should not be code for 'blaming fat people', because that just shifts the focus away from many of the factors that keep our society in an unhealthy place. Instead, personal responsibility includes an acceptance by some people that their actions also contributed to our unhealthy society, even if they deemed 'healthy'. Keeping people unhealthy is great for business, but quite detrimental for the average person.

Or we can just setup a Thunderdome and do things that way. 😀

 

[Iwillheal]

I did draw a comparison earlier between smoking and unhealthy eating, as two "unhealthy behaviors." I still think it is a fair comparison, although obviously eating/weight are more visible and more tied to self-image. Smoking can be concealed.

That's a horrible comparison and I recommend you never make that comparison again as it's not accurate, nor useful--or rather as useful as comparing apples and cigarettes.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Yes, and when I operated as a therapist (not something I do anymore), a core emphasis for me was locus of control. "What can you control?" was a question that I often asked. A shortage of personal responsibility, a shortage of knowledge of how things work, a shortage of theory of mind.

I took a similar approach, though I started off with more of a motivational interviewing approach to find motivational factors, and then I applied a solution focused approach using those factors. Behavioral reinforcement was both the carrot and the rod...depending on the patient.

 

[Pragma]

That's a horrible comparison and I recommend you never make that comparison again as it's not accurate, nor useful--or rather as useful as comparing apples and cigarettes.

I disagree. I think unhealthy behaviors can be compared as long as their differences are acknowledged. I also brought it up as the discussion had to do with stigma and making a personal change in behaviors - I noted that social stigma regarding smoking was a catalyst for my own behavior change, despite the fact that I did not appreciate being stigmatized.

 

[Iwillheal]

I see. Well, good for you for quitting, it's very hard.

 

[Pragma]

I agree with the above 1000%. If you ran for office I'd vote for you. 😀

Somehow I doubt that 😉 but I am glad we are in agreement about this particular issue.

 

[Pragma]

That's a horrible comparison and I recommend you never make that comparison again as it's not accurate, nor useful--or rather as useful as comparing apples and cigarettes.

Ironically, in my college dorm building years ago, I once observed another student utilize an apple as an apparatus with which to smoke a particular substance. 😛

 

[mewtoo]

As for folks saying "well, some people get sick when they did everything right"...do you hear yourselves right now? That's a rationalization I hear whenever someone wants to do something unhealthy.

In no way was that meant to condone unhealthy behavior or to say that "you are going to get something so you might as well just do what you want." I was more-or-less just agreeing with the previous poster that in many instances "the victim" is blamed for "the crime" more than they should. I'm not saying people who are obese are victims or that being obese is a crime or anything either. I'm just drawing upon a common saying. I was just simply stating that in many instances diseases you get are up for the draw and no matter what you did to "prevent" them it doesn't matter. For example, while you may avoid every know carcinogen you can still get cancer basically "just because." Now I'm not saying you should just go "Damn it all to hell!" and smoke 5 packs of cigarettes a day and slather yourself in lead paint or anything (which is more along the lines of what you thought I meant).

Overall I just meant that less blame and stigma should be placed on those who have a disease or health problem such as the obese by others. Many overweight are shamed by others and I don't see how that can help anyone really. If you are going to do anything you should encourage healthy behaviors and quit shaming the bad. From what I've seen shaming the unhealthy behaviors just leads to "sneak eating" and hiding while they preform unhealthy behaviors and not to a cessation of these behaviors. Mostly what I'm saying is that a lot of this stems from others completely and utterly blaming the obese for being obese. I think the blame should be spread between the obese person and their genetics/body/metabolism because while they decide their behaviors they in no way have control over what they were born with. To what percent of the blame should be assigned to each, I don't know (although I believe the behaviors should get a larger chunk). This should not be viewed as a free pass to people to just do whatever they want. It should just simply be viewed as the harsh reality of the world we live in. A certain percent of the population is going to get a certain disease as predicted by our old friend statistics. Should this just mean people should give up? No. Should they realize that most of their health is controlled by their behaviors? Yes. And on the other hand, should it mean they should realize that not everything about their health is in their control? Yes.

 

[Doctor Eliza]

I'm a little puzzled by the idea that the major problem here is lack of personal responsibility. In my clinical experience, I don't run into people who are saying, "I'm fat, but it's not my fault, so I'm not going to do anything about it." Quite the opposite really. I much more often meet patients who say things like, "I have tried to lose weight for years but my successes are only temporary. I am a failure." And of course, they mean "a failure as a person" and not "a person who is unable to succeed at weight loss." I think these people would greatly benefit from a better understanding of the complex issues related to weight.

I think with regard to weight there is the idea that a little bit of shaming is good and motivating. As psychologists we know more about motivational theory than that, but even we fall into that trap sometimes. There are serious consequences of this shaming for people of all weights. The so-called "obesity epidemic" is accompanied by a "fear of fat" epidemic. I have had a number of child clients who are 8, 9, 10 years old worrying that they are too fat. In most cases, even their pediatricians had stated that their weight was in a healthy range. But even in their young minds, being fat is equated with being deeply flawed and unacceptable as a person. We are spending a lot of time here talking about the horrors of being overweight, but what about how the fear of fat relates to eating disorders and the seriously underweight? Does it benefit people in eating disorder recovery to feel that being fat is a fate worse than death?

Last, I would like to voice my support for Wig's contributions to this thread. I do not find her to be defensive or overly sensitive, but rather helpful in pointing out additional data and points of view. I think the strong backlash as a result of her comments is instructive with regard to how we as a society and professionals feel about issues relating to weight.

Best,
Dr. E

 

[paramour]

I'm a little puzzled by the idea that the major problem here is lack of personal responsibility. In my clinical experience, I don't run into people who are saying, "I'm fat, but it's not my fault, so I'm not going to do anything about it."

I'm completely playing outside the box here, so please bear with me...

But I have clients who claim that their major problems for their anxiety, depression, social phobia, substance dependence, criminal behavior, so on & so forth is not their fault. It's "nature." It's "genetic." They have no choice in the matter. They're going to wait for a pill to "fix" them. They're highly ambivalent about doing anything for themselves, change, etc.

I'm not sure why the same cannot be said for obesity? Particularly when there are *some* within the field who perceive it to possibly be on the spectrum of eating disorders, in which change can be just as problematic--and again, *some* (I didn't say all) folks may not take responsibility for their change for any multitude of reasons.

And, if we're going to speak, anecdotally, I have a family full of obese individuals who claim they're not going to a damned thing about their weight because it's not their fault. It's genetic (so they claim), so accept it and move on with life (and continue gaining even more weight in the process...).

 

[Pragma]

I’m a little puzzled by the idea that the major problem here is lack of personal responsibility. In my clinical experience, I don’t run into people who are saying, “I’m fat, but it’s not my fault, so I’m not going to do anything about it.” Quite the opposite really. I much more often meet patients who say things like, “I have tried to lose weight for years but my successes are only temporary. I am a failure.” And of course, they mean “a failure as a person” and not “a person who is unable to succeed at weight loss.” I think these people would greatly benefit from a better understanding of the complex issues related to weight.

Yeah I have never had someone present in this manner. It has typically been "I eat a lot, but my life sucks and my stressors are so great that I can't do anything different" type of presentation.

Obviously two different clients are going to require a different type of intervention. And at least for me, I never really saw my role as a psychologist as being the weight police. Weight loss was never really a goal in therapy for any clients, atlhough I always pushed exercise because of its inherent benefits.

 

[Pragma]

And, if we're going to speak, anecdotally, I have a family full of obese individuals who claim they're not going to a damned thing about their weight because it's not their fault. It's genetic (so they claim), so accept it and move on with life (and continue gaining even more weight in the process...).

Yeah, I have seen this. Or more of an apathetic "I'm not going to do a damned thing about it because I just don't care."

 

[Pragma]

Overall I just meant that less blame and stigma should be placed on those who have a disease or health problem such as the obese by others. Many overweight are shamed by others and I don't see how that can help anyone really. If you are going to do anything you should encourage healthy behaviors and quit shaming the bad.

I think we have acknowledged that some stigma and shaming exist when it comes to weight. But I also have seen a lot of "it's okay" types of messages as well.

Yes encouraging healthy behaviors is great. We can all do that all we want. But if we don't discourage unhealthy behaviors, you likely are not going to see a lot of change. I mean behaviors such as smoking, unhealthy eating habits, etc, etc...

Should this just mean people should give up? No. Should they realize that most of their health is controlled by their behaviors? Yes. And on the other hand, should it mean they should realize that not everything about their health is in their control? Yes.

Music to my ears.

 

[mewtoo]

Yes encouraging healthy behaviors is great. We can all do that all we want. But if we don't discourage unhealthy behaviors, you likely are not going to see a lot of change. I mean behaviors such as smoking, unhealthy eating habits, etc, etc...

I agree with you about discouraging unhealthy behaviors. It just seems for most people (I mean the population at large) they see shaming as the optimal way to discourage unhealthy habits or don't realize that's what they are doing. To me I think, "Don't eat that donut because you are fat and no one wants to marry a fatty," is more harmful than helpful. And you may scoff at the ridiculousness of that statement, but I literally heard a woman say that to her teenage daughter (who was barley overweight if she even was) at a hotel breakfast bar, but that could be a whole other thread itself. If someone is going to discourage it they should say something more along the lines of "You shouldn't eat that donut because its got a lot of fat calories (or whatever nutritional thing you want to highlight) and will cause a sugar spike and later crash." They could then encourage healthy behavior by saying something like, "This oatmeal and fruit has less fat calories (or whatever) and will help fuel your body until lunch time." Obviously I think that an informed and educational way would be the best way rather than an emotional one (which I think is easier to turn into shaming), but I'm sure there are other approaches (especially more behavioral) which would be very helpful. I'm just afraid the average person would turn to the shaming because its easier than having to educate themselves so they in turn could help, for example, family members with weight problems. But that of course is my opinion. Others may have more faith in people than I do. 😛

 

[paramour]

I agree with you about discouraging unhealthy behaviors. It just seems for most people (I mean the population at large) they see shaming as the optimal way to discourage unhealthy habits or don't realize that's what they are doing. To me I think, "Don't eat that donut because you are fat and no one wants to marry a fatty," is more harmful than helpful. And you may scoff at the ridiculousness of that statement, but I literally heard a woman say that to her teenage daughter (who was barley overweight if she even was) at a hotel breakfast bar, but that could be a whole other thread itself. If someone is going to discourage it they should say something more along the lines of "You shouldn't eat that donut because its got a lot of fat calories (or whatever nutritional thing you want to highlight) and will cause a sugar spike and later crash." They could then encourage healthy behavior by saying something like, "This oatmeal and fruit has less fat calories (or whatever) and will help fuel your body until lunch time." Obviously I think that an informed and educational way would be the best way rather than an emotional one (which I think is easier to turn into shaming), but I'm sure there are other approaches (especially more behavioral) which would be very helpful. I'm just afraid the average person would turn to the shaming because its easier than having to educate themselves so they in turn could help, for example, family members with weight problems. But that of course is my opinion. Others may have more faith in people than I do. 😛

I think, to some extent, you need to let kids be kids, damnit. Yes, they need to educated, but when my child develops a "fear of fat" at the age of 4 that was discussed earlier in the thread and continues for years? There is absolutely no need for it. Watch what you eat. There are healthy and unhealthy foods, yes. But when everything is based on calories, weight gain, etc.? C'mon? My child has never been a pound overweight a day in his life and the kid looks like he has a frakkin' 6-pack, which is semi-disturbing to me at his age. But it seems that just about everything (and everyone) who focuses on healthy eating leads their "nutritious" messages with #1: caloric intake. Um, yeah, let's try something different, why don't we.

As for the second comment in bold print, I know you're speaking in "averages" here, but your hypothetical family members must be receptive to education, change, etc. If they don't want to hear your non-shaming, educational, informational messages, there is absolutely nothing you can do for them. I've run into too many "experts" in/out the family who go by the latest media fads, alternative treatments, weird ass crap spread around the internetz, or passed down through family generations.

Hell, I had an ex-partner who became angry with me because I *refused* to shame him when he didn't exercise, ate greater portions, gained weight, etc. He decided that it would be easier to lose weight if I mocked him for becoming fatter, if I hounded him to lose weight, if I told him to stop eating, basically pulling away his food, becoming the "food police," etc. This is a very intelligent man and usually quite logical, but he was quite irrational in this particular area. I could be supportive of his desire to lose weight, if that is what he wanted, but it's something he has to do for himself. I can't do it for him ... or for anyone else for that matter.

 

[mewtoo]

I think, to some extent, you need to let kids be kids, damnit. Yes, they need to educated, but when my child develops a "fear of fat" at the age of 4 that was discussed earlier in the thread and continues for years? There is absolutely no need for it. Watch what you eat. There are healthy and unhealthy foods, yes. But when everything is based on calories, weight gain, etc.? C'mon? My child has never been a pound overweight a day in his life and the kid looks like he has a frakkin' 6-pack, which is semi-disturbing to me at his age. But it seems that just about everything (and everyone) who focuses on healthy eating leads their "nutritious" messages with #1: caloric intake. Um, yeah, let's try something different, why don't we.

As for the second comment in bold print, I know you're speaking in "averages" here, but your hypothetical family members must be receptive to education, change, etc. If they don't want to hear your non-shaming, educational, informational messages, there is absolutely nothing you can do for them. I've run into too many "experts" in/out the family who go by the latest media fads, alternative treatments, weird ass crap spread around the internetz, or passed down through family generations.

Hell, I had an ex-partner who became angry with me because I *refused* to shame him when he didn't exercise, ate greater portions, gained weight, etc. He decided that it would be easier to lose weight if I mocked him for becoming fatter, if I hounded him to lose weight, if I told him to stop eating, basically pulling away his food, becoming the "food police," etc. This is a very intelligent man and usually quite logical, but he was quite irrational in this particular area. I could be supportive of his desire to lose weight, if that is what he wanted, but it's something he has to do for himself. I can't do it for him ... or for anyone else for that matter.

I was actually picturing a teen during my example above and used calories because thats whats commonly used. I, personally, used weight watchers online to lose about 30 pounds so I don't actually have any clue how many calories are in different things. 😛 I agree about the just let children be children sentiment. I think ideally the parents would have a healthy lifestyle so its would just rub off on their kids- not "eat this because it only has 3 carbs", but eat this because you've eaten it since your little and you don't know the difference . ;] When/if I have children I hope I'm in a point in my life where I could do something like that.

For your second point, of course, I agree. But to me if you aren't receptive to education on nutrition/fitness are you really in the right mindset to lose weight (or stave off weight gain)? If your not receptive, your not receptive and I still see shaming as a bad way of getting around that fact even if it was the only "option".

Wow... I couldn't do that to someone even if I didn't like them! That just seems mean to me, but then again I wouldn't be asking someone to be my food police. I could see how someone could think of it as a good idea if they felt they didn't have the willpower to actually change themselves, but it still seems masochistic to me. 😱

 

[paramour]

I was actually picturing a teen during my example above and used calories because thats whats commonly used. I, personally, used weight watchers online to lose about 30 pounds so I don't actually have any clue how many calories are in different things. 😛 I agree about the just let children be children sentiment. I think ideally the parents would have a healthy lifestyle so its would just rub off on their kids- not "eat this because it only has 3 carbs", but eat this because you've eaten it since your little and you don't know the difference . ;] When/if I have children I hope I'm in a point in my life where I could do something like that.

For your second point, of course, I agree. But to me if you aren't receptive to education on nutrition/fitness are you really in the right mindset to lose weight (or stave off weight gain)? If your not receptive, your not receptive and I still see shaming as a bad way of getting around that fact even if it was the only "option".

Wow... I couldn't do that to someone even if I didn't like them! That just seems mean to me, but then again I wouldn't be asking someone to be my food police. I could see how someone could think of it as a good idea if they felt they didn't have the willpower to actually change themselves, but it still seems masochistic to me. 😱

I think we're agreed on all counts here.

I recognized that you used a teen in your example, but I've seen a lot of parents do this with their children as well (my ex-partner doing this with our child, which we were constantly in disagreement about; other parents we knew doing this with their children; heck, his school did this when he was at elementary school because of the "obesity epidemic"). All of these people were most definitely not living healthy lifestyles, but "you don't need to turn out like this..." Think something along the ads you've seen for the campaigns in Georgia that got a heck of a lot of national publicity. (If you've not seen them, google them; they'll pop right up... I use them in my classes.)

As for the second bit, just to clarify, I don't think we should shame people if they're unreceptive to the education, change, etc. I simply cannot do it.

The "food police" thing sometimes happens with folks with EDs as well, interestingly enough (and usually ends up with some resentment issues).... Regardless, I refuse to be the food police. I can certainly support you and do whatever else you need me there for (within reason), but I'm not grabbing food out of your hands while you're eating it.

 

[Messler]

Reminds me of how, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, white people were apparently resourceful enough to "find" food at local grocery stores, while Blacks resorted to "looting";
http://o-dub.com/images/looter.jpg

I noticed you capitalized "Blacks" but not "White people." Would it kill you to show a little sensitivity?

 

[AcronymAllergy]

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/08/10/myth-ideal-weight/?intcmp=features


changes in perception of ideal weight in the US since 1990. Very drastic and consistent with my earlier points in this thread.

It's an interesting trend, although I haven't read the study, so I wonder if perhaps there are some other explanations for the results. For example, did they ask the participants what they think the "ideal" weight of a man/woman is in general, or instead what their ideal weight for themselves is/what they would like to weigh?

I think those two questions/ideas could lead to different results. For example, it could seem easier/more realistic to consider losing 10-15 lbs (e.g., from 196 to 181) vs. 25 pounds (e.g., from 196 to 171), leading to a rise in the "ideal" personal weight concomittant with the rise is actual average weight. Additionally, while I have no evidence for this, based solely on anecdotal experiences, I think if you poled a wide variety of people about personal weight loss, the modal answer for the goal of those who desired to lose weight would be somewhere around 10 or 15 lbs.

Although I also wonder if perhaps there's a quasi-cognitive disonance component, and if they examined differences in results for people who were happy with their current weight vs. those who were not? I would think that if a person did actually want to lose weight and/or were not happy with their weight, it might be easier to accept the idea that the "ideal" weight would be 15 lbs. below yours rather than 25 lbs. Also, I wonder if they qualified "ideal" at all (e.g., ideal for health purposes, ideal for aesthetic purposes, or just "ideal" in general).