|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 6 new of 41 responses total. |
furs
|
|
response 36 of 41:
| 
Jul 4 16:16 UTC 2007 |
I completely agree with the discrimination, and it's sad. The think
that irritates me about it is that there are people who make lots of bad
choices in their lives (like drinking, smoking, drugs, etc.) that don't
effect they way they look, yet some day their actions will result in
some sort of consequence most likely. So they bitch about fat people
when it is only because of the way they look and it is hypocritical.
I worked with this guy and he hated me because I was fat. I was so
appalled by him, but I was always really nice to him. I finally asked a
coworker why he was so mean to me, and he told me. I was just
flabbergasted.
It's very sad.
|
slynne
|
|
response 37 of 41:
|
Jul 4 17:43 UTC 2007 |
resp:34 It may be the case that people like your friends who arent on
official diets are not reflected in any studies. Certainly they or
people like them wouldnt be included in studies of specific diets. But
it could also be the case that they have been included and that it is a
coincidence that you happen to know people who have lost weight and kept
it off for years. Or maybe not so much of a coincidence...I can recall
reading of one study that showed that socio-economic class was a factor
in sustained weight loss with people in the higher socio-economic
classes more likely to lose weight and keep it off. There are also
studies that show a correlation between income and weight. There
certainly is a connection in the public psyche. I imagine that you
probably know more people in the higher socio-economic classes than in
the lower ones.
There might have been studies though that show that making permanent
lifestyle changes yields more success than going on a diet with the idea
that the diet is temporary or at least I remember reading that and
somehow got that idea in my head. It was one of the main reasons I
stopped going on diets. I would think to myself,"is this something you
want to do for the rest of your life?" and for me the answer is pretty
much always "no," But obviously for your friends, the answer was
different.
Which kind of leads into furs's comment in resp:33. Most likely, furs,
you will need to monitor your weight for most of the rest of your life.
If doing that is ok with you, and it sounds like it is, then clearly you
have made the right choice.
The hypocritical health concern made by people with plenty of unhealthy
habits always bugs me too. The employment discrimination does as well.
Also the discrimination in health care. And all of the thousand messages
everyone in our culture is bombarded with every day that being fat is
not ok and that fat people are bad people.
|
slynne
|
|
response 38 of 41:
|
Jul 5 02:56 UTC 2007 |
Just in case anyone was in doubt about the nature of fat hatred in our
country, consider the following essay. Apparently fat people are
responsible for pretty much everything that is wrong in our country. Or
rather
"The fat on our bodies is simply the external manifestation of the fat
that infects the national spirit the corruption of our most sacred
institutions, the incompetence of our public servants, the erosion of
our civil liberties and the apathy that weighs us all down like a double
Whopper with cheese."
http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/Content?oid=344915
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 39 of 41:
|
Jul 5 19:40 UTC 2007 |
From today's Dean Ornish column in Newsweek
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19617152/site/newsweek
"A new study published this week in the prestigious journal Nature
Medicine looked at the effects of stress on weight gain in mice.
Investigators reported that chronic emotional stress turns on a peptide
(chemical messenger) called neuropeptide Y, which is found in body fat.
This hormone increases appetite, especially for carbohydrate-rich
foods. It also causes your body to convert these calories into belly
fat, a double whammy.
What's especially interesting is that chronic stress alone didn't have
much effect on weight gain in only two weeks, nor did a high-fat,
high-sugar diet. However, combining both together was especially toxic
and markedly increased abdominal fat deposits in only two weeks.
When the researchers blocked the effects of neuropeptide Y, it reduced
stress-induced visceral (belly) fat by 50 percent "without any
discernible effect on food intake, which remained as increased as it
was" according to the investigators.
In other words, they ate the same amount of food, didn't exercise more,
yet their belly fat decreased by half when the effects of neuropeptide Y
were blocked. This is amazing stuff."
----------------
First time I've seen research that begins to explain why some people
might not be able to lose weight even by eating fewer calories.
|
slynne
|
|
response 40 of 41:
|
Jul 5 20:55 UTC 2007 |
Yeah, that stress research has been ongoing. It is nice to see that it
continues. I have heard it as a possible explanation for some of the
differences in weight among people of different socio-economic classes.
There is also some research that suggests that belly fat increases
certain hormones that in turn cause a person's body to become resistant
to insulin (aka type 2 diabetes). So if a drug could be developed that
prevented the belly fat, it might also be something useful in treating
diabetes.
There really has been a lot of research in this subject because, let's
face it, there is a huge economic insentive here. Can you imagine how
rich a drug company would be if they actually could develop a drug that
caused people to lose weight without the terrible side effects of
current and past weight loss drugs?
|
denise
|
|
response 41 of 41:
|
Jul 6 18:54 UTC 2007 |
[Lots of interesting stuff posted here since I was here last... I'll
have to come back and check out some of the links and such sometime
soon when I have more time to read and think about it, then post
comments.]
|