Eating Disorders

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Or how many women simply do not eat

I'm pretty sure that most women eat sometimes. Or is that just a rumour?

Intentionally misunderstanding things
Because you can't make better arguments

And since 2/3 of American women are overweight, most women could do with eating less. The number of women considered underweight is far lower. In the low single digit percentage range.

And then might the conflict that is created between the idealised female body (thin, etc) and the reality of the situation for many American women (they are overweight) create a certain amount of stress and hopelessness, reducing their quality of life? Perhaps they look at the television and think they can never possibly achieve such, which only perpetuates the problem.

Again, replacing these things with a value on healthy living is preferable.

[KrazyHorse]

Averages can mask great internal differences.

What's your point? There are hardly any underweight individuals in the US. On the order of 1-2% from what I recall reading (BMI < 18.5)

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Averages can mask great internal differences.

What's your point? There are hardly any underweight individuals in the US. On the order of 1-2% from what I recally reading (BMI < 18.5)

Which is 3-6 million people? Assuming your statistics are correct, and the methodology is also correct. Hardly an insignificant portion of the population, and they most definitely deserve to life lives of high quality

I hardly see what is contentious about saying that we should value health above these various competing body images pushed by the media.
Given that you seem to be resisting it so much, I can only conclude that you do not value health, and thus despite what you are saying right now ("they should just get on the treadmill!!1"), you are simply uncomfortable with them, or uncomfortable with other images. Perhaps due to some other insecurities you may have?

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


What a bunch of new age relativist tripe.

WHERE'S THE EPIDEMIC OF WOMEN DYING OF MALNUTRITION AND MEN DYING OF STEROIDS?

The average American adult is 30+ lbs overweight.

If you ask me, we could do with a little more societal pressure to be in shape, not less.

sparta

JM

[KrazyHorse]

Again, replacing these things with a value on healthy living is preferable.

Horse****.

For the same reason that if you ask people how active they are everybody says "moderately" or "very" and nobody says "not active".

People lie to themselves. They need objective external measurements to tell them when they're fatasses. Which is why, to a first approximation, the BMI is a wonderful tool. As is the body fat percentage test. And I'd also recommend the Cooper 12 minute test as a proxy for VO2MAX along with a muscular strength test.

But until the day everybody measures those, beer belly versus sixpack is a good start.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Again, replacing these things with a value on healthy living is preferable.

Horse****.

For the same reason that if you ask people how active they are everybody says "moderately" or "very" and nobody says "not active".

People lie to themselves. They need objective external measurements to tell them when they're fatasses. Which is why, to a first approximation, the BMI is a wonderful tool. As is the body fat percentage test. And I'd also recommend the Cooper 12 minute test as a proxy for VO2MAX along with a muscular strength test.

Nothing in this post really clashes with what I've just said. It is indeed entirely possible to value health while also allowing objective external measurements to measure this health

Of course, again, we need to promote healthy values. Promoting exercise and activity and good eating is healthy. Promoting very thin or very muscular models as what we should be aspiring to is most definitely NOT healthy.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar


Which is 3-6 million people? Assuming your statistics are correct, and the methodology is also correct. Hardly an insignificant portion of the population, and they most definitely deserve to life lives of high quality

a) Most of them are not underweight due to eating disorders. Rather, most of them are either naturally skinny, or have an actual chronic disease (not some made up psychological bull****).

b) The good of the many outweighs the good of the few.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar


Nothing in this post really clashes with what I've just said. It is indeed entirely possible to value health while also allowing objective external measurements to measure this health

Of course, again, we need to promote healthy values. Promoting exercise and activity and good eating is healthy. Promoting very thin or very muscular models as what we should be aspiring to is most definitely NOT healthy.

Whine whine whine.

GIVE ME BACK MY SCALE. FAT WHINERS ARE INTERFERING WITH MY EXERCISE ROUTINE.

[Jon Miller]

BMI is only good for nonatheletes. If you are an athelete, you are healthy (often) even if your BMI is higher than the 25.

I consider myself barely active, and I go the gym 3-4 days a week (and keep trying to make it 6-7 days a week).

JM

[KrazyHorse]

This is something I actually admire the Euros on. They're much less accepting of fat people.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


a) Most of them are not underweight due to eating disorders. Rather, most of them are either naturally skinny, or have an actual chronic disease (not some made up psychological bull****).

b) The good of the many outweighs the good of the few.

A) Again, the size of this population is irrelevant. I won't ask you for a source for the statement that very few of them have psychological probelms, because it does not pertain to the conversation at hand: The media is creating harms for both this section of the population and for the overweight section of the population, and therefore we have a duty to address these issues.

B) But they are not opposed to each other - we can help both groups of people at the same time, indeed, with the same action.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Whine whine whine.

GIVE ME BACK MY SCALE. FAT WHINERS ARE INTERFERING WITH MY EXERCISE ROUTINE.

Honestly though, buy a scale. They aren't expensive, and some of them will even give you an estimate of your BF%.

JM

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Whine whine whine.

Well, I guess if you aren't really striving for health, your whining about fat people also not valuing health isn't exactly going to inspire sympathy

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
BMI is only good for nonatheletes. If you are an athelete, you are healthy (often) even if your BMI is higher than the 25.

I consider myself barely active, and I go the gym 3-4 days a week (and keep trying to make it 6-7 days a week).

JM

BMI is, as I said, only a useful first approximation.

But make sure you aren't trying to ignore it because it's telling you something you don't want to hear. If you're a man and your BMI is over 25 you either have a bfp of <8% or you should probably lose some weight.

[Aeson]

I don't discount genetics, because I'm one of those who's just got a metabolism that won't quit. I can lay around for months eating nothing but junk and other than losing muscle tone I don't gain weight at all. Generally lose weight if I eat poorly. Of course I feel like crap, but from an aesthetic perspective there's very little difference.

But a lot of it is societal as well.

The way the media portray beauty, it's no wonder that so many have just given up on being healthy. The vast majority of people, even if in perfect health, are just not going to look as good as the faces we see every day on TV, billboards, ect. Even the "good looking" that are plastered there are extensively made up, the lighting and camera angles are handled by professionals, and the results are airbrushed and touched up before we see them. It's completely unrealistic to think any amount of exersize is going to make people look like that. (Personally I think that's a good thing, that made up look is less appealing than more natural beauty/health.)

Even in regards to a person's figure... we all just aren't put together the same way. There's little to nothing you can do to change your skeletal structure. And that has a pretty big impact on how a person looks.