Medical Conditions Which Affect Weight: Separating Fact From Fiction
Replies
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »The leaky gut syndrome may have been at the root of my autoimmunity health issues.
youngandraw.com/8-sneaky-causes-of-leaky-gut-that-can-lead-to-weight-gain/
While it is true that there are some autoimmune diseases that have been attributed to increased intestinal permeability (Crohn's disease, Celiac disease, Multiple Sclerosis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Irritable Bowel Disease) , some questionable sites on the internet such as the one you have linked here have taken the results of these studies overblown the results. None of these autoimmune diseases lead to weight gain. In fact, some of them (the intestinal ones, to be sure) can lead to weight loss when not under control. While some foods have been linked to increased intestinal permeability (gluten in the case of Celiac, the foods on the FODMAP list in the case of IBS), it remains to be seen what other foods might be linked, the results tend to have something to do with genetics and how the specific genes in each disease cause the intestines to respond to specific foods.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1856434/0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »CurlyCockney wrote: »I just wanted to thank those of you that have shared, you are all truly inspiring.
I wanted to share my health issues too, but although I will talk about it in part talking about all of it is overwhelming to me. I don't know if it's because it's ongoing with no cure or reprieve, or because things change and new problems appear (it all stems from Transverse Myelitis), but I can only cope with it by dealing with one issue at a time.
Having said that, my life changed radically 7 years ago and the weight piled on. I couldn't eat nutritious meals as I wasn't able to prepare or cook them, and I've lost my hunger and satiety signals due to nerve damage. Last year, I got more support with other practical things so now I can use what energy I have to eat properly, and I eat by the clock rather than waiting for signals that aren't going to come. I've always known that CICO works (we used to just call it calorie counting though), but now I've had to learn that my calorie expenditure isn't what it was and adjust accordingly. I've tried to do some exercises with resistance bands, but it's not sustainable for me because it causes too much pain and fatigue. I'm not giving up though, and the weight is coming off just from eating in a deficit. 1st 13lb (27lb) so far, one more pound until I have to fulfil my promise to myself to give up smoking!
Curly, congrats on the loss so far, and good luck with the quitting smoking, you can do it! I have a lot of aunts and uncles who swore they would never quit (my daughter comes by her stubbornness naturally I guess!) and yet, once they decided to do it, they all just did it, and never went back. I've never heard one of them talk about missing it, either, once they got past that initial adjustment.
I hope I never ever hear DKA in any statement that refers to dieting ever, ever again. It is a life threatening medical condition. It is a false argument to say that it negates any rule of CICO. Losing weight because of a medical crisis has nothing to do with deficits or maintenance calories. It should be in the same group as VLCD's, not allowed.
Rabbit, I am just too fast
and GMTA 
@theocine sorry to hear about the cancer diagnosis
^All of this.
To be clearer, CICO is a scientific concept, and even if we on the boards misuse it colloquially, the factors presumed to be there scientifically are still there whether we "lay people" are aware of them, personally factor them in, or discuss them.
The colloquial usage and understanding of "CICO" does not negate its real scientific meaning, which is indeed absolute and accounts for all factors.
No, sorry. It is understood in the scientific community that it is neither absolute nor accounts for all factors. The best current model from my readings is the KD Hall model. Even with this model, research to validate it has shown:
"Gilmore et al found that the estimated average energy intake during overfeeding reasonably matched the actual energy intake and the uncertainty of the method amounted to a few hundred kilocalories per day.
It's a good estimator, it is an excellent tool for weight loss but it isn't exact nor absolute.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/100/3/744.long
http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/298/3/E449.abstract?ijkey=bf9a88465582dccc9d7f04bf73034c8ea6ea3a66&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
I don't want to pollute your excellent thread on with this. If someone is interested with those details - it should be in another thread.
By the way, this doesn't negate your criticisms on the CICO denial - the variants are smaller than the majors.
Fair enough. How about ... how your body operates is absolute outside of our ability to account for it since we're not perfect?
Close enough is good enough and, as you said, doesn't come near validating the CICO denial.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »The leaky gut syndrome may have been at the root of my autoimmunity health issues.
youngandraw.com/8-sneaky-causes-of-leaky-gut-that-can-lead-to-weight-gain/
While it is true that there are some autoimmune diseases that have been attributed to increased intestinal permeability (Crohn's disease, Celiac disease, Multiple Sclerosis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Irritable Bowel Disease) , some questionable sites on the internet such as the one you have linked here have taken the results of these studies overblown the results. None of these autoimmune diseases lead to weight gain. In fact, some of them (the intestinal ones, to be sure) can lead to weight loss when not under control. While some foods have been linked to increased intestinal permeability (gluten in the case of Celiac, the foods on the FODMAP list in the case of IBS), it remains to be seen what other foods might be linked, the results tend to have something to do with genetics and how the specific genes in each disease cause the intestines to respond to specific foods.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1856434/
I had pretty advanced malabsorption with my celiac, and remember reading some and such on leaky gut. I'm not really convinced I ever had it, even after what I went through. I did have pretty drastic weight loss, and it was not a pleasant experience.0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »Fair enough. How about ... how your body operates is absolute outside of our ability to account for it since we're not perfect?
Close enough is good enough and, as you said, doesn't come near validating the CICO denial.
Exactly. While it can be said that our estimates of intake and output are subject to varying degrees of error, the immutable fact remains that if you manage to get your intake below your output, weight loss will occur. There are factors which can make either end of the equation more difficult/complicated, but it doesn't negate thermodynamics/energy balance.0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »The leaky gut syndrome may have been at the root of my autoimmunity health issues.
youngandraw.com/8-sneaky-causes-of-leaky-gut-that-can-lead-to-weight-gain/
While it is true that there are some autoimmune diseases that have been attributed to increased intestinal permeability (Crohn's disease, Celiac disease, Multiple Sclerosis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Irritable Bowel Disease) , some questionable sites on the internet such as the one you have linked here have taken the results of these studies overblown the results. None of these autoimmune diseases lead to weight gain. In fact, some of them (the intestinal ones, to be sure) can lead to weight loss when not under control. While some foods have been linked to increased intestinal permeability (gluten in the case of Celiac, the foods on the FODMAP list in the case of IBS), it remains to be seen what other foods might be linked, the results tend to have something to do with genetics and how the specific genes in each disease cause the intestines to respond to specific foods.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1856434/
I had pretty advanced malabsorption with my celiac, and remember reading some and such on leaky gut. I'm not really convinced I ever had it, even after what I went through. I did have pretty drastic weight loss, and it was not a pleasant experience.
It isn't a certainty in every case - it is still very much in research stage.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
PeachyCarol wrote: »Fair enough. How about ... how your body operates is absolute outside of our ability to account for it since we're not perfect?
Close enough is good enough and, as you said, doesn't come near validating the CICO denial.
Exactly. While it can be said that our estimates of intake and output are subject to varying degrees of error, the immutable fact remains that if you manage to get your intake below your output, weight loss will occur. There are factors which can make either end of the equation more difficult/complicated, but it doesn't negate thermodynamics/energy balance.
Works for me. If you're talking about extrinsic estimate error, and we also add that we might also take into account time-dependent variability of intrinsic factors such as biochemical efficiency, imperfect absorption, etc. and that BMR and TDEE are not constant, then ... if you manage to keep your intake below your output over time, weight loss will occur.
Truly, I applaud the sharing of stories in this thread (and much more interesting than then CICO part of the discussion) - not only have a lot of people overcome significant personal barriers but also highlighting some of specifics of their struggles and ways of overcoming them is probably useful to others in similar situations.0 -
oyChihuahua wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »CurlyCockney wrote: »I just wanted to thank those of you that have shared, you are all truly inspiring.
I wanted to share my health issues too, but although I will talk about it in part talking about all of it is overwhelming to me. I don't know if it's because it's ongoing with no cure or reprieve, or because things change and new problems appear (it all stems from Transverse Myelitis), but I can only cope with it by dealing with one issue at a time.
Having said that, my life changed radically 7 years ago and the weight piled on. I couldn't eat nutritious meals as I wasn't able to prepare or cook them, and I've lost my hunger and satiety signals due to nerve damage. Last year, I got more support with other practical things so now I can use what energy I have to eat properly, and I eat by the clock rather than waiting for signals that aren't going to come. I've always known that CICO works (we used to just call it calorie counting though), but now I've had to learn that my calorie expenditure isn't what it was and adjust accordingly. I've tried to do some exercises with resistance bands, but it's not sustainable for me because it causes too much pain and fatigue. I'm not giving up though, and the weight is coming off just from eating in a deficit. 1st 13lb (27lb) so far, one more pound until I have to fulfil my promise to myself to give up smoking!
Curly, congrats on the loss so far, and good luck with the quitting smoking, you can do it! I have a lot of aunts and uncles who swore they would never quit (my daughter comes by her stubbornness naturally I guess!) and yet, once they decided to do it, they all just did it, and never went back. I've never heard one of them talk about missing it, either, once they got past that initial adjustment.
I hope I never ever hear DKA in any statement that refers to dieting ever, ever again. It is a life threatening medical condition. It is a false argument to say that it negates any rule of CICO. Losing weight because of a medical crisis has nothing to do with deficits or maintenance calories. It should be in the same group as VLCD's, not allowed.
Rabbit, I am just too fast and GMTA
@theocine sorry to hear about the cancer diagnosis
^All of this.
To be clearer, CICO is a scientific concept, and even if we on the boards misuse it colloquially, the factors presumed to be there scientifically are still there whether we "lay people" are aware of them, personally factor them in, or discuss them.
The colloquial usage and understanding of "CICO" does not negate its real scientific meaning, which is indeed absolute and accounts for all factors.
No, sorry. It is understood in the scientific community that it is neither absolute nor accounts for all factors. The best current model from my readings is the KD Hall model. Even with this model, research to validate it has shown:
"Gilmore et al found that the estimated average energy intake during overfeeding reasonably matched the actual energy intake and the uncertainty of the method amounted to a few hundred kilocalories per day.
It's a good estimator, it is an excellent tool for weight loss but it isn't exact nor absolute.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/100/3/744.long
http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/298/3/E449.abstract?ijkey=bf9a88465582dccc9d7f04bf73034c8ea6ea3a66&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
I don't want to pollute your excellent thread on with this. If someone is interested with those details - it should be in another thread.
By the way, this doesn't negate your criticisms on the CICO denial - the variants are smaller than the majors.
Suspect that the portion of the population that sat through science or engineering courses remembers how the prof started Monday with some simple proposition like △E =0 and then spent the remainder of the week expanding it to fill all three chalkboards in the room. Then came "magic Friday" when he (they were all males back in my school days) would point to each term, explain why it accounted for relatively little in the greater scheme of things, and then put a big slash through it. (for engineers, anything that was less than 10% was neglected) The end result: a few quantities that yielded a good enough guess to make an airliner fly or a bridge stand.
There are a great deal of variables folded up in "CI" - enough for the prof to spend an entire semester unpacking; everything from percentage of intake that gets absorbed, efficiency of digestive tract, gut bacteria effects, fast carbs and slow carbs, and so forth.
There are just as many variables in "CO"; ability to effectively measure exercise calories, body efficiency in converting food to energy, TEF, closeness of cellular adipose droplets to mitochondria; and so forth.
But none of those factors stands apart from the fundamental balance in energy in and energy out required by the Law of Conservation of Energy. Most would receive the prof's "slash" on Friday. Because at the end of the day, energy is neither created nor destroyed. Even if our ability to measure it is not perfect.
If you stayed away through that
you eventually got to the point where the prof. pointed out that the sum of the excluded terms might need reintroduction when their impact together was significant. Or when you where looking at reducing the impact of the major factors. In terms of weight loss, those minors certainly can count for a lot in people close to their target weight, weightlifters (where macros and meal partitioning can be used to affect satiety and training) or in people with certain disease (like PCOS, where macros can have a significant influence on the success of straight out focus on just CICO).
Engineers that only focus on the majors?
https://youtu.be/j-zczJXSxnw 0 -
Holy cow
That was hypnotic0 -
Thank you to everyone that has shared their stories in this thread, truly inspiring! 0
-
Hang on
Doesn't NEAT include BMR?
Eg BMR+ activity level = NEAT
NEAT+ purposeful exercise = TDEE
That's how I have always used it
indeed, and you haven't been correct. Non Exercise Activity Thermogenesis is not part of BMR nor does it include BMR, it is energy used on activity (eg fidgetting) that isn't "exercise".
The root of your confusion might be the people who talk of the "NEAT method" vs the "TDEE method" where in the former case (as used by MFP's algorithm) you take a deficit of the BMR + NEAT (possibly + TEF) and cancel out exercise by eating back, in the latter case you take a deficit from the true TDEE.
What do you mean I haven't been correct @yarwell
I said NEAT = BMR+ activity
You said NEAT is not included in BMR
Same thing
I am not confused by NEAT vs TDEE as I understand how to differentiate purposeful exercise from activity level
"I said NEAT = BMR+ activity" you did indeed, and it is incorrect.
BMR + NEAT + TEF + EAT = TDEE
As I said above, NEAT is the energy expended in ACTIVITY that is not exercise, it is not your BMR or inclusive of your BMR. BMR is not activity, and therefore doesn't fall under NEAT.
NEAT is not included in BMR, and BMR is not included in NEAT @rabbitjb
0 -
Hang on
Doesn't NEAT include BMR?
Eg BMR+ activity level = NEAT
NEAT+ purposeful exercise = TDEE
That's how I have always used it
indeed, and you haven't been correct. Non Exercise Activity Thermogenesis is not part of BMR nor does it include BMR, it is energy used on activity (eg fidgetting) that isn't "exercise".
The root of your confusion might be the people who talk of the "NEAT method" vs the "TDEE method" where in the former case (as used by MFP's algorithm) you take a deficit of the BMR + NEAT (possibly + TEF) and cancel out exercise by eating back, in the latter case you take a deficit from the true TDEE.
What do you mean I haven't been correct @yarwell
I said NEAT = BMR+ activity
You said NEAT is not included in BMR
Same thing
I am not confused by NEAT vs TDEE as I understand how to differentiate purposeful exercise from activity level
"I said NEAT = BMR+ activity" you did indeed, and it is incorrect.
BMR + NEAT + TEF + EAT = TDEE
As I said above, NEAT is the energy expended in ACTIVITY that is not exercise, it is not your BMR or inclusive of your BMR. BMR is not activity, and therefore doesn't fall under NEAT.
NEAT is not included in BMR, and BMR is not included in NEAT @rabbitjb
Yep you're right. I've been misusing that term, thanks for the correction0 -
I have a few chronic illnesses and the one that has affected my weight is hypothyroidism. Certainly CICO applies whether normal or suffering form medical conditions. It is fact though that it would be virtually impossible to work out the calories out before diagnosis and I'm of the opinion that my thyroid has been struggling since i was a child. Do i blame my hypothyroidism for my weight gain?absolutely,I don't think i could have lowered my calories enough to stop gaining weight, as in i would have had reduce my calorific intake so much i would have risked not eating the quantities of nutrients my body needed which would have been dangerous (i.e. well below 1200kcal). Do I blame it now for not losing very fast? No, that is because i can be pretty lax some days/weeks I'm in no rush.
I did read some comments that i found pretty harsh in the sense that you must have over eaten to gain so much before diagnoses. I should point out that some thyroid patients are diagnosed early on with a just out of range TSH and T4 and others can have extremely high TSH (I know of hypo patients with a TSH over 200 at diagnoses) now this obviously has an impact on metabolism and how much reduced the CO portion of the equation is and therefore how much weight is gained, the ability to lose weight at the time, etc. So what is the experience for one thyroid patient is not the same for another and we should not judge.
Once well controlled which can also be a battle in itself as doctors automatically assume once in the normal range all is well and may not be for the individual, being hypo shouldn't and in my case doesn't affect weightloss. I am lucky though, i have a very supportive doctor who doesn't panic when my tsh is on the low side (which is where i feel best).0 -
Yep you're right. I've been misusing that term, thanks for the correction
You're welcome. I even found a nice definition at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12468415
"Non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT) is the energy expended for everything we do that is not sleeping, eating or sports-like exercise. It ranges from the energy expended walking to work, typing, performing yard work, undertaking agricultural tasks and fidgeting. Even trivial physical activities increase metabolic rate substantially and it is the cumulative impact of a multitude of exothermic actions that culminate in an individual's daily NEAT."
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »Fair enough. How about ... how your body operates is absolute outside of our ability to account for it since we're not perfect?
Close enough is good enough and, as you said, doesn't come near validating the CICO denial.
Exactly. While it can be said that our estimates of intake and output are subject to varying degrees of error, the immutable fact remains that if you manage to get your intake below your output, weight loss will occur. There are factors which can make either end of the equation more difficult/complicated, but it doesn't negate thermodynamics/energy balance.
Works for me. If you're talking about extrinsic estimate error, and we also add that we might also take into account time-dependent variability of intrinsic factors such as biochemical efficiency, imperfect absorption, etc. and that BMR and TDEE are not constant, then ... if you manage to keep your intake below your output over time, weight loss will occur.
Truly, I applaud the sharing of stories in this thread (and much more interesting than then CICO part of the discussion) - not only have a lot of people overcome significant personal barriers but also highlighting some of specifics of their struggles and ways of overcoming them is probably useful to others in similar situations.
That is indeed what I was hoping to accomplish here. I have overcome/manage my own health struggles and wanted to see if others could do the same. I'll share my story later. No time right now.
0 -
My weight gain started before I got a diagnosis of HyperPARAthyroidism. The hyperparathyroidism did not cause my weigh gain, but the symptoms caused me to eat more and move less: depression, fatigue, weakness, muscle and joint pain. Even after the diagnosis, the weigh gain kept going because I was so afraid to do anything where I might break a bone! Having osteoporosis at 26 is scary! I also became a slug after surgery on my kidney because the stomach muscle around my 9 inch incision were numb and tingly all the time.0
-
I have a few chronic illnesses and the one that has affected my weight is hypothyroidism. Certainly CICO applies whether normal or suffering form medical conditions. It is fact though that it would be virtually impossible to work out the calories out before diagnosis and I'm of the opinion that my thyroid has been struggling since i was a child. Do i blame my hypothyroidism for my weight gain?absolutely,I don't think i could have lowered my calories enough to stop gaining weight, as in i would have had reduce my calorific intake so much i would have risked not eating the quantities of nutrients my body needed which would have been dangerous (i.e. well below 1200kcal). Do I blame it now for not losing very fast? No, that is because i can be pretty lax some days/weeks I'm in no rush.
I did read some comments that i found pretty harsh in the sense that you must have over eaten to gain so much before diagnoses. I should point out that some thyroid patients are diagnosed early on with a just out of range TSH and T4 and others can have extremely high TSH (I know of hypo patients with a TSH over 200 at diagnoses) now this obviously has an impact on metabolism and how much reduced the CO portion of the equation is and therefore how much weight is gained, the ability to lose weight at the time, etc. So what is the experience for one thyroid patient is not the same for another and we should not judge.
Once well controlled which can also be a battle in itself as doctors automatically assume once in the normal range all is well and may not be for the individual, being hypo shouldn't and in my case doesn't affect weightloss. I am lucky though, i have a very supportive doctor who doesn't panic when my tsh is on the low side (which is where i feel best).
I have never known anyone with a higher TSH than my sister. Hers was over 800 and they marveled that she was not dead. In fact, they tested her three times because they were sure it had to be an error.
It wasn't.
She was only 20 pounds overweight at diagnosis.
I am sorry, it is EXACTLY how much food you eat that determines the extent to which you gain weigh beyond which your metabolism slows down from the disease.
As for doctors? It depends on the doctors. Good endocrinologists treat symptoms, not numbers. It's on us as patients to advocate for ourselves and seek them out.
I have a history of missed diagnoses and being mistreated by the medical system. I had enough of playing victim and whining about it. Things got drastically better for me when I became a proactive advocate in my own health care.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
I think it is true that we don't know the whole story.
Maybe the Mom is concerned that the OP has lost enough weight already and then being so rigid about having any kind of triggering food around is concerning because it has red flags all over it. That is my initial take on it.
I think you're in the wrong thread, love!0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Ariel_themeanwoman wrote: »Fat and lazy medical condition. I pay taxes for your medication so i can say whatever i want
I guess you have no life so you have to troll for attention, such a shame. Have you tried voluntary work? It could fill your boredem time and teach you some life skills
0 -
Ariel_themeanwoman wrote: »Its called being truthful
How about taking some English lessons to fill your time meaningfully?0 -
Ariel_themeanwoman wrote: »Fat and lazy medical condition. I pay taxes for your medication so i can say whatever i want
I pay taxes so that you can have the right to stand and hold up a flag on a beach and say whatever you want.
Rarely do I laugh this much when I first get up in the mornings...so...thanks!0 -
Don't feed the trolls folk - hopefully a mod will be around shortly to clean the beach.0
-
Yep...beach cleaning should begin momentarilyEvgeniZyntx wrote: »Don't feed the trolls folk - hopefully a mod will be around shortly to clean the beach.
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Don't feed the trolls folk - hopefully a mod will be around shortly to clean the beach.
I rarely throw out those little bits of troll seeds but it amused me so much. I think sometimes someone's arrogance is so outrageous that all you can do is laugh.0 -
I haven't read all the comments on this thread, so maybe I am repeating, but my husband works on genetic links to PCOS in one of the leading labs in Europe and I suffer from it as well so I have a fairly good understanding from a scientific approach and having been there... It seems that someone with PCOS, however much they eat, due to the way their hormones affect their metabolism, will have an additional KitKat in their daily diet, without having consumed it. IE, their body thinks they have eaten approx 200 calories more then they actually have, and although 200 isn't that much, across the weeks, months and years it adds up. Therefore, a PCOS sufferer will have to restrict their diet more than a regular person.... So yes, whilst it is still CICO, in their case it isn't quite as simplistic... And to make matters worse, the more overweight the woman is, the "more calories are added to their diet"
Does this make any sense??
(PS, i'm totally "doomed" because Im on steroids as well, so my battle is so much harder.......)0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »I have a few chronic illnesses and the one that has affected my weight is hypothyroidism. Certainly CICO applies whether normal or suffering form medical conditions. It is fact though that it would be virtually impossible to work out the calories out before diagnosis and I'm of the opinion that my thyroid has been struggling since i was a child. Do i blame my hypothyroidism for my weight gain?absolutely,I don't think i could have lowered my calories enough to stop gaining weight, as in i would have had reduce my calorific intake so much i would have risked not eating the quantities of nutrients my body needed which would have been dangerous (i.e. well below 1200kcal). Do I blame it now for not losing very fast? No, that is because i can be pretty lax some days/weeks I'm in no rush.
I did read some comments that i found pretty harsh in the sense that you must have over eaten to gain so much before diagnoses. I should point out that some thyroid patients are diagnosed early on with a just out of range TSH and T4 and others can have extremely high TSH (I know of hypo patients with a TSH over 200 at diagnoses) now this obviously has an impact on metabolism and how much reduced the CO portion of the equation is and therefore how much weight is gained, the ability to lose weight at the time, etc. So what is the experience for one thyroid patient is not the same for another and we should not judge.
Once well controlled which can also be a battle in itself as doctors automatically assume once in the normal range all is well and may not be for the individual, being hypo shouldn't and in my case doesn't affect weightloss. I am lucky though, i have a very supportive doctor who doesn't panic when my tsh is on the low side (which is where i feel best).
I have never known anyone with a higher TSH than my sister. Hers was over 800 and they marveled that she was not dead. In fact, they tested her three times because they were sure it had to be an error.
It wasn't.
She was only 20 pounds overweight at diagnosis.
I am sorry, it is EXACTLY how much food you eat that determines the extent to which you gain weigh beyond which your metabolism slows down from the disease.
As for doctors? It depends on the doctors. Good endocrinologists treat symptoms, not numbers. It's on us as patients to advocate for ourselves and seek them out.
I have a history of missed diagnoses and being mistreated by the medical system. I had enough of playing victim and whining about it. Things got drastically better for me when I became a proactive advocate in my own health care.
Oh I'm not disputing that it is the amount of food I have put in my mouth that has determined how much overweight I become my argument is that to determine CO is difficult when not diagnosed and had i reduced my calories accordingly i would have been on a dangerously low amount of calories at that time. Also i wasn't all that overweight at diagnosis it was the year it took them to get my all medication right where it piled on, I was really quite ill. If i hadn't had hypothyroidism and i remained eating the same i wouldn't have gained sooo much weight.
In the UK it is very difficult to seek out good doctors my gp manages my hypothyroidism (which is standard practice here and she is very good) and a referral to an endocrinologist is limited to the local hospitals which in my area means just the patronising arrogant tw"t i have had dealings with, that calls himself an endo. Short of being able to pay for one privately thats where most people would be stuck with the nhs docs (most of which are very good btw just a bad experience with an endo for me).0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions