"eating disorder" thrown around loosely
Replies
-
you choose these ridiculous points to stand your ground on. avoiding food for months at a time is not healthy. you can survive perhaps, but it's not healthy.
In what way was this medically supervised procedure, reported in a peer reviewed journal, "not healthy". The guy didn't eat for a year. Does that disturb you in some way ?
Weighing over 300 lbs is not healthy, the guy clearly improved his health and prospects massively. In doing it the way he did we can gain useful insight into the body's behaviour under extremes that can guide us under more sensible conditions.
whatever. The point is that the assertions banded out by many are unfounded nonsense.what a silly point you are trying to make.
Try to stick to the subject and save us the ad hominem comments.0 -
Yes, and I'm sure they are hitting the gym daily in their weakened state. :laugh:
The large majority of people have no interest in going near a gym, they can loose weight without.
In fact the solution to the "eating 1200, exercising like mad and not loosing" people may well be to drop the exercise part, as Lyle McDonald suggests.0 -
Just kills me when people are here trying to better themselves and doing a good thing and people constantly want to tell them they have an eating disorder and need to seek professional help or a doctor. In a perfect world we would all like to be able to run 10 miles, eat all the veggies and go to the gym 3 hours per day and see the best doctors and nutritionists..
+1
The majority of people don't do formal exercise, and many would rather eat their organs than go to a gym.
At least in the UK this stupid 1200 calorie thing isn't "a thing" at all :-)
And this is a problem for you because.........??0 -
That is the only one that has thrown me (I never heard of it before coming here either). Deciding to stay away from twinkies and eat vegetables, potatoes, meat and fat is not an eating disorder anymore than it is if you tell people you hate broccoli or all vegetables as I have seen many times on this board. Weird. Some people are really attached to the idea that you should be able to eat everything and lose weight. It doesn't work so easily for everyone, and some people chose to eat differently for health.Also, if anyone says they have cut out certain foods, i.e. processed sugar, gluten, processed carbs, ice cream or pop tarts, then they are indeed attacked and accused of having orthorexia. (a word I had never even heard of before coming on here).
The times I've seen people concerned about anorexia with a poster are mostly when that poster has a history of an eating disorder listed in their profile.0 -
Also, if anyone says they have cut out certain foods, i.e. processed sugar, gluten, processed carbs, ice cream or pop tarts, then they are indeed attacked and accused of having orthorexia. (a word I had never even heard of before coming on here).
Orthorexia is a recognized (if not relatively "new" term, coined in 1997) eating disorder. As with all eating disorders, criteria is met when the level of anxiety concerning the food you are eating damages your daily life, social living, and mental health.
It is a real thing and not simply an MFP creation.0 -
I just looked it up. It's not in DSM 5, so it's not yet 'recognized' by the official diagnosis manual.Orthorexia is a recognized (if not relatively "new" term, coined in 1997) eating disorder0 -
Double post. Curses.0
-
I just looked it up. It's not in DSM 5, so it's not yet 'recognized' by the official diagnosis manual.Orthorexia is a recognized (if not relatively "new" term, coined in 1997) eating disorder
It is not in the DSMV (which is and has been under serious overhauls for a few years now as we are discovering more and more workings of the brain). But you will find many psychiatrists will use the word as a diagnosis. Often patients with restrictive diets, such as anorexia, will "switch" to orthorexia as a way to restrict foods. When your eating - regardless of how healthy it is - leads to anxiety, a refusal to enjoy food in the company of others, and consumes more of your time than is enjoyable, that becomes a problem. As such, professionals have been finding terms to label it and thus make treatment easier.0 -
That's fine, people love labels, but it is not in the DSM, so I'm guessing it's because the criteria seems a little too broad or because if people have some serious type of problem (I'm not talking about avoiding gluten or some processed foods!) it is included in 'eating disorder not specified'.As such, professionals have been finding terms to label it and thus make treatment easier.
Orthorexia is thrown around WAY too quickly on this site, for some pretty nonsense reasons, imo. It's not necessary to label everybody who is avoiding twinkies with a (not even officially recognized) eating disorder.0 -
That's fine, people love labels, but it is not in the DSM, so I'm guessing it's because the criteria seems a little too broad or because if people have some serious type of problem (I'm not talking about avoiding gluten or some processed foods!) it is included in 'eating disorder not specified'.As such, professionals have been finding terms to label it and thus make treatment easier.
Orthorexia is thrown around WAY too quickly on this site, for some pretty nonsense reasons, imo. It's not necessary to label everybody who is avoiding twinkies with a (not even officially recognized) eating disorder.
Many words are thrown on this site far too easily, I agree.0 -
For anyone who has battled a weight problem for awhile, and is trying very hard to get to a healthier weight, there certainly IS a level of anxiety that is quite normal.
When you have planned out your calories for the day, then friends want to go our for pizza at 10pm and you choose to either not go, or to go and not eat, since you have already had your food for the day, this should NOT be considered an eating disorder!
A person who is diabetic, or insulin resistant, that has cut out processed sugars and carbs from their diet, does NOT have orthorexia.
A person with a family history of cancer, who has done their homework and chooses to eliminate foods with chemicals and preservatives as much as possible in an attempt to better their odds of avoiding cancer, is simply being responsible for their own health. They do NOT have an eating disorder.
And someone who has put in the hard work and has lost down to a healthy weight, and now must learn maintenance, it is normal for them to be a bit anxious about eating at a higher calorie level, or eating foods that are higher in fat and calories that they may have avoided up til now. This is normal thinking. It is NOT an ED.
I have to agree that the sensitivity of many people on here to jump to judgment and diagnose everyone with an ED is a bit over the top.
There is an old saying. "When all you have is a hammer, everything is a nail."
Just because someone has had an ED in the past, doesn't mean that everyone else has one as well.
The drama of this generation has gotten to a ridiculous level. Everything has to have a diagnosis. SMH
A lot of us need to really lighten up a bit.0 -
you choose these ridiculous points to stand your ground on. avoiding food for months at a time is not healthy. you can survive perhaps, but it's not healthy.
In what way was this medically supervised procedure, reported in a peer reviewed journal, "not healthy". The guy didn't eat for a year. Does that disturb you in some way ?
Weighing over 300 lbs is not healthy, the guy clearly improved his health and prospects massively. In doing it the way he did we can gain useful insight into the body's behaviour under extremes that can guide us under more sensible conditions.
whatever. The point is that the assertions banded out by many are unfounded nonsense.what a silly point you are trying to make.
Try to stick to the subject and save us the ad hominem comments.
such rich irony... you seem to spend a great of your time making ad hominem attacks on here.
chemotherapy is also medically supervised. does that make it healthy?0 -
For anyone who has battled a weight problem for awhile, and is trying very hard to get to a healthier weight, there certainly IS a level of anxiety that is quite normal.
When you have planned out your calories for the day, then friends want to go our for pizza at 10pm and you choose to either not go, or to go and not eat, since you have already had your food for the day, this should NOT be considered an eating disorder!
A person who is diabetic, or insulin resistant, that has cut out processed sugars and carbs from their diet, does NOT have orthorexia.
A person with a family history of cancer, who has done their homework and chooses to eliminate foods with chemicals and preservatives as much as possible in an attempt to better their odds of avoiding cancer, is simply being responsible for their own health. They do NOT have an eating disorder.
And someone who has put in the hard work and has lost down to a healthy weight, and now must learn maintenance, it is normal for them to be a bit anxious about eating at a higher calorie level, or eating foods that are higher in fat and calories that they may have avoided up til now. This is normal thinking. It is NOT an ED.
I have to agree that the sensitivity of many people on here to jump to judgment and diagnose everyone with an ED is a bit over the top.
There is an old saying. "When all you have is a hammer, everything is a nail."
Just because someone has had an ED in the past, doesn't mean that everyone else has one as well.
The drama of this generation has gotten to a ridiculous level. Everything has to have a diagnosis. SMH
A lot of us need to really lighten up a bit.
Anxiety about what you eat does not an eating disorder make. Anxiety that rules your day, disallows you joy, or otherwise consumes time that should be spent doing other things does. If you cannot see that these things are measured in severity, then you have little to no grasp of either healthy OR unhealthy eating.
The converse is also true - just because YOU *don't* have a disorder doesn't mean that other's don't. This is a fitness site that focus on diet reduction. It will attract, among other things, people who have unhealthy diet reduction ideas and/or behaviors. Our concern is for those people, not necessarily you or the next person who merely feels worried that they are not doing the right things to get healthy.0 -
Yes, and I'm sure they are hitting the gym daily in their weakened state. :laugh:
The large majority of people have no interest in going near a gym, they can loose weight without.
In fact the solution to the "eating 1200, exercising like mad and not loosing" people may well be to drop the exercise part, as Lyle McDonald suggests.
That's too bad. You couldn't pay me to go without food for a whole day, let alone an extended period. food = fuel
ETA: Without exercising *at all* I would still feel so weak and hungry, even hangry, without food. I feel sorry for poor people who can't afford nutritious foods. I simply can't imagine going without food, especially protein, for so long. Just dumb, imho.0 -
I think it's interesting that the people who choose to eat less think that others have malicious intent. I really don't think that's the case. Metabolic damage is real. Highly restrictive diets may work in the short term, but what is the cost? That type of calorie deficit can't be maintained indefinitely. When you return to "normal" eating habits, you're likely to gain all the weight back. And if you've damaged your metabolism you might even gain more weight than before while eating less.
Many people have been through this song and dance themselves and I think a majority of them are trying to help.0 -
horrible yet your next reply says "great quotes".Eating disorder and disordered eating are two different things. I've seen more with disordered eating here than actual disorders. Usually orthorexia, often overeating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disordered_eating
That is a horrible article. I read it and still have no clue what it's supposed to mean. Disordered eating....does that mean skipping breakfast? Does that mean eating a big breakfast and a light lunch and dinner? Does that mean having dessert with every meal? A better definition is needed here.0 -
Yes, and I'm sure they are hitting the gym daily in their weakened state. :laugh:
The large majority of people have no interest in going near a gym, they can loose weight without.
In fact the solution to the "eating 1200, exercising like mad and not loosing" people may well be to drop the exercise part, as Lyle McDonald suggests.
Nobody really listens to Lyle anymore, he's as silly as Martin. Listen to people like Alan.0 -
horrible yet your next reply says "great quotes".Eating disorder and disordered eating are two different things. I've seen more with disordered eating here than actual disorders. Usually orthorexia, often overeating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disordered_eating
That is a horrible article. I read it and still have no clue what it's supposed to mean. Disordered eating....does that mean skipping breakfast? Does that mean eating a big breakfast and a light lunch and dinner? Does that mean having dessert with every meal? A better definition is needed here.
The quotes that I quoted *were* great quotes...from Julia Childs. The Wikipedia article on disordered eating is what I find to be horrible and lacking a definition. I decided to Google it and found this one: https://wsr.byu.edu/disorderedeating <-- much better explanation. Sometimes Wikipedia articles are great; other times, not so much. :ohwell:0 -
I think it's interesting that the people who choose to eat less think that others have malicious intent. I really don't think that's the case. Metabolic damage is real. Highly restrictive diets may work in the short term, but what is the cost? That type of calorie deficit can't be maintained indefinitely. When you return to "normal" eating habits, you're likely to gain all the weight back. And if you've damaged your metabolism you might even gain more weight than before while eating less.
Many people have been through this song and dance themselves and I think a majority of them are trying to help.
The problem arises when some people butt their noses in where it is not wanted.
Unless a person asks for assistance within their "diet" or weightloss programme, people should keep the hell away because as sure as eggs are eggs, the one butting in and telling them they are not eating enough/have an ED/will go into starvation mode/will damage their metabolism etc etc etc blah blah blah really has not got a bloody clue what the person they are talking to is all about.
Regarding "normal" eating habits, define "normal" - it should not be what you were eating before, because that is what made the person overweight in the first place and no, they do not have to stay on low calories for the rest of their life, this is a terrible myth that those who really are ignorant on the matter of calorie restrictions started.
From what I have witnessed during the last 6 months, much of it has bordered on spiteful insinuations and accusations that really should have no place pn a website that was designed to be supportive. This place was completely different two years ago, it was not the way it is now and it is a damn shame.
Let people live and let live, let them do their weightloss their own way, if it does not work, then they will soon be asking for help, but I have seen some people's weightloss be basically a success only for them to post some innocent remark on the forums and for somebody then to come on and reply "you are not eating enough" or "you will damage your metabolism" - how the hell is that helpful especially when the person concerned did not have a problem with their weightloss, somebody just did not like them succeeding the way they were doing and decided to throw a great big spanner in the works - why?
What works for one person, may not be suitable for another and people should realize that and leave others the hell alone.0 -
Obviously people don't understand what an eating disorder is. According to the FAO, the average person in the world needs a minimum of 1800 calories a day to maintain their weight and yet, people here will say 1200 to lose weight is starving yourself.
http://www.fao.org/hunger/en/
I'm not sure how I feel about that statistic. I maintain at a higher calorie than that and I'm 4'11". Granted I'm also a special snow flake and I workout. That being said I'm curious what conditions they have to be living (like how active they are) to maintain at that calorie count.
On the 1200 comment... This is just my personal perspective, so someone might disagree with me and that's fine. But I consider someone starving themselves when they eat below below the minimum about of calories you body needs to function. My bmr is about 1283 last I checked. Anything below that and I could be starving myself as far as I am concerned. And I'm under 5 foot. And that's also an extreme number since it isn't taking into account any physical activity.
That being said, I don't understand how anyone could justify eating below 1200, with the exception of situations where it is medically advised and supervised. To me you are starving yourself. Am I going to say you have an ED? No.... But I'm sure I'm thinking it or at the very least that personal has a sad and unhealthy relationship with foo0 -
Obviously people don't understand what an eating disorder is. According to the FAO, the average person in the world needs a minimum of 1800 calories a day to maintain their weight and yet, people here will say 1200 to lose weight is starving yourself.
http://www.fao.org/hunger/en/
I'm not sure how I feel about that statistic. I maintain at a higher calorie than that and I'm 4'11". Granted I'm also a special snow flake and I workout. That being said I'm curious what conditions they have to be living (like how active they are) to maintain at that calorie count.
On the 1200 comment... This is just my personal perspective, so someone might disagree with me and that's fine. But I consider someone starving themselves when they eat below below the minimum about of calories you body needs to function. My bmr is about 1283 last I checked. Anything below that and I could be starving myself as far as I am concerned. And I'm under 5 foot. And that's also an extreme number since it isn't taking into account any physical activity.
That being said, I don't understand how anyone could justify eating below 1200, with the exception of situations where it is medically advised and supervised. To me you are starving yourself. Am I going to say you have an ED? No.... But I'm sure I'm thinking it or at the very least that personal has a sad and unhealthy relationship with foo0 -
I totally agree that unsolicited advice isn't a good idea.
I put normal in quotes because I realize that it will be different for everyone. Very few people can stay on a very low calorie diet long term. Models and Hollywood people do it, but it's pretty tough for your average person.
I know you say you don't have to stay on a low calorie diet forever and you're right. But here's the problem. Once you've slowed your metabolism down, it will take some time to get it back up again. You have to add calories back in very slowly or you will have rebound weight gain.
So you can't just start eating at "maintenance" once you've lost the weight.. If you do, you will most likely gain weight. If you don't understand what happened, you'll probably follow it up with another crash diet. It can be a vicious cycle.
But actually my original point was that I don't think people giving advice are trying to hurt others. I'm really not sure what kind of person sits at a computer trying to "sabotage" a bunch of people on the Internet they don't even know. Seems pretty odd to me. But I guess it could depend on the situation.
The problem arises when some people butt their noses in where it is not wanted.
Unless a person asks for assistance within their "diet" or weightloss programme, people should keep the hell away because as sure as eggs are eggs, the one butting in and telling them they are not eating enough/have an ED/will go into starvation mode/will damage their metabolism etc etc etc blah blah blah really has not got a bloody clue what the person they are talking to is all about.
Regarding "normal" eating habits, define "normal" - it should not be what you were eating before, because that is what made the person overweight in the first place and no, they do not have to stay on low calories for the rest of their life, this is a terrible myth that those who really are ignorant on the matter of calorie restrictions started.
From what I have witnessed during the last 6 months, much of it has bordered on spiteful insinuations and accusations that really should have no place pn a website that was designed to be supportive. This place was completely different two years ago, it was not the way it is now and it is a damn shame.
Let people live and let live, let them do their weightloss their own way, if it does not work, then they will soon be asking for help, but I have seen some people's weightloss be basically a success only for them to post some innocent remark on the forums and for somebody then to come on and reply "you are not eating enough" or "you will damage your metabolism" - how the hell is that helpful especially when the person concerned did not have a problem with their weightloss, somebody just did not like them succeeding the way they were doing and decided to throw a great big spanner in the works - why?
What works for one person, may not be suitable for another and people should realize that and leave others the hell alone.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions