Bound to be controversial

barbecuesauce wrote: »

Nearly every HAES proponent I've seen has been in their 20s. If you're in your 20s and have lousy blood test results, that's probably more the work of your lousy genes than your weight. Where are the 57-year-old HAES advocates?

But the doctor card thing HAES bloggers advocate kills me:



because there are times when the patient NEEDS to lose weight and when medical intervention would be completely inappropriate without weight loss. A person in their twenties can blow out their knees with excess weight. Should they be given new knees, which can last for up to 20 years (but might fail in 3-5, a major risk factor for early failure being excess weight)? What kind of doctor would operate on such a person?

That's anti-vaxxer levels of derp right there.

TimothyFish wrote: »

I haven't read the other comments, so I'm sure someone has already mentioned this, but some people who are overweight have normal blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar levels. Of course, they're still bound to have joint problems and put themselves at risk for stress fractures, but other than that, they are healthy. At the same time, there are those people who are at a normal BMI but have high blood pressure, etc. consistent with a fat person (a.k.a "skinny fat").

if you have joint problems, you are NOT healthy! People do seem to downplay any body issues relating to the skeletal system. I wonder why that is?

Bones, tendons, cartilage and ligaments - damage to them can cause permanent, sometimes irreversible damage to our bodies. Why do we think it's OK to deal with the daily pain and discomfort of this kind of damage, but only consider ourselves unhealthy once we're out of breath hauling our damaged limbs up stairs, and talk about 'lung capacity'! Is it because this system is also the 'property' of strong, fit athletes? I'm genuinely curious as to how people perceive skeletal system pain and problems.

Ay ay ok im not too familiar with the HaES and dont fully support that card post above but this is so close to my heart, and all i can give my opinion base in my personal experience,i grew up surround it by doctors, i work all day next to doctors and it killls me the way i see everyday people with weight issues are treat, and many/some times they are not getting the same atention a normal weight person does.

Its like you name the reason why they go to the doctor, and many time they are not taken seriously and allways get the same answer/look ; loose weight , next patient please. seriously? Not all is over weight related it, do your job and help me the way you are suppose to and my god the average of people here in mfp are at least in their late 30's so yeah it takes time for people to change their life.

Ps: not a rant, but have witness very unfair over weight people being treat

sapphire1166 wrote: »

Depends. I think if you're 150 lbs over your "normal" weight, there really isn't any way on earth you're healthy. But if you're a little over and exercise regularly, sure you can be healthy. When I was in high school, I was considered overweight by about 25/30 lbs. BUT I was on the track team (shot put and discus), was a 2nd degree black belt teaching 4 martial arts classes a week, and ran regularly. I was toned and athletic, but still felt insanely fat in my size 14 jeans. Looking back as an adult there's no doubt in my mind I was healthy despite being overweight, and this has helped me set realistic expectations for my weight loss this time around.

I think the matters is ask our self is what is the definition of healthy. I see by your definition that i wasn't healthy in your book, but not so long ago i was 300 lbs/150 lbs over weight and i didn't have any medical health issues, likeeee nothing, blood test, hormones, metabolic panel perfect, joints working perfectly.etc

So being healthy to you is define by the actual health condition of a person or by the potentially risk a person have to develop some medical health weight issue in the future?

yopeeps025 wrote: »

karyabc wrote: »

Ay ay ok im not too familiar with the HaES and dont fully support that card post above but this is so close to my heart, and all i can give my opinion base in my personal experience,i grew up surround it by doctors, i work all day next to doctors and it killls me the way i see everyday people with weight issues are treat, and many/some times they are not getting the same atention a normal weight person does.

Its like you name the reason why they go to the doctor, and many time they are not taken seriously and allways get the same answer/look ; loose weight , next patient please. seriously? Not all is over weight related it, do your job and help me the way you are suppose to and my god the average of people here in mfp are at least in their late 30's so yeah it takes time for people to change their life.

Ps: not a rant, but have witness very unfair over weight people being treat

So now you try to act smarter the doctors who have degrees? A lot of issues can happen from being overweight and a lot of issues go away once you get back into "healthy weight range".

Ohhhh 1) i dont try to act , i actually went to med school , did my 5 years and graduate so yes that actually qualifys me to write that sort of opinion cause i have the same degree than the "smarts people"

2) what is your point? I think i said not all issues are over weight related it, of course many health issues are going to improve once you loose weight

barbecuesauce wrote: »

Nearly every HAES proponent I've seen has been in their 20s. If you're in your 20s and have lousy blood test results, that's probably more the work of your lousy genes than your weight. Where are the 57-year-old HAES advocates?

But the doctor card thing HAES bloggers advocate kills me:



because there are times when the patient NEEDS to lose weight and when medical intervention would be completely inappropriate without weight loss. A person in their twenties can blow out their knees with excess weight. Should they be given new knees, which can last for up to 20 years (but might fail in 3-5, a major risk factor for early failure being excess weight)? What kind of doctor would operate on such a person?

I love how HAES claims to be evidence based, then eliminates key evidence points of weight, height, body mass.

karyabc wrote: »

Ohhhh 1) i dont try to act , i actually went to med school , did my 5 years and graduate so yes that actually qualifys me to write that sort of opinion cause i have the same degree than the "smarts people"

I'm not buying it.

barbecuesauce wrote: »

Physicians serve the role of health advocates. In Canada the accreditation body for specialty medical training is the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons and their model of residency training is summarized in the CanMEDS roles, one of which is "Health Advocate." As an advocate for health you are responsible for advising your patients to quit doing harmful things - wear their seatbelt when driving, wear a helmet while cycling, stop smoking or drinking to excess and, yes, lose some weight if obese.

It is actually my JOB as a physician to encourage obese people to lose weight. Studies on smoking cessation prove beyond a doubt that a physician advising someone to quit smoking increases their likelihood of actually doing it. I've no reason to think that obesity is any different.

karyabc wrote: »

sapphire1166 wrote: »

Depends. I think if you're 150 lbs over your "normal" weight, there really isn't any way on earth you're healthy. But if you're a little over and exercise regularly, sure you can be healthy. When I was in high school, I was considered overweight by about 25/30 lbs. BUT I was on the track team (shot put and discus), was a 2nd degree black belt teaching 4 martial arts classes a week, and ran regularly. I was toned and athletic, but still felt insanely fat in my size 14 jeans. Looking back as an adult there's no doubt in my mind I was healthy despite being overweight, and this has helped me set realistic expectations for my weight loss this time around.

I think the matters is ask our self is what is the definition of healthy. I see by your definition that i wasn't healthy in your book, but not so long ago i was 300 lbs/150 lbs over weight and i didn't have any medical health issues, likeeee nothing, blood test, hormones, metabolic panel perfect, joints working perfectly.etc

So being healthy to you is define by the actual health condition of a person or by the potentially risk a person have to develop some medical health weight issue in the future?

I agree that there are very different definitions of "healthy". When I was 100 lbs overweight I didn't have any heart, blood pressure, joint, etc issues at all. On paper, other than my weight, I was "healthy". But I couldn't walk up 3 flights of stairs without being winded. I couldn't get up off the floor without using every limb of my body and holding on to something. I didn't have the energy to throw my kid up in the air and play for more than a minute at a time. So I considered myself unhealthy despite what blood tests showed.

It would be better if the message was that you can pursue health at any size.
Encouraging chronically obese people to care about their bodies regardless of the number on the scale can't be a bad thing. It would be great if the movement encouraged healthy nutrient rich diets with physical activity and self care. Surely the scale would follow for the majority of people, even if the scale wasn't the focus.

Merkavar wrote: »

I guess healthy is a bit to subjective.

For one it could be running a half marathon and for another it could be not being in hospital.

On the same lines as this.....

People can be fit at any size. BUT, fit is just one component of being healthy as far as I'm concerned. There are lots of health issues associated with a high body fat percentage.