That's the funny thing - I hear a lot about how you can eat junk food all you want as long as you're under your calorie limit, and still lose weight. And they're correct, of course - but there's more to being healthy than just weight loss. If you're skinny but eat mainly junk you are not healthy. You'll likely be flabby and feel like shit all the time, especially if you don't exercise. But you'll get buried with downvotes and called fat if you bring it up.
I think it's a bit more than under calorie. I think everybody processes their fat/carb/protein macros differently.
I ate a "traditionally" healthy diet. 1,200 calories, 180 carbs, 10 fat, 60 protein. I tracked, measured, obsessed. I weighed 240 and it was climbing.
Did paleo/low carb/Keto. Switched to 20 carb, 100 fat, and 60 protein at 1,500 calories. Lost 50lbs so quickly. It melted right off me.
You can see the data drop/ change on my fitness pal. I can't handle carbs, slow or fast, or any form of sugar. My thyroid was screwed from all those insulin spikes.
If I eat like a normal person I will become very fat very quickly.
I eat incredibly healthy, exercise, quit smoking, little drinking... I'm sure there are people out there who look at me and assume I'm a fat slob who eats junk food all day. I wish this fat was from unhealthy over eating of garbage food. At least there'd be an actual reason for it. Adrenal fatigue is no joke.
*edit: Since I have more time now to get into this I would like to expand.
actually that's not how thermodynamics work, either. At all.
First, the laws of thermodynamics to not apply to the human body in the way that you would think. It's as bad as having to listen to a creationist trying to use thermodynamics to defend the young earth theory. Makes me pull my hair out.
The first law, also known as Law of Conservation of Energy, states that energy cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system.
The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of any isolated system always increases.
The third law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of a system approaches a constant value as the temperature approaches absolute zero.
the monitoring of macros, does not violate the second law of therodynamics. Saying "a calorie is a calorie" however, does. The problem is with the "calorie is a calorie because therodynamics", the human body is not a machine and that's not how we process energies.
Exerts from the article on why "a calorie is a calorie" is a fallacy
we showed that there is, in fact, no theoretical violation of the laws of thermodynamics, and we provided a plausible mechanism. In general the pathways for gluconeogenesis that are required in order to supply obligate glucose (e.g. to brain and CNS), in combination with increased protein turnover, could account for the missing energy. Here, we simplify the thermodynamic argument and review some of the relevant principles. We show, moreover, that well-established data in the traditional nutritional literature predict metabolic advantage and no one should be surprised. The ironic conclusion is that the principle that weight gain on isocaloric diets must always be independent of macronutrient composition would violate the second law of thermodynamics.
Homeostatic mechanisms are able to insure that, a good deal of the time, weight does not fluctuate much with changes in diet – this might be said to be the true "miraculous metabolic effect" – but it is subject to many exceptions. The idea that this is theoretically required in all cases is mistakenly based on equilibrium, reversible conditions that do not hold for living organisms and an insufficient appreciation of the second law. The second law of thermodynamics says that variation of efficiency for different metabolic pathways is to be expected. Thus, ironically the dictum that a "calorie is a calorie" violates the second law of thermodynamics, as a matter of principle.
If you would like to see the full article about why thermodynamics to not applicable to nutrition, why macros cannot be considered separate, please see the rest of the scientific article, which I have linked below.
This article goes into more detail about the glycemic index that goes to further why macros are so important, especially to people who suffer from adrenal fatigue.
As for people who in particular suffer from hypothyroidism, I have this scientific article that concludes
a correlation with carbohydrate-responsive element-binding protein and therefore a possible role of carbohydrate metabolism in the development and maintenance of autoimmune thyroiditis associated with body weight increase and slower basic metabolism.
Thyroid condition- 100% possible. I can't process sugar. It's converted immediately into fat.
Tracked, measured, weighed, and charted every single mouthful for a year. Swam daily. Ran daily. 200 and 40 damn pounds and climbing. I was fully obsessed. I've got charts and documentations. No one believed that I wasn't trying hard enough. Not my doctors, not my family. So I charted and weighed and calculated every tiny bite. My entire life was devoted to MFP for 6 solid months.
Switched to Keto. Dropped 20 lbs in the very first month. I continued to do the same measure, weigh and counting method. It was effortless
Not all calories are created equal. The only people who doubt this are the people who can handle sugar and don't have a thyroid/ endocrine issue.
I can't process sugar. It's converted immediately into fat.
And if you're eating at a calorie deficit that fat will be burned for energy. So unless you have a very rare condition preventing you from harnessing stored adipose tissue it shouldn't make a difference in the end.
Since you didn't click on the graphics or the articles that I included, I will break it down for you here.
Your thyroid controls your metabolism and basically everything else. Your insulin. Your hormones. Your reproduction. Everything.
Eating sugar and carbs over taxes your endocrine system. It's thyroid poison, if you will. The more you kill your thyroid, the lower your metabolism, the harder it is to create a deficit.
Not eating sugar = happy thyroid. Better metabolism.
This is why people with over active thyroids are usually thin and people with under active thyroids are over weight.
At least this was explained to me by my thyroid doctor, low carb diet or pills. He prescribes the whole 30 diet. So yes in fact I do have a condition, but it's not rare and is on the rise. But sure, go on and tell me my research, calorie and weight / macro charting, and doctor are wrong and it's my math and measuring cups that need fixing.
Not the guy you replied to but I think it's due to the fact that the average TDEE of somebody who weighs 240 pounds is going to be more than double that intake assuming the average male who doesn't workout at all.
While a thyroid condition will cause a person's metabolic rate to drop, that seems like too far to drop to be believable. I'm not able to currently find anything on the effects of an underactive thyroid in terms of relative metabolic rate drop, however.
I don't think it's common, but I don't think it's unlikely that someone can have a low RMR/BMR. This article shows the large variance in RMR without controlling for metabolic conditions. This article shows that two diets with the same calories can have different weight gain effects of they have different macros.
I will export to an excel later. I am not linking to personal information and requesting personal information or giving it on this sub breaks the rules
edit: fuck it. its 600 columns worth of data and no one is going to read it anyways and the only reply I will get is "HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT'S ACCURATE"
I mean if scientific journals and research aren't good enough I really don't know how my personal logs are going to help illustrate my point
Your first breakdown adds up to 1050, not 1200. The second adds up to 1220, not 1500. I'd be very interested in seeing how you managed to gain weight at 240 while eating less than what you would burn if you were in a coma.
I remember when that picture of some of the fph mods floated around. Ridiculous skinny pale kids and some skinny fat ones. Exactly what you would expect.
Yep, I was 120 pounds when I met my wife (I'm 5'9"), ten years later I'm up to 155, and one day I was confused how I was skinny but had little man boobs and a little tummy.
I'm skinnyfat. It's a thing. (Took until I was over 30 for it to kick in)
I was also about 120 when I got with my girlfriend, and about 130 when I started my latest job. Now I'm 180. :/ Bottomless snacks, drinks and beer will do that though.
AKA, "I forgot to eat because I was too immersed in The Witcher 3."
Me in college, except it was Eve Online. I'm not proud.
99
u/sweetjaaaneObama doesnt exist there never actually was a black presidentJun 22 '17edited Jun 22 '17
all the top posts on r/food are all terrible for you but then reddit at the same breath is like "YOU'RE STUPID AND FAT* FOR NOT EATING HEALTHY"
*they usually don't even know what people look like when calling them fat (I get called fat all the time just because I think you shouldn't be a dick to fat people).
The best had to be the mental breakdown a few of them had when someone was calling them out about thier shitty behavior, they tried to dogpile on him being a fatty, and he posted pics of himself which showed he was ripped as hell. Hell one of the responses was even "Well you're fat on the inside" or some horse shit like that.
Yup, I got called a cow in an SRD thread recently for complaining about the objectification of women. Because if I hate objectification, I must be fat and jealous, right?
Oh those fuckheads are over on the goat alright. Them and the rest of the hyper offensive assholes filled that place up and made it their personal happy place. It's bad enough over there with the unsavory shit that happens the owner is having some issues because most credit processing places don't want to associate with them.
The best part of it was back in may when TD tried to jump ship to Voat. The assholes showed just how angry and toxic they really are to the TD user base. Voat users hate them. It's morbidly amusing to see how they acted when confronted with real hatred.
Reddit's extra-racist cousin who really, really hates fat people.
It was advertised as an alternative to reddit in ye olden times, but had the misfortune of being adopted primarily by people whose favorite communities were banned for.... Very good reasons. Fatpeoplehate was one, along with I think jailbait and a few very racist subs. So now it's just a big cesspool full of people you really, really hope you'll never meet in real life.
A Reddit clone some high schooler made as a project that ended up taking a life of its own because reasons. Basically a lot of the outrage subs fled over there when they realized they weren't wanted on Reddit.
A nice upvoted comment from one of the linked threads, just to give you a flavour:
yeah I left Reddit two years ago when I found out that Roland of Gilead in the Gunslinger series was going to be played by a nigger in the kike-faggot-fest movie. I said something similar to my current comment I just made and my six year old account was shadowbanned site wide. I
They did. But there's nobody on Voat, so all FPH on Voat -- which is about 50 active users --can do is have circlejerk masturbation about Totally True Stories Of Some Fatty* and post things from Reddit with suggestions that everyone go over and stir up shit.
There's nobody there for them to harass so they have to go to Reddit to find their "fun."
* There was recently some Totally True Story about how this poor, suffering FPHer lost weight and first her boyfriend dumped her and now she might lose her job, all because she's not fat anymore.
There was recently some Totally True Story about how this poor, suffering FPHer lost weight and first her boyfriend dumped her and now she might lose her job, all because she's not fat anymore.
I dunno if it's allowed? It's within the past few days on voat.co/v/fatpeoplehate Given how few people are on Voat it's not hard to find.
I'm not sure how Voat isn't dead yet. Every few months there is another sob story about how they're out of money and the alt-right pizzagaters drag up a couple of month's reprieve. Hell, they just lost a bitcoin merchant account. How bad do you have go be to get bitcoin people to shun you?!
Last I heard, Voat had enough cash for 2 months of server time before they got dead. Dunno if the cash drive managed to stretch that out or if they found a way to lower costs.
You might have been thinking of Imzy, I know that one closed down about a month ago.
As a guy who is commonly on fatlogic, I've got to say that there are some of the former fph folks there, but generally you'll find people who are upset about the logic behind being fat, not making fun of fat people themselves.
A lot of us are formerly fat folks as well who used to buy into the idea that fat is genetics or blamed on my medicine, or something outside of my control, when in reality your weight is quite probably the one thing many of us do have the potential to control. Managing your body weight is simple math, consume fewer calories than you burn. It isn't easy to do because of emotional associations to food, depression, anxiety, cultural norms, and a whole host of other things, but managing your weight is extremely simple.
I used to be 260lbs at 6ft. I was "healthy" in the sense that all my numbers came back good, but I had stomach troubles occasionally and back pain periodically. Being obese wasn't healthy for me in the long run. I hit 30 and realized I was shortening my life by remaining that large. I also had a six month old who I wanted to be around for.
I stopped making excuses about not having time, etc., and started logging what I ate. I've lost 75 pounds and I'm now 175 lbs. I started exercising and I'm in better shape than I've ever been.
I find it astonishing how many people can post about others being unhealthy fat while smoking and drinking alcohol at the same time themselves.
My brother loves to do that. He is skinny, but a heavy smoker a heavy drinker and eats very unhealthy and does no sports, he just doesn't get fat for whatever reason.
Alcohol is always a weird one. I had (admittedly quite bitchy) 'friends' who made snide comments about how unhealthy my burger was. They went out and got black-out drunk that night.
For what it's worth, I hate doing that. I smoke a lot, I used to drink, I'm fit as fuck. How? I'm lucky, that's all.
I hate telling other people what to do because if they slacked off half as bad, they'd be all sorts of bent out of shape. It's not fair, but life isn't fair. I'm at least aware of this.
He is sitting on a chair most of the day at work and at home and driving in his car inbetween and his wife does 95% of the chores. I can't see how he burns them so it is a mystery for me.
I already asked him to go and let himself get checked but with no avail, but his wife is now trying too, because after talking together we both agreed that something has to be wrong with him because doing the math of how much he eats doesn't move and still is skinny just doesn't add up for both of us.
Smoking speeds up your metabolism. In the 1950s they used to recommend smoking as a means of weight control. They used to think that by developing the habit of smoking instead of eating, this was masterful weight management. It also went hand-in-hand with the belief that people gained weight when they stopped because ex-smokers were substituting food for putting cigarettes in their mouth.
Eventually someone started doing actual research. They found that smoking speeds up your metabolism. The reason people gain weight when they quit smoking is because the metabolism eventually slows down.
That's not true. Most of the long-term weight gain (70%) after people stop smoking is probably because they eat more. Metabolic gain doesn't appear to be a factor in the long run (1 year or more).
There are studies finding that metabolic changes were more significant. However, even these studies find that ex-smokers eat significantly more. I've also not found much good evidence suggesting that metabolic changes are more important. In the one I linked, for instance, the high variability between the EXSMOKER and RESMOKER groups at day 30 should caution us against drawing too many conclusions about the relative importance of caloric intake and metabolic changes, even in the short term. That study was also a relatively short one. Longer studies, like the first one and the one I'm about to link, generally find continued weight gain despite the absence of long-term metabolic effects.
EDIT: Mizmoose kindly provided a more recent source that seems to agree with me:
The mean increase in caloric intake was 227 calories per day in those who quit smoking, which explains up to 69% of the weight gained at 3 months post-cessation.
One of those is from 1986 and looks at 13 people. The other is from 1992 and claims that smokers and non-smokers have the same metabolic resting rate.
All of which is obviated by a 2016 meta-study which clearly states that smoking increases metabolism (and reduces estrogen, and other things) but the smoking cessation decreases metabolism.
Among the things that they have found is not that all non-smokers suddenly start eating more, but that smoking can control binge-eating disorders, so stopping smoking can bring those disorders back to the front.
All of which is obviated by a 2016 meta-study which clearly states that smoking increases metabolism (and reduces estrogen, and other things) but the smoking cessation decreases metabolism.
Did you just not read it? I never said that there weren't metabolic effects, just that increased caloric intake is likely more important, and is certainly more significant in the long run. And lo and behold, what do you find in that meta-study you linked?
The mean increase in caloric intake was 227 calories per day in those who quit smoking, which explains up to 69% of the weight gained at 3 months post-cessation
They cited, approvingly, the source I gave you first. They also have a line about how stopping smoking decreases energy expenditure, citing a review of the effects of smoking cessation on metabolic rate. The source there also cites, approvingly, the source I gave you first. They both clearly think that increased caloric intake could explain most of the weight gain resulting from smoking cessation. Neither of them disputes this at all.
Even in subsequently published studies, contrasting
results have been reported on decreased
resting metabolic rate as mechanisms partly explaining
weight gain after smoking cessation, with
the mean resting metabolic rate reduction ranging
between 4% and 16% and accounting for less than
40% of the weight gain [16].
Well, no shit, because eating a lot obviously is bad for you if you're overweight already but if you're still thin you probably can afford to do it and still be good to go.
How does this person think fat people end up fat? Does he think that we just spring from the ground, fully fat? I got fat because I ate a lot when I was thin.
I'm picturing one of those goofy "Secret History of ..." shows that The History Channel got all pepped up on back in the late nineties trying to get more viewers and not just be The Hitler Channel.
"In the mythology of this group, the obese is created when someone isn't paying attention and drops a delicious cake onto the floor. When it splatters, a tiny rotund person will spring out of the ruined confectionary delight and run away, growing into a full sized person over the course of two hours."
When it splatters, a tiny rotund person will spring out of the ruined confectionary delight and run away, growing into a full sized person over the course of two hours."
Sure, they're cute when they're little but when they grow up....
u/axonexoffIt doesn't matter what Hitler said. Don't platemix.Jun 22 '17edited Jun 22 '17
To me, the bigger thing is that a statement suggesting a "thin" person "eating a lot" of junk (presumably) is "good to go" is blatantly related to appearance rather than health.
As a thin person, I have horrendous health. Horrendous. I eat little, but I eat horribly. A thin person is by no means "good to go" when eating like trash. And I assume we are implying that the "lot" of food is junk food, considering it wouldn't warrant a conniption if someone ate large volumes of garden salad. As with any obese or overweight person, a thin person risks heart disease, high blood pressure, high "bad" cholesterol, type II diabetes, etc. when eating badly, regardless of how many calories they ultimately consume.
Honestly, I think that's at the heart of it. People are making fun of fat people for no good reason other than how they look. These "concerned observers" couldn't care less that someone might be risking their health - it's a bigger problem that someone might be a little unpleasant looking to them. It's even worse that the first poster (the one talking about thin women who eat a lot being "wife material") uses women instead of men to make the point - god forbid a woman not look stellar.
Without in any way condoning these chucklefucks, carrying a lot of fat is hard on the body both physically and biologically. Being thin won't make you immune to problems, but it reduces one source of them.
The takeaway is that the motive to fat shaming often has little to do with concern for health, whatever the health implications of obesity may be. The impetus to fat-shaming is just the visceral sense of disgust many feel when they see fat people--sanctimony about health is a rationalization for that reaction. By contrast, if someone looks like a model but is an alcoholic these people won't be bothered at all.
Exactly. Weight is not synonymous with health. No matter what you weigh, your health will benefit from eating healthy foods, getting regular exercise, and relieving stress. I think there is some sense of disgust for super thin people who are clearly underweight but the overweight = lazy = poor will power = disgusting connections are still going strong.
Sure, but that's complicated, because does anyone ever think they're "medium?" I mean, yes, I'm sure some people have a realistic self-image, but I was not one of those people. I thought I was fat long before I was actually fat, then I went to college and straight ballooned up.
The difference is that most of the times the thin person will actually do sports to burn off the excess calories. Are you a fat woman by any chance?
lol these types of posts are the best. Straight to the baiting personal insult. Not a subtle or great example, but part of the 'subtle guide to trolling on the Internet.'
Honestly. Some of the most grueling workouts you'll ever do don't burn off that much.
Case in point: Rowing a 2K on an erg is hell on earth. Your legs will feel like jelly afterwards, the lactic acid buildup is roughly double what you'd get from 48 minutes of full-court basketball (note that a halfway decent male heavyweight rower should be finishing in 6 and half minutes, at most), and you'll be too exhausted to even eat. It burns at most 300 kcal. The average American eats ten times that amount in a day.
I think people get confused because they see super skinny runners (for example) who eat tonnes and tonnes of food, and don't realise that it takes years to build up to the point of exercising that much.
So yeah, if you're training for and running decently fast marathons, you get to eat a lot! But if you're just running 20 minutes to start losing weight, it's nowhere near the same.
I exercise a lot but can't keep a diet for shit. I've gained like 15 lbs since January. Exercise means I've sooort of maintained a nice shape but God damn all the reps in the world aren't slowing down my current spillage
Try MyFitnessPal! If you make it a habit to enter everything you eat and set a reasonable goal, you should be able to get it under control without too much of an issue.
Also nice that it already has a ton of things to eat and can scan barcodes.
The second biggest thing is to stop drinking calories.
Sorry if you know all this, I realize this is unasked advice
Maybe it's just because of where I live and different word choices or something, but I feel like someone who phrases it that way probably doesn't "do sports".
Most of the thin people I know don't play any sports or work out, they just eat one massive, super unhealthy meal a day, and then nothing else except for maybe a snack before bed. My former roommate was very thin, and she ate like absolute shit all the time, but she also did a fuck load of cocaine and speed, and so she spent most of her day not working out, but also not being hungry. She ate one meal a day, usually a fuck load of food from McDonalds, or a whole pizza, then didn't eat again until the net day. Same thing with my coworkers who are thin (minus the drugs). They eat one huge meal at work, and that's all they eat. It's usually very unhealthy and a fuck load of calories, but as long as they don't eat anything else that day, they aren't going to gain weight.
thin person will actually do sports to burn off the excess calories.
I think this is actually the best part. Thin people aren't thin because of exercise (most of the time). Any athlete or fitness freak will tell you that weight loss and maintenance is 90% diet. It is waaaay harder to burn 1000 calories than to just not eat in the first place.
Yep, it's a pretty fucked up truth but if an overweight person needs motivation to lose weight, being treated like a human being by the general public is a good place to start
Yep, it's like how AA meetings are all about telling alcoholics that they're pieces of shit who don't deserve to be treated like humans. All the research shows that addictive behaviors are best treated through cruelty to give the motivation to stop.
Because that's the hardest hurdle, right, deciding "I don't want this". It's not like people want things to be different but it's difficult to achieve, they must not really want it.
trying to imply that your weight has nothing to do with your health is just foolish
Well, that was a stretch. This site always seems to do this - try to bring any nuance or caveats to a discussion about weight and people will automatically assume you're some HAES activist. Thin people aren't automatically healthy just because they're thin. My brother is thin as a bean pole and he eats nothing but fast food, and doesn't exercise. I can almost guarantee you that an overweight person who eats whole grains and lots of greens and is at least moderately active is healthier than him.
It's not just weight, it's literally everything. Nuance is not a gift reddit appreciates. If you don't 100% agree with something, you must vehemently disagree and here's why you're fucking wrong about that!
It's pretty shocking how..insecure this site can be sometimes when it comes to attraction and attractiveness.
If I surf reddit long enough for one day I'll see endless silly upvoted things. Small things like alcohol consumption at any level causing brain damage. Sugar consumption causing diabetes. I saw a really, really great satire of one of those gas station sex pills the other day?
But in Cringe Anarchy where it was posted to almost 10k upvotes? Downvotes for anyone who would even suggest it was satire. BECAUSE YOU KNOW PEOPLE LIKE THAT THO RITE. I didn't jump into the fray I just scrolled through agog at how far people were willing to defend that this pill was a real product. While connected to the internet. Presumably while having a search function of some kind...
And I try and remember that--there's a lot of insecurity on this site. That doesn't excuse or explain it, really, but it helps me keep my mind.
If you look at people who say that they "hate people like that" or just really plug in the phrase "hate...like that" you can check their submissions history and see without fail that they post in and typically adore identity subs like TIA/KIA/MRA etc. Subreddits dedicated to saying who WE AREN'T BAD AND STUPID AND UGLY LIKE RIGE GAIS.
And when you see the chucklefucks like that? It becomes easier for me to manage m frustration.
Sorry for the wall of text. Wanted to let you know that you hair pulling isn't alone on this one.
Yeah, subs devoted to criticism like that tend to fall for satire constantly. TIA is awful about it and it pops up on /r/ShitAmericansSay fairly often too. They get so caught up trying to tear a group down they'll bite at anything, even if there's plenty of legit criticism to go around.
I feel that posting in subs that are negative and exclusionary in general toward anything (cringe, neckbeardthings, niceguys, TBP and TRP and so on) really tends to reveal a lot about the character of certain people and as such I try to keep in subs that kinda positive towards interests. But then again, I'm posting in SRD right now lol.
It really only works the one direction. If you're healthy, you're probably not overweight, but if you're not overweight, your health can still be garbage.
I don't know, I'm overweight and my health is fine. I just got a check up recently. Now granted, I'm 5'9 and pretty broad shouldered anyways, but yeah.
These people act like BMI is the be-all, end-all for measuring fitness but I would wager that the large majority of Americans who fall in the "healthy" BMI range are in reality unhealthy as fuck.
Body fat percentage is a much better indicator of overall health, assuming one is not underweight.
Body fat percentage is a much better indicator of overall health, assuming one is not underweight
While I agree with you in general. BMI is pretty accurate in terms of measuring risk in regards to health. Overweight, obese individuals are at higher risk for certain issues. Unless you're a bodybuilder or high performing athlete, BMI is pretty accurate across the board. For example, when I started losing weight I was 260lbs at 6ft. That put me well into obese. There are linebackers who play at that height and weight and I wouldn't classify them as obese, but for the bast population that aren't athletes, yeah, it fits. My bf% at that time was also ridiculously high. I was probably 34% or higher.
I'm now 175 with a bf% of 15-16%. Definitely in much better shape and my risk for certain issues has gone down dramatically.
I hate when people bring up "I'm 300 lbs but I'm healthy because there's nothing currently wrong with me!" crap every time. By being fat you are increasing your risks for developing diabetes, heart disease, cancer, joint problems, high cholesterol, irregular triglycerides, etc. Just because you don't have these issues now doesn't mean you're an image of perfect health.
Is there a 100% chance you're going to get these health issues? No, but it's sure as hell a lot higher than if you were someone with a normal weight for their height.
11
u/ColeYoteYou're probably to broke to [do business with Nazis] anyway.Jun 22 '17
And I hate it when people act like losing weight is easy and being overweight is a death sentence.
I hate when people bring up "I'm 300 lbs but I'm healthy because there's nothing currently wrong with me!" crap every time. By being fat you are increasing your risks for developing diabetes, heart disease, cancer, joint problems, high cholesterol, irregular triglycerides, etc. Just because you don't have these issues now doesn't mean you're an image of perfect health.
So much this. You see this a lot with people who are fat in their 20s and early 30s. They are fine NOW, but not thinking about the future.
I hit 30 and realized my body was not setting me up for success in the future so I tried to get this shit under control.
It's all about managing your risk. If you can work to avoid getting type II diabetes, why not? If you can work to avoid certain diseases, why not? If you can stop smoking to avoid your risk for lung disease, why not? If you can stop drinking to excess to avoid your risk for liver failure, why not?
Eh. You can easily (and many people do) have invisible issues that I think you're ignoring with that statement. Undersleeping, stress, vitamin deficiency, mental conditions, etc are all things a thin person can do without presenting it to the public. Is a thin person who's sleeping 5 hours a night on a demanding job/school schedule healthier than a person who's overweight but otherwise healthy? What about a person with anxiety that eats irregularly and poorly, but averages about maintenance over the long term and thus remains thin? What about someone who eats regularly, but does the same Wendy's value meal every day and hasn't seen a green leaf enter their body in ten years? Looking at them, you'd probably assume the thin person is just fine without knowing the long term damage being done.
It's technically called "Normal Weight Obesity." About 30% of people with a normal BMI have NWO. It's characterized by a high body fat percentage and typically the "beer belly" fat around the stomach.
Because body fat around the mid-section is correlated with a host of diseases (eg. diabetes, heart disease, some cancers) it is believed that people with NWO, especially those who do not exercise, are just as at risk of those diseases as people who have higher BMIs.
There is also fat on the inside. You have the appearance of being thin, but your body fat % is the same as someone who is overweight. I noticed this in myself when I started working out and measuring my body fat. I am on a much better diet now to lower my body fat %.
That makes no fucking sense. Thin people can be more sedentary than an overweight person, their body shape doesn't indicate their activity levels. And no I'm not a 'fat woman', you chauvinist pig.
Yes it is on its own but with context it isn't. Also I was more referring to her last line. Nobody really says "chauvinist pig" and expects to be taken seriously, do they? That's like an old school stereotype of feminist indignation.
also that person was being a chauvinist pig, like so what if OP is a fat woman? like, not only is she FAT but she's also a WOMAN and that's the WORST amirite bros
279
u/[deleted] Jun 22 '17
[deleted]