9 ms·

Such a shame that the "healthy at any size" BS is so popular these days. Literally killing people.

Afton 8y ago
HAES is not BS. Here's the deal. For lots and lots of people, being not fat is very very hard. So hard, that even though there is enormous social pressure that they've had basically from ~12 years old to however old they are, they still haven't managed to become non-fat for any significant length of time. HAES is a reaction that says "What if we accepted that some people are just going to be fat, and then tried to come up with ways of being as healthy as possible given the circumstances". You may not like the packaging that HAES comes wrapped up in, and the most vocal proponents of it are often the least interested in making it palatable to you. But it's not BS. Consider that there is essentially nothing that medical science has for people who are chronically fat except a gastric sleeve. Shit is hard, yo.
- diminoten 8y ago
  > being not fat is very very hard Irrelevant. It is not more healthy to be fat than it is to be not-fat because it's hard. Acceptance is not going to change a damn thing about the health risks inherent with being fat. You have all my sympathy. One of my closest friends is a very large guy, and I want him to be around when we get old, but the stats tell me that's less and less likely every year he stays obese. Me accepting him (and I do) won't keep him on this planet. :(
  - soneca 8y ago
    Damage control might be a smart way to improve health.
    - diminoten 8y ago
      The data doesn't say it is. Sure you can improve on other axes, but weight is a leading indicator of mortality. I wish you were right, it'd be great to be able to be obese and healthy, but that just isn't how it is.
      - soneca 8y ago
        That's not what damage control is. I am not claiming that there is a way to be fat and absolutely healthy. I am saying that there are ways to be healthier while being fat. That is damage control, like the ones applied to drug addiction. And that is proved to be a good decision in some cases.
        diminoten 8y ago
        > And that is proved to be a good decision in some cases. No it hasn't, because it doesn't exist as you describe. It exists as I've described. Everything you can do, while obese, you can also do while not-obese.
  - Afton 8y ago
    Why do you think I'm fat? I'm not > Irrelevant. It is not more healthy to be fat than it is to be not-fat because it's hard. Acceptance is not going to change a damn thing about the health risks inherent with being fat. You are entirely missing the point. The issue is "given that I'm going to be fat, perhaps I should work with what I have, rather than beating myself up over the fact that I'm fat". Once you do that, you can start to look at what else you might change about your life that would improve your health.
    - diminoten 8y ago
      "You" here being a stand-in for anyone reading this who is fat. It's not really relevant if you're fat. And I'm not missing the point, you're making up some kind of generalization that doesn't A) fit the facts as we know them, and B) doesn't actually address the issue. You're saying, "What else can I do to be healthy?" but you can/should do those things as well as work on losing weight. Giving up on losing weight doesn't lower your risk at all. You can stop beating yourself up about being fat and keep trying to lose weight, as well. I think we can agree the moralizations aren't helping here, but you can't wish away the unhealthiness of obesity, like this stupid movement tries to do.
- noja 8y ago
  Sometimes I see comments like this and it's like someone is posting from another galaxy. I've literally never heard of a movement that says that can be healthy. How did that even happen? Edit: link for HAES https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_at_Every_Size https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_at_Every_Size
  - koboll 8y ago
    On the internet, there is a supportive community for every possible opinion humans can have.
- NotAnEconomist 8y ago
  So it's the same logic as, "Well, we should let them do heroin -- just try to make it as safe as possible"? Seems like a meme we should minimize the transmission of, to me. > Consider that there is essentially nothing that medical science has for people who are chronically fat except a gastric sleeve. It also yields ridiculous statements like this. Medical science has some very clear advice for fat people: eat less and exercise more. They're making an entire movement to justify why they're lazy and undisciplined.
  - Afton 8y ago
    What do you think Safe Injection sites are, if not exactly that?
    - NotAnEconomist 8y ago
      Yes -- that's the logic I was referring to. However "safe injection sites" are anything but safe to the surrounding community, and may increase usage rates while only mildly decreasing fatality rates. By keeping the sickly ones around, we're actually making the whole herd less healthy -- particularly when we enable them spreading their illness. I think the medical professionals involved in "safe injection sites" should be seriously questioned about their medical ethics: they're failing to quarantine sick patients, and in treating them without that buffer, spreading the disease to the healthy population. It's quack "medicine", just like HAES/HAMS.
      - diminoten 8y ago
        Are you implying we kill/let die the "sickly"? Seems extreme...
        minikites 8y ago
        It's the entire Republican plan for healthcare: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_big_idea/2011/09/let_him_die.html http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_big_idea... >Blitzer pressed the point. "But, Congressman, are you saying the society should just let him die?" At that point, the rabble erupted in cheers and whoops of "Yeah!"
- brobdingnagians 8y ago
  Most people in history were _not_ fat. It used to be _hard_ to be fat. Modern society and sedentary jobs make it harder to not be fat, so it takes discipline and hobbies like hiking and working out to actually get physical activity, and healthy diet is the key element. When everyone is eating processed food and doing very little during a typical day, it is hard to not be fat, but that doesn't mean we should accept that, we should push for a healthier society. There are things about lifespan, but also quality of life, ability to think, dealing with stress, _huge_ mental health effects, etc. Our entire society would improve if we decided to change things instead of giving up.
  - minikites 8y ago
    How well is your strategy of "blaming individuals" working out? Should we blame them even harder to see if that works more often?
  - Navarr 8y ago
    Obviously we should push for a healthier society, but that doesn't necessarily mean we should shame those who do not have a fit body size. Don't forget that in many circumstances cooking and hobbies like working out and hiking and such can be privileged. Someone working two jobs to get by probably doesn't have the funds for a gym membership or to go out hiking, and might not even have the mental energy to. And then cooking healthy food is surprisingly expensive and time consuming when compared to processed foods. So yes, absolutely, we should push for a healthier society, but at the same time we should accept that there are valid reasons someone might not be fit, and we shouldn't shame them for that. Instead, we should try to improve the situations that cause it as much as we can within our abilities.
    - brobdingnagians 8y ago
      Not shaming, but that is a false dichotomy. I don't want to go around condemning people; I just don't think telling them everything is okay and letting them die young is a good idea. There are many other options to take; better education on the topic, better culture around work, better pay, better childhood involvement in activity, less videogames, etc. It isn't just a poverty issue and it is getting worse in all levels of society.
- Waterluvian 8y ago
  It's complicated. On one hand you don't want to foster mental health issues by constantly reinforcing to people that their weight is wrong and bad. On the other hand, you probably don't want to excuse a physiologically unhealthy condition by calling it "healthy". I don't have an answer. I was fit until I hit university and now I'm struggling with my weight constantly. I'm committed to trying. Losing weight. Getting in a healthy habit. Relapsing. Dozens of times in a decade. But what I don't ever want to do is declare that I'm just healthy at any size and therefore throw in the towel. The grim reaper doesn't give a crap what I think healthy means.
  - Afton 8y ago
    I think you are seeing what I'm trying to say. It's not like most fat people are not aware that they're fat, and not aware that that is a problem. They are just exhausted with trying to change it. Particularly for people who have "always" been fat. Consider that being fat might be better for you than alternating between eating disorders and being fat, which is the choice that a non-trivial number of fat people are faced with.
- koboll 8y ago
  >HAES is a reaction that says "What if we accepted that some people are just going to be fat, and then tried to come up with ways of being as healthy as possible given the circumstances". You may not like the packaging that HAES comes wrapped up in, and the most vocal proponents of it are often the least interested in making it palatable to you. But it's not BS. If that was all it was saying, I'd be onboard. But it also says things like "losing weight is literally impossible!", and "there is no evidence that obesity is unhealthy!" and then cherry-picks and misconstrues research so that it seems to give scientific backing to those conclusions, which are deeply harmful lies.
  - Afton 8y ago
    No, people say these things. This is cherry-picking as well. Again, lots of fat-acceptance people aren't stupid, they have just decided to pick their battles.
- towelr34dy 8y ago
  Let's reconsider this position using some other example: Healthy on Heroin. HOH HOH is not BS. Here's the deal. For lots and lots of people, being not addicted to heroin is very very hard. So hard, that even though there is enormous social pressure that they've had basically from ~18 years old to however old they are, they still haven't managed to become clean for any significant length of time. HOH is a reaction that says "What if we accepted that some people are just going to be heroin addicts, and then tried to come up with ways of being as healthy as possible given the circumstances". You may not like the packaging that HOH comes wrapped up in, and the most vocal proponents of it are often the least interested in making it palatable to you. But it's not BS. Consider that there is essentially nothing that medical science has for people who are chronically addicted to heroin except a detox. Shit is hard, yo.
  - QuotedForTruth 8y ago
    You chose a pretty poor example. Have you ever heard of methadone? Its literally accepting that someone will be addicted to opiates for a long time or life and then giving them a healthier alternative that doesnt try to change that. https://www.crchealth.com/addiction/heroin-addiction-treatment/heroin-detox/methadone_life/ https://www.crchealth.com/addiction/heroin-addiction-treatme...
    - towelr34dy 8y ago
      Yeah, see, no one is bothered by that because no one is saying: Be proud of your true heroin addicted self. Show it to the world. IF they don't accept your heroin addiction THEY ARE wrong. See. If any movement said that, I'd be against it. Because they are trying to remove stigma from something that SHOULD HAVE IT.
  - bitcrusher 8y ago
    Let's reconsider this position using some other example: Such a shame that the "healthy at any genetic condition" BS is so popular these days. Literally killing people.
    - 8y ago
- wvenable 8y ago
  You can be fit and still be fat though. I've been working out with a personal trainer for a couple of years now and I'm significantly healthier and stronger than I was before I started but I haven't lost the gut (yet). If HAES is just an excuse to not try and be fit, it is going to kill people.
  - Afton 8y ago
    Some people will use it for that. Others won't.
    - wvenable 8y ago
      I don't see what else the "movement" would be used for. If you are obese than you are unhealthy. It might be hard to be hard to maybe impossible to improve that but it doesn't suddenly become "healthy" because of that.
- a11595 8y ago
  Plenty. I'm very fit all my life, but as I have gotten older, metabolism slowed down, less time and energy, I am still exactly as fit as I was, and still eat w/o a diet, often before bed. What's changed: every morning I wear an ab belt while getting ready for work. With every greasy mean I pop an orlistat. I wear a couple of electrodes on my chest/back/arms under my shirt while at work, instead of a workout most days. 5'11, 170lb, 6% bodyfat, bench 300 20 times. This is 100% because of medical science, because I'm a lazy 40yo slob. Just a really fit one despite the daily cake and pizza before bed.
- matchbok 8y ago
  It's impossible to create matter out of nothing. Dieting works and will always work. Not saying it's easy, but waving off obesity as incurable is crazy.
LeoPanthera 8y ago
It's not "popular". It's a strawman created by anti-feminists. It doesn't really exist in the real world.
- Afton 8y ago
  It's really not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_acceptance_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_acceptance_movement
  - learc83 8y ago
    A Wikipedia article on the subject doesn't mean that it's not a strawman.
    - Afton 8y ago
      I don't know what to say. It's not a global media conspiracy. For decades there have been actual fat acceptance activists and communities. Good luck.
      - learc83 8y ago
        "Doesn't exist" was hyperbole. If you want to be literal, what the OP was saying is that it's an extremely small fringe group that isn't large enough to matter, and the response to it created by internet outrage culture makes it look like a much bigger issue than it actually is.
        LeoPanthera 8y ago
        Yes that was my intention. Please note that I didn't say "doesn't exist", I said "doesn't really exist", which is not the same.
NotAnEconomist 8y ago
I've noticed that they don't actually believe "Healthy At Any Size", because they routinely skinny- or fit-shame people. So I've started referring to them as "Healthy At My Size", which is their real argument -- that their overweight size is healthy. It also yields a more appropriate initialism.
learc83 8y ago
It's not popular. There are far more people making fun of fat acceptance than there are people who are making the claim that being fat is healthy. There are plenty of people who are against body shaming, unrealistic beauty standards etc... Very few who think that being very overweight is actually healthy.
- vokep 8y ago
  You claim this, but now if you goto a department store, you'll find the mannequins are all a little bit heavy, as in, overweight.
  - learc83 8y ago
    If you go into department stores, the vast majority of mannequins aren't clinically overweight unless you are specifically shopping in a plus size store. Even if this were true, your argument doesn't follow from the evidence. The existence of clothing for overweight people doesn't imply that people believe that being overweight is healthy. It only implies that overweight people exist, and someone wants to make money selling clothes to them.
    - justtopost 8y ago
      Duck 'vanity sizing' sometime.
      - learc83 8y ago
        Google 'average mannequin size'. The average female mannequin is underweight, not overweight. One study did a survey and found that 100% of the female mannequins they examined represented a clinically underweight woman. Vanity sizing is a thing because female sizing completely arbitrary and stores want to make women feel better about their weight. If anything this is evidence that fat acceptance hasn't caught on--if it had, people wouldn't be ashamed to wear a larger size. Regardless, I'll say it again--the fact that overweight people exist says nothing about the assertion that many people believe that being overweight is healthy. 1. https://jeatdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40337-017-0142-6 https://jeatdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40337... This 2017 study did a survey and found that 100% of the female mannequins they examined represented an underweight woman.
0x8BADF00D 8y ago
Depends on your genetics. If you don’t have high blood pressure, dyslipidemia, or diabetes, and you’re clinically healthy, it’s fine. Some people are ectomorphs. I have friends who are hardgainers, and believe me, it is a struggle for them to bulk. You have to eat a massive surplus of calories per day and most of that has to be protein. Conversely, some people are endomorphs. It’s very difficult to cut (in my case). I need a big caloric deficit relative to others, and do cardio on my rest days in order to keep my body fat at a reasonable percentage. Eugenics should be actively encouraged. We have the technology to make it so many will never have to suffer metabolic issues or chromosomal abnormalities.
- bitexploder 8y ago
  What is a "big calorie deficit" relative to others? I am just curious because the general physiology is pretty simple and I have read some things that pretty thoroughly debunk endomorph vs. ectomorph. It is must more useful to classify based on muscle fiber composition. People with a lot of fast twitch muscle fiber build muscle quicker, etc.
  - 0x8BADF00D 8y ago
    What is a "big calorie deficit" relative to others? For me, I’ve found 400-500 below my maintainence works best. > It is must more useful to classify based on muscle fiber composition. People with a lot of fast twitch muscle fiber build muscle quicker, etc. I agree with you here. I needed labels to bin the two (very general) categories of body composition types, so I chose those two.
    - bitexploder 8y ago
      Makes sense. I have had my RMR tested and I am dead average. I have never had success with small deficits because I am not disciplined enough to maintain -700 net cals per week or whatever.
thosakwe 8y ago
Do we really have to go through this on this site...? The point of the body positivity movement is literally crystal clear - to end shaming of people for the size of their body. There's no "BS" to it. People's health is their own concern. Whether or not someone decides to change for a healthier lifestyle, there's nothing wrong with them at least loving their self throughout the process. It's also really not that popular of a sentiment. Just ask any overweight person the things they hear on the regular. Come on now.
- CuriouslyC 8y ago
  People's health is their own concern to the extent that they do not burden society with their health care costs, nor the people in their life due to their poor condition.
  - learc83 8y ago
    >burden society with their health care costs That's every single non-optimal health decision though. You shouldn't have gone into construction because now you need a knee replacement. You should've used a treadmill desk instead of sitting for so long. If you'd just had a child before you were 30 you probably wouldn't have gotten breast cancer etc...
- tachion 8y ago
  It's not true that people's health is their own concern. Especially not when my taxes pay for your treatment when you've deliberately not taken care of yourself and not when your lack of regard in this manner promote similar thing happening to other people (children, for example).
  - lordCarbonFiber 8y ago
    If you're actually concerned about "your taxes" you should celebrate the over weight and otherwise unhealthy. The lion's share of health care costs are end of life treatments; don't have to worry about those if you die of a heart attack at age 45.
rsync 8y ago
"Such a shame that the "healthy at any size" BS is so popular these days. Literally killing people." I don't wish ill health or discomfort on anyone but ones physical condition, appearance and personal health are one's own business. Provided that you rise to a minimal standard of civic responsibility... I owe it to you to be able to run for help. I owe it to you to be able to perform chest compressions for 3-5 minutes. I owe it to you to be able to carry or drag an adult a few hundred feet to safety. I owe it to you to be fit to join a group standing in physical defense of others. If you can't do those things, you have something to answer for - regardless of the diet/fitness/health/appearance fads of the day.
pm90 8y ago
I don't think its healthy at any size as much as not shaming people for their body sizes, which are different issues. We can and should continue promoting healthy living habits while restraining from shaming those who aren't there yet.
bitxbitxbitcoin 8y ago
Bad reading is killing people. The relevant info is still there it is just hidden: Being fit and not smoking is healthier than being fit or not smoking separately.
paulcole 8y ago
What in the article led to this comment? There's no mention of"healthy at any size" in the article and no mentions of "fat", "obesity", or "overweight."

HAES is not BS. Here's the deal. For lots and lots of people, being not fat is very very hard. So hard, that even though there is enormous social pressure that they've had basically from ~12 years old to however old they are, they still haven't managed to become non-fat for any significant length of time. HAES is a reaction that says "What if we accepted that some people are just going to be fat, and then tried to come up with ways of being as healthy as possible given the circumstances". You may not like the packaging that HAES comes wrapped up in, and the most vocal proponents of it are often the least interested in making it palatable to you. But it's not BS. Consider that there is essentially nothing that medical science has for people who are chronically fat except a gastric sleeve. Shit is hard, yo.

diminoten 8y ago
> being not fat is very very hard Irrelevant. It is not more healthy to be fat than it is to be not-fat because it's hard. Acceptance is not going to change a damn thing about the health risks inherent with being fat. You have all my sympathy. One of my closest friends is a very large guy, and I want him to be around when we get old, but the stats tell me that's less and less likely every year he stays obese. Me accepting him (and I do) won't keep him on this planet. :(
- soneca 8y ago
  Damage control might be a smart way to improve health.
  - diminoten 8y ago
    The data doesn't say it is. Sure you can improve on other axes, but weight is a leading indicator of mortality. I wish you were right, it'd be great to be able to be obese and healthy, but that just isn't how it is.
    - soneca 8y ago
      That's not what damage control is. I am not claiming that there is a way to be fat and absolutely healthy. I am saying that there are ways to be healthier while being fat. That is damage control, like the ones applied to drug addiction. And that is proved to be a good decision in some cases.
      - diminoten 8y ago
        > And that is proved to be a good decision in some cases. No it hasn't, because it doesn't exist as you describe. It exists as I've described. Everything you can do, while obese, you can also do while not-obese.
- Afton 8y ago
  Why do you think I'm fat? I'm not > Irrelevant. It is not more healthy to be fat than it is to be not-fat because it's hard. Acceptance is not going to change a damn thing about the health risks inherent with being fat. You are entirely missing the point. The issue is "given that I'm going to be fat, perhaps I should work with what I have, rather than beating myself up over the fact that I'm fat". Once you do that, you can start to look at what else you might change about your life that would improve your health.
  - diminoten 8y ago
    "You" here being a stand-in for anyone reading this who is fat. It's not really relevant if you're fat. And I'm not missing the point, you're making up some kind of generalization that doesn't A) fit the facts as we know them, and B) doesn't actually address the issue. You're saying, "What else can I do to be healthy?" but you can/should do those things as well as work on losing weight. Giving up on losing weight doesn't lower your risk at all. You can stop beating yourself up about being fat and keep trying to lose weight, as well. I think we can agree the moralizations aren't helping here, but you can't wish away the unhealthiness of obesity, like this stupid movement tries to do.
noja 8y ago
Sometimes I see comments like this and it's like someone is posting from another galaxy. I've literally never heard of a movement that says that can be healthy. How did that even happen? Edit: link for HAES https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_at_Every_Size https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_at_Every_Size
- koboll 8y ago
  On the internet, there is a supportive community for every possible opinion humans can have.
NotAnEconomist 8y ago
So it's the same logic as, "Well, we should let them do heroin -- just try to make it as safe as possible"? Seems like a meme we should minimize the transmission of, to me. > Consider that there is essentially nothing that medical science has for people who are chronically fat except a gastric sleeve. It also yields ridiculous statements like this. Medical science has some very clear advice for fat people: eat less and exercise more. They're making an entire movement to justify why they're lazy and undisciplined.
- Afton 8y ago
  What do you think Safe Injection sites are, if not exactly that?
  - NotAnEconomist 8y ago
    Yes -- that's the logic I was referring to. However "safe injection sites" are anything but safe to the surrounding community, and may increase usage rates while only mildly decreasing fatality rates. By keeping the sickly ones around, we're actually making the whole herd less healthy -- particularly when we enable them spreading their illness. I think the medical professionals involved in "safe injection sites" should be seriously questioned about their medical ethics: they're failing to quarantine sick patients, and in treating them without that buffer, spreading the disease to the healthy population. It's quack "medicine", just like HAES/HAMS.
    - diminoten 8y ago
      Are you implying we kill/let die the "sickly"? Seems extreme...
      - minikites 8y ago
        It's the entire Republican plan for healthcare: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_big_idea/2011/09/let_him_die.html http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_big_idea... >Blitzer pressed the point. "But, Congressman, are you saying the society should just let him die?" At that point, the rabble erupted in cheers and whoops of "Yeah!"
brobdingnagians 8y ago
Most people in history were _not_ fat. It used to be _hard_ to be fat. Modern society and sedentary jobs make it harder to not be fat, so it takes discipline and hobbies like hiking and working out to actually get physical activity, and healthy diet is the key element. When everyone is eating processed food and doing very little during a typical day, it is hard to not be fat, but that doesn't mean we should accept that, we should push for a healthier society. There are things about lifespan, but also quality of life, ability to think, dealing with stress, _huge_ mental health effects, etc. Our entire society would improve if we decided to change things instead of giving up.
- minikites 8y ago
  How well is your strategy of "blaming individuals" working out? Should we blame them even harder to see if that works more often?
- Navarr 8y ago
  Obviously we should push for a healthier society, but that doesn't necessarily mean we should shame those who do not have a fit body size. Don't forget that in many circumstances cooking and hobbies like working out and hiking and such can be privileged. Someone working two jobs to get by probably doesn't have the funds for a gym membership or to go out hiking, and might not even have the mental energy to. And then cooking healthy food is surprisingly expensive and time consuming when compared to processed foods. So yes, absolutely, we should push for a healthier society, but at the same time we should accept that there are valid reasons someone might not be fit, and we shouldn't shame them for that. Instead, we should try to improve the situations that cause it as much as we can within our abilities.
  - brobdingnagians 8y ago
    Not shaming, but that is a false dichotomy. I don't want to go around condemning people; I just don't think telling them everything is okay and letting them die young is a good idea. There are many other options to take; better education on the topic, better culture around work, better pay, better childhood involvement in activity, less videogames, etc. It isn't just a poverty issue and it is getting worse in all levels of society.
Waterluvian 8y ago
It's complicated. On one hand you don't want to foster mental health issues by constantly reinforcing to people that their weight is wrong and bad. On the other hand, you probably don't want to excuse a physiologically unhealthy condition by calling it "healthy". I don't have an answer. I was fit until I hit university and now I'm struggling with my weight constantly. I'm committed to trying. Losing weight. Getting in a healthy habit. Relapsing. Dozens of times in a decade. But what I don't ever want to do is declare that I'm just healthy at any size and therefore throw in the towel. The grim reaper doesn't give a crap what I think healthy means.
- Afton 8y ago
  I think you are seeing what I'm trying to say. It's not like most fat people are not aware that they're fat, and not aware that that is a problem. They are just exhausted with trying to change it. Particularly for people who have "always" been fat. Consider that being fat might be better for you than alternating between eating disorders and being fat, which is the choice that a non-trivial number of fat people are faced with.
koboll 8y ago
>HAES is a reaction that says "What if we accepted that some people are just going to be fat, and then tried to come up with ways of being as healthy as possible given the circumstances". You may not like the packaging that HAES comes wrapped up in, and the most vocal proponents of it are often the least interested in making it palatable to you. But it's not BS. If that was all it was saying, I'd be onboard. But it also says things like "losing weight is literally impossible!", and "there is no evidence that obesity is unhealthy!" and then cherry-picks and misconstrues research so that it seems to give scientific backing to those conclusions, which are deeply harmful lies.
- Afton 8y ago
  No, people say these things. This is cherry-picking as well. Again, lots of fat-acceptance people aren't stupid, they have just decided to pick their battles.
towelr34dy 8y ago
Let's reconsider this position using some other example: Healthy on Heroin. HOH HOH is not BS. Here's the deal. For lots and lots of people, being not addicted to heroin is very very hard. So hard, that even though there is enormous social pressure that they've had basically from ~18 years old to however old they are, they still haven't managed to become clean for any significant length of time. HOH is a reaction that says "What if we accepted that some people are just going to be heroin addicts, and then tried to come up with ways of being as healthy as possible given the circumstances". You may not like the packaging that HOH comes wrapped up in, and the most vocal proponents of it are often the least interested in making it palatable to you. But it's not BS. Consider that there is essentially nothing that medical science has for people who are chronically addicted to heroin except a detox. Shit is hard, yo.
- QuotedForTruth 8y ago
  You chose a pretty poor example. Have you ever heard of methadone? Its literally accepting that someone will be addicted to opiates for a long time or life and then giving them a healthier alternative that doesnt try to change that. https://www.crchealth.com/addiction/heroin-addiction-treatment/heroin-detox/methadone_life/ https://www.crchealth.com/addiction/heroin-addiction-treatme...
  - towelr34dy 8y ago
    Yeah, see, no one is bothered by that because no one is saying: Be proud of your true heroin addicted self. Show it to the world. IF they don't accept your heroin addiction THEY ARE wrong. See. If any movement said that, I'd be against it. Because they are trying to remove stigma from something that SHOULD HAVE IT.
- bitcrusher 8y ago
  Let's reconsider this position using some other example: Such a shame that the "healthy at any genetic condition" BS is so popular these days. Literally killing people.
  - 8y ago
wvenable 8y ago
You can be fit and still be fat though. I've been working out with a personal trainer for a couple of years now and I'm significantly healthier and stronger than I was before I started but I haven't lost the gut (yet). If HAES is just an excuse to not try and be fit, it is going to kill people.
- Afton 8y ago
  Some people will use it for that. Others won't.
  - wvenable 8y ago
    I don't see what else the "movement" would be used for. If you are obese than you are unhealthy. It might be hard to be hard to maybe impossible to improve that but it doesn't suddenly become "healthy" because of that.
a11595 8y ago
Plenty. I'm very fit all my life, but as I have gotten older, metabolism slowed down, less time and energy, I am still exactly as fit as I was, and still eat w/o a diet, often before bed. What's changed: every morning I wear an ab belt while getting ready for work. With every greasy mean I pop an orlistat. I wear a couple of electrodes on my chest/back/arms under my shirt while at work, instead of a workout most days. 5'11, 170lb, 6% bodyfat, bench 300 20 times. This is 100% because of medical science, because I'm a lazy 40yo slob. Just a really fit one despite the daily cake and pizza before bed.
matchbok 8y ago
It's impossible to create matter out of nothing. Dieting works and will always work. Not saying it's easy, but waving off obesity as incurable is crazy.

LeoPanthera 8y ago

It's not "popular". It's a strawman created by anti-feminists. It doesn't really exist in the real world.

Afton 8y ago
It's really not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_acceptance_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_acceptance_movement
- learc83 8y ago
  A Wikipedia article on the subject doesn't mean that it's not a strawman.
  - Afton 8y ago
    I don't know what to say. It's not a global media conspiracy. For decades there have been actual fat acceptance activists and communities. Good luck.
    - learc83 8y ago
      "Doesn't exist" was hyperbole. If you want to be literal, what the OP was saying is that it's an extremely small fringe group that isn't large enough to matter, and the response to it created by internet outrage culture makes it look like a much bigger issue than it actually is.
      - LeoPanthera 8y ago
        Yes that was my intention. Please note that I didn't say "doesn't exist", I said "doesn't really exist", which is not the same.

NotAnEconomist 8y ago

I've noticed that they don't actually believe "Healthy At Any Size", because they routinely skinny- or fit-shame people. So I've started referring to them as "Healthy At My Size", which is their real argument -- that their overweight size is healthy. It also yields a more appropriate initialism.

learc83 8y ago

It's not popular. There are far more people making fun of fat acceptance than there are people who are making the claim that being fat is healthy. There are plenty of people who are against body shaming, unrealistic beauty standards etc... Very few who think that being very overweight is actually healthy.

vokep 8y ago
You claim this, but now if you goto a department store, you'll find the mannequins are all a little bit heavy, as in, overweight.
- learc83 8y ago
  If you go into department stores, the vast majority of mannequins aren't clinically overweight unless you are specifically shopping in a plus size store. Even if this were true, your argument doesn't follow from the evidence. The existence of clothing for overweight people doesn't imply that people believe that being overweight is healthy. It only implies that overweight people exist, and someone wants to make money selling clothes to them.
  - justtopost 8y ago
    Duck 'vanity sizing' sometime.
    - learc83 8y ago
      Google 'average mannequin size'. The average female mannequin is underweight, not overweight. One study did a survey and found that 100% of the female mannequins they examined represented a clinically underweight woman. Vanity sizing is a thing because female sizing completely arbitrary and stores want to make women feel better about their weight. If anything this is evidence that fat acceptance hasn't caught on--if it had, people wouldn't be ashamed to wear a larger size. Regardless, I'll say it again--the fact that overweight people exist says nothing about the assertion that many people believe that being overweight is healthy. 1. https://jeatdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40337-017-0142-6 https://jeatdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40337... This 2017 study did a survey and found that 100% of the female mannequins they examined represented an underweight woman.

0x8BADF00D 8y ago

Depends on your genetics. If you don’t have high blood pressure, dyslipidemia, or diabetes, and you’re clinically healthy, it’s fine. Some people are ectomorphs. I have friends who are hardgainers, and believe me, it is a struggle for them to bulk. You have to eat a massive surplus of calories per day and most of that has to be protein. Conversely, some people are endomorphs. It’s very difficult to cut (in my case). I need a big caloric deficit relative to others, and do cardio on my rest days in order to keep my body fat at a reasonable percentage. Eugenics should be actively encouraged. We have the technology to make it so many will never have to suffer metabolic issues or chromosomal abnormalities.

bitexploder 8y ago
What is a "big calorie deficit" relative to others? I am just curious because the general physiology is pretty simple and I have read some things that pretty thoroughly debunk endomorph vs. ectomorph. It is must more useful to classify based on muscle fiber composition. People with a lot of fast twitch muscle fiber build muscle quicker, etc.
- 0x8BADF00D 8y ago
  What is a "big calorie deficit" relative to others? For me, I’ve found 400-500 below my maintainence works best. > It is must more useful to classify based on muscle fiber composition. People with a lot of fast twitch muscle fiber build muscle quicker, etc. I agree with you here. I needed labels to bin the two (very general) categories of body composition types, so I chose those two.
  - bitexploder 8y ago
    Makes sense. I have had my RMR tested and I am dead average. I have never had success with small deficits because I am not disciplined enough to maintain -700 net cals per week or whatever.

thosakwe 8y ago

Do we really have to go through this on this site...? The point of the body positivity movement is literally crystal clear - to end shaming of people for the size of their body. There's no "BS" to it. People's health is their own concern. Whether or not someone decides to change for a healthier lifestyle, there's nothing wrong with them at least loving their self throughout the process. It's also really not that popular of a sentiment. Just ask any overweight person the things they hear on the regular. Come on now.

CuriouslyC 8y ago
People's health is their own concern to the extent that they do not burden society with their health care costs, nor the people in their life due to their poor condition.
- learc83 8y ago
  >burden society with their health care costs That's every single non-optimal health decision though. You shouldn't have gone into construction because now you need a knee replacement. You should've used a treadmill desk instead of sitting for so long. If you'd just had a child before you were 30 you probably wouldn't have gotten breast cancer etc...
tachion 8y ago
It's not true that people's health is their own concern. Especially not when my taxes pay for your treatment when you've deliberately not taken care of yourself and not when your lack of regard in this manner promote similar thing happening to other people (children, for example).
- lordCarbonFiber 8y ago
  If you're actually concerned about "your taxes" you should celebrate the over weight and otherwise unhealthy. The lion's share of health care costs are end of life treatments; don't have to worry about those if you die of a heart attack at age 45.

rsync 8y ago

"Such a shame that the "healthy at any size" BS is so popular these days. Literally killing people." I don't wish ill health or discomfort on anyone but ones physical condition, appearance and personal health are one's own business. Provided that you rise to a minimal standard of civic responsibility... I owe it to you to be able to run for help. I owe it to you to be able to perform chest compressions for 3-5 minutes. I owe it to you to be able to carry or drag an adult a few hundred feet to safety. I owe it to you to be fit to join a group standing in physical defense of others. If you can't do those things, you have something to answer for - regardless of the diet/fitness/health/appearance fads of the day.

pm90 8y ago

I don't think its healthy at any size as much as not shaming people for their body sizes, which are different issues. We can and should continue promoting healthy living habits while restraining from shaming those who aren't there yet.

bitxbitxbitcoin 8y ago

Bad reading is killing people. The relevant info is still there it is just hidden: Being fit and not smoking is healthier than being fit or not smoking separately.

paulcole 8y ago

What in the article led to this comment? There's no mention of"healthy at any size" in the article and no mentions of "fat", "obesity", or "overweight."