5 ms·
People really want these things - exercise, weight - to be important moral objectives for others, when they're not that important in the grand scheme of things.
by pjc50 2y ago
People really want these things - exercise, weight - to be important moral objectives for others, when they're not that important in the grand scheme of things. Now you'll just have to find another easy visual marker for ranking people by moral superiority.
- snapcaster 2y agoI see your point but not really true. people in good shape vs. people who lost weight is pretty visible
- ben_w 2y agoIf you're as muscular as Schwarzenegger, some people will fancy you, others will say you're ugly and unnatural because you're taking steroids. On weight, France (amongst others) had to ban extremely low BMI models*, which implies that people are very happy to look at — and desire to have — dangerous body forms. * https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32174364 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32174364
- arp242 2y agoThe "stick figure" fashion models have been widely ridiculed for as long as I can remember, since the 90s. It mostly seems confined to the fashion industry: models outside of that tend to be thin, but not as extremely so. I'm not really clued up on that world to know why this is the case.
- macintux 2y agoI remember the phrase "heroin chic" from that era.
- throwaway2037 2y agoGisele Bündchen is one of the most famous runway models in the world. Surely, her BMI is below 18. (If you look at unstaged photos of her, she is so unbelievably thin. No one would think a relative who looked like that was healthy.) I am pretty sure that is the "legal" limit in France. How do they work around it? Does she never walk the runways in Paris?
- throwaway2037 2y agoThis is such a classic HN overreach. The OP wrote: > people in good shape vs. people who lost weight is pretty visible You then reached for two polar extremes: Professional body builders who abuse performance enhancing drugs (steriods, HGH, etc.) and people with eating disorders. People in good shape can be someone who runs/bikes/swims for 30-60 mins a few times a week.
- const_cast 2y agoIt’s not really, and it’s more complicated than we think. If we take a gander at Hollywood, we would be deceived into thinking it’s full of men who take really, really good care of themselves. But it’s not so - most are taking steroids, and even more are doing extreme starvation diets prior to roles. We can actually see the inflation of physique in real time. Look back 5 years, then 10, then 20. Look at the protagonists - they represent the “peak” of what humans want to look like. By today’s standards, those super heros 20 years ago are scrawny.
- lotsoweiners 2y agoI dunno about this. When I was growing up in the 80s and 90s, the biggest action stars were Schwarzenegger and Stallone. Most of the top action stars of today look a little lean compared to those 2 in my opinion.
- sdwr 2y agoI think Tom Hanks in Big is the ideal male body. He works out, but it's not the center of his personality.
- const_cast 2y agoWe've definitely had a bit of a roller coaster in which we had stigma against steroids for a while and now we don't, since we have so many new, advanced, and stealthy steroids.
- JCharante 2y agobut no one claims that it's a way to get you into good shape. Just a way to not be obese.
- anon291 2y agoRealistically speaking it correlates extremely well with self control. Not perfect and I'm not talking about a few extra pounds. But morbid obesity? Yeah pretty much always ..
- rekenaut 2y agoI don't know that that's true. For subset of people, this correlation may be true. To be extremely anecdotal though, I have never had trouble maintaining my weight even though I don't exercise, have a mostly sedentary lifestyle, and don't pay attention to my diet. I just got lucky in that I feel hungry more rarely than others. I think it would be absurd to say this is a reflection of my self control, and I am sure there are others that this applies to too.
- phil21 2y agoBeing skinny does not, but being morbidly obese absolutely is a strong correlation to the point of it being a rounding error. Medical conditions that cause it are extremely rare. For better or worse, as a formerly morbidly obese person I can say society doesn’t really care why - they absolutely take you less seriously overall regardless of the underlying reasons.
- anon291 2y ago> as a formerly morbidly obese person Congratulations!
- cameronh90 2y agoI would suggest that you're overstating the certainty of your view. At least in how it relates to rekenaut's point. Purely focussing on people who are fat because they eat too much (which includes myself, albeit also now formerly morbidly obese thanks to Mounjaro): (1) The studies find a statistically strong correlation, but that doesn't mean everyone who is morbidly obese has poor self control. The raw data still tends to show a big overlap of obese people with good self control and thin people with poor self control - so it's not reasonable to say anyone in that group is just a rounding error. (2) The way that food self-control is usually measured is, for example, delayed gratification testing with food. It's not surprising that an obese person will do worse at this, but it doesn't necessarily mean the issue is self-control. It could be that their experience of hunger is stronger than the person who is able to exercise more restraint, so even if they're exercising the same level of self-restraint, they're going to give in sooner. It'd be like saying someone who can hold a plank for longer has more determination. There's a bit of that obviously, but then there's also (much more importantly) how fit and muscular you are. (3) Self-control itself can be, and often is, a medical issue. Obviously there's ADHD/Autism/depression/thyroid issues/so on. which affect your mind in the general sense, but many common drugs including antidepressants, antipsychotics, antihistamines, etc. are also well known for causing obesity. Science still doesn't know why, exactly, they cause weight gain, other than it's through increased caloric intake - but not clear what drives it. (4) This one is more speculative, but when I started taking Mounjaro, my general self-control increased. This is quite a common reported side effect. There's no evidence (yet?) that it directly affects your brain in any way that would affect self-control, but nevertheless it seems to for many. Separately, we know that being hungry seems to reduce your general self-control. It doesn't seem like a huge leap of logic to think that maybe the reason Mounjaro is having such powerful psychological effects on people is actually because being hungry is quite a powerful general non-specific motivator -- in which case, the studies testing calorie consumption against general measures of self-control might be producing a correct result but have the cause and effect the wrong way round. Cards on the table, I'd say the proximal cause for why I'm fat is because I am less to resist food than the average person. However, my general self-control seems to be pretty much fine, and I only got fat after I started taking antidepressants for anxiety. Impulsive would be one of the last words anyone would use to describe me - it's just isolated to food as far as I can tell. Prior to Mounjaro, I was just thinking about eating pretty much all the time. While I'm eating, I'd be thinking about what I'm going to eat next. I was never NOT hungry.
- mvdtnz 2y agoYou think exercise is "not that important in the grand scheme of things"? I urge you to do a bit of research on the topic, if you care about living a long and healthy life.
- bb88 2y agoIf you think it's important for you, awesome. I personally think nuclear proliferation is a more important issue for the world than if I lose weight or not. And that's okay for me, and it should be okay for you, too.
- mvdtnz 2y agoI didn't say anything about losing weight.
- chemicalnovae 2y agoThe parent said exercise though right, not weight loss? Exercise can/does lead to weight loss but it's certainly not the only benefit and might not even be the most important one.
- tbrownaw 2y ago> I personally think nuclear proliferation is a more important issue for the world than if I lose weight or not. That's a bad comparison though. A better one would be the effects that you losing weight (or getting in shape or whatever) would have on your life vs the effects that nuclear proliferation would have on your life. Or the effects that globally eliminating obesity would have on life expectancy vs the effects that solving proliferation would have on life expectancy.
- bb88 2y agoI completely disagree with you, as is my right. And you can disagree with me, and that's okay. I absolutely, truly believe nuclear proliferation is more dangerous than carbs. Fight me. The problem with your argument are the words, "you" and "your". You are making the mistake that pj50c is exactly arguing against. People arguing in effect, that "__you__ should do something." "If only __you__ understood...." "If only __you__ could control your lizard brain telling you you're hungry...." Those are your beliefs. They are not mine. And this is what people talk about when respecting "boundaries". I'm not saying you can't have you're opinion. And you can say, "I believe x, y, and z. And here's why...." And I'd be fine with that. In fact, I'd probably be more open to listening to you.
- TheOtherHobbes 2y agoObesity is literally the major cause of ill health. Cancer, dementia, heart disease, diabetes, and strokes are all extremely unpleasant and are all credibly linked to excess weight. The food industry is a lot like the tobacco industry. Everyone is aware of marketing around health and fitness. But the marketing and social programming that keeps people eating - ad campaigns, portion sizes, food consumption traditions that are billed as "family" events, even things like giant popcorn buckets in cinemas, or the idea that sweet things are "naughty" but also rewarding - gets a pass because it flies under the radar. It's literally a double bind. Everyone gets two contradictory messages about food, starting from early childhood. And they cannot be reconciled. So no. It is not about personal morality or shaming people for the sake of it. Medically, economically, and personally, it really is that important.
- Barrin92 2y ago>People really want these things - exercise, weight - to be important moral objectives for others because they are. The visual changes are superficial. Exercise is important because it holistically moves people to a healthier and active lifestyle. It literally changes your mental state. Ozempic is to weight loss what pain killers are to pain or sleeping pills are to insomnia, something that numbs a symptom (hunger in this case), without any impact on the underlying behavioral reasons that led towards the kind of lifestyle that promoted obesity.