Friday, 5 February 2016

Got Fat

The Guardian started a series of reports on the National Health Service (the NHS). Last Thursday attention turned to 'obesity'. You can imagine how well that turned out.

The headline [article] goes "How Britain got Fat" no question mark. In short, lots of calorie dense food, represented by the proliferation of fried chicken shops. A pre-clusion undermined by its own subtitle.
With cheap and fattening food everywhere, there has been a shape shift that means people do not recognise obesity when they see it in the mirror
Shapes shifted before Britain went clucky. Depending on your historical perspective, societies fattening started; after WWII, from 1960/ the mid-1970’s or 1979/80. Hilde Bruch started her studies on US children in 1937.
As Bruch later told it, her inspiration was simple: she arrived in New York in 1934 and was “startled” by the number of fat kids she saw—“really fat ones, not only in clinics, but on the streets and subways, and in schools.”
This was during the Great Depression, this extended to the UK, Orwell wrote the diet of working class people at the time.

The "does not recognize you are fat is why you are fat" theme typically reveals the only model for reversing weight is drawn from [ideas about] anorexia.

See you are fat ="feel fat".

Feel fat =starve self.

Not starving oneself whilst fat = thinks [one is] thin.

If you felt fat you'd automatically starve yourself-and presumably, wouldn't be fat anyway. This kind of nonsense is replete in 'obesity' cultism.

The short answer to the headline statement is: Deliberate stimying and derailing of proper investigation into useful means to reverse weight. Not as snappy as-too much fried food.

The whole focus on the person-ad hominem -and food/eating is wholly unnecessary, an irrelevant distraction from the objective pursuit of knowledge. The issue is, you want people alter their weight. That is where the focus should be. When trained scientists have found an effective efficent means, they can after testing, present it to the public.

There is nothing mysterious or frightening. It's not like quantum physics, the body already knows how to vary its weight and does so on an every day basis. Finding out how it does this will be a useful course, one calorie restriction and character assassination can never match.

In spite of an unswerving devotion to making a show of a solution to an "obesity crisis” mention of metabolic function is absent, though an immediate central theme in rare mention of the mechanics of another metabolic outcome-height.

No one is or has ever been stopping the white coat science and health establishment from genuine pursuit of means to reverse weight effectively and effciently, but they. The way is open for the resumption of objective inquiry any time they feel like.

Which doesn't appear to be quite yet. 

The only people truly and honestly devoted to making fat people slim have been fat people.

see Oprah as the patron saint of this yearning...

None too ironically the ones most accused of the disengenousness of their tormentors.

The phony dog and pony of eat less, do more, ELDM-which manages to be both outstandingly toxic and useless, makes intrinsic demands number one being the prioritization of those who are more prone to gain, at the expense of those less able to.

Socially, the power has been with the latter. Inevitably, they just continue behaving normally, which means celebrating the food most useful to human kind -calorie dense food. Their joyful active pursuit of an environment filled with such food remains intact. They saw nothing wrong in with that-because there isn't.

Hence hospitals welcoming in fast food giants on long favourable contracts, decades after their own aggressive promotion of weight as a CRISIS. Calorie restriction makes food wrong [or right]. It makes human nature wrong. It makes the will to live, wrong, lack of desire to self harm wrong, because it sets itself against all these.

All this is easy to overlook, if no one’s demanding that you diet.

Such an against human nature route needs the dictatorship of minimizing energy to be organizing principle of society. To have a hope of implimentation.

In democratic societies that flow along the lines of consumer choice and freedom. Plus increasing accessibility for individuals i.e. removing heavy doors in favour of automatic ones, lifts for stairs and such-this reduces energy wasting.

And people making conscious choices toward less activity, i.e. favouring cars and other motorized transport and so on.

Science as the only route to pursue was set not only by the suffering of fat outliers, who have various conditions that scramble their metabolic function. But by historical precident and these societies socio-economic course.

The only type of society that could have a chance at implimenting ELDM would be the kind of dictatorships that make a show of huge open air displays of physical exercises and can control food production.

An extraordinary hegemony invested in this delusion means consequences can be dodged, in favour of incantation of fantasy.  The fundamentally hostile, stigmatizing and abusive framing of 'obesity' helps maintain this canard.

'Obesity wallahs and health profession got around humans innate resistance to starvation by presenting weight loss dieting as a solitary, wholly individual pursuit. Implying slim people could continue mainly unbothered by their invasive dictates.

The lie of slim people’s possibility of exemption from the rule of calorie restriction is increasingly breaking down. More and more restrictions, penalties and harrassments are proposed, in addition to food scares, guilt and taxes. As numerous slim people cry: "Why should I be penalized for those who cannot control themselves?"

Leaving aside the thinking behind this kind of judgement, such mission creep was inevitable given the staunch refusal to accept the failure of calroie restriction dieting as a failure of it, not the person.

Even if dieting was remotely viable, millions of permanent dieters would have acted as cultural enforcers of that principle. Hungry desperate dieters, versus those who wish to be surrounded by calorie dense food, who do you think would end up dominating?

The game is in there. On some level, there’s understanding that fat people have probably been set up for failure. At the same time, there’s been hope that millions of reduced fat people will do the work of reversing the tide of normal eating for them.

What’s expected from fat people is rarely spelled out explicitly. It’s obvious that what is required of them isn’t how slim people behave or they’d have nothing to fear-it would only be duplicating their own lives after all.

That is how Britain or anywhere else, "got fat."

Wednesday, 3 February 2016

Slim Women Diet.....

Now here's a story-which happens to relate to the last post.

To recap for your reading pleasure.

It has been engineered from on high- that the only possible means of lowering weight must be through restriction of calorie intake. It should therefore be evident that if you have any active desire to lower your weight-whether you weigh 100lbs or 1000lbs-you will have to do it by restricting your calorie intake.

If you want to know why, ask the producers of knowledge-and the dispensers of medicine. Good luck in getting anything remotely resembling truth. If that felt comfortable, it would be out in the open and there wouldn’t be this kind of storm-in-a-pissbowl.

The product at the heart of this claims to be a "fat binder". This is supposed to bind with fat in your diet, causing more of it to be excreted without being digested. This is supposed to increase the extent of weight loss during a regime of calorie restriction. Repeat, the only way to lose weight on offer for everybody.

The advert featuring this fat outcha whazoozy aid has been banned after numerous complaints, including from British Naturism- [I know, who knew?!] The ad had the barefaced cheek [yes, now I see the pun....] to feature two slim women.

Apparently, everyone’s supposed to pretend slim women don’t diet, even though the media is constantly filled with seasonal weight loss regimes and ideas to get you into your bikini. You’re supposed to fit your clothes, rather than they fit you.

I happened to catch the ad in real time. I was surprised to see it, not due to the nature of its content but the honesty at the heart of it. Two slim women talking about how they want to lose weight to "look good". That's not only what people say, the 'obese' generating establishment says the same thing.

Most slim women, girls, I’ve ever met have been concerned with their weight, dieting and remaining slim-using various means of dietary restriction/exercising.

The obvious key to all this is everyone’s desire to collude in the imposition of starvation on all fat people.

SELLING FAT PEOPLE OUT, SELLs YOU OUT TOO.

Whatever you weigh.

The company in defence of itself, included a hilarious reference this company made-in its defence to the current "obesity-related" meme of “prevent obesity only.” What is a “prevented obese person”?

Correct: A slim person.

“Obesity prevention” = slim people impersonating anorexia, in order to avoid the 'threat' of 'obese'. Something they've done as long as I've been alive anyway.

Obese prevention=calorie restriction/lifestyle change.

Child obese prevention=calorie restriction/lifestyle change.

Obese prescription =calorie restriction/lifestyle change.

Any alteration of weight....you get the picture.

I have never felt any different on this issue. Slim people, women especially wish to be slimmer, for their own reasons. Basic bodily autonomy of being able to change your own body/appearance. Fashion, because amongst women, being slim/mer carries greater kudos, etc.,

This is taken advantage of-but is not created by various agencies, profit-making or otherwise. Let slim women own their own desires.

Physical inadequacy/body image issues comes from the idea of perfecting your body and means on offer-weight loss dieting. It does not come from adverts, they trade on the decisions made by individuals. 

The problem as I see it is not the urge of anyone to “lose weight.” It is the method insisted upon that is creating ALL THE PROBLEMS. There is not one problem I can see as being caused solely by the desire to lose weight-if you lose calorie restriction as the means and find other ones that are natural, non invasive and physiologically astute as well as truly effective. Which dieting isn't, never has been, never will be.

None of the guff spouted about poor old slimz, makes any damn sense. And yeah its profoundly patronising to claim slimz are docilely lead to starve and hate their bodies by slimming companies.

If you wish to reduce anorexia-amongst slim people-you’ll have to give up the psychological dependence on starving fat people. As long as you wish to hurt fat people, you have to sacrifice some slimz. At the very least, stop pretending the best trigger of anorexia isn’t calorie restriction.

No fat hater can be taken seriously as a pitier of thin anorexics or slim women’s so called body image problems.

Monday, 1 February 2016

They've got the Fear

Concerning Rachel Wiley's poem "For Fat Girls Who Considered Starvation When Bulimia Wasn’t Enough"

The title at least, was inspired by Ntozake Shange's famous 1975 "choreopoem", 'For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide/When the Rainbow Is Enuf'


Poetry and myself have never been more than occasional acquaintances, so I cannot speak to artistic merit. But the thing that's caused a bit of a kerfuffle is abandoning the absurdist pretence that "weight loss" insisted upon in the west isn't inherently eating disordered.

That calorie restriction induced weight loss-CRIWL isn't effectively weight loss through starvation. That the 'obesity' cult and anyone swallowing weight=calories in - activity expenditure, isn't recommending the impersonation of anorexia. 

That people stick their fingers down their throat and vomit up the contents of their stomach, primarily to manage their weight, ditto abuse laxatives, engage in exercise bulimia, starve, fast and do all sorts of other things to "lose weight." 

Part of this maybe the term "starvation". It's both the act and end point. In other words, if you starve yourself, it doesn't mean you are skeletal or emaciated and dying...yet. It means you are from wherever you are, eating little enough for your body to use up part of itself to tick over.

This is about minus calories as the only route made available to reverse weight. It's not simply inevitable, that is weight loss-the end. The difference between someone trying bulimia, anorexia etc, as a "lifestyle" aspiration and someone who becomes a fully blown bulimic/anorexic is susceptibility. A minority of people have systems that seem to submit to starvation, rather than keep countering it.

For a couple of decades, the rigid lie has been enforced, anorexia has nothing to do with slimming/dieting/weight loss. It does-it has everything to do with it. 

A bit like the difference between someone who's out of breath from exertion, to someone having an asthma attack. You can tell people are fronting because though it might be easy for someone in the know to immediately tell the difference, no-one would deny surface similarity.

Starvation denialists (lols) just outright deny any similarity between; Dieting to lose weight-cut calories until your body uses its own stores and you lose weight. They do this because they are that afraid of being linked with 'obesity'.

But are too embarrassed to say this.

Anyone who's encountered raving anorexics and their coterie may doubt this. But all slimz are terrified of any connection with 'obese'.

Perhaps due to it being the only category of anything remotely connected to health where the people working in the 'field' are hellbent on the misuse of what's nominally their concern. Their default is to erase the subjectivity of what's supposed to be their vehicle of study.

Even those who work with murderers and paedophiles do not behave in this way.

The insatiability of their urge to mess fat people up, with the power they have to do it is terrifying.  No one wants any of that.

Instead of saying this out loud, they pretend anyone failing this pretence is trivialising anorexia in some way. It's more the other way around. Anorexia is not trivialised at all, on the contrary its given an importance way above the numbers concerned.

It's just, that isn't the cure. Understanding exactly what's going on is. And few can do that, whilst operating from a false consciousness. The disconnection of slimming from anorexia has undoubtedly caused many people over the years to drift unwittingly into anorexia without knowing why.

Even after recovery, some former anorexics told me, they still didn't get what that was about. It's not just 'obesity' were lies abound, but for different reasons. The term "eating disorder" is in itself dubious. I cannot even explain what happened to me without abandoning it.

The disconnection of the obvious connection between starvation and starvation helps shore up the pretence that the failure of dieting is inexplicable. That [fat] people experiencing this uselessness are the ones that are in need of "psychological help".

The holding up of anorexia as a lifestyle you can acquire with sufficient motivation would offend these advocates deeply if their offence was real. It doesn't. Indeed many anorexic promote and agree with slimming and 'obesity' propaganda.

You can imagine why. 

The most shocking thing is the way they expect their drivel to be take on face value and repeated. Yet think nothing of challenging any personal testimony from a fat person.

Fat people are so often blasé if not resentful about/of their own fortitude, so it can be hard to believe that others are terrified not of being fat, but of the sickening taint of 'obesity' wallahs relentless aggression. That they wish not to run away from those they hate, but to go directly to them, take them over and direct their lives is deeply creepy. 

Many's the time when fat people are warned off all sorts of comparisons, though often valid, the explanations for warning off fat people aren't. It's a situation where what the person says is correct, but their reasoning isn't.

That tends to show they aren't giving their true reasons from this-fear of erased subjectivity.

The other day someone cited intersectionality in this mode. That they wished fat white people would recognize the classism inherent in their situation yadda yah. Yet as usual, they failed to mention intersectionality would have left the 'obesity' cult without any support from social justice warriors.

Sunday, 17 January 2016

Mandated Physical Mis-Education

'Obese' is a trap set for fat people-to force us to impersonate anorexic exercise bulimics. Everyone lurrrves it. Forcing us to pay a physical mental and fasting penance for the 'sin' of being in a fat state.

Like most traps set for those society others though, the trap eventually starts to include the enforcers'. Here's some ob mission creep. Teachers are fed up of their lazy, stupid, boring, exclusionary and punitive "physical education" lessons being evaded, by those lucky enough to have simpatico parents.

Apparently, it took 'research' to find out that those who hated the punitive regime in their own childhood are more likely to write fake (or otherwise presumably) sick notes for their offspring. Despite the obvious fact that everyone has spent decades insisting fat people must 'lose weight' and achieve this through energy restriction and wastage- whilst consistently making choices that make that more difficult. On top of it going against basic human nature. I'm talking about choosing to prioritize the motor car-making streets to dangerous for children to explore on their own.

Selling off school playing fields, assigning the feeding of children to profiteering catering giants who favour serving calorie dense industrial food effluent, often "shaped" into dinosaurs and the like. I could go on. Just for the record, I never had a problem with PE, apart from the psychologically injurious pecking order of being picked for teams.

I've just got no sympathy for the lack of interest in truly educating children physically and the debasement of sport into mere calorie expenditure aid, rather than an activity worthwhile for the sake of self-mastery and skill acquisition.

As if you'd need telling, this ownership of a child's body is being justified on the grounds of 'obesity prevention'. Hence the trap you set for others becomes one for yourself. Sticking it to fatties becomes, "Let's teach children that extreme physical discomfort is something to treat with supreme disregard." Why should an adult demanding your participation in undesired physical activity not be a good idea? How extravagant to teach children that your body belongs to you, not to others.

If you're a self deluding hypocrite fat phobe who writes sick notes for your slim children, what are you going to say to this mandatory activity?

How about you try: "Weight shouldn't have to be regulated via unwanted physical activity. There should be other ways"[?]

Thursday, 14 January 2016

Inside Every (Desperate) Person is a Fat phobe Waiting for Release

Most people lead lives of quiet desperation. So it's hardly surprising that inside all of us is a cowardly bully or bigot (often both) waiting to be liberated. In this instance, by permission of the white coat mafia. From scientists and medics who hold our lives in their hands (only because many of them just won't let go). To the head docs who tell us what and how to think and about how we feel and think, along with how to interpret whatever's left in our minds.

When you stop either auto fat phobia or the fat hatred you have for others, it usually has numerous effects-which I'd like people to discover for themselves. But I would challenge anyone, fat to thin alike to simply stop hating fatness and/or fat people-the latter is so nonsensical when you think about it. Imagine "hating" slim people(?!) It's effectively misanthropy, which means it is also self hatred.

Really bite the bullet and root this out. Systematically.

It has been said by many that fat phobia does not signal self esteem. I'd be more direct and humbly suggest that it is often a marker of low mood or even depression. And that if you stop fat phobing, you will take strain off your mood. Bring back some lost energy and that is often key to neurosis of all kinds, depression and anxiety especially.

If you excise it as completely from your mind and its functions as you can, you'll feel better not simply about yourself, you'll feel better about everything. I'd avoid setting out to "love" fat. That is, positively fetishizing fat. That often brings its own problems. It can and does sit side by side, with a virtually unchecked loathing of fatness/fat/fat people.

Its important that you stick to getting rid of any ill feeling, any over-excitation about fatness, fat and people in any aspect. Think more of a kind of acquiring of a neutral stance. Concentrate on the aim of changing the way you react emotionally and mentally to fat. Quiet your nervous system right down when you think of it, see it or hear it mentioned.

Go further than you think you need to. Fat phobia can be peskily hard to spot, until you have gotten rid of a certain amount-when more hidden depths of prejudice, surface. Often after a gap or high point of reversal. That is probably true of a lot of most, if not all prejudice.

Fat phobia is a mental drag.

Fat phobia has costs.

Do the experiment on yourself and make up your own mind.

Friday, 1 January 2016

Happy New Year One and All

To make that even happier still. I'd say, drop the notion that slim people are stopping fat people from being real. Slim people are out of it. They can't help themselves. They need an intervention, that of fat people refusing to indulge them anymore.

I've sadly come to the conclusion that they cannot be expected to do any better than they are on this issue.

It's starting to feel almost cruel to expect them to understand fat people, without fat people understanding themselves. This is on fat people. If that makes your heart sink to your boots, that's an indication of something fundamental.

I recently saw a post praising the idea that it was empowering to change being fat into a choice. As if that would make it so. As if that notion isn't part of the problem. I have to wonder whose side that is on.

If fatness was driven by conscious direction, fat people wouldn't be awol from their own state of being. If you look at conditions where direct choice is a driving force-if only initially-people are far more present in their own narrative. They're often in charge of it.

When one hears about anorexia, drug addiction, alcohol dependence, mental illness, or other states/conditions people try to force weight into, one hears from those involved, whether that is bullshit or not.

Not completely, I'm not saying there's no professional fooling going on. Ultimately though, the tropes we parrot come from who've directly experienced those various situations. That comes from a pattern of making choices that lead to the outcome.  Not with fatness, on the contrary, all you hear about is measurements and ignorant judgements. People do not exist in 'obesity'

The reason I put 'obesity' in quotes, is because it has nothing to do with people. It is an imposition.One that is wholly empty of narrative of strategy of anything. If this is to change, fat people need to recognise that it is we who are refusing to speak for ourselves.

It has been said that fat people used to ignore fat phobia, this is nonsense, we bowed to it. To really blank it, to emotionally detach from it and the people disseminating it, would do far more good than a 'social justice' challenge.

So here's to 2016, may it be a great year for everybody. And the year when all fat people finally turn up for their own lives.

Thursday, 31 December 2015

Diabetes Trippy

I'm not even going to pretend to care about Rob Kardashian or the rest of his family. I don't get what they are for and I'm as okay with that as I am with others totally getting the point of them. But it seems Rob has got the diabetes.

The fat kind. The naughty, type 2 diabetes. The one you get for being guilty.

The twist here is he's basically a bit of a five minute fatty. Unconvincingly so at that.

According to reports, this man gained over 100lbs in one year. He was also depressed, seemingly hyperphagic and having problems with alcohol.

From my own point of view of no medical expertise whatsoever. I'd say such a cluster of symptoms, along with such ferocious weight gain signalled RK's incipient diabetes. This could be totes wrong of course. That a slim guy decided apropos of nothing to force feed himself, turn down thermogenesis and chub up by a nice round 100lbs (why not 50 or 150?) because erm, "fat logic" is far more plausible.

After choosing to enter "fat logic" whilst slim, he became depressed about it, because he was getting what he planned, yes, that sounds the ob construct mal-logic to me. Never knowingly makes sense and no-one cares because it serves a purpose, nothing of which is to be of use to any fat person whatsoever.

Interestingly enough, he was taken to hospital suffering diabetic ketoacidosis, something most indicative of type1 diabetes, the innocent, unimpeachable kind. Alas for Rob, his problems made him fat, so, the obstacle that is the 'obesity' construct will have to be negotiated.

In my strictly non medical judgement.

The ob construct is increasingly forcing medical segregation by body size. From the nonsense of "obesity-related" to this progressive cleaving of diabetes along weight lines. I'm not entirely surprised to learn that diabetes tends to be the classification for chronically elevated blood sugar. Like others, I'm not particularly convinced that they are related to each other enough to bear the same tag.Though I could not swear against it either.

However the issue here is not about weight, it's about metabolic function and whether the angle we are viewing it from is the most useful or accurate. I didn't get those suspcisions from the good doctor, I've said forever that the term "insulin resistance" has always thrown up a conceptual red flag for me. [I can't help a wry smile when I hear "auto-immune" too.]

In a way, the addition of "leptin resistance" seems to confirm my suspicions about the nature of cross over between type 2 diabetes and weight.

As will be of little surprise to you, Rob has been told his diagnosis, rather than being shock of mortality, a challenge to his personal sense of self, or a potential light bulb moment for what he may well have assumed was wholly "emotional" is simply a "wake up" call for him to stop being fat etc.,Yes, heaven forfend any fellow feeling on the impact of finding out that you have an illness.

"Everyone knows," fat people get ill solely due to the wages of sin, in order to motivate them to an anorexic triumph and the approval of people who think that's an apt response. The criterion for diagnosing diabetes has been lowered to that end. And why not? It is frequently said, that medicine is an art not a science.

RK's apparently off to rehab for the etc., part of which is probably indicative of his underlying condition. The best comment on rehab was made by the late Amy Winehouse. She was much mocked for this, but all she said was the truth, rehab is mostly hot air. Unless you count attention and time away from your normal existence.

That's usually called a holiday.