Saturday, 25 October 2014

Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

My first response when I heard CBT (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy) was finally being waved around in conjunction with "weight management" was this should be good. Won't this expose the practice of turning of fat people's mind against themselves? [The 'obesity' construct starts its mindwarping with "child obesity" mess.]

Given the purpose of fat phobia has been to make being fat feel so bad that this unease either produces dis-ease or feels like it. The use of CBT and the like would surely expose that by turning it around? The theory behind this to provide explanation as to why diet's fail. Fat people's fatty tristesse. Why're ya sad fatso? Becasuse of my fat gut *sob.* Why d'ya have a fat gut? Because I'm sad. Neat isn't it? So, if fat people's a-hem.... mental health is improved-diets will stop failing.

Don't whatever you do ask how this affects metabolic function, after all that would technically be a scientific breakthrough.  It's the usual 'obesity' cult improvisation. They study afterward. Hey that reverses the clinical trial pathway.

I wonder if anyone's been given an award for this innovation?

Putting it bluntly, the kind of things CBT exists to combat were the techniques employed surreptitiously, to turn 'obesity' into a draining imposture. Goes something like this;

"Negative" Behaviour Cycle
Instead of the "everyone doesn't like me" it's you are disease, not a disease, the disease. That tends to produce "distortions", i.e it sets up a negative mindset. You can learn to interrupt and challenge this process, difficult though that can be (to the point where others define this kind of pattern as "illness.")

Buuuut, when the definition of you is producing it, that can become a life sentence until that [definition] is removed. 

Less sophisticated seeming societies would refer to this kind of shit as spell casting, bad magic etc., Basically through a set of culturally relevant mindwarps, you get people to mess themselves up, then claim that resultant badness/evil i.e. 'obesity' or less formally, "fat logic" is emanating from within them. Technically, a lawyer might argue that's not wholly incorrect [yes that's a double negative, enjoy.] Often the "treatments"required to expel this malevolence are quite vigourous, shall we say.

Anyway, let's see, here are ten cognitive distortions- negative expectations and beliefs that dominate your overall perceptions. How many of them will seem familiar?

1. Mental Filter- Sole focus on the worst possibilities and aspects of a situation filtering out any positives, i.e. the "obesity"construct.

2. Disqualifying the positive- Explains itself really. Any positives don't count.

3. All or Nothing Thinking-Things are either one thing or t'other, slim people are good fat people are bad, any deviation is "denial."

4. Overgeneralization-One example is universal. i.e. One person losing any amount of weight for any length of time, makes fatness "preventable."

5. Jumping to Conclusions- Events cue your pre-formed belief. Fat people are eating disordered. So fat people being enthusiastic about food signals, this eating disorder or the current craze "food addiction."

6. Catastrophization-Maximize negativity, i.e. An observation that either end of the spectrum of any trait, height, weight etc., has higher overall mortality than in between, becomes: Fat kills!!!!

7. Should's and Ought's- Please, you should be slim, you ought be on a diet. You should do whatever you're told, diet's ought to work. 

8. Personalization- Feeling to blame for what is partially or wholly outside your control. Fat people's over-responsibility feeling being fat is our fault and so's the failure of dieting, mind you, we're told that. [Also associated with those who have to look after adults from a young age.]

9. Emotional Reasoning- This is a doozy, basically the idea that because you feel something, it must be so, i.e. because others have cultivated excruciating discomfort about fatness, it's just got to be baaaad.

10. Labelling- Defining yourself, rather than the quality or nature of actions/circumstances/occasions.
And that's just ten of them. Don't hold your breath for this to be mentioned or any contrition or reversal of the 'obesity' cult mindwarp to be a direct out in the open target for the alleviation/ reversal of mental and physical health issues [yes I said physical]. Otherwise known as recovery.

What seems to be happening instead is that is deemed your neuroses. I'm not kidding. The constant panic mode insisted on by 'obesity' alarmist rhetoric, plus things like your nervousness through the aftermath of a constant threat of famine and, exorting yourself to diet and feeling angry with yourself for being fat. Is just the mismanagement of your mind.

Well, technically, that's not entirely false either. You did, but it doesn't say you felt morally obligated to go along with it.

This was wholly supported and advanced by "our betters." And they don't have the cojones to state that openly. Their courage is solely in the area of tearing up fat people pompously. Or now latterly dripping us with oleaginous pity, ((((shudder)))).

Luckily, there are some techniques that purportedly change the content of these to quite a degree to reverse the effect, as fatsphere has instinctively been doing by challenging received opinion. And connecting with our own real experience as human beings.

Or "obesity denial"/"fat logic" as our detractors should have it. 

Friday, 24 October 2014

Lifestyle Anorexia

There are quite a number of things I didn't expect to be controversial. Number one, that dieting is proto-anorexia, that is early stage anorexia nervosa (AN).

Allow me to settle that before I continue;
Anorexia is a mental illness.

Anorexia is an illness.

Anorexia is very serious.

Anorexia is very important. 
Okay.........erm, what's the difference between restricting calories to [for] the point of weight loss if you are anorexic or not?

Let's try it this way. A person with a mental health diagnosis jumps up and down, Maasai style. A person who we'll describe as legally sane does the same what's the difference in the mechanics of the act of jumping between the two?


Though context may differ, I'm actually not referring to that. I'm talking about specific action aimed at a specific purpose.

I thought this was obvious, not least to [thin] anorexics themselves, who I'd credited with having the kind of awareness their social status allowed. My policy on listening to others define their state of mind or being is a bit like the rule of asking artists about their work. Suffice to say, some room for a bit of careful and respectful skepticism may be required. We all seek to present ourselves in the light we would wish to be seen in, even unconsciously, which can clash with a more objective interpretation.

I don't necessarily start with that as policy. That starts when what you're saying doesn't make sense.

There's a groove in the thinking of many thin anorexics and their supporters borne of insisting dieting is separate from anorexia. To the extent many who've experienced the (latter) condition can't make sense of it. We all sense this distinction is dubious, but ceded to PWA insistence due to the influence of their social class.

Yes, there are other forms of anorexia, say, those who don't get paid enough. That tends to filter out susceptibility. Those who will cut back on food from those who cannot and have to find ways round that/ cut other necessities. But, that's not the kind we are talking about.

To be scrupulously fair, one could say, dieting as a prescription for 'obesity' did not consciously start off as the aping of anorexia. At least, not permanently. Losing a certain amount of weight and then leaving it behind was perhaps tolerable. What went wrong was the true nature of human metabolic function.

Turns out its built not simply to resist [calorie restriction induced] weight loss, but to recover any loss. Rather like the body does with other tissue loss; blood, bone, skin.

This was a surprise to everyone, myself included. We imagined adipose tissue would behave as we saw it-superfluous. Whether that's so or not, doesn't matter, the point is biologically speaking, the cudgel of starvation just becomes another assault on tissue that the body functions around replacing.

I was intrigued by the (supposed) rationale for separating calorie restriction dieting, from calorie restriction that becomes anorexia. The difference in the latter is the system of defenses that defeat calorie restriction in the main either doesn't function fully, or is somehow overwhelmed by a countering force.

That difference seems mainly inherent in a few, though it can vary in source [for some it seems to be related more to their mindset enabling them to enforce anorexia, rather than having AN proper] and strength. For some its very close to the surface, others less so.

Previous explanation centered on how weight loss dieting trivialized anorexia. In other words the connection wasn't denied then-it was too well known. Now though that has become truth, rather than convenient fiction. What's shocking those who are susceptible to anorexia need to be aware of this connection. Not being so leaves them to blunder into their potential unknowingly. That has always struck me as shockingly cruel. I have to wonder how many who've perished could have been saved by being fully aware of this beforehand.

This disconnection trivialised dieting, making it harder for people to grasp why dieting created such a mess. They ended up blaming themselves for being, greedy, lazy and flaky.

Dieting is so appalling and unsustainable because of the nature of its inherent pathology-something that moves you towards ill health/ death.  Not because there's anything wrong with the dieter-regardless of size. Insisting this continues the pathologizing of 'obesity' by another route.

This is often countered with but, but 'obesity' c'est mal, but even if that was so, it wouldn't alter the pathology and unsustainable nature of calorie restriction dieting.  Indeed, that  form of countering actually acknowledges this.

Even when there is an eating disorder, it's common practice to just swap one disorder for another. Wasted anorexics are coerced/"supported" to overfeed, gainer style as recovery. Reversing the fixation on loss with one of gain. Watching the scales, celebrating gain, rather than loss. Food as the primary route to both, dieting down is the cause and dieting up the "cure."

The same disregard for and riding roughshod over internal feeling. In this case it may be well meaning. But it seems many thin anorexics dislike the possibility of swapping one ED for another plus the weight gain that can occur in a metabolism primed by dieting (down) for gain, see above link.

Wishing to preserve their much valued and hard won thin or at least slimness. Separation of the two enables them to hide their anorexic behaviours, although at a slightly different pace in, successful dieting i.e. "healthy dieting/lifestyle anorexia." 

A lot of people will find this hard to entertain, given the hostility of many, including authority to pro-ana, which is congregations made up of amateurs dedicated to anorexia as a lifestyle. Amateurs who agree with authority can invoke their ire by being too direct about it. Anorexia is well supported by the establishment and the class milieus which generate, at least the administration of it.

As we can see in the way we are all kept contained within calories in/out, up/down. 

When I speak in a personal capacity about anorexia, I'm mostly referring to the experience of dietary restriction and weight loss dieting. Many thin fat phobic anorexics don't seem to realise how potent their condition really is.

Seeing fat people as the unspeakable opposite, they can barely conceive of shared experience from the same source. Despite telling everyone how much more seriously they need to take it, they sometimes can't grasp, a little of it can go a surprisingly long way.  

Friday, 10 October 2014

Real Women L0L

"Un-photoshopped   "the female body-no matter what size or shape"

Examine closely for shaming of the skinnies

That's what the work that brought the term to prominence always referred to, real women. Women in the flesh, have curves. Whether women are thin or not, they curve. They have curves. Especially when their bodies aren't excessively gym modified.

An added reference of RWHC was working class women (in this case Chicana/Latina) and their bodies were made by their lives and their work. Where some of them get the "exercise" that doesn't count.

And that was the problem. WC +/or WoC don't count among the internet classes. "Real women" was cynically false flagged into "skinny shaming." That this nonsense was acceded to is pure and simply thin and class privilege. It had nothing to do with injustice full stop. The idea that thin/slim women ever feel less than real is not convincing.

Yeah, I'm sure they feel insecure in the face of an acceptably voluptuous woman, that's hardly the same thing.

The point of this sort of distraction is slim women still feel caught out by fat women's refutation of the pathology assigned them. They know they "should" support it, but they can't quite make themselves. And they can't think of an acceptable sounding way to put that.

Demanding meaningless shows of subservience is supposed to reassure slim people, but it never does.

Fat people as usual feel very guilty and responsible when slimz are distressed in conjunction with them, so went with this status politicking. Also perhaps to win them round [slim chance].

The irony is, real women have curves, was precisely in response to the surround of technically altered images of women that encourages all to see themselves through this lens of barely attainable. Thin and slim women keep trying to make a complaint about how its assumed they suffer no image problems. Forgetting that they've signed on for being the only acceptable human form/s and are supposedly thus due to their highly evolved consciousness.

If there was desire to communicate. This could have been an opportunity to explore this anguish honestly. Join forces to overcome it. Instead, women aren't ready for that so, the priority is "damage limitation."

Friday, 3 October 2014


This is one of the very bad places depression can get you to;
I follow his eyes to the figure huddled in a corner, head resting on upturned knees, a flimsy blanket covering her modest frame. A saline drip atop a metal pole is connected to her arm.“She doesn’t move from there”, the special offers.
Indeed, in our short time there, as we hover uncertainly, she appears as still as an apparition.....She refuses all food and drink in the next few days and needs intravenous hydration, which is not permitted on the psychiatry ward so she stays on our unit. .....the psychiatrist diagnoses her with catatonic depression, a condition aptly described in 1843 in which patients appear “in a state of stupor, with fixed gaze, a facial expression of frozen astonishment, muteness, and indifference.’
Here's why the body will throw everything it can in the path of something like this. Put it crudely, would it be better to gain 100lbs or end up suspended in the grip of this deathlike de-animated catatonia? That's a rhetorical question. I'm not seeking your imagined preference. I'm getting you to think more in line with your body's instincts and what kind of state it might go all out to stop you reaching.

We're so used to "depression" in the form of a relatively trivial misery that goes with a bit of exercise and self management. The sense of urgency the body might feel about it is lost. Ironic given the supposedly progressive touting of the importance of mental health.

Weight gain=disease process ignores the body's defence mechanisms against mental illness and just what the body might be defending you against. And how well they work-overall. The 'obesity' construct further trivializes mental health by using the destruction of mental health as "motivation" for its neuroses as treatment cure-anorexia and exercise bulimia.

Weight gain can be a defence against sinking into depression, like a life jacket trying to keep you afloat. Stop you from drowning, but obviously, not able to get you out of the water-that's the job of your conscious mind-including and up to enlisting the help of others. Bear in mind that weight is often a layered process. People are on a spectrum of weight, lowest to highest and in between. Weight gain can and often happens on top of/in addition to that.

It can be hard to grasp just how serious a potential threat depression is to your life.  Suicide is obvious, but if you've been depressed, felt miserable as anything for long periods, without feeling that, it may be hard to grasp the feverish activity of your nervous system trying to prevent a slide.

The closest I've ever been to this state was some temporary catatonia when I was trying to prevent myself from eating-this is the absolute truth! Long story short, I ended up with my arms up in the air in a claw-like pose. They'd risen on their own as my muscles got tighter and tighter on their own.

In slow-mo, I became aware of not being able to remember what I was not supposed to be doing, only that I had to keep resisting. I was paralyzed and couldn't move; not a metaphor, I genuinely could not move. I hung there for a while mesmerized by the way my conscious mind's ability to function ran out of any nerves to operate in. Taken over as my brain capacity was, by this rigidity.

So when people tell me, not ask, tell, that I tried minimal calorie restriction for five minutes then threw in the towel, you can imagine why I can lack a certain patience with them. It's also why I tell those who think they've barely bothered with dieting. Don't worry about that, people like me have. You were just more in tune with your body's own wisdom than I. Pat yourself on the back.

To but it bluntly, I was an idiot about dietary restriction. Even after this episode, do you think it occurred to me for one nano-second that this might be the last straw? I'm actually laughing as I type that.

How did this end? Well, after hanging there for what seemed a long time, with no signs of it abating. And, being unnerved by not being able to call to mind, yet knowing what I was not supposed to be doing- I decided to let it arms flopped straight down to my sides.

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

Shape Backlash

Since the beginning of the internet imprint of fat acceptance, a lot of slim/mer women seem to have struggled with an overwhelming bitch of a fact. Being caught out in their collusion with the official objectification of other women.

This has emphasized the objectification of all women.

They didn't care because they accepted their elevation by weight.  Being crowned with a (slim) halo obviously felt, feels uplifting.

Humans keep falling for this faux superiority elevation act. I suppose the hook is rooted in the optimist bias of our minds. Positive objectification feels positive, even when you are ultimately losing by buying into it as slim/mer people have.  

Witness spectacles such as women calling themselves feminist, insisting fat women we are "unscientific" by referring to the ways our bodies actually work in reality because that's not women's place. Men are the only one's qualified to decide that. How arrogant of us to "forget" [i.e. assume we were just self reporting].

Deviating from established fictions ballasted by male privilege has shown that women don't feel they have any real innate credibility in describing what it is to be human. We're more qualified in testing matters of the intellect like housework and crafts.

This has been one of those sneaky tests for women, one that has shown us up very badly indeed and no, I don't mean being competitive. Invoking banal misogynistic expectations of women under the guise of feminist analysis as distraction ain't cute. This is about women's conviction that reality is something outside us-something we receive, unless its fashion or something.

Proving our own unnecessary levels of disgust and contempt for ourselves as female human beings. Rather than worry about fat/thin shaming or what, let's just try and have the (feminine?) grace to end this farce shall we? It's dragged us all down.

And no, class-male is not to blame for this. This ones on us.

Nevermind, no-one's perfect right? Let she who's without sin cast the first stone and all that.

In the end, we all know: "Putting other women down doesn't lift you up." "Shaming thin bodies isn't helpful to fat women." We can see that now. What have slimz got out of this really? The media aimed at women is deluged with their multiple insecurities. They've not gotten away from their "internalized misogyny" by trying to dump that on lesser status women, it's just stirred it up. So why didn't they say any of this to themselves during their gathering enthusiasm for the crusade? Come on now.

We can see you!!!

And wouldn't you know who's currently fuelling this fire?

T/W: Contains lots of swears. 

spot any fat chicks up in this beatcch??!!

Enter Mz Minaj.

This piece of fluff is pretty crude in its erm storyline, featuring what Mz M's "anaconda" does and doesn't like.  But an aspect of its overall message touches on something quite interesting.

First at taste of the nontroversy;
Minaj actually raps; "Little in the middle but she got much back" "Yeah, this one is for my bitches with a fat ass in the f***ing club." "I said, where my fat ass big bitches in the club."[I'm being delicate tuhday.] Then she says "f*** skinny bitches.."

Ouch to the [thin] anorexics. Minaj is mostly talking about shape and how having one associated with femaleness is totes the best. It's a bit like the idea that slim is the only way to be human, just without the backing of the medical machine.

This kind of shape has been deemed a liability in the feminist era. In the aura of FA, plus Black women's necessary self assertion, she's proclaims the integrity of having an outstanding tush-on a small frame.

One irony is her (supposed) current arch nemesis's most startling physical feature is her very prominent hips, on a small frame. 

Feeling duly inspired she squeals; "fat ass big bitches" and then eff "skinny bitches", managing to prod the genesis of fat phobia in the feminist movement. Before you pseud me.

The way that a female identifying shape; big bust, big butt, big hips, big thighs goes against feminism's much favoured straight up and down/ muscular androgyny. Downplaying anything seen as emphasizing femaleness.

What these lady features have in common is fat mass. This is how "fat" has become such a devastating put down to women. It is the humiliating reminder of woman=lesser. Hence feminist's problem with fat and why women are called fat merely for not being straight up and down AND thin. Whether conscious or not Minaj slips from fat arse to big bitches.

The combination of fat phobic misogyny, plus feminist androgyny means women "feel fat", for being anything more than a gender pranging beanpole. 

I noted the "Buns of Steel" era with confusion, 'til I worked out what was happening. Having an andro, though fat shape myself, I didn't get the hip / butt anguish. Women, many of whom did not even see themselves as feminist let me in on this via their actions.

All kinds of women are in on this shape trouble. Having a female identifying shape has been almost a faux pas for a while. Hip and thigh whittling dominates the slimming and fitness industries. In the era when the un corsetted stomach has been a seat of profound disgust, we have been deluged with slim your hips/ buns of steel, slim/tone those thighs.

I knew it was inevitable that there would be some swingback from such an extreme position. Just never thought FA would help create the spark for it.

Monday, 29 September 2014

"Obesity Denial" Really?

Something I've never been able to take seriously is the incontinent application of terms relating to "denialism," whether referring to the form coined for those who would seek to deny the Holocaust or the delusions of grandeur therapy mess form.

Despite having total control of what is the mainstream narrative on fatness, that's still not enough to satisfy the insatiable hunger for what.............? Fat people's pain, humiliation, stigmatization, pathologization? I really don't know, do you?

Now we can add to this meaningless word generator of "obesity denial", referring to anyone not seeing things in the same loony tunes manner.

I happily refute the idea of people as disease. They obviously aren't and cannot usefully or indeed ethically be construed as such.  And, need I say, though fully on board with the lipogeddon scenario, the AMA's scientific committee-to their very great credit-felt impelled to point out no "disease" has been coined.

In case that's confusing. 'Obesity' wallahs can't define the "disease of obesity" because it doesn't exist, nor does what they're pissy about lend itself to that metaphor.  Either they have to define metabolic deviance or people's weight, they cannot collapse the two togehter. As they don't accept this reality and no one's going to make them, they've ended up just pointing at people and asserting "disease." Few feel to query that. Not because they have any respect for "obesity science" or the medical profession-the way they sue the latter to dirt, creating not a little of the bitterness they're working out on fat people.

Inevitably, this neuromush has been applied to any thoughtful unashamed fat person- as in they are engaging in...... "obesity denialism", dun-dun-duuuuuuhhhhhhr!!!!

This charge intends to shame by association with creationists and more latterly, those skeptical of climate change and/or the nature of.

Leaving aside rejection of the construct 'obesity' has come to brand.

This unspoken but obvious comparison exposes something fundamental about the nature of the delusional constructed view of fatness.

Climate, happens outside us all. 

Theoretically, it is equally observable (or not) by anyone, objectively so. We don't have those advancing climate change experiencing climate change as their physical being, versus those disagreeing not experiencing it as their physical reality.

That isn't the case with being fat. A fat person is experiencing their existence as an on-going physical, spiritual, emotional and intellectual process.

A person who isn't fat, isn't sharing that.

Casting fatness as if it's available to all equally, reveals the creepy extent to which fat people's boundaries have been eviscerated by those who seek to own and direct that. Here's 'obesity' folklore naked with its failure to write fat people as discrete sentient beings. This, not "looks" undermines if not cleaves other people's ability to relate to fat people as real. That definition becomes a mental block.

It also reflects the dream of the power elite working itself out in metadata surveillance controversies currently playing out. The desire is to know everything about you at a glance. Whilst they remain in the shadows.

Those protesting the loudest about privacy, are too often on board with this view of "science" turning others into powerless puppets. Imposing fictional roles of what they're supposed to be and/ or stand for.

That the difference between climate and being/not being wasn't immediately spotted by at least those who have some awareness of what fat acceptance is about, is a sign of how completely comfortable we all are with the idea that fat people are neither conscious nor autonomous.

That we could possibly be informed any by our own experience of being. This is the kind of thing I'd point to when people regurgitate such sj platitudes as "We don't have to change society does." Are you sure you don't want to change this? Because I'd say its desirable, in fact necessary.

No one deserves that to happen more than those who really thought could replace human consciousness with a puppet version and get away with it forever. That's what I call motivation.

How about it fat people?

Tuesday, 16 September 2014

Obesity Junk

There's a new 'obesity' drug on the market. You may not have heard of it because really, wgad? Gig Pharma's slimming drugs have been universally execrable. Toxic, of barely perceptible efficacy, possessed of a cornucopia of harm generating effects, many of which uncannily turn out like those "associated with obese."

This one looks just as cute. It's a mixture of this and that. Results exceeded the placebo by 4.1% (as much as that). So much for 'obesity' is addiction.

Businessweek seem surprised by fat people's seeming indifference to toxic, useless prescription tabs. Rightly so, none of this has stopped this kind of crud from getting takers in the past. That probably aided the reluctance of insurance companies to pay out for this crap now, which is a hurdle in the US.

Pill taking has ceased to be a mere act. The act's become an article of faith. In more quack riddled areas of soft science. We've learned to take drugs not simply because they work, but also, because the idea of them working works, like weight loss dieting. That can release the placebo effect in us. The placebo effect is hard to perceive when it comes to reversing weight though.

There's placebo, where there's room for it. 

Fundamental levers of human metabolic function are not known to be located in the conscious mind, the relationship between them and the mind are more indirect and unknown.

Neurosis is different, people are haunted by the notion of- you can pull yourself together at any time. So, insisting it is illness has a different context to what people feel are issues with weight.

Of course, 'obesity' is cast along with neuroses such as; depression anxiety, eating disorders. Actually, fatness is cast as just about everything; a decision, an eating disorder, mental illness, substance ab/use, neurosis, gluttony, pleasure seeking, a sign of trauma, unhappiness, a way of exiting the sexual meat market, a physical micro aggression, a way of insulting your spouse, child abuse/rape prevention.....

Versatile ain't it?

You'd think people would be tired enough with this to just knuckle down and accept, you find out what something is by studying it, objectively. Fact gets in the way of the imagination though.

The placebo effect in neuroses can be breathtakingly effective because there is a direct relationship between your ability to think and your ability to alter the course of your own thinking. Put it this way, your mind is a self healing entity. Your whole body is. Think of cutting yourself and the way your body stems the bleed, forms a scab and if serious enough a scar, then that fades perhaps completely.

In your mind this is complicated by the trickiness of manoeuvring your mind, using your mind. You in the form of your conscious awareness, are part of the process. 

People often prefer the [promised] reliability, convenience, and depersonalized ease of a magic bullet-or the idea of and are ashamed of both. We are increasingly secular. Faith healing's a bit of a no-no.

Now this process as a whole has become a placebo for bringing about weight change, which is being crow barred into this mould.

Weight is has never yielded to this. It can't be bullied like people. Ethan Lazarus, a Colorado obesity-medicine [lol] physician;
He likened the country’s current view of obesity and its need for treatment to that of “depression back in the 1980s,” and said it would take some time to change attitudes.
You have been warned. Expect docs to be riding your fat arse to take this junk soon.

Clearly, the whole let's make people as disease official is supposed to bypass fat people's sobriety. It's of course overlooked that fat people tend to more sober than the average non-fat person.

Fat people tend to drink, drug and smoke less than those who aren't. Sorry if you're a fat drug and drink loving smoker, not meaning to leave you out. But, overall, sobriety tends to go more with higher weight.

That's one for those who've decided in their wisdom to cast fatness as 'substance abuse' I used to joke about turning fat people into slim junkies, but it seems to be on. The whole crusade is about turning fat people into slim people. With that though, you identify some real things about slim that don't appear in advice lists entitled "How to think slim"

When people stop drugging, drinking and smoking, there's a tendency to fill out.

Yes it's true there are fat junkies, and a binge-drink habit can fatten a person substantially, especially over time. And some smokers are fat.

Overall though, the relationship is thinner user, fatter sober.

There's an interesting balance at work. Fat people's overall risk of liver disease could be slightly elevated in comparison to others. Sobriety could take pressure off the liver. It seems a good idea, and is something to keep an eye on if fat people get junky.

I have never been convinced myself that weight reversal requires drugs, just a more intelligent way of seeing things and a better target. I wouldn't rule out drugs, but they'd have to be short course not long term rent seeking, that's currently the holy grail.

Like most lies, those telling them are most convinced and aim an onslaught of in person persuasion to get us on board popping pills. There will no doubt be takers for this nonsense. Neglected people desperate for positive input will submit to abuse of all kinds if it comes with the appearance of care.

And any harm done can be turned into proof of the harms of 'obesity'. I'm looking at the pushing of surgery. Just like the impact of stigma became the harm 'obesity' does.

I truly hope fat people can maintain their lack of enthusiasm for to the culture of junk. I honestly think everyone needs us to.