Sunday, 15 June 2014

A cure for diabetes? Poverty

Being too poor to eat or more accurately, having not enough food around anyways. Between 1991-5, in the post-soviet shakedown Cuba's ability to feed itself decline. This lead to a population wide fall in consumption of calorie intake and weight of 12lbs/5.5kg on average .

Along with a fuel shortages, which caused people to take to travelling by pony bike and foot, diabetes went into decline. According to boffins, this caused a decline in the level of deaths by heart disease as well as diabetes. Smoking was mentioned, but no matter.

Intriguing given the notoriously better health of richer people. Rather in keeping with an underlying green romanticism about how measures people take when poor are green and need to be preserved.

After 1995;
A rebound in population weight followed in 1995 (33.5% prevalence of overweight and obesity) and exceeded pre-crisis levels by 2010 (52.9% prevalence).
Sort of what happened in many countries post-WW2. That played its part in the weight spikes of the 1960's and 70's, the latter is the real beginning of the modern rise in fatness.

This is what my brain worked out years ago, weight regulation (management) via calorie restriction requires the whole of society on a diet. Yet we're all constitutionally designed to loathe and resist calorie restriction. Furthermore, those less inclined to store weight's interests begin to be diametrically opposed to those who are more inclined to store weight. And the former win.

Individualization of weight loss is not about blame, its about leaving slimz and thinz out of it. The blame is a lever to apply this, not a cause of trying to make calorie restriction private. 

Rather like gastrectomy is the only thing that delivers meaningful weight loss results (to hell with health and too often life obviously). To overcome the high resistance of our design to cal res, you must cut people into it restriction. The parts of the mind that don't run the body, cannot override the parts of the brain and nervous system that do. Or the latter would be superfluous and nature always has a reason.

Society shaped around dieting is key to implementation. The results are another story.

Four years isn't long enough to find out what would happen. There's little doubt in my mind that any longer, would simply reveal other problems. That's the problem with the fashion for either/or assumptions replete in healthism.

The weight loss or undermining of the ability to maintain a higher weight for those who aren't prone to storing fat, would create more of them and more health problems for them. Just as before when they suffered from such societally induced wastage. This is part of fat people's proneness to guilt. The sense that we are shafting them.

That comes from this chosen solution which is insisted upon, no matter what.

That's why some along with myself have pointed out, the best resolution is to find a way of altering the metabolism individually. Dieting isn't that, sorry, it only impersonates it. That should satisfy everyone. Don't want to lose weight? Don't. Want to, do. Slimness can no longer pretend to be a big deal, no class created around weight falsehoods. A block to eating disorders acquired through trying to lose weight through cal res. Yes that's the cause of many ED's, no probably not all.

As I keep saying, manipulating metabolic function is a gateway to better treatment for all issues related to metabolism and use of energy. That includes the possibility of better (actual) mental health treatments-drug free ones. Note I mean real scientific study of actual metabolism and its function, not any pseudo 'obesity' nonsense.

Or we can continue with this derangement.

No comments:

Post a Comment