...absolutely no control around food. Since many binge eaters restrict food intake...If you are restricting your intake, then that's, by these people's notion "control".
The snake swallows its tail after first slithering toward something getting hold of it in its teeth. The intensity of pursuit narrows its peripheral vision until it ends up biting its own tail. The cycle is complete and is able to perpetuate itself.
With anorexia-restriction, circuitry around the response to hunger seems to weaken and /or the circuitry around blocking is activated and becomes powerful. An ever decreasing vortex of response ensues.
With binge/purge-restricting certain foods, increases appetite for them til that becomes irresistible creating panic leading to a salvaging action of purging stomach contents (aspire assist) this reduces/threatens to reduce energy intake, which increases hunger function to compensate for lack or prospect of it. A cycle is established.
Then you have binge eating disorder,
...defined as consuming large amounts of food within a two-hour period at least twice a week without purging, accompanied by a sense of being out of control.That's not a cycle. Also, the equivalent of "purging" is the restriction beforehand. It's a reversal of binge/purge, instead its restrict/restore. One step forward, one step back.
That this is not really an eating disorder like anorexia or binge/purge is confirmed by this startling piece of information: "...an issue that’s remarkably responsive to treatment.." EDs aren't remarkably responsive to what passes for "treatment", because that doesn't consist of any technique that does the job of restoring response to hunger.
Responsivity to "change the way they think about and consume food" is a voluntary action. The whole point of a disorder is it has become involuntary, that's why people ask for, or end up in hospital needing help.
I've usually struggled to grasp what BED advocates were getting at, the coinage contains different cross currents of hunger and other metabolic dysfunction. The addiction folk don't get it, for them-eating=thinking. They want to fit it into their model. "...they think of food in addictive terms." "They’re obsessed with food..." Obsessed with food is those using the diet-weight hypothesis;
...unusual relationship with food. ...they think about food...they gorge on food... ...change the way they think about and consume food. ...a great deal of food.. ...hidden foods and/or food wrappers. ...unaware of the smell or the taste of the foods...That's the first 6-7 paragraphs, excluding all references to eat, eating and binge.
Food. Food, food, food, food, food, food, ........................foooooood. Food. Dammit. Foooooood. Once you step back from all this and you really begin to feel the senseless obsessiveness of it all.From BED advocates descriptions, I'd realised it's probably an effect of chronic calorie restriction dieting. As I said, there is no yo-yo dieting, dieting is the yo-yo. If it takes at all, this heightened hunger is one reason why it doesn't.
I had to reserve judgement in case I was missing something. They also vigorously denied this link.
Since many binge eaters restrict food intake during the day and binge at night, the goal is to get them to eat three meals a day and a snack.Those who treat eating disorders use duress and pressure to get some restoration of a person's hunger response. Getting someone to eat three meals a day is hardly that. It's more like someone who hasn't been eating properly.
Despite "diet culture" etc., people still cannot grasp that calorie restriction dieting is inherently unbalanced. Including if not especially people who should know better by now. This may come as a surprise given the insistence that "weight loss" is an absolute no-no due to continued conflation of that with cal res dieting.
Seems (dieting induced) weight loss is totally bad, but dieting itself can be good, so much so, that this gets in the way of perceiving the unbalancing effects of dieting. "Good dieting" is when your body overcomes the assault, not the the nature of the assault itself.
If you smoked furiously for a few years, stopped and your body did not succumb to any related probs later. That's not "good smoking" that's your body's operations standing up to that pressure. As they are designed to do but cannot in every instance.
I've put it out there that the "obesity diagnosis" is not compatible with mental health, it is an assault on it, not the "drug addiction movement" [no such thing]. Freudian slippage on "fat acceptance movement" there. Addicts do not reverse their dependence, they go through withdrawal, that doesn't demand much transferable skill.
This sort of linking of fatness to various pathologies seeks to use your acceptance of terms supposedly embedded in our psyche. Usually to do with finessing professional failures as the way its supposed to be, up to an including letting people die -yes, what Michael Buerk said.
Whether or not one can be fully cured of binge eating depends on one’s definition of “cured.”That'd be normal hunger function, which is of course not their aim because they're not charged with solving anything. What they've forgotten is the current targets of their theatre are. If something is "remarkably responsive to treatment.." treatment which consists of voluntary action of stopping cal res dieting and the pathologising of yourself and your body-should fully 'cure' it.
Treatment often begins with efforts to recognize distorted, all-or-nothing thinking .....Like;
Normal people don’t consume 4,500 calories worth of food in one sitting, or order takeout for four when dining alone.Yeah they do, it's the function, not the person. See how journalist generalised from the specific, typical all or nothing thinking, like 'obesity', which because someone else feels some way about your size, the whole of you must be defined by that feeling.
No comments:
Post a Comment