Being honest with ourselves about injectables

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP is definitely ignorant. Not sure about cnt because I don’t know her. It is ignorant to believe that someone who is 50 or 100 pounds lighter isn’t healthier. OP doesn’t understand the full definition of healthy. Also, why did she feel the need to post this? Maybe that’s where cnt comes in.

Another example of saying someone who is lighter is automatically healthier...

Someone who loses a 100 lbs is of course healthier than they were before they lost the weight.

So if I'm an adult who weighs 160lbs, develop a severe eating disorder, and lose 100lbs... I am now HEALTHIER at my new 60lb weight?

Never mind, I assumed I was responding to an adult who understood that no one who weighs 160 lbs is losing a 100 lbs. Moving on now, as having conversations with you would be like pissing in the wind.

You're the one who made the blanket statement that "of course" they would be healthier. Just like your blanket statement that "no one" who weighs 160 would lost 100, which also isn't true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do registered dietitians and personal trainers have codes of ethics?

Do those ethics say anything about shitposting and trolling message boards?

It’s not so much the message but the way it was delivered.

And yes, weighing less does mean you are healthier.

What a dipshit.

Ehhhh not exactly. Weighing less does not mean you are healthier. Not trying to argue or defend OP, but that blanket statement isn't true.

It is. It's healthIER than being obese. It might not necessarily be completely healthy. But it's still an improvement. Just the impact on joints alone is an improvement.

You truly think an adult weighing 60lbs is healthier than an adult weighing 160lbs? Weighing 60lbs is an improvement?

Even at less than 4' 10" tall (midget status), 60lbs for an adult would be severe malnutrition and borderline life threatening.

Again, this is a healthier weight?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP is definitely ignorant. Not sure about cnt because I don’t know her. It is ignorant to believe that someone who is 50 or 100 pounds lighter isn’t healthier. OP doesn’t understand the full definition of healthy. Also, why did she feel the need to post this? Maybe that’s where cnt comes in.

Another example of saying someone who is lighter is automatically healthier...

Someone who loses a 100 lbs is of course healthier than they were before they lost the weight.

So if I'm an adult who weighs 160lbs, develop a severe eating disorder, and lose 100lbs... I am now HEALTHIER at my new 60lb weight?

Never mind, I assumed I was responding to an adult who understood that no one who weighs 160 lbs is losing a 100 lbs. Moving on now, as having conversations with you would be like pissing in the wind.

You're the one who made the blanket statement that "of course" they would be healthier. Just like your blanket statement that "no one" who weighs 160 would lost 100, which also isn't true.

As I said, pissing the wind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do registered dietitians and personal trainers have codes of ethics?

Do those ethics say anything about shitposting and trolling message boards?

It’s not so much the message but the way it was delivered.

And yes, weighing less does mean you are healthier.

What a dipshit.

Ehhhh not exactly. Weighing less does not mean you are healthier. Not trying to argue or defend OP, but that blanket statement isn't true.

It is. It's healthIER than being obese. It might not necessarily be completely healthy. But it's still an improvement. Just the impact on joints alone is an improvement.

This is a dangerous statement. Plain and simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if OP is the same poster who thinks people on GLP are still "spiritually fat." They get off on the idea they are superior than fat people, and when they no longer have that visual to make themselves feel better, have to fantasize about how their arteries are clearer and their blood is more oxygenated. I actually feel sorry for people like the OP.

I was at a dinner party a couple of weeks ago and a very pretty, thin woman in her 50s was ranting on and on negatively about GLP users. She was so critical, and I knew several of us in the room were on them or had been in the past. No one said a word, so I did. All I said was I had taken them in the past, and they were helpful to lose 30lbs. Of course it was awkward after and she was very quiet then. It's like it's the new politics now with people opposing each other.

I have also experienced these people who have never struggled with their weight GLP-1s ranting against them. They are desperate to maintain the moral high ground they have always felt about overweight people. Now they’re no longer overweight, they need to inveigh against the way they got thin. It’s honestly just mean. We aren’t taking these drugs for fun or because we haven’t spent decades trying and failing every single diet and fad.

With all due respect that’s your problem right there. No one loses weight on fad diets. They are not sustainable. To OPs point it’s about learning to live a healthful lifestyle

You couldn’t be more ignorant and more wrong. My point is that we had tried everything. Why do you think 97 percent of people who lose weight put it back on? You think it’s just because they “hadn’t learned to live a healthful lifestyle”? We knew what to do but our bodies worked against us, and over time the growing hunger proved irresistible.

Whoa 97%?! Where do you read that? I always thought it was lower. New study somewhere?

[Anonymous]

We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

There are people who are overweight but have normal blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, etc. and for those people, the extra weight probably doesn’t matter. But for the vast majority of people, losing weight will improve health metrics like blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

There are people who are overweight but have normal blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, etc. and for those people, the extra weight probably doesn’t matter. But for the vast majority of people, losing weight will improve health metrics like blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar.

Nice gaslighting and changing the topic. Some of us remember the Health at every size movements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

There are people who are overweight but have normal blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, etc. and for those people, the extra weight probably doesn’t matter. But for the vast majority of people, losing weight will improve health metrics like blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar.

Nice gaslighting and changing the topic. Some of us remember the Health at every size movements.

Were those movements started by physicians or "influencers"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

There are people who are overweight but have normal blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, etc. and for those people, the extra weight probably doesn’t matter. But for the vast majority of people, losing weight will improve health metrics like blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar.

Nice gaslighting and changing the topic. Some of us remember the Health at every size movements.

Were those movements started by physicians or "influencers"?

This was way before influencers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

Shhhh it fits the GLP-1 "success" agenda now. Of course the scale now matters!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

There are people who are overweight but have normal blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, etc. and for those people, the extra weight probably doesn’t matter. But for the vast majority of people, losing weight will improve health metrics like blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar.

Nice gaslighting and changing the topic. Some of us remember the Health at every size movements.

Were those movements started by physicians or "influencers"?

This was way before influencers.

Again, was it the medical community?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

There are people who are overweight but have normal blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, etc. and for those people, the extra weight probably doesn’t matter. But for the vast majority of people, losing weight will improve health metrics like blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar.

Nice gaslighting and changing the topic. Some of us remember the Health at every size movements.

Were those movements started by physicians or "influencers"?

H.A.E.S. started in the 1960s...

You can literally search for a doctor that champions HAES when looking for a new physician...

Yet suddenly, the scale now matters again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We spent the last several years saying the weight on the scale doesn’t matter, but it’s other health measures. So now the same folks are saying that was just bs and the number of the scale is the key?

There are people who are overweight but have normal blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, etc. and for those people, the extra weight probably doesn’t matter. But for the vast majority of people, losing weight will improve health metrics like blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar.

Nice gaslighting and changing the topic. Some of us remember the Health at every size movements.

Were those movements started by physicians or "influencers"?

This was way before influencers.

Again, was it the medical community?

The National Institute of Health, John's Hopkins, UC Berkley, etc have all done countless studies and promotions of it. Does that satisfy your "medical community" requirement?