Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ah. RDN. Those lovely ghouls who helped convince us all that dietary fat was the devil, that satiating butter, animal fat and egg yolks were worse for us than anything, that if we put butter on vegetables we might just as well not eat them. The period in which that was the advice coincided with America’s astonishing weight gain. Hmm.

No honey. Do you need a refresher course on the difference between "source" and "messenger"? Or maybe an RD hurt your family dog as a child, or something?

The scapegoat you're looking for is the USDA at the behest of elected officials from Midwestern farm states where commodity crops are grown.
https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga95/12DIETAP.HTM

How the Ideology of Low Fat Conquered America
Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Volume 63, Issue 2, April 2008,
https://academic.oup.com/jhmas/article/63/2/139/772615

In relevant part:
"[t]he low-fat diet for weight reduction was already well in place before physicians and scientists began promoting it for cardiovascular health in the 1950s. The low-fat diet was part of our dieting tradition before the ideology of low fat conquered America."


?

Struck a nerve, did I? Your sources confirm what I said.

The cited works contradict what you claimed, that dieticians were the root cause of the low-fat diet advice. Contradict is different than confirm. Enjoy your atherosclerosis, though!

You can’t read, you hypersensitive RDN! I said “Those lovely ghouls who helped convince us all that dietary fat was the devil” Did or did not dieticians convey the low fat dogma to patients? I didn’t say the invented it (thanks, Ancel!), I said they helped convince us.

Also, why assume I’m developing atherosclerosis? Or wish it on someone? I’m confused what kind of angry defensive medical professional with a god complex might suggest that the dietary advice of an RDN is not infallible and in fact helped perpetrate the National obesity crisis.

Ok then, why do you focus blame on the messengers of the low-fat recommendations — the RDs — rather than the federal policymakers and scientists who actually developed the policy in the first place?

I'm not an RD, just someone who finds your overwrought and misguided bitterness a little odd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ah. RDN. Those lovely ghouls who helped convince us all that dietary fat was the devil, that satiating butter, animal fat and egg yolks were worse for us than anything, that if we put butter on vegetables we might just as well not eat them. The period in which that was the advice coincided with America’s astonishing weight gain. Hmm.

No honey. Do you need a refresher course on the difference between "source" and "messenger"? Or maybe an RD hurt your family dog as a child, or something?

The scapegoat you're looking for is the USDA at the behest of elected officials from Midwestern farm states where commodity crops are grown.
https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga95/12DIETAP.HTM

How the Ideology of Low Fat Conquered America
Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Volume 63, Issue 2, April 2008,
https://academic.oup.com/jhmas/article/63/2/139/772615

In relevant part:
"[t]he low-fat diet for weight reduction was already well in place before physicians and scientists began promoting it for cardiovascular health in the 1950s. The low-fat diet was part of our dieting tradition before the ideology of low fat conquered America."


?

Struck a nerve, did I? Your sources confirm what I said.

The cited works contradict what you claimed, that dieticians were the root cause of the low-fat diet advice. Contradict is different than confirm. Enjoy your atherosclerosis, though!

You can’t read, you hypersensitive RDN! I said “Those lovely ghouls who helped convince us all that dietary fat was the devil” Did or did not dieticians convey the low fat dogma to patients? I didn’t say the invented it (thanks, Ancel!), I said they helped convince us.

Also, why assume I’m developing atherosclerosis? Or wish it on someone? I’m confused what kind of angry defensive medical professional with a god complex might suggest that the dietary advice of an RDN is not infallible and in fact helped perpetrate the National obesity crisis.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ah. RDN. Those lovely ghouls who helped convince us all that dietary fat was the devil, that satiating butter, animal fat and egg yolks were worse for us than anything, that if we put butter on vegetables we might just as well not eat them. The period in which that was the advice coincided with America’s astonishing weight gain. Hmm.

No honey. Do you need a refresher course on the difference between "source" and "messenger"? Or maybe an RD hurt your family dog as a child, or something?

The scapegoat you're looking for is the USDA at the behest of elected officials from Midwestern farm states where commodity crops are grown.
https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga95/12DIETAP.HTM

How the Ideology of Low Fat Conquered America
Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Volume 63, Issue 2, April 2008,
https://academic.oup.com/jhmas/article/63/2/139/772615

In relevant part:
"[t]he low-fat diet for weight reduction was already well in place before physicians and scientists began promoting it for cardiovascular health in the 1950s. The low-fat diet was part of our dieting tradition before the ideology of low fat conquered America."


?

Struck a nerve, did I? Your sources confirm what I said.

The cited works contradict what you claimed, that dieticians were the root cause of the low-fat diet advice. Contradict is different than confirm. Enjoy your atherosclerosis, though!

Anonymous wrote:There are a shitload of people on this thread who fail to grasp the difference between large, replicated research trials and huge epidemiological studies and their one friend Susan who is a size 16 and has normal cholesterol levels and doesn't have any terminal diagnoses yet at age 42.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ah. RDN. Those lovely ghouls who helped convince us all that dietary fat was the devil, that satiating butter, animal fat and egg yolks were worse for us than anything, that if we put butter on vegetables we might just as well not eat them. The period in which that was the advice coincided with America’s astonishing weight gain. Hmm.

No honey. Do you need a refresher course on the difference between "source" and "messenger"? Or maybe an RD hurt your family dog as a child, or something?

The scapegoat you're looking for is the USDA at the behest of elected officials from Midwestern farm states where commodity crops are grown.
https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga95/12DIETAP.HTM

How the Ideology of Low Fat Conquered America
Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Volume 63, Issue 2, April 2008,
https://academic.oup.com/jhmas/article/63/2/139/772615

In relevant part:
"[t]he low-fat diet for weight reduction was already well in place before physicians and scientists began promoting it for cardiovascular health in the 1950s. The low-fat diet was part of our dieting tradition before the ideology of low fat conquered America."


?

Struck a nerve, did I? Your sources confirm what I said.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lost 60 pounds which makes me just 50 pounds overweight. I will likely never lose that other 50 pounds but I feel better, move more and look better in a smaller body. I had forgotten how it felt to try clothes on in a store and have them fit. To not feel like people were watching and judging me when I ate or tried to exercise. I did/do not love being fat. But it is unhealthy to hate my body, which gets me up every day and gets me around the world. I think the body positivity movement is about not hating your body and honoring what it can do.

This. I'm working on loving my body just so I *can* lose weight.

Body positivity is great. Healthy at every size is a fantasy. The OP asked about HAES.

Anonymous wrote:There are elements of our culture that are just insane. On one side we are encouraged to obsess over our weight and be ridiculously thin, on the other end we are fed body positive BS, and yes it is BS. There is nothing positive about being obese or stick thin.

Anonymous wrote:There is a theory I have heard that I completely believe as they enter my 40s. Women that are objectively thin at this age are either a) genetically small. Look at their mothers and sisters. Or b) disordered.

Anonymous wrote:It's a complete fantasy that excess weight (and I mean more than 20 lbs overweight) causes zero health problems.

When you have more weight for your body to carry, it necessarily puts more pressure on your muscles and bones. At the extreme, it's harder for doctors to do surgery because they have to cut through the fat.

For some people, they can't help it, but for many it's PREVENTABLE.

That's why it's completely different from having special needs and comparing the two is offensive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone who’s a size 16 is probably not affecting your life. Not spilling into the next airplane seat, not flipping out bc of the size of the seats in the movie theater, and not having a heart attack during a 5k or using the squat bar at the gym.

Also, stop saying that thin women are genetically blessed or totally disordered. That’s equally terrible.

Maybe if a body was just a body and people didn’t feel judged, shamed, or defensive, we’d all be more motivated to optimize our health.

I’ve been thin and I’ve been fat and I’ve been thin again. The objectification never stops, just swings from positive to negative and back to positive.

But OP, this is what I think: you can be healthiER at any size.

This is precisely what the fat acceptance/HAES is about - shaming fat people just makes them feel ashamed and encourages weight gain. Studies show this. Fat acceptance/body positive/HAES says you aren’t disgusting and you deserve to treat your body well, to exercise, to go and play with your kids, to swim in a pool, to dress stylishly, to embrace yourself and be happy. To be kind to yourself and be happy in the body you’re in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a complete fantasy that excess weight (and I mean more than 20 lbs overweight) causes zero health problems.

When you have more weight for your body to carry, it necessarily puts more pressure on your muscles and bones. At the extreme, it's harder for doctors to do surgery because they have to cut through the fat.

For some people, they can't help it, but for many it's PREVENTABLE.

That's why it's completely different from having special needs and comparing the two is offensive.

You can say the same about being xs and s or at the bottom of your BMI. It causes health related problems.

Most Japanese people are size S or XS and yet one of the longest living nations in the world