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. 

Monday, 15 September 2014

Weight Stigma

It's Weight Stigma Awareness week from the 22-26 September 2014. it's the third of an annual event from an organisation called BEDA-Binge Eating Disorder Association. It's purpose is to raise awareness about binge eating disorder [BED]. Sounds ominous.

The last grand push for eating disorders awareness was anorexia which started thin people getting harassed and accused of being anorexic on sight. Similar may happen with fat people being defined as binge eaters on sight. As has already happened with the risible "food addiction." Plenty of fat people will "confess" to it too, whether they have hyperphagia or not. There's the definition of fatness as eating disordered and the indistinct diagnosis.

I couldn't diagnose shit with this sort of thing. Nor am I sure I can grasp or be sure of what binge eating disorder is as distinct from hyperphagia nervosa or compulsive eating disorder though I do see there does seem to be some kind of distinction. I get its eating a lot in a short time. What I mean is a deeper sense of its specific discrete momentum. All of the major ED's have them.

It's absurd that its in the DSMV, but as ever "millions of people are now recognized and validated" is the reason, not fact. I'd prefer explanation and an accurate grasp of my condition. No one should look to psychiatry for validation, that's giving it even more power than it already has.

They have a twitterstream going right now @WSAW2014, which is where I saw this;
Weight stigma could be said to be just another way of saying fat stigma. Discouraging that requires people to stop stigmatizing fatness. To undergo a process similar to neurotics seeking to re-train their nerves to a calmer state.

Thursday, 11 September 2014

Know What Bluffing Looks Like?

Check this premise;
A study suggests that African American women in the US have a different picture of what unhealthy weight looks like than medical experts, prompting suggestions that pictures should be more widely used with health messages to counter the new normality of excess weight
Lipophbes got everything they wanted and more yet everyday is a tendentious groundhog day with them. They got it wrong and cannot acknowledge this to themselves, instead they have what a friend called "point-finger disease".

Society's shift to the right of the weight graph was entirely predictable. I saw there was nothing to stop it continuing. Given the investment in individuated calorie restriction experiment and the refusal to accept its results. All eggs in that basket + doesn't work="new normality" ahoy.

I've no issue with showing what BMI 30 + really looks like. But why so sure Black women are wrong and Medical professionals must be right? Lol [so comedic.]

Seriously, how do they know this doesn't reflect some extent of overall physiological difference in comparison to other races? Fat and muscle percentage differences vary between as well as amongst races. Black people seem to be at the higher end compared to others. That's probably true-though not necessarily in the same way-of others like Pacific Islanders or the Maori of New Zealand.

This nark swerves those advocating for people with anorexia. They tend to get antsy when the line is drawn at the more prevalent "stage 1 obesity." It doesn't match the barely interrupted death threat hype of 'obesity' promotions Inc. It can at times look eerily close to the acceptably weighted even chubby people closer to the majority of PWA. The emaciated poster children seem to be more acute phase than everyday, how typical.

Always looking for an extreme to illustrate the mean.

The media itself has veered towards fat outliers. Those with a BMI often way above 40. I get the sense this is an instinctive lean towards matching the quel horreur tone of the crusade. A lot of people feel this way, often not perceiving themselves to have crossed that line, considering themselves: "Nowhere near obese." Having preceded by announcing they're; 'overweight'/chubby/plump/could do with losing a couple of stone.

Do the math/s as they say.

They seem underrepresented in surveys. In this case a sample size of 69.
The researchers point out that there is a long history of African American women feeling more satisfied with a large body size than non-Hispanic whites.
"Long history" eh? There hangs resentment. The 'dissatisfaction' of especially middle/upper class White women is not all it seems. Humble bragging has greater cultural currency. Women know their assigned worth and it doesn't tend to match what survey says. Looking at your body and saying "What, this old thing?!" is not the same when you are surrounded by constant validation of its image.

And no, I'm not going to be popular for saying that. WM/UW's bodies also have a different currency in their own race/class milieu than others deemed below them socially has in theirs.

Anyway, this rather obtuse mis-reading of Black women has been a big bone of contention [have at the puns] for oh, just about everyone. That includes professionals who seem to have trouble not assuming they must be right about everything in this area, despite their desultory impact. Such an extent of taking themselves for granted as the standard by which all should be measured, is bracing.

How can I put it, not everyone has to agree with that. Even if AAW aren't on the same page, what basis of presumption makes that a good idea?

You've heard of double consciousness? When the imposed cultural pretense of universal rules for good citizenship gets kicked in the nuts by the needs of one's position in society's hierarchy. Basically, a lot of people have to go along with the idea of a universal set of ethics, skills, attitudes, but then have to live the way that will enable them to actually live, capice?

Resistance to outer dictates of supposed inferiority are a necessary facet of mental self defense. That's a triumph, not a pathogen. Black women are affected by this surround though. Self value is personal, but it also merges with the political at some place.

Black women's self assertion merges with their ability to survive and thrive within that. It's just the time of take responsibility everyone claims is sorely lacking. Do clueless professionals really want to tear into that? To achieve what exactly? Fanciful notions that might not even be what they seem at face value? This is one of the reasons why they don't always get far with this kind of effort. They aren't listening and paying attention to the needs of the people concerned, preferring instead to pontificate.

That all these women accepted the premise of ' a healthy weight' tells you they're not uncaring about weight, they just haven't reached the deranged levels achieved elsewhere. There's a big question mark over the purpose of the 'obesity' crusade. Slimming fat people is a mere a potent entry point for influencing behaviour.

Yet, those demanding this right to interfere in people's most private beliefs, thoughts and habits tend to go apeshit if others demand close to that level of self examination from them, if not at their instigation.

White America takes more drugs and has more anorexic/bulimic eating disordered behaviour as part of its weight regulation strategy. Though that's a highly charged point. Black women also seem less inclined toward alcohol and cigarettes.

I can't say for sure that repressing weight aggressively would lead to a rise in some or all of these areas, but it's worth bearing in mind context, when making comparisons. Put it this way, I wouldn't bet against it. It's worth noting there's a discrepancy between the weight of middle/upper class men and women, why?

It doesn't feel like much of my business-though I'm ever curious-but hey, if they're to be held up as the standard to attain, these things need to be out in the open. Are they ready for this?

I'd be a tad more wary of trying to match the weights of either Black women or indeed working class women of all races to those of White middle/upper class women and concentrate instead on increasing well-being and health. Try matching habits to actual context and the demands made on people. Don't presume.

I don't doubt something's gone awry with some AAP's diet. A better focus would be on reviving cooking skills of the near past, history lessons, connecting with older relatives and such. Seeing which still remain, encouraging the obvious ingenuity and skill that's still out there. And spreading it as necessary.

Dietary content does not lift the weight of society off you, nor does it free you from the constraints that your body just has to adapt to. Attacking what may be defense is not a good move, people aren't willingly "self destructive."

Repeat, real ways to reverse the body's weight must be found-it's been done. Things that don't require the whole of society to go on a diet. Come up with genuinely individual solutions- the extent of persistence with defunct wld shows how popular that idea is.

People don't want their lives and heads managed by others just to alter their weight. They want to do that directly. Nor do they want to their fate to hang on the reluctant, those whose bodies are unsuited to a low-cal existence or those who are hostile to their bodies, culture or lives. Sooner or later we will need to grasp the nettle on how metabolism truly functions.

Let's not forget the outliers, those who have actual metabolic problems. They should not have to be cut into the mainstream's obsessive compulsion with anorexia.

Tuesday, 2 September 2014

Liberation Gainer

When a dieting/gym bunny type elects to take a gainer holiday [or path], it's to satisfy their own desires, rooted in fatigue with the diet and exercise strictures they impose upon themselves. Spurlock's excuse was to show the supposedly typical 'merican obese's habits that he made up. Well who's going to argue? This enthusiastic carnivore had long adhered to a vegan diet to fit in with this amoureuse.

Some personal training types hanging out with fat people, start building up enticingly verboten impressionistic curiosity. The usual projections of what a fat person is surreptitiously becomes a vehicle for fantasies of what they feel they aren't. Eventually the need for release comes through their tried and tested yen toward a body modification solution. There's the added sensual/ sexual thrill of feeling their own [self generated] adiposity. I mean, really feeling it.

We query why folks don't listen to what fat people say about being fat. But overlook that the construct is as much if not more of a mindwarp to others as it is to fat people. They can't hear us. The disconnect of fat people as disease blocks comprehension. If you are the only ones who are fully human, you become the only valid vehicle for human experience.

Katie Hopkins wishes to teach fatz all about taking responsibility. Wishing to “prove” it’s easier to lose weight than some [fat] people say. I'd say its more dysfunctional, stupid and degenerate.

Is her ability to support her chosen attitude to fat people flagging? Just how much unquestioned security does a person need? It’s her choice; if she wants to use the sight or thought of a fat person to feel any feeling, that’s her business and nothing to do with any qualified fat person applying any job she may have on offer in any of her enterprises.

That's the trouble, people like this can't keep their boneheaded mental grunts to themselves. They have to void their problem with "fat people", onto fat people. 

It's known that her body can shed weight. She was shown in The Apprentice, looking plumper than she subsequently dieted down to, though not in quite the same way as now. Her body extended beyond her usual equilibrium to accommodate her circumstances, then deflated making her expert in human metabolic functioning. This lack of humility can at times, be moderately amusing. 

But hey, don't milk it!

In terms of the position fat occupies for her, emotionally. It seems a space to toy with her own feelings about being branded "ugly" by those close to her. She, like certain self hating fatz boasts of her strength of character in accepting this. Despite her actions not exactly backing this up. She can become "pretty" i.e. slim, this time, the judgement isn't so damning.

I daresay she feels fat people don't appreciate the sheer immutability of other judgements. When all we have to do is swerve the bacon.

Though she's getting paid, she would have said no if she didn't want or need to do this.

Usual odd features of this fat for pay feeder sub-species apply. The urge to define the experience of being fat is in order to impose it on fat people. This time with added sob; addicty, complex mental pwablems= 'overeating' leptin da de dah, instead of lazy and greedy. @besity's a construct all about its architects and adherents. Their instinct is to uphold their own tedious fiction.

More interesting is the speedy weight gain, faster than even than many fat people at the top of the weight tree averaged out. 3 stones/42lbs/19.5 kg in three months! Imagine putting on that x4 on every year. On she says 6,500 calories a day.

At that rate, most people in the 'obese' category would've taken between 2 and less than 6 months from her 8st/112lbs/50.8kg starting point. Doubling from that would have taken less than another 3 on the end of that. This might give insight into the much touted gluttony of obeses.

It also tells you if you don't know that being fat isn't about-this. In the main dieting up as I call it is more fetish. That's probably the best lens to view this kind of irrelevant sideshow. Normally, gain is metabolically led. And, despite doing exactly what fat people are accused of but we can see, rarely do-mindlessly choosing to be greedy and get fat, and freely admitting it, praise ensues.

Anyone still want to insist fat people are hated because we are/are seen to be greedy? 

Anyway, this begs repeat of the observation, these weight managers on a break, can really pack it on. Leaving aside things that usually provoke this rate; drugs, hormonal flux-puberty, menopause, rebounding from weight loss dieting/ drug abuse or some other metabolic overture. This kind speed of rise shouldn’t occur.

How is it this possible to just mechanically eat without the apparent response to hunger?

Remember all those thin/ner who complain bitterly about the impossibility of putting on weight [via dieting up]? They aren’t lying. Imagine having sex without desire for it. Not impossible, but sustaining it several times a day for months?

Food should quickly become unpalatable with nothing more than conscious notion. That's how my body was able to recover from hyperphagia. One of the last diets I tried was high protein. It was an unserious last throw of the dice, no pressure to restrict calories. I lasted two bites of meat before it turned to an unpleasant tasting rubble in my mouth. That was an example of the disgust reflex. Your body's reaction, thwarting the prospect of any narrowing of its ability to meet nutritional needs.

You may think you or anyone can just eat, but many people would be surprised at how hard going they'd find the mere thought of calorie dense food after a while without biological drive.

I'm not saying I couldn't eat as much myself, but it would have to be driven by hunger, disordered or not. That's why I keep saying the problem with HN isn't food-its hunger signalling.

The obsessive fixation on eating comes from those who deal in restriction, which they then project onto fat people-as we can see from their fantasy of being fat. Once that's gone there's little desire to eat for no reason.

Indeed I'm not entirely convinced of that proposition. Though I'm wary of appearing to contradict those with binge eating disorder.

Perhaps this long term diet and desire to gain illuminates binge eating disorder. The ability to diet, then reaching some kind of impasse then swinging back with bingeing. This might feel subjectively like a conscious elective choice to eat, of the "I use food" variety. Bingeing may well be that impasse, plus those signals re-awakening. You go from feeling in control to being swept away, so the latter feels willful in contrast.

Dieting requires you to ignore your inner signalling. That's likely to put you out of touch with it, which both undermines it's clarity and your ability to read it. This suggests that hunger is there but in some minds it is tuned out partially or wholly. A bit like, when you go for a massage and when relaxing, you begin to feel how tense you are. You were always, but you'd stopped being aware of it was your mind screened it out. 

Who knows what internal prompt could be operating here, translating into this subjective desire to walk on the fat side? The more it happens, the more one has to consider whether this could be prompted by some kind of internal crisis being reached.

How many of these types reach a point where they too just climb off the horse and stretch their legs for a bit? How rare is this among these people?

A constant long term diet and exercise regime where your average slim or a bit plump person, goes down to being.... slim is that it subjects their bodies to the same defences as any. But they're barely going anywhere, if at all. They aren't seeking to lose a 1/4,1/3/1/2 etc., of their body weight.

Metabolic conservation or slow down-accounting in part for this speedy gain and baggy indistinct, hunger and appetite signalling, is shown in this ability to eat by rote.

People overlook, eating requires digestion. It's not like taking a pill, where a drug quickly passes into the bloodstream ditto booze. With food, the body has to be prepared for it, in multiple ways. It takes effort to get it to that stage.

The ability to just eat, suggests a body in a ready to regain mode. Not much of anything to regain though. But, perhaps denial-of hunger- gives this greater capacity. They're sort of hungry and not always aware of it. They're out of synch with the feel of it. Hence this desire to eat mechanically without apparent drive.

Probably, this is how they eat all the time. From the head cutting across their bodies, not normally/intuitively. 

A fat person goes from fat to fat, a slim person goes from slim to slim. Why do people keep stating that once your 'obese' it's unlikely you'll become slim... Who's changing categories? Let the slim become thin. Let Katie's 8 st become 6 and stay there why not? That would replicate the experience better.

F4P's also to a wo/man pack it on much more around the middle than anywhere. This is arresting given this is the supposed metabolically active area. Though I do believe there is some truth in that, it's not in the way 'obesity' fans want. This is supposed to raise risk, not without doubt though.

Whilst this kind of regime lowers weight and is healthy making, it also seems to shift bodies towards metabolic activity around the middle, which we can't necessarily see 'til they put weight on it. Hum... could be the speed. Both forced eating and starvation tax the body. It's possible if they'd taken more time, they might've had a more even spread.

But, having seen a lot of these types gain due to being diverted from their course by personal circumstances. I'd say probably in degree only. So, the question is, how wise is it to go down this forcing route at all?

By that I don't mean dietary rigour and exercise, I mean the being this out of tune with your own signals?

I can't speak for all fat people but I could not do this. Nor would I attempt it for any money. Having spent years of my life with batshit hunger that wouldn't quit, this makes me want to chuck just thinking about it. I cannot eat mechanically as a notion, nor am I sure my body could gain that much weight that quickly. I also can't lose much without wasting a whole lot of time.

The lack of ability to lose + [compared to this] a lack of ability to gain fast. Versus fast gain, fast loss-also a sign of being "metabolically active." There's at least a symbolic equilibrium in both.

Thursday, 28 August 2014

Embodiment Switch

Reblog, with edits!

The 'obesity' construct and the demand to be slim forces a fat person to disassociate and become somewhat detached from your own body-i.e. it's not real, it's temporary. And bond with a [slim] version of it that doesn't exist as the real one. We know this.

Following instructions from outside yourself-because your own thoughts are making you fat or what a men's diet club forum calls "fat logic"- a consequence of this unnatural situation is the internal balance of being grounded in yourself goes off.

The general norm is to set standards of behaviour and reaction rooted in the way you are generally treated and expect to be treated. That helps to set an internal standard by which we judge how others ought to be treated. What they should have to put up with. 'Obesity' alters that. Our internal standard becomes the treatment fat people accept for themselves. We couldn't possibly use that as a standard to judge others by.

Removed from a fat context-it would disturb, become sinister and unhinged, often psychopathic in tone. You get used to it, yet you know it. In abstract, it doesn't necessarily seem bad. It would though to judge slim people that way and would to me if I were to judge slim people by that standard too. So we know it is.

We instinctively get used to applying expectations born of how slim people are treated to judge situations and people. This becomes the automatic human standard, one we apply to ourselves too, and yet not.

I suppose the distinction is a little like the way you treat visitors as opposed to the way you treat your family.  I used to say a lot when I first got into FA that fat people have no double consciousness. WRONG. This is sort of one, though its nothing like as profound as that of a Black person or even a female double consciousness. It's more a mental switch than a consciousness.The fact that I overlooked it though, shows how ingrained and unnoticed it is.

The problem comes when we stop participating in the 'obesity' cult. Stop rejecting our own bodies and selves as somehow temporary or unreal. Not immediately but gradually, nature begins to reassert itself as we become (re-)grounded in ourselves. Our minds start to normalize, judgement grounded in our own experience and the standards we've inevitably adapted to.

This causes immediate problems. Cries of not grasping how slim people can have body issues etc., arise. That's not the case. It's more some of these problems which previously loomed as large to us as to them, begin to need a microscope. Because the place of judging them has shifted from an internalized form of their own, to a further distance away from there

Working out acceptable expectations can get interesting. We carry on using to the human [slim] standard, but some of our necessarily blasé attitudes born of facing the most outrageous nastiness can start to bleed into that.

I have this problem big time.

Going back and forth between the chasm that is how we have to think of slim people and how we have to think of ourselves becomes more and more, meaningless, boring, even irritating. It's a standard no longer nourished inside you as it was. And let's face it society has this divide too, in frustratingly plain sight. Which is causing its own issues. I've always wondered why people think shitting on a large minority of the population isn't a threat to democracy, in the sense that people get used to that treatment undermining the ability to perceive infractions.

I know that I can grasp far more of injustice perpetrated on others, than I could before. That is a big shock and I wonder if it's part of the suspicion the left has about fat people as a group.

This pre-post mental aspect of re-embodiment, has always caused a divide amongst fat people, especially the self hating kind, but also amongst many who do get it. It occurrence, degree and how one incorporates its strands are unpredictable and don't match ones commitment to self-assertion.

To those people as much as slim people, it can seem like fat people are being angry or even vengeful. Alas, it rarely occurs that fat people might have a reason for feeling anything that deviates from the 'obese' script that isn't malevolent. It's as if there's as much of a script for fat people's unexpected actions as there are for what's expected of us, i.e. imperfect eating and exercising.

I think the definition of people as disease pathology creates that. Priming minds to expect wrong doing. So the well is often immediately poisoned with these expectations, in lieu of more just explanations. How to explain these things? It never occurred for one second that this would happen, until it did to me.

Thursday, 21 August 2014

Oversensitive

Due to the nature of both the eating disorder and 'obesity' construct fields and their spread of disinformation, we've lost a real sense of what hyperphagia nervosa (HN) is really like. 

I want to try and give you a basic idea of what HN, which used to be called "compulsive eating disorder" and is now latterly being styled as/or overlapping with "food addiction" feels like.

I used to object routinely;
  • a) CED/HN in essence a mechanical fault-of the nervous system functioning 
  • b) neurosis can help cause it by provoking the nervous system to keep triggering the part/s of itself concerned with hunger and appetite 
  • c) eating is not the real problem, excess hunger/appetite signals are 
  • d) it is not eating to get high, nor can any food but alcohol make you high that is intoxicate 
  • e) it is not done (directly) for pleasure. You are compelled by the signalling, which is even more powerful than normal hunger-which is more than compelling enough 
  • f) it is not caused by eating, it's caused by the misfiring of your hunger/ appetite mechanisms i.e. it doesn't have the conscious input of A or BN 
  • and g) treating it by suppressing that signalling is more likely to increase than reduce it. WLD alone can trigger it in those susceptible to it.
"Some crave food even after they have just eaten, suggesting addiction."
This kind of ideation is currently being spread around. It's from one of latest studies trying to craft hyperphagia into this nonsense category-the ubiquity ad absurdum use of [f]"addiction" should get your bs detector zinging like a buzzsaw;
Claus Voegele, Professor of Clinical and Health Psychology, said: ‘All addictions are similar in that the sufferer craves to excess the feel-good buzz they receive from chemical neurotransmitters produced when they eat, gamble, smoke, have sex or take drugs.’ 
Absolute cobblers.

Says more about the wild imaginings ignorant fat phobes want to have about fat people than real life hyperphagics who come in all sizes. I'd say they get a feel good buzz out of this similar to "drug addicts", except without the accountability of their actions being visited on their own bodies.

The 'obesity' construct, merges all fat people together-functional outliers and average alike-no matter what else they do-does being fat prevent you from using drugs? Prescription ones obviously-they're the more (immediately) fattening ones.

So what is the above, wanting to eat straight after eating quote referring to really? It may surprise you if I say that the thing that most came to mind was a friend of mine who's bladder became sensitive. She had a constant urge to go to the toilet, even when her bladder was not closed to full or even empty. More than once, she went to the toilet with an empty bladder, came back and then immediately felt like going again.

Catch any resemblance?

Wanting to eat, after just having eaten-in this case after the stimulus of seeing a picture of food. Versus wanting to go to the toilet straight after trying to empty an empty bladder.

Both centre around a sensitized area, subject to an excess of nerve signalling

There are several forms of bladder problems. My friend had a sensitive/sensitized bladder, but this woman developed both that and urge incontinence-the bladder releasing too quickly.

What's remarkable about her description and that of her doctor, is how many points touch on what I said long before I heard any of this. She Marlene Brown, talks about how her life came to revolve around going to the toilet.

How she tried to adapt to try and prevent it, which caused her other problems. How the "constant urge for the bathroom...... was making my life a misery."

How often do you hear that from hyperphagics? That the constant hunger/appetite signalling is wearing them out? How can you, when the standard issue fat phobic lens is fixated as ever, solely on food, determined to keep fat people in their box, no matter what?

The ever present signalling after about almost a couple of decades put me on the edge too. I described it before as like some who develops tinnitus. The inability to not hear that can drive them up the wall.

It's the unrelenting nature that can erode sanity, even more than the thing itself.

She even talks about how she felt as if something was pressing on her bladder. I used to talk about how I felt as if a foot had its foot on the accelerator of my hunger somewhere in my mind not my head. It was not as physical. More an impression, but a palpable one nonetheless.

Her specialist Wai Yoong, explained to her;
I had urge incontinence, where the nerves around the bladder send off faulty signals that cause it to become hypersensitive. So even when it’s holding just a little fluid, the bladder thinks it’s full and starts to contract and spasm, which is why you feel the urgent need for the loo.
That's far closer to my experience of HN than any eating disorder professional I've come across has come close to in their witterings of what they want HN to be, certainly since I hit the net. Every squeak that happened in that area was magnified by its sensitized state.

And what about the treatment that she says halved her symptoms;
The new procedure involved putting a needle into my ankle for half an hour at a time, with an electrode under my foot to create a circuit. This would stimulate a nerve that runs from the spine to the ankle, passing the bladder on the way — somehow this would get the nerves sending normal signals again. 
So, in order to affect signals going to the bladder, you can get to them through the ankle and foot?! Think of the way they freely bind and cut fat people's organs rather than creating careful and ingenious procedures like this. The absence of loathing is a wonderful thing.

You might also sense the trickiness of treating HN. You have to achieve similar, using your mind on itself. My current conclusion is AN is easier to treat, but is a lethal condition. HN is not acutely dangerous, in the main, but is far harder to dismantle. That's because it doesn't have the direct conscious input that a lot of AN does. It's body led and its extended from a normal state rather than an acquired pathology. 

Yes, I recognise, there are differing perspectives. Most in the ED field, dominated it seems by women, seek an emotional angle. And let me make clear again, just in case, I don't believe the notion that emotions are lesser than or in opposition to thought. I believe they are a form of thought, they are at a different sometimes earlier stage and stand alone to what we translate into word(y thinking).

Emotions are to thoughts as we understand them, what stem cells are to an organ or body part. Emotions are both matter and what larger more conscious thought is read as.

The emotional component is there, but its as much the physical effect of emotions than direct mental disturbance in itself, like anorexia. Emotional signals go through the nervous system. When this is in a permanently heightened state, via depression, anxiety, negative self imagine etc., that gets the nervous system into basic range where your everyday emotions, reactions, experience, activities, on top of that, create surges powerful enough to trigger the mechanics of eating and hunger to signal excessively.

Strictly, you could say that's hypothesis, but its based on experience, it's not speculative. Nor attempting cultural recognition or increased social status. It's about trying to accurately render what's going on, so that everyone who wants it, has a chance to grasp what we are dealing with here.

It was also the basis of understanding that led me to be able to dismantled HN and I did, so there's that. I'm of course not the only one. Others have stumbled on a similar path, though I don't pretend to endorse their typical faddiction lens or premise.

The key to sketching a detailed biochemical view is in the details of function. But we'll only know the full story, when people stop messing around with silliness like forcing HN and anything else remotely or otherwise associated with fatness, into mad, crazed, greedy, consciously degenerate, fat  baddies, faddiction crud. 

Wednesday, 20 August 2014

Perfectionism

Aim for the moon and you get to the stars. Perfectionism is when you're disappointed with those twinklers because, they're not the moon!!

The belief that perfection is a real possibility rather than something to aim for, is a hard task master. It means the likelihood of spending most of your life in a state of ever burgeoning disatisfaction. Until you crash in some way. You probably will.

Unless you think you're perfect, then you'll just be a pain to everyone else.

Perfectionism is the underpinning to many mental health crises, neuroses mainly. It often becomes depressing, as it is exhausting to the nervous system. Many people in this state of mind feel they have low self esteem. Not necessarily.

Our default is self esteem, we tend to notice if that's being undermined, by falling short of impossible standards.