BMI (the most common “diagnostic tool” for determining “obesity”) is a crock; it’s not actually diagnostic at all, is deeply flawed, was invented by a social scientist (not a doctor), was never intended to be prescriptive (only descriptive), AND has been “updated” based on flawed and irreproducible studies, creating a dramatic increase in the number of “overweight” and “obese” people literally overnight. This change has then been used to justify the cries of “obesity epidemic!” and excuse attempts to systematically discriminate against people who fail to meet this flawed standard.

Other studies have shown that body type and weight is as heritable as height. There is NO–repeat, NO–known “cure” for obesity; medical science has over and over again failed to find ANY way to cause an “obese” person to lose weight AND keep it off permanently. Yes, many programs result in weight loss. At least 95% of those people regain all the weight, plus 10-15%, within 5 years. Extremely few studies have ever followed a cohort for more than 2 years (and even there, weight re-gain is already evident). Yet more studies have shown that for an average “obese” person to lose weight and keep it at a “normal” level, they must engage in eating patterns that have all the earmarks of starvation and anorexia; they become obsessed with food, and must maintain ridiculously low caloric intakes, sometimes of 1000 calories a day or less, simply to maintain their weight. Exercise works for some, but also often requires unreasonable amounts (in excess of several hours a day), to the point of physical damage and deleterious effects on the rest of their life, for most “obese” people to maintain a “normal” weight.

Don’t believe me? Start reading here: http://www.junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/ . I highly recommend the “Obesity Paradox” series (see alongside the right side of the page). Other specific links you will certainly find interesting:

“How we’ve come to believe that overeating causes obesity”:
http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-weve-came-to-believe-that.html

“Part One: What does the evidence reveal? Can diets work?”:
http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2007/12/part-one-what-does-evidence-reveal-can.html

“Part Two: What does the evidence reveal? Can diets work?”:
http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2007/12/part-two-what-does-evidence-reveal-can.html

Does all of this mean that we should give up trying to eat “healthier” and sit on our arses in front of the TV all day eating bon-bons? That because body type is “fated” we are absolved from all responsibility for our own health and choices? No. What it means is that “healthy” eating varies from person to person; that body-type is largely fixed, although a range of 20-30 lbs is within a normal variation for most people; that we should pursue a reasonable amount of physical exercise to keep our bodies functioning well, irrespective of the numbers on the scale; that body type should not be used for social discrimination, any more than skin color should. I highly suggest taking a look at the Health At Every Size (HAES) principles: http://www.bodypositive.com/HAES.htm . They demonstrate a healthy approach to eating, exercise and body image.

Rail all you want about our culture of victimization. But please stop promulgating inaccurate and damaging stereotypes about obese and overweight people–including yourself. It does no one any good, and it takes the focus off of real issues that truly ARE about “choice.”

also *applause* for the article itself

Thanks!

Here is a link to our affiliate program.

CDBABY affiliate program

And here is a link with our banners and buttons.

CDBABY Banners!

Cdbaby links…

For Artists

For Customers

Talk about it!

The first idea here is rooted in the concept that “God” and “evolution” are one and the same. That God is the evolutionary impulse, the “working out” or unfoldment of it all.

Second is that God is Consciousness, expressed in myriad ways through all creation. For all the diversity of creation, there is one consciousness or energy that informs all of it. And that consciousness (God) is exerting an extremely subtle “pull” toward something specific.

That “something specific” is, in my opinion and that of many other integral thinkers, anything that moves toward higher and higher levels of consciousness. These higher levels were in our past expressed politically in our move from primitive family clans to larger tribes affiliated under one leader, for instance. And then for those larger tribes to affiliate as nation/states.

Intellectually, you see this development as a child’s ability to know that the word “dog” actually means a furry, four-footed creature, and that the picture of said creature also means “dog.” This is a leap in consciousness that’s exemplary of this kind of development, and it doesn’t stop there. It moves on into an ability to understand rules and accept roles, to reason abstractly, to “think about thinking”… etc.

As far as we’ve been able to determine, God/evolution doesn’t stop. It’s still moving forward. Where is it going from here? That’s always the question, but if history is any indicator, it’s always about higher consciousness, wider embrace, larger concerns. From that generality, we begin looking at specifics. To wit, that blog post.

Hope this helps.