Obesity To Be Classed As A Disabiity

poppy12345

tomtontom wrote: »

I used to be fat too, I used to find every excuse under the sun to blame for my weight - including an underactive thyroid, medication and mobility issues. Then I realised the only person that controlled my weight was me. So I worked my backside off (literally), completely changed my eating habits, and now manage to maintain a healthy weight.

Rant all your want, but the fact is the only thing that keeps you being fat is your denial.

How dare you judge me. You don't know anything about me just like i don't know anything about you. Please stop judging others until you know their medical issues.

Richie-from-the-Boro

Which came first - the chicken or the egg ?

Fat[ness] is too much food. Thin[ness] is too little food. Eons of debate about the right ~v~ wrong type of food and the poor or depressed is irrelevant Fat[ness] is too much food. Fat[ness] is also too much food when applied to for example to a true physiological condition such as lack of mobility or a thyroid issue .. .. its still too much food for the 'condition' in the same way that Stephen Hawkin is not fat because he is not fed too much food.

Addictive behaviour is just that, repetitive overeating when you know it harms both your your physical and mental health is an automatic response, a habit or an addiction. Its not a need, its greed, hence the biblical descriptive 'gluttony' which is an uncontrollable self-defeating trance like desire to eat more than you require. You are so bonded with the behaviour pattern of eating that it keeps you doing it over and over again and so the cycle of familiar pain, grief, shame, guilt, fear, loss, sadness, failure or similar negative outcomes persist. Its not just an unusual run of bad luck - its a lifetime addiction to eating too much.

Not one person reading this needs to overeat, all fat people overeat because they want to ..................... you can also stop overeating if you really really want to.

Which came first - the chicken or the egg ?

NOTE : Roll on Christmas with lashings of roasts, pigs in blankets gallons of double cream and kilo's of good chocolate !

nannytone_2

jack_pott wrote: »

Partially blind presumably. If she can see to type the message and read the posts of others, the benefit of the bold type must be fairly limited.This sounds reasonable to a degree, but by the time their feelings are getting hurt they're already fat. It would be better to address why they comfort eat in the first place, then the solution will work when their feelings get hurt for other reasons too.

I think that this sheds more light on the problem than any amount of research. Just how many episodes would you have to watch before you realise that if you go on the show you're going to get made a fool of? It baffles me how they can still find contestants.

you are just showing your total ignorance.
'blind' doesnt necessarily mean totally without sight.
i AM blind. i can see 'bold' ( thopugh not enough to read it.
i use reading software. the reason i use 'bold' is so that i dont have to read a thread from the beginning, and just from when i last posted.
youve made yourself look rather silly and childish by trying to say ' well she cant be that blind' in much the same way as schoolkids say 'my dads bigger than your dad'
grow up and reckognise that you dont know everything

nannytone_2

jblack wrote: »

And if lazy people don't want to get a job they can now use being overweight as an excuse, because they now have a label - disabled.

Of course this would never happen though would it? Just like people who pump out child after child knowing they'll get paid for it? Again that doesn't happen either.

Anyway, I'll go back to reading my Daily Mail now:D.

this ruling applies to 'some' people who are morbidly obese. so a 'normal' person would have to triple their bodyweight to fit into that category. you really think that its a step that people would be clamouring to take for £100 a week?

Prinzessilein

Not everyone who is obese has become that way by simply over-eating,


I cannot exercise. At all.


From Junior School onwards I was medically excused all Sports/PE lessons at school - and things have gone downhill from there.


These days, I use a walking aid to get around - and some days I can't even manage with that.


From my mid-teens onwards I was prescribed medication for conditions with which I was born. Some of the meds clearly state on the packaging that amongst the side-effects is weigh-gain.


I am not disabled because of my being overweight...but my disabilities have most definitely plated a large part in my weight gain.

Richie-from-the-Boro

Which came first - the chicken or the egg ?

If anti-psychotics and antidepressants do increase an individuals weight then this can be compensated by a corresponding reduction in food intake. If a year of Lithium based bipolar treatment puts 10 pounds on, you reduce you calorie intake to achieve a weight loss of 11 ounces per month. If a lifelong use of chemicals leads to a lifelong loss of mobility, was it the chemicals, or the fact that lack of exercise makes people fat, so fat that they can't / don't / won't exercise.

Which came first - the chicken or the egg ?

Angry_Bear

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

Which came first - the chicken or the egg ?

If anti-psychotics and antidepressants do increase an individuals weight then this can be compensated by a corresponding reduction in food intake. If a year of Lithium based bipolar treatment puts 10 pounds on, you reduce you calorie intake to achieve a weight loss of 11 ounces per month. If a lifelong use of chemicals leads to a lifelong loss of mobility, was it the chemicals, or the fact that lack of exercise makes people fat, so fat that they can't / don't / won't exercise.

Which came first - the chicken or the egg ?

You are trivialising to the point of absurdity, and I doubt that you really do think it's that easy. Choosing not to feed cravings for "bad" food can be hard. When you also have depression, or other conditions that mean you struggle dealing with day to day life, the battle with food might be one you can't face.

One example (and the reason I believe I got fat), is when you are depressed and have very low self esteem, you look in the mirror and hate yourself. You feel worthless, and you don't feel like you deserve the effort it would take to do something about it. You don't feel like anything you could do would actually help, because you are useless and you fail at everything.

Personally I was very lucky. I got past my depression and since then have been able to tackle many of the other areas of my life I wasn't happy with, including my weight. It's lovely being able to not hate myself every single day. Other people aren't so lucky.

nannytone_2

Angry_Bear wrote: »

You are trivialising to the point of absurdity, and I doubt that you really do think it's that easy. Choosing not to feed cravings for "bad" food can be hard. When you also have depression, or other conditions that mean you struggle dealing with day to day life, the battle with food might be one you can't face.

One example (and the reason I believe I got fat), is when you are depressed and have very low self esteem, you look in the mirror and hate yourself. You feel worthless, and you don't feel like you deserve the effort it would take to do something about it. You don't feel like anything you could do would actually help, because you are useless and you fail at everything.

Personally I was very lucky. I got past my depression and since then have been able to tackle many of the other areas of my life I wasn't happy with, including my weight. It's lovely being able to not hate myself every single day. Other people aren't so lucky.

i'm the total opposite.
the more stressed and down i am the first thing i lose is my appetite.
the ha[ppier i am, the heavier i am!
i am careful what i eat though and am fortunate not to have a sweet tooth

Richie-from-the-Boro

Which came first - the chicken or the egg ?

I don't do stupidity I do facts, every addict has an immaculate defence for the addiction, eating too much food can and does lead to a miserable and disabled life and even death, eating less reduces or removes that miserable and disabled life and even potentially .. .. death. You call me stupid but defend the right to self a self inflicted disabled life style on the basis that :

Choosing not to feed cravings for "bad" food can be hard / other conditions that mean you struggle dealing with day to day life / the battle with food might be one you can't face / have very low self esteem, you look in the mirror and hate yourself / because you are useless and you fail at everything

- you won't die if you eat less. you are less likely to become mobility disabled if you eat less
- every addict has a series of immaculate defences for the addiction, depending on who asks
- every addict repeatedly avoids the reality that you really do need to face up to and deal with - as you eventually did

Which came first - the chicken or the egg ?

Angry_Bear

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

You call me stupid but defend the right to self a self inflicted disabled life style on the basis that :

No I don't (and I've rephrased anyway - I didn't like the use of "stupidity"). A couple of points that will hopefully clarify my position ...

1. There is no suggestion that obesity will ever be a disability (please check the actual ruling rather than the hype).
2. I think that people who are obese should be helped to lose weight. I don't think trivialising their issues and calling them lazy is helpful in any way.

You seem to have missed the point and carried on with your weird ranting about how all it takes is to eat less without appreciating that your "advice" is probably not helpful, and in fact may well be the opposite.