The stupid explodes: obesity now a disability

Well, if it is then you shouldn't have any trouble finding a vast body of literature that supports the contention :)

Except there isn't.

You do realise scientific research gets paid for by someone? I can't imagine there are many sponsors lined up on that one.

Six years ago my father dropped dead from arteriosclerosis and he didn't have a shred of body fat on him. So what's your point exactly?

If you need someone to point out that heart disease is far more prevalent in obese than non-obese people then I question your motives and ability to find evidence.

This is not news:

CDC

NIH

World Heart Federation

And just for you, Monash.

I have no idea who that person is.

Well, actually, there is - which has kind of been my whole point all along. But, again, whatevs. You're clearly more interested in ranting and raving, if anything it seems to me you're just annoyed that this thread didn't evolve in the usual back-slapping "they so stoopid" manner that many other threads on this forum follow.

Aside from the fact that if you knew ANYTHING about me or my history you'd realise how dumb that accusation is, it is yet another of your feeble and tedious strawmen.
 
Rubbish. From the literature I've cited that ...

..... I have cited the evidence I have found, .....

No you haven't. I sampled three from the google scholar list. None of the abstracts describe your POV, and the articles require payment to read them.

Care to "quote" anything from the studies you've paid for?


... I suspect ...

I'm sure you do.
 
I cant help thinking this one of those times when well intentioned science overides common scence
 
I cant help thinking this one of those times when well intentioned science overides common scence

Yep, and that comment's been made in the thread already.

Problem is, everyone knows exactly what the problem is and what the fix is already, and they're both very simple. On the surface.

If you're obese, eat less, creating less burden on health services, extending your life and ensuring you don't need to take the disabled carpark from the spina bifida sufferer.

Just implementing it's the issue.
 
No you haven't.

Uh. Yes I have. That list of reasons is almost verbatim from a link provided that isn't even locked.

I sampled three from the google scholar list. None of the abstracts describe your POV, and the articles require payment to read them.

Care to "quote" anything from the studies you've paid for?




I'm sure you do.

Give me the citations. If I've got access to the journals I'll unlock them and add them as an attachment so everybody can read them.
 
Last edited:
Except there isn't.

You do realise scientific research gets paid for by someone? I can't imagine there are many sponsors lined up on that one.

:jaw-dropp

Yes. That's right. Your feelies would be able to be proved if it wasn't for the Big Pharma conspiracy.

This has gone beyond absurd.
 
Give me the citations. If I've got access to the journals I'll unlock them and add them as an attachment so everybody can read them.

Take a breath.

Are you implying that every article on that list will support your position?
Because you've read then all?
Or, because you typed the word 'stigmatisation' into the search?

You must see my predicament.
 
This is some of the material I found skimming over the first page of each of the search terms I showed Shiner - there's a lot more information that says the same thing.

"The principal barriers identified included social stigma and labelling, lack of awareness of the range of treatment options, concerns about childcare, the perceived economic and time costs of residential treatment, concerns about the confrontational models used by some treatment services, and stereotypical views of clients of treatment services"

Copeland, J 'A qualitative study of barriers to formal treatment among women who self-managed change in addictive behaviours', Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, Volume 14, Issue 2, March–April 1997, Pages 183–190

An exploratory factor analysis identified five potential barriers to treatment, including: availability, stigma, cost, uncertainty, and avoidance.

Rockloff, M.J, Schofield, G 'Factor Analysis of Barriers to Treatment for Problem Gambling', Journal of Gambling Studies
June 2004, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 121-126

The data on the impact of self-stigma are most extensive with the seriously mentally ill, the majority of whom also have substance use problems. In this population, self-stigma has been associated with delays in treatment seeking (Kushner and Sher 1991; Scambler 1998; Starr
et al. 2002), diminished self-esteem/self-efficacy (Wright et al. 2000; Corrigan and Watson 2002; Link et al. 2002) and lower quality of life (Rosenfield 1997). Some similar data are available for substance use problems per se. For example, the fear of being stigmatized is a reported barrier to seeking treatment among those with substance abuse problems (Tuchfeld 1981; Hingson et al. 1982; Klingeman 1991; Cunningham et al. 1993;Tucker et al. 1994).

JASON B. LUOMA, BARBARA S. KOHLENBERG, STEVEN C. HAYES,
KARA BUNTING, & ALYSSA K. RYE, 'Reducing self-stigma in substance abuse through acceptance and commitment therapy: Model, manual development, and pilot outcomes' Addiction Research and Theory
April 2008; 16(2): 149–165

The majority of current research also highlights the negative impact that obesity stigma has on health and social behaviours and outcomes. Obese individuals are prone to social isolation and exclusion (Miller, Rothblum, Barbour, Brand, & Felicio, 1990; Strauss & Pollack, 2003); are less willing to engage in health promoting activities (such as physical activity) and health care services (Amy, Aalborg, Lyons, & Keranen, 2006; Drury & Louis, 2002); are more reluctant to engage with public health messages about obesity (Lewis, Thomas, Hyde et al., 2010); and experience stigma-related depression,anxiety, low self esteem, poor body image and psychological stress (Friedman et al., 2005; Thomas, Karunaratne et al., 2010). However, more recently debate has ensued about the possible effectiveness of stigma in stimulating behaviour change (Bayer, 2008). Some argue that obesity stigma may actually be positive by motivating individuals to engage in weight loss (and thus improve health outcomes), and may be a key factor in sustaining weight loss successes (Latner, Wilson, Jackson, & Stunkard, 2009). This approach has been seized upon by some health policy makers and professionals, who have promoted shame-based risk discourses as an effective way to motivate obese individuals to lose weight (Betts, 2010; Triggle, 2010). Despite the increasing popularity of this approach, there is very limited evidence to show that ‘shame based’ tactics are either effective or ethical in health promotion initiatives seeking to improve the health and wellbeing of obese individuals (MacLean et al., 2009; Lewis, Thomas, Hyde et al., 2010; Thomas, Lewis, Hyde, Castle, & Komesaroff, 2010).

Sophie Lewisa, , , Samantha L. Thomasb, R. Warwick Bloodc, h, David J. Castled, Jim Hydee, g, Paul A. Komesaroff, 'How do obese individuals perceive and respond to the different types of obesity stigma that they encounter in their daily lives? A qualitative study', Social Science & Medicine Volume 73, Issue 9, November 2011, Pages 1349–1356
 
Last edited:
Take a breath.

Are you implying that every article on that list will support your position?
Because you've read then all?
Or, because you typed the word 'stigmatisation' into the search?

You must see my predicament.

For the most part, yes. Everything that I've looked at covering the topic at hand most certainly does, as you can see above.

I can see your predicament in that you're not willing to skim over the abstracts and engage with the evidence. Not even to find material that might not support my contentions. I'm willing to bet that you would be very hard pressed to find much material saying that stigmatisation is an effective method of motivating people. It exist, as one of the papers I've quoted above shows, but in the context of the body of evidence it is flimsy and has largely been debunked.
 
Despite the increasing popularity of this approach, there is very limited evidence to show that ‘shame based’ tactics are either effective or ethical in health promotion initiatives seeking to improve the health and wellbeing of obese individuals

That statement applies equally. Some studies argue the complete opposite position, and can't be proven wrong except on an individual, hence anecdotal, basis.
 
This one was interesting in light of some of the simplistic notions being advanced by people in this thread - sadly I don't have access

Obese people, who are already subject to adverse health effects, are additionally victimized by a social stigma predicated on the Hippocratic nostrum that weight can be controlled by 'deciding' to eat less and exercise more. This simplistic notion is at odds with substantial scientific evidence illuminating a precise and powerful biologic system that maintains body weight within a relatively narrow range. Voluntary efforts to reduce weight are resisted by potent compensatory biologic responses. This article will review some of this evidence, together with promising avenues of research. Further progress in understanding and treating obesity will come not from repetition of anachronistic preconceptions but rather from the rigorous scientific approach that has driven advances in so many other areas of medicine.

Friedman, J 'Modern science versus the stigma of obesity', Nature Medicine 10, 563 - 569 (2004)

But back on the topic:

Stigma may worsen obesity through dynamics such as fear of going out, fear of ridicule while exercising, cycles of emotional eating and the development of eating disorders (Schwartz and Brownell, 2007). Further, stigmatization is correlated with significant health problems such as depression, hypertension, coronary heart disease and stroke (Major and O'Brien, 2005; Stuber et al., 2008). Thus, stigma itself may independently contribute to the health risks associated with obesity.

Lynne MacLean, Nancy Edwards, Michael Garrard, Nicki Sims-Jones, Kathryn Clinton and Lisa Ashley, 'Obesity, stigma and public health planning', Health Promotion International, First published online: January 8, 2009

This study sought to examine the association between BMI and delay/avoidance in seeking health care among women who comprise a continuum of body weights. Three additional variables (self-esteem, satisfaction with medical care, and attribution for weight) were analyzed on data obtained from the obese subjects in the sample.

The results obtained in this study support previous findings that the societal and medical stigmas of obesity act as barriers to seeking health care. As body weight increased, the rate of health care delay/avoidance also increased. The data from this study shows that reasons for delaying or avoiding health care include both weight-related and non-weight-related reasons. The most frequently cited weight-related reasons were “having gained weight since the last health care visit,” and “not wanting to get weighed on the scale.” The positive correlation between participants’ perception of weight and weight-related reasons for delay/avoidance of health care indicates that having the perception of being overweight causes some women to delay seeking health care. Thus, the societal ideal of thinness and the societal and medical stigmas of obesity extend their influence to women categorized as “normal” weight as well as to women categorized as obese.

Christine Aramburu Alegria Drury MSN, APRN, BC1,* andMargaret Louis PhD, RN, Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners , Vol 14 Issue 12 (2005)

It goes on and on like this - the is scant evidence, aside from that which has been quoted by marplots and myself, that stigmatisation has any benefits. While there is ample evidence that it is entirely counterproductive and can even contribute to the problem.
 
That statement applies equally. Some studies argue the complete opposite position, and can't be proven wrong except on an individual, hence anecdotal, basis.

Again, refer to the phrase vast body of evidence - you will find contrary positions in ANY body of evidence, but ignoring the preponderance of evidence that all points in the same direction is confirmation bias akin to denialism.

And, you should note, that the lit review in question identifies far more research refuting the handful of findings that it is positive than the actual studies themselves.
 
. It exist, as one of the papers I've quoted above shows, but in the context of the body of evidence it is flimsy and has largely been debunked.

I don't see where it has been debunked. Please link to that.

What we have is two opposing views both with at least some academic backing.

I've read a lot on this subject, as well as nutrition and health in general.

Stigmatisation keeps healthy people healthy. This is proven.

I'm willing to concede that it can't be shown to help obese people.

Its a paradox. That's why I'm playing the way I am. There is no right/wrong.

Here's something else to contemplate.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103113001042
 
Stigmatisation keeps healthy people healthy. This is proven.

That's just absurd. For starters, you don't "prove" anything in science, all you can do is gather evidence one way or the other. I find it ironic that you would make such a statement and then follow it up with the link that you did. Saying something "proved" just because a small handful of discredited papers reached a conclusion that confirms your feelings - while ignoring all the other evidence to the contrary is, as I said above, confirmation bias akin to denialism.

I don't see where it has been debunked. Please link to that.

I already have: (MacLean et al., 2009; Lewis, Thomas, Hyde et al., 2010; Thomas, Lewis, Hyde, Castle, & Komesaroff, 2010). PM me your email address and I'll send you the PDF so you can follow the cites for yourself.


Faith in science... as opposed to faith in feelings?
 
Last edited:
That's just absurd. For starters, you don't "prove" anything in science, all you can do is gather evidence one way or the other. I find it ironic that you would make such a statement and then follow it up with the link that you did. Saying something "proved" just because a small handful of discredited papers reached a conclusion that confirms your feelings - while ignoring all the other evidence to the contrary is, as I said above, confirmation bias akin to denialism.



I already have: (MacLean et al., 2009; Lewis, Thomas, Hyde et al., 2010; Thomas, Lewis, Hyde, Castle, & Komesaroff, 2010). PM me your email address and I'll send you the PDF so you can follow the cites for yourself.

Interesting post. "Absurd" is the result of a peer reviewed study.

What you just said: "you can't prove science. Here, let me prove a study is wrong with another study".

Still jumping all over those conclusions.

You aren't reading my posts.

You're right, I shouldn't have said "proven". How silly of me to be so assertive.
 
I know Im the dumb one but do half the posts have to.read like novels to explain fairly obvious stuff?
 
Bit pattern.

One question. Answer y/n

Is caterogising obese people disabled stigmatising thing
 
Interesting post. "Absurd" is the result of a peer reviewed study.

What you just said: "you can't prove science. Here, let me prove a study is wrong with another study".

Still jumping all over those conclusions.

You aren't reading my posts.

You're right, I shouldn't have said "proven". How silly of me to be so assertive.

So you're resorting to falsely attributing things to me that I've never said now? Classy...

If you don't understand concepts such as 'proof' and 'preponderance of evidence' I would suggest you need a crash course in the scientific method:



Fast forward to the 5 minute mark for the relevant section

Interesting post. "Absurd" is the result of a peer reviewed study.

No, you saying that you feelings are "proved" by the existence of two papers, while ignoring the dozens that contradict them, is absurd.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom