NAAFA and obesity-enabling

[ItsTheWooo]

We all know NAAFA has an anti-dieting stance. Curious, I decided to go to the source, their own web board, and open up a dialog of communication regarding this issue. I posted a message to their forum asking if they would support efforts of sustainable, permanent health-promoting lifestyle changes which are not unnaturally extreme and do not cause discomfort that involve weight loss.

I did not write anything which promoted LC diets, I did not try to shame them into dieting, or anything like that. I just essentially asked if they are against exploitation of the fat by the diet industry and fad diets which don't work, or if they were against the belief of fat is something bad which should try to be changed itself. I asked if they would support the educated, informed attempt at changing ones life in a sustainable way which would improve health and lower weight. Well, the forum moderator locked my thread immediately, with this message:

"I'm not clear on your position. A "change of lifestyle" that results in weight loss is usually a diet. Diets don't generally work, and they're not supported here.
It sounds as if you have lost weight and can't imagine why others wouldn't want to, too. The fact is, many people do want to lose weight, but this board is about accepting onesself as we are, not trying to fit into a cultural standard that may or may not be the best thing for any individual. Please keep that in mind when posting."

So then I PMed her and explained the term "lifestyle change". I describe it as replacing bad habits with healthy, painless, positive ones which also reduce weight. I explained to her the difference between a lifestyle change and a weight loss diet is that a lifestyle change can be maintained effortlessly, assuming that the user is diligent and doesnt regress into old habits out of laziness. I didn't get into the issue that reducing weight is 9 times out of 10 a health promoting activity because I wasn't prepared to open that bag of worms.

Again, she just replied by saying "any efforts which involve intentionally trying to lose weight is a diet and not supported by NAAFA". She also said this was not welcome to be discussed on the board (basically saying I would not be welcome if I kept pressing the issue).

IMO this response just depresses me. It seems clear to me now that NAAFA isn't about supporting fat people to find the esteem enough to do whats best for them... it's about enabling them to stay fat with lies. They are encouraging fat people to FIGHT against doing what is best for their health. They are convincing the fat and hopeless that having extra fat is ok, that fat is a benign substance, a physically neutral tissue like having lots of hair vs little hair. This is obviously untrue. Fat is metabolically active. Extra fat, not only the situations which tend to cause fatness, have been shown to promote insulin resistance, sex hormone disorders, and heart disease. Visceral fat is well known to promote heart disease. Fat tissue is hormonally active, causing hormonal disorders. Excess fat tissue and fat also tends to store environmental pollutants. Having a large body mass to support puts strain on joints and cardiovascular system. Being larger means you have a much higher metabolism since you eat more, and metabolic activity itself contributes to shortened lifespan.

IMO, NAAFA is a downright shameful and potentially dangerous organization. These people would look a bed ridden 700 pound woman square in the eye, and tell her not to try to "make lifestyle changes with the intention of losing weight". I hold them in about as high a regard as I do pro-ana and pro-mia eating disorder groups.

[cls923]

Well said, and I totally agree!!

[Zuleikaa]

I disagree.

[adkpam]

"any efforts which involve intentionally trying to lose weight is a diet and not supported by NAAFA"

What if they decided to improve their HEALTH with a walking program or watching their carbs because they have diabetes? Would that qualify as a no-no to NAAFA?

[Zuleikaa]

Probably not. That's a health issue. They encourage activity.

[odyssey]

I disagree as well. These people are inundated with talk about fat being bad and losing weight all day every day in one way or another. They have few other if any other places to talk without it being discussed. NAAFA gives them that place And in many cases it is a place they need just to keep their sanity in a world that is summarily against them.

What may be easy and painless for you may not be for someone else. Just look on this board and you can see there are a lot of people who for one reason or another backslide or "cheat" as they call it(i hate that word). Many people who are overweight may indeed want a lifestyle change if they truly and honestly believed and had proof it would work personally for them. But many also have taken so many chances and believed only to have their hopes dashed and their weight grow ever heavier.

Going to NAAFA with something like that is the near equivilent of going to a home for repeatedly battered women(in multiple relationships) and talking about eHarmony or something like that. It might work for a lot of people who join eHarmony but the fact that it doesn't work in *every* case means that there are people who belong to that shelter who would end up getting hurt more than they already are.

[Zuleikaa]

odyssey
You said well what I couldn't find the words for.

[Sunslyte]

I must say that going to the NAAFA to try to start a conversation about something that you had to know was going to be unwelcome was inappropriate at best.

Each of us has the right to choose our own lifestyle, whether Someone Else thinks its good for us or not.

[Dean4Prez]

I must say that going to the NAAFA to try to start a conversation about something that you had to know was going to be unwelcome was inappropriate at best.

Inappropriate? Yeah, the gods forbid people on a "public" website be exposed to something that might make them change their minds.

ItsTheWooo, "You sadist, you try and make people think," as e.e. cummings said to Ezra Pound.

Each of us has the right to choose our own lifestyle, whether Someone Else thinks its good for us or not.
But my right to choose my own lifestyle doesn't mean Someone Else has no right to tell me he/she thinks my lifestyle is wrong/immoral/unhealthy/etc. OTOH, his/her right to tell me his/her opinion doesn't mean I have no right to tell him/her to get stuffed. And so on, and so on...

[Dean4Prez]

IMO this response just depresses me. It seems clear to me now that NAAFA isn't about supporting fat people to find the esteem enough to do whats best for them... it's about enabling them to stay fat with lies.
I agree with you. The idea of NAAFA depresses me too -- it seems like the psychological equivalent of an animal gnawing off its leg to escape a trap. Even more tragic, from the viewpoint of a low-carbing self-metaprogrammer like myself, the trap is itself an illusion -- like an elephant trained during childhood by being fastened to a stake too strong for it to budge, who can be "restrained" as an adult by a leg chain attached to a lightweight stake that it could easily break.

However, as your experience shows, they will vigorously resist anything that might challenge their shared illusion. I say leave them be. It's much more fun to hang out here and create threads with suggestive titles (like this one: http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=165381 )

[odyssey]

It has nothing to do with changing their minds. It has to do with healing internally. There are plenty and plenty of places to go to learn about weight loss if that is what they are READY to go and do again.

[adkpam]

There is a lot of food for thought here, but the elephant example makes me think of the principle of "learned helplessness."
It is extremely discouraging to try to do things about one's weight & health and find only failure and despair. I think that was this organization's motivating factor, as a support group for people with a serious problem.
But just as I blame the American Diabetes Association for ignoring Dr. Bernstein's Solution, I blame any organization that does not act to TRULY help their members.

[Kristine]

>>"Inappropriate? Yeah, the gods forbid people on a "public" website be exposed to something that might make them change their minds."

I agree - I think it's fair game to ask group members to clarify their mandate. NAAFA isn't just a support forum like this one, it's a organization with money and an agenda. The line between "improving one's lifestyle" and "dieting" is a very fuzzy one.

[FromVA]

"I'm not clear on your position. A "change of lifestyle" that results in weight loss is usually a diet. Diets don't generally work, and they're not supported here.
It sounds as if you have lost weight and can't imagine why others wouldn't want to, too. The fact is, many people do want to lose weight, but this board is about accepting onesself as we are, not trying to fit into a cultural standard that may or may not be the best thing for any individual..."


The effect of obesity on one's health certainly wouldn't fit into "a cultural standard ". It's a serious health issue! And the statement, "Diets don't generally work...", is just plain ignorant. Diets DO work, but you have to change your lifestyle to maintain the weight loss.

"any efforts which involve intentionally trying to lose weight is a diet and not supported by NAAFA"

This group is nuts...if they are trying to help their members that is sure convoluted thinking. How in the world do they "help one heal internally" by discouraging discussion of efforts which involve intentionally trying to lose weight?? A lot of the poor self-esteem is the result of that weight!

[Zuleikaa]

Just as others have been asked to leave this board who promote hc diets, I believe it was right to ask you to take your message elsewhere from NAAFA.

[FromVA]

ItsTHEWOO: I didn't know that NAAFA took an anti-dieting (read lose weight) stance. I was quite shocked to read your post. You are also right when you refer to them as "obesity-enabling".

[odyssey]

If you don't even know what their "stances" are, how can you say you know enough about the organization to say they are "obesity enabling"?

You know there are a lot of people who think those who seriously low carb are "nuts". We understand, they don't. If you don't understand something it's better to learn about it rather than denigrate it or its members.

People go there to heal. If one person's view on what they think is a "lifestyle" change is allowed then others have to be as well and then soon it just becomes another diet board rather than a place to go to say how you feel without being told you are ugly because you are fat or that your fat is ugly(which has been said here on THIS board even in forums i've read). They promote healthy choices. They promote activity and exercise. What they don't promote are things that might lead one of their members to further turmoil.

Look at all the people on this board obsessed with the scale and how truly hurt and sick they get when it doesn't move according to their wishes. Look at how many people "fall off-plan". How in the world can it be wrong to have a place to gather to where you don't have to put yourself or the way you look down or read others put Themselves down when they are much smaller than you?

Most people would agree that staying the weight you are and improving other areas of your life, both internally and through healthier eating and lifestyle(all things they promote) would be much better than constantly yo-yoing up and down from diet after diet and "lifestyle change" after "Lifestyle change". Why does it bother some people so much that this group allows people to be who they are without trying to make them think that what they look like is bad?

NAAFA is not about dieting. If they were then they would be hypocritical. They ARE about health and activity. If a person gets healed more inside then, as some members here can attest, he/she may decide for many reasons to change their eating habits, perhaps low-carbing, but for some it will never happen if everywhere they turn they are being told "lose weight".

[Zuleikaa]

Hear Hear!!!!

[ItsTheWooo]

Just as others have been asked to leave this board who promote hc diets, I believe it was right to ask you to take your message elsewhere from NAAFA.
The thing is, I wasn't "promoting" anything, least of all LC dieting. All I was trying to do is receive (and maybe give) information. I went there to understand their position on weight loss attempts (are they against the act of losing weight itself even if done responsibly and healthfully in a completely sustainable manner, or are they only against the exploitation of nutritional ignorance by the weight loss industry?).

If it turned out to be the former, I also was hoping to open a dialog of communication to find out why they feel losing weight itself is bad. I have an inkling it has something to do with the myth that fat is neutral, metabolically inactive tissue which does not really effect health directly, and bias against extreme fatness is only for cultural reasons. Since they believe fat has no affect on health and anti-fat sentiment is purely cultural, they should not try to lose weight but rather try to change culture.

I do agree with them, in a sense. Bias against moderate overweight is cultural issue. Moderate overweight itself does not threaten health, in fact moderately overweight people have been shown to be more healthy than the underweight body types our culture espouses. If this anti-dieting message was confined only for people with bodyfat in the overweight/moderate obese range, I would have far less of a problem with it.

However, extreme amounts of overweight are health-threatening for all the reasons I listed in my first post. For NAAFA to say "if you are 500 pounds, you shouldn't try to lose weight since the problem is only with culture and not your body and health", they are placating their already emotionally fraught super morbidly obese members with enabling lies. When you are several hundred pounds overweight, you have limited mobility and probably several health issues, with several more looming over the horizon. How can they in good conscience encourage people to stay like that?

[FromVA]

[QUOTE]"any efforts which involve intentionally trying to lose weight is a diet and not supported by NAAFA"[QUOTE]

Sorry, but the above quote simpy reinforces the impression that NAAFA is an obesity-enabling organization. If NAAFA wants mainstream support it needs to clarify what it means, because it isn't "okay" to be obese. The health risks to the individual alone should make that obvious. Smokers have become persona-non-grata just about world-wide because of the health care issues associated with smoking...do you honestly think the obese are going to be given a free pass over this issue?

[ItsTheWooo]

I agree with you. The idea of NAAFA depresses me too -- it seems like the psychological equivalent of an animal gnawing off its leg to escape a trap. Even more tragic, from the viewpoint of a low-carbing self-metaprogrammer like myself, the trap is itself an illusion -- like an elephant trained during childhood by being fastened to a stake too strong for it to budge, who can be "restrained" as an adult by a leg chain attached to a lightweight stake that it could easily break.

However, as your experience shows, they will vigorously resist anything that might challenge their shared illusion. I say leave them be. It's much more fun to hang out here and create threads with suggestive titles (like this one: http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=165381 )
I agree with you totally. If you listen to their personal histories, they come from backgrounds wrought with hurt. I can deeply sympathize, as I was at one time morbidly obese and know what it feels like. I have ventured out in the world, all the while feeling like a physical oddity. I know what it's like to not be accepted. I know what it's like to have strangers of all ages insult you for the way you look.

Many of them also have been yo-yo dieters. In desperation, they turned to fad diets (liquid diets like optifast), low fat dieting, bulimia, anorexia... desperate to lose weight.

I can see how they would feel NAAFA is the best option after that; they figure "Every time I try to diet I wind up gaining more. I'm stuck here fat, I might as well live life and accept it".

But, like you said, this feeling is very much learned hopelessness. If they tried to do something less drastic to lose weight, like say cut out the whites, they might be pleasantly surprised to find they have made a lifestyle change that both reduces weight and improves health that *isn't* a quick fix diet.

I wouldn't dare suggest low carb to them (as much as I would *love* to). I understand the claims of how wonderful the "all steak and cheese diet" is sounds very familiar to them; they've already been through the hoops and loops with all manners of "wacky fad diets". Most of them are far too jaded to give it a try, and I can't say I blame them. If I were a bit older and had been through the fad diet obsession madness of the 80s and 90s, I probably would be well over 300 pounds today, and long given up on finding the myth of permanent, sustainable weight loss. In fact, the reason I had not dieted before finding low carb is because I knew I would be far too miserable on it to sustain any loss and would wind up regaining. However, Atkins made sense and I, in my naive 20 years of life, decided to give it a try. I was very very lucky to find information about carbs/GI/insulin first, without first turning to something drastic or inefficient.

When you've been failed so many times before, and you are emotionally so broken and shamed, it is easy to understand how they do what they do. I just wish there was a way to change their minds, and encourage them to take just one more leap of faith...

[Zuleikaa]

NAAFA provides a safe environment for large and obese people. All obese people do not have health issues!!! When weight impacts health they urge you to address it. Many times, however, the issue that is looked at as weight related is not. And many times just seeing the weight triggers sterotypes in peoples minds. I think your attitude toward these people is shown by your descriptives "emotionally fraught super morbidly obese members". Isn't morbidly obese or obese adjective enough? Perhaps NAAFA is protecting its members from being "emotionally fraught" by you.

FYI members of NAAFA are not all morbidly obese nor are they all unhealthy.

NAAFA members are encouraged to be active, healthy, confident and social within their present bodies. While individual members of NAAFA may choose to go on a diet, it is the line of NAAFA that they will not take a position encouraging such for the harm it has done to it's members as well as the attitudes of society that the problem rests with them and their behaviors. They have been browbeaten with that attitude enough!!!

Just because you have found the holy grail of lc and wish to impart that knowledge with the fervor of the newly or successfully coverted, they do not have to accept your prosthelitysing (sp?). Leave them alone. If you wish to convert obsese people to lc, do it one at a time by example among the obese people you know in your own environment. Surely by example you can lead.

[ItsTheWooo]

If you don't even know what their "stances" are, how can you say you know enough about the organization to say they are "obesity enabling"?

I can say with confidence they are obesity enabling, judging from the *several* times the moderator told me NAAFA does not support any efforts, no matter what they may be, with the direct intention of lowering body fat.

If that's not obesity enabling, what is?

You know there are a lot of people who think those who seriously low carb are "nuts". We understand, they don't. If you don't understand something it's better to learn about it rather than denigrate it or its members.

That is exactly why I went there odyssey, I went there to communicate and learn. You seem to be under the impression that I was promoting LC diets or something; I did not and had not intention of (as much as I would like to educate them about the principles behind atkins, I understand this would be a bad idea... see the above post).

I went there to ask them to clarify their position on weight loss. I also had the intention of asking them why they think it is such a bad thing if people try to lose weight in a responsible, sustainable, healthful fashion (meaning without hunger pain or excessive deprivation), but I didn't get the chance to do that as the moderator locked my thread immediately.

People go there to heal. If one person's view on what they think is a "lifestyle" change is allowed then others have to be as well and then soon it just becomes another diet board rather than a place to go to say how you feel without being told you are ugly because you are fat or that your fat is ugly(which has been said here on THIS board even in forums i've read). They promote healthy choices. They promote activity and exercise. What they don't promote are things that might lead one of their members to further turmoil.

Again, I did *not* promote *my* particular "lifestyle change", I was just asking if they were against lifestyle changes which result in weight loss in general.

I understand NAAFA is about teaching obese people to love themselves; but with such a physically and psychologically deleterious message of obesity enabling (and yes, you certainly must agree that discouraging your members from doing *anything* to lower their weight IS trying to encourage them to stay obese) you have to ask yourself, how healthy mentally and physically is NAAFA? What kind of organization would tell a super morbidly obese person he can be just as healthy as anyone else, regardless of his weight?


Look at all the people on this board obsessed with the scale and how truly hurt and sick they get when it doesn't move according to their wishes. Look at how many people "fall off-plan". How in the world can it be wrong to have a place to gather to where you don't have to put yourself or the way you look down or read others put Themselves down when they are much smaller than you?

Most people would agree that staying the weight you are and improving other areas of your life, both internally and through healthier eating and lifestyle(all things they promote) would be much better than constantly yo-yoing up and down from diet after diet and "lifestyle change" after "Lifestyle change". Why does it bother some people so much that this group allows people to be who they are without trying to make them think that what they look like is bad?

NAAFA is not about dieting. If they were then they would be hypocritical. They ARE about health and activity. If a person gets healed more inside then, as some members here can attest, he/she may decide for many reasons to change their eating habits, perhaps low-carbing, but for some it will never happen if everywhere they turn they are being told "lose weight".

I have nothing at all with NAAFA's message that you should love yourself and live regardless of weight.

I also do not think NAAFA should directly encourage weight loss. That is not their point.

My qualm with NAAFA is the fact they do not have a neutral stance on weight loss; they directly PROMOTE obesity by telling the world and their members they "do not support any changes with the direct intention of lowering weight in mind.

... not only does NAAFA not support any efforts to reduce obesity, but they take a neutral stance towards feederism. To those of you unaware, "feeders" are (usually male) admirers of very obese women. They encourage their already heavy girlfriends to get fatter through (often sexualized) "feeding"... sometimes to the point of immobilization, or at least impaired mobility. Feeder relationships are often exploitative; most of these women are lonely, starved for attention, and feeders pray on them, exploiting them to fulfill their fetishes. It is a take-take relationship... what happens when they break it off? Then what... she's left with a gained dozens of pounds.

How NAAFA can speak openly against "any efforts to directly lower weight", but at the same time take a neutral stance towards feeders, relegating it as a "personal lifestyle choice", and by choosing to be a feedee you are just being free to do what you want with your body, is just disgustingly hypocritical.

Intentional weight gain neutral, intentional weight loss bad. Gotcha.

It is this, and only this small but very poisonous message that spoils NAAFA for me. If NAAFA was even neutral about weight loss, I would think they are great. I might even consider joining. However, not only are they hypocrites when it comes to weight loss (they will condemn the intentional changing of the body in one direction, but not the other?), but they ENABLE people to stay obese. They are like a pimp, a predator, they look for people who feel they have no way out of their "hell" and exploit them.

[Wenzday]

I have been and still am obese...what really gets me about NAFAA is that to ME they ARE promoting being unhealthy. I KNOW they promote activity and loving yourself for who you are... ah, who knows.. maybe the problem is I just never could really love myself fully being 275... I was flat out ashamed and I KNEW I looked terrible. I do have a friend who seems happy at over 300 though..she isnt thrilled about her weight but she is a lot healthier than I was at my top weight over all.. still... I do think they are enabling.... BUT I agree that they shouldnt have to talk about diets and lifestyle changes if that's their thing... we should all have a safe place to talk about what we choose too... in MY RL there is nobody who thinks Atkins is safe...everyone around says I am killing myself.

[ItsTheWooo]

NAAFA provides a safe environment for large and obese people. All obese people do not have health issues!!! When weight impacts health they urge you to address it. Many times, however, the issue that is looked at as weight related is not. And many times just seeing the weight triggers sterotypes in peoples minds. I think your attitude toward these people is shown by your descriptives "emotionally fraught super morbidly obese members". Isn't morbidly obese or obese adjective enough? Perhaps NAAFA is protecting its members from being "emotionally fraught" by you.


First of all, there comes a point when you get to a certain weight you can't but help devlop health issues. FAT is not a metabolically neutral substance, this is the biggest lie NAAFA is founded on. The point at which extra fat starts to be a problem is different for everyone, but everyone does have a point by which extra fat interferes with good health and living life to the fullest (impared mobility). I can't support a blanket statement like "all people should never try anything to lower weight".

Oh, and my description of their members is mostly accurate, I think. You don't join NAAFA if you feel happy and accepted in the world.

Why do you keep accusing me of trying to start trouble, or make them feel bad? I never told them to lose weight, that wasn't an issue in my post, at all. I just simply asked them to clarify their position on weight loss. I asked them to communicate. You are displaying perfectly the kind of escapist-denial life and mentality that NAAFA supports. I am so sorry I commited the HORRENDOUS CRIME of asking them about dieting! GASP!



FYI members of NAAFA are not all morbidly obese nor are they all unhealthy.

That's not the point. The point is they enable those who are unhealthy to stay unhealthy.

NAAFA members are encouraged to be active, healthy, confident and social within their present bodies.

But, according to NAAFA, if it is your current body which is causing the lack of health, activity, and confidence, then ultimately you should choose unhealth, immobility, and denial rather than "make an attempt at any "lifestyle change" that has the purpose of inducing weight loss".

Don't you see how contradictory that message is? If they really are encouraging their members to be healthy a d feel good, how can they outright say they do NOT support personal choices to lower weight in any case?

While individual members of NAAFA may choose to go on a diet, it is the line of NAAFA that they will not take a position encouraging such for the harm it has done to it's members as well as the attitudes of society that the problem rests with them and their behaviors. They have been browbeaten with that attitude enough!!!

Oh come on. I've heard several examples of NAAFA shunning the "rogue member" who DARES to diet. NAAFA has repeatedly shown they don't support personal choices to improve health, if those choices involve intentional weight loss. You don't have to look farther than the first page of the message board to find an example. One woman was asking for a scale that weighs up to 400 pounds. She sounds positively frightened that the members of the board might think she is "dieting to lose weight". She explains how her weight has started to affect her health and she has no choice but "break the rules" by going on a diet.

What a sick attitude and atmosphere. What kind of group shames their members into justifying the improving your health?

Just because you have found the holy grail of lc and wish to impart that knowledge with the fervor of the newly or successfully coverted, they do not have to accept your prosthelitysing (sp?). Leave them alone. If you wish to convert obsese people to lc, do it one at a time by example among the obese people you know in your own environment. Surely by example you can lead.
I wasn't pushing LC on them. The only time I mentioned LC, was when I was describing the lifestyle change I made, and the only reason I did that was to provide an example of lifestyle changes.

[Wenzday]

It is this, and only this small but very poisonous message that spoils NAAFA for me. If NAAFA was even neutral about weight loss, I would think they are great. I might even consider joining. However, not only are they hypocrites when it comes to weight loss (they will condemn the intentional changing of the body in one direction, but not the other?), but they ENABLE people to stay obese. They are like a pimp, a predator, they look for people who feel they have no way out of their "hell" and exploit them.

THIS IS EXACTLY how I feel! I looked to this group a lot but felt almost sickened that I would not be accepted if I wanted to better my quality of life by losing the weight. :( it's very very sad to me!!!!!!!!!!

[red1cutie]

Thank you Odyssey & Zuleika! Well said!

People go there to heal. I have never been to NAAFA but how can it ever be wrong to learn how to love and accept yourself at any size.Just as others have been asked to leave this board who promote hc diets, I believe it was right to ask you to take your message elsewhere from NAAFA. So true! We are intelligent people. The information is out there and we all have access to it. I don't want anyone preaching to me about how bad low carb is so I am not going to instruct complete strangers on how to eat and live their lives. I also get really mad when people talk about Atkins who have never read the book so I sure as heck would not want anyone who hasn't been in my shoes/walked my path giving me advice.

Perhaps if we all treated everyone the same regardless of size, color, religion there would not be a need for places like NAAFA.

red

[ItsTheWooo]

Just to be clear, I am going to state one more time, in big letters...

I DID NOT GO THERE TO PREACH OR PROMOTE LC LIFESTYLE CHANGES, OR ANY KIND OF PARTICULAR WEIGHT-RELATED CHANGE IN LIFESTYLE. I MERELY ASKED IF THEY COULD CHANGE THEIR LIFESTYLE IN A WAY THAT RESULTED IN WEIGHT LOSS, WOULD THEY SUPPORT IT.

[red1cutie]

Well I think NAAFA clarified their position: "any efforts which involve intentionally trying to lose weight is a diet and not supported by NAAFA".

:)

red

[odyssey]

You may not have felt as if you promoted LC but to someone who has been on diet after diet and heard just about everything You did promote it .. how? by telling just how much you lost, how quickly, and how you did it.
The first part of Your letter there to me sounded like the beginning of a weight loss ad in all seriousness, even though i know whole heartedly that is not how You meant it, that is how it came across to me so i am certain that some others who saw it who have issues with dieting would also see it in that same vein.
The moderator told you that indeed there are probably many overweight people there who wish to lose weight BUT that their boards were not the boards to discuss it on.
These people are not in a vaccuum. They are not sheltered from news and television etc etc .. when they are ready to venture out, if they so choose, and lose weight they will do so. i can tell you right now that if i looked at this as a way to lose weight i NEVER would have started LCing because all i have done when i tried to lose weight is ended up even heavier.
And YES it IS better to tell a 500 pound woman not to diet if she started out as a 200 pound woman who dieted her way to 500 pounds. The next diet she goes on might make her 600 or kill her. Better for her to be where she is and learn about health and ways to be more active than diet her way higher.

[ItsTheWooo]

Odyssey, you may have a point that it sounded like I was pushing a type of weight loss on them, it wasn't my intent but I may have used a poor choice of words to get my message across.

The thing is, NAAFA doesn't only discourage people from desperate unsustainable scrambles to "lose weight quick". If this was the true intent of their message, I would passionately embrace it. I do think people should not feel so terrible that they try to punish themselves to thinness through crash diets that only make them gain more in the end.

NAAFA explicitly states that never, ever, should you try to lose weight, regardless of circumstances method or proceedure. I was told this twice; twice I was told no qualifier can justify the purposeful intent of lowering bodyfat.

It is because of this position I simply can never in my reasonable mind support NAAFA, as much as I wish I could. I do strongly believe NAAFA has the potential to do a lot of good, to change a lot of wrong things in our culture. It is unfortunate that their position on weight loss spoils it for me.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

[adkpam]

The home page has a mention of a walk against bariatric surgery which says this: "Movement and healthier eating will go a lot longer toward maintaining health than any surgery"

And this link is about a "size 16-18" fitness instructor who can lead classes 6 days a week but doesn't "look" right and so didn't get a job:

http://www.naafa.org/news/fatfitness.html

Which have impressive, positive messages. But then there's this:

http://www.naafa.org/documents/brochures/nextdiet.html

Which is titled "Before you start your next diet" which we all know is a bad word around here. We're supposed to think "lifestyle change."
And then I have issues with some of the things they say on this page:

"Many people say they just feel better at a lower weight. This attitude is primarily a result of internalized oppression against fatness. A healthy dose of self-esteem, an active social life, and a moderate exercise program will make a person of size feel better."

This is encouraging people with aching joints and back pains, or indigestion, that they don't really feel better. That's undermining their decision making, I think.

"DO YOU ENJOY HIGH RISK ACTIVITIES?
You have about as much chance of winning the lottery as you do of permanently losing weight by dieting. Over a five-year period, only 2-5% of dieters succeed in keeping their weight off. and over one-third of all diets result in long-term weight gain. Would you accept a treatment for any other medical condition that had those "success" rates? If you've dieted frequently in the past, what makes you think this time will be any different? You may be wasting time, money, and energy, and risking your health if you go on another diet. Are the odds worth it?

WILL THIS BE YOUR FIRST DIET?
If you're planning to go on your first diet, make sure that you also plan to make it your last. Many of the 2-5% of successful dieters are those who have never dieted before. If you have a particular medical incentive for dieting, this may be just what you personally need to beat the odds. But if you've never dieted before, also be forewarned of some of the possible side effects: tiredness, irritability, mood swings, obsessing about food, and inability to concentrate."

Well, I guess all this is true about dieting. Except when I lost weight with exercise, which was a plus, and I'm doing better with LC, which makes me feel even better.

And here's the section titled: "Admirers"

http://www.naafa.org/documents/policies/fat_admirers.html

Once again, there IS a line between being a big girl (I expressed my delight in seeing a beautiful girl on a lingerie commercial who was probably size 16-18) and people whose overweight threatens their health.
The gorgeous big girl needs NAAFA to help make the world recognize her as a person.
The people who must sleep sitting up, who have serious health problems, don't need NAAFA telling them "diets don't work." I was saying NAAFA owes its members full support, which is not only pointing out the ways that DON'T work (it's great they have a consumer protection section) but also actively looking at ways that DO work.

I'm a person who struggled with overweight issues, though maybe not enough for NAAFA. I'm a person whose mother had health issues because of her weight. I'm a person with friends of all shapes.

If they really are an anti-discriminatory organization, anyone on this board should be welcome there.

[Zuleikaa]

Adkpam
Where's the lie? It's been proven "diets don't work"!!! The fact that lc and Atkins works as you and I believe is beside the point!!! As far as NAAFA is concerned it's just another diet. As I've said before and before...all obese people are not unhealthy!!! Too, all obese people don't have aching joints and back pains, or indigestion.

Why are you picking on the negative?

As odyssey said, And YES it IS better to tell a 500 pound woman not to diet if she started out as a 200 pound woman who dieted her way to 500 pounds. The next diet she goes on might make her 600 or kill her. Better for her to be where she is and learn about health and ways to be more active than diet her way higher.

As many have found on this board, eating healthily and regular exercise don't necessarily or automatically make you lose weight. We have many members doing so that have been on 3..6..9..12 month stalls. But it does make you feel better and NAAFA does promote that.

[Wenzday]

Zulieka.. I think you have had a couple incredible posts on this thread...finally making me understand a bit more about why there IS a NAFAA.. I lurked on the message boards there for months and I really felt out of place and like in no way apart of it..yet I was near 300 pounds...obviously its not for everyone and nobody NEEDS to understand the purpose, maybe, except those who DO need it...in general I think the lobby ing they do is in general good and important.

sorry I have a kid on my lap...cant type well

[ItsTheWooo]

Great post adkpam :)

[Zuleikaa]

Thank you for understanding!!!

[Lisa N]

Just as others have been asked to leave this board who promote hc diets, I believe it was right to ask you to take your message elsewhere from NAAFA.

Not exactly true, Zuleikaa...those that wish to discuss and promote a high carb way of eating or argue that low carbing is unhealthy are welcome here but clearly asked to restrict their posts on such discussions to the War Zone.
NAAFA is so threatened by the idea that there MIGHT be something that would enable an obese person to successfully lose weight, they ban any and all discussion of it.


As I've said before and before...all obese people are not unhealthy!!!

That may be true: ALL obese people may not be unhealthy for a time. Can you find me one obese person who has lived past the age of 70 being obese nearly their entire lives and does not have at least one serious health issue? For that matter, what is the average age of a NAAFA member?
Since NAAFA likes to focus on the percentages of diets that fail, it seems a gross disservice to their members to not also discuss the odds of becoming seriously ill due to obesity instead of claiming that it won't happen (obesity doesn't cause disease) and if it does, just move more and eat healthier (I have yet to see them define what constitutes "healthier") and you'll feel better. I work with several people that are 200+ pounds overweight. The amount of excercise that they are capable of is very limited at best; 3 of them cannot walk slowly from their desks to the lunch room (perhaps 100 feet) without becoming out of breath. I'm 50 pounds overweight at least still and not exactly in the greatest shape; I can make it to the lunchroom and back 3 times in the amount of time it takes them to get there once. I seriously fear for their safety and ability to get to safety quickly should there ever be a fire or tornado.
This link goes into the co-morbidities of obesity: http://www.spotlighthealth.com/morbid_obesity/obesity_overview/related_problems.html
For me, those are a lot scarier statistics than the number of people who fail at traditional diets or even fad diets and I feel that it's inexcusable for NAAFA to actively encourage its members to stay in such as state as to give a high probability of their developing one or more of these conditions at a relatively young age under the guise of "it's all society's fault for not loving you as you are". Yes, they should be accepted as human beings and treated with respect and dignity regardless of their physical size, but that is not a reason to encourage them to stay on a path that will likely ruin their health in the name of "acceptance".
I agree with the assesment that they are obesity enablers and worse.

[Sunslyte]

Great posts Red1cutie, Odyssey & Zuleika!

As someone who avoided doctors for Years because so many had insisted that I should diet because THEIR way was the Best, I can understand why NAAFA does NOT want to get involved in the whole diet zoo.

At 350# I had NORMAL blood sugar, NORMAL cholesterol, and NORMAL everything else. You don't have to be sick just because you are overweight.

Even if, however, I had had EVERYTHING wrong with me, its still no reason to think that ANYONE has the right to try to convince me that I need to change my ways. THAT IS A PERSONAL DECISION. It is not license for OTHERS, no matter how Well-meaning, to evangelize about what I need to do to "improve" myself.

NAAFA is there to NOT JUDGE people because of their weight or appearance -- its a safe place to go to when you are overweight and are darned tired of being preached to about what is wrong with you. Its a way find that you are not a freak, and are not alone.

When people are READY to look for a path like Low Carb, they will seek it out -- they dont need it thrown at them.

After all, they ARE on the web -- its not like they are incapable of finding low carb sites if they want them.

[Lisa N]

Even if, however, I had had EVERYTHING wrong with me, its still no reason to think that ANYONE has the right to try to convince me that I need to change my ways. THAT IS A PERSONAL DECISION. It is not license for OTHERS, no matter how Well-meaning, to evangelize about what I need to do to "improve" myself.

Neither does anyone have the right to tell you that if you don't stay as you are that you are being a traitor to yourself and the organization you belong to by "giving in" to societal demands for thinness unless or until you become ill from being obese.
Neither does anyone have a right to make you feel bad for wishing to lose weight and improve your health and actively discourage you from even trying.
Neither do they have the right to harass and badger members who do decide to make an attempt at weight loss despite NAAFA's stance against it.

They're not giving them a choice, they're telling their members they have only one choice and that is to remain obese/become more obese and that doing anything else is destined for failure at best or traitorous at worst.

[FromVA]

Even if, however, I had had EVERYTHING wrong with me, its still no reason to think that ANYONE has the right to try to convince me that I need to change my ways. THAT IS A PERSONAL DECISION. It is not license for OTHERS, no matter how Well-meaning, to evangelize about what I need to do to "improve" myself.
You are right...now, how about alcoholics and smokers? Do they have the same "rights"? What about drug users? Same rights? To me, the costs to society as a whole, are the same for all these groups...including the morbidly obese. Doctors and our "culture" say these behaviors are unacceptable, their blood work can be "normal" and they can otherwise be healthy - for a time. These people are told to "improve" themselves for their health and given programs to help. (Or jail time!) Should these people be encouraged to continue their lifestyles because they are being made fun of, shunned and being forced out of the workplace? Should they be told to ignore this blatant discrimination? I think not.

[adkpam]

Zuleikaa, I just wanted to say I am glad you got good things from NAAFA, that was why I emphasized the good points I thought they were making. So much of what they lobby for is both needed and morally correct.
Perhaps the problem lies in a central paradox.
It's a strange analogy they make: it's true that African-Americans shouldn't torture their hair or their bodies to look like something they are not. Likewise, people in general should not torture their bodies to look like someone they are not.
If NAAFA can keep children from being teased on the playground, or keep an aerobics instructor her job, I think that is great, and I support that.
But African-Americans, to continue the example, cannot find themselves removed from the NAACP or other anti-discriminatory group because they find they are no longer African-American.
Yet someone who does lose weight will not be welcome at NAAFA. That is what I find a little odd.
In every other field of human endeavor, any anti-discriminatory group celebrates those who manage to triumph over the adversity. They are held up as an example of what CAN be done. They are still members of the group, AND role models.
Since NAAFA's mission is to promote acceptance of people of large size, it is perhaps inevitable that someone can shrink out of their member pool.
Yet I think that is regrettable: doesn't anyone who has lost a considerable amount of weight still remember what it was like to be disrespected? Can't they march in the solidarity parades, attend the functions, keep their friends?
Doesn't the moral issue still apply?
Or have they lost their credibility since they are now Former Fat People? No LONGER discriminated against? And they now will make the NAAFA members feel badly about themselves?
When the whole point of the organization is that people can be happy whatever size they are?
The point about the women's movement was equal rights for women. There was some friction during the past decades when there was disrespect for women who CHOOSE to stay home with the kids.
The point of the women's movement was choice, and it has matured so they can accept both women who choose to stay home, and women who choose to work, and their ability to move between those worlds.
Maybe NAAFA can do that too. But that does not seem their present goal.

[odyssey]

Well, time for me to leave this conversation.
i am now being blamed for costs to society.
Sorry I am such a burden for you.

Thank God for a place like NAAFA where
i am not treated like i am subhuman because
i have been overweight since birth.

Be well all.

[FromVA]

Well, time for me to leave this conversation.
i am now being blamed for costs to society.
Sorry I am such a burden for you.

Thank God for a place like NAAFA where
i am not treated like i am subhuman because
i have been overweight since birth.

Be well all.
I re-read all the posts and I didn't see one that was about you, odyssey. They were all referring to the stand NAAFA has taken on members losing weight. Why do you think you were being singled out?

[red1cutie]

AdkPam, your comparison of African Americans (Black) to this topic is absurd. You cannot change your race. So how would it ever be possible to be excluded if you are no longer Black? That makes no sense.

NAAFA is a place for "Big" people to be comfortable and accepted and to know it's okay to be the way they are and it's society that has the "problem" when they treat them with disrespect. From what I understand they have social functions where people can socialize and meet people like themselves who they can feel comfortable with.

Their position is known by all their members when they sign up. The fact it organizations like that are needed and those who don't like it don't join. If some members choose to lose weight or not, that's their choice. They are adults.

You believe in lc as a WOL and NAAFA believes in the rights of their members to be accepted as they are and not go on any diets because diets lead to yoyo-ing which is worse.

[red1cutie]

To compare a fat person to an alcoholic or a drug addict is ludicrous.

[FromVA]

In the context of the post, their behaviors were not being compared...it was a reply to:Even if, however, I had had EVERYTHING wrong with me, its still no reason to think that ANYONE has the right to try to convince me that I need to change my ways. THAT IS A PERSONAL DECISION. It is not license for OTHERS, no matter how Well-meaning, to evangelize about what I need to do to "improve" myself.
and NAAFA's position that the obese should be left alone and not encouraged to lose weight, a position which is certainly not helpful to their members. Some posters seem to think this is a special class with special rights...my point was that so do the people of the other groups, and no one is advocating they should be allowed to continue their destructive behavior, much less encouraging them to continue.

[liz175]

Since NAAFA likes to focus on the percentages of diets that fail, it seems a gross disservice to their members to not also discuss the odds of becoming seriously ill due to obesity instead of claiming that it won't happen (obesity doesn't cause disease) and if it does, just move more and eat healthier (I have yet to see them define what constitutes "healthier") and you'll feel better.

I have also spent some time browsing the NAAFA boards and I have also been troubled at time that they never define what it means to "eat healthier." On the other hand, I have seen posts on the NAAFA board from members who say that they are eating lower carb because they think it is healthier for their bodies, and that eating lower carb they feel better, have more energy, and have lost weight. Those posts have not been censored and other members have responded positively. I have also seen the same sorts of posts with regard to lowfat eating. I think that NAAFA is trying to encourage members to listen to their own bodies and figure out what type of eating works for them to make them healthier. There have been a lot of discussions on the NAAFA boards about "intuitive eating," which means learning to listen to your body, eat what your body desires when you are hungry, and stop eating when you are full. NAAFA moderators have asserted that this will stop people from gaining weight and may help some people to lose weight. There are some very smart people over there. Please don't assume that because you have read a few posts you understand everything they are about. I'd hate to see someone make that assumption with regard to this board.

From NAAFA's perspective, the jury is still out on lowcarb dieting. As someone who has gone on repeated diets, only to end up fatter each time, I totally understand that attitude. It took everything in me to try one more time with lowcarb and frankly, when I started, my highest hope was that it would simply stop my weight gain. I never thought I would actually lose a significant amount of weight. Although it worked for me (at least to some extent -- the jury is still out in whether or not it will help me get below 200 pounds), this forum is full of people for whom low carbing hasn't worked. Given past history with other diets, I totally understand why NAAFA continues to be skeptical.

That said, the NAAFA stance on feeders is unsupportable in my opinion. And, I do think that most of us have a weight which if exceeded becomes dysfunctional for our health and mobility. That weight varies from person to person, and also varies during an individual's life, but I think it does exist. That weight is also significantly higher than society's standards of thinness for most people. At 360 pounds, my weight was dysfunctional and was causing me health and mobility problems. Telling me the solution to my mobility problems was to move more would have been a ridiculous response. I always moved until I became too fat to comfortably do so and even then I continued to swim a mile several times a week. However, at my current weight I am healthy. My blood pressure and cholesterol are normal, I can climb a mountain, hike 5 or 10 miles, and walk faster than most of the women I know who are my age (46). My weight is not dysfunctional. I want to continue to lose both because I am somewhat vain and like the way I look thinner and because I think that this weight may become dysfunctional as I get older and it is easier to lose the weight now (although definitely not easy!) than it will be in 10 or 20 or 30 years.

I want to end with a plea that before you criticize NAAFA, make sure you really understand their stance. I read ItsTheWoo's post and I understand why the moderator found it threatening. I think it she had gone in and said, "I'm still overweight but I used to be much fatter, I made changes in my eating and exercise that made me much healthier (including cutting refined carbs out of my diet), but I'm still struggling with my self image, " the post would have been accepted and she could have started an honest dialogue. That dialogue could have included a discussion of eating and exercise habits. Perhaps I am naive to believe this, but I have seen discussions like that on the NAAFA board. In fact, AntiM (Monika), who posts in this forum, started a thread like that on the NAAFA board and received a lot of support plus one or two somewhat hostile posts (which is par for the course on the Internet).

[Heath]

To me, this would be the same as going to a lesbian board and saying "Hi, I'm Janie and I would like to know if you'd like to know about how to feel accepted as a normal person in society."
There are thousands of websites and hundreds of organizations that talk about diets. And let's be serious. For every 100 people on this board, 5 will maintain a serious weight loss. (Quick check, go look at the # of before pictures and then the # of afters). I just know that I will be one of those 5 ;).
So NAAFA is just protecting itself, just as a Gay/Lesbian board would want to protect it's members from people trying to get them to be more "normal" by becoming straight. Janie did it, and if they can too, they'll be healthy, happy and accepted.
To me, that's more of the analogy than the race card. Can you choose your sexual preference? I personally think you can't. And some people are not EVER going to be thin. Ever. You have to accept that. Even Atkins admits that some people are so incredilbly metabolically resistant that they have to engage in seriously risky behaviors.
There was another thread about this somewhere, I don't know if someone has pointed to it, but their I talked about how I was in great shape at 300 and loved my life. I didn't need NAAFA to protect me, but if there was someone who could help champion the issues I had (BOOTHS!!! ;) ) I would have been thrilled.
NAAFA is kind of the terrorist group of the fat world. Unfortunately, there's not a "Be Kind to Big People" group, which would fight 16" wide plane seats and theater seats with 28" of leg clearance.
There's an 80% chance my kid will be obese. Being a fat kid is a horrible thing. I'm going to protect him as best I can from ever becoming fat. It's nice to know that someone is at least trying to carry a banner about education to the "normal" world and allowing a safe and accepting place for those who need it.

H

[potatofree]

To compare a fat person to an alcoholic or a drug addict is ludicrous.

Is it? I had the same addiction to carbs that an alcoholic has to booze..same drive, different drug of choice.

There's a place for everything, and I don't AGREE with some of the things they stand for, since it sometimes smacks more of giving up and a victim mentality than mere acceptance. That's why I don't GO there. I ignore the people who come here to preach the perils of low-carb, the people who cry over being "obese" at 120 lbs, people who fall into self-pity about being born fat when they have no other recourse than to turn victim and run... I wasn't born at 300 lbs. (unless you believe my mother's labor and delivery stories..:lol: ) I am responsible and accountable for every bite that crosses my lips. I can choose to improve my health and deal with my issues or NOT, as I choose.

My point is (and I DO have one!) that everybody deserves a place to just "be" without having some well-meaning person come in and "show them the way". If NAAFA doesn't support dieting, I might worry for the person who misses a chance, but it's THEIR choice.

[mb99]

Heath, your post was excellent, and I agree with your analogy completely.

I have witnessed, more then once, first hand how shunned people who were once a member of a 'gay' group and then meet someone/settle down with someone of the opposite gender or just adopt a straight single lifestyle are treated. They are treated awfully becuase their behaviour undermines the whole group basis -- that they don't choose your sexual preference, and that it is absolute and non-negotiable.

Similarily, people who successfully lose weight undermine the whole logic that it is nearly impossible to lose weight and the odds aren't worth it.

Both groups survive on the logic that everybody in it will always be in it. When that turns out not to be true, it can be threatening.

[editing to add some more]

And the same can be true of African American groups. You're kidding yourself if you think a member of a racial group who finds out their not a true member will be just as accepted. And those that better themselves or improve their lives are not always regarded as role models etc... how do you think the first black students to fight to get into white colleges were treated? Many fought hard for that as a civil rights issue, but many more questioned that those kids just wanted to 'become white'... to leave the black group and assimilate into another. When the national guard was sent in to force desegregation of colleges, it wasn't just whites protesting. There is always fear when the boundaries of a group are pushed I think.

A society for the obese is always going to be fighting the fact that its members can lose their classification, and that undermines any claim that nobody in their group wants to leave it.

[Alina]

Here we go again. It always amazes me that so many people choose to take any opinion contraditcting their own as a personal insult.

Up to October 2003 I was a heavy smoker. I read and heard many times about smokers being responsible for this or that, killing innocent human beings, being a burden to the society etc. I never took it personally. In fact - I know it has a lot of truth to it. I still loved my smoking and enjoyed so called 'good health' which was only an illusion. Denial is sweet.

This illusion ended sooner than I expected and I took my responsibility to myself. I quit and it was hell.

We should be able to discuss anything. This thread was not started as an attempt to bash a person/persons. The intention was to criticize an organization. That is a big difference...

Still, many people think anyone who dislikes G W Bush hates all Americans....

Not the same thing at all....

Alina

[RCFletcher]

Sorry, what's NAAFA?

[toning_up]

NAAFA: National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance

[Lisa N]

I have also spent some time browsing the NAAFA boards and I have also been troubled at time that they never define what it means to "eat healthier."

What I find a bit of a paradox is that they state that they will support the limting or cutting out of fat, salt, sugar and cholesterol only if it is being done for health reasons or at the direction of a physician and not for the purpose of losing weight. I think for many people there, cutting carbs would also fall under the category of "health reasons" since they do cause health problems in many. NAAFA's position is not that being obese doesn't go along with co-morbidities, but that they result from dieting, not from being overweight; in other words it would appear that they believe that if someone never diets and becomes obese, they won't develop co-morbidities.
I find it odd that they take a neutral position on feederism, stating that it is a lifestyle choice and a personal decision, but take a strong stance against attempts at weight loss. Isn't that also a lifestyle choice and a personal decision? Why is it a personal decision and a matter of lifestyle choice if you choose to deliberately become larger, but somehow a shameful thing if you choose to attempt to become smaller?
I also think we need to make a distinction here that nobody is saying that you have to be stick thin or "at ideal weight" according to the height/weight charts to be healthy, but neither could it be considered healthy to be morbidly obese no matter how good your health may be for a time. Does it have to be one or the other? It seems that people are arguing from the point of one extreme or another. Statistically, even a 10-20% reduction in weight is enough to bring health improvements and reduce the odds of developing disease.
In another thread, I stated that I believe NAAFA started out with a good principle; that people of size should be treated with dignity and respect and not discriminated against, but then took it too extreme. I actually agree with some of their positions (Gastric bypss surgery, for example), but their stance against weight loss by any method prevents me from supporting them as a whole since in supporting an organization, you support them in all their positions, not just the ones you agree with. Not supporting them because I disagree with some of their positions does not mean that I do not support the ideal that they began with.
Here is a paradox that I see with this organization. People who join do so knowing full well what their positions are. They are relieved and overjoyed to find a safe haven and a place where they can go and not be seen as some sort of mutant freak of nature and where they can be treated with dignity and respect as well as encouraged to love themselves. All wonderful, desirable things. However...this can also work to actively discourage members from losing weight, even if they desire to, because in doing so they will cause themselves to become unacceptable to those few people in society that have shown them acceptance and treated them as they deserve to be treated and they will be left with noone to support them while they are in that "in-between" state; too fat to be accepted by the thin world and too thin to be accepted by the size acceptance world. Unacceptance and poor treatment brings them to the organization, but fear of loss of acceptance if they change and decide to lose weight keeps them there and prevents them from even attempting to lose weight. It promotes the type of thinking that says, "I'll fail if I try and what's worse, I'll lose the love and acceptance that I've found." That, to me, is a victim mentality.
I firmly believe that we all need a safe haven from the cold, callous world we live in, but please be careful that your safe haven doesn't become a prison.

Sorry, what's NAAFA?

You can read about what NAAFA is and their official positions here: www.NAAFA.org

[nikkil]

I do think that being overweight could be comparable to being a drug addict/alcoholic/smoker in that it's all addiction, just different drug-of-choice. I am a smoker and I do realize that I place an extra burden on society because I am willingly putting myself at risk, medically, and would then be a burden financially due to my use of the health care system. Obesity does place a burden on society in this way, as well.

There are sites out there that support people regardless of weight. I'm on a parent of ADHD/learning disabled forum and I have never once been asked how much I weigh. If you go to a forum that has anything to do with weight/size, then what are they going to be discussing?

Isn't the epitome of acceptance of 'fat people' (or anybody for that matter) is accepting not in spite of size but just accepting people for who they are?

I think it's fine if somebody is overweight and content to stay at that weight and has no desire to lose weight for any reason (medical, cosmetic). I don't think anybody has the right to try to tell them what to do or how to live their life or how they should feel. Everybody knows there are all kinds of diets and ways of eating and so do these people and if they change their mind and decide that they want to lose weight, they will find one they feel will work for them and give it a go. They have to be in that 'zone' and get to that point in their own time if they ever do. None of my business. Same thing with quitting smoking. I know it's bad for me, I know I should quit, but I haven't gotten to the point where I'm going to do something about it. Somebody lecturing me or giving me dirty looks isn't going to make me get to that point faster.

One caveat to the above: I think a doctor would be derelict if they did not point out the medical dangers of obesity to an overweight person, as long as they convey the need for the person to be ready and be supportive until they are, if ever.

[Zuleikaa]

NAAFTA has members of all shapes and sizes. It is a refuge for people of size and those who support them. That's an absolute. There is a difference in the stance the organization takes and the individual decisions of its members. That's fair. As an organization NAAFTA is against diets, any diet. They are for their members eating healthily, which can mean different things for each individual member. So, of course, they don't define it. At the same time they do offer seminars on health and nutrition and members are encouraged to share the varied strategies they encompass in these areas and how they feel on them and the benefits they receive from them. But they don't support them as a means to specifically lose weight. Rather as a means to be healthy and heal the body.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by red1cutie
To compare a fat person to an alcoholic or a drug addict is ludicrous.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally by Potatofree

Is it? I had the same addiction to carbs that an alcoholic has to booze..same drive, different drug of choice.

I've seen this before and I do resent the inference. For a carb addict, carbs are not a drug of choice. There is NO CHOICE involved but rather a drive due to a chemical imbalance. You could argue the same is true for an alcoholic and a drug user but even if a person became inadvertantly addicted to drugs and alcohol, there is a solution. You can stop using through determination and pure grit. I'd like to see you never eat again and live. The results of carb addiction emcompass many levels of severity and can be set off by many things. Tell a carb addict to never eat sugar, starch, or fruit again. Fine...but carb addicts can also be set off by such things as nuts, vegetables, cottage cheese, too much fat, sugar alcohols, artificial sugars, MSG, and seasonings. Even "safe" vegetables if cooked in soups can then become a trigger. The list of "safe" foods is becoming quite narrow. Further complicating the situation is bingeing brought about by a person's reactions to food sensitivities; the list of those could be anything. Add to those hidden carbs and even the weather and you can see with what some carb addicts might have to contend.

For some carb addicts lc helps and might be the solution. But how many times have we seen someone bingeing and gaining weight on perfectly legal foods? How many times have we seen people binge cycling every two weeks off lc and onto carbs and regaining all the weight they had struggled to lose in the previous two weeks of doing lc strict and legal? How many times have we seen carb addiction activated once someone has come off of induction? And when they go on maintenance? Please!!! Even how many times have we seen people claim to be grazers and having a need to eat 6 or more times a day? All day? On legal foods? All of those behaviors can be looked at as the result of a carb addiction. And that's while on lc!!! We can say lc will solve the problem for the members of NAAFA. But will it? For all of them? How many will fail? The first time? The second? The third? LC DOES get harder to lose the weight on each time for some, you know. How many posts have we seen from members returning? How many of those coming back are even larger than before? This is reality folks!!! Maybe not your reality or mine but it is the reality for some!!! And that's what NAAFA stands against and for!!! They stand against the "perfect" diet and for the members who WON'T succeed and will be worse off than before!!!

BTW. I do believe that most of the morbidly obese do have a carb addiction and have posted a poll in the Triple Digit Club to support my hypothesis. So far, about 75% of those members are reporting as carb addicts.

[Lisa N]

I've seen this before and I do resent the inference. For a carb addict, carbs are not a drug of choice. There is NO CHOICE involved but rather a drive due to a chemical imbalance. You could argue the same is true for an alcoholic and a drug user but even if a person became inadvertantly addicted to drugs and alcohol, there is a solution. You can stop using through determination and pure grit. I'd like to see you never eat again and live. The results of carb addiction emcompass many levels of severity and can be set off by many things. Tell a carb addict to never eat sugar, starch, or fruit again. Fine...but carb addicts can also be set off by such things as nuts, vegetables, cottage cheese, too much fat, sugar alcohols, artificial sugars, MSG, and seasonings. Even "safe" vegetables if cooked in soups can then become a trigger. The list of "safe" foods is becoming quite narrow. Further complicating the situation is bingeing brought about by a person's reactions to food sensitivities; the list of those could be anything. Add to those hidden carbs and even the weather and you can see with what some carb addicts might have to contend.

I still think that addiction to carbs vs. addiction to drugs/alcohol can be a fair comparison. There is some evidence, at least with alcoholism, that it's not just alcohol that is a trigger for the alcoholic; sugar and insulin response can also be triggers as well as certain sights, smells and social situations...even visual triggers, so it becomes just as difficult for them to stay clean as the carb addict. No, the carb addict can't stop eating as someone addicted to another substance can stop "using", but they can discover and avoid their triggers. Does the difficulty in doing so preclude the attempt?

We can say lc will solve the problem for the members of NAAFA. But will it? For all of them? How many will fail?

Okay...so because some will fail (and nobody here can claim that some won't), nobody should try and all obese people should be actively discouraged from trying because they might fail? This, again, sounds like victim speak; "I'll fail if I try, so why bother to try at all?" The victim says that previous failure guarantees future failure and sees no hope or point in continuing to try. The overcomer mentality says that just because I have failed in the past does not mean that I am guaranteed to fail in the future. Often the difference between someone who fails and someone who succeeds isn't that the one who succeeded never failed, but that they never failed to keep trying despite past failures.
Going back to the analogy of drug and alcohol addiction, the success rates of treatment are dismal and those that fail treatment often wind up worse off than they were before treatment; they will either sink to a new low or wind up dead. Based on that, should all drug and alcohol treatment centers be abolished and drug and alcohol addicts be actively discouraged from attempting to overcome their addiction because there is such a high failure rate and if they fail, they will be worse off than before? Should they be encouraged to accept their addictions as an unchangable part of who they are and all of society to accept their addiction because it's too hard for them to overcome it?
Yes, comparing an alcoholic or drug addict to a carb or food addict is an extreme comparison and not a completely equitable one, but there are a great many similarities there as well. I'm also not saying that a drug addict or alcoholic are the same behaviorally or in their impact on relationships and society as a whole as a carb addict; only that there are similarities in their addictions and the difficulties in overcoming them.

[Zuleikaa]

Actually in some countries drug addiction IS treated that way!!! People are given their daily "fix" that allows them to continue to lead productive lives without the problems that come with illegal drug use. Meanwhile other resources are targeted to ensure this population does not grow. Orignially posted by Lisa N
There is some evidence, at least with alcoholism, that it's not just alcohol that is a trigger for the alcoholic; sugar and insulin response can also be triggers as well as certain sights, smells and social situations...even visual triggers, so it becomes just as difficult for them to stay clean as the carb addict. No, the carb addict can't stop eating as someone addicted to another substance can stop "using", but they can discover and avoid their triggers.

So too, it has been found, are carbohydrate addicts subject to these same triggers. So how can they avoid them all? How much harder is it for them? Does the alcoholic or the drug addict have someone hiding the toxin in their food, in the air all around? Carb addicts can be stimulated by many smells not just actually cooking ones but by perfumes, incense, cleaners and other scents contained in myriad products? It's been found that some carb addicts will have a reaction and insulin response not just to smells but even the sight of carbs!! Just the external environment of the carbohydrate addict can be a veritable minefield!!! Add to that the actual food triggers that might make it to the mouth and it's practically a Mission Impossible!!! If the end result is failure time after time, it might seem very prudent and reasonable to the one that has been there and paid the price, perhaps, in additional gained weight, decreased mobility/increased health risks, sense of failure and loss of self esteem not to try the next "guaranteed" sure cure.

Originally posted by Lisa N
Okay...so because some will fail (and nobody here can claim that some won't), nobody should try and all obese people should be actively discouraged from trying because they might fail?
I'm not saying that and neither is NAAFA!!! What their members CHOOSE to do INDIVIDUALLY is their choice!!! NAAFA as an organization does not support ANY diet. Yes, because some will fail and be left worse off than before!!! They do not want to support behavior that has been destructive for its members in the past. Again, if any individual member wants to assume that risk for him/herself, that is their own personal choice!!

[adkpam]

I just wanted to jump in, because perhaps something wasn't clear: the comparisons to African-Americans and discrimination originated from the NAAFA site, and I drew my discussion from that.
And I can't find the comparison now...sorry. It was about how unfair it was to make people feel they have to look a certain way to be accepted.
I am a firm supporter of individual choice. And as myself and other posters have mentioned, it might be inevitable for NAAFA to NOT encourage any weight loss behavior on their members that they feel come from cultural pressures instead of health ones, thus their somewhat contradictory stances that have provoked so much discussion.
But when it comes to the people who love you, what is nagging and what is love, and is it both?
I ordered a copy of Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution for my father, who is slavishly following the ADA's guidelines, and I'm worried sick about him. Will he read it? Maybe. Will he follow it? Don't know. But I have to make the effort.
I have to speak out. And I think that is all we are doing. Don't anyone get hot under the collar just because we are being Americans, part of which is how we know how to disagree!
And I do hope odyssey feels better and comes back. I don't think anyone was saying anything bad about anybody! We were talking about the aims and goals of a certain organization, nothing more.

[FromVA]

So too, it is found, are carbohydrate addicts subject to these same triggers. So how can they avoid them all? How much harder is it for them? Does the alcoholic or the drug addict have someone hiding the toxin in their food?
Are you are saying it is someone else's fault morbidly obese people are morbidly obese and that they are doomed to failure because "someone" is hiding toxins in their food? Everyone who has ever fought and triumped over an addiction, be it cigarettes, alcohol or drugs, would take great exception to your premise that they can do it but it is so much harder for those addicted to carbs they shouldn't even try.

[adkpam]

Speaking of failure.
My husband has Chronic Fatigue Immune Deficiency Syndrome, and has for several years. This is a disease that is not well understood, difficult to treat, and the chances of cure at this stage are pretty infinitesimal.
But one of the things I admire about him are that HE DOES NOT GIVE UP!
He has to treat himself, with medical support, because they don't know much more than he does. We tried some nutritional supplements, and that helped. We tried a new drug, and that was terrible. Now he's getting into low carbing, and has lost weight and gotten some energy improvements.
Low carbing is not his whole answer. But it's making things better. And I think that was the point Lisa N was making. He's not feeling like a victim because even though odds are against any one of these things working, he doesn't give up. I love him, I support him, and I WANT HIM TO GET BETTER. Even if he doesn't.
He is in a situation where he doesn't have control over his body, but he keeps trying, and sometimes things work.
You can't win if you don't play.

[Zuleikaa]

The morbidly obese were at some point only...obese...fat...overweight...plump...heavyset. They got the way they are through the many diets they went on that activated insulin resistance, carb addiction, sugar/insulin imbalances. NAAFA is saying that if they had been left heavyweight and societal pressures had not striped them of self-esteem and the desire to be accepted as "normal" that "forced" them into the dieting cycles and spiraling weight and resulting imbalances they would be at a better place now. How many of you acknowledge that you "dieted" yourself to your weight before lc?

If you're healthy but overweight...maybe you'd be better off if you don't start playing!!

[kyrasdad]

I'm not sure I can fathom the NAAFA position - in my opinion it's all based on The Big Lie that they accept their weight. Can anyone who has lived the life of a morbidly obese person honestly say that they accepted it, never thought about it, didn't wish it could be different?

I live that life, and I can tell you: I fantasiz(ed) about being thin all the time. I thought about it -- still think about it -- more often than I think about sex. Honestly.

I think a 300-pound person who can barely walk across the parking lot is simply either deceiving himself, or others, when he says he is happy with that situation. There were times I worked to create this illusion for myself that I could live that way. But the truth is, I can't live that way. Or not for very long.

They promote acceptance, which I agree with. In many ways, America hates the fat more than it hates any religious, ethnic, or other group. America is wrong to do that, and the people who do it are taught it's the one prejudice they can safely have.

Whether or not it was appropriate for ItsTheWoo to make them think about that stance, I can't say. I have a difficult time believing that it is harmful to challenge unhealthy illusions.

I know the mindset because I've had it myself: To me, it used to be that talking about weight loss is tantamount to saying that there is something wrong with me. I knew there was, and I didn't like speaking of it. Ultimately that was a mindset I had to give up.

If we as obese people want to turn up the car radio when it makes a noise, that's fine. But I've decided to look under the hood. I won't make a values judgment about those who don't, but you can't expect me to think that's fine and dandy.

Fat people deserve respect and kindness like everyone else. I'm not here to challenge those who prefer to live the lie that everything's okay.

[Lisa N]

Okay...so because some will fail (and nobody here can claim that some won't), nobody should try and all obese people should be actively discouraged from trying because they might fail?
I'm not saying that and neither is NAAFA!!!

You may not be, but NAAFA is:

NAAFA'S OFFICIAL POSITION:

Since reducing diets rarely achieve permanent weight loss and can result in negative health consequences, since laws and regulations protecting the consumer are nonexistent or remain unenforced, and since people undertaking diets are rarely given sufficient information to allow them to give true informed consent, the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance strongly discourages participation in
weight-reduction dieting.

They give no exceptions to that statment. It's a blanket statement across the board for all persons who are overweight.

Actually in some countries drug addiction IS treated that way!!! People are given their daily "fix" that allows them to continue to lead productive lives without the problems that come with illegal drug use. Meanwhile other resources are targeted to ensure this population does not grow.

Granted, some countries such as the Netherlands do cater to addicts and do what they can to help them lead productive lives, even supplying them with clean drugs and needles and a safe place to use them, but as you pointed out they are also doing what they can to make sure that the population of addicts doesn't continue to grow. What is NAAFA doing to ensure that the population of obese people doesn't grow? Nothing, because their position is that the obese person doesn't have a problem, the rest of society does and that the majority of problems that people of size do have (health or emotional) are either directly or indirectly caused by pressure from society to diet and become thinner. While there may be some truth to that line of thinking, it also removes any and all responsiblity from the obese person to do something to change their lives. If it's all someone else's fault, that removes all control and responsibility from you. If your obesity causes you health problems, address the health problems and not the obesity.
An interesting thought here; if NAAFA is successful in their mission of eliminating prejudice and discrimination against people of size, there would be no more need for NAAFA. While it might be in the best interest of its members to succeed themselves out of existence, it's not in the best interest of the organization.

[Lisa N]

The morbidly obese were at some point only...obese...fat...overweight...plump...heavyset. They got the way they are through the many diets they went on that activated insulin resistance, carb addiction, sugar/insulin imbalances.

Are you saying that attempting to reduce your weight causes all these conditions and if so, do you have the documentation and studies to support it?
Based on your statement, all of us...every last one...are making our problems worse instead of better by chosing to live this lifestyle and losing weight.
Speaking from personal experience, this has not been the case with me. I have seen only improvements and measurable ones at that, with pursing a low carb lifestyle and losing weight.

[FromVA]

NAAFA'S OFFICIAL POSITION:

Since reducing diets rarely achieve permanent weight loss and can result in negative health consequences, since laws and regulations protecting the consumer are nonexistent or remain unenforced, and since people undertaking diets are rarely given sufficient information to allow them to give true informed consent, the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance strongly discourages participation in weight-reduction dieting.
With a position like this, NAAFA is never going to achieve it's goal...advancing fat acceptance. Regardless of the fact that it is wrong to judge people on their appearance, in the real world that is exactly what happens. Some examples: "beautiful" vs "plain", "normal height" vs "small" people, ect. There is subtle discrimination everywhere, and it is part of human nature. The average person isn't going to buy into the concept that the obese can't do a single thing to lose weight and shouldn't even try because they are being sabotaged by "others"...they understand that "dieting" alone isn't the answer...it is changing your lifestyle to maintain the loss. There is no post on this thread that has yet to refute the original opinion posted...that NAAFA is an obesity-enabling organization.

[Kristine]

I think NAAFA is shooting itself in the foot if its attitude toward dieters is that they're breaking rank, cowering to society's prejudices, trying to please The Man, etc. I agree with Lisa that it's paradoxical that they take a neutral position on feederism, yet a firm anti-weight-loss position. Why not put that in the category of "that's your own business", too?

I've been following the NAAFA threads because discrimination really bothers me. I think they'd have far more support and get a lot more accomplished if they'd focus on discrimination and leave members' diet, lifestyle choices and possible health issues between individuals and their doctors. Should there be safe places, events, etc for those who choose to be diet-free, for the lack of a better term? Absolutely. Should they provide support for dieting? No, because it's already everywhere else. But if anti-dieting is the only option, they've seriously bottle-necked their membership.

[Zuleikaa]

I'm not saying this lifestyle "lc" is one of those "diets". But it MIGHT BE for some. LC does work for a lot of people. It does not work for ALL.

Re diets and their yoyo effects. The literature is out there proving the effect of diets. Tons of it. Dr. Atkins affirms it and so do the Hellers and Eades. We've all seen, heard, and heard it quoted. And further many of us have personally experienced it.

And you've said "speaking from personal experience", which again, is my point. It is YOUR experience. And that of many others on this board and of those that have commented here. It is not EVERYONE'S that is following or has followed lc!!!

[FromVA]

The topic isn't, and never was, about trying to force the NAAFA to promote a LC WOL. It is about the fact that NAAFA discourages it's members from losing weight by promoting the idea that it's members shouldn't even try: "...the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance strongly discourages participation in weight-reduction dieting." The only way to lose weight is to change your eating lifestyle and become more active. If someone is so heavy they can hardly walk up a flight of stairs without becoming breathless, they obviously need to go on some kind of weight-reducing pattern of eating. In the American lexicon, this is referred to as a "diet". The only other alternative is to do nothing. And, again, that is where the NAAFA will fail in it's agenda because regardless of the moral issues, the average person won't buy into the idea that they have to make allowances for people who have chosen to remain morbidly obese and then expect society to re-tool to accomodate them. It's good that NAAFA provides a "safe place"...it's bad that they discourage their members from losing weight.

[ItsTheWooo]

A society for the obese is always going to be fighting the fact that its members can lose their classification, and that undermines any claim that nobody in their group wants to leave it.
Excellent post, mb99. So this is probably a political issue then. If people are slimming down, it makes their claim that fat people should be accepted hold less water. If people are doing something to change fat, why should society stop viewing fat as bad?

[ItsTheWooo]

I do think that being overweight could be comparable to being a drug addict/alcoholic/smoker in that it's all addiction, just different drug-of-choice. I am a smoker and I do realize that I place an extra burden on society because I am willingly putting myself at risk, medically, and would then be a burden financially due to my use of the health care system. Obesity does place a burden on society in this way, as well.

I agree. Though I am fully well aware of metabolic disadvantages and advantages which are out of our control that contribute to body fat levels (women, older people, the IR/hyperinsulemic, shorter people etc all have slower metabolic rates) to become and stay very obese is a self-destructive choice. You are choosing to eat food in quality and/or quantity that exacerbates your tendancy to be fat.

Like Dr. Phil says, you may have a genetic tendency to become very large, but a large weight is but one possibility on a continuum of weights. You are choosing to put yourself at the higher end rather than work hard and limit foods to put yourself at the lower end.

For example, I know I will never be skinny. I have metabolic disadvantages which say "you will be larger than average". I am a size 13 or 12 now. I can't expect to get much smaller than this, healthfully... if I'm lucky I might be a 10 or maybe even an 8 when all is said and done. Just because I won't ever be a size 2 like other young girls and movie stars doesn't mean I should just resign myself to being 280 again.

I think it's fine if somebody is overweight and content to stay at that weight and has no desire to lose weight for any reason (medical, cosmetic). I don't think anybody has the right to try to tell them what to do or how to live their life or how they should feel. Everybody knows there are all kinds of diets and ways of eating and so do these people and if they change their mind and decide that they want to lose weight, they will find one they feel will work for them and give it a go. They have to be in that 'zone' and get to that point in their own time if they ever do. None of my business. Same thing with quitting smoking. I know it's bad for me, I know I should quit, but I haven't gotten to the point where I'm going to do something about it. Somebody lecturing me or giving me dirty looks isn't going to make me get to that point faster.

I agree, if someone chooses to do nothing about their overweight that is their choice. People shouldn't be encouraged to do anything about their weight (medical advice from a doctor non withstanding), because that is a decision that has to come from within. My problem is NAAFA encourages people in the wrong direction. Last time I checked, NAAFA was a group which is supposed fight for the rights of those who are overweight and obese; why in the world do they think they have a right to encourage obesity in their members and non-members?

[ItsTheWooo]

I've seen this before and I do resent the inference. For a carb addict, carbs are not a drug of choice. There is NO CHOICE involved but rather a drive due to a chemical imbalance. You could argue the same is true for an alcoholic and a drug user but even if a person became inadvertantly addicted to drugs and alcohol, there is a solution. You can stop using through determination and pure grit. I'd like to see you never eat again and live. The results of carb addiction emcompass many levels of severity and can be set off by many things. Tell a carb addict to never eat sugar, starch, or fruit again.

I think it is a perfectly applicable comparison.

Binge drinking/cocaine/heroin usage changes brain chemistry in such a way that makes the user dependent on them to achieve physical and emotional well being.
Binge carb usage also changes brain chemistry in the same way.

The solution to controlling alcohol or narcotic addiction is to abstain from the drug, and to fight whatever pangs of craving remain

The solution is the same for the carb addict.

You are being incredibly short-sighted here. YOu are assuming once you quit drugs or drink never again do you have a craving; you are assuming it is easy to kick drugs vs kicking carbs which is harder, since you eat to live. I totally disagree. It is perfectly doable to live, eat, and be healthy without ever eating another oreo cookie or chocolate chip cookie dough icecream. In fact, you would probably be healthier without carb binge junk food.

You are also assuming that carb addicts are the only addicts who can get old cravings again, even in absence of their "drug usage". This is very very false. Fighting emotional cravings for addicts is a life long battle. Ask any ex-smoker if they sometimes get nostalgic for a cigarette when put in an environment that is stressful, or one that would otherwise elicit cigarette cravings. They do. My cousin quit smoking 2 years ago, she tells me she still gets cravings some times.

Fine...but carb addicts can also be set off by such things as nuts, vegetables, cottage cheese, too much fat, sugar alcohols, artificial sugars, MSG, and seasonings. Even "safe" vegetables if cooked in soups can then become a trigger. The list of "safe" foods is becoming quite narrow. Further complicating the situation is binging brought about by a person's reactions to food sensitivities; the list of those could be anything. Add to those hidden carbs and even the weather and you can see with what some carb addicts might have to contend.

In my opinion, "trigger foods" aren't trigger foods for physical reasons, they are primarily emotional cravings.
You need to change the way you use food, not blame the food. Anything warm, with interesting texture, flavor, etc you are going abstain from forever just because it reminds you of comfort food?

Other addicts also have "triggers", you know, they are not limited to carb addicts. They might be out with their old friends, tempted to pick up their old vice. They might be in a stressful situation which previously would have encouraged binge usage of their drug. These are triggers. Triggers are emotional cravings, not physical ones.

If you never deal with the emotional aspects which resulted in your carb addiction you will never fully beat it (to become an addict one must abuse the substance in the first place, and the reason for abuse is invariably behavioral/emotional).


For some carb addicts lc helps and might be the solution. But how many times have we seen someone binging and gaining weight on perfectly legal foods? How many times have we seen people binge cycling every two weeks off lc and onto carbs and regaining all the weight they had struggled to lose in the previous two weeks of doing lc strict and legal? How many times have we seen carb addiction activated once someone has come off of induction? And when they go on maintenance? Please!!! Even how many times have we seen people claim to be grazers and having a need to eat 6 or more times a day? All day? On legal foods? All of those behaviors can be looked at as the result of a carb addiction. And that's while on lc!!! We can say lc will solve the problem for the members of NAAFA. But will it? For all of them? How many will fail? The first time? The second? The third? LC DOES get harder to lose the weight on each time for some, you know. How many posts have we seen from members returning? How many of those coming back are even larger than before? This is reality folks!!! Maybe not your reality or mine but it is the reality for some!!! And that's what NAAFA stands against and for!!! They stand against the "perfect" diet and for the members who WON'T succeed and will be worse off than before!!!

BTW. I do believe that most of the morbidly obese do have a carb addiction and have posted a poll in the Triple Digit Club to support my hypothesis. So far, about 75% of those members are reporting as carb addicts.
In my opinion, LC can be looked at as a tool to conquer carb addiction, it is not the total panacea solution to every aspect of carb/food addiction.

If you refuse to deal with emotional triggers and habitual eating, the LC woe will not work out for you. You will wind up binging on LC foods, falling off the wagon, or eating too much and not losing weight.

To beat an addiction, you need to address the emotional aspects as well as the physical ones. Blaming only the vice, and not your behavior itself, is a recipe for failure.

[ItsTheWooo]

Okay...so because some will fail (and nobody here can claim that some won't), nobody should try and all obese people should be actively discouraged from trying because they might fail? This, again, sounds like victim speak; "I'll fail if I try, so why bother to try at all?" The victim says that previous failure guarantees future failure and sees no hope or point in continuing to try. The overcomer mentality says that just because I have failed in the past does not mean that I am guaranteed to fail in the future. Often the difference between someone who fails and someone who succeeds isn't that the one who succeeded never failed, but that they never failed to keep trying despite past failures.

Good point. I can't STAND when the success rate of losing weight is pulled out to make weight loss efforts seem pointless. You cannot predict success on an individual level for an endeavor which is very much rooted in dedication, discipline, education, and hard work. Individual variance is such that my level of dedication, discipline, education, and hard work is much higher than the next dieter, and therefore our odds of being successful losers are far far different. It would be like saying 95% of people who want to be doctors fail at their dream. Well duh... most people soon realize being a doctor is too hard, requires too much education and discipline. That doesn't necessarily mean because most people are not capable of becoming a doctor that I personally will fail. I have CONTROL over MY BEHAVIOR.

NAAFA, being victim-minded, does not ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that personal decisions and choices are what determine where one's body weight end up. They proliferate the lie that how fat you are is completely out of your control.

90% of people enter diets are failed from the start for the following reasons:
1) They are completely uneducated about nutrition and are incapable of making proper choices for their metabolic needs. This is the unfortunate story of the person with insulin problems doing a high carb diet because they were told it was healthy, which they gain weight, stall, and/or feel hungry and miserable on. It's really not their fault when they fail, they just didn't have access to the proper education to be successful at weight loss.

2) They are mentally and emotionally unprepared to make behavioral changes that are required of maintaining low weight. These are the types who blame everything entirely for their condition (it's the carbs, it's the cheese, it's the nuts, it's the "frankenfoods"!)... except their own behavior. Sure these foods may be triggers, but the problem here is that they refuse to see it is the choices they make and the way they choose to use the food is under their control This type ultimately falls prey to constant binge eating which then results in shame, resulting in more binging, etc. Eventually they feel so beaten down that they give up. The reason they fail is because they are trying to put a round peg in a square hole; the problem is emotional eating but they are only looking at the problem from a physical perspective.

3) Lack of determination. You know this guy, he wants to be thin, he wants to be thin RIGHT NOW, but he doesn't really want to put in the hours, sweat, or make the sacrifices. This is the guy you see talking about carb blockers, eating LC junk food for a staple, and asking what the quickest way to lose 5 pounds a week. Poor guy. Problem here is cognitive dissonance; he expects sustainable weight loss without work, which is never going to happen and is not physically possible. Once he comes to terms with the fact that weight loss can only happen from training in education and emotional handling, discipline, and sacrifice, then he might be successful. Or, on the other hand, he might ultimately decide it's not worth it to lose that extra 20 :).

Just because most people enter weight loss attempts the wrong way, or incompletely, doesn't mean weight loss doesn't work. It only means that most people lack the ability to make weight loss work for one of the above reasons.

[ItsTheWooo]

The morbidly obese were at some point only...obese...fat...overweight...plump...heavyset. They got the way they are through the many diets they went on that activated insulin resistance, carb addiction, sugar/insulin imbalances. NAAFA is saying that if they had been left heavyweight and societal pressures had not striped them of self-esteem and the desire to be accepted as "normal" that "forced" them into the dieting cycles and spiraling weight and resulting imbalances they would be at a better place now. How many of you acknowledge that you "dieted" yourself to your weight before lc?

If you're healthy but overweight...maybe you'd be better off if you don't start playing!!
I think this is not true for many obese people.

I got to my whopping 280 just by eating what I wanted, never thinking about calories, and only following my bodies hunger cues. Unfortunately, my hunger cues were possessed by the blood sugar monster ;O.

I knew better than to try one of those low fat diets where people report they feel like they're going to die. I knew I couldn't keep that up forever, I would be too hungry eating grass and sugar, and I would fall off only to get fatter. I had resigned myself to being "born with a huge appetite and destined to be fat". I was contemplating gastric bypass surgery to correct my hunger issues, to hopefully help me lose weight.

All I can say is THANK GOD I discovered the world of LC and information about blood sugar while still relatively young.

I can honestly say this is my first, and last, change of eating.

[Zuleikaa]

That's your opinion. For a carb addict, triggers can be emotional AND physical, ask any carb addict that has inadvertently eaten some MSG!! And like I said, the carb addict, unlike others, has constant exposure to and surely at least twice a day possible ingestion of his/her "drug" to survive. Are you trying to tell me that other addicts are forced to play Russian Roulette with their addictive sources twice or more times a day?

I'm not saying there might not be emotional issues, there might be. But the emotional issues are far outweighed by the physical ones. In fact the physical ones might lead to or escalate the emotional ones.

[FromVA]

That's your opinion. For a carb addict, triggers can be emotional AND physical, ask any carb addict that has inadvertently eaten some MSG!! And like I said, the carb addict, unlike others, has constant exposure to and surely at least twice a day possible ingestion of his/her "drug" to survive. Are you trying to tell me that other addicts are forced to play Russian Roulette with their addictive sources twice or more times a day?

I'm not saying there might not be emotional issues, there might be. But the emotional issues are far outweighed by the physical ones. In fact the physical ones might lead to or escalate the emotional ones.
Hogwash! What you are saying here is that the obese are "bigger" victims of their addiction than any other addicts and therefore should be excused from not trying to do a thing about it. I bet former smokers probably inadvertantly walk through second-hand smoke more than twice a day, and that will always trigger the desire for a cigarette. You are giving food a lot more power than it deserves. The food didn't make us fat...the over-consumption of it did!

[ItsTheWooo]

That's your opinion. For a carb addict, triggers can be emotional AND physical, ask any carb addict that has inadvertently eaten some MSG!! And like I said, the carb addict, unlike others, has constant exposure to and surely at least twice a day possible ingestion of his/her "drug" to survive. Are you trying to tell me that other addicts are forced to play Russian Roulette with their addictive sources twice or more times a day?

I'm not saying there might not be emotional issues, there might be. But the emotional issues are far outweighed by the physical ones. In fact the physical ones might lead to or escalate the emotional ones.
What you don't understand is you, as a carb addict, do not look at the world in the same way as a person without your particular addiction.

If you ask an alcoholic, he will tell you alcohol permeates and saturates his world EVERYWHERE. He is incessently taunted by comercials which promise drink as a panacea which abates all troubles and worries. Whereever he goes, he smells beer, he sees beer, he walks by a pub and with every bit of restraint he can muster he tries to pass by without entering.

When you are addicted to a substance, when you have become not only physically dependent, but also so emotionally and behaviorally dependent on it as a coping mechanism, to have it taken away, it is devistating. It becomes all you can see, you feel like you are bombarded by it. It is all you can think about.

You as a carb/food addict see cookies, cakes, and other old favorites everywhere you go. Normal people don't think like that. Normal peole don't see a cookie or whatever it is you may fancy, and feel they are being bombarded and broken down. This is because they have a normal physical chemistry, and a normal emotional relationship with food.

If you are to be successful at controlling your addiction, you must recognize this. You must realize the way you feel may be out of control, but the way you react to these triggers, the creation of triggers is in your control. One thing you can do is find counceling. Counceling to learn alternate coping mechanisms will go a long way to rid yourself of the emotional triggers. Once you learn new ways to quelch or deal with stress, anger, happiness, boredom, etc, you will find "trigger food" (that is food that reminds you of comfort food, but doesnt actually elicit the physical symptoms) holds less of a hold over you. I also recommend reading Dr. Phil's book. Potatofree can't say enough good things about it.

[Alina]

We can say lc will solve the problem for the members of NAAFA. But will it? For all of them? How many will fail? The first time? The second? The third?
LC DOES get harder to lose the weight on each time for some, you know. How many posts have we seen from members returning? How many of those coming back are even larger than before? This is reality folks!!! Maybe not your reality or mine but it is the reality for some!!!


So who can tell if a person will succeed or not? Who will adapt LC as a lifestyle and who will not? Are you saying that person D shouldn't even try because persons A, B and C have failed?

Are those who succeed somehow 'less addicted'? Have more luck? Anything else? Can one person be less addicted in the first place? I am a 100% carbohydrate addict too.

As for the cigarettes - don't even go there. :) My DH is a smoker, in every place I go people do smoke, the smoke is coming into my flat via ventilation system....I would have a lot to blame on if I failed to quit.

Alina

[Lisa N]

That's your opinion. For a carb addict, triggers can be emotional AND physical, ask any carb addict that has inadvertently eaten some MSG!! And like I said, the carb addict, unlike others, has constant exposure to and surely at least twice a day possible ingestion of his/her "drug" to survive.

The way you phrase this almost makes me think that you believe that the carb addict has no control over and MUST GIVE IN TO triggers if and when they encounter them while the drug or alcohol addict somehow has more control or a greater ability to not give in to their triggers when they encounter them? Nonsense! Recovering alcoholics and ex-smokers are constantly exposed to their former drug of choice through commercials, magazine ads, second hand smoke, alcohol added to sauces that they wouldn't expect, mouthwash, medicines, even vanilla extract added to a dessert. They also get to watch friends, family and total strangers indulge in their former drug of choice everywhere they go. If you believe that they are not being confronted with