Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > Low-Carb War Zone
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Sat, Mar-16-24, 17:57
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,979
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default The Ozempic Pushers

Quote:
The Ozempic Pushers

Mar. 14, 2024

Some fat patients say doctors are pressuring them to take the miracle drug instead of listening to their immediate health concerns.

Othella Esposita had been on her period for four months straight when she went to the gynecologist last January. The sales administrator from Kansas City has polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), a hormonal imbalance that messes with her menstrual cycle, and was trying to get pregnant. Esposita asked her doctor how to regulate her period, but instead the OB/GYN brought up a “new drug on the market”: Ozempic.

The 38-year-old, who calls herself “super fat,” was confused. “My goal was not to lose weight,” Esposita says. “The whole reason I was there was the bleeding.” She told the doctor she doesn’t have diabetes and thought women trying to get pregnant weren’t supposed to be on the medication. “With your weight, you can’t get pregnant anyway,” the gynecologist said, adding that even if Esposita did, she or the baby would likely die from health complications. “I was shaking and tearing up,” Esposita says. “I was trying to still advocate for myself.” She worried that her insurance wouldn’t cover Ozempic, but her gynecologist kept pushing. She told Esposita that she and several of her staffers were on it, offered to prescribe alternative weight-loss drugs if Esposita’s claim was rejected, and told her about a voucher that would bring down the cost. “I could not keep fighting,” Esposita says. She left the office with a prescription that she didn’t plan to pick up.

Ozempic, the so-called miracle drug, is rapidly changing the way doctors look at all sorts of health conditions. It mimics a digestive hormone that can lower blood-sugar levels, curbs appetite, and slows digestion, leading celebrities and normies alike to seek out the drug for its slimming side effects. While it’s only meant to treat type 2 diabetes, its counterpart, Wegovy, is approved for weight loss in adults with obesity. Scientists are also studying how its revolutionary ingredient, semaglutide, could help everything from Alzheimer’s to liver disease. (There is already some anecdotal evidence that it helps with insulin resistance caused by PCOS.)

But the exciting milestone in medicine has also created an incredibly tough and taxing moment for fat patients who, as study after study has shown, don’t receive proper care because of bias. I spoke to several who told me that instead of addressing their back pain, fertility struggles, or other chronic conditions, doctors pushed Ozempic on them for weight loss. Meanwhile, their immediate health concerns are ignored. Esposita says the interaction with her gynecologist “made me feel like all she could see was a fat body, and that she had to worry about the fat problem before she could see a patient underneath it.” Without even saying, ‘Hey, let’s run some tests. Are you ill? Is anything else going on?’ It was just, ‘Here, take Ozempic.’

Marcy was diagnosed with lymphedema, a condition that causes fluid to build up in her legs, in 2021. The 53-year-old from Queens, who didn’t want to share her last name for privacy reasons like other sources in this story, wanted to work with a nutritionist to follow an anti-inflammatory diet that she hoped would lessen the pain and swelling. Her primary-care doctor made a referral last year, but the callback came from an office administrator at a hospital weight-management center. The person told her that she’d need to be evaluated and then choose between having weight-loss surgery or going on Ozempic. Marcy, who describes herself as “visibly plus size,” told them there must be a misunderstanding. Her goal was to develop better eating habits, not to lose weight. But the administrator said that in order to work with a nutritionist, Marcy had to join the weight-loss program, which a nurse reiterated in a follow-up call.

It felt to Marcy like these health professionals had seen her BMI and made the assumption that “All fat people are unhealthy.” Though her medical chart says she’s obese, Marcy doesn’t have diabetes, high cholesterol, or high blood pressure. The swelling from lymphedema has made her gain weight, but she doesn’t eat regularly because the pain “kind of curbs my appetite.” And yet, medical workers are “focusing on the number on the scale,” she says. “You’re ignoring my diagnosis. How am I supposed to get better?”

Some patients told me they were pressured to go on Ozempic despite having health issues the drug could exacerbate. (And it’s not just fat patients, either: One woman with a family history of osteoporosis told me that her psychiatrist suggested Ozempic, which can lessen bone density, when she brought up SSRI-related weight gain.)

Alisa, who identifies as “super fat,” has struggled with an eating disorder since she was a child. The 51-year-old also has osteoarthritis and went to see a specialist last year about her debilitating back pain. The doctor showed Alisa some devices that could be implanted into her spine to help strengthen lower-back muscles. Then, he pivoted to ask: “What are you doing about your weight?” “I have an eating disorder,” she told him. “I am not involved in any intentional weight loss.” Still, without making eye contact, he suggested she go on Ozempic. Alisa, who lives in Atlanta, reminded the doctor that the drug would trigger food restriction and damage her mental and physical health. “Well, that’s what you need to be doing,” he told her. “You are taking in too many calories.” She felt bullied, especially since the doctor admitted later in the appointment that there was no specific BMI requirement to get the back surgery. “He was on a personal mission to get me to diet,” Alisa says. “He saw this fat Black lady sitting in his chair and he’s thinking, ‘I’m gonna fix this woman. She’s gonna do what I told her to do.’” She cried on her way home from the appointment and later filed a complaint. “He treated me as if I was disgusting and beneath his services,” she wrote in an email to the hospital. “I am fine with my body and my weight and do not need a doctor berating me and triggering my eating disorder.” Someone from the hospital called Alisa to apologize — then described the doctor’s behavior as “understandable,” given her size.

Another woman who has struggled with an eating disorder tells me an endocrinologist who was aware of her history encouraged her to go on the weight-loss drug. When she texted the doctor about her elevated blood-sugar levels, the doctor responded, “How about Ozempic for better control and weight loss?” “My first thought was, Well, **** ***,” she says. “Without even saying, ‘Hey, let’s run some tests. Are you ill? Is anything else going on?’ It was just, ‘Here, take Ozempic.’” Within two weeks of her first injection, she passed out from eating so little and was rushed to the hospital. The next day, she emailed her doctor: “I have discussed with multiple providers that I struggle with disordered eating, including you. It feels like this is being treated like some kind of joke or an excuse because I am perceived as fat, lazy, and disagreeable.” It’s really hard to realize that my doctors haven’t been trying to help me so much as shrink me.

Laura, a medical social worker in the San Francisco Bay Area, experienced a similar bias at a recent appointment with an endocrinologist to discuss her high cortisol levels. The doctor said her hormones weren’t an issue and then brought up her size. “We need to get this weight off you. And we need to do it now,” he told her. “That’s not what I came here for,” she said, pointing out that he hadn’t asked about her medical history. “I had an eating disorder that went undiagnosed for a long time. I feel that dieting for me is extremely risky.”

The 44-year-old describes herself as being in a “smaller fat body.” Still, as someone who works in a hospital, she sees parallels between how doctors treat her and how they “yell and berate” patients struggling with their mental health or drug addiction. “They are blaming people and trying to motivate them by scaring them,” she says. “Most providers want to help patients, but I think we have gotten away from what that is.” Part of the issue, she explains, is the medical establishment’s reliance on the outdated body mass index, which doesn’t take race, gender, or the difference between body fat and muscle into account. “There is still this concept out there that fat is going to kill you,” Laura says. “And there’s just a general unwillingness to look at evidence-based research about it.” She ended up ditching the endocrinologist, as well as her primary-care doctor who made the referral. The prospect of finding new providers with a “non-diet” approach is daunting. “I still feel pretty vulnerable,” she says, “like people are just not going to take me seriously.”

Providers’ enthusiasm for the miracle drug can be off-putting even to those with elevated blood-sugar levels, which it helps to lower. Valerie had been seeing an endocrinologist to treat her PCOS who had repeatedly brought up her weight. When her A1C jumped slightly in 2020, the doctor told her she was “prediabetic” — a term the World Health Organization (WHO) has rejected as medically irrelevant — and instructed her to up the dosage of an existing medication and start taking Ozempic. The 35-year-old from Pittsburgh says her doctor made her feel like “a ticking time bomb.” She stuck with the drug, even though it made her lightheaded and triggered her disordered eating. She later found a Health at Every Size (HAES) provider who is trained not to stigmatize fat patients and who asked Valerie why she was taking Ozempic after looking at her A1C levels. The amount of medication she’d been prescribed, the doctor said, was like “trying to kill a mosquito with a machine gun.” “I’m so disgusted and so upset,” Valerie wrote on Facebook after the appointment. “It’s really hard to realize that my doctors haven’t been trying to help me so much as shrink me.”

Marcy, the woman with lymphedema, tells me she recently found a nutritionist who has agreed to discuss an anti-inflammation diet without pushing weight loss. She’s excited to finally work with a health professional who won’t jump to conclusions based on her size. “I’m not on a couch, eating a half-gallon of ice cream,” Marcy says. She now hopes to become more active with the help of a pump to massage the fluid in her leg and compression leggings. “I want to do Alaska next year,” she says, “and I want to be on a dog sled.” It’s something most doctors she’s been treated by didn’t see in her future. “What Ozempic is offering me is not what I need,” she says. “But they assumed because I’m fat that, ‘Oh, you will just want to lose weight by any means necessary.’”


https://www.thecut.com/article/doct...et-newtab-en-us
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sat, Mar-16-24, 18:01
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,979
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

I hesitated to post this article from The Cut, because it is so alarmist in tone. (I also had to *** out one particularly offensive phrase)

Before posting it here, I decided I'd better do a media bias check on The Cut:
Quote:
"Overall, we rate The Cut Left Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that mostly favor the left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to the occasional promotion of pseudoscience."


In this article, I'd say that really only the idea of "healthy at every size" could classify as pseudoscience.


On the other hand, I also wonder if the patient encounters with Ozempic-pushing doctors were purely the patient's impression, or if they really did pretty much go straight for pushing Ozempic without even briefly addressing the patient's specific health issue first.

Or was it a matter of what those of us who are overweight experience so often - "yes, you have this problem - lose weight and it'll go away", since practically all health problems are considered to be related to obesity. Only now they have a drug that is known as being especially effective at causing weight loss, so rather than just telling you to push away from the table, they prescribe Ozempic.

I also question how they acquired so many horror stories of patients having Ozempic pushed on them, but didn't dig into how they acquired these stories.

Most of the patients clearly qualified weight-wise to be prescribed Ozempic - or since most were NOT diabetics, more realistically qualified for Wegovy. That to me says there may have been a bit of carelessness by the writer in constantly referencing Ozempic, or perhaps it was intentional.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Wed, Mar-20-24, 05:29
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,782
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Othella Esposita had been on her period for four months straight when she went to the gynecologist last January. The sales administrator from Kansas City has polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), a hormonal imbalance that messes with her menstrual cycle, and was trying to get pregnant. Esposita asked her doctor how to regulate her period, but instead the OB/GYN brought up a “new drug on the market”: Ozempic.


This really makes me mad. Maybe Esposita doesn't want to lose weight, (what she says makes me think she's under the unhealthy influence of Fat Positivity,) but if she lost it by eating healthy foods, she would:
  • fix the PCOS
  • likely get pregnant
  • have a healthier child

Yes, losing weight DOES have a healing effect on PCOS, because it is essentially carb poisoning expressed in our hormones.

Just what is this doctor "thinking" if I may be so bold:

Quote:
Semaglutide is not recommended during pregnancy because of the potential risks of birth defects, low birth weight, and miscarriage. Semaglutide (Ozempic) is a medication used to treat diabetes that's also commonly prescribed off-label for weight loss. Aug 25, 2023


Loses weight, loses muscle, further malnourished, and now growing a baby without the drug holding back her appetite. No problem here, move along.

Last edited by Kristine : Wed, Mar-20-24 at 14:33. Reason: Fixing quote tag
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Wed, Mar-20-24, 06:13
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,782
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
I spoke to several who told me that instead of addressing their back pain, fertility struggles, or other chronic conditions, doctors pushed Ozempic on them for weight loss. Meanwhile, their immediate health concerns are ignored.


My italics because this phrase is another Fat Positivity "tell." Doctors see someone overweight with "back pain, fertility struggles, or other chronic conditions" and they know such conditions can be caused by overweight. Ms. Esposito refers to herself as "superfat" so she is considerably obese. And might be a clue to the doctor that she is not receptive to healthy eating plans, (such as they are in the medical field.)

The problem then is that we cannot send someone, of this size, on the usual diagnostic trail for people with these symptoms. They can't fit in a standard MRI. They offer indistinct images on x-rays. Even something like a biopsy or orthoscopy offers challenges with excess adipose tissue, and might require more invasive methods like surgery, but their weight is too much risk for general anesthesia.

And even endocrinologists don't want to give you hormones anymore, unless it's insulin and then it's a double. They want to give you DRUGS if you need hormones. I only get results from bio-identical estrogen, but finally it's OTC on the internet. Even the yam derivatives for menopause, which would tear up my stomach but give me mental relief, are gone.

I recognize how a doctor can see the same patient who refuses to be weighed or talk about weightloss when it's an obvious health risk, regardless of what else is going on.

To borrow a common Fat Positivity example, "I can walk in with a compound fracture and get a lecture about my weight." Perhaps if you stepped off a curb and that's what brought you here, it is pertinent?

A doctor can look at the blood work and see trouble coming, sometimes in a person's teens and twenties. That's a long time, enough for your GP to sigh when they see your name.

We know there's a percentage of people who will not change to a healthier diet if it means effort and new habits and change. When Mr Banting found the answer, and it should still be obvious. It still works, doesn't it?

Put "The Banting Story" on the front page of your health websites, UK. Celebrate your history! Bring Banting Back.

Some people will eat what's available and do what's convenient and demand the same from their doctor, I'm sure.

Maybe we're coming off generations of doctors who patiently tried to tell people they had to change their eating habits. Now that there are surgery and drugs to MAKE people change their eating habits, maybe they are, in a kind of Hippocritical desperation, turning to "drug-induced coercion."

Heaven knows the people are in favor of it, aren't they? Like the Rice Diet guy, who said he had to whip his patients to keep them on it. (We don't know if that was literal or not.)

The average GP is only allotted 15 minutes per patient per appointment. Under that kind of time pressure, one cuts to the chase.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Mar-20-24, 06:31
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,782
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
“I am fine with my body and my weight and do not need a doctor berating me and triggering my eating disorder.” Someone from the hospital called Alisa to apologize — then described the doctor’s behavior as “understandable,” given her size.


This is the language of Fat Positivity. And why it is killing people. She's in the fourth month of being stuck in her menstrual cycle and wants a drug to fix it. He offered the closest thing Standard of Care really allows. He can't titrate her hormones back to normalcy if she is at an "understandable" size.

This is what comes when nutrition itself is a hot mess of propaganda and people trying to make sense of it. This is the atmosphere which breeds deluded and extreme schools of thought with all the bad information. As we see now, in nutrition, where people are equally enthusiastic about wildly disparate ways of making food work for them. And not all of them are truthful about it, like vegans and their secret salmon shipments.

I think all that money they are spending on plant based meat is like an advertising cost, to them. It's part of the global push to get us to eat "mostly plant based" which is sadly what I hear from people who actually are trying to follow official health advice, and what does that tell us?

Meat will become the new cake, because we are eating cake every day!
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Wed, Mar-20-24, 06:45
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,512
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

We can officially add Oprah to the list of Ozempic Pushers!
Demi shared this article from the Daily Mail:

https://forum.lowcarber.org/showpos...76&postcount=33

The title is clear " What a fat load of trash! MAUREEN CALLAHAN slams Oprah as a dishonest shill whose Ozempic special was a glorified Big Pharma ad that indulged her lies about weight-loss jabs... and fed her oversized ego
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Wed, Mar-20-24, 06:45
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,782
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Crikey, this article, I can't stop!

Quote:
Laura, a medical social worker in the San Francisco Bay Area, experienced a similar bias at a recent appointment with an endocrinologist to discuss her high cortisol levels. The doctor said her hormones weren’t an issue and then brought up her size. “We need to get this weight off you. And we need to do it now,” he told her. “That’s not what I came here for,” she said, pointing out that he hadn’t asked about her medical history. “I had an eating disorder that went undiagnosed for a long time. I feel that dieting for me is extremely risky.”


Bolded because this is a typical endocrinologist. And why I only went to one. They all go by lab tests even though lab tests vary by lab, regionality, and whether or not you did the test right. I went to one with a big rep, and I had to bully him into ordering a test, and he did it wrong.

But I still got important information he ignored, just like this one. Because high blood sugar and cortisol dance, or fight, together. Which is why you have to pry actual hormones out of their pharma-bribed hands.

But look at this patient, too. This is Fat Positivity Code that means she has Binge Eating Disorder, and by eating whatever she wants, she doesn't binge anymore. She thinks that's a management system because "dieting will trigger me." In the meantime, she hasn't got the health flex she thinks.

She's not treating her disorder properly, either, but she won't consider grappling with her weight. Perhaps medical science is starting to feel the same way. If this particular doctor visit is any indication, how can this get fixed when they are BOTH wrong?
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Wed, Mar-20-24, 06:59
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,782
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Marcy, the woman with lymphedema, tells me she recently found a nutritionist who has agreed to discuss an anti-inflammation diet without pushing weight loss.


Bold is more Fat Positivity codetalking.

Lymphedema is much more common in overweight individuals because it's a restriction of lymphatic flow, and if someone has excess body fat it's already doing that, all over their body. As vividly described in the book Sugar Crush, an overlooked but highly recommended book by a surgeon. Who wants to prevent the loss of diabetic limbs. He wants less of this work!

"Anti-inflammation diet" winds up being about vegan donuts because plant based can never harm us. Yes, Fat Positivity is the weird cult I research on Youtube. It will return with a new name and new tricks, I have no doubt.

Food manufacturers decided to go all in on normalizing being overweight because the sooner we are all plus-sized, the sooner those airplane seats will get bigger. And so will the food profits.

But they aren't the only ones. Many companies are backdoor financing this "movement" which won't go away because it's not being fat that people mind, it's being made fun of for it. Thus, as abundantly seen in this article, stores will stock more plus-sized clothing. Southwest Airlines will give them a free extra seat. A man who was trapped in one of those first class pods on an airliner had a press release stating "it is not clear how the passenger was unable to exit" but they brought out a jack and yanked out the pod. I don't think he was practicing yoga in there.

Never underestimate the impact of self-interest and using money to increase one's own. A tale as old as polished shells used as money. Which was the first bitcoin! Same principles.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Wed, Mar-20-24, 09:38
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,979
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

I noticed all those things in the article, but hadn't fully linked all of them to "healthy at any size" or (as is apparently the latest iteration of the movement) Fat Positivity.

I realized that virtually all the conditions they went to the Dr about were related to obesity - although you can certainly have infertility and several other conditions mentioned even if you're bone thin.



I recall one time I went to the Dr with what I'm sure was immediately considered to be a weight related issue, because back problems are always considered to be weight related... unless you're a normal weight. I had just lost about 40 lbs from my highest weight. The Dr's recommendation was that I lose some weight "not a lot, 40 lbs would help". I know I must have stood there with my mouth hanging open - I had no words. Yes, obviously I was still obese, but the assumption was that I was obese because I wasn't even making an effort, that it was all my own fault for becoming overweight to begin with - despite the fact most of that weight gain was due to eating what you were supposed to eat: hearthealthywholegrains - I just couldn't stop eating once I had the recommended amount of those, and the only way I was losing weight was to give up those carbs, and swimming about an hour daily. But of course it doesn't all come off overnight, and since I was still obese, it was ultimately still my fault. Of course if I'd developed the back problem after losing all the excess weight, then they wouldn't have blamed it on weight.


That's the difference that bothers me about the way the obese individual is treated at the Dr's office, vs how the normal weight or thin person is treated. The normal weight person must have some kind of underlying condition that caused the problem which can't be determined without a bunch of tests. The obese person is always at fault because they won't control their eating. Why can't the obese person have an underlying condition too? Losing weight is always the first thing, and the assumption is that you've never even tried to lose weight, that you're doing nothing but sitting around watching TV and eating bon-bons all day, no wonder you have this problem.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Wed, Mar-20-24, 11:19
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,782
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calianna
Losing weight is always the first thing, and the assumption is that you've never even tried to lose weight, that you're doing nothing but sitting around watching TV and eating bon-bons all day, no wonder you have this problem.


Yes, they are not seeing the person in front of them. And that they are guilty of. There's things they can do and they should do them. This is part of taking a health history, where they can learn you lost forty pounds already!

But that's gone the way of the dodo, too. I wonder if they are even taught to look at it anymore!
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Wed, Mar-20-24, 12:56
cotonpal's Avatar
cotonpal cotonpal is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 5,357
 
Plan: very low carb real food
Stats: 245/125/135 Female 62
BF:
Progress: 109%
Location: Vermont
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WereBear
Yes, they are not seeing the person in front of them. And that they are guilty of. There's things they can do and they should do them. This is part of taking a health history, where they can learn you lost forty pounds already!

But that's gone the way of the dodo, too. I wonder if they are even taught to look at it anymore!


I moved after I had already lost 50 lbs but still had plenty more to go. My new doctor, who is better than most, used to feel it necessary to tell me that I was obese and needed to lose weight and I would remind her that I had already lost a significant amount of weight. She had never seen me at my heaviest. When I finally reached a “normal” weight according to bmi I asked her if she could please stop telling me I needed to lose weight and she agreed. This doctor has many good qualities but she looks like a lifelong ectomorph who perhaps finds it hard to understand the life journeys of us endomorphs.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Thu, Mar-21-24, 21:58
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,979
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cotonpal
I moved after I had already lost 50 lbs but still had plenty more to go. My new doctor, who is better than most, used to feel it necessary to tell me that I was obese and needed to lose weight and I would remind her that I had already lost a significant amount of weight. She had never seen me at my heaviest. When I finally reached a “normal” weight according to bmi I asked her if she could please stop telling me I needed to lose weight and she agreed.


I seriously doubt that would ever happen for me, since even when I was at what was a normal weight for me, I was still overweight. Not a lot, but enough when seeing a Dr who was fully tied into the restrictive height/weight charts and BMI, I should still lose weight.

My mom took me to a Dr one time when I was about 14, and he told me that I needed to lose 3 lbs. I was too heavy, by THREE lousy pounds. Before that, I hadn't really given much thought about my weight. I knew that I wasn't as thin as most girls my age, but I certainly wasn't fat at that point in my life.

But of course that started the ball rolling of trying to lose weight by trying to eat less, and ending up so hungry that I ate far more than usual, until I was at least 20 lbs heavier by the time I was 19.
Quote:
This doctor has many good qualities but she looks like a lifelong ectomorph who perhaps finds it hard to understand the life journeys of us endomorphs.


I had a good friend who was naturally very thin (ectomorph).

She had very little appetite as it was, and said she would eat just enough so that she wasn't hungry any more, but wasn't quite full. I couldn't imagine that, since I was either ravenously hungry or stuffed, and usually ravenously hungry again an hour or so after eating (even if I was still half-stuffed).

She couldn't sleep at night if she ate "too late" - she needed several hours after eating for her stomach to settle enough so that she could sleep. It wasn't unusual at all for me to be excessively sleepy and doze off an hour after eating.

She never ate breakfast - just wasn't hungry until at least mid-afternoon, so she drank multiple cups of black coffee until she finally felt a little bit hungry many hours later. I was always hungry at breakfast time, so I ate.

If you're keeping track, that means she generally only ate one small meal each day - and that was usually sometime around mid to late afternoon, because she simply wasn't hungry before then. I ate 3 meals a day, plus snacks, because I was HUNGRY all the time.

I mean it was obvious that nothing about the way we each felt hunger, fullness, or digested food was the least bit similar - and yet she simply couldn't understand why so many people were fat, when all they needed to do was just put down the fork and push away from the table a little sooner.

You're very right that the ectomorph/those who are naturally thin just don't understand the endomorph life journey.

But even though going back to LC has done a tremendous amount to give me a more normal appetite, made it easier for me to have a relatively empty stomach and not feel the desperate need to eat, and I can now easily go 6-8 daytime hours without feeling ferocious hunger - I'm still not able to eat the very small amount of food she did to feel full, and still get hungry more than once a day. I'm still an endomorph, just like she was still an ectomorph all her life.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Sat, Mar-23-24, 00:23
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 26,890
 
Plan: Muscle Centric
Stats: 238/153/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 109%
Location: UK
Default

From Nina Teicholz, Unsettle Science:

Quote:
Still, we wonder: Is Oprah delivering her overweight fans from the burden of fat-shaming or has she simply moved over to thin-person camp, suggesting others can do the same? The show felt like an infomercial and featured experts funded by Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly.

Oprah’s latest is part of the normalization of a life-long commitment to the new drugs known as GLP-1 receptor agonists — Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro. In a discussion of the Oprah special on The View,Whoopi Goldberg revealed that she was taking Monjaro, which means injecting the drug once a week. Co-host Sunny Hostin admitted she was, too.

These drugs can jump-start weight loss, but whether they’re sustainable and safe for long-term weight maintenance remains to be seen. The weight loss from GLP-1-based drugs can come at a “terrible price”, says Benjamin Bikman, a professor of cell biology and physiology at Brigham Young University (who wasn’t talking about the financial costs, which can run over $10,000/year). One primary mechanism of action is a slowing of the intestines, which in some cases can lead to stomach paralysis with serious consequences.

“Additionally, with such a change in diet, up to 40% of the weight a person loses is due to lean mass loss,” says Bikman. “Unfortunately, when a person stops taking the drug and weight rebounds (which it does, and quickly), fat mass returns rapidly, while lean mass is likely gone for good.”

We wish the best for Oprah, Whoopi and everyone else on these drugs, and we recognize the benefits of being freed from the burdens of obesity. The long-term consequences of taking such powerful drugs is concerning, however, especially among younger people. Meanwhile, the truly unshackled victors from this week’s events are the drug companies, who now have major media moguls as their champions.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Sat, Mar-23-24, 03:27
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 14,782
 
Plan: EpiPaleo/Primal/LowOx
Stats: 220/130/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 129%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
the thin person camp


And I do understand. After decades of being told wrong ways to lose weight, and blocked from the science that would help them make better decisions, and never even thinking of getting therapy for what is undeniably an eating disorder... it's like learned helplessness.

I'm no stranger to doing stupid things for stupid prizes, but it has made me evaluate the prizes with more vigor. I can't believe I wound up at the opposite of what Authority Said would happen when I eat the way I do now. But I can't deny it happened.

What I can't do is convince very many that I'm telling the truth. That's how confused it makes 90% of the people who ask me "my secret."

I might as well be saying I only eat elk I hunt myself. They are that confused... when I'm eating the essential opposite of what we've been told. And it's all stayed off for years now. Carnivore for five years.

I'm certainly not saying my way is best, only best for me. That's what I tell them. I'm trying to start a conversation about what they eat now, and how they can adjust it, but they don't want to. But THIS is what they would rather do. Why anyone would choose something -- done to them -- instead of choosing -- what to do -- is the part that baffles ME.

A sort of confusion paralysis. I'm sympathetic. And some people will build on this. But watching the various ways people try to tackle this problem, I now realize we are also dealing with addictive behavior.

Which does explain the irrationality. I didn't do induction at the start, only cut my carbs down to 50, but it worked and got me down to 150. Where I bounced around until I got serious and lost another 25, with incredible ease, to be honest. It was a stubborn amount until it wasn't.

So I couldn't "live without bread" in a sense. But it was a temporary situation. I learned.

Last edited by WereBear : Sat, Mar-23-24 at 03:37.
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Sat, Mar-23-24, 09:09
Calianna's Avatar
Calianna Calianna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,979
 
Plan: Atkins-ish (hypoglycemia)
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 50%
Default

Quote:
'm certainly not saying my way is best, only best for me. That's what I tell them. I'm trying to start a conversation about what they eat now, and how they can adjust it, but they don't want to. But THIS is what they would rather do. Why anyone would choose something -- done to them -- instead of choosing -- what to do -- is the part that baffles ME.



In a way I understand it.

They've been told for so many years... decades... that it's a simple mathematical equation based on calories in/calories out: you need to cut calories so that you're taking in less than you're expending. Add exercise to increase your calorie expenditure, add more exercise and cut calories even more if you want to lose even more.

They've had low fat drummed into their heads all this time - cutting down on fat is the best way to cut calories. Stay away from meat unless it's very lean or fat free - that will also lower your cholesterol levels... eat beans and legumes and instead of meat several days per week. You can have egg whites, but avoid the yolks due to that deadly cholesterol. And if you really must eat meat, only have it a couple of times a week, and 2 oz is plenty at a meal.

Eat lots of fruit and veggies - at least half your plate needs to be piled with vegetables. For snacks, have a nice big banana or an apple - the natural fruit sugar will give you energy, and the fiber will keep you full. Whole grains are also an absolute must - the fiber will help keep you feeling full and the carbs will give you lots of energy, so eat plenty of whole grains at every meal.

^^That propaganda has been drummed into their heads for the last 40-some years.^^

And you're still allowed to have the occasional treat - cake, cookies, fries, ice cream, chips, etc. You don't need to give up treats completely, just limit them to the few special occasions that crop up during the year:

Christmas parties (however many you attend)
Christmas Eve
Christmas Day
New Year's Eve
New Year's Day
Valentine's Day
St. Patrick's Day
Easter
April Fool's Day
Cinco de Mayo
Mother's Day
Memorial Day weekend (3 days)
Vacation week (7 days)
Father's Day
Independence Day
Another vacation week (7 days)
Back to school shopping days (however many it takes)
Labor Day weekend (3 days)
Halloween
Thanksgiving
Thanksgiving weekend (another 3 days)
Your Birthday
Family birthdays
All of Your Friends' birthdays
Retirement Parties
Baby Showers
Wedding Showers
Weddings
Anniversaries
Saturdays (52 days/year)
Sundays (52 days/year)
And any other special occasions that pop up during the year

See, you can have treats those "few" days a year, and still stick to a low fat, high fiber diet!


So when you tell them you're eating the exact opposite way and have lost down to a healthy low weith, the first thought is that it can't possibly be true because you're claiming to eat the exact opposite of what they've been convinced is healthy. And what about all those treat occasions? Surely you aren't really giving up all that!

And if they believe that's how you really do eat all the time, and how you lost weight, then it must be because all that meat and fat has made you deathly ill - you must be horribly undernourished, a ticking time bomb just waiting for a stroke or heart attack to happen.

The few who believe you, AND see that you truly are healthy eating like this, AND would like to do so themselves - they know what they'd need to give up to do the same thing: Sugar. Bread. Fries. Cookies. Donuts. Cake... Every food they really truly like... and are addicted to. They would need to give up all treat foods associated with those special occasions listed up there... hundreds of days each year when they couldn't participate in the "fun foods" frenzy. Even if they don't realize that they're addicted to all those treat foods, they do realize it would be torture to deny themselves those treats. It's too hard for them - those who have tried to go LC before and failed will very likely be even more certain that it's just not something they can do. Ever.


But then comes this glorious light from above... a medication that keeps you from eating too much, while not being forced to give up any of the foods you love. You just eat less of them without even thinking about it. And since calories in/calories out is THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE WAY TO LOSE WEIGHT, you can't help but lose weight when that medication makes it impossible for you to eat too much. You don't think about food, don't even feel hunger, which is the main reason people have such a difficult time sticking to a calorie restricted diet.

It's understandable that they consider those drugs to be a win - they lose weight without suffering through gnawing hunger. They don't need to give up foods they love - they just end up eating far less of them. They lose enough that they don't need to shop in the plus size dept any more. They're not mortally embarrassed to be seen in a swimsuit any more. Their Dr will finally stop harassing them about losing weight.

They're actually doing something about their weight problem, even if it costs $1,000/month, and they'll need to take it for the rest of their life in order to maintain that weight loss.


I believe their intentions are good - they're just not really thinking ahead to the potential complications from the drug.

But then aren't most people like that about most drugs? They take a drug to fix one problem, then take another to take care of side effects from the first drug, but that one has side effects too. Before they know it, they're on 6 or 8 different drugs, most of them needed just to counteract side effects from some of the other drugs.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 14:05.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.