The following article debunks many weight-related myths that the media and the starvation/torture industries prop up. It's weakened by tacking on the usual share of mixed messages, but the overall effect is positive.
Not only does it point out the obvious -- that every
diet is a de facto eating disorder -- but in a comparison between a group of dieters and non-dieters, it reveals that the dieters' health and self-esteem were worse
than the non-dieters, and that the women who were not
on a diet had better health and higher self-esteem (!):
Dieting is considered a form of disordered eating.
A 2004 study has found that “yo-yo” dieting weakens the immune system...Dieting may increase diabetes and heart disease risks as well.
Non-dieters showed improvement in blood pressure and cholesterol levels while dieters did not.
Non-dieters had increased self-esteem and lowered rates of depression while dieters had worsening depression and self-esteem
It quotes the brilliant Paul Campos in exposing the fraud of the so-called "weight epidemic":
Is it even true that obesity rates across the world are rapidly reaching epidemic proportions? Law Professor Paul Campos questions this hype.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) reclassified "overweight" and ob***** in 1995, placing almost 70 per cent of Americans in the "overweight" category with the swipe of a pen (or the click of a computer).
“We made everyone f** by framing!” Campos claims. “That is the real epidemic.” He says, “The current rhetoric about an ob*****-driven health crisis is being driven more by cultural and political factors than by any threat that increasing body weight may pose to public health.”
Campos reports that multiple studies have found that those carrying extra weight have lower rates of anaemia, bronchitis, lung cancer and osteoporosis.
Another section points out that BMI has been completely discredited as any measure of health, and that female bodies lacking in natural fullness have greater health risks than fuller-figured bodies:
Lower BMIs don’t equal health. In fact, the very low body f** percentages...are medically unsafe.
Those with such low levels of body f** are more susceptible to illness, loss of bone density and reproductive impairments
But what's new in this article -- at least, this is the first time that I've encountered it -- is that it shatters the myth that fullness is only healthy depending on where it appears on the body. Far from being unhealthy, some women simply naturally store fullness in their midsection -- and this, it turns out, is healthy too:
Not all people with
the apple shape necessarily have high levels of
visceral f**. Some people just store f** there more easily. Harvard researchers found that subcutaneous f** in the abdominal region lowered blood sugar levels...Even more surprising, it wasn’t that abdominal f** was exerting negative effects, but that subcutaneous f** was producing a good effect.”
Plus, how your body looks has a strong genetic component. We all process food differently, store f** differently and have different body types.
“We really don’t know as much about ob***** as we think we do,” Dr Judith Wylie-Rosett reports after a study of weight and heart health. “A considerable proportion of "overweight" and ob*** US adults are metabolically healthy, whereas a considerable proportion of normal-weight adults express a clustering of cardiometabolic abnormalities.”
So yet another group of studies have concluded that being fuller-figured is healthier for women than being thin; that body-diminshment ruins health while increased fullness improves health; and that having fullness around the middle can be just as healthy for women as having fullness in the hips.
Think about it: better health, increased beauty, and the ability to eat whatever one likes -- it should now be abundantly clear that being plus-size is the natural and desirable state for women.