To ask why it is that it is accepted that people can be naturally thin, but not naturally fat?

[MrsShawnHatosy]

Just that really. It seems to me that if one can be true so can the other. But fat is seen as something blameworthy, always.

Nah Love, this is a discussion thread where people are using the excuse (see I used that word again) of being big boned as to why they are overweight.

It's up for debate and it's up for discussion.

Yeah, but we'll outlive the rest of you. 😁
I've got enough stored up to see me through to retirement.

As it's up for debate and discussion - why does this 'excuse' bother you?

Because it is factually wrong. There are people sitting here thinking that they cannot lose weight because of their "big bones". There are mothers who are overfeeding their kids because their kids have "big bones". There are women who think they drew the short straw in life and are destined to be fat because they have "big bones".

But as mentioned above, if you have big bones, and I am one of those that do at 5ft 9 tall with size 9 feet and wrist bones wider than my male partner's, you will also have more muscle etc attached to them. As I keep saying to the thickos like you, I'm not a sodding polo mint with a hole through me that means I can weigh the same as someone with a tiny frame. Honestly, my rib cage is huge, it's been a pain all my life, but I can't opt to only fill half of it so I weigh less. Then throw in the 2 metabolic diseases mentioned earlier and I was never going to be thin ever 🙄 but sadly people like you made me feel stupid for not being skinny until i was probably in my 30s and realised the truth. The lack of basic intelligence on this thread is breathtaking!

If you're such a low weight that it's contributing to osteoporosis then you're not a healthy low weight, are you? The risk as I understand it of low weight is due to inadequate intake of vitamins and minerals, ie a bad diet, not the weight itself.

I understand the point you're making but I think the cancer researchers are in agreement that fat alone increases rates of cancer however that fat was acquired. It also directly causes other diseases of course, like type ii diabetes, and there has been recent research showing that most people can eradicate psoriasis with weight loss.

As experienced second hand in a previous job, there are plenty of fat people in prison, especially women's prisons, because the food provision was shocking. Most of the vaguely edible stuff was carb heavy (chips/white bread/plain pasta) or super processed, and was available at almost every meal. Also stodgy sweet options for dessert and the facility to buy snacks etc if you had money/permitted access. Coupled with the lack of real consistent exercise. Obviously mine was a snapshot over about 6 various category units but the food was consistently crap..

Definitely possible to be naturally fat. There are loads of genes associated with obesity. Some work by creating intense cravings to eat. Some can cause obesity even where the person does not overeat and some poor souls have genes that make them obese even when they undereat (the person may well have to live on a permanent semi-starvation diet of less than 1000 calories a day, sometimes much less), and may thus also have to take dietary supplements to prevent malnutrition despite being obese - they may not be able to get all the nutrients they need from food.

That's before you look at the many non-genetic conditions that also cause obesity without overeating eg Cushings, Hypothalmic damage, Thyroid disease etc. You can be grossly obese eating 700 or 800 calories a day with some of these conditions although it varies. Dieting will not solve the problem as you will hit a plateau long before any significant weight is lost (due to the phenomenon of metabolic adaptation).and then your metabolism will be even slower and you will now not even be able to eat 700 to 800 calories a day without gaining.

And then there are medical procedures like hysterectomy that we know cause weight gain in many. We know in mice that lose their ovaries that weight gain is often inevitable even when you do not allow them to eat any more than they were eating before. This is because if your hormones send the signal to store more body fat then that's what your body will do - to think that these processes and biological signals can be controlled through psychology or behavioural changes in more than a small minority of cases is to misunderstand the nature of the problem entirely.

Totally wrong - ignores conditions like Prader Willi, Cushings, POMC deficiency, hypothalamic damage etc which can cause morbid obesity even on semi-starvation diets. Of course there were fat people in times of war - these conditions aren't modern inventions! But yes, some people are overweight because they overeat.

I'm quite old. Big boned was a kind way of saying fat. My mum was tall and broad shouldered for a woman but she was also about 4 stone overweight.

But we can do these experiments on animals and they do show that different animals can have huge differences in body weight even while eating the same food or being forced to do the same amount of exercise. And that rats bred to have the "wrong" genes will have more fat on their bodies even after dying of starvation than rats with "good" genes have even when allowed to eat to their hearts content. There is a mountain of evidence from the animal world that there are dozens of things that can cause obesity without overeating. And that the wrong genes can condemn you to a life of obesity even on tiny portions of food and plenty of exercise.

I’m no way blaming my obesity on big bones, but I’m definitely blaming it for the fact that I need to be a size 8 before I get into a healthy bmi range. I look almost too thin at that weight.. I’m currently a size 14, edging towards 12 and I’m only just out of the obese bmi range. I don’t look fat. Obviously I don’t look too thin either, but I don’t look like I need to lose another two stones. I look pretty slim and healthy. My wrist measurements are in the “large frame” catagory.

I blame my obesity on what I ate. With a frown towards the food industry and all the added sugar. I was absolutely a sugar addict.

No - this is not fact. For some it is harder, but not impossible. For others it is genuinely impossible. There are conditions that cause obesity even when the sufferer is eating less than 1000 calories a day - sometimes much less. It is not safe to tell these people that they should be eating less - we must not imply that it is always possible to be slim/non obese through healthy eating and exercise alone. It is not.

I don't think this is true. I put on weight so easily and people comment on how little I eat.

My 22 year old son never stops eating, is skinny and can't put on weight as much as he tries.

Many slim women don’t eat enough to ensure healthy bone density and muscle mass due to low appetite.

The issue is the 'however the fat was acquired' bit.

Saying 'being fat raises your risk of cancer' is meaningless if you can't explain why certain people get fat and others don't (beyond the utterly asinine assumption that some people are 'greedy') . You might as well say 'being alive increases your risk of cancer.' It's a fact, but not a useful one.

The word 'cancer' covers a huge range of illnesses that are functionally very different. We know HPV causes most cervical cancers - the virus changes cell structure to make them become cancerous - but we don't know much about how colon cancer develops, for example. For all we know, there could be some hormonal change that happens, which does two things - triggers hunger and causes a tumour to start developing. The effect of this change is such that it takes ten years for the tumour to become obvious, by which time the person is overweight. In this case, the weight gain is a symptom of cancer, or at least of the cancer-causing change, not a cause.

The total lack of curiosity about the weight gain aspect is such a weird, massive blind spot in medicine, caused largely (as far as I can see) by a moralistic belief that being fat is wrong.

I would add that IMO the obsession with weight in medicine is partially due to the fact that the 'cure' is so simple - tell people to stop eating. The fact that the 'cure' rarely works doesn't seem to register.

I find the knowledge useful to motivate myself not to put weight on as I've got older and I suspect a lot of others feel the same. I'm sure many people find it a motivation to lose weight.

I think the question why people are getting fatter is so multifactorial that I think it is fair enough to separate the fact that cancer is associated with increased weight from how that weight got increased.

It is a very sad fact of life for anyone who has a medical condition that makes them put on weight or prevents them from losing it.

Interestingly, I did some research on colon cancer a few years back (not on the medical side, on the patient information side) and all the patients I spoke to mentioned some element of blame - how they felt were 'to blame' for their cancer in some way, or how they couldn't figure out what they did wrong. It's a side effect of the idea that you must behave a certain way or cancer will come and get you, like a bogey man.

I disagree that it is fair enough to separate the fact that cancer is associated with increased weight from how that weight got increased, mostly because it's bad science and bad medicine. There really is no point in telling people that a certain issue causes cancer if you're going to do nothing to figure out how that issue arises, or you're going to assume the issues arises due to laziness or moral failing.

In the mid twentieth century it was observed that mothers of autistic and schizophrenic children tended to be more disconnected emotionally than other mothers. The term 'refrigerator mothers' was coined to suggest that 'cold' mothers caused autism and schizophrenia through their behaviour. None of those idiotic men considered that those conditions might be genetic, meaning that the parent could be exhibiting autistic/schizophrenic behaviours themselves. Far from their behaviour causing autism, the child and mother had shared genetic heritage (who'da thunk??) and showed similar patterns of behaviour.

It is important to explain the full mechanism of how things work and to avoid simplistic or blaming theories that do nothing but make people feel guilty.

There really is no point in telling people that a certain issue causes cancer if you're going to do nothing to figure out how that issue arises, or you're going to assume the issues arises due to laziness or moral failing.

You write as if there isn't any way for most people to reduce their weight.

There is, if they can find sufficient money for injections, sufficient motivation to restrict food intake or assistance from the NHS for either.

Irrespective of how our why you gained the weight in the first place, there are solutions for most people.

Absolutely. But in the scenario I mentioned, where gaining weight and cancer are caused by the same factor, losing weight will make no difference. Weight gain is a symptom, in exactly the same way that weight loss is a symptom. Does that make sense?

To put it another way, if 90% of ovarian cancer sufferers were found to be underweight and the NHS said 'Weight loss causes ovarian cancer' everyone would scoff and tell them to fuck off.

I am not sure there really is such thing as naturally slim and I say this as someone who has never been above 10 stone, at 5ft 7.

What I have realised is I would always say ‘I can eat what I want I’m naturally thin’ but I have always just ate intuitively, and never actually over eaten.

Yes - I have eaten like shit, but for instances got a take away pizza, I would be full off three slices.

I have started going to the gym since hitting mid 30s, and tracking what I eat to build muscle. What I realised is even when claiming to be naturally thin, and eat what I want, and have a fast metabolism, in a week I never exceeded 15,000 calories. Naturally I always balanced out so never gained wait, even with chocolate, wine and pizza.

Biology, chemistry and physics