Some Healthy-At-Every-Size Nonsense and GAINZZZ

A new study claims the non-caloric sweetener erythritol increases the chance of strokes, heart attacks, clots, and death.

Which is really too bad, because erythritol is a great sweetener.

A new study has found that a zero-calorie sweetener that is popular in ketogenic diets has been linked to strokes, heart attacks, blood clots and death.

The artificial sweetener called erythritol is often found in diet foods, such as Truvia, as a sugar replacement because it does not affect blood glucose levels and does not have any calories.

The new study, published in the journal Nature Medicine on Monday, found that higher levels of erythritol are correlated with a higher chance of heart attack, stroke or death in three years when analyzing blood samples from three different populations.

I skeptical from the jump here because I know those "studies" that showed that saccharine would cause cancer were rubbish, and they were funded by, get this, Big Sugar, which was panicking about saccharine as a competitor.

Is this legit? I dunno. Maybe. But:

Researchers first found the correlation between increased erythritol levels and major adverse cardiac events when analyzing chemicals and compounds in 1,157 blood samples of those who were at risk for heart disease that were collected between 2004 and 2011.

...

"Following exposure to dietary erythritol, a prolonged period of potentially heightened thrombotic risk may occur. This is a concern given that the very patients for whom artificial sweeteners are marketed (patients with diabetes, obesity, history of [cardiovascular diseases] and impaired kidney function) are those typically at higher risk for future [cardiovascular diseases] events," the study reads.

Okay, so they're testing the blood samples of people already at risk for heart disease.

And they find that high erythritol levels correlates with higher odds of heart attacks, etc.

But... a lot of the people who have high levels of erythritol in their blood have that precisely because they're already obese and are using erythritol to avoid calories.

So, what is causing the higher rates of heart attacks? The erythritol or the obesity?

Maybe they corrected for that. I'm just very, very skeptical every time I see a study that claims that Big Sugar's competitors will Literally Kill You. They rigged those tests in the 70s to kill off public enthusiasm for saccharine -- and it worked.

I'll keep my eye on this. But... I want to know more.

Update: browndog link to this guy analyzing the claims.

As per usual, this paper is being blown WAY out of proportion!

First off, this was a cohort study that looked up levels of erythritol in the blood over a three year. And compare them to cardiac event and mortality. This paper did NOT EXAMINE ERYTHRITOL INTAKE!

You see, erythritol is a compound that is produced naturally by our body as part of the Pentose phosphate pathway (PPP). Why is this distinction important? Because the population they studied were VERY sick people. Over 40% had already had a heart attack. Over 15% were in heart failure. Over 25% had type 2 diabetes. Over 70% had hypertension. And over 70% had coronary artery disease!

Why is this important? Because people with this metabolic profile (Syndrome X) have been shown to have an overactive PPP & likely produce more erythritol (PMID: 20711518). Therefore, it is highly likely that this paper is simply a case of reverse causality. That means, erythritol did not caused these people to get sick, rather, these people being sick, cause their erythritol levels to be elevated in the blood. Indeed, over activation of the PPP may promote vascular damage (PMID: 27245224)

moreover, in randomized controlled trials, erythritol supplementation was shown to improve HbA1c and insulin sensitivity (PMID: 8933647)

This study certainly warrants more research, but it hardly is evidence that erythritol causes heart attacks or is unhealthy.

Speaking of obesity and risk factors for heart disease: a professor of Fat Studies insists that being obese carries no additional risks for heart disease or poor health outcomes of any kind, except for the "stigma" imposed on the obese by the rest of society, and the psychological stress inflicted on patients by quack doctors who lie to them about obesity being unhealthy.

This is the ultimate in Snowflake "Science." I bet Jonah Goldberg subscribes to her newsletter.

A University of Denver (DU) professor's recent presentation expressed support for Health at Every Size® (HAES) and exploring gender identity.

Oh, she favors "exploring gender identity" as well? I totally didn't see that one coming.

What, what a Plot Twist. Like all of Rion Johnson's ex-girlfriends who were hoping for an orgasm, my expectations have totally been subverted.

"There is absolutely a connection between weight and health," Erin Harrop with DU's Graduate School of Social Work said in her presentation, "Addressing Weight Stigma, Diet Culture, and Eating Disorders in Neurodiverse Clients."

And Neurodiverse Clients, too. She's not just running one grift, she's running all the grift.

"But the argument I'm going to make for you today is that [the] connection between weight and health may be less attributable to the actual adipose tissue in people's bodies and more attributable to the stigma of that adipose tissue from other folks," she continued.

Harrop specializes in "eating disorders," "weight stigma," and "medical social work," according to her faculty biography. Her work relies on an "intersectional social-justice-informed, fat liberation, and [HAES] lens."

That stands for Healthy At Every Size.

HAES is an approach to healthcare articulated by the Association for Size Diversity and Health (ASDAH). After the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued new recommendations for treating childhood obesity, ASDAH tweeted that they are "dripping with fatphobia, racism, [and] healthism."

"Healthism."

In a statement and petition, ASDAH wrote that AAP "claim[s] to incorporate 'non-stigmatising care' and the social determinants of health to improve health equity."

"There is no non-stigmatizing care in the name of obesity prevention or treatment," ASDAH argued, elsewhere referring to the condition as "ob*sity."

During one "plug" for HAES, Harrop acknowledged its criticisms, including accusations of HAES "overly focusing on health," "moralizing health," and "having a white focus."

This is a new constant claim, which seems... racist to me. In order to justify their own opposition to any kind of weight regulation, they claim that the whole idea of being fit and trim is "anti-black."

So, to make their argument, they are constantly claiming that black women are naturally obese. Asking them to diet is imposing "white standards" of beauty and colonialist notions of health on them.

Harrop named symptoms of weight stigma in her presentation, such as heart disease, high blood pressure, and high blood sugar. These are symptoms that, according to the Harvard School of Public Health, are actually attributable to excess fat cells, "the mechanical stress of carrying extra pounds," and other consequences of being overweight.

Nah, it's well known that when you feel stigmatized, your pancreas releases extra insulin.

Diabetes should be re-named Peer Pressure Disease.

I'll refer you to the article for her thoughts about how "exploring gender identity" can help "neurodivergent clients" -- that is, autistic people, by and large.

And yes, autistic people are a primary target of propaganda/recruitment for the trans cultists.

It's bizarre, but they really push the idea that adding another mental disability on top of the autism somehow... helps the autism?

The presentation also suggested "[p]referred terms'' that would replace "[s]tigmatized/loaded terms." Rather than use terms such as "[o]verweight" or "[n]ormal weight," one slide suggests using "[p]erson of size" or "[p]erson of thin privilege."

"Person of Thin Privilege."

The real Plot Twist here is that Erin Harrop is very normal looking and even kind of... hot, even?

Nah, just f*cking with ya.

Instead of those grotesque arm tattoos, she should have gotten some sleek vertical stripes. They're slenderizing, you know!

A video of Erin Harrop addressing a whole group of mutants here. The video is titled, Fatphobia and Diet Culture in Working with Neurodivergent Humans. Almost everyone has their pronouns listed, and I see a few "they/thems."

She introduces herself as a "white, mid-fat, queer, ND [neurodivergent], non-binary person, currently in good health, with a history of disability and thinness," which she has now thankfully cured herself of.

If you don't know what a "mid-fat" is, it's part of the, and I'm not making this up and this isn't a gag, "Fat Spectrum."

She's claiming she's only a "mid-fat," which is two steps away from actually being normal weight.

Wait, did I say "category"? Actually they're called -- again, I am not making this up; check the link if you don't believe me -- "fategories."

This Healthy at Every Size pressure group -- it calls itself, hilariously, the Association for Size Diversity and Health -- recently attacked the American Association of Pediatrics for noting that childhood obesity is an unprecedented and growing problem.

Obesity is a common, complex, and often persistent chronic disease associated with serious health and social consequences if not treated.... The current and long-term health of 14.4 million children and adolescents is affected by obesity, making it one of the most common pediatric chronic diseases in the United States.

The Association for Size Diversity and Health was scandalized and outraged at these heretical utterances!

We firmly and unequivocally oppose the Academy of American Pediatrics' Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Treatment of Children and Adolescents With Ob*sity.

They really put the star in obesity to indicate that it's an offensive vulgarity which is not fit to be printed in its unmodified form. You know, like the f word. Or the n word.

...

It is abundantly clear that the authors of this paper have failed to adequately address their own fatphobia and weight bias and thus are unqualified to author this paper. In failing to do so, they have produced a biased set of recommendations. Worse, they claim to incorporate "non-stigmatising care" and the social determinants of health to improve health equity for Black and brown young people.

Again, again, again: the insistence that "black and brown people" are naturally, genetically obese and that any suggestions for keeping the weight down is just the White Supremacy of Deal-A-Meal.

Does any brown or black person wish to respond to these constant claims that they're all either obese or only not obese due to their acceptance of White Colonialist Brainwashing?

It's pretty obvious what they're doing -- they're not taken very seriously, so they've decided to rope black people into their coalition, without consulting them about it, and claim that fatphobia is now officially Just Like Racism, you racists.

By co-opting this language, they are putting those most harmed by the medical system at greater risk.

I can think of someone else who's co-opting language. Saying the o-word is just like saying the n-word, right?

There is no non-stigmatizing care in the name of obesity prevention or treatment.

What they mean is that any recommendation to lose weight is automatically "stigmatizing," because you're telling people that being overweight or obese -- and let's face it, doctors don't even bother with the overweight condition any longer; they only have time to deal with the obese -- is telling them that they are not in peak physical condition, and this hurts their feelings, and so it's "stigmatizing."

But there is no way to recommend that someone lose weight without suggesting, even if using gentle language, that being excessively heavy is bad for one's health.

And that is their whole point -- there is no "non-stigmatizing" way to tell someone to lose weight, so doctors should just literally never tell someone to lose weight.

They're in favor of "Size Diversity and Health," you see.

...

The ways in which the weight bias of the authors infiltrates the guidelines are many. They include:

* Omitting any discussion on the racist origins of fatphobia and the BMI. Despite several sections discussing the prevalence of higher BMIs among Black and brown people, the connection between racism and fatphobia was completely excluded from the guidelines as well as from their analysis and interpretation of the research.

They. Literally. Never. Stop. With. The. "Darkies Are All Obese." Claims.

Fatphobia was born out of eugenicist and racist ideas.1 These racist ideas are then upheld systemically through tools like the BMI and recommendations such as these. This history and how it shaped research and current medical practice is missing entirely from the AAP's recommendations. Its omission allows for the continuation of harmful, racist, and fatphobic practices.

Literally.

* Underestimating the impact of weight bias and stigma on health and health outcomes. Not only do they spend a whopping ⅓ of a page on this topic, they fail to recognize it as a risk in nearly every Key Action Statement.

The only thing that this group would allow doctors to discuss in reference to weight is that there is "harm" in "stigmatizing" obesity, and that harm is the most harmful harm ever so validate the obese in their size diversity to mitigate the harm of stigmatizing them.

* Failing to consider key ethical considerations underpinning the recommendations. Fat people, and especially fat children, are not responsible for the medical fatphobia of our care providers. Medical providers have an ethical imperative to address their individual weight bias and the systemic barriers affecting fat people in the healthcare system. Fat people, including fat children and adolescents, do not have an ethical imperative to lose weight and participating in pursuing weight loss should never be a requirement to access safe, effective, and non-stigmatizing care.

Do better, health care providers.

Do better.

* Using hyperbolic and sensationalized language. This kind of rhetoric has shown again and again to worsen weight bias in general and in healthcare especially. With 68% of the largest fat people avoiding healthcare, the focus in improving the health of fat people must be on creating equitable systems of care.

They literally claim that obesity is not unhealthy at all so citing any facts showing a linkage between obesity and diabetes, heart disease, stroke, etc., is automatically "hyperbolic and sensationalized language." Again, they insist the only negative health consequence of obesity is the "stigmatizing" of it by doctors and society as a whole.

* Failing to consider alternative and plausible explanations for the correlation between health and weight. The authors double down on weight-biased assumptions with ignorant and harmful interpretations of the research base, often citing studies that were not actually testing the claims they make in their recommendations.

For example, on page 2, they open the introduction with the claim that being in a larger body is affecting the current and long-term health of fat children. They cite two articles that measure the prevalence of ob*sity, not whether it causes or is even correlated with disease.

Like I said, they just refuse to accept the huge pile of evidence linking obesity with bad health outcomes. They're like the cigarette company executives in the 70s and 80s.

And now: GAINZZZ.

I came off a two week semi-fast -- I never tell you guys about these things any more, because several of you get too worried for me -- and really have to finally put together a 50 minute workout routine and start hitting it. As for now, I'm just continuing to run/walk.

I've also gone back to Intermittent Fasting, which I had stopped doing forever. It's really helpful. For those who haven't yet heard about the Health Craze of 2015, Intermittent Fasting is just enforcing on yourself a long period every day when you consume no calories, like sixteen hours. Eight of those will be easy -- you'll be asleep -- so you really just have to make sure you do not eat or drink calories four hours before bedtime, and do not break fast until at least four hours after waking.

Intermittent Fasting is also known by its scientific name, "Skipping breakfast."

But giving your body 16 (or more) hours where no calories are coming in forces it to burn some fat to create energy during that period. It also imposes some simple caloric reduction, because the less time you have to eat, the less food you'll probably end up eating.

Anyway, that works, and it's pretty easy to do past the first week or two, when your body's glands will be sending out hunger hormones during the periods it expects you to be eating. After a time, the body accommodates the new schedule and will start sending out hunger hormones at the new Intermittent Fasting time for the first meal.

I've lost the weight from the holidays, and have moved from Actually Fat to Just Thicc.

But enough about my GAINZZZ.

What are yo' GAINZZZ?

And do you have any PLANZZZZ? PROJEXXX?

posted by Ace at 04:30 PM

| Access Comments