Officials Declare ‘Eating Healthy’ A Mental Disorder

originally posted by: Petros312
There's an extensive process involved before you can start using the term "orthorexia nervosa" with any real validity.

You need validity to use it in a professional sense, you don't need validity to use the term casually.

For example: "The folks over at naturalnews.com seem to have a serious case of orthorexia nervosa."

Obviously the above is not a professional diagnosis.

ETA: It is something that they are trying to get included so they obviously have to name and describe it.

Interesting find, I hadn't heard of this. As someone who isn't nearly as concerned about what he eats as he probably should be, I just wanted to point out that they did a really terrible job at making it sound like a bad thing to eat healthy.

Quoteception from the first post:

“Orthorexia nervosa is a label designated to those who are concerned about eating healthy. Characterized by disordered eating fueled by a desire for “clean” or “healthy” foods, those diagnosed with the condition are overly pre-occupied with the nutritional makeup of what they eat”.

Other than casually throwing the word "disordered" in there and trying to subtly bring the person's judgement into question by quoting "clean" and "healthy", it sounds like something we should all wish we had. I think they're trying to make it sound something like OCD, but calling it a disorder is a big stretch considering it doesn't hurt anything except certain corporations' pockets.

Next they'll be saying I have a disordered habit of making sure all the mechanical components of my car are "working" and in "good condition". Jeez.

My late mother-in-law caught this "disorder" when she was about 65 years old. After a lifetime of eating whatever was at hand, drinking a couple of pots of coffee a day and smoking a pack a day---she became a "health food nut" when mainstream medicine nearly killed her.
She went from nearly dead to an active, healthy woman. She researched and learned and applied the knowledge---all this before the internet was available. For the next 28 years she was one of the healthiest people I've ever known. When we asked her what she wanted to do for her 90th birthday she said she wanted to go hiking in the Tonto National monument because she'd never seen the natural bridge. She wore us out that day!
When she was 93 she suffered a stroke which landed her in a rehab center where she had no control over her food. In only 6 weeks her health declined rapidly but once she escaped that place and could make her own decisions about food, she was able to regain her health and continued being active up until 2 days before her death at 95.

originally posted by: daskakik
in reply to: Petros312
You need validity to use it in a professional sense, you don't need validity to use the term casually.

Oh, I'm sorry. It's just that I have personal values against using a term "casually" to suggest that someone has a mental illness.

I forgot that there are people who will like to use labels like "orthorexia nervosa" like they know exactly what they're talking about.

No offense intended. I was just trying to explain what the real process of having a diagnostic label appear in the DSM actually involves. Most people don't know about it.

originally posted by: Petros312
Oh, I'm sorry. It's just that I have personal values against using a term "casually" to suggest that someone has a mental illness.

You're looking at it backwards. The label exists and is there to be used. Whether it ever becomes a legit diagnosis remains to be seen.

I forgot that there are people who will like to use labels like "orthorexia nervosa" like they know exactly what they're talking about.

I'm sure the author of that article knew what they were talking about.

No offense intended. I was just trying to explain what the real process of having a diagnostic label appear in the DSM actually involves. Most people don't know about it.

None taken, I was just pointing out that even if it never makes it through the process, the idea is there.

Tangentially related?

Is The Junk-Food Era Drawing To A Close?

Not long ago, the great processed-food companies like Kraft and Kellogg's towered over the US food landscape like the high hat that adorned the head of Chef Boyardee, the iconic canned-spaghetti magnate whose empire is now owned by ConAgra.

But now, Big Food has fallen on hard times. Conagra, which owns Hunts, Reddi Whip, Ro-Tell, Swiss Miss, and Orville Redenbacher along with Chef Boyardee, recently slashed its 2015 profit projections and sacked its CEO. Kraft—purveyor of Oscar Mayer deli meats, Jello, Maxwell House coffee, and Velveeta cheese—also recently shook up top management and reported sluggish sales in 2014. Cereal titan Kellogg's has seen its sales plunge 5.4 percent over the past year, Ad Age reports.

If people start eating what is grown locally and healthier for them, Big Food stands to lose a lot of money, no? If people get healthier as a result, so does Big Pharma.

It would logically follow that Big Food needs to get on board (and they are in some respects) or accept their time is coming to an end. Or fight it. With things like orthoxia nervosa and more marketing campaigns to convince people they need junk.

I can't believe so many people here are buying into this. The wool has been pulled down over many eyes.

"Orthorexia Nervosa" is not a real illness. That "doctors" (and I use that term loosely) are creating this illness just means that megacorps like Monsanto are now also utilizing big medicine to push their agenda. They will do anything to make us eat their chemical-laced genetically modified filth.

It is not insanity to want to eat only wholesome organic foods. WTH is wrong with you people? Can you not see the forest for the trees? If you don't see this agenda for what it is, I don't think you have any critical thinking ability.

Would I stop you from eating GMO foods filled with artificial colors, preservatives, and artificial flavors? No. But don't despise and degrade those who would refuse. IMO this mentality shares a lot of similarities with the pro-vaccination mindset. "If you aren't doing the same things we are, you are obviously a mentally insane terrorist". Go suck down your filth and leave me the hell alone.

I never thought society could be dumbed down to this level. I am in awe.

a reply to: peskyhumans

You are right, is not a real disease, but if you see the latest name that the big pharma has targeted to people with in order to sell their prescribed new drugs is a hell lot of new terms out there that means nothing to target none existence conditions.

But as usual most people believe what their doctors tell them and become prescribed drug addicts thanks to their recommendations.

originally posted by: Answer
Next, they should address the issue of people who are addicted to working out, posting gym-selfies, and flooding social media with idiotic "inspirational quotes" plastered on pictures of people working out.

That behavior seems much more like a mental disorder to me.

They have - it's called "fat shaming". Whenever a health-conscious person gets their body into good condition and posts a selfie, all the overweight people feel offended and shout back "your fat shaming":

www.urbandictionary.com...

Almost a kick back at "muesli mothers", parents who strip out every source of fat from their children's diets:

www.highbeam.com...

originally posted by: peskyhumans
"Orthorexia Nervosa" is not a real illness. That "doctors" (and I use that term loosely) are creating this illness just means that megacorps like Monsanto are now also utilizing big medicine to push their agenda. They will do anything to make us eat their chemical-laced genetically modified filth.

Indeed. Proponents of "orthorexia nervosa" are promoting a concept that replaces the people who are seriously concerned about what they are allowing into their bodies, who make the effort to obtain the highest quality food (certified organic, non-GMO, non-processed, etc.), and who are determined to mindfully construct diets that are truly healthy with something like an anxious person who thinks lots of viable food out there is not healthy for you and refuses to eat this food because of an underlying psychological illness -- and one that's even supposedly connected to inflated self-esteem!

a reply to: ~Lucidity

“Orthorexia nervosa" ?!

....does the dx just destroy credibility or does it also justify incarceration? EG., for endangering others by voicing crazy "opinions"?

a reply to: Petros312

You know the irony of all this,

The ubber rich do not eat the crap that food manufactures wants to shove on the working class and poor, their food is the best imported foods money can buy.

Are they to be labeled also?

a reply to: soficrow

That is a repercussion I didn't even dare to take into consideration.

Posting this here because it's what a lot of us have said in this thread about common sense and moderation. No expert stuff here...just sound logic among all the confusing campaigns for your mind and dollar.

Does Anyone Really Know What a Healthy Diet Is Anymore?

Nevertheless, last year my doctor told me she was worried about my sodium level. I misunderstood at first, and figured that I needed to make additional efforts to cut back. But no. My serum sodium level was too low. What's more, it turns out that most Americans consume a safe amount of sodium. The usual recommendation is to keep sodium intake below 2400 mg per day, but the bulk of the evidence suggests that twice this much is perfectly safe for people who don't suffer from hypertension. (And even the recommendations for people with hypertension might be more restrictive than they need to be.)

originally posted by: Petros312
Indeed. Proponents of "orthorexia nervosa" are promoting a concept that replaces the people who are seriously concerned about what they are allowing into their bodies, who make the effort to obtain the highest quality food (certified organic, non-GMO, non-processed, etc.), and who are determined to mindfully construct diets that are truly healthy with something like an anxious person who thinks lots of viable food out there is not healthy for you and refuses to eat this food because of an underlying psychological illness -- and one that's even supposedly connected to inflated self-esteem!

Both exist. What is wrong with pointing out that fact?

a reply to: ~Lucidity

I already told you what this diagnoses entails. Why do you keep lying? At first your ignorance was no big deal. But now after being corrected and still spewing this garbage it's not.

Someone ONLY eating junk food, and someone ONLY eating GMO food would qualify.

Stop the lies.

Fast food will make you bleed out your face if you eat ONLY fast food.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Posting this here because it's what a lot of us have said in this thread about common sense and moderation. No expert stuff here...just sound logic among all the confusing campaigns for your mind and dollar.

Does Anyone Really Know What a Healthy Diet Is Anymore?

Nevertheless, last year my doctor told me she was worried about my sodium level. I misunderstood at first, and figured that I needed to make additional efforts to cut back. But no. My serum sodium level was too low. What's more, it turns out that most Americans consume a safe amount of sodium. The usual recommendation is to keep sodium intake below 2400 mg per day, but the bulk of the evidence suggests that twice this much is perfectly safe for people who don't suffer from hypertension. (And even the recommendations for people with hypertension might be more restrictive than they need to be.)

No but I know what is unhealthy and probably causing 75% of misery in the western world. Its simple, why would it ever be considered right to consume another mammals milk in such massive quantities when it was not designed for us. First clue is , that if your on Blood pressure meds and you stop all dairy, you will most likely have to stop taking them within ten days. Read on www.drmcdougall.com...

Then that's only for starters, a woman produces a tea spoon full of oestrogen in her lifetime, its really just a cell signaller, very little is required. Read this and weep.www.motherjones.com...

The problem is that everyone in the know knows, but consider the implications if, everyone was healthy. The crash of 29, would be kindergarten compared to what would happen.

We maybe shouldn't consume at all milk once puberty has commenced; doing so is known as lactose persistence. It's shocking just how much cow milk we consume, I swear that one of these days we will only know one word. Moo.
 

originally posted by: anonentity
No but I know what is unhealthy and probably causing 75% of misery in the western world.

Meh.

The problem is that everyone in the know knows, but consider the implications if, everyone was healthy. The crash of 29, would be kindergarten compared to what would happen.

Doubt that.