When you state that entertaining the possibility that B causes A instead of A causing B is equivalent to “denying that a link exists whatsoever” is very different than simply not agreeing.
1 Like
Nope. Simply not agreeing. I think I expressed a reasonable and logical point of view reasonably well.
1 Like
Please refer to the first table you posted.
Using the logic in your 2nd to most recent post, how do you explain the continuing increase in prevalence of mean body weight between 1992 and 1993 when the prevalence of diabetes decreased over the same timespan?
that particular narrowly defined example is what I would call an outlier to an overwhelmingly clear trend. How would you explain it?
I honestly do not know why the two trends diverged at that point in time before resuming their similar trend.
The point I am trying to make is that you repeatedly imply that anyone who does not agree with you that A causes B is in denial that a link between the 2 exists.
If someone considers the possibility that B causes A, they are not under any circumstances denying that there is a link between the two.
I never once said that A causes B or that obesity causes diabetes. I repeatedly said that the two are undeniably linked and denying any such link is unproductive.
“- diabetes and obesity are associated. The argument of which does or doesn’t cause which is purely academic and really benefits nobody except perhaps the scientific researcher studying etiology. Though we may never know which came first, the chicken or the egg-- we do know that with less chickens we’d have less eggs and with less eggs we’d have less chickens”. Is the closest thing I said to what you have misconsteud me as saying.
You stated:
"I’ll take the opposing point of view-- diabetes and obesity are associated. The argument of which does or doesn’t cause which is purely academic and really benefits nobody except perhaps the scientific researcher studying etiology. Though we may never know which came first, the chicken or the egg-- we do know that with less chickens we’d have less eggs and with less eggs we’d have less chickens.
I know and understand why some people with diabetes are upset by what they perceive as it’s casual relationship with obesity. The day I was diagnosed, it was probably one of the first thoughts in my ignorant mind, “I can’t have diabetes, I’m skinny!!” But in reality wouldn’t that frustration better be directed toward actually improving the health in our society instead by encouraging others to eat better and exercise more instead of being upset about a possible misconception? I think so."
You made the statement above in reply to Terry4’s post stating "The problem with the word “diabetsity” is that it joins diabetes and obesity into one word and does nothing to illuminate the actual relationship of the two. It implies a causal relationship by making the two words like two sides of the same coin. Obesity is associated with diabetes much like umbrellas are associated with rainy days. Rainy days and umbrellas go together but umbrellas don’t cause rainy days.
Part of the problem with all this is that many in society are not trained to think critically. Hence, the association of obesity and diabetes easily blurs incorrectly into a causal relationship in the minds of many."
(The bolding is mine.)
How exactly does Terry4’s post “deny that diabetes and obesity are associated”?
1 Like
It doesn’t. I’m afraid I don’t see your point. Do you actually disagree with anything I’ve actually said? I’d be happy to continue discussing any actual differences of opinions we might have but it appears to me that your entire objections to mine are not based in anything I’ve actually said thus far.
When one states that they are taking “an opposing point of view” it means that the point of view they are referencing is contrary to (i.e. in opposition to) their point of view.
So when you stated, “I’ll take the opposing point of view-- diabetes and obesity are associated.” in reference to Terry4’s post stating that “Hence, the association of obesity and diabetes easily blurs incorrectly into a causal relationship in the minds of many.” it means that you believe that Terry4’s post opposes your statement that diabetes and obesity are associated. Terry4’s words that I just quoted do not mean that s/he (forgive me for not knowing whether Terry4 is male or female) believes that diabetes and obesity are not associated. It means that Terry4 acknowledges that an association exists, but does not agree that the association is causal in nature. Which is exactly the point that I have been trying to make: That not agreeing with the conclusion that obesity causes diabetes or that diabetes causes obesity does not in any way deny that an association between the two exists.
1 Like
Well thank you for the English lesson, and I apologize if you don’t agree with my wording of the statement “I’ll take the opposing view.” That being said, is there anything of substance or any actual point of view that I’ve stated that you disagree with or would like to further discuss?
Yes. I am disagreeing with your numerous statements saying that I do not acknowledge a correlation (or link or association) between diabetes and obesity when I am simply disagreeing that there is no room for doubt that the correlation is causal in nature.
1 Like
Thank you for clarifying. i have never made a statement saying “you’re saying” anything. At one point I asked the question:
That was the closest I’ve come.
You seem to be either misunderstanding a lot of what I’ve said or be misquoting me intentionally…
I also said
clearly showing that although I understand the concept you are expressing, I consider it a misdirected cause.
As to the original point of the post-- I think “diabesity” is a perfectly fine nickname for the combination of diabetes and obesity that is so prevalent in our society, regardless of which causes which. reguadless of it the relationship is casual or complex-- my point is that it doesn’t really matter. They’re both bad for you, and they’re they’re both undeniably linked.
Exactly what concept of mine are you referring to as a “misdirected cause.”
the concept that obesity could be caused by diabetes and that even if it is that it actually matters, because they are widespread and comorbid major health problems around us. The entire point I was trying to make it that those efforts could better be spent elsewhere. Anyway we’ve totally hijacked this thread now. Sorry about that to the OP, that wasn’t my intention. Going to call it a night now.
1 Like
It may not matter to you if a discovery was made that contradicted the widely held belief (that is currently supported by sound research) that obesity leads to Type 2, but I’d put good money on the fact that the vast majority of folks with Type 2 who are sick and tired of being viewed as responsible for their disease would beg to differ with you. Big time…
2 Likes
You made your point…15 times.
2 Likes
Someone dared to coin the word diabesity[quote=“kathimcb, post:1, topic:47226, full:true”]
I really, really, really hate this word. Never saw it before. Found it [here][1]. [1]: http://medcitynews.com/2015/08/continuous-glucose-monitor/
[/quote]
Instead of hating, I have chosen to forgive and spend all of my positive energy on changing the world. - Camryn Manheim
Diabesity is a stupid word to be sure. One more thing for us to argue, explain, define, misunderstand, defend, and be (as seen in this gig) downright foolish about. I am not going to waste my time hating it and won’t be shocked when it ends up in the The OED or Merriam-Webster dictionary. The 2015 updates are done so it won’t be until 2016 at least.
Maybe the haters can kill it before the next updates are determined and go to print. Then we can concentrate on important diabolical things 
It’s a different coined word, but I’ve met actual folks suffering from diabulimia, and that’s super-scary stuff. Scares the bejeezus out of me that I came close to falling into that trap myself (I’m not female and don’t have all the same societal pressures but thoughts about how easy it could be for me to lose weight by not taking insulin can be surprisingly running around in my head.)
I hate the word “diabesity” it implies that diabetes (if we are lucky they mention type 2) is solely due to being overweight. If that were true, every person who is obese would develop type 2 diabetes. As was said earlier - there are lots of “fit and slim” people Dx’d with type 2. It is the gene pool, ya know? And damage can be done by use of this word, in that people who don’t look the part - i.e. obese, think they are safe. And maybe they aren’t so safe, maybe it runs in the family. Additionally, newer research has been finding that it is the type 2 that is the cause of the eight issues in large part. I 'spose a person who can’t explain having weight issues , ygaining weight without reason, more difficulty in losing that weight woukld get the idea to be tested for type 2.
What disappointed me most about the word “diabesity” is that it was coined by Francine Kaufman, and esteemed Endo in the Los Angeles area. she of all people should know better.
2 Likes
I love to see skinny T2’s. I just smile and say there’s another one.