Did the WoW "Save" DCP from Addiction?

[drumdude]

What Mormonism needs to reinvigorate it is more rules.Precise rules. I mean a set doughnut limit or better sugar calorie rules. You eat a couple extra doughnuts and you have to go talk to the bishop. Share a glass of water and a celery stick.

“ What flavor of donut was it?”

“Was anyone else eating with you?”

“How much did you enjoy it? How exactly did you eat it?”

[Doctor Scratch]

I fear that my criticism of the Proprietor's blog post wasn't as clear as it might have been. To back up a bit: his main assertion is that the WoW "saved" him. Saved him from what, though? He relates that several of his relatives suffered from "problems with alcohol," but he doesn't specify what that means, so one is left to speculate. (And I will note in passing that he is rather uncharitably throwing his relatives under the bus here, all for the sake of Mopologetics.) There is no denying that alcohol *is* harmful, but it can be harmful in a variety of ways. I think most people would immediately point to the *health* problems that it can cause, but if this was what the Proprietor meant, then his post is an epic fail. The WoW might have prevented him from imbibing, but it did not "save" him from toxic substances which, per the scientists who authored the Nature article, cause the exact same health problems as alcohol. The WoW has completely failed him in that regard. By his own admission, in the exact same post, he is freely putting toxic, sugary foods into his system; he might as well be nipping from a bottle of Jack Daniels every time he's sucking down one of those date shakes. According to the science, they both cause similar health problems. So, like I said: Epic fail.

But he goes on to say that his alcoholic family members' problems "impacted others beside themselves," which certainly complicates things. As others have rightly pointed out, the overall harms caused by unhealthy foods are not the same as the ones caused by alcohol. Certainly, you are unlikely to get into a drunken car crash after downing an extra-large milkshake or a half-dozen Doritos Locos Tacos. Still, what does "impacted others" mean? Killed or harmed others due to drunk driving? If so, then once again, this is an epic fail, since speeding is also risky and can have disastrous effects on others, and by his own admission, the Proprietor once had to go see a judge in his youth due to reckless speeding. The WoW did not prevent him from driving in a reckless fashion.

So, then, what about other kinds of behavior that might "impact others beside themselves"--the proverbial "mean drunk," as it were? Was the Proprietor saved by the WoW in this regard? Again: epic fail. If anything, being LDS has arguably made him *even more* mean. We might ask if there is evidence in his family history of vindictiveness, grudge-carrying, cruelty, carrying out vendettas, bullying, or anger-management problems. While the WoW probably could/should have placed prohibitions on certain behaviors, the fact remains that it didn't.

All of which is to say: No--the Proprietor was not "saved" in any meaningful way by the WoW. Epic fail.

[IWMP]

Hmm... I think this is being a bit harsh. I think it is simply to say that DCP may feel that had he not had reason to stay away from Alcohol that was above himself then he might be tempted to fall into the same kind of traps he has witnessed of people in his own family. And more so with the concern that alcoholism is likely genetic.

I don't think I would take it to mean that he is literally saved or that that means we must dissect every other option a person makes that might be adverse. I'm sure if he drank alcohol, he may well have done so and still enjoyed eating.

There are lots of ways alcohol can affect others. And people can have an alcohol problem without others noticing. They can be killing themselves and people being none the wiser. And then you can have the people who get crazy with it. I had a landlady who was an alcoholic and she died from throat cancer caused by her drinking. Had no clue until we seen her with a crazy swollen neck and clearly very ill. She died before we moved out. That affected others because they had to see her suffer. But then on the other side, I knew someone who was so addicted that he actually nearly died multiple times from withdrawal when he ran out of money. He got angry and aggressive. Threatening to kill. Trapping people and manipulating them to give him money. Actually bust up someone's face. But when sober and well, the nicest guy you could imagine although I now wonder if that was all part of the charm that he put on.

I do get the idea behind this thread and it makes for gossip I suppose and the jist makes sense but, sometimes I think it's just a bit unnecessary. Just a bit low. Maybe I'm triggered lol.

ETA: that guy died from something to do with alcohol.

[Moksha]

And the word of wisdom was a product of its time.

The earliest known record of the Word of Wisdom:

Dear Joseph,

If your guys miss the spittoon one more time while speculating around the cracker barrel, then you clean it up. Same goes for those empty whiskey bottles.

Sincerely, your Wife,
Emma

[Gadianton]

But he goes on to say that his alcoholic family members' problems "impacted others beside themselves," which certainly complicates things.

It certainly does. How predictable is it that God gave this really important commandment, and that commandment benefited a certain someone personally? lol. Oh -- but it also has a secondary effect of helping others.

Of course if there was that one thing amiss in a certain someone's makeup, then God is going to be right there with a formula to make it all better. We can't have anything bad happening to God's #1 guy!

Why didn't God provide some insight on abuse of kids in the D&C? I mean, if God is serious about preventing bad things from happening to others.

I think of it this way: what is essentially being said is that all the abuse against kids must be covered up to keep the Church intact, so it can keep talking about the word of wisdom and help folks such as the Afore stay healthy.

You're absolutely right that it's either by no means comprehensive advice as a health code, or it is comprehensive but the individual of reference only follows the part that's easy because he was never exposed to it. Totally true. For me it's just another one of those things where God has to allow all kinds of other terrible evil in order to do a solid for his favs.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I fear that my criticism of the Proprietor's blog post wasn't as clear as it might have been. To back up a bit: his main assertion is that the WoW "saved" him. Saved him from what, though? He relates that several of his relatives suffered from "problems with alcohol," but he doesn't specify what that means, so one is left to speculate. (And I will note in passing that he is rather uncharitably throwing his relatives under the bus here, all for the sake of Mopologetics.) There is no denying that alcohol *is* harmful, but it can be harmful in a variety of ways. I think most people would immediately point to the *health* problems that it can cause, but if this was what the Proprietor meant, then his post is an epic fail. The WoW might have prevented him from imbibing, but it did not "save" him from toxic substances which, per the scientists who authored the Nature article, cause the exact same health problems as alcohol. The WoW has completely failed him in that regard. By his own admission, in the exact same post, he is freely putting toxic, sugary foods into his system; he might as well be nipping from a bottle of Jack Daniels every time he's sucking down one of those date shakes. According to the science, they both cause similar health problems. So, like I said: Epic fail.

But he goes on to say that his alcoholic family members' problems "impacted others beside themselves," which certainly complicates things. As others have rightly pointed out, the overall harms caused by unhealthy foods are not the same as the ones caused by alcohol. Certainly, you are unlikely to get into a drunken car crash after downing an extra-large milkshake or a half-dozen Doritos Locos Tacos. Still, what does "impacted others" mean? Killed or harmed others due to drunk driving? If so, then once again, this is an epic fail, since speeding is also risky and can have disastrous effects on others, and by his own admission, the Proprietor once had to go see a judge in his youth due to reckless speeding. The WoW did not prevent him from driving in a reckless fashion.

So, then, what about other kinds of behavior that might "impact others beside themselves"--the proverbial "mean drunk," as it were? Was the Proprietor saved by the WoW in this regard? Again: epic fail. If anything, being LDS has arguably made him *even more* mean. We might ask if there is evidence in his family history of vindictiveness, grudge-carrying, cruelty, carrying out vendettas, bullying, or anger-management problems. While the WoW probably could/should have placed prohibitions on certain behaviors, the fact remains that it didn't.

All of which is to say: No--the Proprietor was not "saved" in any meaningful way by the WoW. Epic fail.

“According to a study published in the JAMA Network, the number of annual deaths in the United States that are attributable to obesity is estimated to be around 280,000 for adults. When only considering nonsmokers and never-smokers, the estimate increases to 325,000.” - Google A.I.

I would humbly suggest that obesity kills more Americans than alcohol, and impacts families in many, if not more ways than alcohol. Dr. Peterson has set a poor example for his family and the Lord’s flock. Whatever the case may be, I hope he lives many more years, takes many more trips, and enjoys stuffing his gullet to the brim when it pleases him.

- Doc

[Failed Prophecy]

If only we had some sort of prophet, seer, or revelators who could update it!

If only the LDS church were lead by a doctor who could give advice on how diet affects your heart health. If only...

[Physics Guy]

“According to a study published in the JAMA Network, the number of annual deaths in the United States that are attributable to obesity is estimated to be around 280,000 for adults. When only considering nonsmokers and never-smokers, the estimate increases to 325,000.” - Google A.I.

How can restricting the sample to eliminate smoking kill 45000 more people? Google A.I. seems to have messed up here.

What I can believe is that obesity kills a higher proportion of non-smokers than it does of smokers—and therefore a higher proportion of non-smokers than of everybody including smokers. This would be just because smoking steals some kills by bumping people off before obesity can get them. Something is going to get all of us, and if you take smoking out of the game then obesity is bound to get a bigger share. So perhaps Google A.I. has just blindly multiplied the same total American population by the higher non-smoking rate of obesity-related mortality, without remembering that the non-smoking population is smaller than the total population.

This might leave some accurate facts behind Google A.I.'s conclusions, but it's still a basic enough mistake to cast doubt on everything Google A.I. says.

[I Have Questions]

The Word Of Wisdom is about the principle of healthy eating and healthy drinking. A temperance guide of sorts, which is what Joseph Smith copied it from. It’s not bad advice, maybe a little unnecessarily prescriptive in parts, but if you take the spirit of it - moderation and healthy consumption, it’s one of the best pieces of Mormon doctrine. Taking that into account, I can’t see how Peterson can possibly consider himself in compliance with it. He clearly isn’t. Which isn’t a problem really, he can do what he wants to his own body. Where the issue comes in is that he espouses it publicly and proclaim himself a good example. Ffs, get some self awareness man and stop telling other people to practice what you obviously don’t.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

“According to a study published in the JAMA Network, the number of annual deaths in the United States that are attributable to obesity is estimated to be around 280,000 for adults. When only considering nonsmokers and never-smokers, the estimate increases to 325,000.” - Google A.I.

How can restricting the sample to eliminate smoking kill 45000 more people? Google A.I. seems to have messed up here.

What I can believe is that obesity kills a higher proportion of non-smokers than it does of smokers—and therefore a higher proportion of non-smokers than of everybody including smokers. This would be just because smoking steals some kills by bumping people off before obesity can get them. Something is going to get all of us, and if you take smoking out of the game then obesity is bound to get a bigger share. So perhaps Google A.I. has just blindly multiplied the same total American population by the higher non-smoking rate of obesity-related mortality, without remembering that the non-smoking population is smaller than the total population.

This might leave some accurate facts behind Google A.I.'s conclusions, but it's still a basic enough mistake to cast doubt on everything Google A.I. says.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... %2Dsmokers.

The estimated number of annual deaths attributable to obesity varied with the cohort used to calculate the HRs, but findings were consistent overall. More than 80% of the estimated obesity-attributable deaths occurred among individuals with a body mass index of more than 30 kg/m2. When HRs were estimated for all eligible subjects from all 6 studies, the mean estimate of deaths attributable to obesity in the United States was 280,184 (range, 236,111-341,153). Hazard ratios also were calculated from data for nonsmokers or never-smokers only. When these HRs were applied to the entire population (assuming the HR applied to all individuals), the mean estimate for obesity-attributable death was 324,940 (range, 262,541-383,410).

The study’s control group, if I’m understanding this correctly, is from 1991.

Anyway, another:

According to a 2023 study published in Population Studies, obesity and excess weight may be responsible for about 1 in 6 deaths in the United States, and can increase the risk of death by 22–91%. This is a higher risk than previously thought. Another study estimates that 280,184 deaths in the US are attributable to obesity each year, with a range of 236,111–341,153. The National Institutes of Health says that obesity and being overweight are the second leading cause of preventable death in the US, after tobacco use.

Google A.I. scrubbing the Internet for datapoints.