Quote Originally Posted by kindofabigdeal8 View Post
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1.../eat.20828/pdf

The research on Muscle Dysmorphia has been bothering me for some time now.

The link above speaks to the classification of MD in the DSM-V. The article attempts to clarify the nature/epidemiology of the disorder. I have trouble with all of the listed classifications; Eating disorder, OCD, Somatoform disorder. Truth be told, I'm irritated that most of the documented research pertaining to MD has been published by one researcher; H.R Pope.More researchers are jumping into the arena as of late but there still seems to be insufficient research on the onset of the disorder. The studies also mention that only 10% of body builders suffer from this disorder based on pope’s criteria, but from my perspective all bodybuilders would suffer from MD in order to be successful.

My question is what do you think of MD? Is MD a valid disorder? I sometimes (often) feel neurotic as a body builder, but it’s my nature to feel guilt for everything I do; I blame my Judeo-Christian upbringing for that.

For what is worth I pretty much meet all of popes criteria as do most of my BB friends.
.
The classification of something as a disorder is that it that it's associated with some level of distress, disability, or an increased risk of suffering. Where I can see MD meeting the criteria insofar as a disorder would be on an the intersection of distress or increased risk of suffering; 1) Distress in the neurotic sense and 2) increased risk of suffering that occurs through continuation of the activities that lead to, and prolong, MD. Further, I agree with that is closely aligns to an eating disorder with psychiatric comorbidities given its correlational aspects to anorexia and bulimia.

I see no reason as to why it should not be considered a valid disorder but the problem is evaluation in its health risks for anorexia and bulimia have very significant health risk for a person including death. It would be hard to argue the health risk claim of MD in this instance.

Given this article was published in 2010 and the DSM 5 was only approved Dec 1 2012 with publication set for this month, I am surprised they used it.

BTW, few here will understand what the DSM is lol