Rethinking fat stereotypes

24th April 2008

posted in Arts and Music, Diets, Eating Disorders, Fat Acceptance, Fat Bias, Feminist Topics, Health/Nutrition, Mental Health, New Research, Personal |

The belief that upward social mobility in the United States can be achieved with mere hard work and determination has existed almost as long as the country itself. America’s Protestant worth ethic has been encapsulated by people like Horatio Alger, who wrote a series of stories involving poor young men who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps to achieve great success.

Weight-based discrimination is rampant today because of our culturally ingrained stereotypes of fatness and fat people. Fat people, it is assumed, are fat due to “lifestyle choices,” that being a willful overeating of “bad” foods and sedentary lifestyle. So-called obesity-related diseases are viewed to be a drain on our national economy, as they decrease work productivity and increase health care costs. And because of the conflation of fat with overconsumption, those rapacious fat people are also thought to represent a threat to the environment and the security of the nation state itself.

The world collectively sighs as it wonders why fat people won’t just practice dietary restraint, eat healthier foods, exercise and pay scads of money for diet programs, even if such programs have been shown to be largely ineffective. Why, oh why can’t and won’t fat people pull themselves up by their bootstraps to become thin, socially acceptable, and responsible citizens?

Maybe it’s because fatness isn’t always caused by inactivity and a scarfing down of Twinkies. As anyone who has struggled with weight will attest, weight loss and gain aren’t always simple matters of “choice.” Here are some physiological reasons why some people are fat:

Genetic predisposition: We inherit a multitude of different eye, skin and hair colors, why is it impossible to fathom body weights, too, can be determined by our genetics and are variable? A recent study by the University College London suggests genetics and heritability may account for 77 percent of obesity, while environmental factors make up less than 25 percent. Other twin, adoption and family studies have shown that genetic factors play a significant role in body weight.

Genetic Disorders: Genetic disorders such as Prader-Willi Syndrome and Bardet-Biedl syndrome are directly linked to weight gain. While both are characterized by development disabilities, leptin resistance is more common and virtually undetectable except at the genetic level. Researchers have also identified several mutations in human genes that may contribute to obesity entirely independent of environment.

Endocrine Disorders: There exists a spectrum of endocrinological diseases associated with increased body weight, including hypothyroidism, Cushing’s syndrome, growth hormone deficiency, hypogonadism, polycystic ovary syndrome, insulin resistance and insulinoma and hypothalamic trauma.

Aging: Getting older often involves a gradual weight gain from changes in activity and slowed metabolism. According to MSNBC.com: “Between the ages of 25 and 75, body fat naturally doubles. This can be changed with regular exercise and a healthy diet, but even then fat may accumulate in new places, including the chin, neck, abdomen, thighs and buttocks. Fat also tends to shift from just beneath the skin to deeper spots near the organs.”

Medication side effects: As the hundreds upon hundreds of anxious message board posters reveal, numerous medications including anti-depressants and birth control cause weight gain. In fact, weight gain is a reported side effect of nearly all antidepressant medications currently available.

Dieting: Which came first? The so-called obesity epidemic or dieting? Dieting has been shown to encourage and promote weight gain. Ironic, huh? Here’s why: As you reduce food intake to lose weight, your body puts itself on ‘famine alert’ and thus slows down metabolism to best use the small amount of energy it is receiving. When dieters go back to eating normally, they gain weight faster because a much higher percentage of food is stored as fat to prevent future cases of famine

Diet food: People are genetically predisposed to metabolize and store nutrients differently. Diet foods, or what author Michael Pollan calls “edible food-like substances,” may unwittingly and ironically even contribute to weight gain. For instance, the greatest rise in obesity rates came at a time when most Americans were embracing new low-fat, low-cholesterol and fat-free processed foods. Gary Taubes’ new book sheds new light on the conventionally held wisdom of how our bodies react to different nutrients.

Quitting smoking: The average smoker tends to be thin and often experiences weight gain when quitting tobacco. A recent study in Health Services Research found that the average weight gain among former smokers was about 21 pounds, and it isn’t always because smokers turn to snacking. Smoking uses up calories – about 200 a day according to one study. And after quitting, the body’s metabolism slows down, and food is digested better. Insulin levels also increase, enabling the body to process more sugar for energy.

Physical restrictions: You see an obese person whiz by in a motorized chair: Is it because they’re fat and lazy, or could they have some other physical disorder hindering mobility? Those who experience physical trauma or have disorders and conditions that limit mobility often have difficulty burning calories and expending energy stores. Just as we would never presume to mock the disabled or blame them for their condition, nor should we assume fat people are disabled because they’re fat.

Pregnancy: My mom was thin until she had four kids within a decade and has never been able to lose her pregnancy weight. Incubating another human being in your womb for nine months inevitably alters your metabolism, which may persist even after birth. And the fatigue, stressful life changes, family adjustments and lack of energy that occur post-birth may also contribute to an inability to shed the baby weight.

————————————-

Sure, overeating and/or eating unhealthy foods and/or physical inactivity also play a role in weight gain. But the reasons why someone might make such “lifestyle choices” are also not a clear cut case of sloth and greed. Consider these possible reasons why someone might make poor food choices:

Depression: Weight gain is so prevalent amongst those with depression, it’s often used as a criteria for diagnosis. And whilst some people may lose weight as part of depression therapy, others may gain weight as mood improvements result in heartier appetites. Depression may be caused by a brain chemical imbalance, but it can also be brought on by the death of a loved one or other emotional or physical trauma.

Eating disorder: It’s been estimated one in four college-aged women have bulimia and that binge eating disorder eclipses both anorexia and bulimia combined. Not all people with binging-related eating disorders are overweight or obese, but the majority of women with bulimia are average weight or overweight, while a significant number of those with BED are overweight, obese or even morbidly obese. Recent studies suggest some eating disorders are organic in nature, while others are influenced by social environments. Regardless, an eating disorder is never a “choice.”

Poverty: Rising food prices and a lack of availability of healthy foods may also contribute to unhealthy diets. As a recent study indicated, on a per calorie basis, diets composed of whole grains, fish and fresh vegetables and fruit are far more expensive than refined grains, added sugars and added fats, which provide empty calories. It’s not about ignorance, poor character or a lack of willpower; it’s about being limited to those foods you can afford. Poor people, too, often lack access to safe areas in which to walk and exercise.

The above are brief factors I compiled within an hour. Given more time and more research, I’m sure I could uncover a number of other potential causes for fatness. Feel free to add others or discuss any of the above in the comments below. The fact is, body weight is not an exact science and it’s one we still know very little about. Smug assumptions that fatness is a case sloth and gluttony only serves to hurt the very people we purport to help. It also contributes to a toxic environment in which eating disorders fester and weight-based discrimination prevails.

Click to Bookmark

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 24th, 2008 at 11:44 am and is filed under Arts and Music, Diets, Eating Disorders, Fat Acceptance, Fat Bias, Feminist Topics, Health/Nutrition, Mental Health, New Research, Personal. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1 On April 24th, 2008, riv

said:

You know, I hadn’t made the connection between the two “why can’t they pull themselves up by their own bootstraps” attitudes until now. Thank you for this post.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

2 On April 24th, 2008, Fauve

Rachel - excellent post! I can attest to the fact that both depression and an ed is the foundation of my obesity. You started off with the common (mis)assumption that anyone can pull themselves up out of poverty. This is also relates to the lower middle class, as well. It’s easy to blame people for their hardships. People are so extremely judgemental of fat and of poverty. It’s so easy to point the finger. Why don’t people try to look deeper? I think it’s their ignorance and self-serving attitudes. If someone can point the finger at someone else, they don’t have to feel too bad about their own shortcomings and troubles. In terms of fatness, I feel both positive and negative about it, for myself. As an artist, I see beauty in all body sizes. And I love fat, round, smooth things, in general, odd as that may sound. I have a collection of pink, happy-looking piglet figurines, and they remind me of the fat Buddha (he always looks so happy to me and so at ease with himself). I see much beauty in fatness. I also see much pain that can also occur with people. Not all fat people, of course. I do think it’s important for me to be honest about some of the conditions (which you have pointed out) related to my obesity. (And the term “obesity” does not bother me, either. I think there definitely are medical reasons for some people’s weight). I deplore the fact that everyone from a size 16 to a person of 500+ pounds is just called obese, though. The medical profession is wrong to do that. A size 16 and above can be very healthy, but when a person gets to an extremely heavy weight, the physical pulling down of their body from the weight, alone, can cause much pain. There is much hatred toward all fat people, no matter what their size. And, in that sense, we are all targeted and it’s just plain wrong. Beyond this, I also find that enjoying the “bad” food (instead of feeling guilty about it and hating myself) means that I eat it in a more thoughtful, healthy manner.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 2:14 pm

3 On April 24th, 2008, MrsDrC

Sloth and gluttony are just the easy way to villify fat people.

I’ve been relaying something I heard for a long time. America will be fat as long as you can feed a family of four at McDonalds for about $20.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 3:01 pm

4 On April 24th, 2008, Karen

Rachel, you just don’t understand. the whole point of the American Dream is that we, through sheer willpower alone, can overcome even genetics. No matter what is holding us down we can overcome it if it means enough to us. Way back when they used to talk about “bad blood” believing that the reason the poor were poor was because they were made of inferior stuff. That’s why we still believe that everyone can be thin and pretty and rich if only they try hard enough. The idea that people are made with inferior ingredients that make them predisposed toward unfavorable habits/bodies/diseases is not even remotely new, and defining what they ingredients are doesn’t change anything. We’ve always looked down on people with the “well, what else would you expect from THAT SORT” idea and held the ones who overcame it up as proof that everyone else JUST DIDN’T TRY HARD ENOUGH. The entire American Dream is based in the idea that we can overcome any hand we’re dealt if only we invest everything we have in to it.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 3:31 pm

5 On April 24th, 2008, stefanie

This is one of the best-written summaries on weight which I’ve ever read. I’d like to staple it to the forehead of just about everyone who deals with fat people in inhuman ways - medical doctors; school nurses; legislators who pass laws on “fat report cards” for schoolkids; businesspeople who discriminate job-wise.

You put “genetics” at the top of list, too - right where it belongs. Genetics affects just about everything below it on your list, too. Some people *can* drink two liters of soda and eat large fast-food meals every day and still ay thin (my brother-in-law, for example.) Not everyone who eats the “typical American diet” is fat or diabetic. Other people have very little tolerance for refined sugars or carbs. IMO, based on what I’ve read, this boils down to genes.

What scares me about “genetic thinking” and fatness is that it has the power to become really “eugenic,” really ugly very fast.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 3:37 pm

6 On April 24th, 2008, Meowser

OK, Rachel just came up with the Ultimate FA(t)Q. Woo hoo!

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 3:44 pm

7 On April 24th, 2008, Meowser

I’ve been relaying something I heard for a long time. America will be fat as long as you can feed a family of four at McDonalds for about $20.

So how does that explain us fatasses who never eat there, hmm? (And no, we’re not one-in-a-billion freak exceptions, either.)

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 3:45 pm

8 On April 24th, 2008, Karen

Meowser, Even better, how does that explain the non-fatasses who DO eat there? We aren’t the one-in-a-billion freak exceptions either.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 4:04 pm

9 On April 24th, 2008, Meowser

Yeah, Karen, that too. As Marilyn Wann once eloquently put it, “When was the last time you went into McDonald’s and saw only fat people eating there?”

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 4:44 pm

10 On April 24th, 2008, rebecca

Rock on, Rachel. Excellent post.

Just as we would never presume to mock the disabled or blame them for their condition, nor should we assume fat people are disabled because they’re fat.

Sadly, as a person who is both fat and physically disabled (my fatness certainly didn’t cause my disability; my disability MAY have caused some or all of my fatness, but there’s no way to know), I can vouch that there are plenty of people out there who do blame the disabled. For being disabled. Yep.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 5:04 pm

11 On April 24th, 2008, Tari

Fuckin’ A!

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again….it’s just more complicated than can be summed up in any trite catch-phrase like “eat less, move more” or “put down the Twinkie” or “amputate your stomach and your life will magically be awesome!”

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 5:18 pm

12 On April 24th, 2008, Reverence Lily

Yes, yes, and again - yes! I agree especially on the processed foods and dieting points, but you may also want to add in ‘medications’ as well. I was simply an average weight as a child until I was put on Depakote at the age of 12 and contracted medicinally-induced COE disorder. Then my mother solidified it by making me go on a diet. Then I solidified it even more by doing the starvation thing not just halfway; I mean fucking starving, 200-calories-a-day kind of thing.

You wanna know the funny part? The funny part is that I’m a freak of nature. I’m eating raw vegan foods exclusively now (and actually, that was what cured my ED, though it can be triggered by - guess what - WEIGHING myself), I use this diet site to track my calorie intake so I know I’m getting ENOUGH calories, I’m eating about 2,000 calories* a day on average, and my body’s changing. I wouldn’t call it ‘losing weight’, because I think it’s just settling back to a more comfortable place for it to be. But yeah, I’ve lost ‘weight’ (or, some adipose tissue off my body) - while, for literally the FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE, not starving myself.

Life is funny, eh?

*No, it doesn’t freak me out that I’m eating so many calories. Eating raw foods only actually has the effect of completely PREVENTING me from freaking out about food. Weird, huh?

P.S. Love, love, love this site. I’ve been reading it for a while, but I didn’t tell you. You’re awesome! Thanks for being here.

13 On April 24th, 2008, Reas Kroicowl

And there are certainly people who blame the poor for being poor.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 5:19 pm

14 On April 24th, 2008, littlem

I can vouch that there are plenty of people out there who do blame the disabled. For being disabled. Yep.

Rebecca, please help me with this, if you would. I’ve been doing a lot of intersectional analysis lately and will not bore you with the details, but I find myself so aghast at the thought that my mind won’t even compute the details of a situation where that would be possible.

However, I prefer knowledge to denial and ignorance, because even though it can be unpleasant and frightening, at least then you know what you’re fighting and you know what to look for.

So if it’s not disrespectful to ask, would you mind offering an example? What possible rationale is lurking in the mind of someone who thinks that way?

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 5:23 pm

15 On April 24th, 2008, tanglethis

So if it’s not disrespectful to ask, would you mind offering an example? What possible rationale is lurking in the mind of someone who thinks that way?

Who said anything about rationale?
Well, that was a bit snarky, but I think probably negative reactions to the disabled have to do more with unease on the part of the abled than logic. The possible reasons that follow disability discrimination are rationalization, not rationale.

I read a really amazing article once (jeez, can’t remember the author) that used some of Judith Butler’s queer theory to advance his point about disability. Butler suggests that homophobia stems, in part, from hetero anxiety about the completely unstable heterosexual ideal. (If you find that hard to buy, just think about how many books, films, and songs have been dedicated to trying to figure out love & attraction.) The article suggested that disabled bodies create a similar anxiety for abled persons, perhaps because abledness is so easily unbalanced or lost.
And then self-justification comes from there.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 6:28 pm

16 On April 24th, 2008, Rachel

I agree especially on the processed foods and dieting points, but you may also want to add in ‘medications’ as well.

Already there, number four on the list.

So if it’s not disrespectful to ask, would you mind offering an example? What possible rationale is lurking in the mind of someone who thinks that way?

Well, I’ve seen lots of scathing posts about the prevalence of fat people on motorized scooters at Disneyland. Take this comment for instance made on another site:

dave said…

ever notice,95% of the people who use motorized carts should be walking,they are so F#&ken fat they need the exercise!

The fact that these people couldn’t have some sort of legitimate health disorder that isn’t readily apparent and which may have contributed to them becoming fat never occurs to people like this. They see a fat person coasting along and immediately think they’re lazy.

As for a possible rationale… well fat-phobia sums it up nicely.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 6:52 pm

17 On April 24th, 2008, rebecca

Hi littlem,

I can’t speak for all the people who’ve blamed me or my crip friends for our disabilities, but tanglethis and Judith Butler are probably right on the money. (hey, tanglethis, I wrote my Master’s Thesis on Butler!!) Sometimes the blame is blurted out spontaneously, other times it’s been pondered for a long time. “Cripophobia,” perhaps?

We live in a society that constructs health as a MORAL issue. Health is discussed ad nauseum in all sorts of popular media. Maybe some people are terrified (perhaps subconsciously) at the possibility that their own health isn’t under their own control. If the disabled person right in front of them is to blame for being disabled, it makes the accuser feel secure that they themself can avoid disability if they try hard enough.

You asked for examples. Well, there’s John Sarno, whose book says that physical pain is repressed anger. Therefore, if your disability includes pain, you don’t have your emotional house in order. There was the top-level doctor I saw at Beth Israel Hospital (a prominent Boston hospital) who had known me for all of five minutes when he demanded, “Do you pray?”, and when he saw my hesitation to answer, reassured me that it was okay if I didn’t pray per se as long as I believed that I was going to get better (not be sick anymore). If I didn’t believe that, I was dooming myself to illness forever.

And intersecting with fatphobia, there are tons of cultural messages all around us that if we eat “right” and exercise “right,” out health is under our control. Well, that’s onyl partly true. But the more heartily someone belives that, the closer they move to believing that sick and disabled people did something wrong.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 7:10 pm

18 On April 24th, 2008, rebecca

oops, yikes, typos at the end:

…if we eat “right” and exercise “right,” our health is under our control. Well, that’s only partly true. But the more heartily someone believes that, the closer they move to believing that sick and disabled people did something wrong.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 7:12 pm

19 On April 24th, 2008, Cindy

I have to say I really enjoyed Barry Glassner’s analysis of antipathy toward McDonald’s. Conservatives abhor it because it has given the “underclass” a degree of economic mobility through management programs, without the typical 4-years-plus degree programs that make MBA program a big business.

Lefties abhor McDonald’s because of the “toxic” food that is supposedly promoting obesity in the poor (an assumption that discounts the factors of discrimination and food instability that accompany poverty).

He calls this tick “nutritional imperialism.” McDonald’s offers affordable food — meat, dairy, starch — that can be eaten with the fingers, and offers a place for children to play. Everyone hates McDonald’s. Yet no one goes after the four star restaurants — which serve only steamed veggies and dry, grilled chicken breast. (Yeah right. You can get some mighty high calorie stuff at upscale restaurants. Starbucks, too.)

Nope. It’s usually easier to go after Big Food or poverty-line fatties than to address the social issues that make food too expensive for families in poverty.

Well done, Rachel.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 7:16 pm

20 On April 24th, 2008, Rachel

Cindy - I thought Glassner made some great points about class-based objections to fast food. As you noted, all those rich creams and heavy sauces and large hunks of meat have just as much, if not more, calories than a Big Mac.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 7:21 pm

21 On April 24th, 2008, Sherie Sanders

Don’t forget pollution. There is growing research indicating that this too can cause weight gain in some people. All our bodies have so many chemicals that didn’t even exist before WW2 and one of the functions of fat cells is to store chemicals. Interesting that the American Council on Science and Health once declared a moral war on obesity. Who funds them? The chemical companies!

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 7:50 pm

22 On April 24th, 2008, deborah

To add to some of Rebecca’s excellent examples, when I got RSI (crippling pain in both hands that kept me from, oh, reading, using a remote control, using forks, drinking without a straw, *walking*), a coworker asked me, and I quote “So what did you do wrong?”

Another coworker gave me a copy of Sarno’s aforementioned books, and when I read them and politely handed them back explaining that they would not help me, he told me that I was refusing to get better.

A hand surgeon told me that I had an emotional problem and should go to therapy to fix the problem with my hands. Of course, this hand surgeon was also under the mistaken impression that occupational therapy was the appropriate therapy for my emotional problem, so there were all kinds of loaded issues there.

A beloved teacher told me recently that my fear of pain is preventing me from healing.

Basically, a lot of the misunderstood disabilities (and I am trying really hard not to call them “disabilities which are more common among women” but apparently just failed) get treated as forms of hysteria. Elaine Showalter literally refers to chronic fatigue syndrome as a form of hysteria.

… of course, that’s just the invisible disabilities. People with visible disabilities (which can’t be dismissed as hysteria) have to deal with a whole slew of different problems.

posted on April 24th, 2008 at 9:38 pm

23 On April 25th, 2008, Fatadelic

Rebecca said:

…if we eat “right” and exercise “right,” our health is under our control. Well, that’s only partly true. But the more heartily someone believes that, the closer they move to believing that sick and disabled people did something wrong.

That belief (that sick or disabled people have somehow done something wrong) is very pervasive in our society. Suprisingly two groups that a diametrically opposite seem to hold these beliefs dearest; right-wing christians and left-wing new agers.

When my mother was rapidly dying from an extremely aggressive form of breast cancer that had pervaded her bones, her lungs, her kidneys and her liver, she was still being told by people from both those groups that she could effect a cure by positive thinking and prayer, (or meditation or reiki). And was told to change to a juice diet - this when we she was lucky to be ingesting anything at all and we were making her highest calorie milkshakes imaginable just so she would have some sustanence. At her wake, a particularly toxic example of the latter (new age) said mum must have been filled with repressed rage for the cancer to be so aggressive and pervasive and implied that mum could have prevented the cancer by dealing with it earlier in her life. I felt like slapping the bitch down and only didn’t because my partner deftly got me away from that situation.

posted on April 25th, 2008 at 4:12 am

24 On April 25th, 2008, Bri

Authors such as Rhonda Byrne (The Secret) and Louise L Hay (You can heal you body) perpetuate the belief that we are responsible for what comes into our lives whether it be fat, cancer, gall stones etc etc. It is a sophisticated form of victim blaming. If we don’t “heal” then it is our own fault for hanging onto our anger/hate/whatever or for not visualising/attracting thinness/good health/whatever. Reminds me of my fundy Xtian experience where I was told my (ex)husband continued to be abusive because I wasn’t praying hard enough.

posted on April 25th, 2008 at 6:50 am

25 On April 25th, 2008, Bri

Fatadelic,

SNAP!

posted on April 25th, 2008 at 6:52 am

26 On April 25th, 2008, Fauve

This new-age, “be-positive” crap that gets thrown at anyone who contracts a disease like cancer is really upsetting to me. And not just “new-age” people mouth these feel-good platitudes - plenty of conservatives and just regular, middle of the road people can get all positive and pious toward anyone who suffers any castrophe, bad luck or hardship of any sort. Lost a child to death? Just be positive! Poor? Be positive! Dying of cancer? Be positive! Fat? Be positive! (About being fat itself, even if it’s painful for you - Or about losing the weight AND being in a state of perpetual shame if you Don’t or Can’t). Sure, I believe in being positive, but I also believe in being honest about the pain I am going through. If I’m not, my “being positive” is really just a complete lie to myself and others.

posted on April 25th, 2008 at 7:32 am

27 On April 25th, 2008, Sarah

I have to say I really enjoyed Barry Glassner’s analysis of antipathy toward McDonald’s. Conservatives abhor it because it has given the “underclass” a degree of economic mobility through management programs, without the typical 4-years-plus degree programs that make MBA program a big business.

Whaaa? That’s out of line with, oh, every conservative theory and principle I’m aware of.

posted on April 25th, 2008 at 9:21 am

28 On April 26th, 2008, Jackie

This page is bookmarked! If you want more information on where the whole pull your bootstraps up and loose weight already, societal view comes from, you should read:

The Obesity Epidemic: Science, Morality and Ideology by Michael Gard & Jan Wright

It explains alot when it comes to the moral issues behind the obesity epidemic, and how the obesity epidemic is based on moral expectations for those who are fat, rather than any sound science.

posted on April 26th, 2008 at 3:07 am

29 On April 27th, 2008, Tanizaki

To what degree can genetics account for the spike of overweight in the United States from the late 1970s to the end of the century? One would not expect to see such spikes (or valleys, for that matter) in a factor with such allegedly high heritability.

posted on April 27th, 2008 at 10:56 pm

30 On April 28th, 2008, Rachel

Tanizaki: Anytime you have a sedentary population with adequate food supplies, the body weight of the population goes up. This is foremost an indicator of increased health, just as heights and longevity continues to increase. But it does not indicate that people are simply becoming more gluttenous. In fact, as studies have shown fat people eat no more than their thin counterparts, I think we need to examine what it is people are eating and how their bodies are genetically predisposed to them. As I noted in my post, the rise of low-fat and fat-free diet foods emerged in the 1980s - foods journalist Michael Pollan has argued made Americans fatter. Too, the rise of dieting has emerged from a relatively small player in the economic pond to now one of the highest industries in the food chain. I’d love to see a comprehensive study looking at the rates of obesity in tandem with the rates of dieting.

I think as a culture we suffer from poor nutrition, but fat people don’t have the monopoly on this. Once again, it comes back to genetic predisposition and the individual ways in which our bodies react to and metabolize different nutrients. And, of course, genetics is just one of the multitude of reasons why someone may weigh what they do.

posted on April 28th, 2008 at 9:18 am

31 On April 28th, 2008, Tanizaki

Food supplies have been adequate in the United States since most of the people reading these were born. The only food shortage that comes to mind in recent memory is the government-imposed rationing of WWII, and even then, the civilian populace was far from starving. Even if we accept your premise, there was no spike in food supply in the United States starting in the late 70s/early 80s.

Although you mention a number of “studies”, but do not cite to them, I am unable to respond to them. However, I will refer you to the following paper (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=464105), which hypothesizes time preference as a partial factor. Of particular note is the correlation between obesity and savings rates. Specifically, nations with lower savings rates tend to have higher obesity rates. Of course, I am happy to review any peer-reviewed articles regarding the points you have made. It might be a good idea to maintain links to such articles in a “Library/Reading Room” section, don’t you think?

Michael Pollan is not very persuasive to me. I found Botany of Desire to be rather nonsensical, despite the riveting account of his personal experiences with tulips and potatoes. He’s a journalist, not the first profession I would look to for insight on public health or statistical trends in the population.

Lastly, correlation is not causation, as we all know. Did dieting’s spike cause obesity, did it spike in response to it, or for other reasons? One would not posit that increasing cancer research causes cancer, for example.

While humans like to assign a single cause to every event, that is often not the case. It is empirical that there has been an obesity spike in the US and other nations since the late 70s/early 80s. A genetic explosion is unlikely. I think time preference is a factor. I think technology is a factor. I think genetics is a factor, although I do not think it can account much for the spike. It is also worth noting that genetic predisposition is different from genetic predetermination.

posted on April 28th, 2008 at 12:44 pm

32 On April 28th, 2008, candi

ok there are 3 types of eating disorders and ana and mia are not the other ones most call it bin (short for binge eating) this is the worst i think ana and mia and bin are good to an extent i do not think we should get so skinny you can see our bones i need ana and mia and help b/c i am very obesse and i have very little control when it comes to food and i dont have money 4 allo the dieting programs 4 nowa days soo i took up ana and mia 4 help and support but most proanamia people look up to ana & mia as people they are our best friends

posted on April 28th, 2008 at 12:53 pm

33 On April 28th, 2008, Rachel

Tanizaki: I don’t have time to provide citation information, but as you seem quite proficient and knowledgeable on the field, you should be able to find such studies with little effort.

And I disagree with your claims on food security. The number one health risk that continues to face children today is poverty. Food supplies in general may be adequate, but quality, healthy food supplies are not. Someone who overeats an abundance of processed foods can still be suffering from malnutrition. It’s quality, not quantity, that’s key here. This is a problem that continues to grow worse with rising class disparities and global food insecurities.

And I also debate your claims to such a steep “spike.” Research shows the average weight increase in American women since the early 1990s has only been 5 - 7 pounds. Many women can gain and lose this paltry amount the week of their periods. Since studies were often not kept or inadequately kept in the early to mid-nineteenth century, I don’t think we can use them as a reliable gauge by which to measure “spikes” in obesity.

Genetic predisposition is certainly not fatalist, but it’s also not as imbued with the level of choice you seem to indicate. I can weigh what is considered average for my height, but it would require an anorexic lifestyle of 2-hour daily workouts and less than 800 calories a day to do so. I could certainly “choose” this lifestyle, but how sustainable and healthy a choice is it?

Instead of coming to my blog and putting the onus on me to look up studies I’ve long referenced and are available by a basic search of my site or the sites I link to, how about you take the time to familiarize yourself with our arguments and try to understand our point before you try and disprove us all? Thanks for your input.

posted on April 28th, 2008 at 1:15 pm

34 On April 28th, 2008, Rachel

Candi - You are right in that there exists a broad spectrum of eating disordered behaviors (even more than the three you described), but you are wrong in that they any of them are your “best friends” nor are they “good” to any extent. An eating disorder is not your friend; it is your worst enemy. I do hope you realize this and seek out a more constructive way of dealing with those issues that had led you to believe an eating disorder to be your ally.

posted on April 28th, 2008 at 1:34 pm

35 On April 28th, 2008, Tanizaki

I appreciate the constraints on your time, so I have no problem waiting for you to provide citations to support your claims regarding what “studies show”. The burden of proof lies with the party making an affirmative claim, so it is not up to me to find materials to support your claim. When you do get around to citing them, please keep in mind that I am thinking of peer-reviewed articles, not AP or Reuters summaries of studies. For example, (Relationship between juvenile obesity, dietary energy and fat intake and physical activity. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2002 Apr;26(4):458-63.) showed that the obese juveniles of the subject group consumed significantly more total calories than the non-obese subjects. You can view a PDF of the article here: http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v26/n4/pdf/0801967a.pdf. You may wish to note the “Discussion” section, which discusses those articles that show that obese subjects consume as much or even less calories than non-obese subjects, and methodological problems with those studies.

You can “debate” the spike all you want, but it is empirical. For example, see http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2007pres/11/pr20071127a.html, where the government states between 1976-1980 and 2003-2004, “[f]or children aged 2-5 years, the prevalence increased from 5.0 percent to 13.9 percent; for those aged 6-11 years, prevalence increased from 6.5 percent to 18.8 percent; and for those aged 12-19 years, prevalence increased from 5.0 percent to 17.4 percent.” These are increases of 278%, 289%, and 348%, respectively, in under 30 years. One does not need to review antebellum data to see the spike. I would be interested in reviewing the data you mentioned that was limited to American women, which was limited to only the past ten years while I was speaking of the last several decades. Of course, I was not talking about just women.

I am puzzled by your comment about “quality, healthy food”. In this post, http://the-f-word.org/blog/index.php/2008/04/02/healthy-eating-101/, you gave approval to a list of ten tips, which included “There are no “good” or “bad” foods”. Now you are talking about good and bad foods. Perhaps there is a nuance I am missing. For the record, I agree that “good food” and “bad food” are myths. I will disagree that processed food is bad. I would prefer to drink pasteurized milk rather than raw milk that is swimming with pathogens. Unfortunately, I am not your doctor so I have no idea of the accuracy of your self-reported information about your energy requirements.

As stated above, the “onus” is on you to support your claims besides saying “studies show”. I have no idea what studies these are, so I have no way to evaluate them or their methodology. Since they inform your opinion, you are better equipped to provide them, and the burden of proof is yours in any event. Even on your blog.

Lastly, at least we can agree that Candi should not seek to acquire an eating disorder.

posted on April 28th, 2008 at 8:11 pm

36 On April 28th, 2008, Rachel

Tanizaki - A simple search of my site will yield your results. These scholarly, academic and empirically supported studies are all available and have been referenced both on my site and others I link to repeatedly. Your refusal to do so only indicates your intent here, which is not to understand and debate, but rather to disprove and antagonize the blog author.

Since my goal here is not to do research you yourself ought be conducting if you are truly interested in the science of the matter and not just in special interests funded studies, I see little point in wasting my time gathering evidence and citational information that can be found by typing in a few keywords into my search engine or Google.

So, either educate yourself and then enter the debate informed, or leave. It’s really as simple as that.

posted on April 28th, 2008 at 8:23 pm

37 On June 10th, 2008, LaurenSS

Good, I totally agree!

posted on June 10th, 2008 at 9:56 pm

38 On June 12th, 2008, LaurenSch

I think fat stereotypes are absolutely awful, especially in the media. Women automatically that that they should be rail thin, with no hips, not but, and toothpick legs. In reality, this is absolutely not true. Women believe this because of what they are exposed to in everyday life. A person can’t go throughout their day without seeing a celebrity or a model that is 5’10 and 115 pounds. This is NOT realistic.
I also think it is interesting that when you think of overweight issues, a person automatically thinks of overweight women. Never men. Why is it that women have to be so conscious of their weight all of the time? I never hear a man say that he is “On a diet.” I never hear a man say, “Oh my gosh, I look so fat in these jeans.” When a woman has a few extra pounds on her she feels as it is a huge ordeal, but when a man has a beer gut it is no big deal. To me, men are still attractive if they have six pack abs, or if they have a couple extra pounds on them. But the media says that if a women doesn’t have a flat stomach, and if she has a few extra pounds on her that it is not attractive. I think that is absolute bologna. The media never pressures men to become skinny or lose weight. Why does the media target women so much, and NEVER EVER men? Men never feel the pressure that women do about weight.
I have to admit, though, when I do see an overweight person walking along the street I automatically think that they eat unhealthy, and never exercise. Although, this could be the case with some people, but I believe that America is oblivious to some of the diseases and problems listed above. The United States of America is a society shaped and molded around the media, and sometimes the media is not right.

posted on June 12th, 2008 at 10:31 pm