One of the questions that fat acceptance advocates get asked a lot is: what about your health? How can you be healthy, being so fat? How can you accept your fat if it’s making you unhealthy? These questions are based on some misunderstandings, for sure, but the answers to them are complicated.
Please note that I talk about “size” acceptance rather than “fat acceptance” because even if skinny women are treated as more desirable sex objects than fat women, the umbrella problem hanging over all this is that we’re all being judged mercilessly every day on our desirability as sex objects. 500 years ago, fat women may have been considered more desirable, but that doesn’t mean things were better for us then.
The numbers that matter
In determining the quality of your health, weight is one number that doesn’t matter. The numbers that do matter include your good (HDL) cholesterol, bad (LDL) cholesterol and triglyceride ratios, and your blood sugar, among many others. If a doctor tells you that you should lose a few pounds, ask her why – which numbers are off? If she shrugs and says they’re all fine, but it’s just a good idea to lose weight, you’ve got a doctor who’s been brainwashed into thinking “fat=bad.” It’s not that simple, and someone with several advanced degrees in the health field has no business not knowing that.
[ETA: BMI, the way many insurance providers and health practitioners apply it, is a load of bullshit, too. The link goes into great detail on why it's "mathematical snake oil."]
Fat doesn’t cause disease…
There is actually no evidence that being fat will give you diabetes or cancer or PCOS or any other health issues. Being obese tends to correlate with some health problems, but the causes of the health problems may be multiple, and they certainly aren’t thoroughly understood in current medical research.
It must be pointed out that many obese people are perfectly healthy, if you look at the numbers that matter. This seems to refute the idea that fat alone causes artery clogging, diabetes, or anything else it’s often blamed for – clearly, there are at least other factors besides fat, and it may even be the case that fat’s nothing to do with it at all. As long as your other numbers are good, your weight does not impact your health. If you can possibly afford to get your numbers tested once a year, or even every few years, do so. If the numbers that matter are good, your weight is fine.
…but the cures can involve weight loss
Regardless of your size, if the numbers that matter are not where they should be – if your bad cholesterol’s high and the good cholesterol is low, or the blood sugar is heading into pre-diabetic territory, or whatever – then you should make some diet and exercise changes to bring those numbers down. In the course of bringing them down, you may or may not lose weight. People in the underweight to barely overweight range can have bad cholesterol, blood sugar and other numbers that matter, and chances are the dietary changes they make will not cause them to lose significant weight. Also note: you can lose lots of weight without improving the numbers that matter. This may be the single most important fact to memorize: losing weight doesn’t solve anything. Taking steps to improve the numbers that matter, with weight loss as a possible side effect, can solve health problems.
If a diet is bringing the numbers that matter to where they should be, then it’s a good thing. Being on it doesn’t mean a failure to accept your size. Any weight loss incurred in correcting the numbers that matter is merely a side effect of the treatment for legitimate health problems.
Ignorant doctors
Doctors put a lot of overweight women right off getting physicals. Many, many doctors focus on weight to the exclusion of actual health problems that are staring them in the face. (They also tend to look at skinny women and erroneously assume all their numbers are where they should be.) These doctors need to go back to school for a few years, plain and simple. That we tolerate this ignorance in people we license as experts perhaps suggests something about why the United States is falling like the Roman Empire and will probably never recover. Don’t internalize other people’s foolishness (don’t read the comments).
I suggest telling a doctor right up front something like this: “I know there’s no proof that fat causes health problems. I don’t want you to tell me to lose weight. However, I do want you to tell me if my cholesterol, blood sugar or other reliable indicators of disease are off, and if they are, tell me what I need to change and I’ll change it. But if you focus on the weight, you’re not focusing on the right numbers.”
Doctors who promote weight loss for weight loss’ sake are not doing anyone any good, anymore than fashion designers are. Conversely, doctors who promote improved nutrition and exercise for the purpose of keeping the numbers that matter under control are doing it right. Diet and exercise are preferable to taking pills to control these brewing problems, because the pills can have far worse side effects than weight loss.
In conclusion
Basically, what I’m suggesting is that we learn to ignore numbers that don’t really matter – weight and size measurements – and learn to pay attention to the numbers that really are helping people live longer and prevent disease: cholesterol, blood sugar, etc. I have a family tree full of overweight and obese people with excellent cholesterol and blood sugar numbers who live to be well up in their nineties, and I’ve shared this fact with more than one boss who thought fat people were automatically costing his company more in insurance. It really sucks that we can’t get all the right people thinking this way right off the bat. But if we refuse to take seriously advice about what we “should” weigh, and instead insist on reframing that advice in terms of the numbers that matter, maybe we’ll influence one person at a time.
Maybe we’ll influence a doctor who will get curious, do more research, learn what I’ve learned (without his advanced degrees – ha) and start teaching all his patients the right way to look at their body numbers.
Maybe we’ll influence a boss who only wants to hire skinny people because he mistakenly thinks they won’t have long-term, chronic, expensive health problems but fat people will.
Human beings like visual solutions. It’s hard to get cholesterol numbers – there’s blood to be drawn, tests to be run, expenses – but it’s very easy to look at someone and judge them based on their size. The appeal of oversimplified answers must be fought with rolled eyes, logical refutations and perhaps, eventually, even the ostracization of people who insist on sticking with them. In short, society needs to start demanding that people think instead of encouraging them not to.
Size acceptance can and should incorporate concern about the other numbers that represent actual health issues. Despite correlations, weight and size measurements really don’t have anything to do with the numbers that matter. Separating them in your head can help you accept your size while still pursuing good health.
{ 55 comments… read them below or add one }
Next Comments →
+1
You know this has been a recently pushed hot button for me. I wish I was more assertive with doctors, but I go in kind of on the defensive already because I know what’s coming. Then it comes, and I get so flustered and frustrated I totally lose it. So, some of the onus is on me. But at the same time, if I say, “Hey, I’ve noticed some discoloration on my skin, I’d like to see a dermatologist.” I rather expect that’ll be taken more seriously than me pointing to weight on a checklist of issues the doctor wants to know I’m concerned about (a list which included nothing else troublesome to me) and the visit becoming all about that, and not the potential skin cancer.
ETA: Mind you, I would love to lose 20 lbs, but my health has nothing to do with it. It’s my own personal preference and a closet full of clothes that could look and fit much better if I did.
sbg(Quote) (Reply)
sbg,
Ugh, yes. I went to a women’s health clinic to get my birth control script renewed. The conversation I had with the nurse-practitioner went along the lines of:
NP: You understand, your obesity means the pills won’t be as effective for you.
Me: Okay.
NP: This dosage was calibrated for someone half your weight, so it will be spread twice as thin throughout your body.
Me: *thinking simultaneously “someone half my weight would be well below the average American woman” and “if calibration is that important, why don’t you have higher dosages?” * Okay.
NP: And really obesity is unhealthy in all aspects.
Me: Okay.
NP: Here’s a pamphlet on how to eat healthily.
Me: Do you need anything else before you can give me my pills?
On my way out the door, she reminded me that my pills would have reduced effectiveness due to my weight. Somehow I doubt that’s true, given that no other health professional who has prescribed me BC has said that to me. And since it was a charity clinic, I didn’t feel I could say anything about her behavior.
Sylvia Sybil(Quote) (Reply)
Sylvia Sybil,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100816155006.htm
ScienceDaily (Aug. 16, 2010) — The first study to compare the effectiveness of the birth control pill in women with marked weight differences has found that the pill works equally well in women with obesity and thinner women. This new finding by physician-scientists at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center refutes a long-held conviction among many doctors that the pill may not reliably prevent pregnancy in women who are overweight or obese.
Maria(Quote) (Reply)
Oh how I have been there. I have a 5k range where I like to stay in, because I feel good within that range. And I have kept within that range for the last 5 years (I’m 25). However, that range comes with a BMI of (on average) 27. Never mind that I feel good, that I’m athletic, strong and have had professionals measure where the fat’s at (hint: it is nowhere near the danger zones) because it’s an INDICATOR, I should get my BMI down to 25 according the good doc. Heeeelll NO.
Of course, I do get into angry lecture mode when I am discussing this, so I guess that might not be helping things along.
Maartje(Quote) (Reply)
[I've allowed this comment through to demonstrate what we're dealing with AND refute her plausible-sounding claims. Mods, please do not trash. - Jennifer Kesler]
” As long as your other numbers are good, your weight does not impact your health.”
This is just so wrong-headed and dangerous.
Weight affects your joints making it more likely you will be younger when you need a knee replacement. Obesity even with “good numbers” increases the morbidity of all surgical procedures, and increases the risks associated with anesthesia.
Fat impacts healing, blood supply to adipose tissue is not that good, so healing adipose tissue is more difficult and it takes longer, complications( infection, dehiscence of the surgical wound), are more likely.
Obesity causes the heart to work harder, aging it faster than the heart of those who are of normal weight . Obese people are often less active this causes venous statis which increases the risk for pulmonary emboli.
Bringing people to a more normal weight often solves a very big medical problem, High Blood Pressure. HBP is often the cause of Kidney failure, Heart Failure, and contributes to Liver Failure.
That is just to start, and does not even go to some credible studies regarding adiposity and colon cancer.
So, to think that only the numbers matter is frankly ridiculous.
giilian(Quote) (Reply)
sbg,
How is that NOT just malpractice? Melanoma is one of the most lethal cancers around, and fortunately can often be prevented by catching and removing in pre-cancerous stages, but let’s worry about twenty pounds instead!
Maria, Sylvia Sybil,
Thanks for the link, Maria, because what Sylvia Sybil relayed from her doc sounded like complete bullshit to me. Once again, doctors have just made up something that sounds logical, hurled it like a bludgeon at lots of women, and THEN someone has actually bothered to do a study and OOPS.
Maartje,
I probably should have mentioned BMI. It’s really NOT an indicator of anything, not even how much fat you have: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106268439. It certainly doesn’t indicate anything about health, but does that stop insurance companies from using it to screw people out of services? Oh, no, not in the US at least.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Maria,
Jennifer Kesler,
I had the link to the actual study for a while, because I’ve brought it up to gynos before. My present gyno (who’s amazing) explained that you might get break through bleeding if you’re overweight, but that’s not indicative of effectiveness.
Maria(Quote) (Reply)
*scans gillian’s post, sees no links to back up her claims* It’s so nice when a direct messenger from God Almighty pops ’round to tell us clowns how it really works! /sarcasm.
And this person’s email address suggests she is a doctor. What a surprise.
“When” you need a knee replacement? Are you for real? Did you somehow miss the part about my family tree is overflowing with obese people who live consistently into their 90s without ANY of the health problems correlated with obesity? Well, in case it wasn’t clear, none of them ever needed knee replacements, either. How credibility-bombing to suggest fat people always need knee surgeries.
But maybe you just chose a word wrongly. Let’s continue and not harp on that one so much.
Bullshit. It’s so helpful when people actually study something enough to get the truth of it.
But can be rendered a non-problem by, like, skilled surgery instead of the usual butchery. (Sorry, a Jehovah’s Witness friend whose religious precludes blood transfusions has been educating me about get-’em-in-get-’em-out surgical techniques that result in unnecessary tissue trauma and blood loss.)
And which part of this doesn’t show up in the same blood panels alongside “the numbers that matter”? If your doctor feels your heart rate is too high at rest, then – as with cholesterol and others I named – that could be a reason for her to advise a diet and exercise strategy that will get it under control. Duh?
And again, bp is one of the numbers that matter, and while losing weight can help with it, it’s typically more important to reduce salt intake, at least in the typical American diet. Remember all the healthy fatties in my family tree? Most of us have LOW blood pressure until we get into our 70s, at which point it becomes normal or high.
Once again, bullshit. Consuming animal fats or a high fat diet – something that some skinny people do a lot of and some fat people do none of – is what the study suggests may cause colon cancer. How is it I can find this out and you can’t?
Frankly, your entitled ignorance is appalling.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Interesting, thank you. The obsession with a woman’s weight is really sickening. Hell, I’m slim and I not only don’t give a whit about sex appeal and “femininity” and never did, I actively try to avoid these things … yet the nagging inner voice is still there sometimes. It’s nasty to imagine how much worse it must be for women who are chubbier — not to mention the very real health risks you outline here. Health risks that do not result from one’s weight but from others’ perception of one’s weight and overlooking the real issues. How utterly messed up is that, especially when it comes from professionals who should know better?
And I’m sure that in many cases it’s deliberate. For example, selling the diet fad of the week is a lot easier if the target audience is already insecure and full of misinformation and self-hate … Maybe the awareness that fat-shaming is, among other things, yet another aspect of the omnipresent message that women are wrong, ugly and disgusting the way we naturally are and must undergo all sorts of expensive, questionable contortions to even come close to the point where we would be “allowed” to feel like a worthy human being can also be a part of size acceptance?
Korva(Quote) (Reply)
Thank you for this one. I’ll be able to link to this next time I get into one of those tiresome arguments…
esther(Quote) (Reply)
Maria,
Linkie says:
WHAAAT. Sciencey people – medical sciencey people, who study how to keep people alive – were relying on self-reporting of memories surrounding a body status many people have skewed perceptions of (size), dependent on a variable associated with weight (pregnancy)? I count at least four flaws here.
And thank you for the link.
Sylvia Sybil(Quote) (Reply)
giilian,
Okay, let’s start with some basics here. Of my four grandparents, three of them lived past ninety. My paternal grandfather dropped dead of a heart attack one morning in his late seventies or early eighties (I think – I was about 10 at the time). My maternal grandfather (who was on oxygen for the last year or so of his life) died at the age of 93; my paternal grandmother died of a stroke about a month before her 93rd birthday (she was the only one who’d been “normal” or low weight all her life); and my plump, cuddly maternal grandmother finally died off about four years ago, at the age of about 95, from complications stemming from insufficient pain management from a broken bone in her hip caused by a fall.
Weight affects your joints making it more likely you will be younger when you need a knee replacement. Obesity even with “good numbers” increases the morbidity of all surgical procedures, and increases the risks associated with anesthesia.
Fat impacts healing, blood supply to adipose tissue is not that good, so healing adipose tissue is more difficult and it takes longer, complications( infection, dehiscence of the surgical wound), are more likely.
None of my relatives ever needed a knee replacement. My maternal grandmother had a hip replacement in her late 80s. The only relative I know of who’s needed abdominal surgery was my maternal aunt (Mum’s sister), who needed it to deal with ovarian cancer. That was about 20 years ago, she’s still going strong. I strongly suspect the surgery itself was done via laparoscopy, so minimal incisions, minimal damage, and thus minimal healing time required.
Bringing people to a more normal weight often solves a very big medical problem, High Blood Pressure. HBP is often the cause of Kidney failure, Heart Failure, and contributes to Liver Failure.
My maternal grandfather had chronic low blood pressure throughout his life (I think his wife’s blood pressure was a little on the high side, but that was correctable with medication). I’ve inherited that through my mother (who also has low blood pressure – she can feel faint hanging out laundry), so it seems my liver, kidneys and heart will all be safe for a while longer.
As for colon cancer – I also appear to have inherited the family tendency (maternal side) toward irritable bowel syndrome, which I understand is something of a contra-indicant for a tendency toward colon cancer.
One other little inherited tendency I picked up from both sides of the family: I have chronic depression (which I strongly suspect is actually bipolar II). Which means when I have well-meaning, charming people like you telling me how I’m going to drop dead Any Fucking Day Now, all I can think is “well, that’ll be a nice change.” I’ve no real wish to die, and no active plans for suicide, but I’ll tell you what, there are a lot of mornings where waking up feels like a huge betrayal. Because one of the wonderful things about the fat-shaming which has spread through Western culture like a cancer from the lovely US of A since the 1960s is it means I really can’t think of any particular reason why I’d actually want to live.
As someone at Shapely Prose put it once: if shame worked as a way of keeping people thin, there would be no fat people.
Do me a fucking favour, gillian (if you’re still reading, if you didn’t just drive by to drop off your load of shame and humiliation and nastiness). Have a look at the morbidity rates from depression, and tell me – of the spare 50kg or so I’m carrying on my hips, and the salesdemon for suicide I’m carrying in my head, which one is more likely to actually kill me in the next forty years?
PS: I’m 40 now, and from family averages, it looks like I’ve at least another what, 50 years to look forward to…
Megpie71(Quote) (Reply)
Jennifer Kesler,
Sometimes I wonder if people read posts about acceptance as some sort of battle cry for all people to go out and get fat. I think they don’t even know why they feel that way, but I’m sure it’s a lot to do with why the lingering skinny = healthy/fat = unhealthy unequivocally is such a hard mentality to break. Neither are 100% true, yet everyone believes the epitome of health is being as thin as possible and being fat will kill you and cost the nation billions of dollars.
sbg(Quote) (Reply)
The book The Obesity Myth is a good one as far as the whole weight/health, well, myth goes. More people should read it.
Starting with my workplace’s wellness committee and our insurance company. My workplace has a wellness initiative, you know, to get everyone to eat better, exercise more, and lose weight. Because everyone needs to lose weight, amiright. I’ve tried to explain what’s so horribly wrong with this, but no one seems to be listening. I couldn’t even finish the health assessment that kicked the whole thing off because it required me to agree to manage my weight. The thing isn’t mandatory, but it is really disgusting.
depizan(Quote) (Reply)
Megpie71,
Wow. If you weren’t a year older than me, I’d think we were separated at birth. I just… 99% of your post, I could say “ditto.”
This is a great point! People tend to infer extremes into any statement you make against the status quo, i.e., “women’s rights are not quite what they should be” becomes “we hate and wish to crush men under our heels.” I see that bizarre way of thinking so often that it makes total sense that just stating that “fat is not evil” could be reinterpreted as “we should all get fat, it’s awesome!”
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
depizan,
Oh, yes. They’ve got the employers well trained to buy into this shit, and it really IS disgusting.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
depizan,
I’m actually all for wellness programs. If only wellness didn’t actually mean weight loss…
sbg(Quote) (Reply)
Another small thought: my background, class wise, is largely working class. I’m in the first generation in my extended family where all the kids were able to go to university. Of my parent’s generation, my mother and her sister were nurses (taught by the old “apprenticeship” system), my father did the equivalent of a technical college diploma to become a minister of religion (and a brief apprenticeship to become a mine assayer’s assistant), my father’s brother did the equivalent of an apprenticeship to become a radiographer (he used to operate x-ray machines), and my mother’s brother had the option to go to university, but instead got a number of untrained semi-professional jobs here and there around the country town he lived in (doing things which ranged from providing advice to farmers in the region to office work through to computer programming – self-taught – and finally to providing handyman services for one of the local motels).
We’re all descendants of people who survived on low or very low income levels (one of my great-grandfathers was a miner, another was, I think, a tenant farmer in Yorkshire) through adverse times and disease. I’m a descendant of people who didn’t get days off for being sick, who couldn’t recline on the sofa after childbirth and hand the children over to the nurse (my female ancestors were more likely at best to have been the nursemaids or housemaids, and might possibly have got the actual day of physical labour off, but they would have been expected back to work as soon as possible shortly afterwards) and who didn’t get weeks or months of convalescent time to recover from illnesses. So yeah, it’s possible my genes might have been shaped by a different set of social and cultural selectors to those of some upper-middle class executive with at least three generations of inherited wealth before him to cushion the impact of reality.
All of which points to the very real truth that people are individuals, and that no general rule is true in all cases. There are always exceptions. This includes those rules about the risks of being fat. I come from a social and cultural background which most likely selected for being able to put on weight in good years, hold onto it tooth and nail through the bad years, and survive through the worst years without actually falling ill. It shaped the way my body looks (I’ve been told I “don’t look that fat” when I tell people what my clothing size is) and the way my body handles the way it looks. I have solid bones, a great deal of physical strength for my size, and a tendency to put on flesh. I’m a peasant, and I fucking well look like one.
And you know what? I’m damn proud of it. My ancestors did the same as everyone else’s. They fucking well survived. That’s the prize, after all.
Megpie71(Quote) (Reply)
sbg,
EXACTLY. But anything more would be COMPLICATED, and we don’t want to think! Hell, just today, we’ve decided how many creamers to put in our coffee, which route to take to work, and whether to respond to emails now, or after coffee. Life is HARD. /sarcasm
Megpie71,
That sounds very much like my background. It’s also interesting to note that many of my ancestors (and it sounds like yours, too) did a lot of physical labor most days of their lives, walked more places than they drove to, and had access to good, locally farmed foods… and yet they still weren’t slim. So the old “Oh we’re all fat because we eat processed foods and drive everywhere and aren’t active” it another bit of bullshit that sounds logical until you, like, compare it with reality.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
sbg,
As to skinny=healthy, my sis is 165cm/50kg and would live off KFC if there was no-one to cook for her. Never seen her excercise, either. It wouldn’t surprise me if those numbers of hers are terrible. But she’s super-skinny so apparantly, she must be super-healthy, too :8
Gabriella(Quote) (Reply)
Jennifer Kesler,
I tend to find myself wondering about these people who are all terrified about TEH DEATHFATZ – what on earth do they think is going to happen should they live a long and healthy life, exercising religiously, avoiding saturated fats, avoiding all the red meat, keeping healthy all the way… do they think their $DEITY_OF_CHOICE or the universe at large is going to look down at them and say something along the lines of “Oh, you’ve been such a Good Boy/Good Girl, you shall Live Forever as a reward”? I suspect they’re going to be deeply disappointed when they wind up dying just like the rest of us sinners.
A few of the things which get me about the whole business of the DEATHFATZ health kick thing are as follows:
* Nobody yet has been able to give me a solid figure as to how many years I’d gain through following their particular little religion.
* None of them seem to have realised that the extra years I’d purportedly gain will be added to the far end of my life, when I won’t want them anyway (being more than likely as senile as all get-out… both of my grandmothers were senile when they died, and let me tell you, that is the one thing I fear about ageing.)
There seems to be a few underlying assumptions to the whole business that nobody really stops and examines – such as the underlying assumption that if one Does Everything Right, one should be able to avoid dying indefinitely; and that Everyone is equally terrified of the prospect of physical death; and that not being terrified of the prospect of physical death is somehow abnormal. Well, maybe I am abnormal – but I’ve embraced the notion that one day I will die, and that one day my physical presence on this world will end, and one day my consciousness will stop. So I’d rather live the life I have now, rather than continually putting off living until I’ve lost five kilos. Because that One Day might be tomorrow, my physical death might come as a result of a piece of falling space junk, and I’d hate to die with regrets.
Megpie71(Quote) (Reply)
Leaving aside that whole debate about the difference between statistical correlation and causal relations, there is a point I think is important to make about size acceptance here:
Size acceptance is not fundamentally about arguing that all sizes are equally healthy. It is about treating people with equal respect regardless of their size. And yes, that would still apply to the case of a person whose size was a medical problem for them.
Dom Camus(Quote) (Reply)
This is so true. In particular, the point about ignorant doctors. Now I freely admit that I am severely overweight, that for my long-term health I need to/must lose some more weight. And I know I feel better when I lose some pounds, as I have had reinforced over the last 6mos as i slowly worked my way down 20 lbs. I am happy to talk to my favorite clinic doctor about this, and I have because it is a life-long battle that impacts me psychologically, as well as the impact on important numbers as I discovered last time I had my cholesterol checked. However, when I visit a doctor I do not want the entire focus to be on that to the exclusion of my other health concerns that may be more immediate.
For example, there is one particular doctor at the clinic I use that I refuse to see anymore unless there is absolutely no other choice, the receptionist knows this. I’m sure he is a fine doctor & he is actually quite nice; however, on several occasions where I was there for a random ailment and he turned the discussion to my weight for no reason other than I’m overweight I guess. I could tell he was sincere in his concern, but I decided I didn’t need to put up with the aggravation nor the (perceived?) criticism that was playing into the bad aspects of the major depressive episode I was battling at the time. I don’t need him, or anyone else to point out the obvious, I can see it in the mirror every day.
Tangentially related, I get really annoyed by the blanket statement of ‘you need to exercise more & eat less.’ So not helpful. I know I need to exercise more. But eat less? No, IMO its about knowing what you are eating, paying attention to portion sizes, eating regularly, and knowing how what you eat impacts your cholesteral, or blood pressure or blood sugar etc.
KLee(Quote) (Reply)
Jennifer Kesler,
Lol, JK, I thought I WAS reading your story until I paid more attention to the name!
Gabriella(Quote) (Reply)
sbg,
Exactly. If they’d stuck with the goals of eat better and get more exercise, I’d be all for it. But no, they just had to tack on “lose weight.” It’s a classic case of one of these things is not like the other. The science isn’t there for weight loss and there’s a huge difference in the emotional loading of the goals. For everyone. It’s different to, say, be a marathoner faced with a workplace goal of “get more exercise” than it is to be a thin person faced with a workplace goal of “lose weight.” One is just silly and the other might well be the beginning of an eating disorder. Likewise, it’s very different to be a couch potato faced with a workplace goal of “get more exercise” than an “overweight” person faced with the goal of “lose weight.” The couch potato might feel shame, but the overweight person almost certainly will.
I’d love to see a wellness program, workplace or otherwise, that was centered around making people feel good.
depizan(Quote) (Reply)
I just had a thought…how come tobacco smokers don’t get this kind of treatment, since tobacco has a proven, direct connection to cancer? Tobacco is romanticized as a symptom of a bad-boy, devil-may-care attitude; struggling to quit tobacco is romanticized as a family-friendly inspirational about overcoming drug addiction.
Other than paying more for health insurance and a few isolated anecdotes (half of which are “jerk didn’t want me polluting the air she was breathing, can you believe the nerve?”), I can’t think of any discrimination tobacco smokers face. I can’t think of any place where they’re demonized for their “choices” or made to look subhuman. I can’t imagine a show like Mike & Molly with a hook of “two tobacco smokers meet at Nicotine Anonymous and begin a relationship”; nor can I imagine Marie Claire running a blog post talking about how much the sight of smokers grosses the writer out and how they shouldn’t even be allowed on the air.
So it’s really not about health. Could it be because tobacco use doesn’t greatly affect one’s adherence to social standards of beauty (at least not for years), while obesity does? Hmm.
Dom Camus,
Very good point. Even in those cases where obesity is the result of a vice, that doesn’t justify treating them as less than human.
Sylvia Sybil(Quote) (Reply)
Sylvia Sybil,
Well, there’s an awful lot of public policy and law about where smokers can and cannot smoke, which – I’ve heard – is apparently in some smoker’s corners seen as an infringement on their rights. I’m pretty sure there’s an employer in my city that will not hire a smoker (!). Plus, many wellness programs do include smoking cessation, and I think it’s because most really agree that smoking is not good for you.
But you’re right, it’s not nearly as hyped. Every time I think about the “obesity epidemic”, I get that awful Lipozene commercial in my head, and how the “fat model” is always a woman.
sbg(Quote) (Reply)
sbg,
Grrr, Youtube comments…somebody doesn’t seem to understand the extenuating circumstances that can lead to a lack of exercise and poor diet.
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
In parts of Europe, at least, smoking has been losing some of its romanticized air. About time, too (says someone whose body reacts very strongly to nicotine fumes). I can mainly speak for Germany, where the “you’re infringing on my freedom to damage others’ health wherever I wish” crowd has been losing quite a bit of ground. Most smokers appear to accept it gracefully, too.
Here’s another issue that’s actually known to seriously damage the health of and kill people, yet sees much less of a public outcry or awareness than the oh-so-terrible “fat”: the other end of the weight scale. Anorexia. Bulemia. The works. Yes, there are small, slow steps being taken against it too — but not nearly enough, and our society still for the most part collectively wets itself in glee at the sight of women who are literally starving themselves. THAT is where the endless unquestioned “You must lose weight!” mantra leads in its final consequence. How can that still be considered admirable and desirable, while a strong, solidly built, healthy-as-a-horse person (Megpie7, your self-description is great) is vilified? It’s one of those things that make my brain want to to check out with a “divide by zero” error.
Korva(Quote) (Reply)
Thing I am currently wondering:
Why is my BMI being measured at the moment by one of the doctors I see? I am 32 weeks pregnant.
At least my trainer (I was a gym bunny prior to pregnancy) loathes BMI utterly. He was more worried about appropriate heart rates, etc. Admittedly, his own doctor told him he was obese. He had a tiny percentage of bodyfat, but was very, very muscled and weighed quite a bit.
Goldenblack(Quote) (Reply)
Next Comments →