In response to an anonymous comment made on my last post--don't you love people who attack behind an "anonymous" handle?--I want to clarify a few things about fat and thin.
The biggest cause of fatness is genetics. Heritability for obesity is .7, according to this article in the Proceedings of the Nutrition Society published by Cambridge University Press.
Upward of 90% of people who diet to lose weight gain the weight back and then some. So . . .
Diets don't work.
And . . . when diets don't work, they make people fatter.
Calories in do not equal calories out. (Contrary to anonymous' assertion, this concept does not defy the laws of physics; it's a function of metabolism, which is not uniform from person to person, and which is affected by a wide variety of factors. This not something that I "somehow think"; it's been observed over and over by scientists far more knowledgeable than I.)
Fat people tend to stay fat. (See Kolata.)
Thin people tend to stay thin. (See Kolata, Sims, Minnesota Starvation Study.)
Obesity appears to put people at risk for diabetes.
The relationship between fat/obesity and mortality is much more complicated than fat = bad, thin = good.
The current "moral panic" over fat hangs on a "health and wellness" peg but actually derives more from aesthetics than true health.
Even if we all agreed that fat was bad, we don't know how to make people thinner. See point #1.
And finally:
Fat haters have a lot in common with racists. They may cloak their arguments in other terms, but the bottom line is that they see fat people as ugly second-class citizens who don't deserve to be happy, healthy, or whole.
Now, that's ugly.
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Thursday, July 19, 2007
The fat wars and eating disorders
I was going to post this as a comment to the last post, but I feel it needs its own thread here.
I'm so sick of hearing that "eating disorders affect a tiny percentage of the population, but obesity kills thousands."
There is ample evidence that obesity does not kill anywhere near the numbers originally released by the CDC. But that's not where I want to go with this today. Even if it were true, this attitude makes me sick. It's like saying, "Losing a few people to e.d.s is worth it, if the rest of the fatties shape up and lose weight."
As some of you know, my daughter almost died of anorexia, an eating disorder that has the highest mortality rate of any psychiatric illness--up to 20%. It's true that diagnosed eating disorders affect only a small percentage of the population—but they are a very real and very significant problem. Especially if it's your child, your niece, your best friend's daughter.
The argument over whether fat is unhealthy or not is not merely an exercise in fat-bashing and prejudice. If it were, well, as someone said earlier, we could indulge in it until the amusement factor wore off and then be done with it. But there are real, heart-breaking consequences to this. And one is that we are now seeing an unbelievably rabid set of anti-fat messages directed at a vulnerable population: kids ages 8-15. Middle school is a time when just about every kid is horribly self-conscious about bodies to begin with. It's also the average age of onset for eating disorders--in the 13 to 15 range. I think we're going to see a rise in anorexia and bulimia as a direct consequence of this messaging. Anecdotally, I know of many families (including my own) whose eager-to-please children started trying to "eat healthy" in middle school and for a variety of reasons (including genetics) went too far and wound up with AN or BN. For those who are susceptible, this kind of pressure will certainly trigger eating disorders.
So this isn't an academic exercise. There is and will continue to be a very real fallout from the "just eat healthy" messaging. Children, families, and adults will suffer. If you've never really known someone with an eating disorder, let me say that you have NO IDEA how much that person suffers. And not just that person, but their family, and friends. Having anorexia is like living with a demon inside you that torments you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. There is no vacation from e.d.s. They take over your life. You have no life outside them.
And too many of these sufferers will die. Yes, die from eating disorders. And these young women and men are not negligible. They're not collateral damage in (yet another) stupid, ill-advised, mismanaged war. They are our daughters and sons. And I say, enough.
I'm so sick of hearing that "eating disorders affect a tiny percentage of the population, but obesity kills thousands."
There is ample evidence that obesity does not kill anywhere near the numbers originally released by the CDC. But that's not where I want to go with this today. Even if it were true, this attitude makes me sick. It's like saying, "Losing a few people to e.d.s is worth it, if the rest of the fatties shape up and lose weight."
As some of you know, my daughter almost died of anorexia, an eating disorder that has the highest mortality rate of any psychiatric illness--up to 20%. It's true that diagnosed eating disorders affect only a small percentage of the population—but they are a very real and very significant problem. Especially if it's your child, your niece, your best friend's daughter.
The argument over whether fat is unhealthy or not is not merely an exercise in fat-bashing and prejudice. If it were, well, as someone said earlier, we could indulge in it until the amusement factor wore off and then be done with it. But there are real, heart-breaking consequences to this. And one is that we are now seeing an unbelievably rabid set of anti-fat messages directed at a vulnerable population: kids ages 8-15. Middle school is a time when just about every kid is horribly self-conscious about bodies to begin with. It's also the average age of onset for eating disorders--in the 13 to 15 range. I think we're going to see a rise in anorexia and bulimia as a direct consequence of this messaging. Anecdotally, I know of many families (including my own) whose eager-to-please children started trying to "eat healthy" in middle school and for a variety of reasons (including genetics) went too far and wound up with AN or BN. For those who are susceptible, this kind of pressure will certainly trigger eating disorders.
So this isn't an academic exercise. There is and will continue to be a very real fallout from the "just eat healthy" messaging. Children, families, and adults will suffer. If you've never really known someone with an eating disorder, let me say that you have NO IDEA how much that person suffers. And not just that person, but their family, and friends. Having anorexia is like living with a demon inside you that torments you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. There is no vacation from e.d.s. They take over your life. You have no life outside them.
And too many of these sufferers will die. Yes, die from eating disorders. And these young women and men are not negligible. They're not collateral damage in (yet another) stupid, ill-advised, mismanaged war. They are our daughters and sons. And I say, enough.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
The fat wars
Deja Pseu's thoughtful, informative comment on my last post inspired me to start a new thread, which I've been thinking about all day, between reading and responding to comments here.
Deja asks why it's so much easier for people to accept the realities of a fast metabolism than a slow one. Good question. I think it's like the "career women" (in quotes because that was how they were known at the time) of the 1950s and 60s, at a time when most women didn't have careers outside the home. They were the women who made it by playing hardball with the boys, by becoming one of the boys. They paid dearly for their corporate successes, and they were considered freakish by the cultural norms of the time.
Those women were harder on the next generation of striving career women than any men. Their attitude was, "I had to suffer, sister, and by God, so do you."
And that's what Deja's question, and the whole notion of fat wars, reminds me of. In a culture where thinness confers status, and fatness confers untouchability, of course those who have it, who are thin, will hang on to their notions about it forever. To acknowledge that fat and thin are largely functions of genetics would be to give up that special status. And if you're not a naturally thin person, and you've practically killed yourself getting and staying thin, well, it's human nature to want others to suffer right along with you, isn't it?
Depressing thought.
Deja asks why it's so much easier for people to accept the realities of a fast metabolism than a slow one. Good question. I think it's like the "career women" (in quotes because that was how they were known at the time) of the 1950s and 60s, at a time when most women didn't have careers outside the home. They were the women who made it by playing hardball with the boys, by becoming one of the boys. They paid dearly for their corporate successes, and they were considered freakish by the cultural norms of the time.
Those women were harder on the next generation of striving career women than any men. Their attitude was, "I had to suffer, sister, and by God, so do you."
And that's what Deja's question, and the whole notion of fat wars, reminds me of. In a culture where thinness confers status, and fatness confers untouchability, of course those who have it, who are thin, will hang on to their notions about it forever. To acknowledge that fat and thin are largely functions of genetics would be to give up that special status. And if you're not a naturally thin person, and you've practically killed yourself getting and staying thin, well, it's human nature to want others to suffer right along with you, isn't it?
Depressing thought.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
The war on fat, in someone else's words
I won't say where I found this, but this post was written in response to someone raising the question of whether, perhaps, obesity might not be a completely evil phenomenon:
"Obesity is unhealthy. There is no doubt about it. It increases the risk of high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes (and subsequent problems with high blood pressure, kidney disease, and major foot problems, including multiple surgeries and amputations), stroke (partly secondary to the high blood pressure), arthritis (from the sheer weight on the joints), plus other medical and psychological problems. When it is also combined with smoking, which it often is, there is even more disaster.
It is a huge expense to society to have so many obese people with their medical problems. It is a preventable disease. People just need to eat less and exercise. They need more self-control.
To flaunt it as a nonpreventable problem is just not true. What has changed during the past 50 years is that people eat more and move less. Obese people want respect for their eating problems and acceptance. I think that as long as other people are able to control themselves and discipline themselves to exercise, then there will be contempt for those that cannot.
Also, I think that a lot of people resent the high cost of obesity. Health care would be a lot less if people just didn't eat double bacon cheeseburgers, fries and a Coke, then go out for ice cream or beer, and then sit and watch TV (or drink more beer, which has a lot of calories.)
Personally, I resent so much money being spent for accomodations and gastric stapling/bypass surgery because people want to gorge themselves constantly with fatty food!"
It's rare to see so many misconceptions and such hatred right out there in the open. Next you'll be telling us that fat people are responsible for global warming.
Personally, I resent the millions of dollars being wasted on ill-directed and ineffective "wellness" campaigns in schools and offices. And I resent the hell out of the ignorant assumptions behind your words.
So I'm going to exercise tremendous self-restraint (and you know how hard self-restraint is for a fat person!) and recommend that you educate yourself rather than simply parrot the anti-obesity rhetoric of our time. Start by reading Gina Kolata's new book, Rethinking Thin. Kolata is a well-respected New York Times science writer. She is also, if it matters to you--and I think it does--a thin person.
Then I'd suggest reading a little Paul Campos--he's also a thin person, though formerly fat. Then read this post at Kate Harding's fantastic blog.
Then come back and tell me how you feel about fat.
"Obesity is unhealthy. There is no doubt about it. It increases the risk of high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes (and subsequent problems with high blood pressure, kidney disease, and major foot problems, including multiple surgeries and amputations), stroke (partly secondary to the high blood pressure), arthritis (from the sheer weight on the joints), plus other medical and psychological problems. When it is also combined with smoking, which it often is, there is even more disaster.
It is a huge expense to society to have so many obese people with their medical problems. It is a preventable disease. People just need to eat less and exercise. They need more self-control.
To flaunt it as a nonpreventable problem is just not true. What has changed during the past 50 years is that people eat more and move less. Obese people want respect for their eating problems and acceptance. I think that as long as other people are able to control themselves and discipline themselves to exercise, then there will be contempt for those that cannot.
Also, I think that a lot of people resent the high cost of obesity. Health care would be a lot less if people just didn't eat double bacon cheeseburgers, fries and a Coke, then go out for ice cream or beer, and then sit and watch TV (or drink more beer, which has a lot of calories.)
Personally, I resent so much money being spent for accomodations and gastric stapling/bypass surgery because people want to gorge themselves constantly with fatty food!"
It's rare to see so many misconceptions and such hatred right out there in the open. Next you'll be telling us that fat people are responsible for global warming.
Personally, I resent the millions of dollars being wasted on ill-directed and ineffective "wellness" campaigns in schools and offices. And I resent the hell out of the ignorant assumptions behind your words.
So I'm going to exercise tremendous self-restraint (and you know how hard self-restraint is for a fat person!) and recommend that you educate yourself rather than simply parrot the anti-obesity rhetoric of our time. Start by reading Gina Kolata's new book, Rethinking Thin. Kolata is a well-respected New York Times science writer. She is also, if it matters to you--and I think it does--a thin person.
Then I'd suggest reading a little Paul Campos--he's also a thin person, though formerly fat. Then read this post at Kate Harding's fantastic blog.
Then come back and tell me how you feel about fat.
News flash: obesity is not a public health crisis
This somewhat circuitous essay by Jay Bhattacharya caught my eye. Bhattacharya is an M.D. and all-around policy wonk at Stanford University's Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace. (Great name!)
Don't be put off by the offhand judgments Bhattacharya seems to be making early on; the essay becomes more thoughtful as it goes along. His basic premise: obesity is not a public health crisis because it's not contagious, harms only the person him or herself and not others, and, maybe, is not under an individual's control. He makes an interesting point about why fat workers earn less money than thin ones (not because of prejudice, he argues, but because employers "pass through" higher health costs to fat employees); according to Bhattacharya, only fat workers with health insurance earn less. Among those without health insurance, there is no wage gap.
Interesting, but I wonder if the real reason is that the kinds of jobs that don't come with health insurance are so poorly paid that there's no room for a wage differential. Twenty percent less than $20 an hour is significant; 20 percent less than $5 is less so.
The best paragraph in the essay is the last, where he makes a compelling case against setting public policy after jumping to conclusions. Worth a read.
Don't be put off by the offhand judgments Bhattacharya seems to be making early on; the essay becomes more thoughtful as it goes along. His basic premise: obesity is not a public health crisis because it's not contagious, harms only the person him or herself and not others, and, maybe, is not under an individual's control. He makes an interesting point about why fat workers earn less money than thin ones (not because of prejudice, he argues, but because employers "pass through" higher health costs to fat employees); according to Bhattacharya, only fat workers with health insurance earn less. Among those without health insurance, there is no wage gap.
Interesting, but I wonder if the real reason is that the kinds of jobs that don't come with health insurance are so poorly paid that there's no room for a wage differential. Twenty percent less than $20 an hour is significant; 20 percent less than $5 is less so.
The best paragraph in the essay is the last, where he makes a compelling case against setting public policy after jumping to conclusions. Worth a read.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Just for fun--put on your dancing shoes!
Today's New York Times had a story on contradancing and country dancing in the Big Apple.
When I lived in New York City--from 1979 to 1992--this was my subculture. I loved dancing at the church at 13th and Seventh on Tuesday and Saturday nights. It makes me happy to know the dances are still going on. The Times story quoted someone I used to know in the dance scene in New York, Olivia Janovitz. (Hi, Olivia!)
In those days I belonged to a women's sword dance troupe, too. We did things like this.
I miss it! And them.
When I lived in New York City--from 1979 to 1992--this was my subculture. I loved dancing at the church at 13th and Seventh on Tuesday and Saturday nights. It makes me happy to know the dances are still going on. The Times story quoted someone I used to know in the dance scene in New York, Olivia Janovitz. (Hi, Olivia!)
In those days I belonged to a women's sword dance troupe, too. We did things like this.
I miss it! And them.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Self-esteem
Yet another star (in this case, Valerie Bertinelli) is writing a memoir about, among other things, her "lifelong battle with weight and self-esteem."
She's talking about overweight, in this case, and it all sounds so damn familiar: Low self-esteem makes people get fat. It's the same rhetoric that floats around anorexia, which is so often said to be linked to issues of self-esteem. Apparently it works both ways, or both weighs.
Inquiring minds know the truth: Starvation causes all kinds of psychological phenomenona, including depression, anxiety, and, yes, low self-esteem. And being fat in America is an invitation to feelings of worthlessness, inadequacy, and low self-esteem. All you have to do is walk down the street and it flies right at you. Or go to your mother's funeral. Or try to adopt a child.
For once I wish people would get it right. I wish they'd lay the blame squarely where it belongs. In the case of anorexia, that's on biology. And in the case of fat--that's called prejudice.
She's talking about overweight, in this case, and it all sounds so damn familiar: Low self-esteem makes people get fat. It's the same rhetoric that floats around anorexia, which is so often said to be linked to issues of self-esteem. Apparently it works both ways, or both weighs.
Inquiring minds know the truth: Starvation causes all kinds of psychological phenomenona, including depression, anxiety, and, yes, low self-esteem. And being fat in America is an invitation to feelings of worthlessness, inadequacy, and low self-esteem. All you have to do is walk down the street and it flies right at you. Or go to your mother's funeral. Or try to adopt a child.
For once I wish people would get it right. I wish they'd lay the blame squarely where it belongs. In the case of anorexia, that's on biology. And in the case of fat--that's called prejudice.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
At risk for what?
This just in: Experts are now urging women to watch their weight before pregnancy and get back to their pre-pregnancy weight quickly after giving birth. Their new recommendations include:
* Body mass index should be measured as part of vital signs at routine annual check-ups and all women of child bearing age should be counseled to achieve and maintain optimal BMI.
* Preconception counseling programs should include education regarding the poor maternal and perinatal outcomes among the obese and overweight.
* Women with high BMI planning a pregnancy should be counseled to participate in intensive nutrition programs aimed to achieve optimum BMI prior to conception.
* Encouraging breastfeeding can partially help to decrease childhood obesity and also help mother to return quickly to pre-pregnancy weight.
Why the panic? Because, say these researchers, "maternal obesity" leads to all kinds of terrible things for babies, including higher C-section rates, "less chance" of being breastfed, obesity later in life, and--I kid you not--"high birth weight."
And here I thought low birth weight was the big risk when it comes to babies and weight. After all, low birth weight can contribute to respiratory problems, cardiovascular problems, infections, neurological problems, SIDS, cerebral palsy, and other medical issues.
But never mind all that. As we should all know by now, it's much worse to be fat than any of those.
I guess they never heard of genetics, and have never read the dismal statistics on weight loss, or followed the studies that show that losing weight if you're fat actually increases your health risks on many levels.
As Sandy Szwarc pointed out in a recent post, there are people who think you can be too fat to love a child. I guess you can be too fat to have a child too.
* Body mass index should be measured as part of vital signs at routine annual check-ups and all women of child bearing age should be counseled to achieve and maintain optimal BMI.
* Preconception counseling programs should include education regarding the poor maternal and perinatal outcomes among the obese and overweight.
* Women with high BMI planning a pregnancy should be counseled to participate in intensive nutrition programs aimed to achieve optimum BMI prior to conception.
* Encouraging breastfeeding can partially help to decrease childhood obesity and also help mother to return quickly to pre-pregnancy weight.
Why the panic? Because, say these researchers, "maternal obesity" leads to all kinds of terrible things for babies, including higher C-section rates, "less chance" of being breastfed, obesity later in life, and--I kid you not--"high birth weight."
And here I thought low birth weight was the big risk when it comes to babies and weight. After all, low birth weight can contribute to respiratory problems, cardiovascular problems, infections, neurological problems, SIDS, cerebral palsy, and other medical issues.
But never mind all that. As we should all know by now, it's much worse to be fat than any of those.
I guess they never heard of genetics, and have never read the dismal statistics on weight loss, or followed the studies that show that losing weight if you're fat actually increases your health risks on many levels.
As Sandy Szwarc pointed out in a recent post, there are people who think you can be too fat to love a child. I guess you can be too fat to have a child too.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Tornadoes on NPR
Want to hear a funny story? This radio commentary—on surviving my first tornado—ran on All Things Considered today. Let me know what you think.
Saturday, July 07, 2007
Take the love-your-body pledge
The previous post, and some of the comments on it, got me thinking hard about how to begin to change the culture around fat and how we perceive it.
I asked myself: What's the one thing I wish I could change around this issue? The answer: I wish I could change the way girls and women talk to themselves and others about their bodies.
I've posted about this before. And I've written about it in this article. Now it's time to do something about it.
So I have this crazy idea: What if we could disseminate a kind of pledge that young girls and women would sign, promising not to trash-talk about their bodies? Something like this:
I, __________________, pledge to speak kindly about my body.
I promise not to talk about how fat my thighs or stomach or butt are, or about how I really have to lose 5 or 15 or 50 pounds. I promise not to call myself a fat pig, gross, or any other self-loathing, trash-talking phrase.
I vow to be kind to myself and my body. I will learn to be grateful for its strength and attractiveness, and be compassionate toward its failings.
I will remind myself that bodies come in all shapes and sizes, and that no matter what shape and size my body is, it’s worthy of kindness, compassion, and love.
Then what if we got some of their favorite role models to sign, and stand up and say why it's important? Folks like, I don't know, Sheryl Crow and Jennifer Hudson and Mia Hamm? Would you sign it?
See, I think sometimes if you change the story you tell yourself about something, your feelings follow along. So maybe if we change the words we use to talk about our bodies, our feelings about them will follow along too.
And then maybe kids like the 12-year-old in my previous post won't feel so anxious and conflicted about what they eat and how they look. And maybe some of the kids who are genetically predisposed to eating disorders won't develop them.
Maybe it's naive. Or maybe it's a good idea. What do you think?
I asked myself: What's the one thing I wish I could change around this issue? The answer: I wish I could change the way girls and women talk to themselves and others about their bodies.
I've posted about this before. And I've written about it in this article. Now it's time to do something about it.
So I have this crazy idea: What if we could disseminate a kind of pledge that young girls and women would sign, promising not to trash-talk about their bodies? Something like this:
I, __________________, pledge to speak kindly about my body.
I promise not to talk about how fat my thighs or stomach or butt are, or about how I really have to lose 5 or 15 or 50 pounds. I promise not to call myself a fat pig, gross, or any other self-loathing, trash-talking phrase.
I vow to be kind to myself and my body. I will learn to be grateful for its strength and attractiveness, and be compassionate toward its failings.
I will remind myself that bodies come in all shapes and sizes, and that no matter what shape and size my body is, it’s worthy of kindness, compassion, and love.
Then what if we got some of their favorite role models to sign, and stand up and say why it's important? Folks like, I don't know, Sheryl Crow and Jennifer Hudson and Mia Hamm? Would you sign it?
See, I think sometimes if you change the story you tell yourself about something, your feelings follow along. So maybe if we change the words we use to talk about our bodies, our feelings about them will follow along too.
And then maybe kids like the 12-year-old in my previous post won't feel so anxious and conflicted about what they eat and how they look. And maybe some of the kids who are genetically predisposed to eating disorders won't develop them.
Maybe it's naive. Or maybe it's a good idea. What do you think?
Friday, July 06, 2007
Overheard at the lunch table
Recently I had occasion to take my kids on an all-day excursion, to which they were allowed to each invite a friend. As we cruised the lunch joint we'd chosen, the 12-year-old friend seemed, well, anxious about what to choose. She wanted nachos, she said, but that wasn't healthy. (Sound familiar, anyone?) Her parents, she explained, have a rule about eating fruits and vegetables at every meal. She finally settled on nachos and a container of cut-up fruit. "My father says I don't eat enough for a girl my age," she commented. Gee, I wonder why; could she be learning from them to be afraid of food? If she has the genetic loading for an eating disorder, she's in big trouble.
As we ate, the conversation turned to a new movie, Ratatouille. This girl had seen it. "I really liked it," she reported, "except for all those rats who were so fat!" Then she went on: "It's so disgusting! They had all these bulges of so much fat!"
I was fairly stunned, but only because she was articulating what I know so many people think. I didn't know what to say, honestly, and what came to mind wasn't great: "In our family we don't feel fat is bad. People come in all shapes and sizes."
"But all they have to do is eat less and eat healthy and they wouldn't be fat!" she cried. Out of the mouths of babes, huh? "That's not actually true," I said, and then changed the subject, feeling like a coward. But I really didn't feel like taking it on, especially since I could see she was just parroting what she'd heard at home.
Later in the day, everyone else got ice cream, and so, I was happy to see, did she. The fruit went home unopened. For what it's worth.
As we ate, the conversation turned to a new movie, Ratatouille. This girl had seen it. "I really liked it," she reported, "except for all those rats who were so fat!" Then she went on: "It's so disgusting! They had all these bulges of so much fat!"
I was fairly stunned, but only because she was articulating what I know so many people think. I didn't know what to say, honestly, and what came to mind wasn't great: "In our family we don't feel fat is bad. People come in all shapes and sizes."
"But all they have to do is eat less and eat healthy and they wouldn't be fat!" she cried. Out of the mouths of babes, huh? "That's not actually true," I said, and then changed the subject, feeling like a coward. But I really didn't feel like taking it on, especially since I could see she was just parroting what she'd heard at home.
Later in the day, everyone else got ice cream, and so, I was happy to see, did she. The fruit went home unopened. For what it's worth.
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Seeking adults with anorexia for interview
I'm working on a magazine feature for HEALTH magazine about adults with anorexia and am looking for women in their 30s and 40s who would be interested in being interviewed. The original scope of this project was on people who developed anorexia as adults, but it's now changed to women who are still suffering from anorexia as adults, no matter when they developed it.
If you fit the criteria and you've already talked to me, please get in touch again--I lost my records in a computer crash.
If you're willing to talk by phone, please email me off list. I promise it's a sensitively written article, the purpose of which is to help educate mainstream readers about anorexia. God knows they need it!
If you fit the criteria and you've already talked to me, please get in touch again--I lost my records in a computer crash.
If you're willing to talk by phone, please email me off list. I promise it's a sensitively written article, the purpose of which is to help educate mainstream readers about anorexia. God knows they need it!
Monday, July 02, 2007
Anorexia on NPR
A friend called over the weekend to say that she'd been listening to this interview with the author of Peony in Love when she heard interviewer Liane Hansen make a comment about anorexia that made her blood boil. The author was describing lovesick young girls in 17th-century China. Hansen's comment, which comes about 4.15 minutes into the interview:
"It is interesting, the lovesick young ladies that are affected by the opera, what happens to them in their lovesickness is they starve themselves. And that's so much like anorexia, where you have young women today, and young men, starving themselves because that is the only way that they have some control over their own body."
Dear Liane Hansen, you may be an expert on so many things, as your NPR bio indicates, but anorexia is not one of them. Your throwaway comment about anorexia was made out of ignorance rather than malice, I'm sure. But ignorant it was.
Most researchers today believe that anorexia is a biologically based brain disorder. It's not "about" control. It's not "about" bad parenting, any more than autism or schizophrenia are. In fact, it's not "about" anything at all except having the bad luck to be genetically predisposed and to live in a culture full of triggers.
You have a lot of influence, Liane Hansen. I hope you will take this opportunity to educate yourself about anorexia. This website and this website would be great places to start. Then give me a call--I'd love to talk.
"It is interesting, the lovesick young ladies that are affected by the opera, what happens to them in their lovesickness is they starve themselves. And that's so much like anorexia, where you have young women today, and young men, starving themselves because that is the only way that they have some control over their own body."
Dear Liane Hansen, you may be an expert on so many things, as your NPR bio indicates, but anorexia is not one of them. Your throwaway comment about anorexia was made out of ignorance rather than malice, I'm sure. But ignorant it was.
Most researchers today believe that anorexia is a biologically based brain disorder. It's not "about" control. It's not "about" bad parenting, any more than autism or schizophrenia are. In fact, it's not "about" anything at all except having the bad luck to be genetically predisposed and to live in a culture full of triggers.
You have a lot of influence, Liane Hansen. I hope you will take this opportunity to educate yourself about anorexia. This website and this website would be great places to start. Then give me a call--I'd love to talk.
Sunday, July 01, 2007
PETA's fat-hating frenzy
The folks over at PETA have a gripe with filmmaker Michael Moore: they want him to make a documentary about animal rights.
That's cool. But the way they go about airing their gripe--very uncool.
The president of PETA, Ingrid Newkirk, wrote an open letter to Moore last week, which was publicized on PETA's blog. In it, Newkirk urges Moore to go vegetarian:
"Although we think that your film could actually help reform America’s sorely inadequate health care system, there’s an elephant in the room, and it is you. With all due respect, no one can help but notice that a weighty health issue is affecting you personally. We’d like to help you fix that. Going vegetarian is an easy and life-saving step that people of all economic backgrounds can take in order to become less reliant on the government’s shoddy healthcare system, and it’s something that you and all Americans can benefit from personally.”
PETA's blog goes on to say, "The idea is that if people didn't make themselves unhealthy in the first place by eating meat products that are known to cause heart disease, high blood pressure, and strokes, the situation would easier for everyone. As Ingrid puts it, 'Yes, America’s health care system needs to be fixed, but personal responsibility is a big part of why people look and feel as ill as they do.'"
Take that, Michael Moore! It's YOUR fault if you get sick—and so is the whole crappy health care system in America!
Hoo-wee! It's great to feel powerful, isn't it?
Note to Ingrid Newkirk: Go have a doughnut or something.
That's cool. But the way they go about airing their gripe--very uncool.
The president of PETA, Ingrid Newkirk, wrote an open letter to Moore last week, which was publicized on PETA's blog. In it, Newkirk urges Moore to go vegetarian:
"Although we think that your film could actually help reform America’s sorely inadequate health care system, there’s an elephant in the room, and it is you. With all due respect, no one can help but notice that a weighty health issue is affecting you personally. We’d like to help you fix that. Going vegetarian is an easy and life-saving step that people of all economic backgrounds can take in order to become less reliant on the government’s shoddy healthcare system, and it’s something that you and all Americans can benefit from personally.”
PETA's blog goes on to say, "The idea is that if people didn't make themselves unhealthy in the first place by eating meat products that are known to cause heart disease, high blood pressure, and strokes, the situation would easier for everyone. As Ingrid puts it, 'Yes, America’s health care system needs to be fixed, but personal responsibility is a big part of why people look and feel as ill as they do.'"
Take that, Michael Moore! It's YOUR fault if you get sick—and so is the whole crappy health care system in America!
Hoo-wee! It's great to feel powerful, isn't it?
Note to Ingrid Newkirk: Go have a doughnut or something.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
One more reason why I'm a fan of family-based treatment
There are very few follow-up studies (or heck, any studies at all) of anorexia treatment, so I was glad to see this one, done in Norway a couple of years ago. I wasn't so glad of its outcomes.
The study was a one-year followup of adult anorexics who'd been treated on an inpatient unit. Of the 24 patients they followed up with, 10 (42%) had improved one year later, while 14 (58%) had "poor outcomes."
I'm grateful that they did the study, frankly, because most of the numbers on inpatient anorexia treatment come straight from the clinics and units, which often stand to make a tidy sum on treatment. Their followups are usually done at discharge, so they don't take into account what almost always happens after that: relapse and rehospitalization.
So bravo to the researchers in Vikersund. And chalk up another reason why family-based (Maudsley) treatment is an excellent option for anorexia.
The study was a one-year followup of adult anorexics who'd been treated on an inpatient unit. Of the 24 patients they followed up with, 10 (42%) had improved one year later, while 14 (58%) had "poor outcomes."
I'm grateful that they did the study, frankly, because most of the numbers on inpatient anorexia treatment come straight from the clinics and units, which often stand to make a tidy sum on treatment. Their followups are usually done at discharge, so they don't take into account what almost always happens after that: relapse and rehospitalization.
So bravo to the researchers in Vikersund. And chalk up another reason why family-based (Maudsley) treatment is an excellent option for anorexia.
Friday, June 29, 2007
"Who *doesn't* want to lose 20 pounds?"
That's what ex-supermodel Rachel Hunter said in New York magazine about her new gig as spokeswoman for Slim-Fast. She was admitting that she'd never tried it.
This kind of fat trash talk is my least favorite. It's the equivalent of the air kiss, the baring of the throat by the subordinate animal. It's a social custom denoting (supposedly) good taste and submissive femininity. The words themselves aren't the point; it's the intention behind them. And the intension is to erase the self, to make yourself as small and thin and weak as possible.
20 pounds = the weight of 7 brains
20 pounds = the weight of my older daughter at age 11 months
20 pounds = the number of pounds I lost on my first diet, age 15
20 pounds = the number of pounds I lost on my last diet, age 29
20 pounds = the amount of weight lost by my mother in law in the month before she died of cancer
But who doesn't want to lose 20 pounds?
**Thanks to Maggie! for sending this item my way
This kind of fat trash talk is my least favorite. It's the equivalent of the air kiss, the baring of the throat by the subordinate animal. It's a social custom denoting (supposedly) good taste and submissive femininity. The words themselves aren't the point; it's the intention behind them. And the intension is to erase the self, to make yourself as small and thin and weak as possible.
20 pounds = the weight of 7 brains
20 pounds = the weight of my older daughter at age 11 months
20 pounds = the number of pounds I lost on my first diet, age 15
20 pounds = the number of pounds I lost on my last diet, age 29
20 pounds = the amount of weight lost by my mother in law in the month before she died of cancer
But who doesn't want to lose 20 pounds?
**Thanks to Maggie! for sending this item my way
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Another book the world doesn't need--gulp!
Thanks to Kate Harding for posting about the latest entry in the fat hatred sweepstakes--a joint project from two of my former favorite children's book authors. The book is The Gulps, and it features a lazy, gluttonous family who are constantly eating junk food and watching TV. Just like all the fat people I know in real life!
The Gulps was written by Rosemary Wells and illustrated by Marc Brown (of Arthur fame). May it die a speedy, painful death and be remaindered as quickly as possible.
The Gulps was written by Rosemary Wells and illustrated by Marc Brown (of Arthur fame). May it die a speedy, painful death and be remaindered as quickly as possible.
This is what dieting can lead to
This excerpt from a brave, honest livejournal entry, addressed to the "pro-ana" contingent, made me cry. Of course not everyone who diets will become anorexic. But everyone who becomes anorexic goes through this. It's heartbreaking. It's lifebreaking.
"I have anorexia.
Not 'pro-anorexia,'
Not a strict weight loss obsession.
The last 6 months of my life have been hell.
I have watched everything I love slowly deteriorate around me, my own little world be turned completely on its head. I have damaged myself beyond repair and hurt those i love time and time and time again.
And I cannot control it.
Because it is a disease.
It is a condition.
And right now, it's very very bad for me.
I cannot express my frustration with those people who exploit the anorexic condition by using it to starve themselves as a weightloss strategy.
I want to eat.
I want my life back.
Anorexia stops me.
I'm fighting it, but it's hard. the hardest thing I've ever done.
How dare you all, sit there and wish for this.
Get out now while you can.
Please. I wish I could."
"I have anorexia.
Not 'pro-anorexia,'
Not a strict weight loss obsession.
The last 6 months of my life have been hell.
I have watched everything I love slowly deteriorate around me, my own little world be turned completely on its head. I have damaged myself beyond repair and hurt those i love time and time and time again.
And I cannot control it.
Because it is a disease.
It is a condition.
And right now, it's very very bad for me.
I cannot express my frustration with those people who exploit the anorexic condition by using it to starve themselves as a weightloss strategy.
I want to eat.
I want my life back.
Anorexia stops me.
I'm fighting it, but it's hard. the hardest thing I've ever done.
How dare you all, sit there and wish for this.
Get out now while you can.
Please. I wish I could."
Sunday, June 24, 2007
More research on anorexia . . . I think
I'm a big supporter of more research about anorexia. If you've read my blog or articles you know I think one of the reasons we don't have better treatments is lack of good research. So I'm always excited to see a new study come out.
I have to admit, though, that the title of this one--"What is worse for your sex life: Starving, being depressed, or a new baby?"--reminded me of the kinds of questions you ask your friends when you're in middle school, like "Which would you rather do, burn to death or freeze to death?"
Still, I guess it's a good thing to have the redoubtable Cynthia Bulik involved in a new study, whatever the topic. After all, she's at the forefront of the research on the genetics and biology of anorexia.
Oh, and if you're wondering, the answer to the question the study poses is that it's better to have a new baby.
I have to admit, though, that the title of this one--"What is worse for your sex life: Starving, being depressed, or a new baby?"--reminded me of the kinds of questions you ask your friends when you're in middle school, like "Which would you rather do, burn to death or freeze to death?"
Still, I guess it's a good thing to have the redoubtable Cynthia Bulik involved in a new study, whatever the topic. After all, she's at the forefront of the research on the genetics and biology of anorexia.
Oh, and if you're wondering, the answer to the question the study poses is that it's better to have a new baby.
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Shame on you, Dear Abby
I'll cop to reading Dear Abby, despite the often off-the-mark advice she doles out. But today's column went beyond off-the-mark and into just-plain-dangerous-and-wrong territory.
Here's the letter in question: "I'm an attractive, single, successful, 27-year-old woman who has struggled with anorexia ever since I was 12. I have learned to live with it and feel no need to advertise it to the world. However, I find that many strangers, including a large number of people I associate with at work, feel a compulsion to comment on my weight (105 pounds and 5 foot 9), the size of the clothes I wear, or what I eat. It's as uncomfortable a subject for me as I imagine it is for people who are overweight, and I have no 'pat' answer for them." --Annoyed at 105
Here's Abby's response:
Dear Annoyed: Clearly, your weight issues are more obvious to those around you than you chose to believe. However, you are under no obligation to answer these intrusive questions if it makes you uncomfortable. When confronted, reply, "That's a very personal question (or subject) and I'd prefer not to discuss it." Then change the subject.
Argh! Please write to her and set her straight about anorexia: It's not a "lifestyle choice" but a lethal mental illness. Ask her why she would sanction this writer's settling for a life distorted by anorexia. Invite her to list resources that might be helpful to "Annoyed" and her family, including maudsleyparents.org, NEDA, eatingwithyouranorexic.com, and others.
This is a teachable moment on a national scale. Go for it!
Here's the letter in question: "I'm an attractive, single, successful, 27-year-old woman who has struggled with anorexia ever since I was 12. I have learned to live with it and feel no need to advertise it to the world. However, I find that many strangers, including a large number of people I associate with at work, feel a compulsion to comment on my weight (105 pounds and 5 foot 9), the size of the clothes I wear, or what I eat. It's as uncomfortable a subject for me as I imagine it is for people who are overweight, and I have no 'pat' answer for them." --Annoyed at 105
Here's Abby's response:
Dear Annoyed: Clearly, your weight issues are more obvious to those around you than you chose to believe. However, you are under no obligation to answer these intrusive questions if it makes you uncomfortable. When confronted, reply, "That's a very personal question (or subject) and I'd prefer not to discuss it." Then change the subject.
Argh! Please write to her and set her straight about anorexia: It's not a "lifestyle choice" but a lethal mental illness. Ask her why she would sanction this writer's settling for a life distorted by anorexia. Invite her to list resources that might be helpful to "Annoyed" and her family, including maudsleyparents.org, NEDA, eatingwithyouranorexic.com, and others.
This is a teachable moment on a national scale. Go for it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)