The Examination/Washington Post Anti-Diet Hit Piece - Part 1

This is the Weight and Healthcare newsletter! If you like what you are reading, please consider subscribing and/or sharing!

The headline ran “As ob*sity rises, Big Food and dietitians push 'anti-diet' advice…General Mills warns of “food shaming"; dietitian influencers promote junk foods and discourage weight loss efforts.” (As is my policy, I don’t link to studies or articles that contain weight stigma, but I give enough information to Google.)

Why am I calling it a hit piece? For two reasons, first because I know that the authors had every opportunity to provide a more balanced story, and second, because of their… let’s call it methodology.

I’ll start with the one part I fully agree with, which is that everyone must be clear about their paid partnerships and sponsorships. I rail about this constantly when it comes to the weight loss industry, and I think that everyone in every industry must be held to this standard. As far as I’m concerned, if you’re being paid to create content then you should be shouting from the rooftops about it. That said, it’s been pointed out to me that I’m not the queen of the universe and thus while people are required to meet the disclosure criteria in their industry, they are not required to meet my standards for disclosure, we’ll come back to this in part 2.

In this piece, I’ll talk about my experience with one of the authors. In part 2 I’ll examine their methodology.

My experience with this piece started with an email:
“I'm writing in connection to a story we're reporting in partnership with the Washington Post. The story will address the rise of anti-diet movements such as Health at Every Size, how they are changing public understanding of health and nutrition, and criticism of some of the scientific views held by HAES advocates. As a leading voice in the HAES movement with expertise in weight science (REDACTED spoke highly of your work), I'd love to get your perspective. Is there a good time in the coming week you would be available for a call?”

Just as a reminder, Health at Every Size™ is the trademarked brand of the Association for Size Diversity and Health.  At the time I was on a speaking tour in Iowa, but I was able to carve out time to get on Zoom with Sasha. We talked for about an hour and we agreed that I would send him an email with a list of weight-neutral physicians and researchers that he requested (I don’t know if any of them were interviewed but they didn’t appear in the article,) and a list of research (Highlighting research from, and including a link to, this list: https://weightandhealthcare.substack.com/p/the-research-post)

I next heard from him about the story that ended up being the first part of the piece, a woman who watched some anti-diet YouTube videos, adopted some random practices that she came across, and was not happy with the results. I replied:

“Thanks for asking about this, I’m sorry that this person had a negative experience. There’s a bit to unpack here. 

Weight-neutral health is not an intervention, it’s a paradigm. Understanding that health is not an obligation, barometer of worthiness, and is impacted by many things outside of our control, when applied to the concept of personal choices around health, weight-neutral health focuses on the idea of supporting health directly rather than trying to manipulate body size as a path to health. The various paths, programs, and interventions that are right for any individual within this paradigm can vary widely based on everything from personal preference to eating disorder history.

What happened here is not about someone engaging in the weight-neutral paradigm, it is about someone learning valid parts of larger interventions about healing one’s relationships with food and eating from influencers and Youtubers, and applying them without a full understanding of the larger concepts.

This situation is a bit like someone deciding they are interested in yoga, getting tips on doing a headstand from yoga influencers and youtubers, getting hurt trying a headstand, and then suggesting that the entire concept of yoga is dangerous or to blame for their injury. The tips they received about headstands were completely valid, but they require a larger context to be safe and helpful.

I want to be clear that I don’t blame this person for what happened to them – I think the root of this situation is that diet culture and the current weight-centric paradigm condition us to look to influencers and youtubers for  weight loss advice (“three simple steps to weight loss,” “one weird trick to lose belly fat” etc.) and this person may have been trying to view the weight-neutral paradigm through that dangerous diet culture lens.

I hope that helps, please feel free to send any follow-up questions!”

The next time I heard from Sasha it was to tell me that the piece was published and to give me the link. He said  “The story doesn't quote directly from our conversations, but I'm very appreciative of your time and your insights.”

A lot of the article is just the same tired tropes we’re used to hearing uncritically claiming that “ob*sity” is a disease with no discussion of the lack of even a clear definition of this so-called “disease” let alone that the research used to back up these claims fails to control for the impacts of weight stigma, weight cycling, and healthcare inequalities on the physical and mental health of higher-weight people.

I am also interested in their choice to highlight this quote from US Senator Richard Blumenthal

“I think it is really reprehensible for the food industry to prey on the vulnerabilities of people who suffer from diabetes or ob*sity or diseases that are caused by excessive sugar, fat and perhaps other ingredients that do them harm.”

Of course no evidence is given to back up his statement, and they fail to mention weight cycling and weight stigma are correlated with the same health issues (including type 2 diabetes) and excess mortality that gets blamed on existing in a higher-weight body. Still it’s “and perhaps other ingredients” that makes it art and, I think, really tells us everything we need to know about his nutrition “expertise” or lack thereof. Blumenthal is a lawyer with no particular health, nutrition, or science expertise as far as I can tell. He is currently working on legislation being pushed by Novo Nordisk’s astroturf organization the “ob*sity action coalition.”

So already this does not have the ring of sound science but, as we’ll see in part 2 when I look at their claims around the food industry and dietitians and the methodology behind them, this is just the tip of the iceberg!

I also highly recommend these pieces by Virginia Sole-Smith, Christy Harrison, and Clara Nosek (and I highly recommend subscribing to their Substacks if you don’t already!)

Did you find this post helpful? You can subscribe for free to get future posts delivered direct to your inbox, or choose a paid subscription to support the newsletter (and the work that goes into it!) and get special benefits! Click the Subscribe button below for details:

Liked the piece? Share the piece!

More research and resources:
https://haeshealthsheets.com/resources/

*Note on language: I use “fat” as a neutral descriptor as used by the fat activist community, I use “ob*se” and “overw*ight” to acknowledge that these are terms that were created to medicalize and pathologize fat bodies, with roots in racism and specifically anti-Blackness. Please read Sabrina Strings’ Fearing the Black Body – the Racial Origins of Fat Phobia and Da’Shaun Harrison’s Belly of the Beast: The Politics of Anti-Fatness as Anti-Blackness for more on this.