principles of Health at Every Size (HAES(sm)).” 102 These principles are, in turn, defined as:
1. Accepting and respecting the diversity of body shapes and sizes.
2. Recognizing that health and well-being are multidimensional and that they include physical, social, spiritual, occupational, emotional, and intellectual aspects.
3. Promoting all aspects of health and well-being for people of all sizes.
4. Promoting eating in a manner which [ sic. ] balances individual nutritional needs, hunger, satiety, appetite, and pleasure.
5. Promoting individually appropriate, enjoyable, life-enhancing physical activity, rather than exercise that is focused on a goal of weight loss. 103
The Association for the Health Enrichment of Large Persons (AHELP) was a 1990s precursor to ASDAH. 104 The Healthy Weight Journal (which was called the Health at Every Size Journal for the last two years of its existence) was founded in 1986 and terminated in Fall 2006 and provided a venue for research articles adopting a HAES perspective. 105
NAAFA is another key supporter of a health at every size frame. NAAFA, which is the oldest and largest nationwide fat acceptance organization with approximately 2,000 to 3,000 members, included a link to HAES on its 2009 website and featured keynote addresses by authors of books advocating a health at every size perspective at its 2001, 2003, and 2009 NAAFA conventions. 106 Fat activists routinely share stories about how doctors assume, without doing proper exams, that any health problem that a fat patient suffers, from infertility to blood clots to a sore throat, must be due to their obesity. They report how fears about being “harangued about their weight” make them and other fat women reluctant to seek preventive medical care, thus leading to health problems that could have been prevented with early screening. They cite scientific research that corroborates their personal experience, for instance, documenting widespread anti-fat bias among medical professionals. 107 In contrast with proponents of the other frames discussed so far, HAES advocates are overwhelmingly female. As we have already discussed, compared to organizations like the IOTF or CDC, these associations have considerable less economic and cultural capital with which to advance this frame.
However, in June 2004, the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a food- and beverage-industry lobbying group, produced a report entitled “An Epidemic of Obesity Myths” and a companion advertisement that publicized some critiques of claims about the “obesity epidemic.” Quoting researchers including Glenn Gaesser, Paul Ernsberger, Jon Robison, and many others, it specifically challenged the statistic that obesity (and overweight) kills 400,000 Americans each year, the idea that one cannot be overweight and healthy, that overeating is the main cause of obesity, and that obesity costs the U.S. economy $117 billion annually. 108 The CCF publicly criticized a 2004 study by CDC researchers estimating that 400,000 excess deaths were associated with overweight and obesity in the year 2000, calling for it to be retracted in a February 2005 op–ed. 109 In 2005, the CCF publicized a new CDC study that revised down the estimate of deaths associated with obesity and overweight in the year 2000 to less than 26,000 in a book (downloadable for free on their website) and an advertisement campaign, evoking “obesity hype.” 110 While the financial resources of the CCF allowed it to reach a wider audience, its association with the food industry was discrediting in the eyes of many. Indeed, it seems to have discredited obesity skeptics more generally who are often presumed to be tools of the food industry even when they are not. 111
FAT AS BEAUTY FRAME
According to the fat as beauty frame, fat itself is not a problem. Rather, the problem is that people have a narrow understanding of beauty that excludes fat people. A fat as beauty frame affirms fat as a positive
1. Accepting and respecting the diversity of body shapes and sizes.
2. Recognizing that health and well-being are multidimensional and that they include physical, social, spiritual, occupational, emotional, and intellectual aspects.
3. Promoting all aspects of health and well-being for people of all sizes.
4. Promoting eating in a manner which [ sic. ] balances individual nutritional needs, hunger, satiety, appetite, and pleasure.
5. Promoting individually appropriate, enjoyable, life-enhancing physical activity, rather than exercise that is focused on a goal of weight loss. 103
The Association for the Health Enrichment of Large Persons (AHELP) was a 1990s precursor to ASDAH. 104 The Healthy Weight Journal (which was called the Health at Every Size Journal for the last two years of its existence) was founded in 1986 and terminated in Fall 2006 and provided a venue for research articles adopting a HAES perspective. 105
NAAFA is another key supporter of a health at every size frame. NAAFA, which is the oldest and largest nationwide fat acceptance organization with approximately 2,000 to 3,000 members, included a link to HAES on its 2009 website and featured keynote addresses by authors of books advocating a health at every size perspective at its 2001, 2003, and 2009 NAAFA conventions. 106 Fat activists routinely share stories about how doctors assume, without doing proper exams, that any health problem that a fat patient suffers, from infertility to blood clots to a sore throat, must be due to their obesity. They report how fears about being “harangued about their weight” make them and other fat women reluctant to seek preventive medical care, thus leading to health problems that could have been prevented with early screening. They cite scientific research that corroborates their personal experience, for instance, documenting widespread anti-fat bias among medical professionals. 107 In contrast with proponents of the other frames discussed so far, HAES advocates are overwhelmingly female. As we have already discussed, compared to organizations like the IOTF or CDC, these associations have considerable less economic and cultural capital with which to advance this frame.
However, in June 2004, the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a food- and beverage-industry lobbying group, produced a report entitled “An Epidemic of Obesity Myths” and a companion advertisement that publicized some critiques of claims about the “obesity epidemic.” Quoting researchers including Glenn Gaesser, Paul Ernsberger, Jon Robison, and many others, it specifically challenged the statistic that obesity (and overweight) kills 400,000 Americans each year, the idea that one cannot be overweight and healthy, that overeating is the main cause of obesity, and that obesity costs the U.S. economy $117 billion annually. 108 The CCF publicly criticized a 2004 study by CDC researchers estimating that 400,000 excess deaths were associated with overweight and obesity in the year 2000, calling for it to be retracted in a February 2005 op–ed. 109 In 2005, the CCF publicized a new CDC study that revised down the estimate of deaths associated with obesity and overweight in the year 2000 to less than 26,000 in a book (downloadable for free on their website) and an advertisement campaign, evoking “obesity hype.” 110 While the financial resources of the CCF allowed it to reach a wider audience, its association with the food industry was discrediting in the eyes of many. Indeed, it seems to have discredited obesity skeptics more generally who are often presumed to be tools of the food industry even when they are not. 111
FAT AS BEAUTY FRAME
According to the fat as beauty frame, fat itself is not a problem. Rather, the problem is that people have a narrow understanding of beauty that excludes fat people. A fat as beauty frame affirms fat as a positive
Similar Books
Space Station Crisis: Star Challengers Book 2
Kevin J. Anderson, Rebecca Moesta, June Scobee Rodgers
