Why we should stop using the word 'obesity'

printer friendlyprinter friendly

Quick, what image pops into your mind when you see or hear the word "obesity"? You think of a fat person, right? I know I do. I also know that I don't think of junk food or the industry that so heavily promotes it, even though they are a primary culprit behind America's rising rates of type-2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and other chronic illnesses.

Obesity is merely a symptom of a much bigger problem. Yet many of the very groups that are working hard to improve health equity by exposing the role of junk food marketing, income inequality, and other forces beyond individual control have nevertheless placed responsibility -- and shame -- for the country's growing waistlines and related health issues squarely on the shoulders of individuals. It's not intentional. But it happens every time we utter that all-too-familiar "O"-word.

This is a problem because once the conversation is framed in ways that highlight individuals, public health advocates must jump over even higher hurdles to show that we have a need for solutions beyond changes in individual behavior.

That's the trap that former U.S. Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher and physician Pamela Peeke fell into in February when they debated law professor Paul Campos and TV host John Stossel in a panel called "Is Obesity The Government's Business?" Without saying a word, Satcher and Peeke started off at a disadvantage, given the title of the debate.

Similarly, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may have done themselves a disservice by framing their recent Weight of the Nation conference using words that focus on fat bodies, rather than on the unhealthy foods that saturate our surroundings or environments that impede physically activity. Genes and lifestyle aren't enough to explain the country's growing battles with food-related chronic illnesses. And even though the CDC ultimately wants to reframe the conversation to show this, approaching the issue with a focus on weight accomplishes just the opposite.

Airing tonight on HBO, a Weight of the Nation documentary series presented by the Institute of Medicine with the CDC and National Institutes of Health will no doubt face the same challenges.

Framing health issues in terms of obesity not only stigmatizes fat people, it also benefits the food industry. As public health lawyer Michele Simon writes, "[I]t is a problem food companies can supposedly help fix. They can market healthier foods! They can help fund playgrounds and exercise programs!" Ever notice how food companies don't shy away from the word? That itself should sound alarm bells for public health advocates.

Of course, avoiding the "O"-word is difficult even when we know it's problematic. BMSG discussed the trouble with using "obesity" as far back as 2006, yet we still find ourselves reaching for it from time to time.

To successfully reframe the issue will be challenging and may take more than a single word. Still, public health advocates should make it a priority to do so. After all, the people who control how a problem is framed have the best chance of influencing the solution. Public health advocates showed this to be true with tobacco when they stopped talking about smoking cessation and started talking about tobacco control. A small shift in language -- coupled with attention to the policies that shaped environments -- produced a big shift in the public's thinking so that we now see the problem as one related mostly to industry, not just individuals. With enough collaboration and creative thinking, public health can do the same with food.


Newtown (1) structural racism (1) auto safety (1) social math (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) Penn State (3) food justice (1) news monitoring (1) children's health (3) Catholic church (1) california (1) gender (1) tobacco (5) liana winett (1) Chile (1) prevention (1) genital warts (1) democracy (1) sugary drinks (10) cervical cancer (1) news coverage (1) Richmond (5) Amanda Fallin (1) mental health (2) privilege (1) suicide nets (1) food swamps (1) prison phone calls (1) community safety (1) sports drinks (1) public health data (1) media advocacy (23) childhood trauma (3) soda taxes (2) cosmetics (1) cigarette advertising (1) authentic voices (1) political correctness (1) snap (1) industry appeals to choice (1) health equity (10) Whiteclay (4) vaccines (1) Colorado (1) sexual assault (1) diabetes (1) community (1) Proposition 47 (1) public health (71) Tea Party (1) nonprofit communications (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) SB 1000 (1) adverse childhood experiences (3) naacp (1) equity (3) autism (1) SB-5 (1) elephant triggers (1) Sam Kass (1) suicide barrier (2) junk food (2) social media (2) Merck (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) education (1) junk food marketing to kids (2) chronic disease (2) apha (3) communication strategy (1) george lakoff (1) Measure O (1) news (2) gun control (2) white house (1) messaging (3) media bites (1) sexual health (1) new year's resolutions (1) soda (12) Twitter (1) Oakland Unified School District (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) personal responsibility (3) journalism (1) tobacco tax (1) McDonald's (1) Connecticut shooting (1) sandusky (2) Big Soda (2) junk food marketing (4) Big Food (2) Proposition 29 (1) obesity (10) healthy eating (1) Bloomberg (3) Citizens United (1) cannes lions festival (1) environmental health (1) childhood obesity (1) Donald Trump (2) women's health (2) Joe Paterno (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) Big Tobacco (3) product safety (1) PepsiCo (1) corporate social responsibility (1) diabetes prevention (1) water security (1) media analysis (6) nanny state (2) American Beverage Association (1) Michelle Obama (1) Oglala Sioux (3) indoor smoking ban (1) prison system (1) target marketing (9) water (1) digital marketing (3) beverage industry (2) government intrusion (1) public health policy (2) safety (1) weight of the nation (1) news strategy (1) Black Lives Matter (1) Marion Nestle (1) reproductive justice (1) world water day (1) Let's Move (1) front groups (1) Bill Cosby (1) food environment (1) health care (1) paula deen (1) beauty products (1) media (7) El Monte (3) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) HPV vaccine (1) SB 402 (1) Aurora (1) obesity prevention (1) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) campaign finance (1) ssb (1) community violence (1) values (1) cancer prevention (1) suicide prevention (2) cap the tap (1) childhood lead poisoning (1) sexism (2) child sexual abuse (5) online marketing (1) sanitation (1) childhood adversity (1) advocacy (3) violence prevention (8) tobacco industry (2) Jerry Sandusky (3) gun violence (1) Texas (1) summer camps (1) marketing (1) gatorade bolt game (1) paper tigers (1) collaboration (1) filibuster (1) Nickelodeon (1) seat belt laws (1) Sandy Hook (2) community health (1) breastfeeding (3) food marketing (5) Wendy Davis (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) default frame (1) SSBs (1) Rachel Grana (1) food and beverage marketing (3) alcohol (5) framing (14) racism (1) news analysis (3) tobacco control (2) inequities (1) Coca-Cola (3) Berkeley (2) language (6) food access (1) food industry (4) youth (1) community organizing (1) institutional accountability (1) built environment (2) sexual violence (2) communication (2) violence (2) ACEs (2) stigma (1) soda industry (4) food (1) strategic communication (1) Dora the Explorer (1) Telluride (1) Gardasil (1) emergency contraception (1) food deserts (1) soda tax (11) measure N (2) election 2016 (1) race (1) FCC (1) abortion (1) Johnson & Johnson (1) social justice (2) physical activity (1) regulation (2) childhood obestiy conference (1) social change (1) Happy Meals (1) cancer research (1) soda warning labels (1) San Francisco (3) choice (1)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: