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.


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

get e-alerts in your inbox: