Dispelling nutrition myths, ranting, and occasionally, raving

Forget about Nicole Whatsherface, governments demonstrate the ultimate fat shaming


Image from the Rudd Center Image Library

Image from the Rudd Center Image Library

I was reading this article from the recent obesity series in the Lancet the other day and found myself becoming increasingly incensed at the discussion of “examples of shifting the cost of obesity to the obese”.

According to the article, the American government now “allows group health insurance plans to charge 30% higher premia to enrolees who are overweight and refuse to participate in qualifying wellness plans.” While I am well aware that obesity is a risk for many diseases, and may be classified as a disease in and of itself, this approach left a bad taste in my mouth. My immediate response was “WHAT ABOUT HAES (health at every size)??”. Not everyone who is overweight is unhealthy, and plenty of people who are “healthy” weights are not actually healthy and live unhealthy lifestyles. In addition, how do we know that these “state endorsed” wellness plans are any better than any other measures an individual might undertake to lose weight and/or become healthier?

This approach becomes even more suspect when you read a little further down the paragraph and see: “an insurance company can give a 30% premium discount to those with a body mass index of 26 or less. To get the same discount, those with a BMI greater than 26 must walk 150 min per week…” Considering that it’s widely known that BMI is a poor indicator of overweight and obesity (and weight, in turn, not an accurate indicator of health) I find this statement disturbing. It’s possible to be classified as overweight, even obese, by BMI and to be healthy. I’m also curious about the rationale of making the criteria for obtaining a discount walking 150 minutes a week. If the aim is to make people lose weight, it’s highly unlikely that 21 minutes of walking per day is going to achieve that goal. Even if the goal is to make people healthier, regardless of weight, that level of activity is going to make minimal impact. I can’t help but wonder if there was any scientific rationale whatsoever behind this decision.

Reading on… The next example was of a public-health insurance programme that won’t cover nutrition education, bariatric surgery, nor weight-loss management in its basic plan, but if enrolees who, “sign an agreement outlining their responsibilities for meeting health goals receive an enhanced plan with expanded coverage for such services.” That makes sense <– read in sarcasm font. Of course, let’s not allow people to access services in a preventative manner, let’s wait until they’re in need of bariatric surgery to cover their visits to a dietitian. Sigh.

It get’s even better… New Zealand apparently has an immigration ban on individuals whose body mass index is in the obese range, because they are considered to be a potential burden on the health system.” Yep, that’s right, somehow discriminating against people because of their body weight is thought to be a reasonable public policy. All I can say is “wow”.

Author: Diana

I'm a registered dietitian from Nova Scotia, living and working in Ontario, Canada. My goal is to help people see food and nutrition from a different perspective and understand that nutrition and health are not necessarily a result of personal choice.

5 thoughts on “Forget about Nicole Whatsherface, governments demonstrate the ultimate fat shaming

  1. So interesting – and also what you say about New Zealand…. We have a total public health system here – so all hospital treatment is paid by the public tax money. I understand how we might have a policy not allowing people with chronic health conditions (such that might be brought on by obesity) – but I do wonder exactly how they measure that. NZers on the whole I imagine are up there in the ‘obese’ statistics anyway and do cost the public health system as extraordinary amount of money, but I do get frustrated at the lack of support and encouragement for healthy diets / lifestyles, the high consumption of ‘crap’ foods (although – hey – there are gastric bypass operations being done for free by the public system…) It all drives me a little crazy!


    • I agree that there needs to be more support for healthy lifestyles. I just don’t think that programs like the examples given in the article are the right way to go.


  2. Pingback: bite my words

  3. Pingback: The irony of #fatlogic | bite my words

  4. Pingback: Top 5 Posts of 2015 | bite my words

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s