When we learned about these charts in abnormal psych, the prof said that people who measured their ideal far off from their perceived real were psychotic. Or something.
Here's an idea. Why don't we focus on lowering blood pressure and cholesterol and managing or preventing diabetes rather than on losing weight? Kinda of like, "hey get healthy and have more energy and feel better!" rather than "hey, you're a fattie!"
When I first read this, I saw that the lead researcher was "Tiffany Pollard" instead of "Tiffany Powell" and I had a moment of extreme confusion that melted into delight at the thought of VH1 reality star New York asking people about their bodies.
The misperception of body size can also be Body Dysmorphia. It's common in people with eating disorders, like anorexia, where you still think you "look" fat even when you're starving to death. The reverse can also be true. I don't know if they considered that, though.
@tiredfairy: Body Dysmorphia is very common. However, I don't know that it's what's going on in this case. I know people who medically classify as "obese," but who I'd never think of as obese. The people in the study probably base their perception of their weight and what is healthy on the people around them. It's a given that most of America is above the "healthy" size. It's also a given that the BMI is flawed and a person's physical "size" often has little to do with his or her overall health.
@madeofawesome: ::nod:: Agreed. I'm just curious because the study seems to be suggesting that these folks are somehow being "willful" about it, when there are any number of reasons. The ones you suggested are good examples of that.
35% of obese people who felt this way had high blood pressure, 15% and high cholesterol, and 14% had diabetes.
Just curious, what are the rates of hypertension, high cholesterol and diabetes in the population at large? These numbers may be elevated, but it also means that 85% of obese people had normal cholesterol, 86% were non-diabetic, and 65% did not have high blood pressure. If obesity marks people for death, I would expect these numbers to be higher.
See, statistics are fun!
And if "normal" means "normative", then a person who is of average rate is indeed "normal."
@gwaste: Honestly? I'm not invested enough to look into this at the moment. That's why I wondered out loud whether those numbers were elevated. I'm neither a doctor nor a medical researcher, and have no idea. I'm just a humble professional PR person, who gets paid on a daily basis to flip statistics around and say what my client needs them to say. Therefore, I don't trust much of anything I read anywhere - because I know the number of hands that have filtered it.
@Flackette Goes Retro: I think the science writing for these piece both the Jez version and the Eureka version sucks, but I have a hard time believing they included the population numbers in the actual article.
@clevernamehere: The Eureka versions are not often written by scientists. I write a lot of them for my institution, often working based on half-assed information, and looking for a media angle more than anything. Personally, I always read the abstract, conclusion and most of the research involved in the paper, but most science writers throwing this stuff online don't have time to really parse it. It goes through another filter when it hits the actual media, and before long it really means nothing.
@Flackette Goes Retro: As a public health person, I wouldn't actually expect those numbers to be higher. Obesity can be a concern without all obese people having significant health problems. Its clear that obese people aren't dropping dead on the street. I have problems with this study in a couple of ways, but the issue with obesity isn't "all the fatties are going to die and die soon."
I think the problem with articles like this in the press is partly that the articles are truncated by journalists/PR people who are looking to make it interesting when the prevaricating of most journal articles is going to bore the average reader.
The other issue is that there is a difference between individual health and group health. People do come in lots of different sizes and it should be between them and their doctor to decide if their weight and habits are healthy. At the same time, the population's weight has gone up dramatically in the last 30 years as have a host of problems that are correlated to excessive weight. Just because Mary Smith is a totally healthy 200 pound woman doesn't mean that the state of Mississippi's 30% obesity rate isn't troubling. When you're looking at fairly large sample a 35% high blood pressure rate among "obese" participants when compared to a 33% high blood pressure rate in a matched control of "normal" weight participants is going to be significant. The numbers don't have to be shocking. (Cross sectional studies like these are hard to draw conclusions from, but cross sectional research like this played a role in determining smoking caused lung cancer. It is about the body of research and not one single study. The literature on obesity is still developing).
This study might be utter crap, I haven't read it. But I've read lots and lots of articles about obesity and in general, they aren't fat shaming IMO. I find it is the media's versions of these articles and at times physicians' reliance on them to be the problem. On the individual level the issue should be habits and not weight.
And before anyone tells me to read it, I've read Kate Harding's site and several other fat acceptance blogs. Some of it I agree with, some of it I don't.
Are we ever going to start holding people personally responsible for their own self-esteem? Instead of blaming the advertising/fashion industry for it? I'm not saying that those industries cannot or don't exert influence over how women perceive themselves, but pointing the finger first and foremost at models/ads and not realizing that no one can make you feel a certain way unless you LET them... that's only giving women permission to victimize themselves rather than sit up and say "you know what, that model looks damn good all skinny and tall/plump and dewey and I don't look like that, but that's OK and it doesnt reflect on me, and her looking like that is completely unnecessary cuz I would STILL buy those sweeeet shoes, but I'm not gonna huff and puff about it because they're wayyyy more important things in life that determine my happiness anyways... " #selfesteemandmodels
"Dirk Smeesters of Erasmus University in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, Thomas Mussweiler of the University of Cologne in Germany and Naomi Mandel of Arizona State University
in Tempe recommended overweight consumers avoid looking at ads with any models -- thin or heavy."
Avoiding looking at any ads with any models sounds just about impossible without locking yourself in a dark little closet and screening visitors. #selfesteemandmodels
Perhaps I'm being obtuse, but why is physical appearance always the indicator researchers use in self esteem studies? I mean, I understand why (especially given the context of this particular study), but I think a lot of this research just reinforces the (ludicrous) idea that self esteem is something you gain primarily from external factors. My mom and dad always said that self esteem meant not being shaken by descrepancies between you and beauty ideals/restrictive social norms. Then again, they're optimistic folk. #selfesteemandmodels
@jigglyball: I wonder if the test subjects were mostly young women and how the findings would change if a study like this was done on "older" women. It seems to me that the more time you've had to build your self-esteem in ways that aren't necessarily related to how you look, the less affected you'd be. Anecdotally speaking, when I was younger I would have been one of those women whose self-esteem plummeted after looking at models. But now I find I'm much less affected. I think that's because over time I've built my self-esteem though things like education, career, travel, and fulfilling personal relationships. I know aging is a whole other can of worms in our society, and not every woman is fortunate to have the same opportunities I've had. But still, I wonder how the age of the test subjects might factor into the findings. #selfesteemandmodels
@tallgirl-in-heels: Oh so true. Looking at pictures of models doesn’t effect my self-esteem at all anymore. What does make me feel crappy about myself is when a girl my age has accomplished something I could only dream about, or when a peer in my classes answers a question flawlessly, brilliantly, and confidently, or when college friends’ careers really take off. I so wonder if age and marital status are a determining factor in what lowers self-esteem. #selfesteemandmodels
Maybe the thing to do is to stop reading fashion magazines at all, until they just put in pictures of clothes without any women in them. #selfesteemandmodels
The same is true with the recent spate of older models. Yes, they have grey hair, but they are gorgeous, skinny, with smooth perfect skin. The only difference is the color of their hair. #selfesteemandmodels
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
#tips
11/18/09
11/18/09
Just curious, what are the rates of hypertension, high cholesterol and diabetes in the population at large? These numbers may be elevated, but it also means that 85% of obese people had normal cholesterol, 86% were non-diabetic, and 65% did not have high blood pressure. If obesity marks people for death, I would expect these numbers to be higher.
See, statistics are fun!
And if "normal" means "normative", then a person who is of average rate is indeed "normal."
What we have here is a semiotics fail.
11/18/09
@Flackette Goes Retro: Taking statistics classes has made me even crankier than I used to be. This is purely correlational though.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
in the symbols of my friend - 6_9
I'm glad you passed statistics, now try doing a more thorough literature search on the topic you're speaking about.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
I think the problem with articles like this in the press is partly that the articles are truncated by journalists/PR people who are looking to make it interesting when the prevaricating of most journal articles is going to bore the average reader.
The other issue is that there is a difference between individual health and group health. People do come in lots of different sizes and it should be between them and their doctor to decide if their weight and habits are healthy. At the same time, the population's weight has gone up dramatically in the last 30 years as have a host of problems that are correlated to excessive weight. Just because Mary Smith is a totally healthy 200 pound woman doesn't mean that the state of Mississippi's 30% obesity rate isn't troubling. When you're looking at fairly large sample a 35% high blood pressure rate among "obese" participants when compared to a 33% high blood pressure rate in a matched control of "normal" weight participants is going to be significant. The numbers don't have to be shocking. (Cross sectional studies like these are hard to draw conclusions from, but cross sectional research like this played a role in determining smoking caused lung cancer. It is about the body of research and not one single study. The literature on obesity is still developing).
This study might be utter crap, I haven't read it. But I've read lots and lots of articles about obesity and in general, they aren't fat shaming IMO. I find it is the media's versions of these articles and at times physicians' reliance on them to be the problem. On the individual level the issue should be habits and not weight.
And before anyone tells me to read it, I've read Kate Harding's site and several other fat acceptance blogs. Some of it I agree with, some of it I don't.
11/18/09
11/18/09
10/15/09
10/15/09
10/15/09
10/15/09
in Tempe recommended overweight consumers avoid looking at ads with any models -- thin or heavy."
Avoiding looking at any ads with any models sounds just about impossible without locking yourself in a dark little closet and screening visitors. #selfesteemandmodels
10/15/09
10/15/09
10/15/09
10/15/09
10/15/09
10/15/09