The Washington Post article, “As obesity increases, big food and nutritionists are giving “anti-diet” advice.” is an example of what happens when journalists lose all nuance and common sense to sell a narrative that doesn’t fit.
Under the helm of Anahad O’Connor and “The Examination,” the WaPo’s investigative attack dog team, the public is getting used to incompetent and poorly constructed arguments against nutritionists for actually doing their job.
To summarize their argument: dietitians denounce food shaming and diets and promote foods that are not fruits and vegetables. Therefore, we are the reason for the high obesity rates in the United States.
God forbid people have choices about their food AND not be ashamed of what they eat.
This latest piece begins with what the authors believe is a link between the anti-diet movement and cereal maker General Mills’ “Derail the Shame” campaign.
Here, the authors try to convince readers that when nutritionists promote the philosophy that all foods can fit, that’s the same as recommending that people eat nothing but Lucky Charms. That anti-food shaming messages from dietitians and companies are always opportunistic and are solely responsible for rising obesity rates.
It’s a terrible argument.
As you’ll see in a moment, a very small group of RDs (and other influencers conveniently unmentioned by the WaPo) have taken advantage of the “anti-diet” title to advocate unscientific ideas, but that’s not the case when dietitians – or General Mills – stand up and call out the food shaming for the problem at hand.
General Mills has donated a significant amount of money No Kid Hungrywhich works to improve the food security of children in vulnerable neighborhoods across the country.
Let’s talk about shaming for a moment, because in the process of conducting legitimate efforts against food shaming, the authors of this article are indulging in their own brand of shaming.
When we use words like “junk” to describe food, it can lead to guilt and shame for the people who eat those foods. It’s important to understand that food choices are highly personal, complex, and arguably nuanced beyond “eat this, not that.”
People gain weight when they are ashamed of their weight and their diet and research proves this (and here)
Larger-bodied people who feel guilt, shame and disgust about themselves and their eating habits are more likely to overeat, according to this 2022 study. That too. Also this one.
Telling people they shouldn’t eat a bowl of cereal because it’s “sugary junk” isn’t going to help anyone lose weight, and it’s certainly not going to reduce the number of obese people in any country.
We tried dieting. Not only does it not work, it has the opposite effect. The reason why people are obese is much more complicated than a box of cereal.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) chimed in with this perfect example of an uneducated opinion:
“I think it’s really reprehensible for the food industry to prey on the vulnerabilities of people who have diabetes or obesity or diseases caused by too much sugar, fat and maybe other ingredients that are harmful to them,” Blumenthal said. “Telling people they should be proud of eating the wrong things doesn’t do them any favors.”
I had no idea that General Mills specifically advertises to people who have obesity and diabetes.
And with all due respect, senator, I’m sure the majority of nutritionists don’t tell anyone to be proud of what they eat, be it vegetables or grains. This is because the other side – people feel ashamed eating foods that people like you call “wrong” – is destructive and harmful.
Dietitians understand that morally based judgments about food and feeling proud of yourself for choosing the “right” things to eat that day are the hallmarks of a disturbed relationship with food. Food is food. Period.
Yes, some foods are more physically nourishing, some more emotionally nourishing. Healthy eating has both. So please stop your trolling. People don’t need more judgment and more diets. Changes are needed where it can really help.
The article goes on to dietitians who reporters believe are professionally disinterested in promoting foods such as protein pancakes, chickpea-crusted pizza, and grass-fed beef patties.
Lauren Smith, a self-proclaimed “food freedom dietitian” on TikTok, has posted ads for frozen pizza from a gluten-free brand, Banjaand for a high-protein snack company, Lorissa’s kitchento her more than 70,000 followers.
Do I take it that we can’t eat freely without guilt and shame unless we’re eating the “right” foods approved by WaPo reporters?
Dietitian Colleen Christensen published a video eating rocky road ice cream on her TikTok account @no.food.rules, in which she mocks low-calorie alternatives. He has done commercials for pancake makers Kodiak cake and Premier Protein for her 300,000 followers.
NOT TOO THICK ROCK ROAD! OH MY GOD!
The pearly, performative rage surrounding the work of these nutritionists is incredibly blunt. It is unrealistic to imply that nutritionists who promote anything but whole foods are somehow doing harm.
No one’s diet consists entirely of whole foods, not even Senator Blumenthal, I’m sure.
Again, who determines that these foods are not worthy of a dietitian’s endorsement? What are the criteria used here? No matter what food we promote, there will always be someone who thinks it’s “unhealthy”.
Content that conveys the message that we no longer need to punish ourselves with the “diet” foods we think we “should” eat is helping people, not hurting them. It is not the same as “obesity promotion” or denying that excess fat poses health risks.
Only people who have no idea what it’s like to counsel clients on weight loss, or listen to people who have ruined their lives through decades of dieting and disordered eating, would ever make such a silly fuss about what these dieters are doing.
In fact, reading the claims these journalists make about my colleagues is like watching a disaster in slow motion. It’s so completely ignorant, it’s painful.
I have never, ever seen a nutritionist – or General Mills, for that matter – tell anyone that they should replace all of their ready-to-eat cereal meals.
Some people eat cereal for every meal, but that’s likely because they don’t have time, access, or money for anything else. Cereals are cheap, they are convenient, they are enriched with essential nutrients. Often given in food pantries. It’s also delicious.
And no, I was not paid by Big Cereal to write this.
Counseling thousands of people during my 24 years as a dietitian has taught me that food insecurity is a real problem in our society. I believe that this, and other social determinants of health, is the real reason why so many people suffer from weight-related problems.
Not because they are eating the “wrong” foods, but because society is failing them at the most basic levels. Telling people what not to eat is not the answer. What is? Improving access to healthcare and doing something about it the horrible racial treatment (and here) and weight biases leading to poor outcome in these patients. Improving education, increasing wages and continuing to subsidize nutritious food among others.
Read more about the Social Determinants of Health and how they affect us, here.
I find it particularly outrageous that for a left-leaning newspaper that has historically championed inclusion, exposed systemic failings, and cared about telling the whole story, there was no mention in this piece of any of that. This is a shame.
One part of the article I agree with is where the authors write about the co-opting of anti-diet, HAES (Health At Every Size) and intuitive eating movements by privileged people, dietitians and influencers seeking attention and profit.
There is a group of nutritionists whose extreme narrative is that any intentional weight loss is wrong and deranged, that diets cause more health problems than fat, and that fat is unrelated to disease risk.
For the record, I don’t agree with any of this.
The Washington Post was right to call these people out on their misinformation and science denial, but these professionals are a small minority in the diet community. Dietetics is an evidence-based and regulated health profession. There isn’t much room to create your own fantastical anti-scientific theories without getting ostracized or finding your license at risk of being revoked.
The majority of nutritionists help people live better, healthier lives. We can interpret and communicate science effectively and are the most qualified profession in the world to advise and counsel people on what and how they should eat.
If the Washington Post doesn’t believe in the ethics of nutritionists, who should the public trust for nutritional information? Naturopaths? Out-of-control nutritionists or “nutritional therapists”? The downside of an article like the WaPo one is that it erodes trust in nutrition professionals and leads the general public to seek the help of less qualified individuals.
Not sure why this outlet and these particular reporters seem obsessed with finding corruption in the diet community in general when evidence of it has remained elusive… even after two “investigative” pieces?
It may be important not to paint an entire profession with the same brush and to understand all aspects of a complex situation before reporting on it.
