“Why can’t I eat dessert all the time?”

Posted on by

In our quest to find entertaining and educational television shows for our kindergartner, I stumbled across an animated show on Netflix called “Ask the StoryBots.” In each episode, a child asks a question of the StoryBots, and they try to answer it by traveling to different locations and talking with different “experts” or individuals who might have answers. Most of these questions are about the world we live in, such as “why is the sky blue?” and “how do ears hear?” and they are answered in an accessible way. My daughter and I have found most of the episodes funny, entertaining, and interesting, as the show uses lots of humor and catchy songs to educate its audience. The StoryBots themselves are cute and silly and full of boundless curiosity. And the show also has guest appearances from a number of recognizable celebrities, including Snoop Dogg, Zoe Saldana, and Jason Sudeikis, among others.

When I came across the title for episode 2 in Season 2, I automatically cringed a little bit: “Why Can’t I Eat Dessert All the Time?” Teaching kids, especially little ones, about nutrition can be a tricky thing to do. I remember when our daughter came home from preschool one day and told us that her teacher made her eat lunch in a certain way (i.e., sandwich and veggies first and then dessert), I knew that we would have to step in and explain our food philosophy. The teacher was open to our request to let Lorelai eat her lunch in any order she would like, thankfully. But as the days and weeks went by, we started hearing Lorelai talk about “good/healthy foods” and “bad/unhealthy foods,” phrases we never use in our home, and I knew that it was going to be an uphill battle to maintain her intuitive relationship with food and her body.

Lorelai and I immediately skipped over episode 2 of Season 2 because I was afraid that it would be just another fearmongering treatise on why sugar is bad for us. Later on, I watched the episode by myself, and while I did not find it as harmful as it could have been, it definitely was not ideal.

The StoryBots field a question from a young girl named Lilyn who asks them why she cannot just eat dessert all of the time, as she does not like other food. The StoryBots are stumped and tell Lilyn that they will find the answer to this question and get back to her. The first stop for the StoryBots is at a bakery to ask the baker (played by Christina Applegate) why we can’t eat dessert all of the time. In an attempt to answer the question, the baker rolls out a chalkboard filled with formulaic equations and organic chemistry and begins a very lengthy (and swiftly spoken) explanation, using complicated terms that a child most certainly could not understand. She tells them that “an excess of monosaccharides can have an inherently negative effect on everything from our teeth to our metabolism.” She also explains that given the standardized 2,000-calorie diet, “the ratio of calories to nutrients found within your average sugary sweets deviates significantly from what has come to be widely accepted healthy percentages for what one’s caloric intake should be derived from.” Not surprisingly, the StoryBots are confused and at a loss for words.

Obviously, there is a lot that I don’t love about this explanation, but I especially disliked the part about the standardized 2,000-calorie diet. As we know, the 2,000-calorie standardized diet was created as part of the Nutritional Labeling and Education Act in 1990 as a way of simplifying the nutrition label to make it easier to calculate percentages of daily values. 2,000 calories was settled on after the USDA surveyed men and women and asked them how many calories they ate in a day via self-report. Women reported eating between 1,600-2,200 calories per day while men reported taking in between 2,000-3,000 calories/day. So, using these calorie ranges, researchers decided on 2,000 as it was a “nice round number” that would be easy to use for calculations. That being said, 2,000 calories is an arbitrary amount as we truly do not know how many calories one “should” be eating each day. Some folks need much more and others need much less, and the factors that determine this are largely genetic.

As the StoryBots stare at the baker with utter confusion, Jake the Supreme Cupcake (a cupcake that is a “bad boy”) tells them that they can, in fact, eat dessert all of the time and invites them to join him on a journey. The group ends up at Tummy University, where Jake brings the StoryBots to the Alpha Kobbler Pie fraternity. There the partiers (sweets including cake, Twinkies, and gummy bears) are having a sugar rave and initiating new frat pledges, one of which is a piece of broccoli named Brock. Jake explains that the parties at this fraternity are the best because they are “packed with sugar, which gives you short bursts of energy.” All of the attendees are basically bouncing off the walls and acting “crazy,” which they attribute to being “full of sugar.” Brock finds himself at a ritual initiation called “The Dunk,” where pledges are dunked into chocolate, and he decides to bow out.

At the same time, one of the StoryBots, Bing, gets swept up in the rave and is goaded into chugging a two-liter bottle of soda. Brock warns the StoryBots that drinking a two- liter bottle of soda is bad as “it’s almost 100 times the amount of sugar you find in a carrot!” Terrified, the StoryBots try to stop Bing from drinking the soda, but they arrive too late and find him chugging away. Of course, directly after this, Bing starts acting “crazy” like the others, sliding down the stairs on a sled, doing a cannonball into a glass of soda, etc. The StoryBots look on in horror and ask Brock what they can do. He tells them that they will just have to wait as “sugar gives you lots of energy, but you crash and burn pretty quickly.” Almost immediately, the partiers run out of energy, and all of them have sugar hangovers.

The StoryBots end up leaving with Brock as they do not feel that they got their question answered. Brock also wants to find his place at Tummy University. The group runs into the campus police, who are “healthy fats” including avocado and fish. The police chastise Bing for eating too much sugar and are surprised to see Brock coming out of the rave. The police recommend that Brock speak with Dean Banana who is known to say “every food can make the body a better place.” The police then go on to explain that they are healthy fats that are good for protecting the cells in the body. On the way to finding Dean Banana, the group comes across the “Protein Gym,” where a large sweaty T-Bone steak runs over to the group. He has an Austrian accent (reminiscent of Arnold Schwarzenegger) and tells them that protein is needed for building big muscles, and he challenges them to lift heavy weights. Brock does not feel that this is a good fit for him either.

Next the group comes upon a group of foods (including a bowl of pasta, a loaf of bread, and a potato) lined up at the starting line of a track, getting ready to run a race. Brock tries racing with the group who explain that they are “packed with the good carbohydrates,” which give the body sustainable energy, unlike simple sugar. Brock is unable to keep up with the runners and ends up collapsing at the track and then waking up in a hospital bed at the campus medical center. The doctors are fruits and vegetables and introduce themselves as “vitamins and minerals” that “prevent people from getting sick, make the cells in the body strong, and strengthen the immune system.” The doctors share that Brock’s vitamin and mineral levels are “off the charts,” as he has tons of folate, vitamin C, potassium, and calcium, and they tell him that he would be a great fit at the medical center. Dean Banana shows up and confirms that Brock has found his place among the nutrients. He explains that “while a little bit of sugar tastes good,” it’s protein, healthy fats, complex carbohydrates, and vitamins and minerals that “make people strong, smart, and healthy.” The StoryBots believe that they have finally found the answer to their question and are excited to share it with Lilyn.

Overall, the episode is not completely terrible. It is amusing and interesting and provides some solid nutrition education. What I take issue with though is how the simple carbohydrates are portrayed as “naughty crazy partiers,” while the other nutrients are shows as the “good” ones. Young children have very binary thinking, and setting up this “good food/bad food” dichotomy is not necessarily helpful. The message that children will hear from this is that “good foods” such as protein, healthy fats, complex carbohydrates, and vitamins and minerals are to be put up on a pedestal while simple sugars make you sick. This also gives simple sugars the allure of the forbidden food and can result in children over-valuing these foods rather than just having a neutral place in the diet. Kids are naturally born with the ability to be intuitive eaters, and the more that we intervene and try to push them in the direction of “healthy” foods, away from “bad” foods and scare them about the consequences of eating said “bad” foods, the more likely that they will lose their ability to eat intuitively.

Aside from very general nutrition education, namely telling kids that eating a wide variety of foods will help their bodies grow and feel good, I don’t think that getting into the nitty-gritty of how protein, fat, and carbohydrates function is particularly helpful. In our diet-obsessed culture that demonizes sugar and is responsible for the “childhood obesity epidemic,” these types of messages around nutrition do more harm than good. If you do end up watching this episode with your child, please be sure to explain that sugar is not the enemy and that there is more to food than just the nutrients they contain. Food is about connection, tradition, history and pleasure, not just nutritional content.

Working With a Running Coach: Why I Started, Why I Stopped

Posted on by

In February 2019, I had one of the best racing performances of my life. My finishing time was just shy of the personal record that I set 12 years earlier, and had I better understood the course, I think I could have beaten it. Despite my age and three surgeries in the preceding five years, I was still running close to my best. Then, for reasons that I still cannot completely identify, my running ability abruptly fell off a cliff.

Sometimes I have dreams in which I struggle to run, like I am knee-deep in molasses, and this struggle became real in the summer of 2019. My legs were not tired, nor were they sore, but they just would not go. It was the oddest feeling, and the best way I can describe it is to compare it to having a limb that has fallen asleep: There is nothing structurally wrong with it, but it just does not work as it should. One morning, Joanne watched from the front door as I slowly jogged down to the end of the block, stopped, threw my hands up in exasperation and frustration, and walked back home.

From the summer of 2019 to early 2023, my running rebounded to a small extent. My endurance returned but my speed did not when I ran another marathon in 2022. In fact, my speed continued to worsen over those years at a pace that getting older alone does not explain. Each time I had an inexplicably slow run, each one seemingly slower than the preceding outing, my confusion and frustration grew and began to morph into disgust. In the midst of these runs, sometimes I thought about stopping – not just that day’s workout, but giving up running entirely.

After hearing of my frustration, a generous friend gifted me three months with a running coach who works remotely with distance runners all around the world. During our first conversation, the coach offered his opinion that I was running too fast during most of my training runs. Running slower in order to run faster sounded counterintuitive, but I was willing to try his approach for a few reasons. One, the training approach I had been taking clearly was no longer working for me. Two, he had helped numerous runners – including my friend – dramatically improve their running, which gave me hope that he could do the same with me. Three, in my line of work, I am used to offering suggestions that seem counterproductive at first glance, such as stocking, so I know to keep an open mind.

The coach used the workout pattern that I was already following as a starting point, but he made some significant changes. He added an additional day of running per week, increased my mileage, and significantly slowed my pace. Even during my interval workouts, he wanted me to refrain from running as hard as I could.

He gave me a training plan to follow, and while the specifics varied from week to week, the overall pattern was the same. Tuesdays were interval workouts at the track, Thursdays were recovery runs, and Saturdays were long and slow jogs. At first, the workout’s distances and paces were easy for me to achieve, which gave me confidence that I would be able to keep up with the coach’s training plan, and I felt optimistic.

Then problems arose. While I never got injured under the coach’s watch, I began getting sick more often than I ever had in adulthood. The frequent illnesses were more correlation than causation, as I suspect they were mostly due to exposure to the germs that our daughter brings home from kindergarten. However, I was pushing myself too hard. Sure, my speeds were slower than what I would have run on my own, but I also pushed myself to achieve the workout goals even when I was overtired or otherwise not feeling up to it because skipping or modifying a prescribed workout felt like failure. Instead of sleeping relatively late on Saturday mornings, I was waking up and starting my runs in the dark in order to fit in the mileage before beginning daddy duty. Between the decreased sleep and pushing myself too hard in my training, I was wearing myself out.

Still, I kept going, as I was clinging to the hope that following the coach’s training plan would make me a better runner, just like he had done for others. A few months into our training plan, coach began to prescribe faster workouts. After running so slowly for so long though, the goal paces felt lightning quick, and I failed to achieve them. At the beginning of our work, I routinely returned home from my training runs feeling optimistic, happy, and proud that I was able to achieve the goals that coach set out for me, but soon failure became the norm. Before leaving my house for a training run, I looked at the prescribed workout knowing I would need a miracle to achieve the day’s goals. Instead of feeling positive, I felt guilty and ashamed, and I wondered what was wrong with me.

Coach and I ended up working together for somewhere around six or seven months before I called it quits. He is a super nice guy, an elite runner himself, and he has vast coaching experience, loads of knowledge, and a long list of runners he had helped, but I seemed to be some sort of outlier in that my body was not responding positively to his training plan. We seemed to be bumping up against whatever mysterious factors had eroded my running abilities in the first place.

As you have read through my story, I wonder if you have picked up on the common themes between my work with the running coach and diet culture: turning to someone who “looks the part” for guidance, optimism based on testimonials that may or may not be indicative of typical results, reliance on external prescriptions rather than internal cues, and self-blame in the face of failure. Ultimately, realizing these commonalities is why I stopped.

Now I take a similar approach to running that diet survivors do to eating. My body’s internal cues are the primary factors in the decisions I make regarding when, how far, and how fast to run. Instead of focusing on my slow speed and feeling frustrated about it, I am working on accepting that all bodies change over time and the amount of control that I have over mine is limited. These days, I try to approach my running with a spirit of enjoyment and adventure, a fun and relaxing way to be outside, and feeling proud about covering ground on my own two feet – even if they do move much slower than they once did.

Pinkalicious

Posted on by

Mondays are our kindergartener’s “media day,” which means she and her classmates visit her elementary school’s library and have an opportunity to borrow a book for the upcoming week. During one Monday afternoon walk home from school, she gave me a synopsis of the book she was taking home, something along the lines of, “She [the main character] eats a lot of pink foods and turns pink, then she eats more pink food and turns red, and then she eats green foods and her color turns back to normal.”

Uh-oh.

Right off the bat, I had a feeling where this was going. My intuition proved correct once I read the book myself. Pinkalicious is a funny and cute book, but it is problematic in certain ways. If your child is going to read it, an accompanying and clarifying conversation will be important in order to mitigate harm.

The story begins with the main character, a young girl named Pinkalicious, baking pink cupcakes on a rainy day. She disregards her parents’ commands and eats so many of them that she wakes up in the morning and discovers that she has turned pink. Her doctor diagnoses her with a case of “Pinkititis” and advises her, “For the next week, no more pink cupcakes, pink bubble gum, or pink cotton candy.” The doctor continues, “To return to normal, you must eat a steady diet of green food.” Immediately thereafter, the book reads, “(YUCK!)”

The accompanying illustration shows several pink foods crossed out, indicating that Pinkalicious is to abstain from them. While the picture does include strawberries, grapefruit, and watermelon, the vast majority of the foods are desserts: lollipops, jelly beans, cotton candy, ice cream, donuts, milk shakes, jello, and cupcakes.

Following her trip to the doctor, Pinkalicious suffers various consequences as a result of her altered color: Her friend cannot spot her because she is camouflaged among the pink peonies, a bee mistakes her for a flower and lands on her nose, and she cries for her mother to take her home after bees, butterflies, and birds surround her.

Back at home, Pinkalicious requests and is denied another pink cupcake. After pretending to eat her dinner of “mushy, dark vegetables,” she sneaks back into the kitchen in the middle of the night and devours a cupcake that her mother had hidden. In the morning, a horrified Pinkalicious awakens to discover that her condition has worsened: She is now red.

Desperate to return to her normal self, Pinkalicious says, “I opened the fridge, held my nose, and squeezed a bottle of icky green relish onto my tongue. I ate pickles and spinach, olives and okra. I choked down artichokes, gagged on grapes, and burped up Brussels sprouts.” The accompanying illustration shows a few fruits – limes, honeydew, green apple, and grapes – and a bunch of vegetables, including broccoli, cucumber, celery, asparagus, cabbage, and peas. After ingesting these green foods, Pinkalicious loses her discoloration and becomes “beautiful.”

Left to their own devices to interpret this story, a child has likely internalized the following messages: (1) Pink foods are almost exclusively sweets. (2) Too many sweets will make them sick. (3) Sweets have an addictive-like quality. (4) The way to get healthy is to completely avoid sweets and to instead eat green foods. (5) Green foods are almost exclusively vegetables. (6) Vegetables are yucky. (7) Vegetables make them pretty.

Unfortunately, all of these messages are problematic. Let’s take a look.

Problematic Message 1: Pink foods are almost exclusively sweets.

Plenty of pink foods exist that have zero to mild sweetness, including corned beef, edible flowers, beets, dragon fruit, rare steak, and Himalayan salt, yet the only examples of pink foods that the authors cite are sweets because the former is really just code for the latter.

Problematic Message 2: Too many sweets will make them sick.

Sure, too many sweets can make someone sick, a lesson that I learned on Halloween many years ago. However, we tend to single out and villainize sweets, as if they are somehow the only food group that can sicken us in excess, while ignoring the reality that too much of anything can be detrimental to our health. Remember that even water, when consumed excessively, can kill someone.

Problematic Message 3: Sweets have an addictive-like quality.

Admittedly, this message is more subtle than the others, and I can imagine that it will go over the heads of some children. However, for those of us familiar with the apparent fallacy of sugar “addiction,” we can see its theme in the way that Pinkalicious eats another cupcake despite already having turned pink and gone to the doctor as well as in the lengths that she goes to – deceiving her family, waking up in the middle of the night, and sneaking around – in order to obtain the cupcake. Nevertheless, research suggests that sugar “addiction” is not a true addiction, but rather a byproduct of how we tend to demonize and restrict sugary foods.

Problematic Message 4: The way to get healthy is to completely avoid sweets and to instead eat green foods.

If this general sentiment sounds familiar, maybe that is because our culture oftentimes splits foods into dichotomies and presents one side as sin and the other as salvation. Whole30®, detoxes, “clean eating,” etc., are all based on this basic – and flawed – premise.

Alan Levinovitz, a religion professor who has taken to writing about nutrition because of the intersectionality of spirituality and food, sums up the situation very well, “It’s terrifying to live in a place where the causes of diseases like Alzheimer’s, autism, or ADHD, or the causes of weight gain, are mysterious. So what we do is come up with certain causes for the things that we fear. If we’re trying to avoid things that we fear, why would we invent a world full of toxins that don’t really exist? Again, it’s about control. After all, if there are things that we’re scared of, then at least we know what to avoid. If there is a sacred diet, and if there are foods that are really taboo, yeah, it’s scary, but it’s also empowering, because we can readily identify culinary good and evil, and then we have a path that we can follow that’s salvific.”

Sickness and health are never entirely within our control and are certainly way more complex than eat this, not that.

Problematic Message 5: Green foods are almost exclusively vegetables.

To acknowledge the obvious, yes, many vegetables are green. However, for all the green veggies in the world, we also have pistachios, pumpkin seeds, avocados, and other fruits that the book excludes. Are sweets, such as lime jello and green apple jelly beans included? What about – gasp – green cupcakes? Of course not, and I think we all know why.

Problematic Message 6: Vegetables are yucky.

The attitude that we have towards various foods shapes how our children come to see them. In our culture, adults often teach children to view eating vegetables as a chore. For example, earning dessert by first eating vegetables teaches the child that consuming vegetables is the suffering that one must endure in order to be able to eat what they really want.

My first job as a dietitian was a traveling research position that sent me all over the country examining the foods and eating behaviors in elementary school cafeterias. All these years later, I still remember two specific schools. In one suburban Chicago school, the kids saw eating vegetables as uncool and would not eat them, so the cafeteria monitors would proactively remove the vegetables from the trays for fear that the uneaten veggies would be ammunition for a food fight. Peas were on the menu the day I was there, and I remember seeing the bottom of the trash bin lined with confiscated peas. Meanwhile, eating vegetables was the in thing to do in one northern Tennessee school. The problem the cafeteria workers faced there was that kids were taking too many vegetables from the self-serve salad bar, thereby exceeding the allowed serving sizes. The contrast between these two schools stuck with me because it illustrates how cultural views of a food shape its consumption.

Of course we all have our own unique food preferences and aversions, and some people genuinely just do not care for vegetables, but teaching kids that they are “yucky” is mostly a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Problematic Message 7: Vegetables make them pretty.

“I was me, and I was beautiful,” says Pinkalicious after eating green foods and returning to her normal hue. With beauty being the subjective entity that it is, the use of the first-person perspective is significant and raises questions to which we will never know the answers.

On the surface, this quote reads as a self-affirming statement, but does Pinkalicious – who loves the color pink – really think she looks better now than she did when she was pink, or is she rather expressing relief that her color now matches the necessary criteria for societal beauty standards? In other words, does she really think she is beautiful in her own eyes, or because others – her parents, her doctor, and society as a whole – have taught her that being pink was wrong?

Unsaid but certainly implied is the message that if Pinkalicious returned to her beauty after eating green foods, then she must have been less than beautiful when she was eating pink foods, which tells kids that eating sweets makes them less attractive. If that sounds like too much of a stretch, consider the multitude of my adolescent patients (and sometimes their parents, too) who scapegoat sweets for their acne.

Given how many people – including kids – learn to dislike their bodies and yearn to conform to whatever media, peers, doctors, family, friends, etc., say they should look like, the notion that vegetables can make someone beautiful is surely enticing. The problem is that this message is false. Regardless of what one considers beautiful, no food group has the power to dramatically alter appearance.

Do you really want to indoctrinate your kindergartener into diet culture? If not, make sure that enjoying a reading of Pinkalicious is accompanied with a conversation discussing these messages.

Prep

Posted on by

At the beginning of this month, I had my very first preventive colonoscopy. For those of you in your mid-40s and over, you may know that the procedure is now being recommended at the age of 45 (previously it was age 50) to screen for colon cancer and other bowel issues. So when I turned 45 earlier this year, I booked my colonoscopy for this fall and thought it would be “no big deal.” But as the months went by and the procedure day drew nearer, I found myself getting more and more stressed about it.

I was not feeling anxious about the actual procedure itself because people I had spoken to who had had one told me that it is the easiest part. I was more distressed about the prep for the procedure. I knew that for several days prior, I would need to be on a “low residue” diet (basically low fiber), and then on the day before, I could only have clear liquids (but no red, purple, or blue).

I’ve been eating intuitively for over a decade and have not restricted or changed what I have eaten during that time other than while fasting for blood labs. Even though I knew the low residue diet was important for the procedure, it still filled me with dread, and honestly, I felt quite depressed. I found myself becoming preoccupied with what I “could” or “could not” eat. I obsessively looked at the lists of foods to avoid, and I felt such sadness. Despite the fact that now I was supposed to be eating foods lower in fiber (no seeds, nuts, beans, whole grains, or high fiber fruits and vegetables), it felt reminiscent of my dieting days.

Interestingly, I also found myself eating past the point of fullness more often during this time. It felt like I was having my “last supper” before the prep day, as I knew I would not have solid food for over 24 hours. Even though I rationally knew that food deprivation almost always leads to food preoccupation, I was still surprised at how difficult it felt.

The day of the “prep” was the worst day by far. I had stocked up on Jell-O, tea, apple juice, and vegetable broth, but it was (not surprisingly) completely unsatisfying. On the tip of a friend, I learned that I could also have gummy bears and Jolly Ranchers (just not the red, purple, or blue ones) as they liquify at body temperature, so I had some of those as well. Overall, I was a cranky, hangry person, and all I wanted to do was isolate.

By the time I started drinking the liquid laxative that early evening, I was pretty miserable. I will not go into the details of this part other than to say that I spent a lot of time in the bathroom that night and in the wee hours of the morning.

Luckily, I had booked the colonoscopy for first thing in the morning, which meant that I would be done with it all sooner. And, as advertised, the procedure itself was quick, easy, and painless (I was thankfully asleep for it all.) Of course, I was thrilled to hear that my colonoscopy results were excellent, with no areas of concern, and I will not need to get another one for 10 years.

Once I was able to eat normally again, I quickly noticed that my food preoccupation subsided, and I started feeling more relaxed around food. I was no longer a cranky, hangry mess and was able to eat in tune with my body’s cues.

I am very grateful that my procedure went well. And despite the discomfort, stress, and anxiety I felt during the days prior, I am glad that I had this experience. It reminded me that I never want to go through the restriction/food obsession cycle of dieting again. And it also reminded me that my body is amazing and always trying to protect me – that survival instinct is no joke! My advice to those of you who will be getting a colonoscopy? Take off the day before, make sure you have plenty of supplies at the ready, and remember that this too shall pass.

Thoughts on the New Weight Loss Drugs

Posted on by

I’ve been meaning to write a blog about the new weight loss drugs for months now, but every time I start, I find myself having trouble with what I want to say, especially since so many of the anti-diet and fat-positive activists I admire have already written such important and insightful pieces on these drugs. For anyone looking for some in-depth research study analysis, I want to point you towards Ragen Chastain, a speaker, writer, and amazing fat activist, in addition to being a certified “statistics nerd” (her words, not mine!). Her Weight and Healthcare Substack is an invaluable resource that takes a hard look at “weight science, weight stigma and what evidence, ethics, and lived experience teach us about best healthcare practices and public health for higher weight people.” Ragen is adept at sifting through the research studies that the drug companies publish to sell the efficacy of these drugs and finding the myriad issues, conflicts of interest, and straight-up bad statistics that these studies exhibit. So please read what she has written on the topic of GLP-1 agonists.

In this piece, I am not going to get into the science behind how GLP-1 agonists such as Ozempic and Wegovy actually work. Instead, I want to talk about how these drugs (and the weight loss drugs that came before them) have become such a lightning rod in the discussion of weight. I was a teenager in the 90s, and I clearly remember when the drug Fenfluramine/Phentermine (Fen-Phen) entered the weight loss scene. There was such a fervor about it on the nightly news, and the marketing by the drug companies was intense. It was touted as a “miracle drug” that could “cure” o*esity, and everyone was going to their doctor to get a prescription. I also remember the news stories that came out. Famously, there was one in the Boston Herald about how Fen-Phen was linked to mitral valve dysfunction, pulmonary hypertension, and other cardiac abnormalities. Subsequently, it was removed from the market due to these risks. It took years before people were convinced that the harms that these medications caused outweighed the “benefits” of weight loss for higher weight people.

There has been a seemingly significant theoretical shift in the medical community over the past few years regarding higher weight (the “o” words”) and weight loss. Unlike previous decades, when people were told that their high weight was their “fault” and was caused by their “unhealthy lifestyle behaviors,” many medical professionals are now putting forth the message that one’s weight is largely out of one’s control (true) and is not necessarily due to “unhealthy lifestyle behaviors” (also true). Most physicians acknowledge that the BMI is a flawed measurement and that there are many factors that play into health other than weight (true again). But instead of pivoting away from using weight as an indicator of health, there has been a push by the medical community to classify o*esity and o*erweight as “chronic health conditions” that must be managed over one’s lifetime. In essence, the medical community is saying that while being fat isn’t your “fault,” it is still a problem and one that needs to be managed.

In our fat-phobic, image-obsessed culture, it makes sense why these new “miracle weight loss drugs” are creating such a stir. Higher weight people are being told, “Hey, we know that your weight is out of your control, but we can help you manage your ‘condition’ with these medications!” In addition, there is a lot of pressure on higher weight people to “get healthy” (even if many of them are healthy by every measure other than weight), and losing weight is still seen as something that will improve people’s health. The marketing that the drug companies have put forth is simply astounding. I feel like I can’t watch a TV show, peruse social media, or even read the New York Times without sponsored content popping up about these drugs. Add to this all of the celebrities and influencers who have been publicizing their weight loss “success,” I would be surprised if any person in a larger body wouldn’t be affected. Currently, I am in a small-mid fat, abled body, and I’d be lying if I said that I hadn’t thought about turning to these drugs. I can only imagine how those who are in much larger bodies than mine and/or in disabled bodies are tempted to try them.

The studies that have been put forth by Novo Nordisk (the drug company who makes Wegovy and Ozempic) have shown that while participants lost about two pounds per month over a 68-week time period (during which they were also dieting and exercising 30 minutes per day, six days per week), at 60 weeks, those who were still taking the medication experienced a plateau in their weight loss, and in a follow-up study the following year, two thirds of the weight they had lost was regained. Conveniently, the studies all concluded at the second year of testing, as we know that the majority of weight regain occurs between two to five years post weight loss attempt. Novo Nordisk also reported that taking their medication leads to positive health outcomes, but a closer look at their studies shows that there were no statistically significant improvements in HBA1C (a measure of diabetes), triglycerides, cholesterol, or inflammation markers.

I don’t blame anyone who feels like they need to try these drugs. For some folks, losing 10-15% of their body weight (the average weight loss reported by researchers) could feel like it makes a huge difference in their quality of life. What I find distressing about these drugs is how hard they are being pushed by the media and medical community despite the long list of side effects and potentially harmful health outcomes that can occur. Wegovy has a Boxed Warning (the FDA’s most serious warning) due to it increasing one’s risk for thyroid cancer, acute pancreatitis, acute gallbladder disease, stomach paralysis, as well as an increase in suicidal ideation, among other risks. But it seems that the medical community feels that losing weight is worth the risk to fat people’s lives. That even though folks report nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, constipation, and stomach pain while on these drugs, it’s okay as it is just the price to pay for one to become “healthy.”

I wish that instead of telling higher weight people that their weight is a problem that can be “solved” by taking these medications, the medical community could instead focus its energy on reducing weight stigma in healthcare, as this (along with weight cycling or yo-yo dieting and healthcare inequalities) has been found to have much more of a profoundly negative effect than weight on one’s health. I wish that we lived in a society that didn’t prize thinness so much. And I wish that everyone could see that weight is just another human characteristic that exists on a continuum and that bodily diversity is a real thing, not something that has to be “managed” or “controlled.”

The End Is Near!

Posted on by

Seven years ago, when I saw Chic in concert for the first time, Nile Rodgers used the interlude in one of their songs as an opportunity to tell the crowd about his recent cancer battle, which he ultimately won. The songwriter and producer explained that receiving the news inspired him to go on a music-making binge, as he figured he only had a short window of time left to express his art.

Earlier today, as I was driving home from the beach with our daughter, that memory crossed my mind. Since she will soon be restarting school, we have been trying to cram in as many daddy-daughter activities and outings – the Museum of Science, the Butterfly Place, farms, the zoo, fruit picking, restaurants, train rides, the aforementioned beach, etc. – as we can before the start of the school year interferes and forces these bonding experiences from frequent occasions to relative rarities. Before we have even left the parking lot of one activity, I am already thinking about the next one and all of the others that I hope to shove into our remaining time before it runs out. We have fun, but part of me is distracted, anxious, and sad as I think about the end.

Deadlines have their upsides because they can push us to accomplish tasks and achieve goals that might otherwise remain unfulfilled, but they bring with them stress and general feelings of unease that detract from the experience.

Life-threatening illnesses and the school calendar are examples of deadlines imposed upon us, realities that we just have to do our best to roll with, but sometimes we needlessly impose deadlines upon ourselves. A person who wants to get married by a certain age may settle because the timing is right even though the partner is wrong. Someone I know recently spent a hot summer evening in the emergency room with heat exhaustion and dehydration because they stubbornly kept hacking away at a tree they really wanted to cut down before dinnertime rather than conceding they should take an additional day to complete the project. When we were adolescents, a friend of mine wanted to bench press a particular weight before a school dance, and he ended up having to fight to free himself as the much-too-heavy bar laid across his chest.

Because this is a nutrition blog, I am of course thinking about the predicaments we can put ourselves and our relationships with food in due to self-imposed deadlines. An obvious example is the melancholy and frantic overconsumption that precedes a scheduled diet. Trying to lose weight before a wedding or another similar function is a common – yet problematic – behavior that is most likely to result in eventual weight gain and increased risk for developing a wide range of health woes. Someone I know severely dehydrated himself on his birthday and spent much of it at the gym because he had set a goal to be at a particular weight by his new age, and while he did survive and recover, he put himself in a dangerous situation for the sake of an arbitrary goal.

Imagine what these scenarios could look like instead without the needless deadlines. No diet on the horizon could mean more peaceful and intuitive eating without the threat of self-imposed food insecurity looming. Foregoing an attempt to lose weight before an event reduces the chances of harmful and discouraging weight cycling and creates space for the person to focus their time and attention on the big day itself and to go into it full of energy instead of depleted. Personally, I can think of more fun ways to spend a birthday than sweating out as much fluid as possible on an elliptical machine.

Time and opportunities are finite resources, and while we never know when they will run out, we can make life easier for ourselves by leaving self-imposed deadlines in the past.

What We Can Learn From Eating While Sick

Posted on by

We managed to avoid it for over three years, but COVID finally got us. Joanne and I developed strange sensations in our throats virtually simultaneously and then tested positive a couple of days later. Whether due to the disease itself or as a side effect of Paxlovid, we developed terrible tastes in our mouths. Joanne described it as tasting like gasoline, while to me it seemed more a combination of cheese, bad breath, and metal. Additionally, I experienced waves of queasiness and a drastically reduced appetite.

Some of my patients talk about how much easier it is for them to eat intuitively when they are sick versus when they are fully healthy, and my experiences were somewhat similar to their own. When our appetites are diminished and food seems off-putting, our range of tolerable eating options shrinks considerably, which ironically makes food selection easier because foods we are willing and able to eat stand out in greater contrast to the rest.

Sometimes my patients, when they are ill, have an easier time practicing unconditional permission for a couple of reasons. First, because their array of appealing foods is so small, their only realistic option is to go with these foods. Second, because they are sick, they feel they are more deserving of self-care than when they are healthy, so they worry less about their perceived nutritional quality of food or about what they “should” be eating.

Being sick is so unpleasant and disruptive that at least making food choices can be easier for the aforementioned reasons, yet we can learn lessons from eating while sick that we can apply when we are healthy.

Choosing from a vast sea of eating options can be difficult and overwhelming, which is why deciding what to order from the Cheesecake Factory’s massive menu can be challenging. It is why, when our daughter demands “Choices!” when I ask her what she wants for a given meal, I offer her a small selection of different foods. We do advocate for having a wide variety of foods on hand at home so we have a reasonable shot at being able to satisfy whatever criteria our intuitive eating questions lead us to, but selection can nevertheless be hard if every option feels appealing. As when we are sick, having a smaller range of options that sounds good can make the process easier, but we can accomplish the same objective without being ill by eating before the magnitude of our hunger grows to unwieldy levels.

Only some of my patients utilize a hunger/fullness continuum, as it can sometimes be counterproductive if misused, but those who do know that we define a “3” as a comfortable hunger where we are ready for a meal and we are able to discern which foods sound like they will best hit the spot. In contrast, we define a “2” as a hunger that has grown uncomfortable, where we may feel irritable and stressed, and choosing what to eat can be especially challenging because our bodies are essentially telling us, “I don’t care what you feed me, just give me food!”

By eating before we get to a “2,” we give ourselves an opportunity to separate the most appealing foods more easily from the rest of our options. The practicalities of real life sometimes preclude us from being able to have our meals and snacks exactly when our body’s hunger cues suggest we are best off eating, but through experience, we can learn how to incorporate well-timed snacks that have us arriving at mealtime comfortably hungry rather than ravenous.

In terms of unconditional permission and the relative ease with which we can practice it when we are sick, remember that we are always deserving of self-care – including having the freedom to eat what, when, and how much we want without justification – regardless of our state of health. Think of self-care as something to be practiced not just when we are ill and need to get better, but also when we are already well and hope to stay that way. Personally, I can remember many times over the last few decades when I put self-care to the side, disregarded what my body was asking for, and ended up in a state of illness that was arguably avoidable if I had taken better care of myself.

Next time you are sick, consider the lessons about your eating that you can take with you as you leave the illness behind.

When Family and Friends Lose Weight

Posted on by

It’s the beginning of summer, and one theme in particular has been popping up a lot lately in my appointments with patients. It seems like everyone’s mother/uncle/friend from college/cousin has gone on a “weight loss journey” since the winter. As you might expect, witnessing your loved ones and/or friends and acquaintances engage in intentional weight loss can stir up a lot of feelings in those of us who are trying to embrace the bodies that we have. Research on intentional weight loss has found “almost complete relapse” after three to five years. Other data are more specific and suggest 90% to 95% of dieters regain all or most of the weight within five years, while other research has found that between one third and two thirds of people end up heavier than they were at baseline. It can be hard to watch others receive the praise and acceptance that often comes along with these “weight loss journeys.” It’s difficult to watch these folks gain more and more privilege while we remain in bodies that often put us at a disadvantage in our fatphobic society. So what are we supposed to do with all of these feelings?

First off, I try to remind my patients that their mother’s/uncle’s/friend’s/cousin’s bodies are not our business. I firmly believe in body autonomy, or as Ragen Chastain calls it, “The Underpants Rule.” In essence, what someone chooses to do with their body is up to them (as long as it is not harming others). Our family and friends will often make choices that we don’t agree with. And those of us who are trying to fight the near-constant onslaught of fatphobia we are fed on a daily basis feel strongly that these friends/family members are doing harm to themselves and perpetuating diet culture. But at the end of the day, we aren’t in charge of others’ bodies. Just like we wouldn’t want someone telling us how to live in our own bodies, we can’t police others.

That being said, I think there is nothing wrong with protecting oneself and setting boundaries around diet and weight loss talk. If you are active on social media and the friend/family member is an active poster of weight loss updates, befores and afters, or touting their new “healthy lifestyle,” it might be time to either snooze them for a short while or hide them from your timeline indefinitely. This can be done by clicking the “unfollow” button on someone’s Facebook profile or clicking the “mute” button on Instagram. By doing this, you are removing the element of surprise from seeing these things popping up on your timeline. It’s hard to look away or unsee some of these posts, so preventing them from appearing on your social media from the start can be helpful.

Another way that you can set a boundary is by being up front with the friend/family member about how their diet/weight loss talk is affecting you. Sometimes I will help my patients role play what they would like to say to the friend/family member who brings up their diet/weight loss. In these types of situations, I encourage patients to try to give their friend/family member the benefit of the doubt. That is, it is very unlikely that they are intentionally causing you harm or distress; they just are unaware of how this kind of talk can be triggering. Here’s an example of how these conversations can be broached: “Hey, I know that you aren’t intending to, but when you talk about your diet/lifestyle/weight loss journey with me, it makes me feel uncomfortable. I am happy that you are happy with what you are doing, but hearing about it is unhelpful for me as I’m working on accepting my body and letting go of diet culture.” If you are struggling with an eating disorder (and this person knows about it), it could be helpful to also say, “Part of my eating disorder recovery is not engaging in diet/weight loss talk as it can make my symptoms worse.”

If after these tactics, the message is still not getting through, it is within your right to limit your exposure to these individuals. This might mean doing shorter meet-ups rather than long, drawn-out hangouts, limiting your time spent at family gatherings, or getting together less often. If this is not an option, you can take space when you need to at these events, excusing yourself from the room or going for a walk by yourself, for example. I also highly recommend cultivating your own “anti-diet” community either online or in person if you are able to. There are many fat-positive folks all over the world, and it can feel less lonely when you are around those who “get it.” Instagram and Facebook can be helpful in finding these people and connecting with them.

At the end of the day, I hope that the one thing you will remember is that just because your
friend/family member is actively engaging in diet culture, you do not have to go that route. You deserve to embrace and live in the body you have, and you do not have to change it. Your body has never been the problem – our fatphobic culture is.

The Problem With Fat Shaming Professional Athletes

Posted on by

Felger: If we ever get to the point where we can’t fat shame athletes, I quit.

Massarotti: It’s coming.

Felger: It is coming.

Massarotti: It might already be here already.

Felger: It’s not. We’re not talking about a teenage girl. We’re talking about professional athletes whose job it is is to be in shape. We are allowed to call them fat and tease them for being fat. If that becomes off limits, I’m done.

The aforementioned exchange, which took place in the context of discussing Kyle Lowry of the Miami Heat, occurred between co-hosts Michael Felger and Tony Massarotti near the end of their Felger & Mazz sports talk show on May 17, 2023. Much like the fat shaming directed at Pablo Sandoval seven years ago, this problematic dialogue misses the mark and causes harm.

Felger asserted that part of a professional athlete’s job is to be in shape, but what constitutes “in shape” should not be defined by anthropometrics, such as weight or body fat percentage, but rather by an athlete’s readiness to perform their given sport at the level their employers expect of them. If an athlete lacks the strength, endurance, or flexibility to perform, the deficiency in their fitness is the real issue regardless of how their body is built; otherwise, teams would just fill their rosters with bodybuilders and models and call it a day.

“In shape” is also context dependent, as the physical abilities necessary to perform at a high level vary from sport to sport. A gymnast who lifts weights and runs but never stretches, a shot putter who stretches and runs but never lifts, and a marathoner who stretches and lifts but never runs would all have serious issues with their performance regardless of how their bodies look.

Besides, Kyle Lowry is actually quite a good basketball player. Lowry is in the midst of finishing his 17th season in the NBA, he earned spots in six straight All-Star games from 2015 to 2020, he started all 65 regular season and 24 playoff games that his team played on their way to winning the 2019 championship, and he was a member of the USA Olympic team that won the gold medal in 2016. Sure, his statistics dropped off a bit this season, but blaming the dip on his physique – which looks to be the same now as it did four years ago – is a bit of a head-scratcher considering the 37-year-old is the seventh oldest player (out of approximately 450) in a league where the average player is 26.01 years old. According to basketball-reference.com, Lowry’s career performance arc is thus far most similar to those of Terry Porter, Vince Carter, and Allen Iverson, the latter of whom is already enshrined in the Hall of Fame, and another – Carter – will likely get in too once he is eligible.

Lowry is far from the only “fat” athlete to outperform many of his leaner peers. The aforementioned Sandoval made over $73 million during his 14 years in the major leagues, and the two-time All-Star was named Most Valuable Player in one of the three World Series that his teams won. Pat Maroon was fat shamed despite winning three straight Stanley Cups. Back in Lowry’s realm of basketball, Luka Doncic’s own boss criticized him for his weight despite winning Rookie of the Year, then being named an All-Star and making the All-NBA first team in the four seasons he has played since then.

However, the most concerning part of Felger’s opinion is that he seems ignorant of the impact that his sentiments have on people other than professional athletes. “We’re not talking about a teenage girl,” he said, but the reality is that fat shaming anybody breeds fat shaming in general. Discussing the reasons why criticizing Donald Trump for his weight is harmful, Ragen Chastain explained, “And make no mistake, when you engage in fat-shaming, your victim is every single fat person.” The ramifications of fat shaming athletes are clear, as I discussed in the Boston Baseball article I wrote about Sandoval back in 2016.

“Fans and media have labeled Sandoval ‘disgusting,’ ‘lazy,’ and ‘pathetic,’ implying that those same terms apply to everyone who has a body type similar to his.

The message is that fat is to be loathed, that larger individuals are not worthy of the respect enjoyed by the rest of us. We reject stereotypes based on race, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation but we inexplicably tolerate those based on body size.

The idea that we can tell how someone eats or exercises based on his shape or weight is a myth. Some people built like linebackers never lift weights. Some skinny-as-a-rail folks subsist on fast food. And some obese individuals are more active and have a healthier relationship with food than any of them, but inhabit bigger bodies for other reasons.

As we all know, pressure to be thin leads to dieting, which can lead to a variety of problems, including eating disorders. These life-threatening illnesses are so common in Massachusetts that if the crowd at a sold-out Fenway Park represented a random sample of the state’s population, those in attendance with a diagnosed eating disorder would fill section 41.”

Sounds like Felger’s intent was to focus his fat shame on professional athletes while sparing others – and good thing it was, for his behavior would be even more problematic if his intent was otherwise – but we all know that intent and impact are two different entities. Felger certainly should know this, as his co-host was suspended just three months ago for making a poor attempt at humor that came off as racially insensitive. Like Massarotti, Felger should have known better.

If Felger is unwilling to forego fat shaming professional athletes, then the time for him to quit truly has arrived.

Gentle Nutrition

Posted on by

What is gentle nutrition? Imagine a Venn diagram. In one circle, we have intuitive eating, which is an approach to making decisions about what, when, and how much to eat centered around our body’s internal cues. In the other circle, we have medical nutrition therapy, which is the use of nutrition to treat various health problems. In the area in the middle where the two circles overlap lives a concept that we call gentle nutrition.

For my patients who are working to rebuild their intuitive eating skills, getting a firm handle on what gentle nutrition means and how to implement it in their lives are often two of the trickiest steps they face. The most common reason is that people oftentimes do not trust that their body’s internal cues will steer them in the direction of eating in a way that is conducive to their health. This fear, which I otherwise think of as the “If I allow myself to eat whatever I want, all I will do is have [insert the name of your taboo food] all the time” expectation, implies that eating for health means overriding intuitive eating cues.

My counter to that concern is to cite the food journal analyses that I perform on some of my patients. When I look at the intakes of my seasoned intuitive eaters, their nutrient consumption almost always falls within their estimated needs because their body naturally guides them towards the food it requires. In other words, my clinical experience suggests that when we eat intuitively, the eating-for-health part largely takes care of itself.

But what if our body is an imperfect guide? What if we face a gap between how far our intuitive eating takes us and where medical nutrition therapy suggests we should be?

For starters, take a step back and remember that our behaviors have limited influence on our health. One of my patients recently told me about a colleague who was diagnosed with cancer, and as word spread around the office, her co-workers reacted with surprise because the woman is so “thin and healthy.” (And as my patient astutely pointed out, if her colleague was fat rather than thin, people likely would have felt that she brought her health woes upon herself, which is a whole other problem.) Hearing the story reminded me of a fellow healthcare practitioner who was diagnosed with cancer herself despite being clearly orthorexic. For people who erroneously believe that they can control their medical fates if only they engage in certain behaviors, counter examples like these can rock their world.

Given that we may suffer whatever ailment we hope to avoid regardless of our best efforts to steer clear of it, we have to consider the lengths that we are willing to go to – and what we are willing to sacrifice – in hopes of reducing our risk. Focusing on medical nutrition therapy may sound sensible in theory, but doing so can come at the expense of our relationship with food. Consider the following scenarios that someone with hypertension might face.

  • What if you feel like you should never have salty food because of your high blood pressure, or when you do allow yourself to have it, you feel like you are being “bad”?
  • What if you have a history of restriction and the mere thought of cutting down on salt feels traumatic?
  • What if you are a recovering binge eater and stocking salty foods is an important step in your treatment?
  • What if you are on the road and happen upon a restaurant famous for a high-salt dish you really want to try, but you feel like if you do, you are asking for a cardiac event?

Who wants this level of angst interwoven with their eating when the fact of the matter is they could die of a heart attack no matter how much or how little sodium they consume? Unfortunately, stress, guilt, second-guessing, and inner turmoil can be significant issues when we practice not-so-gentle nutrition.

We advocate for gentle nutrition because of the downsides that come with focusing too hard on medical nutrition therapy and because of the upsides of taking a more moderate approach that still respects intuitive eating. Consider how someone practicing gentle nutrition would approach the same scenarios that I listed earlier.

  • What if you feel like you should never have salty food because of your high blood pressure, or when you do allow yourself to have it, you feel like you are being “bad”? They understand that complete abstinence of salty food is neither necessary nor practical, and they can enjoy such foods without guilt.
  • What if you have a history of restriction and the mere thought of cutting down on salt feels traumatic? Before even tackling gentle nutrition for their blood pressure concerns, they first do the necessary work to heal their relationship with food, thereby making medical nutrition therapy feel less triggering.
  • What if you are a recovering binge eater and stocking salty foods is an important step in your treatment? They recognize that in order to make peace with salty foods and get to a place where “a little” does not automatically turn into “a lot,” they have to practice unconditional permission and abundance, which entails exposure, continuous access, and predictable overconsumption for a period of time.
  • What if you are on the road and happen upon a restaurant famous for a high-salt dish you really want to try, but you feel like if you do, you are asking for a cardiac event? They understand that no single eating experience is going to save nor doom their health, that food is part of culture and travel, and that they would probably regret forgoing a rare opportunity.*

How then is the nutrition part of gentle nutrition implemented? That same person with hypertension may use their intuitive eating cues to determine that they feel like having a piece of fruit for a snack, but both the apple and the banana sound equally appealing, so they opt for the latter since it has more potassium than the former. On the other hand, if they feel like solely the apple would hit the spot, they eat it, enjoy it, and look for other places in their day to get their potassium. If the whole day goes by without consuming much potassium, they do not worry, but rather trust that their intuitive eating cues guide them in different directions day to day, and tomorrow they could very well find themselves taking in a high amount of potassium.

After reading all this, you might be thinking to yourself, “Yeah, okay, I get that my health is not entirely within my control, but I want to do everything I can to minimize my risk.” If so, that is entirely your right. You are the expert in your own life, nobody is in a better position to decide your path forward than you are, and I commend you for weighing the pros and cons and making an informed decision that feels right for you.

However, that same autonomy applies to each of us, and many people conclude that not-so-gentle nutrition is just not worth its cons and that gentle nutrition is the way to go.

* Speaking from personal experience, I remember spending a night at a church on a Native American reservation in Montana during my Seattle-to-Boston bicycle trip. My hosts offered me one of their traditional dishes – something that I can only describe as a French-fried donut, although I am sure that is not at all what it was – and it turned out to be literally the best tasting food I have ever had in my life. Sometimes I think about what I would have missed had I turned down the food due to nutrition concerns.