Grains: Bread Of Life, Or Cereal Killer?

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

Going Against The Grain?

In Wednesday’s newsletter, we asked you for your health-related opinion of grains (aside from any gluten-specific concerns), and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

  • About 69% said “They are an important cornerstone of a healthy balanced diet”
  • About 22% said “They can be enjoyed in moderation, but watch out”
  • About 8% said “They are terrible health-drainers that will kill us”

So, what does the science say?

They are terrible health-drainers that will kill us: True or False?

True or False depending on the manner of their consumption!

There is a big difference between the average pizza base and a bowl of oats, for instance. Or rather, there are a lot of differences, but what’s most critical here?

The key is: refined and ultraprocessed grains are so inferior to whole grains as to be actively negative for health in most cases for most people most of the time.

But! It’s not because processing is ontologically evil (in reality: some processed foods are healthy, and some unprocessed foods are poisonous). although it is a very good general rule of thumb.

So, we need to understand the “why” behind the “key” that we just gave above, and that’s mostly about the resultant glycemic index and associated metrics (glycemic load, insulin index, etc).

In the case of refined and ultraprocessed grains, our body gains sugar faster than it can process it, and stores it wherever and however it can, like someone who has just realised that they will be entertaining a houseguest in 10 minutes and must tidy up super-rapidly by hiding things wherever they’ll fit.

And when the body tries to do this with sugar from refined grains, the result is very bad for multiple organs (most notably the liver, but the pancreas takes quite a hit too) which in turn causes damage elsewhere in the body, not to mention that we now have urgently-produced fat stored in unfortunate places like our liver and abdominal cavity when it should have gone to subcutaneous fat stores instead.

In contrast, whole grains come with fiber that slows down the absorption of the sugars, such that the body can deal with them in an ideal fashion, which usually means:

  • using them immediately, or
  • storing them as muscle glycogen, or
  • storing them as subcutaneous fat

👆 that’s an oversimplification, but we only have so much room here.

For more on this, see:

Glycemic Index vs Glycemic Load vs Insulin Index

And for why this matters, see:

Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?

And for fixing it, see:

How To Unfatty A Fatty Liver

They can be enjoyed in moderation, but watch out: True or False?

Technically True but functionally False:

  • Technically true: “in moderation” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. One person’s “moderation” may be another person’s “abstemiousness” or “gluttony”.
  • Functionally false: while of course extreme consumption of pretty much anything is going to be bad, unless you are Cereals Georg eating 10,000 cereals each day and being a statistical outlier, the issue is not the quantity so much as the quality.

Quality, we discussed above—and that is, as we say, paramount. As for quantity however, you might want to know a baseline for “getting enough”, so…

They are an important cornerstone of a healthy balanced diet: True or False?

True! This one’s quite straightforward.

3 servings (each being 90g, or about ½ cup) of whole grains per day is associated with a 22% reduction in risk of heart disease, 5% reduction in all-cause mortality, and a lot of benefits across a lot of disease risks:

❝This meta-analysis provides further evidence that whole grain intake is associated with a reduced risk of coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, and total cancer, and mortality from all causes, respiratory diseases, infectious diseases, diabetes, and all non-cardiovascular, non-cancer causes.

These findings support dietary guidelines that recommend increased intake of whole grain to reduce the risk of chronic diseases and premature mortality.❞

~ Dr. Dagfinn Aune et al.

Read in full: Whole grain consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and all cause and cause specific mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies

We’d like to give a lot more sources for the same findings, as well as papers for all the individual claims, but frankly, there are so many that there isn’t room. Suffice it to say, this is neither controversial nor uncertain; these benefits are well-established.

Here’s a very informative pop-science article, that also covers some of the things we discussed earlier (it shows what happens during refinement of grains) before getting on to recommendations and more citations for claims than we can fit here:

Harvard School Of Public Health | Whole Grains

“That’s all great, but what if I am concerned about gluten?”

There certainly are reasons you might be, be it because of a sensitivity, allergy, or just because perhaps you’d like to know more.

Let’s first mention: not all grains contain gluten, so it’s perfectly possible to enjoy naturally gluten-free grains (such as oats and rice) as well as gluten-free pseudocereals, which are not actually grains but do the same job in culinary and nutritional terms (such as quinoa and buckwheat, despite the latter’s name).

Finally, if you’d like to know more about gluten’s health considerations, then check out our previous mythbusting special:

Gluten: What’s The Truth?

Enjoy!

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • Ear Candling: Is It Safe & Does It Work?
  • Pelvic Floor Exercises (Not Kegels!) To Prevent Urinary Incontinence
    Dr. Christine Pieton offers key ball-squeeze exercises to strengthen your core, featuring breathing, bridge, side plank, and bear plank variations. Watch the video demo for guidance.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Is ADHD Being Over-Diagnosed For Cash?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Is ADHD Being Systematically Overdiagnosed?

    The BBC’s investigative “Panorama” program all so recently did a documentary in which one of their journalists—who does not have ADHD—went to three private clinics and got an ADHD diagnosis from each of them:

    So… Is it really a case of show up, pay up, and get a shiny new diagnosis?

    The BBC Panorama producers cherry-picked 3 private providers, and during those clinical assessments, their journalist provided answers that would certainly lead to a diagnosis.

    This was contrasted against a three-hour assessment with an NHS psychiatrist—something that rarely happens in the NHS. Which prompts the question…

    How did he walk into a 3-hour psychiatrist assessment, when most people have to wait in long waiting lists for a much more cursory appointment first with assorted gatekeepers, before going on another long waiting list, for an also-much-shorter appointment with a psychiatrist?

    That would be because the NHS psychiatrist was given advance notification that this was part of an investigation and would be filmed (the private clinics were not gifted the same transparency)

    So, maybe just a tad unequal treatment!

    In case you’re wondering, here’s what that very NHS psychiatrist had to say on the topic:

    Is it really too easy to be diagnosed with ADHD?

    (we’ll give you a hint—remember Betteridge’s Law!)

    ❝Since the documentary aired, I have heard from people concerned that GPs could now be more likely to question legitimate diagnoses.

    But as an NHS psychiatrist it is clear to me that the root of this issue is not overdiagnosis.

    Instead, we are facing the combined challenges of remedying decades of underdiagnosis and NHS services that were set up when there was little awareness of ADHD.❞

    ~ Dr. Mike Smith, Psychiatrist

    The ADHD foundation, meanwhile, has issued its own response, saying:

    ❝We are disappointed that BBC Panorama has opted to broadcast a poorly researched, sensationalist piece of television journalism.❞

    Click here to read their full statement!

    Share This Post

  • Fasting Without Crashing?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Intermittent Fasting: What’s the truth?

    Before we get to facts and fictions, let’s quickly cover:

    What is Intermittent Fasting?

    Intermittent Fasting (IF) is an umbrella term for various kinds of time-restricted fasting, based on a schedule. Types include:

    Time-restricted IF, for example:

    • 16:8—Fast for 16 hours, eat during an 8-hour window
    • 18:6–Fast for 18 hours, eat during a 6-hour window
    • 20:4—Fast for 20 hours, eat during a 4-hour window

    24hr fasting, including:

    • Eat Stop Eat—basically, take a day off from eating once a week
    • Alternate Day Fasting—a more extreme version of the above; it is what it sounds like; eat one day, fast the next, repeat

    Non-fast fasting, e.g:

    • 5:2—Eat normally for 5 days, have a very reduced calorie intake (⅓ of normal intake) for the other 2 days
    • Fruit Fasting—have a small amount of fruit on “fast” days, but no other food
    • The Warrior Diet—as above, but include a small amount of non-starchy vegetables

    Why IF?

    While IF is perhaps most commonly undertaken as a means of fat loss or fat management (i.e., keeping fat down when it is already low), others cite different reasons, such as short term cognitive performance or long-term longevity.

    But… Does it work?

    Here we get into the myth-busting bit!

    “IF promotes weight loss”

    Mix of True and False. It can! But it also doesn’t have to. If you’re a bodybuilder who downs 4,000 calories in your 4hr eating window, you’re probably not going to lose weight! For such people, this is of course “a feature, not a bug” of IF—especially as it has been found that, in an acute study, IF did not adversely impact muscle protein synthesis.

    “IF promotes fat loss, without eating less”

    Broadly True. IF was found to be potentially equal to, but not necessarily better than, eating less.

    “IF provides metabolic benefits for general health”

    Broadly True. IF (perhaps counterintuitively) decreases the risk of insulin resistance, and also has anti-inflammatory effects, benefits a healthy gut microbiome, and promotes healthy autophagy (which as we noted in a previous edition of 10almonds, is important against both aging and cancer)

    However, results vary according to which protocol you’re observing…

    For what it’s worth, 16:8 is perhaps the most-studied protocol. Because such studies tend to have the eating window from midday to 8pm, this means that—going against popular wisdom—part of the advice here is basically “skip breakfast”.

    “Unlike caloric restriction, IF is sustainable and healthy as a long-term protocol”

    Broadly True. Of course, there’s a slight loophole here in that IF is loosely defined—technically everyone fasts while they’re sleeping, at the very least!

    However, for the most commonly-studied IF method (16:8), this is generally very sustainable and healthy and for most people.

    On the other hand, a more extreme method such as Alternate Day Fasting, may be trickier to sustain (even if it remains healthy to do so), because it’s been found that hunger does not decrease on fasting days—ie, the body does not “get used to it”.

    The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition wrote:

    ❝Alternate-day fasting was feasible in nonobese subjects, and fat oxidation increased. However, hunger on fasting days did not decrease, perhaps indicating the unlikelihood of continuing this diet for extended periods of time. Adding one small meal on a fasting day may make this approach to dietary restriction more acceptable.❞

    American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

    “IF improves mood and cognition”

    Mix of True and False (plus an honest “We Don’t Know” from researchers).

    Many studies have found benefits to both mood and cognition, but in the short-term, fasting can make people “hangry” (or: “experience irritability due to low blood sugar levels”, as the scientists put it), and in the long term, it can worsen symptoms of depression for those who already experience such—although some studies have found it can help alleviate depressive symptoms.

    Basically this is one where researchers typically append the words “more research is needed” to their summaries.

    “Anyone can do IF”

    Definitely False, unless going by the absolute broadest possible interpretation of what constitutes “Intermittent Fasting” to the point of disingenuity.

    For example, if you are Type 1 Diabetic, and your blood sugars are hypo, and you wait until tomorrow to correct that, you will stand a good chance of going into a coma instead. So please don’t.

    (On the other hand, IF may help achieve remission of type 2 diabetes)

    Lastly, IF is broadly not recommend to children and adolescents, anyone pregnant or breastfeeding, and certain underlying health conditions not mentioned above (we’re not going to try to give an exhaustive list here, but basically, if you have a chronic health condition, we recommend you check with your doctor first).

    WHICH APP?

    Choosing a fasting app

    Thinking of giving IF a try and would like a little extra help? We’ve got you covered!

    Check out: Livewire’s 7 Best Intermittent Fasting Apps of 2023

    Prefer to just trust us with a recommendation?

    We like BodyFast—it’s #2 on Lifewire’s list, but it has an array of pre-set plans to choose from (unlike Lifewire’s #1, Zero), and plenty of clear tracking, scheduling help, and motivational features.

    Both are available on both iOS and Android:

    See the BodyFast App / See the Zero App

    Share This Post

  • “You Just Need to Lose Weight” And 19 Other Myths About Fat People – by Aubrey Gordon

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    We’ve previously reviewed another book by this author, “What We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Fat”, and this time, she’s doing some important mythbusting.

    The titular “you just need to lose weight” is a commonly-taken easy-out for many doctors, to avoid having to dispense actual treatment for an actual condition. Whether or not weight loss would help in a given situation is often immaterial; “kicking the can down the road” is the goal.

    Most of the book is divided into 20 chapters, each of them devoted to debunking one myth. Think of it like 10almonds’ “Mythbusting Friday” edition (indeed, we did one about obesity), but with an entire book, and as much room as she needs to provide much more detail than we can ever get into in a single article.

    And far from being a mere polemic, she does indeed provide that detail—this is clearly a very well-researched book, above and beyond the author’s own personal experience. Further, all the key points are illustrated and articulated clearly, making the book’s ideas very comprehensible.

    The style is pop-science, but with frequent bibliographical references for relevant sources.

    Bottom line: for some readers, this book will come as a great validation; for others, it may be eye-opening. Either way, it’s a very worthwhile read.

    Click here to check out “You Just Need to Lose Weight” And 19 Other Myths About Fat People, and get those myths cleared out!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Ear Candling: Is It Safe & Does It Work?
  • How To Stay Alive (When You Really Don’t Want To)

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    How To Stay Alive (When You Really Don’t Want To)

    A subscriber recently requested:

    ❝Request: more people need to be aware of suicidal tendencies and what they can do to ward them off❞

    …and we said we’d do that one of these Psychology Sundays, so here we are, doing it!

    First of all, we’ll mention that we did previously do a main feature on managing depression (in oneself or a loved one); here it is:

    The Mental Health First Aid That You’ll Hopefully Never Need

    Now, not all depression leads to suicidality, and not all suicide is pre-empted by depression, but there’s a large enough crossover that it seems sensible to put that article here, for anyone who might find it of use, or even just of interest.

    Now, onwards, to the specific, and very important, topic of suicide.

    This should go without saying, but some of today’s content may be a little heavy.

    We invite you to read it anyway if you’re able, because it’s important stuff that we all should know, and not talking about it is part of what allows it to kill people.

    So, let’s take a deep breath, and read on…

    The risk factors

    Top risk factors for suicide include:

    • Not talking about it
    • Having access to a firearm
    • Having a plan of specifically how to commit suicide
    • A lack of social support
    • Being male
    • Being over 40

    Now, some of these are interesting sociologically, but aren’t very useful practically; what a convenient world it’d be if we could all simply choose to be under 40, for instance.

    Some serve as alarm bells, such as “having a plan of specifically how to commit suicide”.

    If someone has a plan, that plan’s never going to disappear entirely, even if it’s set aside!

    (this writer is deeply aware of the specifics of how she has wanted to end things before, and has used the advice she gives in this article herself numerous times. So far so good, still alive to write about it!)

    Specific advices, therefore, include:

    Talk about it / Listen

    Depending on whether it’s you or someone else at risk:

    • Talk about it, if it’s you
    • Listen attentively, if it’s someone else

    There are two main objections that you might have at this point, so let’s look at those:

    “I have nobody to talk to”—it can certainly feel that way, sometimes, but you may be surprised who would listen if you gave them the chance. If you really can’t trust anyone around you, there are of course suicide hotlines (usually per area, so we’ll not try to list them here; a quick Internet search will get you what you need).

    If you’re worried it’ll result in bad legal/social consequences, check their confidentiality policy first:

    • Some hotlines can and will call the police, for instance.
    • Others deliberately have a set-up whereby they couldn’t even trace the call if they wanted to.
      • On the one hand, that means they can’t intervene
      • On the other hand, that means they’re a resource for anyone who will only trust a listener who can’t intervene.

    “But it is just a cry for help”—then that person deserves help. What some may call “attention-seeking” is, in effect, care-seeking. Listen, without judgement.

    Remove access to firearms, if applicable and possible

    Ideally, get rid of them (safely and responsibly, please).

    If you can’t bring yourself to do that, make them as inconvenient to get at as possible. Stored securely at your local gun club is better than at home, for example.

    If your/their plan isn’t firearm-related, but the thing in question can be similarly removed, remove it. You/they do not need that stockpile of pills, for instance.

    And of course you/they could get more, but the point is to make it less frictionless. The more necessary stopping points between thinking “I should just kill myself” and being able to actually do it, the better.

    Have/give social support

    What do the following people have in common?

    • A bullied teenager
    • A divorced 40-something who just lost a job
    • A lonely 70-something with no surviving family, and friends that are hard to visit

    Often, at least, the answer is: the absence of a good social support network

    So, it’s good to get one, and be part of some sort of community that’s meaningful to us. That could look different to a lot of people, for example:

    • A church, or other religious community, if we be religious
    • The LGBT+ community, or even just a part of it, if that fits for us
    • Any mutual-support oriented, we-have-this-shared-experience community, could be anything from AA to the VA.

    Some bonus ideas…

    If you can’t live for love, living for spite might suffice. Outlive your enemies; don’t give them the satisfaction.

    If you’re going to do it anyway, you might as well take the time to do some “bucket list” items first. After all, what do you have to lose? Feel free to add further bucket list items as they occur to you, of course. Because, why not? Before you know it, you’ve postponed your way into a rich and fulfilling life.

    Finally, some gems from Matt Haig’s “The Comfort Book”:
    • “The hardest question I have been asked is: “How do I stay alive for other people if I have no one?” The answer is that you stay alive for other versions of you. For the people you will meet, yes, but also the people you will be.”
    • “Stay for the person you will become”
    • “You are more than a bad day, or week, or month, or year, or even decade”
    • “It is better to let people down than to blow yourself up”
    • “Nothing is stronger than a small hope that doesn’t give up”
    • “You are here. And that is enough.”

    You can find Matt Haig’s excellent “The Comfort Book” on Amazon, as well as his more well-known book more specifically on the topic we’ve covered today, “Reasons To Stay Alive“.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Why is cancer called cancer? We need to go back to Greco-Roman times for the answer

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    One of the earliest descriptions of someone with cancer comes from the fourth century BC. Satyrus, tyrant of the city of Heracleia on the Black Sea, developed a cancer between his groin and scrotum. As the cancer spread, Satyrus had ever greater pains. He was unable to sleep and had convulsions.

    Advanced cancers in that part of the body were regarded as inoperable, and there were no drugs strong enough to alleviate the agony. So doctors could do nothing. Eventually, the cancer took Satyrus’ life at the age of 65.

    Cancer was already well known in this period. A text written in the late fifth or early fourth century BC, called Diseases of Women, described how breast cancer develops:

    hard growths form […] out of them hidden cancers develop […] pains shoot up from the patients’ breasts to their throats, and around their shoulder blades […] such patients become thin through their whole body […] breathing decreases, the sense of smell is lost […]

    Other medical works of this period describe different sorts of cancers. A woman from the Greek city of Abdera died from a cancer of the chest; a man with throat cancer survived after his doctor burned away the tumour.

    Where does the word ‘cancer’ come from?

    Galen, the physician
    Why does the word ‘cancer’ have its roots in the ancient Greek and Latin words for crab? The physician Galen offers one explanation. Pierre Roche Vigneron/Wikimedia

    The word cancer comes from the same era. In the late fifth and early fourth century BC, doctors were using the word karkinos – the ancient Greek word for crab – to describe malignant tumours. Later, when Latin-speaking doctors described the same disease, they used the Latin word for crab: cancer. So, the name stuck.

    Even in ancient times, people wondered why doctors named the disease after an animal. One explanation was the crab is an aggressive animal, just as cancer can be an aggressive disease; another explanation was the crab can grip one part of a person’s body with its claws and be difficult to remove, just as cancer can be difficult to remove once it has developed. Others thought it was because of the appearance of the tumour.

    The physician Galen (129-216 AD) described breast cancer in his work A Method of Medicine to Glaucon, and compared the form of the tumour to the form of a crab:

    We have often seen in the breasts a tumour exactly like a crab. Just as that animal has feet on either side of its body, so too in this disease the veins of the unnatural swelling are stretched out on either side, creating a form similar to a crab.

    Not everyone agreed what caused cancer

    Bust of physician Erasistratus
    The physician Erasistratus didn’t think black bile was to blame. Didier Descouens/Musée Ingres-Bourdelle/Wikimedia, CC BY-SA

    In the Greco-Roman period, there were different opinions about the cause of cancer.

    According to a widespread ancient medical theory, the body has four humours: blood, yellow bile, phlegm and black bile. These four humours need to be kept in a state of balance, otherwise a person becomes sick. If a person suffered from an excess of black bile, it was thought this would eventually lead to cancer.

    The physician Erasistratus, who lived from around 315 to 240 BC, disagreed. However, so far as we know, he did not offer an alternative explanation.

    How was cancer treated?

    Cancer was treated in a range of different ways. It was thought that cancers in their early stages could be cured using medications.

    These included drugs derived from plants (such as cucumber, narcissus bulb, castor bean, bitter vetch, cabbage); animals (such as the ash of a crab); and metals (such as arsenic).

    Galen claimed that by using this sort of medication, and repeatedly purging his patients with emetics or enemas, he was sometimes successful at making emerging cancers disappear. He said the same treatment sometimes prevented more advanced cancers from continuing to grow. However, he also said surgery is necessary if these medications do not work.

    Surgery was usually avoided as patients tended to die from blood loss. The most successful operations were on cancers of the tip of the breast. Leonidas, a physician who lived in the second and third century AD, described his method, which involved cauterising (burning):

    I usually operate in cases where the tumours do not extend into the chest […] When the patient has been placed on her back, I incise the healthy area of the breast above the tumour and then cauterize the incision until scabs form and the bleeding is stanched. Then I incise again, marking out the area as I cut deeply into the breast, and again I cauterize. I do this [incising and cauterizing] quite often […] This way the bleeding is not dangerous. After the excision is complete I again cauterize the entire area until it is dessicated.

    Cancer was generally regarded as an incurable disease, and so it was feared. Some people with cancer, such as the poet Silius Italicus (26-102 AD), died by suicide to end the torment.

    Patients would also pray to the gods for hope of a cure. An example of this is Innocentia, an aristocratic lady who lived in Carthage (in modern-day Tunisia) in the fifth century AD. She told her doctor divine intervention had cured her breast cancer, though her doctor did not believe her.

    Ancient city of Carthage
    Innocentia from Carthage, in modern-day Tunisia, believed divine intervention cured her breast cancer. Valery Bareta/Shutterstock

    From the past into the future

    We began with Satyrus, a tyrant in the fourth century BC. In the 2,400 years or so since then, much has changed in our knowledge of what causes cancer, how to prevent it and how to treat it. We also know there are more than 200 different types of cancer. Some people’s cancers are so successfully managed, they go on to live long lives.

    But there is still no general “cure for cancer”, a disease that about one in five people develop in their lifetime. In 2022 alone, there were about 20 million new cancer cases and 9.7 million cancer deaths globally. We clearly have a long way to go.

    Konstantine Panegyres, McKenzie Postdoctoral Fellow, Historical and Philosophical Studies, The University of Melbourne

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Covering obesity: 6 tips for dispelling myths and avoiding stigmatizing news coverage

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    When researchers looked at news coverage of obesity in the United States and the United Kingdom a few years ago, they found that images in news articles often portrayed people with larger bodies “in a stigmatizing manner” — they emphasized people’s abdomens, for example, or showed them eating junk food, wearing tight clothes or lounging in front of a TV. 

    When people with larger bodies were featured in photos and videos, nearly half were shown only from their necks down or with part of their heads missing, according to the analysis, published in November 2023. The researchers examined a total of 445 images posted to the websites of four U.S. news outlets and four U.K. news outlets between August 2018 and August 2019.

    The findings underscore the need for dramatic changes in the way journalists report on obesity and people who weigh more than what medical authorities generally consider healthy, Rebecca Puhl, one of the paper’s authors, told The Journalist’s Resource in an email interview.

    “Using images of ‘headless stomachs’ is dehumanizing and stigmatizing, as are images that depict people with larger bodies in stereotypical ways (e.g., eating junk food or being sedentary),” wrote Puhl, deputy director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Health at the University of Connecticut and a leading scholar on weight stigma.

    She noted that news images influence how the public views and interacts with people with obesity, a complicated and often misunderstood condition that the American Medical Association considers a disease.

    In the U.S., an estimated 42% of adults aged 20 years and older have obesity, a number researchers predict will rise to 50% over the next six years. While the disease isn’t as common in other parts of the planet, the World Obesity Federation projects that by 2035, more than half the global population will have obesity or overweight.

    Several other studies Puhl has conducted demonstrate that biased new images can have damaging consequences for individuals affected by obesity.

    “Our research has found that seeing the stigmatizing image worsens people’s attitudes and weight bias, leading them to attribute obesity to laziness, increasing their dislike of people with higher weight, and increasing desire for social distance from them,” Puhl explained.

    Dozens of studies spotlight problems in news coverage of obesity in the U.S. and abroad. In addition to stigmatizing images, journalists use stigmatizing language, according to a 2022 research review in eClinicalMedicine, a journal published by The Lancet.

    The research also suggests people with higher weights feel excluded and ridiculed by news outlets.

    “Overt or covert discourses in news media, social media, and public health campaigns included depictions of people with overweight or obesity as being lazy, greedy, undisciplined, unhappy, unattractive, and stupid,” write the authors of the review, which examines 113 academic studies completed before Dec. 2, 2021.

    To help journalists reflect on and improve their work, The Journalist’s Resource asked for advice from experts in obesity, weight stigma, health communication and sociolinguistics. They shared their thoughts and opinions, which we distilled into the six tips that appear below.

    In addition to Puhl, we interviewed these six experts:

    Jamy Ard, a professor of epidemiology and prevention at Wake Forest University School of Medicine and co-director of the Wake Forest Baptist Health Weight Management Center. He’s also president of The Obesity Society, a professional organization of researchers, health care providers and other obesity specialists.

    Leslie Cofie, an assistant professor of health education and promotion at East Carolina University’s College of Health and Human Performance. He has studied obesity among immigrants and military veterans.

    Leslie Heinberg, director of Enterprise Weight Management at the Cleveland Clinic, an academic medical center. She’s also vice chair for psychology in the Cleveland Clinic’s Center for Behavioral Health Department of Psychiatry and Psychology.

    Monu Khanna, a physician in Missouri who is board certified in obesity medicine.

    Jenn Lonzer, manager of the Cleveland Clinic Health Library and the co-author of several academic papers on health communication.

    Cindi SturtzSreetharan, an anthropologist and professor at the Arizona State University School of Human Evolution and Social Change. She studies the language people of different cultures use to describe human bodies.

    1. Familiarize yourself with recent research on what causes obesity and how obesity can affect a person’s health. Many long-held beliefs about the disease are wrong.

    Journalists often report incorrect or misleading information about obesity, possibly because they’re unaware that research published in recent decades dispels many long-held beliefs about the disease, the experts say. Obesity isn’t simply the result of eating too many calories and doing too little exercise. A wide range of factors drive weight gain and prevent weight loss, many of which have nothing to do with willpower or personal choices.

    Scholars have learned that stress, gut health, sleep duration and quality, genetics, medication, personal income, access to healthy foods and even climate can affect weight regulation. Prenatal and early life experiences also play a role. For example, childhood trauma such as child abuse can become “biologically embedded,” altering children’s brain structures and influencing their long-term physical and mental health, according to a 2020 research review published in the journal Physiology & Behavior.

    “The causes of obesity are numerous and each individual with obesity will have a unique set of contributors to their excess weight gain,” Jamy Ard, president of The Obesity Society, wrote to The Journalist’s Resource.

    The experts urge journalists to help dispel myths, correct misinformation and share new research findings. News outlets should examine their own work, which often “ignores the science and sets up situation blaming,” says Leslie Heinberg, director of Enterprise Weight Management at the Cleveland Clinic.

    “So much of the media portrayal is simply ‘This is a person who eats too much and the cure is simply to eat less or cut out that food’ or something overly, overly simplistic,” Heinberg says.

    Journalists need to build their knowledge of the problem before they can explain it to their audiences. Experts point out that educating policymakers, health care providers and the public about obesity is key to eliminating the stigma associated with having a larger body.

    Weight stigma alone is so physically and emotionally damaging that 36 international experts issued a consensus statement in 2020 to raise awareness about it. The document, endorsed by dozens of medical and academic organizations, outlines 13 recommendations for eliminating weight bias and stigma.

    Recommendation No. 5: “We call on the media to produce fair, accurate, and non-stigmatizing portrayals of obesity. A commitment from the media is needed to shift the narrative around obesity.”

    2. Use person-first language — the standard among health and medical professionals for communicating about people with chronic diseases.

    The experts we interviewed encourage journalists to ditch the adjectives “obese” and “overweight” because they are dehumanizing. Use person-first language, which avoids labeling people as their disease by putting the person before the disease.

    Instead of saying “an obese teenager,” say “a teenager who has obesity” or “a teenager affected by obesity.” Instead of writing “overweight men,” write “men who have overweight.”

    Jenn Lonzer, manager of the Cleveland Clinic Health Library, says using “overweight” as a noun might look and sound awkward at first. But it makes sense considering other diseases are treated as nouns, she notes. Journalists would not typically refer to someone in a news story as “a cancerous person,” for example. They would report that the individual has cancer.

    It’s appropriate to refer to people with overweight or obesity using neutral weight terminology. Puhl wrote that she uses “people with higher body weight” or “people with high weight” and, sometimes, “people with larger bodies” in her own writing.

    While the Associated Press stylebook offers no specific guidance on the use of terms such as “obese” or “overweight,” it advises against “general and often dehumanizing ‘the’ labels such as the poor, the mentally ill, the disabled, the college-educated.”

    The Association of Health Care Journalists recommends person-first language when reporting on obesity. But it also advises journalists to ask sources how they would like to be characterized, provided their weight or body size is relevant to the news story.

    Anthropologist Cindi SturtzSreetharan, who studies language and culture, says sources’ responses to that question should be part of the story. Some individuals might prefer to be called “fat,” “thick” or “plus-sized.”

    “I would include that as a sentence in the article — to signal you’ve asked and that’s how they want to be referred to,” SturtzSreetharan says.

    She encourages journalists to read how authors describe themselves in their own writing. Two books she recommends: Thick by Tressie McMillan Cottom and Heavy: An American Memoir by Kiese Laymon.

    3. Carefully plan and choose the images that will accompany news stories about obesity.

    Journalists need to educate themselves about stigma and screen for it when selecting images, Puhl noted. She shared these four questions that journalists should ask themselves when deciding how to show people with higher weights in photos and video.

    • Does the image imply or reinforce negative stereotypes?
    • Does it provide a respectful portrayal of the person?
    • Who might be offended, and why?
    • Can an alternative image convey the same message and eliminate possible bias?

    “Even if your written piece is balanced, accurate, and respectful, a stigmatizing image can undermine your message and promote negative societal attitudes,” Puhl wrote via email.

    Lonzer says newsrooms also need to do a better job incorporating images of people who have different careers, interests, education levels and lifestyles into their coverage of overweight and obesity.

    “We are diverse,” says Lonzer, who has overweight. “We also have diversity in body shape and size. It’s good to have images that reflect what Americans look like.”

    If you’re looking for images and b-roll videos that portray people with obesity in non-stigmatizing ways, check out the Rudd Center Media Gallery. It’s a collection of original images of people from various demographic groups that journalists can use for free in their coverage.

    The Obesity Action Coalition, a nonprofit advocacy organization, also provides images. But journalists must sign up to use the OAC Bias-Free Image Gallery.

    Other places to find free images: The World Obesity Image Bank, a project of the World Obesity Federation, and the Flickr account of Obesity Canada.

    4. Make sure your story does not reinforce stereotypes or insinuate that overcoming obesity is simply a matter of cutting calories and doing more exercise.

    “Think about the kinds of language used in the context of eating habits or physical activity, as some can reinforce shame or stereotypes,” Puhl wrote.

    She suggested journalists avoid phrases such as “resisting temptations,” “cheating on a diet,” “making excuses,” “increasing self-discipline” and “lacking self-control” because they perpetuate the myth that individuals can control their weight and that the key to losing weight is eating less and moving more.

    Lonzer offers this advice: As you work on stories about obesity or weight-related issues, ask yourself if you would use the same language and framing if you were reporting on someone you love.

    Here are other questions for journalists to contemplate:

    “Am I treating this as a complex medical condition or am I treating it as ‘Hey, lay off the French fries?’” Lonzer adds. “Am I treating someone with obesity differently than someone with another disease?”

    It’s important to also keep in mind that having excess body fat does not, by itself, mean a person is unhealthy. And don’t assume everyone who has a higher weight is unhappy about it.

    “Remember, not everyone with obesity is suffering,” physician Monu Khanna wrote to The Journalist’s Resource.

    5. To help audiences understand how difficult it is to prevent and reduce obesity, explain that even the places people live can affect their waistlines.

    When news outlets report on obesity, they often focus on weight-loss programs, surgical procedures and anti-obesity medications. But there are other important issues to cover. Experts stress the need to help the public understand how factors not ordinarily associated with weight gain or loss can influence body size.

    For example, a paper published in 2018 in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine indicates adults who are regularly exposed to loud noise have a higher waist circumference than adults who are not. Research also finds that people who live in neighborhoods with sidewalks and parks are more active.

    “One important suggestion I would offer to journalists is that they need to critically explore environmental factors (e.g., built environment, food deserts, neighborhood safety, etc.) that lead to disproportionately high rates of obesity among certain groups, such as low-income individuals and racial/ethnic minorities,” Leslie Cofie, an assistant professor at East Carolina University, wrote to The Journalist’s Resource.

    Cofie added that moving to a new area can prompt weight changes.

    “We know that immigrants generally have lower rates of obesity when they first migrate to the U.S.,” he wrote. “However, over time, their obesity rates resemble that of their U.S.-born counterparts. Hence, it is critical for journalists to learn about how the sociocultural experiences of immigrants change as they adapt to life in the U.S. For example, cultural perspectives about food, physical activities, gender roles, etc. may provide unique insights into how the pre- and post-migration experiences of immigrants ultimately contribute to the unfavorable trends in their excessive weight gain.”

    Other community characteristics have been linked to larger body sizes for adults or children: air pollution, lower altitudes, higher temperatures, lower neighborhood socioeconomic status, perceived neighborhood safety, an absence of local parks and closer proximity to fast-food restaurants.

    6. Forge relationships with organizations that study obesity and advocate on behalf of people living with the disease.

    Several organizations are working to educate journalists about obesity and help them improve their coverage. Five of the most prominent ones collaborated on a 10-page guide book, “Guidelines for Media Portrayals of Individuals Affected by Obesity.”

    • The Rudd Center for Food Policy and Health, based at the University of Connecticut, “promotes solutions to food insecurity, poor diet quality, and weight bias through research and policy,” according to its website. Research topics include food and beverage marketing, weight-related bullying and taxes on sugary drinks.
    • The Obesity Society helps journalists arrange interviews with obesity specialists. It also offers journalists free access to its academic journal, Obesity, and free registration to ObesityWeek, an international conference of researchers and health care professionals held every fall. This year’s conference is Nov. 2-6 in San Antonio, Texas.
    • The Obesity Medicine Association represents health care providers who specialize in obesity treatment and care. It also helps journalists connect with obesity experts and offers, on an individual basis, free access to its events, including conferences and Obesity Medicine Fundamentals courses.
    • The Obesity Action Coalition offers free access to its magazine, Weight Matters, and guides on weight bias at work and in health care.
    • The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery represents surgeons and other health care professionals who work in the field of metabolic and bariatric surgery. It provides the public with resources such as fact sheets and brief explanations of procedures such as the Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

    For further reading

    Weight Stigma in Online News Images: A Visual Content Analysis of Stigma Communication in the Depictions of Individuals with Obesity in U.S. and U.K. News
    Aditi Rao, Rebecca Puhl and Kirstie Farrar. Journal of Health Communication, November 2023.

    Influence and Effects of Weight Stigmatization in Media: A Systematic Review
    James Kite; et al. eClinicalMedicine, June 2022.

    Has the Prevalence of Overweight, Obesity and Central Obesity Leveled Off in the United States? Trends, Patterns, Disparities, and Future Projections for the Obesity Epidemic
    Youfa Wang; et al. International Journal of Epidemiology, June 2020.

    This article first appeared on The Journalist’s Resource and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: