3 Lessons I Learned from Being Obese
By: Shruti G
Tags: Self Improvement, Identity, Life, Self, Health

3 Lessons I Learned from Being Obese

It wasn’t healthy, but it taught me a lot.

Photo by Siora Photography on Unsplash

At my heaviest, I was obese. There’s no skirting around the subject or pretending I wasn’t, because I could see it in pictures and feel it in my core. I was ashamed and shy in front of cameras, wished I was invisible in social situations, and hated wearing jeans.

I still struggle with my weight, but my life has changed since those bolded words on my papers from my annual physical. I didn’t just lose weight. I lost my old life. Over time, I learned to love and care for my body while completely overhauling how I lived and how I ate and how I breathed. I wanted to be happy. I wanted to be healthy. I now know that they’re one and the same. It took me years to be able to understand that and act on those ideas, and ultimately, my wish to become happier and healthier was my biggest motivation.

This is what I learned along the journey.

There are too many conflicting opinions about losing weight.

If you search “how to lose weight,” you’re told to drink more water, drink more tea, eat less sugar, eat less fats, eat out less, eat when hungry, cut out fruit or alcohol, sleep more, and so much more. If you ask friends or family, they’re going to tell you to drink apple cider vinegar or to stop eating bread. If you ask your doctor, you might get mixed responses, depending on how good your doctor is. It gets exhausting. Trying all these recommendations just makes it harder to consistently follow a thorough plan.

Photo by Matheus Cenali on Unsplash

Why is this? There’s a simple answer, and a long-winded answer. Our understanding of the human body and nutrition keeps changing. In essence, nutritional sciences and the media play a huge part into what we understand about food, but with a ton of conflicting reports and suggestions, we don’t have definitive plans as to what would make us healthier. As Dr. Mike, sums up in one of his most recent videos, nutritional science continues to change and that “there’s more that we don’t know than we do know.” Combined with a bunch of factors such as the addictive nature of sugar, poor portion planning education, and more, it’s rather easy to gain weight in our society.

The obesity epidemic is becoming more and more obvious, especially in the United States. To make matters worse, social factors play a huge role into who becomes obese. The Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report only serves to underscore this as it shows with statistical significance that factors such as college degrees, race, ethnicity, and income have a large effect on whether a person is likely to become obese or not.

Michelle Cardel, PhD, MS, RD

The pile of stereotypes associated with obesity may only prevent people from being able to take action on their health. There are numerous traits that they are branded with, such as insecure, lazy, unattractive, socially inept, and intellectually slow. Doctors, who are supposed to monitor your health, have been known to occasionally prey upon these stereotypes in forms of fat-shaming, which is more common than most think. As someone who has personally experienced it, I can attest to the fact that not only did it make me feel terrible about myself, but also that it did nothing to motivate me to better my health. This carries down from doctors and attendings to medical students, who find it acceptable to mock obese patients. Physicians acting on stereotypes view obesity as a behavioral problem rather than a medical problem or a socioeconomic issue. Despite all this, I have found supportive doctors that are able to aid me to pursue a healthier life, but I’m fortunate when it comes to my healthcare and that I can easily find another doctor if needed. For those who are obese or overweight, they’re less likely to have a more flexible healthcare plan to allow them to do so, or even proper healthcare at all.

Adele’s Instagram

On the other hand, the growing Health at Every Size movement, or HAES, shows the issue on the other side of the line. It was started as a movement for everyone to care for their body, regardless of size and weight. In theory, the principles are great: weight inclusivity, eating for the body’s well-being, health enhancement, life-enhancing movement, and respectful care. It does make significant points, such as those who are in a healthy BMI range are not necessarily healthy, or that unrealistic weight expectations are incredibly harmful. And yet, part of the movement evolved into excusing obesity as being normal, and that improving your weight or size can be considered fat-phobic. This was incredibly obvious after the news of Adele’s weight loss broke in the community. Although many were happy for the Grammy-award winning singer for looking happy and likely healthier, others in the community said that the act of losing weight is fatphobic. Granted, this is a minority, but it starts to blend together with the rest of the movement due to the outcries that Adele losing weight doesn’t necessarily mean that she’s healthier. It’s fairly public that Adele has followed a nutritional and lifestyle plan provided by her personal trainer who insists, “It was about getting her healthy,” and that she embraced “wanting to be your best possible version.” So why do people ignore this and insist that Adele’s weight loss may not have been in her best interest? It’s excusing the undeniable facts that obesity can kill and is a huge underlying condition in the United States. After all, the movement is called Health at Every Size, not Healthy at Every Size, and the distinction is important. You can and should care about your health, regardless of your size, but weight and size can have a significant impact on your quality of life.

In the end, it took understanding the basics of nutrition for me to start effectively losing weight in a healthy manner. I counted my calories, cared for my body, and my body rewarded me in turn by becoming healthier and increasing my quality of life. However, the confusing information that is spread by the media and internet made that journey much more difficult, and I am a firm believer that nutrition should be taught at a younger age. The country would be a lot healthier if it was taught in schools.

Food needs to stop being used as rewards or social excuses.

I have to admit that I’m guilty of this one. How many times have I treated myself to a nice burger and fries because I finished a difficult exam? How many times did I feel down and I comforted myself with food? Far, far too many.

Photo by Priscilla Du Preez on Unsplash

This often starts in childhood and eventually may enable emotional eating by creating a connection between certain types of food and feelings. Of course, it’s hard for parents, because it’s easy to tempt kids to eat their vegetables or clean their room with a reward of dessert dangling over their heads. But the increasing preference for unhealthy food or bigger portion sizes is not only an issue for the family, but also it lends an invitation for the complicated sugar and food industry to step into your home and body.

Emotional eating and social eating aren’t that different from one another either. A supportive social network can help boost happy hormones such as dopamine and serotonin, and often social situations involve food; food brings people together and eating behavior of others affect what’s on your own plate. We are even more likely to have bigger portions in social situations. Whether we like it or not, humans are pack animals, and that means that our behaviors have an effect on one another.

A surprising long-term study of obesity in a social network revealed that obesity in individuals can be relevant to the entire network thanks to social ties. To summarize the data, a person’s chances of becoming obese increased by 57% if they had a friend who became obese within a timeframe. For spouses, the likelihood of obesity increased 37%. There wasn’t an influence on the nearby geographic locations, such as neighbors, but those who were in the same social circles were much more likely to be effected, especially if the two people in question were of the same sex. This is incredibly significant because it shows just how linked our food is in a single community, and that your own choices may affect that of your family.

It’s more difficult to eat intuitively in social situations, and you are more likely to encounter “food pushers.” As Registered Dietitian Sarah Moran explains, a food pusher is someone who pressures you to eat something or eat more after you have shown some sort of reluctance or uncertainty. This can range from someone continuously offering you food or suggesting different choices that you wouldn’t normally try to emotionally convincing or even coercing you to eat something you are reluctant to. There are tons of anecdotal stories about food pushers on the the subreddit r/loseit or similar subreddits, and there are several common themes such as family not understanding your choices for better health, sabotage from friends, and shaming for health improvement. For those who live encounter this in a daily basis by eating meals with family, it inherently increases the likelihood of obesity due to overeating or food choices.

It took me a while to realize that I had food pushers in my own life, along with people who were discouraging on my health journey. They made me reluctant to talk about wanting to lose weight or eat better, and even made me second guess my choices. In turn, I was more likely to overeat in social situations or indulge in emotional eating, which is a hurdle that I sometimes still deal with.

Photo by Rod Long on Unsplash

The food industry is out to get you.

That sneaking suspicion you have may be right. Oh sure, we’re told not to grocery shop while hungry, and to stick to the perimeters of the store, and what’s the harm in indulging your sweet tooth occasionally? But the food industry and culture in the United States is meant to be addicting. From the organization of your local market to the fast food joints dotting our roads, it’s safe to say that America might have a food obsession, and big businesses and corporations don’t intend on letting their claws out of us anytime soon.

The sugar industry has had a huge effect on American lives for decades, but especially so since the 1960s, when the Sugar Research Foundation wanted to change the narrative from sugar being a huge culprit in diseases related to obesity and successfully influenced the New England Journal of Medicine to publish an article blaming fat for heart disease. Given that this is a prominent medical journal, it did have an impact on the scientific community and their discussion on nutrition. It was never disclosed that the Sugar Research Foundation paid for this literature review and project.

This led to a precedent of the food industry paying for research. We are seeing evidence of this in situations such as Coca-Cola funding scientists to promote messages that weight gain should be battled by exercise, and less attention should be directed toward what people eat and drink. The company has even partnered with and sponsored the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the partnership was only broken off after evidence emerged that the company was attempting to pay for research that undermined how soda and obesity may be related. Companies like Coca-Cola have attempted to show that they support the overall health of Americans by funding public health projects, but behind the scenes they have been shown to send emails to the CDC attempting to convince them about some of their recommendations. They continue to lobby against public health bills that are trying to reduce the number of sugary drinks available through taxes, which does make sense as that is a direct blow to the company’s growth and revenue. However, there is evidence that CDC officials were attempting to collaborate with Coca-Cola in order to aid their lobbying while providing advice, which is a direct conflict of interest for the CDC.

Photo by Patrick Fore on Unsplash

And don’t think that this is isolated to a single company. It’s a widespread issue and often attempts to target our understanding of pediatric nutrition. For example, the National Confectioners Association, made up of members who make Hershey’s and Snickers and other candies, funded a study that ultimately concluded that kids that eat candy weigh less than those who do not. This study was published in Food and Nutrition Research, which is a peer reviewed journal and follows the rules put out by the ICMJE, which is a group of medical journal editors that outline the proper methods and scholarly peer-reviewed guidelines for other large medical and biomedical journals. But not only were the methods and results in this study flawed, the National Confectioners Association used this to their advantage. One of the scientists that was involved in the study admitted in an email to her co-author that the finding was “thin and clearly padded.” Bonny Liebman, director of nutrition at the Center for Science in the Public Interest says, “When the food industry pays for research, it often gets what it pays for.”

The sugar industry has snuck into our lives through the excess added sugar in our food. Americans typically eat a lot more processed food, which are derived from whole foods that have been taken apart and then put back together again, but with added sugar, salt, oil, and other additives and preservatives.This contributes to our grocery stores and markets too. They’re purposefully structured so we buy more, and therefore possibly eat more. The Mayo Clinic endorses the idea of shopping the perimeter of supermarkets, because the freshest food is often there and allows for a lesser fat, sodium, and sugar intake. But that doesn’t guarantee that the average consumer will make good choices. Big brands pay big money for control over shelf space and displays in our supermarkets, which use their eye-grabbing packaging and location in order to entice consumers to buy. It costs millions to launch a new product in grocery stores, which are known in the industry as “slotting fees,” and this drastically shapes our grocery stores. It takes large companies and significant cash in order to get a prime space on the shelves, and the companies that are more able to do that are ones with high revenues.

A great example of this is ice cream retail sales, which is dominated by Unilever and Nestlé. Jon Gorden, an entrepreneur that attempted to enter in this retail system with a brand of sugar-free ice cream explains that the majority (90%) of the frozen dessert section of a supermarket would be dominated by these two brands. Slotting fees meant that a minimal amount of space would be left for other competing brands who wanted space on the shelves. It seems logical that slotting fees and supermarket placement would cater toward bigger brands who can pay the store company more, but this also means that profitable companies with tons of added sugar are on always in the consumer’s vision when doing groceries. This is why name-brand sugary drinks and processed foods can be found all over the store, but healthier options are relegated to a single shelf, explains Jessica Almy, another director of nutrition policy Center for Science in the Public Interest. The report released by the non-profit group talks about how the presentation of products influence what consumers buy and also eat, and that cities should change the ordinances so that prime locations of the store (such as the checkout aisles and endcaps) aren’t used to undermine the health of consumers.

Photo by Nathália Rosa on Unsplash

That isn’t to say healthy products aren’t prominent in the supermarket. Healthier choices such as Sabra hummus and Earthbound Farm Organic leafy greens are easily found in stores, but notice how these items are typically on the perimeter of stores? It’s harder to change the landscape of our local markets in the middle aisles, as the outer aisles are typically containing more whole and less processed foods. More than 75% of caloric energy in US households come from processed foods and beverages, and our grocery stores are a huge reason why.

But big food brands profit from outside of the grocery store too; school lunches for children make up a multibillion-dollar industry. School lunch programs are less scratch cooking and more food processing, and nutritional guidelines are stretched to their very limit. Tomato sauce and french fries are considered servings of vegetables thanks to industry lobbying, explains Marlene Schwartz, director of the UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. Companies such as Tyson has its own food catalog marketed toward schools and their cafeterias, and they even fail to mention in its annual report how much they specifically profit from partnerships with school programs. Brands such as FritoLay, Grandma’s, General Mills, and more all have their own school food catalogs, in which they slightly change their products to make a slightly healthier version that adheres to USDA guidelines for schools, but these companies also fail to distinguish between that and the store version. Marlene laughs, saying that children who are exposed to these foods in schools are more likely to ask their parents to buy them in stores, without even realizing the differences between the school and regular store version. Companies are smart, and through their lobbying efforts, they know they can influence children from a young age to show interest in processed foods.

Photo by Egor Myznik on Unsplash

Our food culture plays to corporations’ strengths, but it’s different in other countries. In comparison, school lunches in Japan include education about food and nutrition, which is a large difference from that in America. They have dishes made from scratch and schools often work with local farmers to get quality ingredients. Their meals include whole foods such as fish, vegetables, soups, and rice. This inherently encourages a healthier lifestyle from childhood. Japan also makes it easier and cheaper to buy healthier options of food, even if you have less time. Consumers in Japan are used to smaller portion sizes and on average eat a thousand less calories per person per day when compared to that of the United States. Frankly, it’s cheaper to eat unhealthy in the United States, and fresh produce ends up being more expensive than the processed alternatives explains Julia Belluz, Senior Health Correspondent at Vox. On top of that, common components of processed foods such as corn, soy, and wheat are more likely to be subsidized by the government, which brings down prices for consumers. Fresh produce such as strawberries and arugula are less likely to be aided with government subsidizing. This is a huge reason why obesity and lower-income communities are so closely linked, because for consumers that are under the poverty line, choosing the healthier option might not always be the fiscally responsible option.

Photo by Brad Helmink on Unsplash

The food culture in other countries is vastly different from that of the United States. The American cuisine was shaped by capitalism rather than agricultural hardship from rotating crops, such as lentils and beans for the French, and buckwheat for the Japanese. In Asian countries, it’s easier to reach for healthier options, even if you’re on the run. In European countries, portion sizes are under much more control than that in America. Simply put, the way that citizens of other countries view food are very different, and that plays a role into their nutrition, whether it’s intentional or not. The United States food industry has to change in order for obesity rates to start decreasing, especially in “food deserts,” where it’s easier to buy a fast food meal rather than a head of lettuce.

My own journey required me to start being more aware of all the food I was putting in my body, and to stop making my food choices a subconscious act. When companies and stores make it so easy to choose unhealthier options, consumers have to be more intentional with their choices. The sugar and processed food industries are meant to be addicting, and breaking out of that addiction requires good education about nutritional requirements and easy access to healthier food.

But I’m human.

None of this is to say that I don’t eat sugar, or don’t eat with friends, or haven’t tried new suggestions for weight loss. It’s just that the food culture and health culture in the United States makes it difficult to make better and educated choices about what goes into our mouths and how we eat. We, as a society, need to face the facts that obesity in the United States is a public health crisis because it is killing us and creating unnecessary chronic diseases in our population and lowering our lifespans. The risks can be as simple as sleep apnea, which is upper airway obstruction during sleep, to cognitive dysfunction, to cancer.

As someone who was previously obese and dealt with how complex it was and had to make lifestyle changes in order to combat the disease, I understand it’s a difficult journey to embark on. There are so many uphill battles to fight along the way. But I want to live in a healthier society, a happier society, and a less food-obsessed society. If there’s one thing you take away from this article, I want it to be that everyone is capable of being a healthier individual, but it’s incredibly hard to do so unless you understand just how deeply food culture impacts our daily decisions because the food industry, your own social circle, and continuously changing opinions on obesity and health are huge barriers.