Personal Convictions, Money, and Conflicts

Tamar Haspel is angry. She notes that many of the people expressing righteous concerns about advanced obesity medicines are also folks who have a book to sell you. Or a diet or a supplement or an exercise program. Personal convictions, money, and the conflicts that go with all of that are a jumbled mess when the subject of obesity arises and Haspel has her sights on something that’s very real:

“Okay, I get it. If you make a living selling some kind of diet or supplement, you’d understandably root against these drugs. Ditto if you think fat people should have to work hard for their thinness and don’t deserve a shortcut. But I’m having a hard time coming up with another reason you’d prefer that these drugs don’t pan out.”

The Righteous Cause

It’s easy for a person to sound righteous when they’re deeply invested in living out their personal convictions. For example, Jillian Michaels made a career for herself as a celebrity fitness coach. No doubt she believes she did good work on the Biggest Loser reality show – even if the weight loss was unsustainable and the fat-shaming ethos of the show was clearly repulsive. So she’s quick to tell people that obesity medicines are bad – that losing weight with diet and exercise is not hard. It’s the right way to do it. She takes pride in telling people to stop taking their meds.

Another righteous line of thinking is that these new meds will let those bad food companies off the hook. Writing in the Guardian, Sarah Boseley says treating obesity will do no good. “Preventing it in the first place is the only way.” Tax the bad foods, subsidize the good stuff, and promote healthy, virtuous lifestyles. Yes indeed, she says, her prescription the only way to go.

Someone should tell her it’s tough to prevent something that’s already happened.

Pursuing an Agenda

Long ago, we convinced ourselves that obesity comes from eating the wrong things the wrong ways. We’ve been certain that the root of the problem is dietary fat, saturated fat, sugar, refined carbs, and now ultra-processed and hyper-palatable foods. Questioning these articles of faith invites the label of a heretic or a shill. Coming along for the ride is much easier – plus it opens doors for funding and commerce.

In this way, convictions, money, and the potential for conflicts flow together and become virtually impossible to disentangle. Because most everyone has an agenda in nutrition and obesity, objectivity becomes a challenge. This is equally true for people who are angry at the food industry and for people who are making money in that industry.

The only antidote is curiosity about different perspectives and how the facts line up with them. Right now, the facts are telling us that we have much better options for treating obesity. Progress is a good thing, even though it often brings us new challenges.

Click here for Haspel’s essay in the Washington Post. For further perspective on agendas and conflicting interests, click here, here, and here.

Balance, painting by Francis Picabia / WikiArt

Subscribe by email to follow the accumulating evidence and observations that shape our view of health, obesity, and policy.

April 26, 2023