by As a UCLA professor and researcher who contributed to the science behind the anti-diet movement, I feel the need to weigh in. My research has found that restrictive weight loss diets are not effective for long term weight loss. However, I think the problem comes when “don’t diet for weight loss” equates to “eat whatever you want.”
These are not the same, but I don’t think the solution is to cycle back around to warn “So you better watch what you eat!” I think how we got to this point is because everyone is laser focused on weight and obesity, when the focus should really be on health, not as measured by Body Mass Index but real markers of health like blood pressure blood and triglycerides. Health professionals can and should shift the focus to healthy behaviors like exercise, eating more fruits and veggies, reducing stress, and getting great sleep. When you focus on weight, then fat shaming happens. When you focus on downstream health or upstream behaviors, health can improve the number on the scale.
A. Janet Tomiyama, City of Angels
The writer is director of the Dieting, Stress, and Health Laboratory at the University of California, Los Angeles.
I commend The Post and the Examiner for their article highlighting influential dietitians who are misleading the public with messages that suggest that all food is equal and that it is wrong to fight excess body weight . I also agree with the article’s criticism of alliances between dietitians and the food industry. The dietitians’ code of ethics makes it clear that nutrition and dietetics practitioners should “refrain from accepting gifts or services that may or may influence professional judgment.” It sickens me that many influential dietitians are violating their own code of ethics, and I believe that these violations should be addressed.
At the same time, I wish the article drew a sharper line between influential foodies and the majority of practitioners. Influential dietitians are a small percentage of the more than 112,000 registered dietitians in the United States. Admittedly, most dietitians work in clinical settings and are quite conscientious.
Second, using one person’s anecdotal experience, that of Jaye Rochon, to suggest that an anti-diet approach is always wrong does not adequately address the complexities and nuances of behind the reasons why some dietitians try to help their clients get off the yo-yo diet mill. , mixing metaphors. I have advised thousands of clients on weight management over the past 27 years, and it is clear to me that there is no single effective approach to weight management. Some clients need to abandon “going on a diet”, but that message should be personalized and presented in a measured way.
Valley Marking, St. Joseph, Minn.
The writer is a visiting professor in the nutrition department at St. Benedict’s College and St. John’s University.
There was much that made me uncomfortable about The Post’s April 5 essay on dietitians and the food industry. Let’s start with the headline. Calling processed food companies “Big Food” seems to have uncomfortable rhymes with “Big Pharma”. People who can’t afford to buy a party of organic bok and hand-cornered chèvre from a goat with a first, middle and last name don’t need to be made to feel bad about it. And there is a difference between dietitians who include convenient processed foods as part of one’s eating plan and the unscrupulous pharmaceutical salesmen who fueled the opioid free for all.
Then there’s the way the dietetic article paints with a broad brush. It seems to undermine the profession, encouraging readers to doubt sound food advice and confirm their worst fears, with the image of dietitians “climbing and sliding down a giant yellow box of General Mills cereal into a bowl of Cheerios plushie”.
That worst fear? It is fatness. Being fat was scary to me for many years of my life. I loved this article during the time when I was eating 1,000 calories a day and exercising too much while devouring Michael Pollan’s books. But luckily, I’m not that sad girl anymore. I am a fat woman who is also successful, fulfilled, and, well, whole.
There are many things worse than looking like me: you could be a dictator, you could cut your nails on the carpet or you could spend years of your life ruining your mental and physical health trying achieve an “ideal” body weight. You could lose the Costco samples because you don’t want to be the fat kid eating in public. You might skip birthdays because you don’t know how to tell your friends you can’t eat the cake. You could develop any of several serious medical issues from an eating disorder.
I promised myself that after losing 15 years to hating myself, dieting wouldn’t take up any more of my time. Fat people don’t care about anyone’s health. They don’t have a body that someone else considers acceptable. And they certainly don’t owe you more time missing out on beautiful moments in life because all they can worry about is being thin.
Hannah Landers OrganSamarkand, Uzbekistan
The Post’s front page article about influential dietitians in league with food companies made my blood boil. What General Mills is doing – and the unethical dietitians who support their disinformation campaign – is scurrilous. Telling consumers that they should eat more processed food is more than a disservice. It is dangerous.
Consider that diabetes and heart disease are two of the leading causes of death in the developed country of Ecuador. The Ministry of Health then responded with a “red light” food labeling system to inform consumers which foods are the highest in sugar, fats or salt. When I visit and shop there, I find the Ecuadorian food labeling system very helpful. The United States should continue to label foods more prominently, especially when daily recommendations for added sugar and salt consumption are exceeded. I hope that Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and the Food and Drug Administration will prevail and help us move beyond the deceptive practices of Big Food.
Karen Madsen, Silver Spring
Send Mr. Will to the principal’s office!
Regarding George F. Will’s April 4 op-ed “School choice is thriving in Arizona. We hope it survives.”:
As a staunch liberal, however, I tend to think of George F. Will as a conservative whose reasonable and reasoned arguments deserve frequent consideration. So I was disappointed to see him join the ranks of those who made inflammatory accusations against public education. I won’t argue that he wants to make a school choice. What I will strongly take issue with is his assertion that during the pandemic, “kids who were consigned to distance learning opened their laptops at home’, and the parents heard that learning the indoctrination.”
This is an irresponsible statement to make without evidence. I taught in Maryland public schools for 44 years. My wife had a second career as a special educator. Whether it was presenting “The Wizard of Earthsea” in a middle school classroom, “Beloved” in a senior honors class or buying “And Tango Makes Three” for my elementary school library, I did not try to “indoctrinate.” on any student or group. of students. But I’ve never seen a colleague do that.
Apart from ensuring that every student, regardless of grade level, has a strong foundation in the basics, the goal of teaching is to no to tell young people What to think. The goal of public education is to teach young people how think for themselves. And that often means presenting ideas from across a broad spectrum. In his column, Mr. Will never tells us what thoughts he feels these children with their open laptops were being forced to entertain. What terrible thoughts did their parents hear and fear?
The kind of language that Mr. Will uses in this editorial is the kind of language that has fueled unnecessary conflict in school districts across the country. It’s the kind of rhetoric that gives student teachers second thoughts about a career in education. His decision to quote an anonymous music educator – speaking of music photography rather than public schools – who says “mediocrity is like carbon monoxide: You can’t see it or smell it, but one day, you’re dead” is it is misleading and dangerous. Why would Mr. Will invite his conservative readers to rise up against teachers when he could encourage them to help rebuild the public school system?
Richard Park, Clarksburg, Md.
I am an elementary school substitute teacher in Montgomery County. I am confused by George F. Will’s reference to the teacher mystery in his recent column on school choice. What have I missed? In my 35 years of representation in grades K-5, I have felt, at times, like a sympathizer, an empath, a cheerleader, a nurturer, a health aide, and oh, yes, importantly, an educator. I never felt powerful or mysterious. I think mystique is a myth.
