This video is an introductory overview of the full 15-minute audio below.
The audio-only version is available for the full discussion due to issues with network connections this week.
I recently released another article in my series on the flaws in “obesity science.” Once again, this put me in front of the “firing squad.” I questioned another “sacred cow” of the weight-loss-food-blame game. Depending on the current food trend, stepping outside of the wellness line that labels the latest dietary compound as “good” and “bad” is a “no-no.”Alas, here I go again! This time, the topic is on the flaws in the theory of “food addiction.” I deconstruct the science and report on what is often not stated in the “conclusions.”I also argue that creating fear around food is detrimental. It is causing emotional and physical repercussions that are counter-health and causing people to become disconnected with their own bodies.
What you’ll learn in 15-minutes:
- The pitfalls on stating that “obesity” is a “cause” of chronic health diseases and what conclusions can be made in experiments testing for an association vs. causation.
- What factors influence overall health and the many “lurking variables” in associative and epidemiological studies on “obesity.”
- What determines body size and how food is only one small factor. (Check out this study on environmental toxins and effects on body size.)
- The problem with blaming “food addiction” for “obesity.”
- Why I am NOT advocating for non-nourishing foods and “junk” and still believe quality, whole foods can be medicine.
- That I AM advocating for re-nourishing the body and mind, including the de-stigmatization of all body sizes.
- What factors were not accounted for in food addiction studies and how I “missed” them at first.
- How deprivation studies on food differ from addiction of substances and that this gets misinterpreted in current dietary approaches and medicine.
- That igniting the “pleasure” center in the brain for food is a natural survival instinct.
- How studies show that deprivation and starvation lead to over-consumption, but non-dieting and free access to foods leads to moderation and normalization of body weight.
- Studies on dieting that show that restriction causes emotional and physical backlash.
- The very real physiological and psychological response to overeating certain foods that occurs with dieter’s restricting it and that it can be painful.
- Different approaches to healing one’s relationship to food. These include complete avoidance of “problem foods” or guidance with working through exposures to these “bad foods” in order to make peace with food and one’s body. (Note, eliminations that are not based in medicine, such as avoiding wheat in celiac disease, are challenged in the later method.)
- How I support the re-nourishment of my clients from the chronic elimination of certain foods in conjunction with offering “fear foods” to prevent the scary “backlash” of “feeling out of control.” (I also have suggestions for referrals for nutritionists/dieticians that incorporate HAES for additional support!)
- Why I desire to give back the power of choice in what decisions my clients make with their own body and diet. This means finding what resonates with them based on their own experience and evidence-based science on nutrition. This does not include relying on outside sources that promote fear of “death with one bite” or “in vogue” dietary trends.
Get the the resources and references from the accompanying article here.
Feel free to share your thoughts and comments below.
This material is for information purposes only and is not intended to diagnose, treat, or prescribe for any illness. You should check with your doctor regarding implementing any new strategies into your wellness regime. These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. (Affiliation link.)
Disclaimer: This information is applicable ONLY for therapeutic quality essential oils. This information DOES NOT apply to essential oils that have not been tested for purity and standardized constituents. There is no quality control in the United States, and oils labeled as “100% pure” need only to contain 5% of the actual oil. The rest of the bottle can be filled with fillers and sometimes toxic ingredients that can irritate the skin. The studies are not based solely on a specific brand of an essential oil, unless stated. Please read the full study for more information.