What "Health at Every Size" means to me
May. 31st, 2007 01:44 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sarahmichiganI was writing back and forth with an LJ friend about doing size-acceptance and fat-politics posts on LJ. You may have noticed that I haven't posted much to my "obesity propaganda" or related tags lately. This is partly because I've been thinking and processing but haven't been able to formulate a coherent post, and partly because I'm really damn tired of arguing about these topics on my own journal.
If I was posting my opinions and viewpoints as completely unbiased fact on a health-related journal, I'd expect to be challenged and wouldn't mind it so much. But I hate having the same clueless responses and repeated arguments on my journal, where I'd think it's obvious that this is my worldview and I really don't want to argue the basics of HAES.
Now, if you think that I've got some minor detail wrong, or you're questioning the way I'm wording something, that's fine. But if you disagree with the *basics* of "health at every size," then I'd just prefer you stay quiet and scroll on by, because I really don't want to argue about it any more. I know a fair amount of others who are pro size-acceptance or fat activists, and I know that most of them tried to be vocal at first but got worn down like I have by the "but everybody knows fat causes heart attacks" and the "but some sizes are JUST TOO BIG to be healthy!" comments.
I think that discussions of "health at every size" and related topics often get bogged down in discussions of where to draw the line. "OK," someone will say, "I think you can be healthy at 190 pounds if you exercise every day, but 400 pounds is JUST TOO BIG!" or "I realize some people are naturally thin, but a BMI of 16 is just too small to be healthy!"
My take on HAES is not about line-drawing. There probably is an unhealthy low weight, somewhere south of BMI 17, and probably there are sizes that are too big, somewhere north of 300 or 400 pounds, where it's impossible to be particularly healthy. But I'm not drawing that line, because I've had enough "us vs. them" mentality in my life already. I've seen fat people pointing at other fatter people and saying, "Well at least I'm not THAT fat." I find this kind of talk to be entirely unhelpful and actively hurtful, and I'm not going there.
To me, these are the basics of HAES:
1. People naturally come in a variety of sizes, are born with different amount of fat cells and with different metabolisms.
2. Most people have a "set range" of weight where they feel best, and it's very hard or impossible to change that by more than 5 or 10 percent permanently.
3. The best approach to improving health focuses on changing behaviors, one small step at a time, rather than focusing on numbers such as weight or BMI.
4. People can become healthier (NOTE: "healthier" not "completely healthy") without losing or gaining even one pound if they improve their eating and exercise habits.
5. Changing your health habits may lead to a small amount of weight loss, but some people don't lose much or any weight, and that's OK. You can often improve other measures like cholesterol, blood pressure, and resting heart rate by getting more exercise and changing the way you eat even if you don't lose much or any weight.
6. Weight and body fat are not the sole or even the most important issues when it comes to health. Getting adequate sleep, keeping stress under control, wearing sunscreen and getting skin cancer checks, getting regular pap smears, and practicing safer sex are all important to overall health, and should not be neglected in favor of obsessing over your body shape or size.
If you want to nitpick certain portions of what I've said or the way I've phrased them, I can understand that. But if you don't believe at least the basiscs of HAES as I've outlined them here, we're probably not going to have a constructive debate, because these are the bedrock principles of HAES as it fits into my worldview.
If I was posting my opinions and viewpoints as completely unbiased fact on a health-related journal, I'd expect to be challenged and wouldn't mind it so much. But I hate having the same clueless responses and repeated arguments on my journal, where I'd think it's obvious that this is my worldview and I really don't want to argue the basics of HAES.
Now, if you think that I've got some minor detail wrong, or you're questioning the way I'm wording something, that's fine. But if you disagree with the *basics* of "health at every size," then I'd just prefer you stay quiet and scroll on by, because I really don't want to argue about it any more. I know a fair amount of others who are pro size-acceptance or fat activists, and I know that most of them tried to be vocal at first but got worn down like I have by the "but everybody knows fat causes heart attacks" and the "but some sizes are JUST TOO BIG to be healthy!" comments.
I think that discussions of "health at every size" and related topics often get bogged down in discussions of where to draw the line. "OK," someone will say, "I think you can be healthy at 190 pounds if you exercise every day, but 400 pounds is JUST TOO BIG!" or "I realize some people are naturally thin, but a BMI of 16 is just too small to be healthy!"
My take on HAES is not about line-drawing. There probably is an unhealthy low weight, somewhere south of BMI 17, and probably there are sizes that are too big, somewhere north of 300 or 400 pounds, where it's impossible to be particularly healthy. But I'm not drawing that line, because I've had enough "us vs. them" mentality in my life already. I've seen fat people pointing at other fatter people and saying, "Well at least I'm not THAT fat." I find this kind of talk to be entirely unhelpful and actively hurtful, and I'm not going there.
To me, these are the basics of HAES:
1. People naturally come in a variety of sizes, are born with different amount of fat cells and with different metabolisms.
2. Most people have a "set range" of weight where they feel best, and it's very hard or impossible to change that by more than 5 or 10 percent permanently.
3. The best approach to improving health focuses on changing behaviors, one small step at a time, rather than focusing on numbers such as weight or BMI.
4. People can become healthier (NOTE: "healthier" not "completely healthy") without losing or gaining even one pound if they improve their eating and exercise habits.
5. Changing your health habits may lead to a small amount of weight loss, but some people don't lose much or any weight, and that's OK. You can often improve other measures like cholesterol, blood pressure, and resting heart rate by getting more exercise and changing the way you eat even if you don't lose much or any weight.
6. Weight and body fat are not the sole or even the most important issues when it comes to health. Getting adequate sleep, keeping stress under control, wearing sunscreen and getting skin cancer checks, getting regular pap smears, and practicing safer sex are all important to overall health, and should not be neglected in favor of obsessing over your body shape or size.
If you want to nitpick certain portions of what I've said or the way I've phrased them, I can understand that. But if you don't believe at least the basiscs of HAES as I've outlined them here, we're probably not going to have a constructive debate, because these are the bedrock principles of HAES as it fits into my worldview.
