Think Before You Advertise

Just a few weeks/months ago, there was controversy surrounding a t-shirt that Urban Outfitters was selling on their website and in stores. It said "Eat Less." [I wrote a post about it that you can check out here.] Since then, the shirt has been pulled from stores as well as from the UO website. It just boggles my mind when a company endorses an idea like this- it really makes me wonder who signed off on this, thinking it was a good idea!!

Well, the Snack Factory, a snack company based out of San Francisco, is marketing their new pretzel thin pretzel snacks and has stirred up quite a controversy over their choice of creative advertising. The picture above is the ad, and while I try to avoid using triggering images, I thought that this image was relatively safe- and important to show! So, here is the Snack Factory's idea of clever advertising. Too bad their advertising campaign comes at the expense of millions of young women and men who struggle with this very lie that 'you can never be too thin'. In response, people in New York City have been covering these ads with pictures of emaciated women, and the phrase, "Actually, you can [be too thin]." The Snack Factory responded to complaints via Twitter by saying that they are "using the word ‘thin’ in a creative way to describe our product," and that people "seem to be interpreting it in their own way... we're a thin pretzel cracker!"

I get that they thought they were being cute and creative, but that does not make it appropriate or okay. When you choose to promote a pro-eating disorder belief as your advertising campaign, you have to take responsibility for it. Thankfully, the VP of marketing for the Snack Factory has heard the public outrage and is responding by pulling the pictures and ads. This is another reminder that speaking out makes a difference, and that we can truly make an impact! This is also a good reminder that more education about eating disorders is needed, and that we need to continue to bust the myths about eating disorders so things like this will become less frequent.

One Woman's Thoughts on Barbie...

I grew up playing with Barbies- cutting their hair, putting real make-up on them, and dressing them up in all kinds of crazy outfits. I actually used to force my brother to play Barbies with me sometimes when we were little and we would argue over who got to drive the Barbie corvette or the Barbie volvo- sorry Jonathan to out you like this. I was a bossy kid and I didn't like playing Barbies by myself! : ) Because of my history of playing with Barbies as a kid, I wouldn't say that I am a hater. But I would by no means say that I am a fan. The sort of global impact that Barbie has had on the self-esteems and body images of women everywhere is not to be overlooked. Let's just take a minute and look at the following facts about Barbie..

Barbie, the best selling fashion doll in the world, has unattainable and unhealthy body proportions. If she were alive, she would be unable to menstruate. Research has shown that very young girls (ages 5-7) who are exposed to Barbie have lower self esteem and want a thinner body than they have.(Dittmar, Halliwell, & Ive, 2006)

While statistics vary depending on which source you use, Barbie's dimensions (if she were alive) would be somewhere around the following- she would be 6 feet tall, 100 lbs., and wearing a size 4. Her measurements would be 39"/19"/33" and as a result would have to walk on all fours because her body's dimensions would not allow her to stand upright (Statistics taken from Eating Disorders Info and ANRED).

Does playing with Barbies cause eating disorders? No way. If that were the case, we'd all have developed eating disorders. But I believe that the way in which we view our bodies and beauty has probably been shaped by Barbie, a pop cultural icon, in some capacity. Interestingly enough, the story of how Barbie came to be might surprise you. It really surprised me. Dr. Susan Albers who has written some great books on mindful eating wrote a piece in the Huffington Post recently entitled "Why I Don't Hate Barbie Anymore." She shares about the life of Ruth Handler, the woman who created Barbie. Handler, the youngest of her 10 siblings, was raised by her eldest sister. She wanted to make something of herself and be successful in spite of the odds and circumstances stacked against her. Handler found worth, value and self-esteem in her work. She even went on to create prosthetics for breast cancer survivors who had lost their breasts to cancer- sadly, she was one of these women.

This article (as well as the book written about Handler's life) provides some very interesting context and thoughts on Barbie, her legacy and the woman behind the doll, as well as a GREAT message on self-esteem and where we each find our value. I would really encourage you to check it out (here!). Let me be clear- in the words of Dr. Albers- "Barbie's negative symbolism and impact on body image clearly overshadows the rest of this story." I can't do this piece justice in my description of it, so I would encourage you to read it for yourself (here). I know I am always encouraging you all to check out different articles, but if you read just one, read this one! What a great reminder that our value and worth as people come from more than our achievements and 'success.'

On 'Stigmatizing Health' and Orthorexia Nervosa

The Huffington Post is great at stirring up controversy with its opinion pieces. That's partly why I love it. It's a good (and fairly benign) forum for people to engage with different thoughts and think critically. What I don't love, though, is when people write things that are not accurate or informed. Case in point- the other day, someone wrote an article on orthorexia nervosa that was very misinformed. It's okay if people have differing opinions (based on empirical evidence) regarding how to effectively treat an eating disorder, or if people disagree on how we can improve and increase accessibility of treatment. What is tough though is when someone in a public forum, who has no psychological training, refutes the validity of a mental illness.

The article is HERE if you are interested in checking it out. Or, I can save you the four minutes and give you a brief synopsis. In all honesty, you might want to read it just to get a sense of her perspective, but Christina Pirello argues that orthorexia nervosa has been made up by psychologists and health professionals in order that the status quo is maintained, which essentially fuels an industry (pharmaceutical) created to profit from our unhealthy eating. She believes that healthy eaters should not be marginalized for choosing to eat healthily and that healthy eating does not equate with being mentally unstable. While I agree with her on that last part, I think the problem with her argument is that she really doesn't get that eating disorders are not a lifestyle choice, like healthy eating is. Eating disorders are a mental illness. Someone who suffers from an orthorexia is no more choosing to eat healthy than someone who suffers from bipolar disorder chooses to have a mood disorder.

Orthorexia nervosa is not just the desire to eat healthy. Orthorexia interferes with one's ability to live a normal, high functioning life due to the pursuit of eating only pure and healthy foods. This may mean avoiding work, family and social commitments or events to avoid having to eat anything that is not pure, raw or healthy. Orthorexia is also pathological in nature. This means that the disorder goes beyond someone's desire to adhere to healthy eating; there are negative consequences that result from the behavior. If someone is just eating healthily, that is not pathological! It is pathological though when this pursuit of healthy eating interferes with one's ability to lead a normal life. The preoccupation with healthy eating can become an interference in everyday activities, relationships and life. It also becomes pathological when one's health is compromised. Often, one who is orthorexic may avoid eating anything but fruits and veggies- the way that this can affect one's body can be detrimental. Your brain needs carbs to function properly (maybe Pirello needs some carbs!) and your body needs other essential nutrients that cannot be utilized from a handful of foods. While I can appreciate a perspective that is different than my own, my fear is that Pirello's perspective serves to further perpetuate myths about eating disorders. For more information on orthorexia nervosa, follow this link.

A Diet is a Diet is a Diet

Lately I've been ragging on celebrities- Kim Kardashian, Jennifer Love Hewitt, and now... Jessica Simpson. I've written about Jessica Simpson in the past (here and here) because she has been involved in many efforts to encourage women to examine what real beauty is, both through her show, Price of Beauty, and through her work with Operation Smile. She was also on Oprah a few months ago, sharing her thoughts about beauty, body image, and her renewed sense of self. At one point, she got teary-eyed and when Oprah asked her what she was feeling, she responded that she was frustrated by the pressure put on women by the media to be thin.

Well, this week, Simpson posted on twitter that she has started a strict vegan diet. While she later added that this diet has nothing to do with weight loss, and only has to do with being healthy, I was a little disappointed and surprised that after her campaign to focus on health, beauty and accepting her body, that she would publicly discuss her 'strict vegan diet' that she says 'shocked her system.' Because she has made body image and beauty her platform, it seems irresponsible of her to mention her latest fad restrictive vegan diet. Diets, as I have preached and preached about, are ineffective and BAD (why? find out here). If Simpson chooses to follow a vegan diet, that is her choice, but to announce that she has started a new diet puts the focus in the wrong place, whether this diet has to do with weight loss or not. Some may disagree with me, and that is ok! But I think that it would be better if she kept that information to herself, especially due to her history of engaging in fad and yo-yo diets and the ongoing scrutiny over her weight- as anyone hearing about her latest diet would naturally assume it has to do with weight loss (as all of her other diets have been in the past).

Our society is obsessed with dieting, who is eating what, losing weight fast, bodies, etc. It's tough to go onto facebook or twitter anymore without reading a status update or tweet about some kind of disordered behaviors/thoughts regarding food and exercise. I'm not calling anyone out here or thinking of certain people as I write this (well, maybe Jessica haha), but the more we call attention to these things, the more we are playing into the unhealthy dynamic created by the media. As much as Jessica Simpson has experienced criticism and pressure from the media, I would think that she would not want to perpetuate the focus and value on such things herself. I am afraid that by making a public point to share her latest diet plan, she is compromising the stance she has been trying to model with health and beauty. It's not that all of her progress and encouragement to women has been completely wasted and forgotten, but she is sending some pretty mixed messages. From here on out, it might be more helpful for her to refrain from promoting or discussing her current meal plan. And so should everyone else. We don't need a play by play via facebook or twitter about how many pounds you lost last week or how fat you feel or how intense your exercise routine is or how you can fit into your skinny jeans again. Food nourishes our bodies, it gives us energy and fuel to think well and be active. Let's keep the focus there and spend the rest of our energy, time and thoughts on things that matter more, like family, friends, our careers, and making the world a better place.

More on The Biggest Loser...

Back in April, I wrote about The Biggest Loser. Actually, I didn't really write about it so much as just post a link to a great article about it that someone else wrote! Follow this link to check out the post and article. Or if you didn't read that post (or the article) and don't feel like doing it now, I'll try to provide a quick re-cap : ).

First, I know that there are a lot of people who love watching this show (including some of my friends and family- hi guys!). This critique is not meant to encourage anyone to stop watching the show, but more so just to encourage critical thinking about what really is going on and if it is healthy! I watch a little TV that is regularly critiqued for many reasons (the bachelorette, for one- haha), so believe me, I am not throwing stones. But my overall thoughts on the show can be summarized by saying that the show seems to perpetuate some pretty unhealthy views regarding weight, body image, health, and happiness, as well as unhealthy, immoderate and unsustainable practices (exercising up to 6 hours a day?). The only reason that I bring this whole thing up again is because an article was published a few days ago by Kate Ward on Entertainment Weekly.com entitled "Former 'Biggest Loser' Contestant Claims Show is 'Dangerous'; NBC Issues Response." In light of my post a few months back, I thought that this article was an interesting follow up. Check out this link to view the article, or read the copy and pasted version for your convenience below! If you all have any thoughts or comments about this, I would love to hear them (as always)!

About twice a year, we tune into the latest season of The Biggest Loser and watch in admiration and awe as a dozen or so contestants quickly shed pound after pound from their bodies, until they’re left looking like healthy, happy individuals. But, if former contestant Kai Hibbard is to be believed, oftentimesBiggest Loser graduates are anything but.

The season 3 contestant — who lost 118 pounds on the show — appeared on CBS’ The Early Show this morning to discuss her claim that the NBC show is hurting its contestants, and promoting an unhealthy body image. (See the video embedded after the jump.) Beginning her interview by voicing appreciation for being part of something that has inspired people to lose weight, Hibbard went on to accuse Biggest Loser of supporting a “myth that’s dangerous,” and claims the show stretches the truth when it comes to its shooting schedule: “I have people that come up to me and talk to me and ask me why they can’t lose 12 pounds in a week when I did. It didn’t happen. It’s TV…a week is not a week in TV.” (Hibbard also discussed dehydration, which is used to affect the outcome on the scales, something Biggest Loser fans are already fairly knowledgeable about.)

The former contestant also went on to explain how Biggest Loser affected her own health:Hibbard says she suffered from an eating disorder after shooting wrapped, which only ended after her husband and friends staged an intervention when they saw her substitute coffee for meals, and began to notice her hair falling out. “I left with a very poor mental body image,” she said on the Early Show. “I found myself loathing what I looked like the more weight that I dropped because of the pressure on me.” What’s more, Hibbard claims at least six former contestants from seasons after hers have approached her to complain about their own unhealthy experiences.

When asked to comment, NBC issued the following statement to EW: “Contestants on The Biggest Loser are closely monitored and medically supervised. The consistent health transformations of over 200 contestants through nine seasons of the program speak for themselves.” Of course, Biggest Loser is not new to controversy — nearly every season, the show comes under fire from viewers and health professionals alleging the show’s lose-weight-fast format is unhealthy for its cast members, especially since the show seems intent on adding bigger and bigger cast members with each new season. (Just see the latest Biggest Loser winner, Mike Ventrella, the heaviest contestant to ever enter the ranch.) But now that a former contestant is alleging the show is dangerous, is it easier to believe?