Slate's Bizbox
human nature: Science, technology, and life.

Fat LiesObesity, laxity, and political correctness.

By William Saletan
Posted Thursday, July 26, 2007, at 5:21 PM ET
Illustration by Robert Neubecker. Click image to expand.

Obesity is contagious like a virus. Willpower can't contain it. Stop blaming and stigmatizing fat people.

That's how scientists and the press are spinning a new study about weight gain, published today in the New England Journal of Medicine. The spin is politically correct but medically perverted. The study's findings tell exactly the opposite story: Obesity spreads culturally, individual decisions are crucial, and responsibility and stigma are part of the solution.

How did the story get twisted? Start with the contagion metaphor. The word contagious never appears in the original paper, written by Nicholas Christakis of Harvard Medical School and James Fowler of the University of California at San Diego. But it's all over their sound bites. "Obesity Is 'Socially Contagious,' " said the headline on UCSD's press release. Christakis told reporters that obesity can "spread from person to person like a fashion or a germ" and that "once it starts, it's hard to stop it. It can spread like wildfire." A government official who funded the research concluded, "It takes what was seen as a noninfectious disease (obesity) and shows it clearly has got communicable factors."

These metaphors spread rapidly through the media like … well, like bad metaphors. The New York Times ("Study Says Obesity Can Be Contagious") opened its report with the line, "Obesity can spread from person to person, much like a virus. …" The Los Angeles Times ("Obesity is 'contagious,' study finds") began, "Obesity can spread among a group of friends like a contagious disease," and added that the study showed a "pattern of contagion most often associated with infectious diseases." The Washington Post began, "Obesity appears to spread from one person to another like a virus or a fad. …"

The virus metaphor infected—actually, no, it didn't infect, it simply influenced—the authors' and the media's conclusions. "Treating people in groups may be more effective than treating them individually," Christakis argued. The Los Angeles Times paraphrased one expert's inference that "obesity treatment programs should move away from their emphasis on individual willpower." The Post said the results "lend support to treating people in groups or even whole communities." A warning against "relieving people of responsibility for watching their weight" vanished from the Post's article overnight.

Obviously, from a collective standpoint, it's more efficient to address obesity in a group than in one individual. But just as obviously, groups consist of individuals. And the gist of this study is that obesity did not spread through the sampled population like a virus or any other materially transmitted malady. It spread culturally, individual to individual, through the relaxation of standards of personal discipline.

Many scientists believe that in some cases, viruses literally cause obesity. Others point to genes or environmental constraints, such as fast-food joints, distances too great to walk, and a shortage of parks, sidewalks, and good grocery stores. Research suggests these factors do matter a lot—and to that extent, fat people deserve sympathy, not blame. But such factors can't account for the spread pattern documented in this study. Genetics can't explain it, since having a fat friend was more likely to predict a person's obesity than having a fat sibling was. Environmental constraints can't explain it, since faraway friends made a difference, while next-door neighbors didn't. Availability of food can't explain it, since friends had a bigger effect than spouses did. Nor can sheer imitative eating, since faraway friends had as big an effect as local friends did.

Cross off genes, viruses, environment, and imitation, and the only explanatory factor you're left with is, as the paper notes, each person's "perception of the social norms regarding the acceptability of obesity." In other words, culture. Moreover, the study documents obesity's differential spread not through an amorphous group but through a network. The point of differential spread though a network is that each node—in this case, each person's cultural decisions—matters.

The upshot of the data is that if you find yourself caught in a fattening social network, you have three options. You can resist the fattening norm. You can try to reverse it. Or you can ditch your fat friends.

That doesn't sound very nice. The study's authors certainly don't want to say it. In talking to the press, the Post notes, they "cautioned that people should not … stigmatize obese people." Likewise, an obesity expert from Yale warned the New York Times against "blaming obese people even more for things that are caused by a terrible environment." Fowler cautioned that studies "suggest that having more friends makes you healthier. So the last thing that you want to do is get rid of any of your friends." Christakis added, "We are not suggesting that people should sever ties with their overweight friends. But forming ties with underweight or normal weight friends may be beneficial to you."

Come on. Everything in the study belies these mealy-mouthed conclusions. To resist a fattening norm, you need willpower. To reverse it, you need to promote responsibility, which implies blame. You almost certainly need stigma. And realistically, to add normal or underweight friends to your circle, you have to relegate others who are overweight. That may be bad for your fat ex-friends, who will lose your friendship as well as your thinness. But it's fine for you, since you'll have just as many friends as before.

Maybe it's not nice to speak these truths. But maybe being nice, when you should be speaking the truth—especially to your friends—is the problem.

Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
William Saletan is Slate's national correspondent and author of Bearing Right: How Conservatives Won the Abortion War.
Illustration by Robert Neubecker.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Remarks from the Fray:

The NEJM analysis implies that having friends who are overweight (and, importantly, thinking of them as friends rather than acquaintances) increases one's risk of obesity through (the authors theorize) changes in one's perceptions of social norms. If this is conscious - that is, if one actively and knowingly becomes more accepting of overweight/obesity through friendship - then "ditching your fat friends" seems pretty silly, as you could simply consciously decide not to let yourself gain weight.

If this effect is unconscious, on the other hand, then contagion is the proper metaphor, as obesity spreads by person-to-person contact without the victims conscious participation.

Either way, Saletan's conclusions are off base.

--tgt_ma

(To reply, click here.)

Unless I missed something, the study reports that obesity spreads along social networks for men only. That might make sense if the media does more to shape women's idea of what they should look like, but it seems odd that none of the articles about the study (including William Saletan's) commented on it.

--rpetro7110

(To reply, click here.)

A few months back, a Midwestern sorority was castigated for expelling all the fat girls. Thanks to the fat lobby, they had to come up with some pc garbage about the girls "not being sufficiently involved." As Saletan so stridently notes, they should have stuck to their guns: these girls were a health hazard! Thank God for sororities. We need more such right-minded people. Our very society depends upon it.

--noisette

(To reply, click here.)

I can't decide if I was struck more by the fact that us fat folks need "compassion" or by the fact that we're well on our way to infecting millions--okay, okay, possibly billions--of people with our...fat?

Prejudice is prejudice is prejudice, right? Can you catch being black? Being gay? Is this seriously the last socially acceptable prejudice?

Being fat does not automatically relegate you to a king-size bed on the 21st floor of an apartment you haven't seen the outside of since you moved in. Fat people go for walks, have sex (and you don't even have to roll us in flour), get married, give birth to children, go swimming, and eat vegetables.

Just because the majority of America is offended doesn't mean I have to give a tinker's damn.

--suchaprettyface

(To reply, click here.)

What is Saletan's suggestion for the fat rejects? That they not have friends or social networks at all? It seems to me that that, having been deprived of the delightful companionship of their thin friends, overweight people would seek solace and friendship with one another, thus leading to yet stronger and more widely distributed social networks of the sort the NEJM study cites as contributing to obesity.

Thin people: ditch your fat friends, and fat people will grow more numerous...till they overtake thin people like you...till they rule the world...

--marzipan

(To reply, click here.)

Now that the zeitgeist is aware of society's effect on eating, I'm wondering if Saletan or any Fraysters can take measured look at social norms and the balances that end up being struck. For example, stigmatizing fat may make people skinnier, but it's also very likely to increase the rate for individuals to develop eating disorders, which are some of the deadliest mental illnesses around.

--Bate

(To reply, click here.)

Your analysis of flawed reporting about the study you cited is correct, but your conclusion that stigma will help is a leap of faith. Nothing in the study supports that conclusion.

What really happens when you direct hatred towards obese people? When you shun them, fire them, refuse to hire them, insult them, attack them, abuse them? Does it motivate them to become thin?

What it does is depress the hell out of them. Quite a lot of them turn to food as the only fleeting source of comfort remaining to them.

My take on this study is this: social influences do matter. If you hang out with guys who routinely wolf a box of doughnuts, you may say "why not?" And wolf your own. People can be influenced socially into altering behavior. But this mechanism is "reinforcement," or "encouragement," not "stigmatization." There's no way to conclude that stigma will produce the reverse effect.

If you've seen any studies which show a positive correlation between stigmatization and weight loss, I'll eat my words. If you haven't, take it back, William. Your treatment is worse than the disease.

--UrgeIt

(To reply, click here.)

(7/27)

Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Topic A: Obama's Speech
| Pundits and diplomats respond.
Robinson: Sunshine in BerlinToles: Obama the UniterTelnaes: Meanwhile, McCain
PLUS » Stumped: Bring Back Bill Clinton