Episode 117 Transcript

Read transcript alongside audio.

Welcome to the Fierce Fatty Podcast. I'm your host, Victoria Welsby and this is episode 117. Today, we're talking about Why is the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics prescribing disordered eating for fat clients?

I'm Victoria Welsby TEDx speaker, Best Selling Author, and fat activist. I have transformed my life from hating my body with desperately low self esteem to being a courageous and confident fierce fatty who loves every inch of this jelly. Society teaches us living in a fat body is bad. But what if we spent less time, money, and energy on the pursuit of thinness and instead focused on the things that actually matter? Like if pineapple on pizza should be outlawed? Or if the mullet was the greatest haircut of the 20th century? So how do you stop negative beliefs about your fat body controlling your life? It's the Fierce Fatty podcast Let's begin.

1:20

Hello, welcome to this episode of fierce fatty so glad that you're here to hang out with me. Oh, look at that rhyming. Rhyming. I'm so good. Today Oh my goodness. I'm so cute. If you're just listening in audio. I've got my hair too little bunches. Got some pink lipstick on and my gray round glasses. And my new jumper that says fat icon. Love it. Some of what me it is a present. Let me see fat icon. Where is it from? And I get dressed? Yeah. And I get dressed. So if you're in the States, you can get it. You can get it. Or you can get it in Canada too. I'm in Canada, obviously. But here's the thing. Here's the thing. It's in US dollars and then when it ships they put on a fucking handling fee not and I get dressed. But the the UPS fucking up. So the the jumper is 4990 or 50 bucks. And then best shipping handling, which I paid on the other end. So then so then shipping is 20 bucks. And then shipping that I had to pay not because of the company because of UPS UPS was 47 Seven, how much no 4178 4178? Rude. Rude. Rude. So yeah, you can order it if you're in Canada, but it's gonna cost you twice as much twice as much as it should, unfortunately. So if you're in the US enjoy it. Jealous. Well, I'm not jealous. I've done it, you know, but you know, I'm feeling for the other people in the rest of the world who don't want to spend gajillion dollars on handling to UPS fucking suck my tits. Yes, but anyway, the reason why I'm saying that is because I wanted to share that. When I woke up, I didn't feel good in my body. I thought you know what, my hair looks a bit shit. I need to I need to go to the hairdresser's. And I just wasn't. I was just like, Yeah, not a lot. But I love it when it comes up. I love it when it comes up. Because then I can tell you about it and then tell you about what I'm doing to make myself feel better. And so I put my hair in some these these bunches and put on some put on this new jumper. But some lippy, put on some eyeliner. And then I'm like, oh, turns out but I didn't suddenly become really ugly in a day. Just the perception that I have of my body has changed for whatever reason. And so then I'm like, Okay, what could have triggered me to not feel as great. It could be that my head is looking a little bit wonky. Or it could be that I had a date. I had a date, the last last night the night before? Not before night before I think we'll be fine. I'll give it like a five out of 10 Nothing bad. Nothing great. But I had said to the guy how do you feel about dating Someone who's fat. And he said, I've never dated anyone, all of my past partners have been, quote, normal size. And he said he put it in quotations normal size because he didn't know what the right word was. So, you know, that's fine. As I said, I told him I went straight size. But it made me feel unsafe to be with him. In regards to He wasn't like, oh, he just happens to be the I've ended up with people who are straight sighs and but of course, I see the beauty in all different types of bodies. That's why I'm here because you are a fucking smack show, obviously. Which is what my brain says, right? My brain is like, well, if you have, well, you know, if you're here, then you must find me attractive. But he was like, You know what? Yeah, I'm really you have really nice green eyes. And that's what attracted me to you. And it was like, Oh, the eye complement the eyes. Same as a smile.

6:04

You have such a beautiful face. And he wasn't outwardly saying, you know, despite your body, you've got nice eyes. You know, he, he wasn't saying that, but it kind of just made me feel unsafe, you know, and safe in regards to am I going to hook up with this guy? That was my plan. Motherfucker Robbie, I don't have I haven't had sex in two years. So I'm Come on. Give me some do. Yeah, so I just I just thought, you know, am I gonna give him the pleasure of seeing my gorgeous fat body? Because it would be his pleasure for him to not fully, you know, to educate him. When he's not like who? Yeah, I mean, you're repacking gray. Because I am really fucking great. You're not I mean, so. Yeah. It was a no from me. There we go, there we go. There we go. The next, you know, two days after the date, waking up not feeling as good about myself. So, you know, our brains are not walking around in a vacuum. We are influenced. And even someone like me who does this for a living, I too have a human brain that is influenced. And, you know, I want to be loved and worshiped and all that type of stuff. And so, when someone is not worshiping Me, they're wrong. They should be. They're not worshiping Me, then, you know, it's obviously triggered me, which is interesting. So, so it's just gonna be information and now I can just get myself some nice self care. And it's all good. And that whole process of me thinking about that took like, I don't know, 90 seconds. And it makes it kind of takes me out of the belief that yeah, I'm not I'm not good enough. Whatever we know, I was believing into Oh, there's a part of Vinnie that is feeling like they're not good enough. And it was triggered because you know, this guy said this or that or whatever. And so what can I adult self Vini do to support that part of me that is triggered so anyway, little story for you. But I wanted to do this episode. I wanted to do this episode. Last week. I had I had so much I had so much to talk about what would pause last week's episode. Oh, yeah, the fucking we go V drug bullshit. And then this bullshit happened as well the same week. And so I decided to do the the weego V thing first because I was steaming mad about it. And now I'm like, steaming mad about this. And so we're talking about the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics which is the if you're not familiar with who they are. Wikipedia tells us that it is a 501 C trade association in the United States. I don't know what that means. What a 501 C probably something like for profit or something who knows? Anyway, with over 112,000 members, the association claims to be the largest organization of food and nutrition professionals, comprising many registered dietitian nutritionists are the NS nutrition and dietetic technicians registered and the T RS and other dietetics professionals. So that's who they are. So they're kind of like a Yeah, association, a group you're like, oh, yeah, I'm a member of and so they release guidelines. These other bloggers have a release guidelines on how to deal with fatties. Okay, they did a they did a review of this The research and they released these guidelines which surprise fuckin surprise, something that's pulled out of 1993 and is really fat phobic. They release them during National Eating Disorder Awareness Week, and during Black History Month. I mean, how fucked up is that. And the reason why that's super fucked up, in case that's not really clear is that fatphobia weight stigma disproportionately affects people, black people, people of color, and people who are struggling with eating disorders, especially those who are fat. So, I mean, they just like go for the home run, combine was really stick it to them as that's, you know, increase the stigma that black fat people face.

10:59

And those with disordered eating or eating disorders, ready to give it to them girls come on, let's just increase the stigma is what they thought was a great idea. So we do have a little bit of power here to make some change, because they've opened the, their, their opinion piece to a survey that is available to submit until March 25. Links for everything I'm talking about is going to be in the show notes first it.com, forward slash 117. And so you can go on there, there's gonna be a link straight to the survey monkey thing, it's very easy. You can by the way, you can submit more than once. So you don't need to put your in your email or anything. And so it just says Are these are these things? Are these recommendations helpful? Blah, blah, blah. So there's like five, yes, no questions. And so the answers are? No, no, no, no. Yes. The final one is a yes. And then the rest of them of the nose. And then there's a little space box there to say, what do you think? And then you can tell them what you think? And then there's like, Who are you kind of thing? Like, are you a client, a member of the public blah, blah, anyway, and that's it. So it takes like, depending how much you put in the textbox, I will take probably about a minute. So if you want to if you feel compelled, the link is going to be in the show notes. First party.com, forward slash 117. And look for the survey monkey link, I'll make sure that it's the one of the first links up there. So let's go into what they recommended. And see if because they've done this review of evidence, right? See if what's going on here. Because you know, when when a body in association and authority comes out with recommendations, people listen. And so it's important that we understand exactly what they're saying what they're recommending, and if there is any holes in their arguments, to try and get us to be critical thinkers and and, and not be scared to say, Oh, well, yeah, this governing body or you know, and the you know, that's what, that's what they called the acronym and is recommending this. So maybe I'm maybe I'm silly for believing in health, every size, maybe I'm ridiculous for not being on a diet because this governing body has looked at the research research. And they're saying this. One thing to remember is that individuals, organizations are not free from weight bias themselves. Right? And so that's always going to be informing what, what's put out into the world. But let's let's get into it, let's get into it. The first thing I want to read is, as does response and so, Aster is the Association for Size diversity and health and Aster are the other folks that hold the register. Is it trademark, you know, the thing that isn't our you know, yeah, register your trademark of Health at Every Size. The reason why you we see it with a little r as a registered trademark is because as a s d h, have protected it so that it cannot be used nefariously because you know, motherfuckers are gonna be up here being like health, every size diet, how about every size, how to lose weight. And so because of that protection that as the hold as a group as a community, it's not one member that holds that it's basically the fat community that holds that, that trademark, they've protected health every size from that bullshitter II that intuitive eating has seen right? Intuitive Eating is not trademarked and as we see into to eating diets and to to Intuitive Eating lose 75 pounds in 12 minutes with intuitive eating all that type of non science anyway okay so as the has written a letter because the so a and a nd has said in the recommendations basically let me tell you what they've said trigger warning I'm going to be talking about calories, amount of calories that they recommend.

15:29

So if that doesn't feel good, skip ahead one minute. So they have recommended that fat clients need to be put on a 1200 to 1500 calorie diet a day and they need to not follow Health at Every Size or a non diet approach. Okay, so they're saying so not only are they saying eat nothing, but don't you be following health every size Don't be engaging in health promoting activities and behaviors because what they think health every size is because they did tons of research. They think Health at Every Size is a way to lose weight. So they say don't do health every size because you won't lose weight. What would you fucking yes oh my goodness. It's like saying don't use your car to drive across a lake in the water because the car will sink? Well Yeah, no shit. That's why you use a fucking bow. You know not that's not what car use a car a road. You know, it's just anyway, this is what this is what as the says recently and completed a review of health every size interventions as part of the adult weight management guideline that included many fat phobic and weight biased recommendation recommendations. One of the proposed recommendations is for adults who are Oh words. It is suggested that audience or international equivalent not use health every size, or non diet approach to improve BMI and other cardio metabolic outcomes or quality of life. We want to start by acknowledging the trauma caused by and being reactivated by Ann's actions, we see the frustration if not only the continued, of not only the continued violence of recommendations such as these against fat people, but the violence of attempting to discredit haze, which to many of us represents not only a safe path to health and healthcare, but a community where fat people are celebrated the action of and are not surprising dietetics the concept of health and the system of healthcare were built on and continue to thrive on fat phobic or racist ableist eugenicist and violent beliefs, it is doubly upsetting that their proposal comes during Black History Month, a time when the racist roots of fatphobia should be centered rather than further promoting ideas that most harm fat black people. White supremacy plays a key role in the development of guidelines such as these as well as in our response to the recommendations. We see it in the way we value the written word, especially when it includes copious citations and rubrics and people with an alphabet of credentials behind their names. So the first bit of that paragraph, it links up so white supremacy is underlined it links to a really nice, like five pages of five pages on it's like nine pages. Link of information on white supremacy culture. Really interesting. Again, I'm going to make sure it's in the show notes. But there there's this concept of white supremacy culture, we are so steeped in it, but there are certain things that we it's just built into our society that come from white supremacist idea ideas, and this goes into into that, but let me just read out like a few bullet points of I'll read out the top the what they are, it's just you know, it's like nine of them. So you know, so perfectionism, sense of urgency, defensiveness, quantity over quality, worship of the written word. Only one right way. paternalism either or Thinking, Power hoarding. Fear of open conflict, individualism. I'm the only one. Progress is bigger, more objectivity right together. Comfort. Okay, so underneath, all of those are bullet points and then antidotes to those things, just like a side note. And so if you're, if you're thinking like why are they talking about how the written word and how responding with a written word and how their guidelines with all of the links and blah, blah, blah, is is steeped in white supremacy. That's why.

20:26

Okay, so continuing, none of this makes their guideline, the truth, we see it in the binary thinking that one must be right and the other must be wrong, that for their adult weight management guidelines to remain correct, they must tear down any ideas that say otherwise. We see it in the urgency to respond immediately we see in the white martyr and white savior responses both at and and in our communities. We see it in the power hoarding, because because fat people were not at the table black. Indeed, indigenous and other people of color were underrepresented at the table, and the Asda and haze community was not at the table. This underscores a reality of our work. While we work to make health care less harmful in the now we ultimately cannot reform a system whose core and foundation is white supremacy. The review conducted by the end adult weight management team was limited in many ways, the first and most important of which was conducting an AMA Anana analysis on Hayes as an intervention for adult weight management. As many of you reading this will likely already know the Health at Every Size principles reflect the research that weight does not need to be quote managed, that pursuit of weight loss is not effective in making fat people thin nor is a minimal amount of weight loss, weight loss by most to attempt to do so sustainable over the long term, blah, blah, blah and more but that of the five outcomes they analyze that make up their recommendation, the three of them are anti antithetical to health, every size principles, lower BMI, percent weight loss and smaller waist circumference. For the other two outcomes, blood pressure and quality of life, only two articles each were included to draw their conclusions. Interestingly, only studies specifically using the term quality of life were included other studies which included similar measures, but use terms like psychological distress were not included in the team's analysis for quality of life. Yeah, because, you know, psychological distress is what a lot of people experience on a diet. So, yeah, that's important to look at. Another major limitation of their analysis was that Haze is a singular intervention, rather than an approach to health that reflects existing research, most of most of which does not explicitly explicitly name Health at Every Size. Any intervention that improves health markers, regardless of weight is part of the Hayes toolkit. So just a little thing in there just to make sure that we understand that is that not everyone? References health, every size in their research, not everyone is aware of it. But we will have research that says, hey, if you if you lower your stress, your health is improved. If you are no go fishing twice a week, your stress levels are improved, and therefore your health is improved. So those types of studies are not going to be linked to health every size. But it is part of the Health at Every Size paradigm, right? Because it's not saying you need to lose weight to be healthy. It's it's saying that health is a very complicated topic, and there's lots of different ways to be healthy. Okay. And, you know, outside of losing weight, people of all sizes have the same outcomes, right? So any intervention that improves health markers, regardless of weight is part of the Hayes toolkit, the search was limited to papers, naming haze or non die in the intervention, along with other inclusion criteria, such as only including programs overseen by dieticians, and only including studies that were limited to fat people, which is problematic, right? You know, we're only going to let this study count. If it's overseen by dieticians. Why, why, why is why why, why.

24:42

And only looking at Fat people well, you know, only looking at Fat people, we can't say, oh, yeah, let's let you know, we need to look at a wide variety of sizes of people to see how you know fat people do compared to to straight size people how this gender compares to that gender, how you know, all of these different variables and so they're saying no, only Fat people? Well, we can't see if that intervention worked for straight size people, and also worked equally well for fat people, you know. Okay, so the result of their search choices, including the mischaracterization of health, every size led to the identification of seven total studies included in their review. So what they did was they looked for Health at Every Size as a tool to help people lose weight, how much evidence are we going to find to say that how for every size is going to help people lose weight? No one says, Oh, my God. Okay, so despite lacking sufficient evidence to make claims about hey, they decided to write a recommendation that Hays interventions not be used, though none of the study showed harm, and none of the reported health outcomes measured worsened measures worsened during haze interventions. For example, one of the papers included was designed to measure heart rate recovery time, their results showed significant improvements in this measure in the haze group compared to the control group. This paper was only used in the analysis for BMI as an outcome by the team. Other studies showed improvements in dietary quality LDL cholesterol and binge eating, these outcomes were not evaluated. And these results were not considered in making the proposed guideline statements. Events like these remind us why the community elected to trademark Health at Every Size and haze. And why the community chose to have a community led organization hold the trademark, white supremacy and fatphobia will continue to rise up to discredit our work. haze was not created by any one individual and continues to evolve with our community. Likewise, we collectively protect it against efforts like this by banding together by remembering that their attempts cannot take away what we have built as trauma inducing and violence as they are we as the proud that the organization has come so far to be able to respond quickly and thoughtfully to events such as these. And we're even more proud to return to our work of building a new world with liberation for all at the center. Yeah, so loved that loved that loved that. And others have gone in even deeper to the particular the particular recommendations and the evidence I looked at now, it's very interesting that if you want to see the evidence that they be looked at, so if you want links to what they looked at, you have to pay them for it. Of course, which again, hello, white supremacy, hello gatekeeping is just and it's not like, they didn't pay for these studies, right? They're just like, hey, here's a list of here's a list of the links that we here's a list of the studies that we looked at. Right? So it doesn't cost them anything to say, Yeah, we looked at study A B C, D is behind a paywall. Of course, of course, and somebody makes it harder, it makes it harder for the average person, the average dietitian who's not that familiar with this, if not, has not seen the backlash to to go in and be like, oh, I want to know, I want to go in and have a look and see, you know, getting it a little deeper. It's behind a paywall, they'll probably just lay out whatever, you know, I would I'd be like, Wow, whatever, you know, they know what they're talking about. They've done the research, therefore, I can just you know, I'll just don't just take it for face value. I know that Haze is bad. I know that the non diet approach is bad. Which Yeah, gets on my floppy terms. So let's have a look at going in a little bit deeper as the problems in here and turning it over to Reagan Chasteen and Reagan's newish I guess in the last few months, Regan has got a substack newsletter thing. So basically you subscribe, so I paid like 50 bucks for the year to get

29:30

twice, three thrice weekly emails from Reagan, where Reagan is writing these fucking amazing pieces, I think yeah, so you can get them for free. Yeah, you can because I'm linking to this thing. So I don't think you don't have to pay but if you want to, you can and you can pay like a monthly thing, which is probably just a few bucks, right? 50 bucks for the year. So consider doing that. I'll link to it in the show notes. But the what I'm going to pull quotes from I'm not gonna read the whole thing, which is a Reagan, the title is, is the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics choosing weight stigma over science question mark? Answer. Yes, that's me adding that, yes as the answer. But some key points here that we're going to look at. So headline of this paragraph is, so here's the issue. So here's the issues that Reagan is pointing out. So first is body size as pathology. So, quoting first they are adopting the concept that simply existing in a higher weight body, regardless of actual health status is a pathology to be solved by weight loss, including using first person language, which has been championed by those who sell dangerous and expensive weight loss myth, methodologies make me wonder if they are in some way aligned with those interests, by the way. So Reagan has I've spoken about this on the on the blog before and Reagan has spoken about this. The person first language, which originally came from the disability community, and is very controversial in that community. A lot of people say they like it, a lot of people say that they really don't like it. And it's it's super stigmatizing. And so person first language is saying someone with fatness versus saying a fat person. And the reason why the critiques on on that is that it's, it's again, making it seem like fatness is such a such horrible thing that we, we don't want to say they are fat, you know, like we don't have to say, person with brown hair. Because we're not offended, we're not worried about offending someone, because they have brown hair. Because we don't think that brown hair is a bad thing. Having a fat body isn't a bad thing. And so we don't need to be using first person first language or like it is and it's kind of like their same with euphemisms. And but even more so with the Oh words, which has even more layers of shit on top of it. So anyway, just a little sideline up like my commentary on these on these articles. They recommend that all higher weight people be given traditional weight loss interventions in order to quote improve BMI percent weight loss, waist circumference, blood pressure and quality of life. Note that three of their five goals focus on body size and not health. One way to entrench yourself in the weight loss paradigm is to make body size manipulation rather than actual health, the goal of the intervention they've tripled down on this here. I don't believe that weight loss is shown to be ethical evidence based intervention to low to lower blood pressure. But we'll get into that in a moment. Suggesting body size manipulation is as a way to improve quality of life life suggests that people who experience weight stigma should just change themselves to suit their oppressors as a queer person who came out in the mid 90s. This has echoes to me of the ways that so called Conversion therapy, or suggested just solve homophobia for queer people by making a straight. Since weight loss fails the vast majority of the time, this pins their higher weight clients hopes of a better life on that intervention that almost never works, and an industry that blames his victims for the interventions, failures. And so she continues there. Another one of the titles is weight loss as an ethical evidence based intervention. And that's one of the problems we've spoken about this many times on the show how it's not an evidence, evidence based intervention. So I won't go into that. But the next point is very small amounts of weight loss, create, quote, health benefits. And so that's what they're saying. And it's saying that if you lose a little bit of weight, you are going to see health benefits. And this is what Reagan says. Their guidelines utilize a claim created not through clinical trials, but through attrition due to these abject failure of weight loss interventions, that three to 5% weight loss can result in cardio metabolic health improvements. So in the case of a 200 pound person, we are talking about only six to 10 pounds.

34:27

Continuing guidelines, specifically against weight neutral care, so let me just like wrap up that last one actually, do we really think that losing six to 10 pounds is going to result in quote, health benefits? I mean, where's the evidence? You know, you're gonna lose six pounds and then be like, yeah. No, you know, that's not gonna happen. And also like, just to recognize that some of the things that people do To lose weight, like maybe changing in the moving their body, diversifying what they and things like that could be helpful towards changing health outcomes. Marginally. But, you know, just a side note there. Okay, so guidelines specifically against weight neutral care. So that's one of the problems. The first thing to notice is that by creating outcome goals based on size slash BMI, rather than actual health, they are trying to discredit weight neutral interventions on the basis that they don't create weight change. This is a common trick of the weight loss industry and the research they fund. If you make weight loss, a target outcome, then you discredit weight neutral interventions from the start. If you make health improvements, the desired outcomes, then weight neutral interventions are shown to provide great benefits with less harm, it's helpful to recognize this trick that is used to continue to advance a weight loss paradigm by putting the focus on size instead of actual health. Also, by a new naming haze and anti diet, they have ignored the more general category of weight neutral interventions. That's exactly what as I was saying is that you know, we've got this kind of the official term, the term that they've they've trademarked but then there are weight neutral interventions, which fall under the umbrella of it, but they don't have that name, health every size. So they're just ignoring anything, which is weight neutral, right? So Reagan ends with broader questions, given the fact that and is so blatantly not just ignoring research around the failure rate and potential harm of the proposed interventions. But in fact, actually attacking the evidence based weight neutral paradigm, I think we need to be asking some serious overall questions about these guidelines. And the and one, are the people creating these guidelines ignorant of the research? Or are they unable to understand it? Or do they know about it and understand it, but are going against it on purpose? If the former why are they in charge of writing proposed guidelines? If the latter, why two? Is this profit driven? Are the people driving these recommendations financially invested in the weight loss paradigm? Are their funders? Is this about their pharmaceutical ties are some critical mass of their members so invested in selling weight loss that they are pressuring the organization to create guidelines that go against the science? Three? Are these decisions political, the and does significant lobbying and has put out numerous papers supporting the weight loss paradigm, they are ignoring the evidence and doubling down in order to avoid having to say that they've been wrong? Are they ignoring the evidence and having to say that they've been wrong for is their goal to avoid competition with those dieticians who are working from an evidence based weight neutral perspective by threatening the work and careers of dietitians who won't swear fealty to the weight loss paradigm. So that is Regan Chasteen. And again, links to everything in the show notes. And I want to share one one last thing if you say an Instagram post from softening dot nutrition, which points

38:39

out that the evidence Oh God, let me just read this. Okay, so this is from softening nutrition.

38:52

And it's a multi slide, Instagram post. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics evidence analysis library EAL practice guidelines for treating individuals in larger bodies are stigmatizing oppressive and harmful and indirect opposition to providing passionate inclusive equitable care for all folks. Okay, so AMD and then we've got another acronym here, here EA L. So the AMD have added this to the evidence analysis library. Okay, so EAL, that's what that is. Let me go to the next slide. The E L claims to be a quote synthesis of the best, most relevant nutritional research on important dietetic practice questions. Okay, and then there's some other words here and we go here to slide five. That's their recommendation on how much calories someone should be consuming is the same energy needs of a two to three year old toddler and will likely result in draught stick under feeding of any adult body. So not only is this unsustainable, but it's also wildly unethical as it prescribed restricted disordered eating patterns, defaults in already stigmatized bodies, putting them at even higher risk for developing an eating disorder. And here's the thing that I really want to share here. Okay. Statement 4.6 recommends that registered dieticians do not use health every size or non diet approach to quote improve BMI, blah, blah, blah. So it says full stop. Note, the grading of the recommendation listed here for this statement is to D, as outlined in the beginning of their guideline, two. So there's one and two, two equals weak strength of recommendation, and D. So you have ABCD, very low strength of evidence, basically, the least evidence based guideline grading possible. So they're saying we're making these recommendations, but the strength of the evidence we're providing is very weak. It's like, they've given themselves an F, in brackets, F. But you know, the average person looking at this is they're not gonna, they're gonna see that at the end of the sentence that says brackets 2d, you're gonna be like, Oh, okay, 2d is like that's the link to a reference. That's like, for some note at the bottom, you're not going to be like, okay, to D. What does that mean? I'm going to look it up, I'm going to go and have a look, oh, two means this D means that you just don't look at that stuff. Right? Yeah, so it's just it's kind of funny. It's kind of funny. It's not, you know, but it's a you know, it's like they tell on themselves, right? They tell on themselves. But sometimes you have to do a little bit of digging to, to get them to tell on themselves. You know, when you get these studies of like, oh, massive weight loss in participants of a study shows that anyone can lose weight, and then it's like, massive weight loss. And then you go and you look, and you say, you see the massive weight loss they're talking about is like three pounds. And then they're like the participants. Who were the participants? Oh, it was three mice in a lab. Oh, oh, really. And so you see this big like splashy kind of fat people are fucking horrible. And then you then you have to do a bit of digging. And a lot of times it means that you have to pay to get the information. And people don't do that, because it's sexier, just to be like, oh, yeah, fat people are horrible. Fat people need to lose weight, you know, you know. So anyway, so to summarize the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, and released guidelines on how to treat fat patients. And this was during Eating Disorder Awareness Week, and during Black History Month, which is flabbergasting considering their recommendations are so harmful to black people and other people of color, and those who have a history of disordered eating or eating disorders. So perfect timing. Amazing. I love it. Their recommendations are to eat as many calories in a day that a toddler needs and so eat like a two to three year old. That's how many calories that you as an adult are allowed.

43:49

And then they say do not subscribe to Health at Every Size, or the non diet approach as these are not effective. These are not effective, and making fat people thin. Which they got right they are right, how they resize won't make fat people thin because that is not what it is designed to do. And it's not what it is about. So and Andy even share in their recommendations that the evidence that they have put forth to support their claims, is graded to D which means the quote weakest and lowest strength evidence. So they're telling on themselves that this evidence is pretty shit that they're putting forward. So if you think that ans recommendations are as fucked up as many people do, then you can go and tell them, their recommendations are open for public comment until March 25 2022. There's going to be a link around here somewhere for you to be able to do that. It's very quick and easy. He is going to take probably about a minute of your time. So go tell them if you think that it's pretty fucked up that they're recommending fat people. Only as much as a toddler to be healthy. So that is our episode today. Thank you for hanging out with me. I appreciate it. Don't have anything to tell, you know? Yeah. And I think I don't think I'm hungry. So I'm going to go and get some lunch, you poos algae, or do you know what? Oh my god, some of you are going to be like, No, duh, like. Okay, so, because of my dieting throughout my life, I had never eaten a kebap because I was like, No, I will never eat such a thing. I roll I roll. Anyway. And so and then, for the last however many years, multiple years I've been a vegetarian. And as you know, I've spoken on the episode if you don't know, recently, in the last couple of months, my body was like, I want some meat, please. And so I said, okay, buddy, here you go. Here's some meat. Anyway, there is a kebab place across from my my house and it has these like, I've gone in there and got like falafel before. Very nice. And the kebab thing that they've got looks really lovely. And anyway, so I went in there and I said all cannot go on. I'll have a try every chicken. I was waiting nervous, because, you know, I'm still kind of new to meat, right? It was so fucking Oh my God. Oh, like the meat was like kind of a little bit like because it'd been, it's, you know, they have it on that rolly thing. And then it's like gets, like browned was like kind of like a little bit like, not crunchy, but you know, kind of a little bit. Which was really nice. I went I've since I had that that was maybe like two weeks ago, I've gone back and I've had three I've had three and three kebabs in total as well because then as well with the kebab. You can get a and it'll give you a little cup of lentil soup. And the lentil soup of man so good. And I was just like shit. Fuck, I mean diet culture. And probably you know, like in me being like it's gonna be not good because it's you know, on a spit or something so probably racism as well has stopped me having this joy in my life of this I'm 37 and my whatever the things that I haven't eat because you know, I haven't you know, sometimes you haven't tried something because you've never had the chance so you've not been exposed to it but I've definitely had many chances to eat kebabs. And of course there are some might some kebabs are probably not as nice you know, the type of stuff that you know, you get get after a night out and but this is really nice. And all of the things like the joys that diet culture takes from us, right, man, I'm not. I'm not going to go get one for lunch now.

48:07

Am I? I'm thinking about that lentil soup that lentil soup was good. Yeah, I'm gonna go. I'm gonna get one for lunch. Yeah, it's across the street. It's across the street. I'm

48:17

looking fabulous. This is gonna do it. There we go. Go. Thanks for lunch recommendation, everyone that great one good word. Okay, so thanks for hanging out with me and have a wonderful rest of your day. Stay fierce fatties. And I'll see you in a while. Alligator goodbye thanks for listening to the episode and if you feel ready to get serious about this work and want to know when the doors open to fears fattier Academy which is my signature program, where I teach all about how to overcome your fat phobic beliefs and learn to love your fat body. Then go to first party.com forward slash waitlist again that is phase fatty.com. Forward slash waitlist to get your name on the waitlist. For when first Mattie Academy my signature program opens