[caption id="attachment_10599" align="alignleft" width="300"] Danielle DeCosmo, an
Read Part One of this post here:
Wait a minute.
People who are overweight and/or obese have a problem controlling how much they eat. That’s bad for their health.
However, the inability to exercise complete, rational control over your behavior at all times is the hallmark of being a living, sentient, human being.
Fat people are not more damaged than other people. They’re not less stable.
Fat people are just really, really unlucky. Everyone has issues, imperfections, foibles, big and small. Heavy people wear a personal shortcoming externally, for anyone to see and judge. And pay them less.
Lisa didn’t become a better mom when she became a thinner mom. The fact that Lisa was not able to stop overeating, and even her admission that, as a working, single mom she frequently fed her kids cheap, take-out, fatty pizza (shocking!) doesn’t mean that she ever failed to meet their emotional or material needs.
Weight is not a moral or character issue. It’s a health issue. But the Biggest Loser is relentless in characterizing contestants as initially weak, childlike, and even, in trainer Bob’s words, “broken” people.
This week, 11 million Americans watched unemployed Mississippian Patrick walk away with the title of “The Biggest Loser” and $250,000 on the tenth season’s live finale.
Patrick’s win, like the $100,000 at-home prize for Mark, felt canned and dull.
The only spicy note in the unveiling of the victors was the tension between the two champs. Mark was one of two players this season, along with Jessie, who felt betrayed by Patrick’s cash-rules-everything-around-me vote to send them home. However, viewers were assured that they all love each other now. Phew!
Surprise! Both winning men were the final contestant weighed in their categories.
This disturbing tale begins with a question: are children taking psycho-stimulants like Prozac and Ritalin because of scientific information or commercial use? Shockingly, all the evidence favors the latter. After several doctors and a Pulitzer Prize nominated journalist began investigating, it was found that no valid studies have been conducted illustrating the benefits of these drugs. What was found was that the research was mostly anecdotal.
But how did these drugs then become so pervasive in our lives, especially in the lives of children? The answer lies in the clever marketing strategy of pharmaceutical companies. Children were the last “untapped” market, and once targeted for consumption, this industry enlisted the help of doctors. Suddenly psychiatrists received grants and were sent to conferences, all which drummed in the same information: some brains were chemically imbalanced and our drugs can help them. Through this system, psycho-stimulants became the method of calming restless children; all the while the perverse side effects were kept secret. It is through the use of these medications that normal human brains become chemically imbalanced and these medications can even cause brain atrophy.
On last night’s Biggest Loser, Patrick, a sweet, aw-shucks unemployed 27 year-old husband and dad of two from Vicksburg, MS, was crossing the finish line of a marathon on the California coast. Weighing in somewhere in the mid 200s (the show’s official weigh-in had not yet happened), he made a respectable time of 5 hours and 45 minutes.
But there was another man talking to him. It was …. also Patrick, taped back when he weighed 400 pounds, just three months prior. Disconcertingly referring to himself as “we,” meaning, “the fat me and the skinny me,” he also commented:
“I don’t believe there’s any way that I could run a marathon. I’m not sure that I could even finish it. It would take all day. That’s like climbing Mt. Everest or somethin’….”
Moments later as viewers continued to watch our heroic final four dieters run, jog and walk to the marathon finish, they heard from Fonzie-like Staten Islander Frado, a family man and financial trader: “You can do this. If I can do this, anybody can do this.”
It was marathon night on Biggest Loser, where the four remaining dieters each completed a 26.2 mile course. Ada ran it in a competitive burst with a final time of 4.5 hours while Elizabeth surely walked most of her 7.5 hours. Regardless, for the series’ penultimate episode, it was the perfect, symbolic choice. Nothing could be a clearer demarcation of how far the losers have come, or a more perfect representation of how many missed opportunities America’s biggest health-related TV show has seen this season.
After all, a two-hour diet and exercise show which regularly pulls in between 7 and 12 million viewers has a pretty strong platform for disseminating encouraging information, right?
I may be in the cheering section when I hear others urging the transparent and shameless public discussion of health issues. The problem is that I don’t think I’ve ever been very good at it when it has been my health issue.
Which leads — prepare for a jarring transition — to my prostate. I had a biopsy done last Monday. I wanted to share some of what went through my mind as I hopped on the table doing deep breathing exercises, preparing for a distinctly unpleasant procedure.
For close to two decades, I have been teaching an undergraduate class at Hunter College that has examined the representation of disease and illness in media and culture. Much of the class has necessarily focused on HIV/AIDS and other health issues. In recent years, I have taught a related graduate version of the course. You’ll have to trust that in the classroom I have been able to speak about these topics explicitly and without shame.
And actually done it pretty well.
A few months ago I started a video project exploring food policy programs in New York City. Our news media is saturated with talk of healthy eating and diet-related disease – I was curious: what is happening in NY to address the problems with our food system and increase access to healthy, affordable food for city residents? What are some of our local discussions and controversies? In my next few blog posts I’ll share some of the people and projects (and policy initiatives) I’ve been profiling and talk about how it all adds up to a pretty vibrant and growing urban food movement.
There is much to be said about the debates and challenges surrounding anti-obesity initiatives. For example, a recent webinar: SNAP and Soda: whose business is it anyway? is worth watching. For this first post, however, I decided to share a story which gives plenty of cause for optimism: I’d like to introduce Fabienne and her cooking classes.
I met Fabienne one hot morning last summer in Corona, Queens, as she prepared to teach a nutrition lesson and cooking class at the local farmer’s market. As she maneuvered through the market she told me: “I grew up in a family that was always food centered… and then my mother got sick, she had heart disease. I saw how food had a big impact on this so I became interested in nutrition.”
Currently she works for the city health department’s Stellar Farmer’s Markets program. The program is based at farmer’s markets throughout the city, primarily in neighborhoods with high rates of chronic disease, that are home to majority low-income residents or folks enrolled in SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). Stellar provides a hands-on way for people to see cooking demos, sample seasonal produce, and receive “Health Bucks” – vouchers they can use to buy fruits and vegetables at the market and support local farmers.