Stuart W Flint

Obesity and discrimination: The next 'big issue'?

A concomitant increase has been observed between the prevalence of obesity and the stigmatization and discrimination of the condition. Despite reports of such negative experiences, there appears to be little deterrence for individuals to behave in a non-discriminatory fashion towards the overweight and obese. This article focuses on an emergent academic, legal and medical debate concerning obesity and human well-being and its possible impacts in the workplace and on disability discrimination laws. The disability laws in the United Kingdom require employers and employees not to discriminate or harass their colleagues, yet the model of discrimination seen in the United Kingdom emerges from a historical basis where sex and race were accommodated by the Sex Discrimination Act (1975) and the Race Relations Act (1976) respectively, and laws prohibiting disability were introduced later by the Disability Discrimination Act (1995). These laws in conjunction required UK citizens in the workplace and beyond not to subject their fellow citizens, potential workmates and current employees to less favourable treatment and to provide reasonable adjustments in the workplace where discrimination was a possible outcome of behaviours or policy arrangements.

Obesity Discrimination in the Recruitment Process: “You’re Not Hired!”

Previous literature reports that obese persons are discriminated in the workplace. Evidence suggests that obese people are perceived as having less leadership potential, and in comparison to normal weight peers, are expected to be less successful. This study examined whether obese people are discriminated against when applying for employment. Three hypotheses were offered in line with previous research: (1) obese people are less likely to be assessed positively on personnel suitability than normal weight people; (2) obese people in active employment are more likely to be discriminated against than people in non-active employment; and (3) obese women are more likely to be discriminated against than obese men. 181 Participants were sampled from sedentary, standing, manual and heavy manual occupations. Participants rated hypothetical candidates on their suitability for employment. Employees also completed measures of implicit and explicit attitudes toward obesity. MANOVA was conducted to examine if obese candidates were discriminated against during the recruitment procedure. Results demonstrated that participants rated obese candidates as less suitable compared with normal weight candidates and when the weight status of the candidate was not revealed for work across the four workplace groups. Participant gender and weight status also impacted perceptions of candidates’ suitability for work and discrimination toward obese candidates was higher in participants from more physically demanding occupations. The study findings contribute to evidence that obese people are discriminated against in the hiring process and support calls for policy development.

Counter-conditioning as an intervention to modify anti-fat attitudes

This study examined the effect of anti-fat attitude counter-conditioning using positive images of obese individuals participants completed implicit and explicit measures of attitudes towards fatness on three occasions: no intervention; following exposure to positive images of obese members of the general public; and to images of obese celebrities. Contrary to expectations, positive images of obese individuals did not result in more positive attitudes towards fatness as expected and, in some cases, indices of these attitudes worsened. Results suggest that attitudes towards obesity and fatness may be somewhat robust and resistant to change, possibly suggesting a central and not peripheral processing route for their formation.

Menu labelling and food choice in obese adults: a feasibility study.

BackgroundTo date research examining the benefits of menu labelling in the UK is sparse. The aim of the present study was to examine the impact of menu labelling in a UK obese population.MethodsUsing a repeated measures design, 61 patients at a tier 3 weight management service completed four questionnaires to assess their food choice (control) and behaviour change when presented with 3 menu labelling formats (calorie content; nutrient content; and energy expenditure).ResultsAll three forms of labelling increased participants weight control concerns compared to the control condition. There was a significant difference in content of food ordered in the three menu labelling formats compared to the control condition. The calorie condition had the largest percentage decrease in calories selected followed by energy expenditure and nutrient content. However, no difference was observed between the three conditions in the desire for menu labelling in restaurants to be introduced in the UK.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that menu labelling should be enforced in the UK as it is both beneficial to promoting healthy eating and in demand. This study is the first to examine menu labelling in a UK obese population using energy expenditure equivalents to provide nutritional information.

Weight stigma in frequent exercisers: Overt, demeaning and condescending

The aim of this study was to qualitatively examine weight stigma in individuals who exercise frequently. In total, six focus groups, comprising 30 participants aged 18–25 years, were conducted using convenience sampling. All participants were frequent exercisers. Five themes emerged in the data with participants discussing bullying, the consequences of obesity, causes of obesity, lack of willpower and interventions to reduce obesity. This study is the first qualitative examination of weight stigmatisation in frequent exercisers, where the beliefs reported by focus group participants suggest that frequent exercisers stigmatise, discriminate and dehumanise obese people. Future research to examine the impact of weight stigma on exercise motivation and behaviour of obese people appears warranted.

Are we selling our souls? Novel aspects of the presence in academic conferences of brands linked to ill health

There is evidence linking unhealthy food and drink consumption to ill health such as diabetes.1–3 Counterintuitively, research demonstrating these links has been presented at national and international health promotion conferences sponsored by companies that manufacture and sell unhealthy food and drink; primarily conferences related to public health, sport and exercise, nutrition and dietetics.4 ,5 For example, Flint4 reported the presence of The Coca-Cola Co. at the European College of Sport Sciences (ECSS) conference in 2014, while in the same year Herick de Sa5 also noted that they were a sponsor at the Fifth International Congress on Physical Activity and Public Health. The Coca-Cola Co. have also been a yearly sponsor of the National Conference on Health Disparities in the USA. It seems unfathomable that such companies were present at health-related conferences where, for example within the ECSS mission statement, it is specified that the purpose includes the application of sport science knowledge to sports competition, performance, improving health, well-being, fitness and social relationships,6 and much of the research presented at the conference aimed to improve health and well-being. The Coca-Cola Co. were a Gold sponsor, an exhibitor and sponsored three streams of oral presentations at ECSS 2014. Likewise, McDonalds Corp. and other food companies have a history of sponsoring nutrition research and conferences. For example, in 2014 McDonalds Corp was a Gold sponsor at the California Dietetics Association conference in Pomona, USA. Furthermore, food and drink companies that produce unhealthy products such as McDonalds Corp. and The Coca-Cola Co. have been major sponsors of sports events such as the Olympics. More recently, these companies have increasingly …

Obesity stigmatisation from obesity researchers

Obesity stigmatisation has become a major topic of research, with empirical evidence showing neg ative consequences for people who are stigmatised. With research showing that obesity stigmatisation is widespread and that antifat attitudes are strong, there have been not only of diet in primary prevention. Thus, of fi ve protective patterns of health behaviour in men in America, diet was the fi rst of fi ve factors mentioned and had too been stressed for in women in America. Furthermore, diet in relation to disease was first mentioned in The Lancet in 1947, by Magnus Pyke and colleagues. In 2008, a prospective cohort study about the role of lifestyle factors showed, after 24 years of follow-up, that diet is of major importance to the health of American women. Thus, arguments could be made to suggest that Bauer and colleagues were non-specifi c in their four aims that did not emphasise diet in the prevention of chronic disease.

Weight Bias and the Training of Health Professionals to Better Manage Obesity: What Do We Know and What Should We Do?

Health professionals have a role in supporting patients with weight management. Good training is available but has yet to be widely implemented. The required content of training is clear except perhaps how to address negative attitudes that stem from obesity stigma. There is good evidence that healthcare professionals hold and perpetuate the negative stereotypes and attributions that are core elements within obesity stigma and weight bias; with consequences for relationships with patients and their experiences of care. There may also be consequences for health outcomes but more research is needed. Further studies should triangulate weight bias attitudes with robust observation of healthcare processes and outcomes. This will help determine whether training about weight bias can simply reside in the general preparation of healthcare professionals (as part of anti-discriminatory practice for example) or, whether it requires more active interventions to change practice.

Disability Discrimination and Obesity: The Big Questions?

Obesity discrimination in employment and recruitment has become a topic of focus for research examination with increasing reports of discrimination by colleagues and managers. Whilst a limited number of legal cases have emerged, disability law is consulted in line with the expectation of anti-discriminatory practices at work. In line with disability law, whether obesity is defined as a disability or not has an impact on the outcome of a court ruling. Ambiguity when defining obesity through either the medical or social model means there are many questions that remain unanswered which might lead to inconsistency in court rulings.

Lead by example: should sport take a stand against brands of unhealthy consumption?

Previous literature has highlighted the link between unhealthy food and drink consumption with chronic illness such as obesity and diabetes.1 However, unhealthy food and drink sponsorship in sport is common. Unhealthy food and drink is promoted through sport to encourage the formation of favourable attitudes towards unhealthy consumption. Thus, the counterintuitive association that sport, a generally healthy pursuit, has with brands of unhealthy food and drink consumption is a particular concern.