Narratives for Obesity: Effects of Weight Loss and Attribution on Empathy and Policy Support

The implications of defining obesity as a disease: a report from the Association for the Study of Obesity 2021 annual conference

Unlike various countries and organisations, including the World Health Organisation and the European Parliament, the United Kingdom does not formally recognise obesity as a disease. This report presents the discussion on the potential impact of defining obesity as a disease on the patient, the healthcare system, the economy, and the wider society. A group of speakers from a wide range of disciplines came together to debate the topic bringing their knowledge and expertise from backgrounds in medicine, psychology, economics, and politics as well as the experience of people living with obesity. The aim of their debate was not to decide whether obesity should be classified as a disease but rather to explore what the implications of doing so would be, what the gaps in the available data are, as well as to provide up-to-date information on the topic from experts in the field. There were four topics where speakers presented their viewpoints, each one including a question-and-answer section for debate. The first one focused on the impact that the recognition of obesity could have on people living with obesity regarding the change in their behaviour, either positive and empowering or more stigmatising. During the second one, the impact of defining obesity as a disease on the National Health Service and the wider economy was discussed. The primary outcome was the need for more robust data as the one available does not represent the actual cost of obesity. The third topic was related to the policy implications regarding treatment provision, focusing on the public's power to influence policy. Finally, the last issue discussed, included the implications of public health actions, highlighting the importance of the government's actions and private stakeholders. The speakers agreed that no matter where they stand on this debate, the goal is common: to provide a healthcare system that supports and protects the patients, strategies that protect the economy and broader society, and policies that reduce stigma and promote health equity. Many questions are left to be answered regarding how these goals can be achieved. However, this discussion has set a good foundation providing evidence that can be used by the public, clinicians, and policymakers to make that happen.

Developing theory-driven narrative messages with personal stories: A step-by-step guide

OBJECTIVE

Narratives are commonly utilized in health promotion and behavior change interventions due to their efficacy over didactic or expository interventions. While grounding narratives in behavioral theory may render them more effective, balancing the integration of theoretical and creative aspects of the narrative development process while maintaining authenticity is challenging. Thus, this manuscript describes a rigorous process through which researchers can intentionally integrate theory and personal stories for health interventions.

METHODS

The process for creating theory-driven narratives involves the following steps: (1) defining the purpose of the narratives, (2) selecting a guiding theory, (3) collecting personal testimonials, (4) immersing self into testimonials, (5) identifying central narratives and important variations, (6) considering additional theories, (7) piecing quotes into cohesive stories, (8) filling in the gaps, and (9) checking for resonance.

RESULTS

To exemplify this step-by-step process, we provide a case study from our research involving the development of a psychoeducational intervention to model information seeking strategies for managing cancer-related uncertainty among women who have recently tested positive for pathogenic genetic variants that increase risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

We discuss special considerations for developing theory-driven narrative interventions and reflect on how this rigorous step-by-step process can be adapted by other researchers.

Association of public explanations of why children struggle and support for policy solutions using a national sample

Purpose

Despite evidence showing the importance of structural determinants for child well-being and the existence of policies that can promote child well-being, many communities are not adopting these policies. Limited awareness of structural determinants may explain this gap. This study establishes the public's recognition of structural determinants and their associations with support for policies that promote child well-being.

Methods

Secondary analyses of survey data collected in 2019 from a random sample of 2496 adults in the United States. This survey asked why some children "struggle" (e.g., do poorly in school, use drugs, or get involved in crime). Respondents could select individual (e.g., lack of effort) and structural (e.g., low wages) explanations. Respondents were also asked about their support for policies that are supportive of children and families.

Results

Stronger beliefs of structural explanations were associated with greater support for policies that strengthen family economics, family-friendly work, and afford access to high-quality early childcare and education. Beliefs in individual explanations were inversely associated with support for these policies.

Conclusions

These findings suggest increasing recognition of the structural determinants that hinder child development may help increase support for policies that are effective in improving children's outcomes.

Weight stigma and obesity-related policies: A systematic review of the state of the literature

Weight stigma is an important issue colliding with obesity-related policies; both have population health and social impacts. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature that combined the concepts of stigma, obesity, and policy. We searched PsycINFO, Medline, Scopus, and Google Scholar for peer-reviewed articles amalgamating terms relevant to stigma, obesity, and policy. Of 3219 records identified, 47 were included in the narrative synthesis. Two key types of studies emerged: studies investigating factors associated with support for obesity-related policies and those exploring policy implementation and evaluation. We found that support for nonstigmatizing obesity-related policies was higher when obesity was attributed as an environmental rather than individual problem. An undercurrent theme suggested that views that blame individuals for their obesity were associated with support for punitive policies for people living in larger bodies. Real-world policies often implicitly condoned stigma through poor language choice and conflicting discourse. Our findings inform recommendations for policy makers that broader socioecological stigma-reduction approaches are needed to fully address the issue of weight stigma in obesity-related policies. Efforts are needed in the research and policy sectors to understand how to improve the design and support of nonstigmatizing obesity-related policies.

Practical Approaches to Treating Obesity: Patient and Healthcare Professional Perspectives

Obesity is a chronic and treatable disease carrying risk for numerous health complications, including cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus and certain cancers. While there is a great need to address the topic in clinical practice, healthcare professionals (HCPs) often struggle to initiate conversations about weight. In this paper, guidance on how to raise and address the subject of weight with individuals is provided from an HCP and patient perspective using the 5As framework. This model facilitates advising individuals on the benefits of weight loss and supports them to develop achievable and sustainable weight management plans. With obesity rates still rising across the globe, it is imperative that more HCPs become skilled in raising and addressing the issue.