The world of health, nutrition and fitness is becoming increasingly confusing, with messages coming from multiple sources. While most of us are becoming aware that not everything we read on social media is true or credible, how do we navigate those statements and guidelines that seemingly come from respected resources in the form of public health messaging. From billboards, to leaflets in our doctor’s surgery, to television adverts, what and how we move and eat is big news.
There is no doubt that Obesity is on the Government’s agenda, and no-one can blame them when latest data reports that 25.3% of adults aged 18 years and above were living with obesity between November 2020 to 2021 (Active lives adult survey), where obesity is defined as an individual having a BMI (body mass index) of 30 or above. BMI is the ratio between height and weight and while it serves as a measure, it is not always seen as the most accurate, with many athletes with a larger but lean frame falling into this category by default, with no consideration to body composition. However presently, it is the criteria used for weight classification due to the fact that it is easy to collect and non-invasive.
However, regardless of the accuracy of using BMI as a marker, we know that being significantly overweight and/or obese carries more risk of developing chronic health conditions. Thus, the key focus of public health nutrition messaging is aimed at this target audience to encourage behaviour change and improve their health metrics. The problem is this is NOT EVERYONE.
Research reports that 16% of the UK population aged 16 years or over have been diagnosed with an eating disorder of some description.Similarly, research from 2021 reports that 3-14% of the exercising population have an exercise addiction. And then there are the rest of us who don’t fall into any of the categories mentioned above.
So the question is when we have these generalised sweeping statements and guidelines, how relevant or appropriate are they for everyone to consume?
Or more importantly should we be asking how do we add nuance to these statements so that they are more responsible?
When I saw this headline last week:
Whitty says, as new exercise guidance published my heart sank. Not because I necessarily disagree with the new research or findings, but because once again, there was no thought to those population groups where this will cultivate anxiety and encourage them to participate in behaviours that are just not necessary for them as they already do enough.
It was the same when the guidelines were being pushed through for calories on menus. The lack of scientific data demonstrating that this approach was unlikely to change eating habits in the designated target demographic was ignored. Additionally, no thought was given to the negative impact it would have on vulnerable individuals who have a complex relationship with food.
While there is no denying regular, moderate intensity exercise is good for our mental and physical well being, in some people this tips into an obsessive compulsive need which causes huge amounts of guilt, irritability and anxiety if they are forced to rest or miss an exercise session.
While the government exercise guidelines have not changed and are still recommending:
Across a week adults should accumulate at least 150 minutes of moderate intensity activity, such as brisk walking or cycling, or 75 minutes of vigorous activity such as running or a combination of these.
Additionally , strength activity should be done at least twice a week.
However, when discussing the new guidelines, Chris Whitty said, “adults should be physically active every day, any activity is better than none, and more is still better.”
It’s this I take issue with because in my clinic, one of the biggest issues we see are people doing too much and statements like the above help to validate their behaviour. We are often encouraging people to take 1-2 rest days a week to support their emotional and physical well being as well as trying to be more realistic about their overall load due to the presenting symptoms. So no Chris Whitty, more is not always better!
It is true, I am probably more sensitive to this type of headline due to my area of work. After all, I see the devastation and destruction over exercising can cause.
So how do you navigate this type of messaging?
I am by no means saying you should discard all public health guidance but what I am asking is that we all take some time to consider what is appropriate and relevant to your circumstances.
Exercise and nutrition should never be one size fits all. We are all unique. That is what makes us amazing. So many of us forget that genetics play such a huge part in who we are from what we look like, our personalities and also our abilities. We know that not everyone will be an Olympic athlete, regardless of how hard you train. Only a very small percentage of the population will have the physiological and genetic talent to take them to those heights.
With such variation and diversity in our lifestyles and bodies, why are we preaching the same approach for everyone?
My advice is always to find what works for your body, supports your life and helps you feel your best. Sustainable change comes from learning to listen to and understand your body, then building a programme around your individual needs, shaped by experts with real-world clinical experience supporting people of all backgrounds and needs.
You can find out more about personal fuelling by reading my books, More Fuel You and Fuel For Thought.
Sources:
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.