Putting Exercise Amounts on Food Labels Is A Dangerous Idea

WTF are you doingToday I’m writing about the horribly misguided idea of putting exercise amounts on food labels. Before I get too far into it, I want to point out that this may be triggering to those who could develop, have, or are recovering from disordered eating and/or eating disorders.

Some UK researchers are trying to suggest that food labels should include “how much activity it would take to burn off food.” They are calling it PACE (Physical Activity Calorie Equivalent) and they claim it could “combat ob*sity.”

There’s so much wrong with this that I hardly know where to begin.

First of all, when I hear the phrase “combat ob*sity” I imagine someone rushing at me, wearing boxing gloves. All these metaphors that are used to discuss what are supposed to be health interventions for fat people are telling, in their common theme of violence. Combating… tackling… war on… – these are all things that harm, not help, their victims. It’s another reminder that they want us thin or dead and they don’t seem to care which.

They are claiming that this is based in research. In reality, the The UK Royal Society for Public Health wanted to use PACE labeling and created a project team who seem to have been tasked to find a way to say that the research supported it (anyone who learned scientific method at the fourth-grade science fair knows that this has already gone awry.)

They cobbled together the results of 14 small studies, each of which had a different design, and almost none of which were carried out in real-world settings. The studies found that in a single incident of reading a PACE type label (typically in a non-real-world setting) people consumed fewer calories. They then extrapolated from that single incident to three meals and two snacks a day to come up with a number of calories not eaten that sounded more impressive.

Then the study’s author put out a statement that said “Public health agencies may want to consider the possibility of including policies to promote it as a strategy that contributes to the prevention and treatment of ob*sity and related diseases.”

Except that’s not what they found. All they found that in one incident of using a Pace label, a small group of people ate a few less calories in that one incidence. (Seriously, the number of words in their press release that mean “maybe, we don’t actually know” would be impressive if it wasn’t so awful – might, may, maybe, linked, suggests, associated, some promise, likely to, could, the list goes on and on. They have not drawn a single solid conclusion. Not. One.

And here we see one of the major problems with research around weight and health- it’s held to an impossibly, shockingly, low standard. As a former research methods student, I can tell you that making the claims they are based on the “research” they’ve done would cause a student in a Beginning Research Methods class to fail their assignment.

Then there are the issues with the actual calculation.

“Under the proposed system, a small bar of chocolate would carry a label informing consumers that it would take 23 minutes of running or 46 minutes of walking to burn off the 230 calories it contains.”

The number of calories that are burned during a minute of activity varies wildly from person to person, based on many factors that include everything from the person’s weight, muscle mass, balance of slow- and fast-twitch muscle, and level of fitness, to how fast the person is running or walking, what kind of surface they are doing it on, and how hilly it is.

The lack of even the most basic science here is staggering. And that’s not the worst of it.

You see, it’s not just fat people these so-called scientists don’t care about, it’s also people of all sizes who may develop, have, or are recovering from, eating disorders. Because the idea that you have to use activity to earn food or that you should “burn off” off food using exercise is a precursor to, and common behavior of eating disorders.

So people who are supposed to be public health professionals are going to risk perpetuating eating disorders, some of the most deadly mental illnesses, because in a few small studies a few people ate a few fewer calories one time?

At the very least, interventions that claim to be pro-public health should not leave the public less healthy. This is beyond irresponsible.

Was this helpful? If you appreciate the work that I do, you can support my ability to do more of it with a one-time tip or by becoming a member. (Members get special deals on fat-positive stuff, a monthly e-mail keeping them up to date on the work their membership supports, and the ability to ask me questions that I answer in a members-only monthly Q&A Video!)

Like this blog?  Here’s more cool stuff:

Wellness for All Bodies ProgramA simple, step-by-step, super efficient guide to setting and reaching your health goals from a weight-neutral perspective.  This program can be used by individuals, or by groups, including as a workplace wellness program!

Price: $25.00 ($10 for DancesWithFat members – register on the member page)

Body Love Obstacle Course

This e-course that includes coaching videos, a study guide, and an ebook with the tools you need to create a rock-solid relationship with your body. Our relationships with our bodies don’t happen in a vacuum, so just learning to see our beauty isn’t going to cut it. The world throws obstacles in our way – obstacles that aren’t our fault, but become our problem. Over the course of this program, Ragen Chastain, Jeanette DePatie, and six incredible guest coaches will teach you practical, realistic, proven strategies to go above, around, and through the obstacles that the world puts in front of you when it comes to living an amazing life in the body you have now.
Price: $99.00
($79.00 for DancesWithFat members – register on the member page)

Love It! 234 Inspirations And Activities to Help You Love Your Body
This is filled with thoughtful advice from the authors Jeanette DePatie, Ragen Chastain, and Pia Sciavo-Campo as well as dozens of other notable names from the body love movement, the book is lovingly illustrated with diverse drawings from size-positive artist Toni Tails.
Price: $9.99 softcover, $7.99 Kindle, ($6.95 + free shipping for DancesWithFat Members)

Non-Members click here for all the details and to register!

Book and Dance Class Sale!  I’m on a journey to complete an IRON-distance triathlon, and I’m having a sale on all my books, DVDs, and digital downloads to help pay for it. You get books and dance classes, I get spandex clothes and bike parts. Everybody wins! If you want, you can check it out here!  (DancesWithFat Members get an even better deal, make sure to make your purchases from the Members Page!)

Book Me!  I’d love to speak to your organization. You can get more information here or just e-mail me at ragen at danceswithfat dot org!

I’m (still!) training for an Iron-distance triathlon! You can follow my journey at www.IronFat.com .

If you are uncomfortable with my offering things for sale on this site, you are invited to check out this post.

9 thoughts on “Putting Exercise Amounts on Food Labels Is A Dangerous Idea

  1. I wish they would put a label on food: This provides enough energy to use your brain for x amount of time – perhaps that would trigger people to REALLY use their brain instead of selling random “facts” as science 😉

  2. Very nicely put.
    I think it’s horrendous bullshit. Never would suggest this.
    Yet, there is another side to look at: our bodies need energy just to function,not counting in any exercise at all. Some might understand (children especially) that you need to burn all the food you eat through exercise, thus ending at, well, zero energy for your body to perform things like, let’s say, regular heartbeat. And eventually, if continuing it long enough, they would die.

    1. Yeah, if you are poor, and you can barely afford food, and you know you need to WORK, and you know what sort of work you’ll do, and how much of it, you can then read these labels and figure out the most cost-effective food to buy to give you enough calories to do the things you need to do to get by.

      Of course, that’s just taking into account actual work, and not breathing, pumping blood, actually digesting the food, thinking, speaking, and just generally being awake.

  3. The Whole Systems approach strikes again.

    “And here we see one of the major problems with research around weight and health- it’s held to an impossibly, shockingly, low standard. As a former research methods student, I can tell you that making the claims they are based on the “research” they’ve done would cause a student in a Beginning Research Methods class to fail their assignment.”

    It’s Whole Systems. They know that. It’s right in the mission statement they proudly posted that they don’t actually expect any of this crap to work. The purpose of the Whole Systems Approach to Obesity- which again, *this is not me speculating,* this is how the people who created this program describe their own creation in their “Tackling Obesities” pamphlet- is to normalize cruelty towards fat people and the suspension of fat people’s civil rights to reduce potential public blowback to future large-scale *cough* “obesity treatment plans” that would currently be considered too cruel or illegal to enact. Tackling Obesities: boring as shit to read, chilling as hell to comprehend. That’s where this is coming from.

  4. Be lucky if all they are running at us with is “boxing gloves”…

    Have seen bits of this. Scary thought. How to teach everyone how to eat JUST ENOUGH to keep breathing! Based on Whose body and metabolism I wonder? Doesn’t matter, ANY resulting fat can easily and OBVIOUSLY be attributed to TOO MANY CALORIES- resulting in what next? Prison/work it off house sentence? They are not kidding when they say “War On.” We are moving into a very scary place. People can say Look at how easy we (governmental oversight) have made it, JUST FOLLOW THE RULES and you too will Be OK, ie, NOT FAT! How much longer till it is not just knee jerk thoughts about transgressors but actual actions to “re educate the non-thin”? God help us being in the path of anyone’s “For their own good.”

  5. This whole concept made me so angry! And for exactly the point you made, that everyone burns calories differently. This is so ridiculous on any level.

    And I wish we could destroy the idea that you can balance calories in and calories out and get some magically perfect weight.

    1. Can’t have it. It moved into Commandment status in 1992.

      Sure as they will use a fat person eating, well anything, as the example for Gluttony, in movies when doing the deadly sins…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.