Today I was reading an article of hers which jolted me and got me to see a bunch of things differently than I usually do -- in one of those lightning-flash kinds of ways:
Many people who contacted me were told that it was simply impossible to properly diagnose someone of their BMI, or that treating them is a “waste of time” since they are likely to re-injure themselves anyway. One woman was told that, at 5’4, 250 pounds, she was simply to big to get an MRI.
I find that interesting because last week the following people received the absolute best medical treatment, including in some cases MRI, with no discussion of weight loss at all:
6’2, 308 pounds – knee injury – “class 3 obesity” (Super Fat!)
6’4, 285 pounds – arm injury – “class 2 obese”
6’4, 263 pounds – ankle injury – “class 1 obese”
6’3, 260 pounds – achiles injury – “class 1 obese”
These are, in fact, just a handful of “obese” people who were afforded evidence-based medical care for injuries without being required to lose weight and despite the fact that they are very, very likely to re-injure themselves.Read on:
The message, to me, is really clear:
- If you are male and are "obese" and play (American) football (especially for the NFL), you get one standard of care.
- If you are female and are "obese", it doesn't much matter what activities you're capable of -- international competitive dance being one -- and you get a different standard of care. One where you don't actually get treatment for what's wrong with you.
This leads me to ask:
- What activities do we, as a society, place value on?
- Which people are we willing to treat with evidence-based care, and which people do we demand undergo "treatments" that have no supporting evidence, but lots of supporting cultural narrative?
- Why do our cultural narratives support evidence-based care for one group, but not another?