MUST READ: An Open Apology to Weight Loss Clients

Standing, clapping, wiping away a tear. Bravo. Good find.

Stuff like this terrifies me. Good read though.

Such a great article! Thank you very much for posting

I really liked the post but I have a question. If this is so bad, why does MFP say that I should only eat 1200 calories a day? I am 5'3 and weigh 139 but would like to lose 10 to 15 pounds and I set my goal as 1 pound a week and I run 3 days a week for 1 hour each. If this isn't right, then what gives?

I think she's saying she told women to eat 1200 calories regardless of their BMR.

Thank you.

This was my story:

"I'm sorry because you were young and so beautiful and only there because your mother thought you needed to lose weight. And because there were too many of you like that. Girls who knew you were fine, but whose mothers pushed that belief out of you until you thought like she did. Until you thought there was something wrong with you. And the one time I confronted your mother, you simply got switched to a different consultant. I think I should have made more of a stink, but I didn't. I'm sorry because you were in high school and an athlete, and I pray that you weren't screwed up by that 1,500 calorie diet. Seriously, world? Seriously? A teenage girl walks in with no visible body fat and lots of muscle tone, tells you she's a runner and is happy with her weight... but her mother says she's fat and has to lose weight and so we help her do just that. As an individual, as women, as a company, hell, as a nation, we don't stand up for that girl? What is wrong with us? There ain't nothing right about that. Nothing."

You are brave for writing this. Blessings to you. And forgive yourself. k? xo

I read this article this morning and read some of the accompanying comments. I agree with one commentator who said the piece lacked any kind of information, it was very vague. It's a nice story, but without the flesh (which company? which clients, one or many? etc) it reads almost like a fan-faction!

IDK, don't you think the general sentiment is readily applicable regardless of the actual company or clients? I kinda feel like the message is readily transferable and applicable across companies and clients. Particularly given the rampant isomorphic tendencies in the weight loss industry generally. :-)

Like I said, it's a nice story, but it is, overall, a fluff piece.

It's similar to how I feel about the Dove commercials. Dove 'real women' campaign is beautiful on the surface, but then you realize the company is owned by Unilever which makes skin whitening products in Asia or has commercials which glamorize the female body for men's pleasure and it kind of detracts from the overall message.

I read this article this morning and read some of the accompanying comments. I agree with one commentator who said the piece lacked any kind of information, it was very vague. It's a nice story, but without the flesh (which company? which clients, one or many? etc) it reads almost like a fan-faction!

Right, I went to read the original. I liked the article, but was disappointed by the lack of ways to fix the problem. And frankly depressed by the "Meet Our Body Image Heroes" and comments beneath the article. I think the heros are great, however, placing them right beneath this article just reinforces the message that "1200-1500 cals" a day or overweight are the only options.

First off, kudos for posting, OP, and more for properly attributing the article to its source.

Second, to the above poster, one way to fix the problem was provided right there in the article and it's something that is said every day in these forums. I quote:

Just eat food. Eat real food, be active, and live your life. Forget all the diet and weight loss nonsense. It's really just that. Nonsense.

Put another way:

Eat less, move more.

There is no bad food or good food, only food.

And yes, if you have a ED, then seek counseling, not help with losing weight.

One of the best articles I've read in a long time. Amazing.

I really liked the post but I have a question. If this is so bad, why does MFP say that I should only eat 1200 calories a day? I am 5'3 and weigh 139 but would like to lose 10 to 15 pounds and I set my goal as 1 pound a week and I run 3 days a week for 1 hour each. If this isn't right, then what gives?

MPF doesn't suggest 1200. It suggests a minimum of 1200, plus exercise calories. Also, it depends on how accurately or appropriately the user sets up his/her profile.

When I had 30 pounds to lose and set it to 2 pounds a week and sedentary, of course it gave me 1200. But I shouldn't have set it for 2 pounds a week and I wasn't really sedentary. When I had the right activity level and right weekly goal, I had more calories. When I was down to the last 10 pounds, I was set to 1500 (plus exercise calories) to lose a half pound a week. I lost weight eating a total of between 1800-2000+ calories.

I read this article this morning and read some of the accompanying comments. I agree with one commentator who said the piece lacked any kind of information, it was very vague. It's a nice story, but without the flesh (which company? which clients, one or many? etc) it reads almost like a fan-faction!

IDK, don't you think the general sentiment is readily applicable regardless of the actual company or clients? I kinda feel like the message is readily transferable and applicable across companies and clients. Particularly given the rampant isomorphic tendencies in the weight loss industry generally. :-)

Like I said, it's a nice story, but it is, overall, a fluff piece.

It's similar to how I feel about the Dove commercials. Dove 'real women' campaign is beautiful on the surface, but then you realize the company is owned by Unilever which makes skin whitening products in Asia or has commercials which glamorize the female body for men's pleasure and it kind of detracts from the overall message.

I totally disagree with you. Fanfiction? Fluff? It makes a clear point. Companies (doesn't really matter which) profit off of people desperate to lose weight. Regardless and perhaps even in spite of negative physical consequences. Why does it need to be any more complex than that to make a valuable point?