SHOULD WE RENAME OBESITY?
Calls to remove or rename health conditions or identifications to reduce stigma are not new. For example, in the 1950s, homosexuality was classed as a “sociopathic personality disturbance”. Following many years of protests and activism, the term and condition were removed from the globally recognised classification of mental health disorders.
In recent weeks, European researchers have renamed non-alcoholic fatty liver disease “metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease”. This occurred after up to 66 per cent of health-care professionals surveyed felt the terms “non-alcoholic” and “fatty” to be stigmatising.
Perhaps it is finally time to follow suit and rename obesity. But is “adiposity-based chronic disease” the answer?
NEW NAME NEEDS TO GO BEYOND BMI
There are two common ways people view obesity.
First, most people use the term for people with a body-mass index (BMI) of 30 or above. Most, if not all, public health organisations also use BMI to categorise obesity and make assumptions about health.
However, BMI alone is not enough to accurately summarise someone’s health. It does not account for muscle mass and does not provide information about the distribution of body weight or adipose tissue (body fat). A high BMI can occur without biological indicators of poor health.
Second, obesity is sometimes used to describe the condition of excess weight when mainly accompanied by metabolic abnormalities.
To simplify, this reflects how the body has adapted to the environment in a way that makes it more susceptible to health risks, with excess weight a byproduct of this.
Source: CNA
