Fat stigma goes global, anthropologists say


March 31, 2011

Slim bodies often are idealized by Americans, who seem to have a disparaging attitude towards fatness. But, does the rest of the world view overweight bodies the same way?

Recent findings by a team of Arizona State University researchers show that rapid globalization has brought the stigma associated with obesity to other parts of the world, including those regions that previously viewed large body size in a neutral or positive light. Download Full Image

Biological anthropologist Alexandra Brewis, cultural anthropologist Amber Wutich and graduate students Ashlan Falletta-Cowden and Isa Rodriguez-Soto of the ASU School of Human Evolution and Social Change in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences collected and analyzed data on cultural ideas about big bodies, fat and obesity from 10 countries and territories. The results appear in the April issue of the journal Current Anthropology.

In each locale – American Samoa, Mexico, Paraguay, the United Kingdom, the United States, Tanzania, Iceland, Argentina, Puerto Rico and New Zealand – people were asked to respond to a series of cultural statements pulled from public health literature and ethnographic interviews. Negative and positive statements were used, such as “Fat people are lazy” and “A big woman is a beautiful woman.”

Using a special anthropological approach called consensus analysis, the group tested for evidence of shared ideas in the specific domain of fat and obesity, and they found it. People around the globe seem to be thinking similarly about the topic.

Among the key ideas that appear cross-culturally are the concepts of obesity as a disease and the result of social and personal weakness. Some level of fat stigma was found in each sample.

“We were essentially trying to take a snapshot of what everyday adults are thinking in a range of places,” said Brewis, who has done similar research as far back as the 1990s, when places like American Samoa and Puerto Rico were fat tolerant. “It was stunning to find how widespread stigmatizing attitudes to fat bodies now are.”

The study’s highest fat-stigma scores were recorded for Paraguay, followed by American Samoa. The least were found in Tanzania. Surprisingly, the United States registered among the lowest for fat stigma.

Wutich offered, “We found that fat stigma was the highest in some of the sites we expected to be most fat accepting. We believe that, in sites where people have held fat-stigmatizing views for a longer time, people may have developed social norms about the importance of masking beliefs that are viewed as impolite.”

The researchers selected places where some obesity was already evident. They suspect that a different pattern may have emerged if places where little obesity is present, such as Asia or sub-Saharan Africa, had been included.

The group’s next step is more comprehensive study, using more sophisticated ethnographic tools, at a couple of their previous sites. Rodriguez-Soto is already in Puerto Rico interviewing grandmothers, mothers and daughters in an attempt to understand the evolution of that nation’s trend towards fat stigma.

Brewis, who is the executive director of the ASU School of Human Evolution and Social Change and director of the Center for Global Health, recently published the book “Obesity: Cultural and Biocultural Perspectives” through Rutgers University Press.

She is particularly concerned with the possible fallout from the profusion of negative attitudes towards large bodies. “Stigma causes prejudice and discrimination and a lot of emotional suffering. The spread of stigmatizing ideas has the potential to do enormous social damage,” she said.

While there is no current data to directly address why fat stigma is spreading, Brewis suggested that a good area for further study is health education media, such as public health messaging. As obesity rates rise around the world, she noted that, “We need to make sure the way we educate or intervene to deal with health aspects of obesity doesn’t inadvertently promote greater stigma.”

Rebecca Howe

Communications Specialist, School of Human Evolution and Social Change

480-727-6577

Beetle may pack a big punch in curbing salt cedar


March 31, 2011

Non-native vegetation’s infiltration to the greater Southwest has caused its share of ecosystem concerns over the years. Now Heather Bateman is looking at the effectiveness of some of the methods employed to help control invasive species, especially salt cedar, along the Virgin River.

Salt cedar or Tamarisk, a non-native tree of Eurasian/African origin, is a deciduous shrub or small tree that was first brought to the western United States in the early 1800s. The Virgin River, which flows from Zion National Park in Utah through the northwest corner of Arizona into northeastern Nevada where it empties into Lake Mead, is overwhelmed with salt cedar where it can have detrimental effects on native plants and habitat quality.

“A healthy riparian ecosystem will have a diverse range of vegetation,” says Bateman, assistant professor in the Department of Applied Sciences and Mathematics in the College of Technology and Innovation at ASU’s Polytechnic campus. “Salt cedar is a concern because it can grow in dense single species plant populations, displacing native plants and altering wildlife habitat.” Download Full Image

Bateman studies riparian ecosystems, the vegetated area along rivers and streams where land meets water. She studies how wildlife populations respond to habitat alteration, with a particular interest in amphibians, reptiles, small mammals and birds.

Though riparian ecosystems take up a small part of the landscape, they are important because many wildlife species will use these zones at some point in their life cycle for foraging, nesting and commuting.

To combat the salt cedar invasion along the Virgin River, natural resource managers opted to use a form of biocontrol in 2006 rather than chemical, mechanical or burning methods. So what is the biocontrol method? A leaf beetle, which is a specialist herbivore or native enemy, has been introduced as biological control of salt cedar.

“The beetle forages along the stems of the tree and causes it to drop its leaves, thus controlling the salt cedar population,” Bateman says.

Although some biologists feel that biocontrol is a better control option than the use of chemicals or prescribed burning, it still could have consequences. Despite the widespread application of the leaf beetle, only limited research has described the benefits or cost to native riparian communities. It is these consequences Bateman plans to study in collaboration with other scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey, University of California-Santa Barbara and Northern Arizona University. 

The beetles are slowly making their way down the river, and Bateman sees this as an excellent opportunity to get a before-and-after look at the riparian ecosystem.

Because Bateman and her colleagues were able to establish study sites prior to leaf beetle establishment, she will be able to collect data along the river prior to the beetles’ arrival and after their departure. She uses capture-mark-release methods to track amphibian, reptile and small mammal populations.

This before-and-after study will allow her to make observations about the effects the beetles have on the riparian ecosystem, which will be helpful to natural resource managers to balance the need to conserve native habitats and species with weed control.

“I want my results to be meaningful to natural resource managers and to provide them with information that allows them to make the best land management decisions they can,” Bateman says.

Although some researchers are focused specifically on bird populations, this project is likely the first attempt to document the impacts of beetle biocontrol on small wildlife communities. Depending upon funding, Bateman and her colleagues hope to collect data along the Virgin River for many years.

 

Media Contact(s):
Christine Lambrakis, 480/727-1173, 602/316-5616, lambrakis">mailto:lambrakis@asu.edu">lambrakis@asu.edu