Social media‘Don’t compare your behind-the-scenes with somebody else’s highlight reel.’
STEVE FURTICK
In 1995, American researcher Robert Kraut and colleagues provided Internet access and a computer to 93 households that had previously had no Internet experience at all, and tracked their psychological health over several years.91 After one year of using the Internet, the researchers concluded that greater Internet usage was linked to more signs of depression and loneliness. Although several years later they found that most of the negative impact had dissipated with time, since then the general concern over the impact of technology (and particularly the Internet) on health has escalated.
Now technology is more than just about Internet access and television. It also includes social media, which we have access to 24/7 from our phones, it’s about Netflix and access to a greater variety of videos than ever before, and it’s about the continuing impact of the images and bodies we see all around us, reinforcing the idea that there is one ideal body shape, one ideal diet, one way to be healthy.
These influences have existed for an arguably very short period of human history, and arguably during that time they have had a huge impact on the way we live our lives. Try to imagine a life without television, magazines, newspapers, the Internet, social media or advertisements. Some might consider this to be paradise, whereas to others the idea is horrifying.
Social mediaAs of 2018, Instagram now has 1 billion monthly active users, Facebook 2.23 billion and Twitter 335 million. In 2017, there were almost 2.5 billion people using social media, with over 70 per cent of Internet users having an active social media profile. At the time of writing there are almost 3 billion social media users around the globe. That’s a lot of people.
Almost everyone in developed countries has at least one social media profile, with many people having several. We spend hours and hours online on these platforms, especially the apps, and each notification lights up our phones demanding our immediate attention. I’m going to assume that if you’re reading this, you’re probably well aware of the different social media platforms and what they look like.
But what impact do these sites have on our health? It doesn’t look too good.
Major depression is more than just feeling a bit down. It’s a serious health issue that affects tens of millions of people each year, yet only a fraction of people receive adequate treatment for it.
Using social media has been linked to increased depression in young people. In one interesting study, those who spent the most time per day on social media had a much higher risk of depression than those who spent the least time online.92 More frequent Instagram use has been shown to have a direct association with greater levels of depressive symptoms.93 There doesn’t seem to be a popular social media platform that hasn’t been linked with depression in some way.
Interestingly, on Twitter, researchers have used tweet patterns to detect the onset of depression in individuals. They detect this through measuring lower social activity, greater signs of negativity, high focus on the self rather than others, increased voiced concerns about relationships, and being more likely to express religious thoughts.94 There is the hope that, in the future, Twitter may be a tool by which undiagnosed individuals may be alerted to their altered behaviour in the hope they can seek help earlier.
Unlike other uses of the Internet, social media involves receiving notifications and alerts at all times of the day. These constant notifications create pressure to be constantly available and contribute to a severe case of FOMO (fear of missing out). This helps explain why social media use is linked to increased anxiety,95 particularly among young adults, and has led to the term ‘social media anxiety disorder’ being coined, where people feel stressed and anxious if they are not able to check their accounts and notifications regularly. Receiving and seeing a notification provides a small dopamine hit, which makes you feel good, and while I wouldn’t necessarily go so far as to say it’s addictive, it can leave you feeling disappointed if you check your phone to see no notifications at all. In some cases, for some people, this can lead to an endless feedback loop with a need to post more and receive more likes in order to feel just as good as they did initially.
The symptoms of social-media anxiety are not set in stone and are variable (see the end of this chapter for a rundown), but in general they tend to involve an obsessive need to maintain an online reputation or persona, while also ensuring that popularity is maintained, and communication is active and regular. A little bit of this kind of behaviour is arguably normal and healthy – it makes sense to care what others think of us in our social society – but when it starts to interfere with normal daily functioning, and when it starts to inhibit face-to-face social behaviour, then it may be problematic.
Eating disorders and related behaviours have been linked with social media use. Viewing health- and fitness-related content on social media means you’re more likely to have an eating disorder, but also more likely to engage in healthier behaviours such as not binge-drinking or using illegal drugs.96 Spending more time on social media in general (rather than a specific site) is also linked to greater odds of having eating concerns.97
In people who already have an eating disorder such as anorexia nervosa, a high level of Facebook use is associated with greater levels of symptoms,98 and viewing pro-anorexia websites and forums have greater negative effects99 compared with people who don’t view these sites.
There is a strong ‘image first, text second’ rule on Instagram, which allows for easy comparison of bodies, particularly bodies that fit the thin or lean ideal. Instagram tends to reward bodies that fit this ideal, as they get more likes and engagement. High social media usage in general is linked to increased body image concerns and disordered eating behaviour.100
Around a quarter of young people turn to social media to find information about healthy eating, which is concerning considering that pretty much all Insta-celebs or people with large followings have no relevant qualifications and definitely aren’t experts on nutrition. The advice given online is generally misleading and isn’t regulated in the same way that health claims in advertising are. So it’s no wonder that many people believe that exclusion of food groups is important for health, and that people fall for crazy diets peddled by people they follow and look up to.
The entire ‘clean eating’ movement owes its success to Instagram. The pioneers of this movement relied heavily on this platform, and had (have, in some cases) a powerful presence, reaching and influencing millions of people, despite having no formal qualifications in nutrition or cooking. Due to Instagram being an image-based platform, it may be that people are more likely to follow advice or imitate the diets of Instagram ‘celebrities’ such as these, as they feel a more personal connection than they otherwise would with a text-based platform. As such, Instagram plays a key role in the development and maintenance of disordered eating patterns associated with orthorexia nervosa, to the point where high Instagram use is a risk factor for orthorexic symptoms.76 Even though most of these bloggers have now distanced themselves from the term ‘clean eating’, there still exists a large body of fearmongering, misleading information on Instagram, which can trigger and reinforce orthorexic ideas.
Social media and self-esteem are tightly intertwined. Positive feedback on your profile seems to enhance social self-esteem and well-being, whereas negative feedback seems to decrease self-esteem and well-being.101 In contrast, viewing your own profile appears to increase self-esteem.102 It seems that the more emotionally invested you are in your social media accounts and profiles, the more they affect your self-esteem, so people who feel a strong emotional connection to social media are most at risk.
The negative impact of social media on self-esteem seems to be mediated by social comparison. Social comparison is the tendency to compare yourself with others on specific attributes, and we are more likely to compare ourselves with someone we think is similar to ourselves – our peers.
Evolutionarily, throughout history we have compared ourselves with a small number of people within our social environment, i.e. people within our tribe or small social circle. The rise of social media has drastically shifted who we consider our peers and who we therefore compare ourselves with. Our ancient brain hasn’t had time to adapt to this new social environment, which has only been around for the last 10 years or so (Instagram launched in 2008).
The prefrontal cortex in our brains is most associated with higher cognitive functions such as critical thinking, and is moulded by our environment up until the age of around 25. Now that almost every young person is on social media, and follows a variety of people, including friends, celebrities and influencers, the Instagram feed is interpreted as reality and helps shape this social comparison. This means the brain can’t tell the difference between your neighbour or an Instagram model, and they are interpreted as peers of the same social group and therefore a reasonable target for comparison. Naturally, this doesn’t bode well.
People are far more likely to make upward social comparisons on social media compared with real life. Upward social comparisons are when we compare ourselves with other people who we perceive as being slightly better than us or who we look up to in terms of certain characteristics, whether it’s appearance, fitness or academic grades. For example, although you likely won’t compare yourself to Albert Einstein, you will compare your grades with those of others in your class, especially those who you perceive to be on a similar or slightly higher level to you. Although upward comparison can be beneficial when it encourages ambition and inspires people to become more like the people they admire, more often than not it has a negative effect.
How does this relate back to self-esteem? Online, you can take your time to strategically construct a persona that emphasises your most desirable traits and hides any flaws, whereas face-to-face interactions do not allow for the same degree of contemplation or flexibility. On social media, people are far more likely to only share the best aspects of their lives and treat it like a highlight reel. Viewing others’ carefully constructed profiles that show a highlight reel of positives appears to diminish our own self-worth. Essentially, when we compare our offline lives with the carefully curated highlights we see online, we fall short. We routinely believe that other people’s lives are better than ours, and that people are happier than we are.103
This social comparison trap is particularly important in the comparison of bodies. Unsurprisingly, spending more time on social media means more time for body comparisons, which means a higher chance of internalisation of the thin ideal, body dissatisfaction, body shame and disordered eating.100 Just like in mainstream media, social media sites are a source of images that objectify and oversexualise women, which drives this process further.
Upward comparisons are not just about popularity or appearance; they’re also about judging behaviours, such as fitness or eating. There is an idealisation of eating patterns on social media, particularly when linked with moral or personality attributes (e.g. organised, good, healthy). So someone who eats healthily and posts about it on social media by holding a plate of salad next to their abs is likely to be seen as aspirational. There’s a reason why ‘what I eat in a day’ videos have become so popular on YouTube – they’re the perfect comparison tool.
Social media provides abundant social comparison opportunities. Before the rise of social media, our social comparison would be limited to school or work hours, and we’d go home and be surrounded by simply our parents (and sometimes siblings). Now we carry our phones in our pockets and have access to social media 24/7, and we use it for an increasing number of tasks and hours in the day. The speed and ease with which we can access information about other people on social media makes for greater opportunity for social comparison. This risks overexposure to upward social comparison information that may have a cumulative detrimental impact on well-being. As a result, it’s hardly surprising that more frequent Facebook use has been linked to lower self-esteem in adults, due to increased exposure to upward social comparisons.104 Also, people who make more social comparisons on social media report greater depressive symptoms, and feel like they are further from their ‘ideal self’.
Interestingly, your ‘default state’ (so to speak) self-esteem level also plays a role, so if you’re someone who normally considers themselves to have quite high self-esteem you will generally think of yourself as being more likeable, whereas someone who considers themselves to have low self-esteem will think they are less likeable. Both groups of people, when they feel comfortable and safe, will engage in similar social comparison processes. That is, there’s no real difference between them. But add social media into the mix and the differences between these people becomes apparent. When there is a threat to self-image, such as when we are presented with body-ideal images on social media, high-self-esteem individuals are more likely to make a downward social comparison, which raises their self-esteem after the brief dip when they see the images. In contrast, low-self-esteem individuals are more likely to make an upward social comparison, which further lowers their self-esteem.105 So low mood is amplified, not negated, by going on social media and looking at others, in part due to the social comparison. If you’re on your own and looking at social media, then the low-self-esteem individuals definitely have a harder time of it. But in a public group setting – perhaps where you’re in a position to compare bodies with peers or you’re discussing someone’s Instagram account – what this means in practice is that high-self-esteem individuals defend their ego under threat by distancing themselves and becoming more independent, which makes them seem less likeable (‘She may have a nicer figure but at least I’m more intelligent.’). The low-self-esteem individuals defend their ego by becoming less independent and more interdependent, which makes them more likeable in a group (‘Yes, she’s more attractive than me, but wow she really does look amazing and happy.’). So even though people with low self-esteem think of themselves as being less likeable, in practice they’re actually liked more because of the way they compare and interact with others.
When it comes to Instagram, the audience isn’t aware that the content they see may be driven by self-presentation needs (taking pictures of food that you don’t eat or enjoy just for the ‘likes’) and by the creator’s own disordered eating behaviour. Following a greater number of strangers on Instagram also leads to greater levels of negative social comparison,93 which goes a long way to explain the link between Instagram and depression. This social comparison is the key to why social media is linked to issues from depression and anxiety to eating disorders and self-esteem.
Of course, it’s important to note that there are some positives to using social media. The most important of those is communication. These sites allow us to communicate with friends, family, and strangers with similar interests who can become friends. Many people in the Internet generation, including myself, have become real-life friends with people they have met online, and more couples than not now meet through online dating apps. You can meet and engage with people online who are far more diverse than your real-life friendship group, and have discussions with people who think completely differently from you, which can force you to develop your arguments and also see the world from another perspective.
In particular, social media allows people to join a community that they may struggle to find in the real world. Platforms that allow you to post anonymously, such as Tumblr or Instagram, may allow those with social anxiety or other mental health issues to feel less alone. Social media can also be a source of strength and community, for example for LGBTQ+ folks or disabled people who don’t see people they can connect with in real life.
Social media also allows people to have a creative outlet and to share that creativity with the world, whether it’s art or music. Ideas are developed and shared from creating blogs, podcasts and vlogs. There is even something to be said for the ability to access health information online. People can find out more about subjects such as sexual health and mental health, which they may feel embarrassed to ask about in person or find from a book. Mobile technologies have already produced multiple improvements in healthcare, such as increased medication adherence, better disease understanding and fewer missed appointments.
There is evidence linking social media use with increased self-esteem, but by a different method not involving social comparison. As mentioned before, when people view their own social media profiles it increases self-esteem, as we are able to view an idealised version of ourselves – our own personal highlight reel.102 Also, looking at the social media profiles of family and close friends doesn’t tend to lower self-esteem, but most of us, especially on Instagram, follow more strangers than friends.
Image-based social media platforms such as Instagram have an additional benefit of decreasing self-reported loneliness to its users, whereas text-based platforms such as Twitter and Facebook don’t.106 Image-based social media platforms may actually mitigate feelings of loneliness because the images give a sense of communicating with an actual person, rather than an object, and allow more insight into a person’s life. Humans recognise images much faster than text, which make platforms like Instagram and YouTube seem more personal.
Finally, there’s no denying that social media allows for easy sharing of food images and recipes, which can inspire people to try new foods cooked in new ways. Many people now use social media to discover and share food experiences.
Mass mainstream mediaAlthough it is tempting to blame the mass media for perpetuating and glorifying unrealistic standards of physical beauty, the truth is, as always, more complicated than that. Throughout history, the ideal body type has been shaped by society through cultural and political climates, but today we have the addition of the media (including television, film and print), which makes it a far more powerful presence than ever before.
We are surrounded by these media influences daily, so much so that it’s impossible for us to be objective and accurate about how much of an influence they have on us. We all like to believe we don’t fall for advertising, but if that were the case, companies wouldn’t spend huge sums of money on billboards and screen time. They must work.
One incredible study looked at rates of eating disorders in Fiji before and after television was introduced in 1995. Ethnic Fijians have traditionally encouraged healthy appetites and have preferred a rounder, softer body type, as this signified wealth and fertility. Having a strong sense of identity, particularly if tied to culture, can be protective against eating disorders, and this was seen in Fiji as there was only one case of anorexia reported on the island before 1995. But after TV was introduced, rates of dieting shot up from none at all to 69 per cent, people showed clear signs of disordered eating, and they cited attractive actors and actresses on their screens as the inspiration behind their intentions.107 In follow-up research, it was found that even indirect exposure to mass media increased the risk of disordered eating.108
Eating disorders are multifaceted and complex, and it would be a gross oversimplification to suggest that the media is purely responsible for the development of eating disorders, but it’s fair to say it plays a role. So why is this?
There are three major core sources of influence that contribute to the development of body image and eating disturbances: parents, peers and the media. These three sources exert their effects through internalisation of societal standards of health and beauty, and through appearance comparison. So the reason the media negatively affects body image is that people will often compare their body with the bodies they are viewing in the media or will internalise the standards of health and beauty that these bodies represent.
Essentially, when you combine a highly lucrative dieting industry with media pressure to look a certain way, increasing rates of eating disorders are obviously concerning, but are also understandable. Cultural standards and ideas of beauty are nothing new, but the impact of the media is a fairly recent addition to this, and is incredibly powerful.
For women, body dissatisfaction results from (and feeds) a system that integrates three fundamental components: idealisation of the thin body, an irrational fear of fat, and a strong belief that weight and shape are key determinants of identity and self-worth. For men, this is becoming a growing problem as well, except with an emphasis on leanness and muscularity over thinness. The media plays a big role in shaping and reinforcing these ideas.
Westernised sociocultural values and focus on the ideal body, which are portrayed through media messages, especially on the Internet, are considered to be a risk factor for the development of disordered eating and eating disorders.109 Repeated exposure to the depiction of ideal bodies in the media leads to an internalisation of this ideal as normal, realistic and necessary in order to be seen as attractive and desirable. The discrepancy between this ideal and the reality of our own bodily appearance, and how we fall short, leads to body dissatisfaction, low self-esteem and higher risk of eating disorder symptoms. This occurs regardless of the media type.
Interestingly, it seems not all people are affected by the thin ideal in the media, but most are, to the point where it still makes sense for it to be a risk factor.110 For those who are negatively affected by it, they may be more likely to internalise these ideas and therefore be at risk of disordered eating. Overall, the media influence on women’s body image and eating habits appears to be negative.111
This makes a lot of sense, and explains why negative body image and disordered eating are consistent phenomena among adults (often young adults) across all ethnicities, social gradients, cultures and countries – the media influence is both influential and omnipresent. It also helps explain why weight and shape concerns and the diet mentality tend to emerge in childhood or young adulthood (as children and teenagers are heavily targeted by the media), why these concerns are so prevalent among young people, and why it’s been around for so long that it’s considered ‘normal’ for young people to worry about their weight and body shape.
But if the media is so powerful and omnipresent, and if pretty much all young people are exposed to the content, then why do only a small percentage go on to develop clinical eating disorders? This argument disappears when you consider that the media doesn’t act in isolation. Combine this media exposure to the thin ideal with other risk factors – peers talking about weight and body shape, family history of dieting, and reinforcement of the thin ideal by parents or older siblings – and even if we assume that each one has a probability of occurring only in 35 per cent of the population (a very conservative estimate), the probability of all four factors occurring together is 0.354, which is 0.015, or 1.5 per cent of the population. Considering it’s estimated that 1–2 per cent of the UK population has an eating disorder, it definitely fits.
But while the media certainly has influence over the kinds of bodies we see and are idealised, there is arguably less scope for upward social comparison. Whereas social media is very much peer-based, in newspapers and on television we see more models, celebrities and well-known figures, and these people aren’t seen as peers in the same way. There is also greater awareness of the use of editing and airbrushing in traditional media, more so than in social media.
Despite this, there is something about these traditional forms of media that leads us to idolise those who appear and are featured. We see them as being special or noteworthy in some way for being the ‘chosen ones’ who are accepted to appear on our screens or in the pages we flick through. Especially in today’s digital age, there’s something exciting about seeing your name or your face in print.
According to studies of adult and adolescent women, exposure to magazines that feature and glamorise the thin ideal is positively correlated with disordered eating.112 Wanting to look like celebrities and models in the media is a strong predictor of weight concerns, dieting behaviour and binge-eating. A similar study of nearly 800 adolescent girls found that almost 90 per cent said they desired the thin ideal that the media promoted, and as such were more likely to use extreme dieting and disordered eating to try to achieve the ideal.
In television as well, early exposure to the thin ideal leads to an increase in body-image problems years down the line for young girls, regardless of actual or perceived body shape. It affects everyone, no matter their size or ethnicity. The more television a young girl watches, the more likely she is to internalise the thin ideal; and – in adolescence in particular – the more importance a girl places on her appearance, and the more her self-worth is shaped by her body, the more likely she is to have negative body image.
This all comes down to three key facts for girls and young women: first, the perception of pressure from the media to fit the thin ideal is linked to body dissatisfaction. Second, this pressure leads to internalisation of the thin ideal, which means they are more likely to have disordered eating habits. Third, these issues are particularly problematic to the subgroup that are ‘high internalisers’ – people who are more sensitive to and more affected by the thin ideal, who internalise the ideal more readily by focusing it inwards on themselves, and so are far more likely to feel dissatisfied with their bodies.
Much of the research into the media and body image has focused on women, but there has been a growing interest in the influence on men due to greater awareness of the effect that images of the ideal lean, muscular body can have. Gyms will sell their products and services by displaying pictures of strong, muscular men using their equipment or supplements, and it’s highly effective. It persuades men that if they only join that gym or take that supplement, they can look like the man in the image too, even though those particular images, as well as others, are practically unattainable for most people. Over time, these images have become more and more muscular.
Men who feel pressure from traditional media influences to change their body and become more muscular are also more likely to compare their bodies with media images and feel worse about their bodies. These negative feelings mean that these men are more likely to engage in negative behaviours such as increased steroid usage or higher supplement intake, and have an increased chance of developing muscle dysmorphia, bulimia or anorexia nervosa.113 These behaviours and conditions could lead to health problems or death, including by suicide. Muscle dysmorphia is a growing problem for men in particular; as media images have exerted more pressure, there is a greater chance someone will see their body as ‘defective’ or ‘not big enough’. If the desire to attain this ideal muscular body becomes consuming, then the person may develop great anxiety around their body, which hugely disrupts their life.
In fact, the effect of exposure to the ideal body in the media was similar for men and women – they are all equally affected and made to feel worse about their bodies. It’s definitely not just a female thing.
Aside from eating issues and body image, it seems as though excessive media consumption is associated with depression. This definitely seems plausible as there are many different mechanisms by which media exposure could influence the development of depression. For one, spending excessive amounts of time in front of a screen means not being able to spend much time talking to people face-to-face and engage in experiences that are protective against depression, such as exercise. If someone is spending a great deal of time in front of screens at night, then it can displace sleep, which is important for learning and memory, as well as normal emotional development. Another mechanism by which media can more directly lead to depression is by the messages that are internalised from the content viewed. For example, TV shows often present characters and situations that promote ideal body shapes or personality traits, which drive upward social comparison and can lead to low self-esteem. They may also show highly stereotypical portrayals of sociodemographic factors such as sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation and occupation. These stereotypes can interfere with normal identity development and, again, drive social comparison in an unfavourable way. As well as this, what we see on our screens can be very negative or anxiety-provoking, which can lead to a very pessimistic and hopeless view of the world. The combined effect of all of these influences can increase the risk of depression if someone is vulnerable.
Taking all the above together, unsurprisingly the research does show that television exposure and total media exposure are associated with an increased risk of depressive symptoms in young adults, especially in young men.114 There is also a link between time spent watching TV and use of computer (more than six hours per day) and higher risk of depression in adults.115 Television in particular tends to feature a large amount of advertising, where the purpose is to make the viewer feel their life is inadequate unless they purchase the items on the screen.
On the flipside, people do use media such as video games and watch TV as a social activity, which can negate some of the negatives. There are also certain types of television content that can actually reduce the risk of depression. Humour, which is an integral part of many shows, tends to result in laughter, and laughter can reduce stress and lift mood. This doesn’t seem to apply when someone is already in the depths of depression, though. Individuals with depression may spend more time watching TV due to the social isolation and lack of energy, irrespective of whether their viewing habits contributed to the onset of their depression.
Aside from mental health, spending too much time watching television has an impact on our physical health, because if you’re spending several hours per day watching TV you’re also likely sitting down for that whole time. This sedentary behaviour, i.e. sitting down for hours on end, is related to higher risk of heart disease and death, regardless of how much physical activity you do. This is partly because being too sedentary can increase signs of inflammation and stress in your body.116 I don’t say this in order to scare you out of watching any TV at all, just to highlight that, as always, too much of anything isn’t ideal – especially if your job requires you to sit down for most of the day.
It’s easy to see the media as a highly negative influence on our health, especially our mental health. But there are some positives to note.
Exposure to media outlets can help you to understand the world around you, how different people live, and in general what’s happening outside your immediate environment. For children, television shows can be educational and provide teaching moments. A great example of this is Sesame Street, where young children can learn about simple arithmetic, the alphabet, kindness, and even complicated issues such as disability and race.
Video games get a lot of bad press, but there’s some good in them too, particularly as some can help people develop and fine-tune their motor skills and coordination.
It’s important to note that the Internet, with everything that comes with it, including media and social media, provides something that is accessible to people with disabilities, allows people with mental health issues to access help from the comfort of their homes, and is a safer route for people seeking aid from domestic abuse than a phone, as it’s easier to erase proof.
Overall, there are some positives to the media, but, as you might have already noticed, this section is quite short compared with the potential negative impacts.
Overall, exposure to thin- and lean-ideal media has many negative effects: it’s linked with greater body dissatisfaction and self-criticism, lower self-esteem, negative mood, disordered eating, more self-consciousness, higher weight-related appearance anxiety, and feelings of depression, shame and guilt. That’s pretty damning.
Misinformation and the rise of NetflixThe biggest issue with media and social media is the widespread availability of misinformation: 42 per cent of American adult social media users have said that the information they find on social media would affect health decisions related to diet, exercise or stress management, and nearly 90 per cent of people aged eighteen to twenty-four years have indicated they would trust medical information found on social media. To me, that is more than slightly worrying.
There is no real regulation of the information and advice given on the Internet, where anyone can portray themselves as an expert and conflicts of interest are hidden away. Social media undoubtedly plays a key role in this, and this is now being discussed extensively. But what hasn’t been talked about enough is the role of documentaries with blatant agendas, and the role of streaming services such as Netflix in circulating these to a huge audience.
What the Health, Fat, Sick and Nearly Dead, The Magic Pill, GMO OMG… There is an ever-increasing number available online.
Documentaries such as What the Health don’t really deserve to be called documentaries. They are propaganda pieces that twist available evidence, cite ‘expert’ opinions and use emotive fearmongering language to further their respective agendas, all under the guise of informing with impartiality. These programmes are so relentlessly terrifying that by the end you want to immediately change your entire way of eating, convinced that particular foods will certainly kill you and cause you great harm. They aren’t documentaries so much as horror movies.
What the Health has a highly specific agenda: it promotes the vegan diet as the answer to preventing and curing pretty much all disease; any foods that don’t fit this mould (eggs, dairy, meat, fish) are viciously portrayed as the enemy, and this information they’ve ‘uncovered’ (ha) is all being hidden by Big Food*, who are trying to keep you from the truth.
It’s also highly hypocritical: conflicts of interest that serve the agenda are highlighted, but they don’t acknowledge that pretty much everyone they interview also has conflicts of interest, whether it’s their diet books or supplements or activism work. While this isn’t enough, I would argue, to completely discredit what they say, bias is still bias, and it should go both ways. But instead of being impartial, these documentaries can’t instil a single ounce of doubt, and so instead go for a massive double standard that further reduces their credibility.
Contrast this with The Magic Pill, which promotes a ketogenic/paleo diet that is very low in total carbohydrates, high in fat and high in animal products. This is a diet that is arguably the polar opposite of veganism, yet if you were to watch both programmes (and I highly recommend you don’t), you’d see some surprising similarities between the two.
First, both have a very simple solution to the complex issue that is what we should eat. Go vegan! Avoid sugar! Eat fat! Only juice! There is only one right way to eat for health and any evidence to support any other way must be totally ignored. Second, they both rely on celebrities and doctors (or nutritional therapists) who vehemently support this one way of eating and who will say only positive, supportive things about it, even if they’re wrong. These are the kind of doctors who usually don’t see patients one-to-one, who sell diet books and/or supplements online, and who are deeeeeefinitely not biased in any way. Anecdotes and testimonials are far more powerful at persuading the public than endless studies, so getting some of those in certainly helps. Third, they use the most outrageous language to induce fear. Toxins! Chemicals! Epidemic! Disaster! Deadly! It’s important to make the situation sound as dire as possible. This is then accompanied by the usual stigmatising images of fat people walking, eating the scary food, and fat building up in the body.
Most food documentaries are bad because nutrition science isn’t definitive. But we like the simple narrative of ‘X food causes Y disease’, even though it’s incredibly difficult to determine causality in nutrition research. These documentaries take complex messages of potential associations and simplify them to suggest that there are good foods that prevent disease and bad foods that cause disease, and this is all you need to know.
Yes, the dramatic and emotional effect of the stories does have an impact and a purpose, and it succeeds. Their main goal is for you to change and to feel bad about not changing. One of the dangers of these kinds of documentaries is that they scare people into making drastic food decisions, which they then either abandon just as quickly for another fad, or which they maintain out of fear, where any transgression causes immense anxiety, leaving them in a situation very much reminiscent of orthorexia. Drastic dietary changes like that, unless supervised by a medical professional, are risky as they are poorly researched, which means a higher likelihood of deficiencies and ill effects. For example, one of the ‘experts’ in What the Health states that you can get all your protein requirements from eating 2,000 calories worth of rice, which completely ignores the fact that rice doesn’t contain amino acids in the right proportions, and this would (over time) result in a lack of leucine in the diet. And anyone stupid enough to compare eggs to smoking shouldn’t be allowed to give medical advice. The Magic Pill even goes so far as to suggest a ketogenic diet can cure cancer – an incredibly dangerous suggestion.
Almost all these documentaries are set in the US and focus on the US food supply, which is quite different from the UK, from Europe and from Australia. Everything they say about the food supply and about food manufacturing should be taken with a pinch of salt, and you definitely shouldn’t assume it’s the same here.
Netflix health documentaries don’t help us be healthier or help our understanding about health. They confuse what we know about nutrition science and obscure the truths of nutrition that could actually help us live healthier lives.
ConclusionWhether you are impacted by the media and social media in a positive or negative way, or barely at all, depends on a complex interplay between individual personal characteristics and the larger social climate. Most of the time, negative media effects are not intended, of course. Most media producers and social media influencers aren’t trying to harm people, but that doesn’t absolve them from responsibility when the content they produce has negative effects.
Also, don’t get your nutrition information from sensationalist documentary film-makers.
Check how many of these common symptoms of social media anxiety disorder you identify with:
YES/NO |
|
Interrupting conversations to check your social media accounts |
|
Lying to others about how much time you spend on social media |
|
|
Withdrawal from friends and family |
|
|
Trying to stop or reduce your use of social media more than once before without being successful |
|
|
Loss of interest in other activities |
|
|
Neglecting work or school to comment on Facebook or Twitter account |
|
|
Experiencing withdrawal symptoms when you are not able to access social media |
|
|
Spending over six hours per day on social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter or Instagram |
|
|
Overwhelming need to share things with others on social media sites |
|
|
Having your phone with you 24 hours a day to check your social media sites |
|
|
Using social media more often than you planned |
|
|
Severe nervousness or anxiety when you are not able to check your notifications |
|
|
Negative impacts on your personal or professional life due to social media usage |
|
The more of these you identify with, the more likely it is that you may have some anxieties around social media and should perhaps look into reducing your usage.
Please read each of the following points carefully and indicate the number that best reflects your agreement with the statement.
DEFINITELY DISAGREE |
MOSTLY DISAGREE |
NEITHER AGREE NOR DISAGREE |
MOSTLY AGREE |
DEFINITELY AGREE |
|
I’ve felt pressure from TV or magazines to lose weight. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
I compare my body with the bodies of people who are on TV. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
I would like my body to look like the models who appear in magazines. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
I would like my body to look like the people who are in films. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
I’ve felt pressure from TV or magazines to have a perfect body. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
I’ve felt pressure from TV or magazines to exercise. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
I compare my body with that of people who are athletic. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
I’ve felt pressure from TV or magazines to change my appearance. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
The higher your score, the more you rely on the media and societal ideals to shape your ideas about your body and weight.
* You know, those large industrial food producers and manufacturers who only care about profits and apparently have unwavering unlimited power over our food supply? Those guys.