transformed into a connection: “fat people cause global warming” (Kolata,
2006 ).^22 The problem obesity experts point at in this case is the amount of
excess fuel needed in air travel, compared to a situation where everybody
adhered to the official normal weight. Six years later, Furedi writes about
“The moralistic, Malthusian war against fat people.” He refers to the much
broader statement that obesity is an “ecological not just a health problem”
(2012). In this case the obesity experts have calculated that “If all countries
had the BMI distribution of the USA, the increase in human biomass of 58
million tonnes would be equivalent in mass to an extra 935 million people
of average body mass, and have energy requirements equivalent to that of
473 million adults” (Walpole et al., 2012, p. 439). Clearly, the obesity pan-
demic is unsustainable.Furedi (2012)quotes one of the researchers from a
BBC radio interview: “Having a heavy body is like driving a Range
Rover.” In this case the deviance of overweight people consists of threaten-
ing the future of mankind and Planet Earth.
As a summary of the above and as an indication of the extent to which
itcan be generalized, I conclude this section by quoting Dutch obesity
experts who collected 70 different obesity interventions from many coun-
tries. They found these interventions could be problematic from an ethical
point of view:
We selected 60 recently reported interventions or policy proposals targeting overweight
or obesity and systematically evaluated their ethically relevant aspects. Our evaluation
was completed by discussing them in two expert meetings. We found that currently pro-
posed interventions or policies to prevent overweight or obesity may (next to the bene-
fits they strive for) include the following potentially problematic aspects: effects on
physical health are uncertain or unfavourable; there are negative psychosocial conse-
quences including uncertainty, fears and concerns, blaming and stigmatization and
unjust discrimination; inequalities are aggravated; inadequate information is distribu-
ted; the social and cultural value of eating is disregarded; people’s privacy is disre-
spected; the complexity of responsibilities regarding overweight is disregarded; and
interventions infringe upon personal freedom regarding lifestyle choices and raising
children, regarding freedom of private enterprise or regarding policy choices by schools
and other organizations. The obvious ethical incentives to combat the overweight epi-
demic do not necessarily override the potential ethical constraints, and further debate is
needed. (Ten Have, Van der Heide, Mackenbach, & De Beaufort, 2011,p. 669)DISCUSSION
Above I illustrated how the urgent need to prevent the further development
of the obesity pandemic creates new opportunities to label organizations
132 ROEL PIETERMAN