Briana Jordan

Biology 1090
Professor Sawitzke
11/1/2014
Taking Sides #2: Can An Overemphasis On Healthy Eating Become Unhealthy?
For the second taking sides assignment, I have elected to explore the debate on
orthorexia nervosa and its status as a legitimate, diagnosable eating disorder. I was drawn to
this topic over the others due to its relevance to myself and many of my friends young,
female, concerned with our health, concerned with our looks, and under a constant deluge of
information on what we ought to be and what we have to do to get there. While were all
aware of the signs and dangers of anorexia and bulimia, orthorexia is a newer concept that I
had less information on, and so it seemed the logical choice to explore.
The issue being argued is whether or not orthorexia exists, and furthermore, if it
presents a significant health risk to those who might suffer from it. Orthorexia is supposedly an
eating disorder with similar behaviors and pathologies to the better known anorexia and
bulimia, but is marked by the quality of food consumed, rather than the quantity. Where
anorexics restrict calories and bulimics binge and purge in an attempt to manage caloric
absorption, orthorexics are less concerned with caloric intake or with weight or measurements
than they are with eating only the right food organic, unprocessed, etc. Whatever the
patient in question has designated clean. There is some debate in the scientific community as
to whether these symptoms are enough to justify orthorexia as a diagnosable disorder,
whether it should be included in the DSM, and whether it can be as damaging as other, better
studied eating disorders.
In the first article, detailing the affirmative position, Lindsey Getz discusses orthorexia
nervosa, its symptoms, its onset, its risk factors and why it is a condition worth the concern of
the medical community. Like anorexia and bulimia, she writes, orthorexia is essentially an
anxiety disorder wherein the patient restricts his or her diet to unhealthy measures in order to
maintain control. According to Getz, it is not just an emphasis on healthy eating or
disparagement of junk food orthorexia is marked by disordered thoughts and behaviors, and
can become so serious as to require therapy or even hospitalization.
She does note that, due to its exclusion from the DSM, orthorexia cannot be considered
an officially recognized diagnosis. She argues that this does not make it any less vital for dietary
professionals to be able to recognize the warning signs, and in fact, insists that in a situation
with an emerging disorder, where research is still in the infantile stage, that vigilance becomes
more important. Orthorexia may be an emerging condition, she writes, but dieticians should
realize they have the power to prevent it from becoming a more widespread issue.
The second article is a piece by Chris Woolston discussing the shortcomings of the
typical American diet, the consequences of those shortcomings and, ultimately, how to improve
and minimize the following health risks. He divides the American diets into two broad
categories, prudent and Western, and details the effects the Western diet has had on
American society skyrocketing obesity rates, increased instances of cardiac disease and
diabetes, so on and so forth. He speaks on the causes of these issues, such as distorted portion
management and convenience culture, and he recommends strategies for improving a
Westernized diet, such as minimizing meals eaten away from the home and eating a wide
variety of food groups.
After considering both articles, were my opinion to be predicated entirely on the
information they present, I would be wholly swayed towards orthorexia being a verifiable
mental illness. Woolstons argument is not an argument at all. In fact, what we are given to
review never even touches on orthorexia or its validity. It is an interesting and well-written
article on the dangers of the American diet and what steps must be taken to rectify it, but at no
point is disordered thought even approached. The only information we have drawing us to the
conclusion that the article is at odds with Gatzs piece is the contextual presentation of the
assignment. On that merit alone, I would argue that Getz thoughts on orthorexias validity have
gone unchallenged, and must therefore stand. While no one would argue that eating well is a
harmful thing, if disordered thought and behavior intertwine with the impulse to eat well and
begin to negatively impact a patients life, that is the very definition of an eating disorder.
That being said, I have found myself in this discussion before, and it was my instinct to
dismiss orthorexia as either too vague for diagnosis or, at worst, downright alarmist. As of 2007,
only two peer-reviewed studies have been conducted on the topic, and of the existing reported
cases, few meet the criteria for a verifiable eating disorder. Often the symptoms are blended
with symptoms of other eating disorders, or are inconclusive enough to warrant a diagnosis of
nothing more specific than eating disorder NOS. Which is not to say orthorexia is not a
developing issue or emerging disorder only to say that the research upon which I normally
base my opinions simply is not there, and this makes it difficult for me to clearly identify with
either one view point or another.
I wish I could form a coherent and persuasive position strongly in one camp or another
for this issue, but based on the evidence presented, I am unable to do so. Getz argument for
orthorexias inclusion as a verified eating disorder is compelling, and logic dictates that any
disordered behavior severe enough to interfere with a patients life likely falls under the
heading of a disorder, but without a strong, well-researched counter argument, I am not
convinced I have been well educated enough to speak to the veracity of one side or the other. I
would require further research, additional sources, and, for preference, a wider variety of
studies on the topic. I do not believe that conclusions should be drawn before evidence has
been thoroughly reviewed, and as the research on this disorder is still in its infancy, I may
instinctively lean towards orthorexias validity, but I will not speak in absolutes. Not without
more adequate research.