MAHA Messaging Will Fuel Eating Disorders
People with the genetic predisposition and other factors that make them susceptible towards the development of an eating disorder are particularly vulnerable to media messaging. I know this both as an eating disorder therapist and as someone who previously struggled with an eating disorder.
The U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) has allocated $234.6 million to support Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) initiatives in FY 2026. This large amount of money could be used to make big changes in facilitating food access and health equity. Instead, MAHA messaging has largely focused on assigning personal responsibility to health through alarmist, all-or-nothing talking points that are full of anti-fat bias. This messaging is particularly harmful towards individuals struggling with disordered eating or eating disorders.
MAHA messaging carries some extremely damaging themes, four of which I will analyze here. To understand why it is so harmful, it is important to look at the core messaging that MAHA is promoting.
1. MAHA sees health as a moral obligation.
MAHA frames health as a “personal responsibility,” whereas the reality is that many societal and systemic factors — i.e. poverty, food access, access to healthcare, etc. — play a large role in individual health outcomes. MAHA also positions health as something that we owe society. This is harmful because health is deeply personal and should only be a matter of focus for each individual and their doctor. Further, MAHA messaging insinuates that “healthy” people are “good” and “disciplined,” while “unhealthy” people are “lazy” and “weak.” Broad judgemental messaging like this does not make note of differences in access people have to health promoting factors. It also does not give people autonomy to choose their own priorities (health or not). It can also lead to shame and stigma for those who struggle with chronic health conditions and will therefore never meet MAHA’s definition of “health.”
2. MAHA exclusively associates health with thinness.
This position is fundamentally flawed. There are lots of thin people who are healthy, and there are also lots who are unhealthy. Similarly, there are lots of fat people who are healthy and lots who are unhealthy. MAHA exclusively associating thinness with health, and fatness with disease, serves to reinforce weight stigma and anti-fat bias, both of which are harmful to health (more on that later). It’s also not backed by research. This kind of messaging is very triggering to folks in recovery from eating disorders who are working to let their bodies be wherever they naturally want to be. Perpetuating rhetoric around alleged “health problems caused by gaining weight” is a huge trigger for individuals who are trying to develop a positive relationship with food and their body. In reality, when weight stigma is accounted for, research has not established a direct causal relationship between health status and body size. Ultimately, developing a healthy relationship with food and one’s body is beneficial to health outcomes.
MAHA also makes judgmental comments about so-called “obesity.” The World Health Organization catalogs diseases through The International Classification of Diseases, as “any harmful deviation from the normal structure or functional state of an organism, usually associated with specific signs or symptoms.” Having a fat body is not the only type of body that is associated with specific signs or symptoms of poor health. Individuals in fatter bodies can be both “healthy” and “unhealthy.” Thus, a fat body is not inherently diseased because of its size. Further, there is growing evidence that individuals in fatter bodies with cardiovascular, pulmonary, or renal disease have better mortality outcomes than thinner individuals. Utilizing the word “obesity” — a flawed medical diagnosis — to describe someone’s body serves to perpetuate anti-fat bias.
Research has also demonstrated that weight stigma and anti-fat bias lead to poor health outcomes independent of actual body size, thus accomplishing the opposite of what MAHA is purporting to care about. Weight stigma triggers a chronic stress response, which can lead to higher cardiometabolic risk, disordered eating behaviors, and increased inflammation. The Health At Every Size paradigm, on the other hand, does not focus on weight loss and has been shown to lower blood pressure, cholesterol, avoid weight cycling and increase positive body image.
3. MAHA promotes fear-based narratives around food.
MAHA perpetuates extremist and fear-based narratives around food. Some of the common elements include:
Demonizing specific foods or ingredients (for instance processed foods)
Labeling foods as “toxic” or “addictive”
Encouraging rigid rules
As an eating disorder therapist, this messaging goes against everything that I work on deconstructing with clients. Food and body narratives can shape mental health, and these extreme and false viewpoints can negatively impact someone’s mental well-being. Chronic dieting (i.e., disordered eating) is a big risk factor for the development of eating disorders. Thus, encouraging restrictive eating behaviors will contribute to more individuals struggling with eating disorders.
So just to make it clear:
Having anxiety about specific foods or ingredients raises cortisol (the stress hormone) which is not healthy. Persistently high cortisol levels can lead to type two diabetes and hypertension.
Eating disorders are the second most fatal mental illness, second only to Opioid Use Disorder. Struggling with an eating disorder is far less healthy than any food that you could possibly eat.
Having flexibility with food will bring far more peace and joy than obsessing about food labels ever would.
4. MAHA messaging encourages a distrust of medical and mental health care.
A core undercurrent of Make America Healthy Again messaging is the idea that modern medicine has failed us and that health should be achievable without medical intervention if people just lived “correctly.” This is incredibly harmful.
While, of course, it’s ok to discuss improvements that can be made within the medical and mental health care system, encouraging general mistrust of the system while touting extremist language around food, health, and weight is dangerous. Research has indicated that distrust in healthcare systems is associated with lower treatment adherence, delay in diagnosis and care, and underutilization of health services, all of which can lead to worse and even deadly health outcomes. This rhetoric is particularly damaging for people with eating disorders, chronic illness, trauma histories, and mental health conditions.
MAHA has created a false binary between “natural living” and the medical system. The reality is that lifestyle approaches and medical care are not mutually exclusive. Many individuals utilize both lifestyle approaches to enhanced health — such as stress reduction techniques, mindfulness, or yoga — alongside traditional medical approaches. And research supports this approach. Integrative practices that combine supportive lifestyle practices with medical care can improve overall health outcomes, such as improving symptoms of fatigue, sleep quality, and a decrease in pain ratings for those with chronic pain.
The Bottom Line
Society and culture right now are a landmine of potential triggers for those who are vulnerable to eating disorders and disordered eating. The MAHA movement is certainly not helping and, in my opinion, will cause harm. Rather than improving health, it risks worsening both physical and mental well-being, while further reinforcing anti-fat bias and stigma toward people in larger bodies. We cannot claim to care about health while promoting narratives that shame, exclude, and harm those most at risk. Instead, we can move towards a more evidence-based approach to health that recognizes systemic and individual factors, as well as the impact that weight stigma can have on health outcomes.
