In 2005, the moral panic about “obesity” was ramping up, and there was big money at stake, all resting on the idea that fat kills. 

Well, Flegal’s research pulled the rug out from under those views, not only showing that fatness was associated with only 1/3 the associated deaths that previous research estimated (and even that smaller estimate can be critiqued), but also showing that being “overweight” conferred no increased risk at all, and may even be a protective factor against all-causes mortality relative to lower weight categories. 

The reaction to these results – which have been verified over and over again in the years since and in decades of prior research – was swift and vicious. Powerful people launched a smear campaign against Flegal and her work:

Her research became the target of an aggressive campaign that included insults, errors, misinformation, social media posts, behind-the-scenes gossip and maneuvers, and complaints to her employer. The goal appeared to be to undermine and discredit her work.

Flegal’s first-hand account of her experience illustrates how power and stigma pervade and bias weight science. This can have a chilling effect:

One of the effects of the public insults may also have been to deter or intimidate other investigators. An anonymous researcher was quoted elsewhere as saying if character assassination is the price for publishing data that contradicts established beliefs, fewer academics will be willing to stick out their necks and offer up fresh thinking.

And all of this is terrible for science and horrific for Flegal. But when the dust settles, who is really hurt? Fat people. Always.