By age 18, my knees hurt. I didn’t know why, and they didn’t hurt a lot, but they did hurt a bit most of the time. As someone who took a lot of dance classes and played my share of netball, it was annoying, but not something I thought much about. After all, I reckoned, bad knees run in my family. But by age 20, the pain had gone from a bit annoying to definitely annoying. I decided, for the first time, to see a doctor about it.


She was a brisk woman with close-cropped grey hair, who glanced at me and told me my knee pain was due to early-onset arthritis as a result of my being overweight. My blood tests were negative for rheumatoid arthritis — but that didn’t matter, she told me. The only way to stop my pain from getting worse was by losing weight. So with the resigned sigh of anyone who has grown up fat, I accepted my fate. I was arthritic, at 20.

By 22, things were worse. My knees had gone from hurting a bit most of the time to spontaneously collapsing in blinding pain while I was doing innocuous activities like walking down the street. I went back to the doctor — a different one, because I just saw whoever was available at the student clinic. He asked me about my pre-existing medical conditions. I explained that my arthritis was a result of being overweight. He looked at me incredulously. “That’s not a thing.” No one gets non-rheumatoid arthritis in their twenties as a result of being overweight, he explained.

Instead, he decided we should figure out exactly why my knees were spontaneously collapsing. He sent me for an MRI, and I had a consultation with a specialist surgeon. “Patellae chondromalacia,” the surgeon declared. He showed me the shadows on my scan, which indicated rough patches on my knee caps. It was probably hereditary, exacerbated by my weight.

“Ok,” I said. “So what can I do about it?”

“You’re just going to have to manage the pain,” he explained. “And once it gets to be too much, you’re going to need your knees replaced. And that will probably be before you’re 30.”

[quote position=”full” is_quote=”true”]I had eight years before I turned 30. It felt a bit like a death sentence.[/quote]

Resigned, I accepted my diagnosis. I said goodbye to yoga and dance, which aggravated the condition, and started wondering about how much two new knees might cost, and how I’d get around on crutches. I had eight years before I turned 30. It felt a bit like a death sentence.

At 24, my new housemate decided she was joining our local gym, and in a moment of optimism, I decided to go with her. This gym offered a free short session with one of their personal trainers to help newbies learn the ropes. “I’ll put you with Hao,” the receptionist said. “He’s got a physio background; he’s good with injuries.”

Hao was intimidating — really tall, super buff, thick Chinese accent that was hard to understand at first. “It says here you’ve got an injury,” he told me. “What is it?”

“I’ve got patellae chondromalacia in both knees,” I replied. “It’s-“

“Oh that,” he said, interrupting me. “I can fix that.”

What?

Hao explained to me that what I had was a pretty standard sporting injury that is usually treated successfully using exercise — a fact that none of my doctors had mentioned. I’d probably injured myself as a result of all that dance and netball I did as a teenager, and it might have been exacerbated by my family history of dodgy knees. It’s normally caught early and treated early — it’s very rare for it to get to the point of causing knees to collapse, but that can happen in serious cases with no treatment. “Work with me for 10 sessions,” said Hao. “If you don’t notice a difference, I’ll give you your money back.”

Well, after 10 sessions I noticed a pretty significant difference. After six months, the pain that had plagued me for six years was entirely gone.

[quote position=”full” is_quote=”true”]When doctors looked at me, they didn’t see a girl who danced, cycled, and played team sports. They saw a fat girl .[/quote]

I can’t help but think that there’s a whole lot of physical pain I could have avoided if any of the medical professionals I saw had considered the fact that I might have a sporting injury. And I can’t help but wonder if the reason they didn’t has to do with my weight.

When doctors looked at me, they didn’t see a girl who danced, cycled, and played team sports. They saw a fat girl — and they based their diagnosis on stereotypes about what that meant. I’m 29 now, and my knees no longer hurt. I don’t need to have them replaced — but if I’d listened to the weight-prejudiced opinions of my doctors, I might have.

This story is hardly unique.

Research shows that doctors have less respect for patients with higher body-mass indexes, which can lower the quality of care those patients receive. As one study put it:

“Many health care providers hold strong negative attitudes and stereotypes about people with obesity. There is considerable evidence that such attitudes influence person-perceptions, judgment, interpersonal behavior, and decision-making. These attitudes may impact the care they provide.”

Troublingly, many of the ideas that doctors have about fat patients aren’t even grounded in medical fact. Indeed, too often it’s forgotten that the science around weight loss and health isn’t all that settled. Does excess weight cause you to live a shorter life? Maybe, maybe not. Countless studies by BMI category have found that overweight people actually have lower rates of all-cause mortality than normal weight people.

Some researchers think that if you adjust for the increased risks caused by weight cycling (aka. yo-yo dieting) and dangerous weight-loss drugs, you’d find the same mortality rates for normal, overweight, and obese people — yes, even very obese people. And even without the adjustments, the increased risk for very obese people is only small — not the “you’ll be dead before you’re 30” nonsense often pedaled by purveyors of weight-loss surgeries.

What about serious disease? There’s certainly a correlation between being overweight and some diseases, but multiple studies suggest that the weight might actually be a symptom rather than a cause.

Then there’s the idea that excess tissue “strains” the body. Eminent obesity researcher Dr. Paul Ernsberger has been quoted as saying, “The idea that fat strains the heart has no scientific basis. As far as I can tell, the idea comes from diet books, not scientific books . . . Unfortunately, some doctors read diet books.”

[quote position=”full” is_quote=”true”]So why, then, do doctors insist on prescribing diets and weight loss as a treatment for anything and everything?[/quote]

What about dieting? Well, there actually is some scientific consensus there :  Diets don’t lead to lasting weight loss—not even if you call them lifestyle changes. After an extensive metastudy of diet and weight loss studies, Dr Traci Mann concluded, “The benefits of dieting are simply too small and the potential harms of dieting are too large for it to be recommended as a safe and effective treatment for obesity.”

So why, then, do doctors insist on prescribing diets and weight loss as a treatment for anything and everything?

Sarah, 29 from Newcastle, Australia, had the misfortune of breaking both legs as a teenager, the result of a freak accident involving her legs falling asleep and then getting twisted to the point of breaking. Not long after learning how to walk again, she was involved in a serious car accident that left her with further damage to her legs. “I’m accident-prone,” she laughs. The multiple injuries have left Sarah with a build up of scar tissue that can make walking painful. But when she went to the doctor, her pain was blamed on her weight.

“My weight is a factor in the healing process,” she says, “But it wasn’t the cause of my injuries — and I’ve got police reports, x-rays, and specialist reports to prove it.”

Sarah changed doctors recently, and her new doctor decided to do a full medical history, checking the notes from all the physicians Sarah has seen. What she found shocked her. “She said there’s no record of my injuries with most of my previous doctors,” Sarah said. “They all had written that my leg pain was caused solely by my weight, and that meant I wasn’t getting any useful treatment for the pain. They just told me to diet.” Sarah’s new doctor promptly started her on a physical treatment plan designed for someone with compound injuries and severe internal scarring.

The difference has been immediate.

“Within two weeks I could walk nearly five kilometers. Before I started the treatment, I could only manage one kilometer or less before my knees were so swollen and painful that I couldn’t keep going,” said Sarah. “Getting actual treatment for my injuries, rather than just being told to lose weight and see what happens, has changed everything.”

Just to be clear, I’m not saying that eating healthily and exercising aren’t good for you. The problem is when doctors prescribe diets and weight loss to patients without fully considering their symptoms and other treatment options.

Stigmatization may also, problematically, stop fat people from seeking out medical care in the first place.

“I just don’t go to the doctor,” says Anita, a 28-year-old advertising executive. The last time Anita saw a doctor, it was a routine visit to discuss vaccinations and antimalarial medication for an upcoming overseas trip. The doctor prescribed the vaccines and asked a nurse to administer the jabs. It was the nurse who decided Anita had diabetes — without having spoken to her, or seeing anything pertaining to her medical history.

“He kept saying I would get a discount on the vaccines if I registered my diabetes,” Anita explained. “I haven’t got diabetes, but he wouldn’t listen. His whole attitude was like, ‘You know you’re fat, right?’ Um, yeah, I’ve noticed that, actually. Just give me the jabs.” The experience was pretty upsetting, and left Anita firmer in her resolve to avoid doctors wherever possible.

Still, Anita, Sarah, and I are relatively lucky; our experiences have caused us pain and humiliation, but no permanent damage. This is not true for everyone.

First Do No Harm is a website that chronicles the experiences of fat people with medical professionals — and it’s filled with harrowing stories.

One woman lost a lot of weight suddenly and was praised for it — with doctors missing the fact that it was a sign of the cancer that shortly killed her.

A man vomited constantly due to multiple sclerosis, but instead of viewing that as a medical red flag, doctors simply celebrated the 120-pound weight loss it caused. The vomiting led to permanent nerve damage, back pain, and tooth decay.

A woman had an emergency doctor declare that she didn’t need treatment for abdominal swelling after a serious car accident because she was just fat. She nearly died.

A woman went years just being told to lose weight to address her ongoing, multiple health problems. It turns out she has a rare neurological disorder; the diagnosis delay has led to permanent brain damage.

There’s another trove of awful stories on fat prejudice here. And of course Google’s got plenty more.

[quote position=”full” is_quote=”true”]Hormonal problems? Lose weight. Broken finger? Lose weight. Migraines? Lose weight.[/quote]

A consistent narrative runs throughout these stories. Hormonal problems? Lose weight. Broken finger? Lose weight. Migraines? Lose weight. Losing weight is the consistent — sometimes only — treatment offered for every ailment imaginable.

For many, changing the narrative around weight is literally a matter of life or death. So what can be done to address the problem?

The good news is that there’s some recognition within the medical profession that this is a serious issue which must be addressed. It’s been noted that medical students don’t receive nearly enough training on obesity, and efforts are beginning to try to change that. Researchers are also working on empathy programs and raising awareness about the impact of implicit bias against patients. All of this is a promising start.

At the same time, we can all become our own health advocates. If you’re a fat person, or someone you care about is a fat person, you can develop your critical thinking skills and challenge the classic “just lose weight” prescription if it doesn’t seem to fit the symptoms.

This isn’t easy. There’s an implicit power imbalance between patient and doctor that makes challenging their statements very difficult. By working to become experts on our own health and our own situation, we stand a better chance of being able to call out something that doesn’t feel right.

Doctors are highly educated people, but they’re subject to the same biases as the rest of us, and many of them don’t stay up to date with the latest research. That’s not good enough. If obesity really is a major health concern, it’s essential that doctors stay educated on recent studies and metastudies that look at how to get the best outcomes for fat patients. If doctors really do care about their patients, they need to start looking at the overall picture of a person’s health, not simply the size of their body.

Most of all, doctors need to stop prescribing a treatment that’s proven not to work for conditions that don’t warrant that treatment in the first place.

The medical profession needs to step up. It needs to accept that diets aren’t the universal treatment option for fat people. It needs to accept that fatness isn’t the universal cause of ill health in fat people. It needs to engage with the very real damage caused by its attitudes toward fat people, and with the substandard care delivered to many people as a result of their size.

It’s not exaggerating to say that lives depend on it.

This piece is published in partnership with The Establishment.

  • More women are rejecting ‘optimization culture’ for realistic wellness plans
    Photo credit: CanvaA woman intensely exercises, left, and a morning stretch, right.

    Being fit used to mean getting enough sleep, drinking more water, and moving your body, perhaps in a daily walk. With the explosion of social media and digital self-help trends, finding an acceptable level of wellness can feel like stepping into a full-time job with daily performance reviews.

    For many women, what started as self-care has slowly become another exhausting form of self-optimization. And increasingly, they’re pretty much done with it. According to Women’s Business Daily, one of the biggest wellness shifts happening right now is a move away from extreme routines. Women want habits that actually fit into real life.

    fitness culture, self-optimization, realistic wellness, mindful living
    An intense workout.
    Photo credit: Canva

    Wellness feels like a full-time job

    Instead of chasing perfection, more women are choosing what can be described as a more realistic approach to wellness, incorporating sustainable routines built around balance and emotional well-being rather than climbing a never-ending ladder of constant improvement.

    The shift comes after a solid decade of what many refer to online as “optimization culture.” This exhausting idea assumes that every part of life needs to be carefully measured, improved, and optimized.

    Experts believe this mindset is not only making people miserable; it’s unsustainable.

    wellness overload, social wellness, health fatigue, hustle culture
    An exhausting routine.
    Photo credit: Canva

    A backlash against the “always improve yourself” culture

    A recent article in Psychology Today found that “wellnessmaxxing” trends turn self-care into another form of anxiety. This is especially true when routines become so demanding that people feel more guilt than relief. As creators post TikToks showing themselves “maxing out” in some kind of self-congratulation, they spread unhelpful expectations that no longer promote self-care.

    Verywell Health explains that these influencers broadcast an all-consuming performance metric. People now face a painful realization that they can never do enough. It’s hard to miss the irony that wellness has begun to feel unhealthy.

    Women are increasingly embracing low-pressure routines instead of overly aspirational ones. Think walks instead of cross-training, and a morning meditation instead of a week-long stay at a Tibetan monastery. It’s okay to just eat more vegetables instead of a perfectly balanced daily nutrition plan of 150 grams of protein, wheatgrass smoothies, and specifically rated pH-balanced alkaline water.

    After all the extreme exercises, self-help books, and sophisticated meal plans, it’s time to get back to basics. Here’s one version of a realistic plan: drink some water, get outside, and try to sleep a little better.

    anti-hustle, performance pressure, happiness, lifestyle
    A casual walk with a dog.
    Photo credit: Canva

    Getting back to the basics

    A beauty editor writing for Who What Wear documented her attempt to follow a social-media-inspired wellness reset. With all the expensive and complicated habits she hoped would unlock the “incredibly high-functioning, ultra-productive version” of herself, she came away understanding that she should stick with the basics.

    Modern life already asks women to juggle careers, caregiving, appearance standards, finances, and relationships. Somewhere along the journey, wellness became just one more category to add to the pile.

    work life balance, culture, community, women wellness
    Maintaining a perfect life balance.
    Photo credit: Canva

    Women are choosing simple, sustainable routines

    Finding realistic wellness is a trend that reflects a growing desire for community-centered wellness rather than isolated self-improvement. Instead of wellness looking like a solo pursuit for an achievement award, many women are leaning toward connection: walking groups, shared meals, accountability with friends, and being honest about feeling burned out on all of it.

    The Times reports that people feel walking groups are less intimidating and more emotionally supportive. People don’t just want fitness; they want to belong to something.

    A 2025 study in Frontiers in Psychology focused on the benefits of women finding social support groups. Programs that incorporated women’s preferences into their daily lives were more likely to be enjoyed and maintained.

    Wellness cultures have told women the answer is to do more: more discipline, more self-reflection, more perfect sleep, more work dedication, more family direction, more effort.

    Making life more enjoyable and realistic can help well-being feel easier to maintain. A joyful life is better lived “in” than constantly measured “against” unrealistic expectations.

  • Is baby talk bad? Why ‘parentese’ actually helps babies learn language
    Photo credit: MoMo Productions/DigitalVision via Getty ImagesEmphasizing the sounds of certain words to young children can help them retain language, not confuse them about speaking properly.

    Many parents have heard the warning: Don’t use baby talk with babies and toddlers. Instead, caregivers are often encouraged to speak properly and use adultlike language, out of concern that simplified speech could confuse children or delay language development.

    But my research, which I highlighted in in my new book, “Beyond Words,” suggests the opposite is true. The sing-song voice many adults instinctively use with infants, sometimes called “baby talk” but more accurately known as “parentese” or infant-directed speech, actually helps children learn language.

    Far from confusing babies, exaggerating phrases like “Loooook at the doggie!” capture their attention, help them detect patterns in speech and strengthen social bonding.

    And the funny mistakes children make along the way, such as saying “goed,” instead of “went,” or “mouses” instead of “mice,” are not signs that children are learning language incorrectly. They are evidence that children are actively working out the rules of language for themselves.

    A man holds his hands away from his face and leans over a small baby lying on a bed and smiles.
    Speaking ‘parentese’ to a child doesn’t involve nonsense words. BjelicaS/E+ via Getty Images

    What parentese really is

    When many people think of baby talk, they imagine nonsense phrases like “goo goo ga ga” or made-up words like “num nums.” But that’s not what linguists and developmental psychologists mean by parentese.

    Parentese uses real words and grammatically correct sentences, but with exaggerated intonation, a higher pitch, stretched-out vowels and a slower rhythm. Think of the way a caregiver might naturally say: “Hi, baaaaby! Are you huuungry?”

    There is little evidence that occasional playful nonsense words harm children’s language development. But studies suggest that parentese in particular helps babies pay attention to speech, recognize patterns and engage socially.

    Adults across cultures tend to speak this way to infants instinctively. Even people who swear they never use baby talk often slip into it around babies.

    Researchers have found that infants actually prefer listening to parentese over regular adult speech. The exaggerated sounds and slower pacing make language easier to process. Babies are better able to pick out individual sounds, notice word boundaries and recognize patterns. In other words, parentese helps tune babies into language.

    It also strengthens emotional connection. Language learning does not happen in isolation. Babies learn through warm, responsive interaction with caregivers during feeding, play, bath time and everyday routines.

    Interestingly, humans are not the only ones who respond to this style of communication. Studies have even shown that cats react more positively when people use a baby-talk voice with them.

    Babies are not passive learners

    Children do not learn language simply by copying adults word for word. They actively test hypotheses about how language works. That is why toddlers make predictable and surprisingly logical mistakes.

    One common example is overgeneralization. A child learns that people form the past tense of many verbs by adding “-ed,” so they produce forms like “goed,” “eated” or “comed.”

    These are not random errors. In fact, they show that the child has understood a grammatical rule and is trying to apply it consistently. The problem is simply that English is full of irregular exceptions. The same thing happens with plurals. Children may say “foots” instead of “feet” or “mouses” instead of “mice.” Again, the logic behind these errors is sound.

    Linguists sometimes say that children are little scientists, constantly testing patterns and revising their understanding as they receive more input from the world around them.

    Why toddlers call everything a ‘dog’

    Young children also make predictable mistakes with meaning.

    A toddler might learn the word “dog” and then use it for every four-legged animal they encounter. Linguists call this overextension. On the flip side, some children use words too narrowly. A child may use “dog” only for the family pet and not recognize that other dogs belong in the same category. Linguists call this tendency underextension.

    These mistakes reveal how children organize and categorize the world around them. They are gradually mapping words onto objects, people and experiences.

    Pronouns are another tricky area. Small children often confuse “me” and “you” because these words constantly shift depending on who is speaking. If a parent says, “I’ll pick you up,” the child hears themselves called “you.” But when they try to repeat the sentence, they may not yet understand that the labels switch from speaker to speaker.

    This is why toddlers sometimes say things that sound unintentionally cute or confusing. But beneath the confusion is a sophisticated learning process.

    Even the Cookie Monster gets it wrong

    Children’s speech errors are so recognizable that they often appear in popular culture. Sesame Street’s character Cookie Monster famously says things like “Me want cookie,” while Elmo often refers to himself in the third person: “Elmo wants this.” These speech patterns mirror real stages of child language development. Young children commonly confuse pronouns or refer to themselves by name before mastering forms like “I,” “me” and “mine.”

    Despite occasional complaints from adults, there is no evidence that hearing this kind of speech harms children’s language development. If anything, it reflects the natural experimentation children go through.

    A Cookie Monster puppet stands near a black tarp with its mouth open and holds a cookie.
    The Cookie Monster saying ‘Me want cookie’ won’t teach babies and young kids to speak incorrectly. Brian Killian/WireImage via Getty Images

    ‘Pasketti’ and ‘wabbit’

    Pronunciation develops gradually too. Young children often simplify difficult sounds and groups of consonants. “Spaghetti” becomes “pasketti,” “rabbit” becomes “wabbit” and “yellow” may come out as “lellow.”

    Speech-language specialists call these simplifications phonological processes. They are a normal part of development because some sounds are physically harder to produce than others. Sounds such as r, th, sh and ch tend to develop later because they require more precise control of the tongue and mouth.

    Most children naturally outgrow these pronunciation patterns as their speech matures. However, persistent difficulties can sometimes signal a speech or language disorder, which may require professional support.

    A graphic image shows a young child's head with various colorful thought bubbles inside.
    Children don’t learn language by copying adults word for word. They learn through interaction, experimentation and repetition. DrAfter123/DigitalVision Vectors via Getty Images

    Mistakes are part of learning

    Parents are often under enormous pressure to do everything right, including helping their children learn to speak a language. But children do not learn language by avoiding mistakes. They learn through interaction, experimentation and repetition.

    Parentese helps babies focus on speech and engage socially. The funny mistakes toddlers make reveal that they are actively piecing together the complex system of language and are often signs of normal development. Language acquisition is messy, creative and remarkably sophisticated.

    Speaking in an exaggerated sing-song voice to a baby is not something parents and caregivers need to feel embarrassed about.

    Far from harming language acquisition, it may help lay the foundation for it.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

  • People who dread working out are trying ‘micro walks,’ and the results feel great
    Photo credit: CanvaWomen enjoy a short walk.

    For many people, working out isn’t the hard part. It’s everything that comes with it: the time commitment, the pressure of consistency, and the feeling that only full workouts count.

    That all-or-nothing mindset keeps a lot of people from even getting started. This might explain why a small idea has been gaining traction. Instead of setting aside an hour or two to exercise, people are taking “micro walks” instead.

    physical exercise, short bursts, mindset, consistency
    Two women enjoy a quick “micro walk.”
    Photo credit: Canva

    “Micro walks” are simple and still provide the benefits

    A loop around the block in the morning. A quick break between meetings or events on the daily schedule. Perhaps another lap after dinner. These short walks sprinkled throughout the day might seem too simple to matter.

    For a growing number of people, the simplicity is what makes it really work. Doing less at a time, but more often, is what’s resonating. The barrier to entry suddenly drops. People don’t need much motivation. Just a few minutes is enough to get started.

    The hidden appeal behind shorter walks

    The appeal of a “micro walk” for people dreading a workout isn’t necessarily about peak optimization. The benefits come from gaining momentum. For individuals who have spent years feeling like they’re either all-in or completely off track, this offers a third option.

    Short periods of exercise fit into the structure of real life instead of competing with it. Finding the time to set aside large blocks of time can be difficult for many people. Breaking movement into smaller increments makes it far more manageable.

    In the end, consistency matters more than perfection. Getting daily steps in becomes something achievable rather than overwhelming.

    Research shows that shorter walks work

    A 2024 study published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, a scientific journal recognized for its rigorous reviews, investigated the benefits of different walking patterns. The findings revealed that short walking bursts use more energy than longer continuous walks. Breaking up exercise is more impactful than it seems.

    Harvard Health Publishing reported that even brief walks can boost energy and counteract the effects of prolonged sitting. Getting moving has significant heart health advantages, and walking is extremely accessible.

    Physical exercise boosts overall well-being

    Turning short walks into a mental reset can boost a person’s emotional well-being. Physical exercise stimulates the body, yet it also increases inner harmony. A 2025 study published in Springer Nature found that even a 10-minute walk can meaningfully improve mood regulation. Finding the time for a brief walk can lessen symptoms of anxiety.

    A 2024 study published in Nature demonstrated that short activity breaks increase cognitive performance and elevate mood. There are immediate emotional advantages to activities like “micro walks,” not just long-term fitness gains.

    Science demonstrates that walking has both physical and emotional benefits. The most common barriers are time and motivation. Shifting from big goals to showing up in small, repeatable moments is what actually matters. “Micro walks” turn movement from something people have to make time for into something that becomes part of how they live. It’s another small step toward finding happiness.

Explore More Health Stories

Health

Is baby talk bad? Why ‘parentese’ actually helps babies learn language

Health

People who dread working out are trying ‘micro walks,’ and the results feel great

Health

Most people don’t know what they don’t know, but think they do – correcting your metaknowledge can make you a better teacher and learner

Health

You can change your emotions – but it’s a 2‑step process that takes some effort