I ran across a page from the National Eating Disorder Association that I thought was worth a few grafs (as in "paragraphs," a vestige of newspaper-ese). The page’s headline is “Factors That May Contribute to Eating Disorders.”
The good news is that one of the subheadings is “Biological Factors That Can Contribute to Eating Disorders.” I, of course, expend a lot of my time promoting the biological aspect, without which “food addiction” would be the empty suit its detractors paint it.
My *general* observation is that among ED professionals, the biological component has taken a backseat, and is often still pooh-poohed by “experts” who say “and I have a Ph.D.” (yes, that happened, on Twitter, in a discussion of several folks on Twitter a couple of weeks ago) or “my practice works for me” without allowing that their failures might be due to this particular blind spot.
So, wtg, NEDA. ‘Course, it’s still listed fourth of four, with strong skepticism not included in the first three categories (psychological, social, interpersonal). Here’s a sample:
Scientists are still researching possible biochemical or biological causes of eating disorders. In some individuals with eating disorders, certain chemicals in the brain that control hunger, appetite, and digestion have been found to be unbalanced. The exact meaning and implications of these imbalances remain under investigation.
”Still researching...possible...some...exact meaning...remain under investigation.” Yes, NEDA, wtg.
The other thing worth pointing out is that in many cases, more than once or several of these factors could all be at play in someone’s problem eating. Just because it’s not only, say, the obesogenic environment, or the abuse in one’s past, or one’s depressive tendencies, doesn’t mean it isn’t also those things.