One the things that has most convinced me of how unserious obesity science is about getting fat people slim, is the lack of interest in the outliers of its own field of study.
Thing about them is, they are the ones most likely to mainfest the condition anyone is studying, usually things are observed in them and traced back to those with lesser symptoms of the matter at hand.
Obviously all stages are observed, but usually outliers take up an inordinate amount of time, often at the expense of those lesser affected. Which has sometimes been a cause for complaint.
They are bound though to attract disproportionate interest to those really fascinated and wanting to achieve mastery.
So why is the field of obesity science so disinterested in the fattest people?
Often the compassion which drives genuine vocation is increased when one sees people with the greatest challenge, if you ignore them, what message does that send about your desire to relieve suffering or even to challenge your intellect?
Obesity science has always felt a mickey mouse area with no relevance to actual people. I can barely think of anything I've learned from it that I've incorporated into my life. Although I'm sure there must be some people who want to achieve something, they don't seem that bothered about the impression given by most of those involved.
It doesn't seem to be getting in their way which is a surprise.
They have the chance to be household names and to find out something peole really want, so why isn't it attracting the ruthlessly brilliant to take a hold of it and really turn it into a compelling subject?
The whole thing is more concerned with those who are not fat than those who are at the top of the scale and that's what is so odd, getting into science for social control, to use its' influence to order people about rather than to cure what we are told by many is a disease.
Why no sense of urgency about reversing it? All the hype to what purpose? To just perpetuate your field so you can carry on regardless?
Science for people not interested in science, so they can play at it perhaps affect what seems a liberal bias into scientific thinking? I think we should be told.