The term “eating disorder” carries stigma and many stereotypes in society. When someone hears the term, they often think of a white adolescent girl, bone thin, with ribs sticking out of her sides and a feeding tube up her nose. This extreme example represents an immensely small population of a large group of people struggling every day with something so many take for granted: eating.

The general public vastly misunderstands eating disorders. When thinking of eating disorders, most think of two types, the one where extremely underweight people do not eat, and the one where people make themselves vomit after every meal. Some may think in both scenarios people choose to engage in those behaviors which means they should simply stop when they want to. However, people with anorexia cannot “just eat,” people with bulimia cannot “just stop,” and it is not “just a phase.” Many believe in an eating disorder “look” as in a person with anorexia must be underweight and a “normal sized” person cannot possibly struggle with an eating disorder. People with eating disorders do not check boxes and they do not fall neatly into diagnostic looks or criteria. Eating disorders, despite popular belief are not about the food, but rather a complex interplay of many different insecurities and worries all channeled into food.

Eating disorders do not only affect models, they affect a large number of people, yet the public directs so little attention to them which only causes a perpetuation of misconceptions. Despite a general need for a greater understanding about eating disorders, they receive so little time, energy or money. This keeps stigma going which leads to adverse effects such as “more marked eating disorder symptoms, a longer duration of illness, lower self ‐ esteem, and greater self ‐ stigma of seeking psychological help.” (Griffiths para. 34) Eating disorders remain incredibly underfunded for research and other prevention strategies, thus creating ongoing misunderstandings. Government funding for eating disorders remains incredibly low compared to other issues “not as pervasive nor as fatal as eating disorders.” (Ekren para 3) The US government funds only 28 million dollars a year to eating disorder research which works out to about 93 cents for each person diagnosed with an eating disorder in America (Ekern para 3). This is compared to alcoholism which receives 505 million dollars, schizophrenia with 352 million, depression with 328 million and sleep disorders with 187 million (Ekern para 4). The funding statistics beg the question: why is something which needs so many resources continuing to receive so few? Currently, despite their prevalence in American society, people remain ignorant to the problem of eating disorders, spreading distorted ideas and beliefs. Increasing funding for eating disorder research into causes, education and best prevention strategies potentially greatly benefits America. The Pennsylvanian Department of Health should take measures to combat this problem and contribute to research initiatives by creating an eating disorder research grant given to the PA Health Research Office.

Thesis:  Currently there is a devastating lack of funding for research on eating disorders despite their prevalence. The Pennsylvanian Department of Health should help to combat this problem by increasing their funding for eating disorder research through grants given to the PA Health Research Office

Solution Section:

A way to start to combat eating disorders in America is to increase funding for eating disorder research. As previously stated, eating disorders are severely underfunded in America, yet are such a prevalent and pervasive problem, affecting people of all ages. An increase in research could help find more concreate causes of eating disorders and work to figure out the most effective ways to treat them. Research on eating disorders could also focus on finding the most successful intervention methods, and the best ways to education children, and the public at large about the problems at hand. Researching things like early warning signs would help medical professionals have the tool to intervene early and effectively

When looking at funding and how to best support those with eating disorders, an issue comes in where the funding can and should come from, and the best place that it should be channeled. When looking on the national scale, it is apparent the national government has taken little care to learn more about eating disorders based on their incredible lack of funding. Therefore, the best way for eating disorders to get the funding for research, prevention and education would be to go to a state-by-state basis and take a more local government funding approach. A local approach would be done by taking state money and creating grants that would go to mental health research and specifically eating disorder research.

The commonwealth of Pennsylvania is in a unique position to become trailblazers in eating disorder funding and research. For one, the Health Secretary of Pennsylvania has a unique background and interest in eating disorders that put her in a perfect situation to being to raise funding and awareness. Before becoming Health Secretary, Rachel Levine founded the Penn State Hershey Adolescent Eating Disorder Program. She has an extensive background in treating eating disorder and carried this interest into her current role in the Pennsylvania government. In 2018, “as part of the commonwealth’s commitment to raising awareness of eating disorders,” Governor Tom Wolf signed a proclamation declaring an official eating disorder week in Pennsylvania (Wolf Administration Discusses Impacts of Eating Disorders para. 3). In the years that followed, Dr. Levine joined with legislative and eating disorder advocates to emphasize the need for resources and support. In 2020, Governor Wolf showed his support for those with mental illness once again when he launched “a multi-agency effort and anti-stigma campaign, Reach Out PA: Your Mental Health Matters, aimed at expanding resources and overall support of mental health and related health care priorities.” (Department of Health Urges Awareness para. 6)

Pennsylvania currently ranks fifth in the country for mental health funding with 287.17 dollars given per capita per year (Sawe para. 5). Pennsylvania’s past allocation of resources indicate a willingness to fund mental health initiatives, and thus directing funding to eating disorder support would be feasible and understandable in this state setting. A state level approach to gaining funding for eating disorder support and research is the best way to start to develop a more national approach to treating eating disorders.

The best way for the state to begin to direct funds for eating disorder research and support would be through state grants in the Department of Health in their Health Research Office. The function of this office is to receive health-related grants from the state, and to carry out the research directives from these grants. A grant from the state for an eating disorder research project in the PA Health Research Office would be the best way Pennsylvania and its leadership could take their interest in this subject and begin to create concreate change in this field. This state funded research project would likely aim to learn more about the causes of eating disorder, but also aim to gain insight in the best preventative measures. By looking at not just cause, but also the measures that can affect outcomes of eating disorders, this project can begin to outline procedures and interventions governments and states can make in preventing these diseases. Any project resulting from this grant should aim to provide details for the state in how to intervene and support those with eating disorders and those at greatest risk.

There still may be questions over the effectiveness of a state approach to funding rather than a national approach. Some believe the recent attention the federal government has given to eating disorders may indicate a national approach as more effective. Congress recently introduced the SERVE Act which “to provide for eating disorders treatment for members and certain former members of the uniformed services, and dependents of such members,” (SERVE Act para. 1) and the LIVE Well Act which “to include eating disorders prevention within the nutrition education and obesity prevention grant program and the local wellness program” (LIVE Well Act para. 2). These two bills, however, do not prove a new dedication of the national government to eating disorders. These bills have yet to make it to the floor of the house and are very unlikely to make it there. When it comes to the national government, most major attempts to bring change to eating disorder awareness and practices have been ineffective, thus strengthening the case for a more localized approach.

If Pennsylvania would expand its demonstrated interest in finding and providing resources for mental health awareness and resources into a more specific eating disorder research initiative, they could become a model for other states around the country. If Pennsylvania were to take the steps to allocate money, more specifically to the Pennsylvania Department of Health, overseen by Dr. Levine, they could demonstrate to other states a process and procedure to create and implement funding and resources. If done in a way that demonstrates significant results, other states may see the need to take similar steps and fund eating disorder research and other preventative measures, thus spreading the awareness to a much greater region than just Pennsylvania. It would only take one state to create a funding blueprint for other states to do the same.

Works Cited

United States, Congress, “SERVE Act.” Congress.gov, 2019. www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2767.

United States, Congress, “LIVE Well Act.” Congress.gov, 2019. www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/2625.

Warren, Perry S. “Co-Sponsorship – Eating Disorder Parental Education Legislation.” The Official Website for the Pennsylvania General Assembly., Legislative Data Processing Center, 10 Jan. 2017, www.legis.state.pa.us//cfdocs/Legis/CSM/showMemoPublic.cfm?chamber=H&SPick=20170&cosponId=21951.

Sawe, Benjamin Elisha. “States Who Spend the Most on Mental Health Funding.” WorldAtlas, Aug. 1, 2017, worldatlas.com/articles/states-who-spend-the-most-on-mental-health-funding.html.

“Wolf Administration Discusses Impacts of Eating Disorders.” Pennsylvania Pressroom, PA Press Office , 27 Feb. 2018, https://www.media.pa.gov/Pages/Health-Details.aspx?newsid=480.

“Department of Health Urges Awareness.” Pennsylvania Pressroom, PA Press Office , 25 Feb. 2020, https://www.media.pa.gov/Pages/Health-Details.aspx?newsid=722.

For my advocacy project, I would like to continue my subject matter from my issue brief and focus on eating disorders in America. The advocacy organization I could hypothetically partner with could be the National Eating Disorder Association (NEDA). NEDA is a major eating disorder resource in the United States and is constantly working to spread awareness of and resources for eating disorders. The exigence for this organization is clear with how prevalent eating disorders are in America, and how deadly eating disorders are. NEDA’s audience is people currently struggling with eating disorders and their families as they provide both education and resources. Other audiences include people who have recovered, medical professionals, mental health professionals, and lawmakers. Overall, they target anyone affected by eating disorder, or those who can impact change in the community. NEDA’s biggest constraints to their advocacy would most likely be funding, and the ability to reduce stigma that is so engrained in society.

https://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/

Here is a post from the NEDA blog:

https://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/blog/you-didnt-choose-and-you-didnt-fail