I have read a lot of scientific papers on the aetiology of anorexia nervosa (AN) over the past 6 years. The papers I read are always peer-reviewed and published in good quality journals – as opposed to a magazine or internet site wherein a health journalist writes an article about AN from bits of information they have obtained. The latter articles are sometimes biased (unintentionally) in accordance with the journalists’ understanding of AN and can generate over-simplistic ideas and erroneous assumptions amongst the public. The advantage of peer-review is that it holds more scientific merit in theory, but what I know from having peer-reviewed published papers myself (and from peer-reviewing papers for potential publication), is that ‘old boys’ networks’ exist. A researcher is often asked by the editor of the journal to suggest appropriate referees for their paper – who they know concur with their own ideas.
From my extensive reading, what I have concluded is that there are so many theories; so many ideas; so many paradigms – in relation to the matter of what triggers AN, and what maintains it…., that it’s almost impossible to ‘see the wood for the trees’. At present it is impossible to state that AN is elicited by a specific environmental/interpersonal/endogenous trigger. It is difficult to say who in society is vulnerable to this illness and what endogenous/exogenous factors drive the illness. Furthermore, there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ effective treatment. Of course, re-feeding to a ‘healthy weight’ (which is individually specific…) and de-sensitisation to the anxiety associated with eating are vital to recovery. However, good nutrition and weight gain alone do not necessarily cure AN. The Minnesota Starvation Experiment is often applied to AN to provide an explanation for the cause of the illness; but unlike many people with AN, none of the volunteers who took part in this experiment struggled with the idea of behaviour change, accepting food, or accepting weight gain during the recovery period.
Over recent years, some researchers have started to study inherited traits that may increase an individual’s susceptibility to developing AN. This makes a lot of sense to me, because such traits are inborn and not a feature of our culture. Furthermore, if the risk of developing AN is determined by inherent traits and the expression of these traits is intensified by semi-starvation, then this may explain why culture is NOT the cause of AN. (So sorry, those people who focus on changing our culture in an attempt to prevent AN; I’m not convinced you’re on to a winner there….). If culture were the cause of AN, then many more teens would develop AN – because we do live within a ridiculously appearance-obsessed, vacuous and somewhat narcissistic world. I am all for changing our culture, but not because I think it will prevent eating disorders. AN is a rare illness.
Last week I read a paper that defined AN as ‘the relentless pursuit of thinness’ – and linked anorexic behaviours to our ‘toxic’ (appearance-obsessed) culture. In another paper, I saw AN defined as an illness wherein sufferers ‘base their self-worth upon their (thin) body shape’. That may be true for some individuals, but it is a very narrow and prescriptive definition of a complex illness. There are lots of people without an eating disorder who dislike their body shape/appearance and try to change their shape (and themselves) through diet. Furthermore, some people with AN do not have major body image concerns… The danger of over-simplistic ideas wherein an illness is considered culture-bound is that the antidote for AN is to change society. Of course that won’t do the trick… AN exists in all cultures. It is merely that those people with AN who live in less industrialised nations, in the absence of widespread fat phobia, provide different personal reasons for their anorexic behaviours. But I would still support a change to our society – away from self-obsession and appearance-focus.
In yet another paper, the authors described AN as a form of ‘restricted repetitive behaviours’ (RRB). This description made a lot of sense to me and my personal experience of AN. RRBs are observed in people with obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), people with an obsessive-compulsive personality, and people with autistic spectrum conditions. I certainly have a longstanding diagnosis of OCD and definite RRBs. I have always said that if my AN were ‘about’ wanting to be thin, why would I have had the urge to exercise on the same treadmill in the gym at the same time of day, for the same duration. Why would I feel terribly frustrated if I entered the gym and found someone on ‘my’ treadmill? My obsessive-compulsive behaviours weren’t ‘about’ losing weight or expending energy; they were anxiety-related, very rigid ritualistic behaviours and fixed routines; the ‘side-effects’ of which were weight loss and the maintenance of a low weight.
I am beginning to think that there are many things we call anorexia nervosa and that it is not a fixed syndrome with a precise cause or common aetiology. And that is why I am in favour of individualised treatment and the avoidance of unified theories/models which purport to explain all aspects of this complex illness.
On a less grim note, I will end this post with a photo of my beloved boy, who incidentally doesn’t have AN.














