Potential Policies and Laws to Prohibit Weight Discrimination: Public Views from 4 Countries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Policy Points : Policies and legal protections against weight‐based discrimination have broad public support in 4 nations where this discrimination is widely documented. Public support was strongest for policies and laws that would prohibit employers from denying employment, assigning lower wages, and refusing promotion to people based on their weight status. Women and individuals with higher weight expressed the greatest support. Weight discrimination is common in numerous life settings, creating social and economic inequities and adverse health outcomes. Policies and legal measures protecting against such discrimination need to be developed and implemented in the United States and elsewhere and would have considerable public support. Context People viewed as “overweight” or “obese” are vulnerable to weight‐based discrimination, creating inequities and adverse health outcomes. Given the high rates of obesity recorded globally, studies documenting weight discrimination in multiple countries, and an absence of legislation to address this form of discrimination, research examining policy remedies across different countries is needed. Our study provides the first multinational examination of public support for policies and legislation to prohibit weight discrimination. Methods Identical online surveys were completed by 2,866 adults in the United States, Canada, Australia, and Iceland. We assessed public support for potential laws to prohibit weight‐based discrimination, such as adding body weight to existing civil rights statutes, extending disability protections to persons with obesity, and instituting legal measures to prohibit employers from discriminating against employees because of body weight. We examined sociodemographic and weight‐related characteristics predicting support for antidiscrimination policies, and the differences in these patterns across countries. Findings The majority of participants in the United States, Canada, and Australia agreed that their government should have specific laws in place to prohibit weight discrimination. At least two‐thirds of the participants in all 4 countries expressed support for policies that would make it illegal for employers to refuse to hire, assign lower wages, deny promotions, or terminate qualified employees because of body weight. Women and participants with higher body weight expressed more support for antidiscrimination measures. Beliefs about the causes of obesity were also related to support for these laws. Conclusions Public support for legal measures to prohibit weight discrimination can be found in the United States, Canada, Australia, and Iceland, especially for laws to remedy this discrimination in employment. Our findings provide important information for policymakers and interest groups both nationally and internationally and can help guide discussions about policy priorities to reduce inequities resulting from weight discrimination.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it