The new fitness world: commodifying well-being in the neoliberal era
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
This paper examines the fitness industry as a by-product of neoliberal ideology, using "The New Way of the World: On Neoliberal Society" as a conceptual framework. Neoliberalism, as articulated by Dardot and Laval, extends beyond economic policy to shape governance and human behavior by embedding market-driven rationality into everyday life. The fitness industry, with its emphasis on individual responsibility for health and self-optimization, exemplifies core neoliberal tenets. It fosters the notion of the "entrepreneurial self," wherein success or failure is attributed to personal merit, thereby marginalizing collective health initiatives. The proliferation of fitness influencers further reinforces this paradigm, often disseminating misinformation and promoting unrealistic ideals of health and fitness. We argue that the commodification of health within the fitness industry aligns with neoliberalism's foundational principles: competitiveness, self-regulation, and the erosion of collective structures. In response, we advocate for a shift toward health frameworks rooted in inclusivity, equity, and shared responsibility, challenging the individualistic ethos embedded in current fitness discourse. Reimagining health policy through a lens of solidarity offers a pathway to dismantling neoliberal rationality and fostering a more democratic and equitable health system.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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