At 21 stone, I promoted body positivity. I should have been honest about how I felt
'While I was heavier, I still did everything I wanted to do – I went travelling, I dated gorgeous guys, saw all my favourite bands in concert,' says Goodman.
'I was determined to never let anything stop me. I always shared pictures of myself living my life and encouraged everyone to love themselves and their bodies, regardless of what they looked like. I should have been more honest about how I was feeling about myself.'
It was Goodman's penchant for binge eating that saw her weight consistently creep up, and at 23, she weighed nearly 21 stone.
Under the glossy veneer of happiness and her promotion of self-confidence, Goodman's life was marred with moments where she would feel shame: the time she had to get off a roller coaster as she was too large for the safety bar to close, or how she would hide her seat belt extenders under her stomach on flights.
'It wasn't every night, but there were times where it would all just hit me and I would cry and cry and cry about my body,' Goodman, now 29, explains. 'I didn't like the way I looked, and I didn't like the way I felt about myself.
'I felt as if I was a thinner girl trapped in a larger girl's body. I desperately wanted to lose weight, but didn't know what to do, which is when I started to look into surgical intervention.
'I'm not going to lie and pretend I don't feel so much better about myself now I've lost weight. I want to encourage others to love their bodies enough to make a healthy change.'
There are certainly plenty of people who need that encouragement: according to a study by Imperial College London, two thirds of UK adults are overweight, with obesity costing the NHS more than £6 billion a year. But it's not always the case that weight loss is welcomed, particularly in some digital spheres. Some factions of the body positivity movement, which looks to celebrate curves and body shapes previously derided as merely being 'overweight', are now critical towards influencers who have chosen to shed the pounds.
For body-positive activist and journalist Gina Tonic, a plus-size model or influencer losing weight can almost seem like a personal slight to their followers who may also be bigger.
'There are unspoken feelings of treachery between people who are fat and those who used to be fat,' she writes in her memoir, Greedy Guts. 'Watching those conceding to societal pressure can feel like a slap to the face.'
Lizzo, once at the forefront of the body positivity movement for celebrating her bigger frame, has faced backlash from some former fans after she chose to start losing weight. While her approach was slow burn (in an interview with The New York Times, the singer asserted that she was dropping the pounds in a gradual manner, and claims to have lost weight through Pilates and being in a calorie deficit), there is now an increasing number of weight loss drugs readily available for those able to afford them. Ozempic has gained popularity in the United States, and Wegovy is available in the UK for weight management.
Similarly, not everyone was pleased for Goodman as she went through her weight loss journey, which she has posted about candidly on Instagram. Her content has sometimes received a string of negative commentary from some of her 34,000 followers.
'I would get remarks that would become quite nasty,' she explains. 'People would say I've 'cheated', or that I've 'taken the easy way out'. But I am totally unapologetic for having surgery, and wish I'd done it years ago.
Though she had previously tried dieting and weight loss regimens such as Slimming World, nothing seemed to lead to long-term weight loss for Goodman. It was a family friend who recommended she try gastric sleeve surgery – a procedure in which a large part of the stomach is removed in order to create a tube-like structure with a smaller capacity. With the procedure being funded by her parents, Goodman went under the knife, and five years later she has lost more than eight stone. She has also earned the money to pay her parents back.
'It blows my mind that people can't just be happy for people. If you see someone go from 300lb to 170lb and they're living a healthier life, why would you not just be happy for that person?'
Canadian influencer Olivia Messina, who has more than 400,000 followers on Instagram, is another who has faced criticism for weight loss. Messina weighed more than 23 stone when at her heaviest, and always encouraged her followers to love their curves and embrace the bodies they were in – but she then started facing a number of health issues that were detrimental to her work as a plus-size model for a fashion brand.
'I found myself getting so tired so quickly,' she explains over Zoom from Toronto. 'I have the skin condition hidradenitis suppurativa, which causes lumps and scarring all over my skin, and it just kept getting worse.'
Beforehand, Messina would 'impulse-eat', loading up on carb-heavy food her body fancied rather than what it really needed. She also found herself relying on takeaways, frequently ordering dinner and snacks on Deliveroo and Uber Eats and eating large portions quickly.
'I was fed up of constantly feeling exhausted, and having to deal with the scars all across my body,' she continues. 'I was also struggling with poor mental health, with symptoms of depression and anxiety.
'My doctor recommended I tried eating a little healthier and work out more to see if that would help, and as I lost weight, my skin condition completely cleared up. Exercise became an outlet that helped me, and I decided to encourage others into starting their own fitness journey. I regret not doing it sooner.'
After more than a year of starting a gym routine, deleting takeaway apps and batch-cooking high-protein meals from scratch, Messina has lost more than 5 stone. To start with, she admits she did feel a little 'hypocritical' at losing weight after building such a following for her fuller figure – and she received some comments from followers urging her not to get 'too thin'.
'I think where body positivity goes wrong is how it tells you to love yourself no matter what,' Messina continues. 'I support body autonomy. I'm an advocate for individuals choosing what's right for them, and having the freedom to do what you want with your appearance.
'I'm very open about how weight loss has improved how I feel about myself and want my followers to understand the benefits of exercise that I've seen.'
Messina now feels healthier and happier with her body having lost weight: 'I used to be quite round, and now I have a more defined waist. I feel more feminine now.'
Goodman feels the same. While she always enjoyed team sports, she now has a regular gym routine and has discovered her love for running – she regularly completes 5km runs and now has her sights set on training for a marathon.
'I regret not being more clued up on nutrition and not knowing how to look after my body properly when I was younger,' she says. 'I understand there may be contention between being body-positive and then going on to lose weight, but it was so important for me to be honest about how I felt in myself.'
Goodman's weight loss has now opened further opportunities for her, seeing her working with clothing brand Gymshark, as well as moderating Gastric Gossip, a digital community for people who have undergone weight loss surgery.
Her substantial weight loss has now seen her undergo a tummy tuck, where she had one stone of loose skin removed from her stomach.
'The first time I looked in the mirror after the surgery, I cried,' she says. 'It was the first time I recognised myself as the girl I wanted to be. I've got the body I always dreamt of.
'I am so unapologetic about my journey. This is what has worked for me. There's always the fear that people would call me out about not being faithful towards being body-positive. And I always respond: I loved myself enough to do something that would make me love myself even more.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
27 minutes ago
- Medscape
Drug Combinations for CVDs Tied to Bullous Pemphigoid Risk
TOPLINE: A case-control study revealed that combinations of drugs for cardiovascular diseases and hypertension were frequently prescribed before a diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid (BP), but the risk associated with combinations did not exceed that associated with individual agents. The most common drug combinations included angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors with statins and antiplatelets with statins. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a nested case-control study using healthcare records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink between 1998 and 2021 and analysed 16,844 BP cases and 79,493 age- and sex-matched control individuals having no BP diagnosis at the index date (the first date a BP diagnosis code was recorded). Association rule mining (ARM) identified the 10 most common drug class or active substance pairs prescribed to cases or control individuals on the same day and within 6 months before the index date. In the sensitivity analysis, researchers identified medication pairs prescribed within 30 days of each other and during the 6 months preceding the index date. Researchers quantified how often two drugs are co-prescribed compared with their independent prescribing by calculating a lift. They then derived the fold change (FC) as the ratio of a lift in cases vs control individuals. The analysis included multivariable conditional logistic regression to estimate the risk for BP following drug combinations and their constituent drugs. TAKEAWAY: The most frequent drug combinations associated with an increased risk for BP were ACE inhibitors-statins (FC of the lifts in the main analysis vs sensitivity analysis: 1.31 vs 1.18), antiplatelets-statins (1.23 vs 1.11), proton pump inhibitors (PPI)-antiplatelets (1.22 vs 1.14), PPI-statins (1.22 vs 1.14), and ACE inhibitors-antiplatelets (1.20 vs 1.09). For drug substances, combinations with a greater lift in BP cases were simvastatin-ramipril (FC, 1.30), simvastatin-aspirin (FC, 1.21), and ramipril-aspirin (FC, 1.19). After adjusting for BP-associated drugs, the Charlson Comorbidity Index, and relevant confounders, the increased risk remained significant for these drug class combinations: antiplatelets-statins (odds ratio [OR], 1.20), ACE inhibitors-statins (OR, 1.16), PPI-statins (OR, 1.22), ACE inhibitors-antiplatelets (OR, 1.26), and PPI-antiplatelets (OR, 1.43; P < .001 for all). The risk for BP associated with these frequently prescribed drug combinations was lower than the risk linked to each constituent drug at both class and substance levels. In both main and sensitivity analyses, patients who developed BP were more likely than control individuals to have received combinations of cardiovascular or antihypertensive drugs before diagnosis. IN PRACTICE: "The ARM algorithm exploratory analysis identified the most commonly prescribed drug combinations prior to BP. Logistic regression confirmed drug combinations for CVDs [cardiovascular diseases] or hypertension associated with increased BP risk," the authors wrote. "The increased BP risk following reported combinations was modest and was not greater than their constituent drugs. Given that the number of patients with BP is low, we do not suggest avoiding the reported drugs but instead being on the lookout for any skin reactions following treatments for CVDs or hypertension," they concluded. SOURCE: This study was led by Mikolaj Swiderski, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, England. It was published online on August 06, 2025, in Clinical and Experimental Dermatology. LIMITATIONS: The ARM algorithm considered only the frequency of prescriptions to obtain drug combinations. Additionally, the algorithm demonstrated limited clinical value, linking only half of the inferred drug class combinations with BP and failing to capture the sequence or precise timing of prescriptions. It also lacked dosage and treatment duration data, and as an exploratory tool, ARM could not establish causal relationships between drug exposures and the risk for BP. DISCLOSURES: This research was supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Research grant via the Research for Patient Benefit Programme. Swiderski reported receiving salary funding from this grant. Another author reported receiving salary funding from King's College London, University of Nottingham, and the National Institute for Health and Care Research East Midlands scholarship scheme. Additional disclosures are noted in the original article. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
Medscape
27 minutes ago
- Medscape
A1c Testing in EDs Can Spot Undiagnosed Diabetes Cases
TOPLINE: Among adults aged 30 years or older presenting to the emergency department (ED) without a prior diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (T2D), A1c testing combined with the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) identified a substantial proportion with prediabetes or diabetes — especially among those from ethnically diverse populations. METHODOLOGY: Researchers in England conducted a prospective study from December 2021 to December 2022 to determine the prevalence of glucose intolerance among 1382 individuals aged 30 years or older (45.1% men) who did not have a known diagnosis of diabetes and presented to the ED of a hospital in Manchester. They also tested the utility of the FINDRISC in predicting the risk for diabetes in high-risk individuals. Data on demographics, lifestyle factors, physical measurements, and A1c levels were collected, and the FINDRISC assessment was conducted by trained staff. Patients were classified as those having normal glucose tolerance, prediabetes, or diabetes according to both National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines. TAKEAWAY: On the basis of the NICE criteria, 80.1% of attendees had normal glucose tolerance, 11.6% had prediabetes, and 8.3% had diabetes; on the basis of the ADA criteria, the corresponding percentages were 61.3%, 30.4%, and 8.3%, respectively. Each unit increase in the FINDRISC was linked to an 8% (5%-12%) higher risk for prediabetes and a 16% (10%-23%) higher risk for diabetes, as per the NICE criteria, with similar findings seen for the ADA criteria as well; the risk remained elevated even after adjustment for confounders. Compared with White individuals, British South Asian and other minority groups showed nearly twice the risk for prediabetes (relative risk ratio [RRR], 1.94; 95% CI, 1.11-3.38) and three times the risk for diabetes (RRR, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.61-4.84). IN PRACTICE: "The considerable prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes within our patient population highlights the critical need for routine HbA1c screening in this setting, which may be the only place where hard-to-reach individuals may attend for healthcare," the authors wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Edward B. Jude, Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care, NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, England. It was published online on August 06, 2025, in Diabetes Therapy. LIMITATIONS: The accuracy of A1c testing can be affected by conditions altering the quality or quantity of haemoglobin, such as anaemia or haemoglobinopathies, potentially leading to an underestimation of diabetes prevalence. Selection bias may exist as the study focused only on patients who underwent bloodwork in the ED. The single-centre nature of the study limited the generalisability of the results. DISCLOSURES: This study received partial funding from Sanofi Pharmaceuticals and Novo Nordisk. One author was supported by the 4Ward North Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Training Fellowship, and another author declared receiving travel and research grants from the funding agencies and other sources. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Giving homeless people stable housing was federal policy for decades. Trump is ending it
Poverty Homes Mental healthFacebookTweetLink Follow Rachelle Ellison spent 17 years sleeping on the streets of Washington, DC, cycling in and out of jails and hospitals. She finally moved into an apartment in 2008, thanks to a rental voucher with mental health treatment and support services attached through a non-profit organization. 'Once I got the housing stabilization and the foundation underneath my feet, I was able to work on myself,' Ellison said. Ellison benefited from Housing First, a policy that moves chronically homeless people into permanent housing, without requiring them to be sober or in treatment beforehand. Housing First programs then offer services for drug abuse, mental illness, education and employment. Housing First has enjoyed bipartisan support for more than two decades. But the Trump administration wants to cut funding, claiming the model is ineffective, contributing to 'crime and disorder' and the record number of people sleeping on the streets. Instead, Trump wants to fund programs with stiffer sobriety or work requirements, and commit more homeless people with mental health issues without their consent. Trump ordered federal troops to forcibly remove homeless people from Washington, DC, this week. It's a major change for the federal government. Since the George W. Bush administration, giving people a home with social services has been the government's main policy to combat homelessness. Leading researchers and homelessness advocates say the move away from Housing First will have dire consequences for people struggling and unhoused. After landing an apartment, Ellison began treatment for drug use and mental health disorders, stemming from abuse as a child. For years, she worked to maintain sobriety with a team of mental health and drug treatment counselors. 'I had to fail quite a few times, and then finally I got tired, and I had a roof over my head,' she said. 'I've been clean and sober ever since.' Ellison, now a national advocate on homelessness, said that 'Housing First actually saved my life.' Housing First emerged in the early 2000s, replacing a treatment-first model of addressing homelessness. The approach mandated people become sober or participate in programs before they got housing, which was often emergency shelters or transitional housing. Several studies have found that Housing First programs offer greater long-term housing stability than treatment-first, and may even lower overall costs by reducing hospital and ER visits, according to a HUD review of evidence in 2023. The Department of Veterans Affairs has used Housing First to decrease veterans' homelessness by 55% since 2009. Houston, Denver and other cities have successfully used the approach to drive down homelessness. But a White House executive order last month seeks to bring back the old model, directing federal agencies to end funding for organizations that offer housing to people without first requiring treatment for substance abuse or serious mental illnesses. The Trump administration is 'proposing to turn the clock back to transitional housing model of 1990s. We did that and it failed. It's the whole reason Housing First came about,' said Dennis Culhane, a professor of social policy at the University of Pennsylvania whose research on chronic homelessness laid the groundwork for Housing First programs. 'What the administration will find out is exactly what happened before: The people who need the most extensive supports get evicted' from transitional housing, Culhane said. Trump's executive order also calls for local jurisdictions to use civil commitment laws to remove people living on the streets who 'cannot care for themselves' or 'pose risks to themselves or the public.' The administration wants to shift these people into 'long-term institutional settings,' but it may run into a shortage of mental health hospital beds in America. Trump has also cut funding for Medicaid and grants for drug addiction and mental health programs, which may make it harder for people to get treatment. 'What we're seeing is a total lack of investment in solutions we do know work,' said Lara Pukatch, the chief advocacy officer at Miriam's Kitchen, a housing and social services nonprofit in Washington, DC. 'The executive order certainly doesn't address issues of homelessness or make access to health and mental health care any easier.' Mass street homelessness is a relatively recent phenomenon in America. A number of factors contributed, including de-institutionalization without provisions for housing or social services starting in the 1950s, government cuts to housing, and an underfunded, patchwork mental health care system. Results of the treatment-first approach during the 1980s and 1990s 'were not very positive,' Dennis Culhane said. 'People who entered were often discharged for failing to comply with sobriety requirements, and so they ended up back on the streets.' George W. Bush's administration began to tackle chronic homelessness, spurred by advocates and Culhane's research that found New York City was spending $40,000 a year for each chronically homeless person due to time in detox centers, prisons and hospitals. Supportive housing reduced costs annually by $16,000. In 2003, Bush announced a 10-year plan to end homelessness as part of its 'compassionate conservatism' agenda, adopting Housing First as the model. 'The shift came during the Bush administration, where they began to recognize that there was real value in addressing chronic homelessness,' said Frederick Shack, the CEO of Urban Pathways, a housing and social services provider in New York City. 'You can do that best by helping people address their core housing need and surrounding them with services.' The Obama administration continued the approach and in 2009 launched a goal of ending veteran homelessness built around Housing First. Congress that year passed legislation that accelerated funding to Housing First programs. The first Trump administration initially continued the Housing First approach, praising the model. But the administration began shifting its position as unsheltered homelessness became more visible, especially in Democratic-run cities on the West Coast. Housing First also became a larger target of the right. Conservative think tanks and policy institutes such as the Cicero Institute and Manhattan Institute opposed Housing First, arguing that housing without treatment requirements has not worked. 'Housing First was oversold, it became far more dominant than it deserved, and homelessness reached historic levels. What you're going to see under Trump is simply a rebalancing of priorities,' said Stephen Eide, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute who studies homelessness. 'For too long, the GOP neglected Housing First's influence.' Republicans in Congress introduced legislation to redirect funding away from Housing First programs to providers that require job training, addiction treatment or other services. Florida, Georgia, Missouri and other Republican-led states also passed laws restricting Housing First programs. But Housing First proponents say the model is not the problem — it's a lack of funding. Both to keep up with rising homelessness and counter a crippling affordable housing shortage. 'Housing First has failed because we haven't fully invested in Housing First,' Shack from Urban Pathways said. 'You can't solve the problem without the resources.' Only about 15% of people experiencing homelessness get into a Housing First program, according to Dennis Culhane's research. In 2022, he and other researchers conservatively estimated it would cost $9.6 billion to provide Housing First to every household in US shelters. Most homelessness service providers employ Housing First principles. They fear the loss of federal funding and a retreat back to policies they abandoned years ago. Ellison said Trump's approach will make it harder for homeless people to get housing, deepening the cycle of criminal justice interactions and trips to the hospital she experienced while living on the streets. 'Housing is the only solution to homelessness, along with wraparound services, if needed,' she said. 'The new executive order is going to make this so much harder, and it's going to add more unhoused people to the population.'
