Body Acne Positivity for Summer 2025
This was just one of the many ways Kihal's body breakouts began to impact her life, both IRL and online. 'I'd spend two hours editing one Instagram photo just trying to blur every little bump,' she says. 'I was terrified of what people would say if they saw my real skin.' Though everyone's guilty of being their own worst critic every once in a while, unfortunately, the unwanted comments about her skin weren't just in her head. 'People did make comments,' she explains. 'Little jokes that stuck with me for years,' she adds. 'It completely messed with my mental health.'
By the time Kihal was diagnosed with Sharp's Syndrome—an autoimmune disease that made her breakouts worse—she felt invisible and deeply alone. So, in 2019, she started posting about her acne journey on Instagram. The response? Overwhelming. 'I realized so many people were going through the same thing. We just didn't see it anywhere.'
She's not wrong: According to the American Academy of Dermatology, acne affects around 40 to 50 million Americans, and approximately half have facial and body acne. According to Kunal Malik, MD, FAAD, a board-certified dermatologist, body acne is caused by the same factors as facial acne—think oil, clogged pores, bacteria, and inflammation. 'But body skin is thicker and the follicles are deeper, especially on the back and chest, which means breakouts can be more painful and harder to treat,' he says. Throw in friction from tight clothing, sitting for long periods, and sweating through heat waves, and it's a perfect storm.
Summer, unsurprisingly, turns up the risk for breakouts, heat rashes, and irritation. 'Heat and humidity increase oil production and sweat, which creates ideal conditions for acne-causing bacteria,' Dr. Malik explains. 'And when sweat isn't washed off quickly—like after a concert or beach day—clogged pores follow.' And just like chronic breakouts on your face, Dr. Malik notes that body acne can be hereditary.
Textured skin anywhere on your body is totally normal and common, but you'd never know it from your FYP or literally any festival-headlining pop star stripped down to their skivvies. Every visible body looks airbrushed into oblivion—so where's the buttne and chest breakouts? What about the KP, ingrowns, or hyperpigmentation?
Well, it of course still exists. It's just being covered up. While facial acne has become somewhat of an accessory that can be dolled up with kitschy pimple patches, but body acne has yet to get that treatment. 'Natural' makeup looks with hints of skin texture peeking through have become the norm, but those walking the red carpet in a low-cut gown or gearing for a photo shoot still get a full glam routine, just for their chest and back.
Celebrity makeup artist Neil Scibelli even has an arsenal of products specifically for covering up bodne (along with varicose veins, tattoos, you name it) for his pre–red carpet clients. 'I'll use a green color corrector for redness, then a matte, transfer-proof concealer, and finish with powder and setting spray to lock everything in,' he explains. 'I'll typically cover veins, tattoos, scars, or hyperpigmentation with a peach or orange color corrector and then add foundation over that.'
It's no big surprise that celebrities get every inch of their bodies primed and prepped before a big moment in front of cameras. But with filters and AI-supported editing apps added to the mix, real and curated images are becoming hard to distinguish. Social media's obsession with perfection isn't doing any favors for our collective mental health and self-esteem, including when it comes to our skin. 'Social media is still a highlight reel,' says Jessica Stern, PhD, licensed clinical psychologist and clinical assistant professor of NYU Langone Health's Department of Psychiatry. 'The more curated the image, the more people compare—and the worse they feel.'
For Kihal, the impact of that shame was deeply personal. 'I started believing my skin had to be perfect to be worthy of being seen,' she says. 'It took years to unlearn that, and honestly, I'm still working on it.'
She's far from alone. Acne—whether on the face or body—has been linked to increased depression, anxiety, and, in severe cases among adolescents, suicidal ideation. A 2011 study found that people with moderate to severe acne were significantly less likely to pursue romantic relationships.
'Shame thrives on isolation,' says Dr. Stern. 'The less something is discussed, the more it makes someone feel isolated, alone, or defective.' Because body acne is not commonly discussed in the media, Dr. Stern explains this lack of representation can falsely portray as if it is less prevalent, 'which then can make someone who has it feel like there is something wrong with them, which can lead to self-criticism, low confidence, self-rejection, and a poor sense of self.'
However, thanks to the rise of skin-positive creators like Kihal, a much-needed shift is slowly happening. Her followers send messages every day thanking her for helping them feel seen. 'Especially when I show my bacne or scars—things people are still scared to share—I get DMs saying, 'I've never seen someone with skin like mine before.' That's the whole point,' she says.
But as much as social media has helped normalize real skin, it's also part of the problem. 'There's so much pressure to keep up an image,' Kihal says. 'We see 'authentic' posts that are still filtered. Celebs and influencers rarely admit to editing. If more people were honest about what's real and what's touched up, it would change everything.'
Some brands are finally breaking the smooth-skin illusion. A few campaigns in recent years from brands like Billie, Starface, and Fur have showcased stretch marks, acne scars, and texture in an authentic, human way. Still, most beauty marketing treats body texture of any kind like a 'before' problem. Not something that's just there sometimes or that people can live with and feel good about.
So what needs to happen? We simply need to accept ourselves, bumps and all, regardless of what we see on TikTok. 'If you catch yourself thinking, Everyone's judging me, ask: So what? What would happen if you stopped hiding?' says Dr. Stern.
Kihal echoes her advice. 'For a long time, I thought I had to shrink myself to be accepted,' she says. 'Now, I know better. If I want to wear a backless dress, I will. If I want to go to the beach, I'll go. I'm not waiting for my skin to be 'perfect' anymore.'
Jennifer is the former beauty editor for BestProducts.com, where she's testing out everything from the latest lip gloss to the craziest skincare trend sweeping the online beauty-verse. Her work has been featured in Allure, Byrdie, HelloGiggles, and more. When she's not swatching eyeshadow all over her arms, you can find the NYC-based editor scouring for hours on end for vintage finds, eating pad thai, and hanging out with her cat, Chunks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Americans get more than half their calories from ultra-processed foods, CDC report says
The report comes amid growing scrutiny of such foods by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who blames them for causing chronic disease. 'We are poisoning ourselves and it's coming principally from these ultra-processed foods,' Kennedy told Fox News earlier this year. Overall, about 55% of total calories consumed by Americans age 1 and older came from ultra-processed foods during that period, according to the report. For adults, ultra-processed foods made up about 53% of total calories consumed, but for kids through age 18, it was nearly 62%. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The top sources included burgers and sandwiches, sweet baked goods, savory snacks, pizza and sweetened drinks. Advertisement Young children consumed fewer calories from ultra-processed foods than older kids, the report found. Adults 60 and older consumed fewer calories from those sources than younger adults. Low-income adults consumed more ultra-processed foods than those with higher incomes. The results were not surprising, said co-author Anne Williams, a CDC nutrition expert. What was surprising was that consumption of ultra-processed foods appeared to dip slightly over the past decade. Among adults, total calories from those sources fell from about 56% in 2013-2014 and from nearly 66% for kids in 2017-2018. Advertisement Williams said she couldn't speculate about the reason for the decline or whether consumption of less processed foods increased. But Andrea Deierlein, a nutrition expert at New York University who was not involved in the research, suggested that there may be greater awareness of the potential harms of ultra-processed foods. 'People are trying, at least in some populations, to decrease their intakes of these foods,' she said. Concern over ultra-processed foods' health effects has been growing for years, but finding solutions has been difficult. Many studies have linked them to obesity, diabetes and heart disease, but they haven't been able to prove that the foods directly cause those chronic health problems. One small but influential study found that even when diets were matched for calories, sugar, fat, fiber and micronutrients, people consumed more calories and gained more weight when they ate ultra-processed foods than when they ate minimally processed foods. Research published this week in the journal Nature found that participants in a clinical trial lost twice as much weight when they ate minimally processed foods — such as pasta, chicken, fruits and vegetables — than ultra-processed foods, even those matched for nutrition components and considered healthy, such as ready-to-heat frozen meals, protein bars and shakes. Part of the problem is simply defining ultra-processed foods. The new CDC report used the most common definition based on the four-tier Nova system developed by Brazilian researchers that classifies foods according to the amount of processing they undergo. Such foods tend to be 'hyperpalatable, energy-dense, low in dietary fiber and contain little or no whole foods, while having high amounts of salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats,' the CDC report said. Advertisement U.S. health officials recently said there are concerns over whether current definitions 'accurately capture' the range of foods that may affect health. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Agriculture Department recently issued a request for information to develop a new, uniform definition of ultra-processed foods for products in the U.S. food supply. In the meantime, Americans should try to reduce ultra-processed foods in their daily diets, Deierlein said. For instance, instead of instant oatmeal that may contain added sugar, sodium, artificial colors and preservatives, use plain oats sweetened with honey or maple syrup. Read food packages and nutrition information, she suggested. 'I do think that there are less-processed options available for many foods,' she said.
San Francisco Chronicle
5 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Americans get more than half their calories from ultraprocessed foods, CDC report says
Most Americans get more than half their calories from ultraprocessed foods, those super-tasty, energy-dense foods typically full of sugar, salt and unhealthy fats, according to a new federal report. Nutrition research has shown for years that ultraprocessed foods make up a big chunk of the U.S. diet, especially for kids and teens. For the first time, however, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed those high levels of consumption, using dietary data collected from August 2021 to August 2023. The report comes amid growing scrutiny of such foods by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who blames them for causing chronic disease. 'We are poisoning ourselves and it's coming principally from these ultraprocessed foods,' Kennedy told Fox News earlier this year. Overall, about 55% of total calories consumed by Americans age 1 and older came from ultraprocessed foods during that period, according to the report. For adults, ultraprocessed foods made up about 53% of total calories consumed, but for kids through age 18, it was nearly 62%. The top sources included burgers and sandwiches, sweet baked goods, savory snacks, pizza and sweetened drinks. Young children consumed fewer calories from ultraprocessed foods than older kids, the report found. Adults 60 and older consumed fewer calories from those sources than younger adults. Low-income adults consumed more ultraprocessed foods than those with higher incomes. The results were not surprising, said co-author Anne Williams, a CDC nutrition expert. What was surprising was that consumption of ultraprocessed foods appeared to dip slightly over the past decade. Among adults, total calories from those sources fell from about 56% in 2013-2014 and from nearly 66% for kids in 2017-2018. Williams said she couldn't speculate about the reason for the decline or whether consumption of less processed foods increased. But Andrea Deierlein, a nutrition expert at New York University who was not involved in the research, suggested that there may be greater awareness of the potential harms of ultraprocessed foods. 'People are trying, at least in some populations, to decrease their intakes of these foods,' she said. Concern over ultraprocessed foods' health effects has been growing for years, but finding solutions has been difficult. Many studies have linked them to obesity, diabetes and heart disease, but they haven't been able to prove that the foods directly cause those chronic health problems. One small but influential study found that even when diets were matched for calories, sugar, fat, fiber and micronutrients, people consumed more calories and gained more weight when they ate ultraprocessed foods than when they ate minimally processed foods. Research published this week in the journal Nature found that participants in a clinical trial lost twice as much weight when they ate minimally processed foods — such as pasta, chicken, fruits and vegetables — than ultraprocessed foods, even those matched for nutrition components and considered healthy, such as ready-to-heat frozen meals, protein bars and shakes. Part of the problem is simply defining ultraprocessed foods. The new CDC report used the most common definition based on the four-tier Nova system developed by Brazilian researchers that classifies foods according to the amount of processing they undergo. Such foods tend to be 'hyperpalatable, energy-dense, low in dietary fiber and contain little or no whole foods, while having high amounts of salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats,' the CDC report said. U.S. health officials recently said there are concerns over whether current definitions 'accurately capture' the range of foods that may affect health. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Agriculture Department recently issued a request for information to develop a new, uniform definition of ultraprocessed foods for products in the U.S. food supply. In the meantime, Americans should try to reduce ultraprocessed foods in their daily diets, Deierlein said. For instance, instead of instant oatmeal that may contain added sugar, sodium, artificial colors and preservatives, use plain oats sweetened with honey or maple syrup. Read food packages and nutrition information, she suggested. 'I do think that there are less-processed options available for many foods,' she said.
5 hours ago
Americans consume more than half of their calories from ultra-processed foods: CDC
Adults and children in the United States are getting more than 50% of their total calories from ultra-processed foods, according to a new federal report released early Thursday. Among Americans aged 1 and older, an average of 55% of their total calories came from ultra-processed foods, according to results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey conducted between August 2021 and August 2023 and run by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Children aged 18 and younger consumed a higher percentage of calories from ultra-processed foods at 61.9% compared to 53% for adults aged 19 and older. "That's excessive," Julia Zumpano, a registered dietitian at the Cleveland Clinic, who was not involved in the study, told ABC News. "That's concerning. It's way too much. … We don't have guidelines, because why would we provide guidelines for junk food, but about 10% would be reasonable." It comes amid Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s crusade to rid American diets of ultra-processed foods. Recently, the White House's Make America Healthy Again Commission, led by Kennedy, released a report blaming ultra-processed foods as one cause of the rise in chronic disease rates, such as obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. The report described ultra-processed foods as "hyperpalatable," containing little to no whole foods and being low in dietary fiber while being high in salt, sweeteners and unhealthy fats. Examples include most, but not all, chips, candy bars, breakfast cereals, sugar-sweetened beverages and ready-to-eat meals. "They're high in sugar, high in carbohydrates and high in fat," Zampano said. "When you combine those, the taste is an explosion in your mouth and you think, 'Wow this is good.'" Studies have shown that consumption of ultra-processed foods has been linked to a higher risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality, the report said. When breaking children down into smaller age groups, the report found that children between ages 1 and 5 consumed fewer calories from ultra-processed foods than children between ages 6 and 22 and pre-teens and teenagers aged 12 to 18. Among adults, those aged 19 to 39 consumed the highest percentage of calories from ultra-processed foods at 54.4% compared to adults aged 40 to 59, who consumed 52.6%, and adults aged 60 and older, who consumed 51.7%. However, there was a silver lining in the report. Data showed that between 2013 and 2014 and August 2021 through August 2023, average calories from ultra-processed foods fell among adults and children. Average total calories from ultra-processed foods decreased from 55.8% in 2013 through 2014 to 53% from August 2021 to August 2023. For children, it fell from 63.8% to 61.9% over the same period. "It's good that we see a decline of the percentage of ultra-processed food in both children and adults," Dr. Fang Fang Zhang, a cancer and nutrition epidemiologist and Neely Family Professor at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, who was not involved in the study, told ABC News. "I wish that there could be some analysis to see which [food subgroup consumption] is declining," she continued. "I didn't see that. It might be the sugars and beverages because we have done a lot of work to try to lower the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages." To lower the percentage of total calories Americans are getting from ultra-processed foods, Zumpano said she would like to see less marketing of the products on television and make sure schools and parents are educated on the negative health effects of ultra-processed foods. "If kids get a packaged snack or a dessert at school lunch every day, they think it's okay," she said. "Or if their parents are eating ultra-processed foods every day, then they think it's okay. It has to come from schools, parents educating themselves and then educating their children." Zhang agreed, saying the reduction of ultra-processed foods in schools and workplaces "could have a long-lasting impact on the overall population level health."
