I think it’s only right that SW, WW and WLI all face the same scrutiny. There’s losing weight, and then there’s doing so unhealthily - whether that’s damaging your relationship with food or losing too much too quickly.
But that’s not exclusive to WLI. Anyone with half a brain cell knows that their purpose is to enable a calorie deficit, and that some people do abuse that and take it too far. FWIW, I’m a former ED sufferer - I’d be one of them. That’s one of the many reasons I won’t take them, I wouldn’t use them properly, and I know that of myself.
SW is problematic. I joined early in my “journey” because I needed the accountability of having to weigh in front of someone, rather than in my bathroom where I can fob it off, and I needed ideas of how to change my horrendous diet. I needed support to make better food choices.
But - it is cult like in some ways, if anyone genuinely believes that mashing a banana makes it worse for you, they’ve lost their head. It doesn’t account for water weight, hormonal changes, whatever. It cares about one thing - loss. It actively categorises food into “bad” and “good,” and for some people that’s really problematic.
What I’m saying is that in much the same way it’s okay to scrutinise SW, WW, someone losing a stone in 2 weeks and whether that’s starvation or a healthy loss strategy, etc - WLI shouldn’t be exempt from that same scrutiny.
It is however that in some cases, whenever anyone questions WLI, or makes remarks about their effectiveness, or scrutinises them in anyway, the response is almost… militant. And that needs to change.