Perceived weight discrimination in England: a population-based study of adults aged ⩾50 years

BACKGROUND: Despite a wealth of experimental studies on weight bias, little is known about weight discrimination at the population level. This study examined the prevalence and socio-demographic correlates of perceived weight discrimination in a large population-based sample of older adults. METHODS: Data were from 5307 adults in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing; a population-based cohort of men and women aged ⩾50 years. Weight discrimination was reported for five domains (less respect/courtesy; treated as less clever; poorer treatment in medical settings; poorer service in restaurants/stores; threatened/harassed) at wave 5 (2010–2011). Height and weight were measured at wave 4 (2008–2009). We used logistic regression to test the odds of weight discrimination in relation to weight status, age, sex, wealth, education and marital status. RESULTS: Perceived weight discrimination in any domain was reported by 4.6% of participants, ranging from 0.8% in the normal-weight participants through 0.9, 6.7, 24.2 and 35.1% in individuals who were overweight or met criteria for class I, II and III obesity. Overall, and in each situation, odds of perceived weight discrimination were higher in younger and less wealthy individuals. There was no interaction between weight status and any socio-demographic variable. Relative to normal-weight participants, odds ratios for any perceived weight discrimination were 1.13 (95% confidence interval 0.53–2.40) in those who were overweight, 8.86 (4.65–16.88) in those with class I obesity, 35.06 (18.30–67.16) in class II obese and 56.43 (27.72–114.87) in class III obese. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that rates of perceived weight discrimination are comparatively low in individuals who are overweight or have class I obesity, but for those with class II/III obesity, >10% had experienced discrimination in each domain, and >20% had been treated with less respect or courtesy. These findings have implications for public policy and highlight the need for effective interventions to promote equality.