Introduction
Nutrition is one of the principal concerns of the present-day population, and increased attention to it implies both benefits and drawbacks. Staying healthy can be one’s high priority, but it should not turn into an obsession. In this case, specialists speak of the emergence of unhealthy eating patterns that is quite the opposite of the initial intention of healthy eaters. The two articles under consideration, written by Jay Polish and Thomas M. Dunn accordingly, reflect on the consequence of such an obsession with healthy nutrition known as Orthorexia Nervosa. Both professionals present their arguments for the necessity to consider this condition a severe disorder, but the article of Thomas M. Dunn is more scientifically useful due to the author’s style and provided data.
Main body
The principal advantage of the information presented in Orthorexia Nervosa is in the inclusion of greater amounts of previous research into the article. It is especially vital because both Polish and Dunn state that this condition is not officially recognized by scientific communities. Such a situation is conditional upon the failure of previous researchers to prove the necessity to consider Orthorexia Nervosa as a mental health disorder (Dunn). Therefore, the attempts of the present-day scholars should be based on past results to make a difference in the perceptions of these health issues related to nutrition. In this way, the inclusion of sufficient information on the development of Orthorexia Nervosa is more beneficial in terms of further research.
Another advantage of the article written by Dunn compared to the one of Polish is the provision of more detailed information on the condition. Thus, for example, he writes more about diagnostic criteria, whereas Polish is focused on the psychological aspect of the problem. There is no doubt that every possible condition connected to eating patterns implies working with mental health and psychology specialists. However, such an approach does not contribute to the recognition of this relatively new health condition but refers to the understanding of its consequences. Meanwhile, it is more beneficial to consider the precondition of Orthorexia Nervosa and typical symptoms to ensure its inclusion in the official list of mental disorders (Polish). Hence, this information is provided only by Dunn, and it adds to the usefulness of his work.
The third advantage of the article Orthorexia Nervosa compared to Is Orthorexia Nervosa Treated? Experts Explain is in its formal tone. This characteristic is significant in inspiring trust among the members of scientific communities within the context of the new eating disorder and its necessity for its recognition. Both authors, Polish and Dunn, agree on the lack of support for this health condition, and this fact defines the preference of a formal style of writing in the matter. Together with the provision of sufficient information on the issue’s history, diagnostic criteria, and treatment approaches, such a characteristic would make a difference in terms of the source’s perceived credibility.
Conclusion
The consideration of the elements of the articles on Orthorexia Nervosa written by Polish and Dunn allows concluding on a higher degree of attractiveness of the latter for scientific communities. Although both sources are credible and well-structured, the work of Dunn differs in providing greater amounts of data from previous research and more detailed information on symptoms and treatment methods. Moreover, his article’s formal style seems to be beneficial in terms of its perception by scholars and professionals who, in turn, will have an impact on the ultimate recognition of Orthorexia Nervosa as an official disorder.
References
Dunn, Thomas M. “Orthorexia Nervosa.” Psychiatric Times, 2020, Web.
Polish, Jay. “How Is Orthorexia Treated? Experts Explain.” Bustle, 2020, Web.