Questions authorities

The stigmatising effect of the official guidelines has been the breeding ground for questioning the official authorities. LCHF-followers cannot recognise a correlation between the official definition of health and the actual experience from following the official dietary guidelines. Several of the respondents express a frustration about the broad acceptance of health-dictation in Denmark and increasingly question its legitimacy:

"(…) I think you could vary (…) so that you include all instead of (…) saying 'If you don't follow these, you are per definition unhealthy'. You don't have to be. (…) I simply don't think they (the 10 diet recommendations) are varied enough. And they are not versatile enough" (App. 8: l. 571-577, Xenia).

The respondents strongly oppose that consumers only can be claimed healthy if they live by the official guidelines. Based on personal experience, LCHF-followers object to rules being imposed on a big group of individuals. This is clear in their opposition of the dominant understanding of healthy food: "I don't think there is one diet suitable for all" (App. 8: l. 525, Xenia) and: "I think there is some kind of hysteria surrounding food" (App. 6: l. 198-199, Maria K.). The respondents object to the thinking that the ‘producers’ such as official authorities determine all choices of consumption and the meaning of the objects consumed (Ellis et al., 2011).

One thing that has made the respondents increasingly sceptical towards authorities is the physical wellbeing experienced after the dietary changes:

"I have just become a bit more sceptical and started believing myself more than what others tell me. I will rather discuss with a colleague what she experiences, than read an article for instance. I will rather use these personal experiences" (App. 6: l. 239-243, Maria K.).

"I’m more critical towards what we learn in there (at a nutrition education). I believe it has been a good thing. You shouldn't take everything for gospel truth. You are allowed to call in additional questions from time to time" (App. 5: l. 164-167, Signe).

These quotations show how the respondents have lost faith in the health promises from the official authorities. The LCHF food regime helps its followers to distance themselves from the restrictions and the authoritative structure inherent in the traditional food regime (Ellis et al., 2011). LCHF-followers therefore also dissociate themselves from people who take an authoritative position and express rules and regulations for the LCHF food regime. Such persons are perceived as fanatics and are not appreciated within the LCHF food regime: "There are some, who are so fanatic (…) and some have talked about 'Okay in relation to the religion LCHF' and I'm like, that's not how it is" (App. 4: l. 534-537, Maria). It is important to the respondents to distance the LCHF food regime from a top-down control and an absolute monarchy of the definition of health.

Health is a bodily state that the respondents have been chasing without luck. Now that they have experienced it by following LCHF, they object that anyone can tell them otherwise. One of the respondents explains: "I think for some it becomes much like a religion or a conviction or the like – it’s the only right thing to do. And everybody should do it - it is the answer" (App. 4: l. 561-563, Maria). This quotation filled with irony is an expression of how the respondent dissociates herself from the thought that one diet fits all – even LCHF. She resents being dictated what to do to be healthy and this goes for more of the respondents. One respondents says: "I believe that (…) those who say 'Well here are some principles, I choose to follow those slavishly', I don't think there are a lot of those people. I’m not even one of them" (App. 7: l. 300-302, Jane). This is an indication of how the respondent denies that the LCHF food regime is constructed in the same way as the traditional food regime. In the LCHF food regime no one is forced, as it has been an individual

choice to abandon the traditional food regime. A respondent expresses the philosophy inherent in the LCHF food regime: "I still believe (…) we must be open towards that people thrive on different diets" (App. 7: l. 283-284, Jane). The consumers seek to establish a new LCHF logic within the Danish food culture, as it is through the consumption of food that LCHF-followers can influence and be a part of creating a food culture (Wallendorf & Arnould, 1991).

5.1.2.1 Alternative authorities

The spread of LCHF in Denmark has primarily been through online blogs, and LCHF has thereby grown like a grass-roots movement without evident authorities. Bloggers have achieved an important role in the fashion world and the same is happening in the food world because consumers have started questioning the traditional institutional world of the field (Dolbec &

Fischer, 2015). Consumers rely on people they can relate to (Scaraboto & Fischer, 2012), and the spreading of LCHF through less official sources can therefore have contributed further to the questioning of authorities.

The dislike of authorities may be one of the reasons for Jane Faerber’s popularity as LCHF-blogger. She started blogging about her own problems, which people could identify with: “I had actually started blogging about it (LCHF). Not like, now I want to spread the word or something but more like ‘Here is the food I eat’. And I experienced a relatively high interest” (App. 7: l. 39-42, Jane). The interest for her personal choice of diet is an example of how consumers are not only inveterate storytellers but also avid listeners (Gorry & Westbrook, 2011). Consumers feel an adherence to the LCHF food regime through Faerber, and a communion around her blog.

Faerber’s personal storytelling has earned her an important position within the LCHF food regime. More of the respondents mention her blog as inspiration for starting and maintaining the LCHF lifestyle (App. 5, Signe; App. 8, Xenia). Faerber has in Denmark become synonymous with the principles of LCHF without even wanting it (App. 7, Jane), since she is very focused on communicating that LCHF is not a set of principles that guarantees healthiness if they are complied to (Faerber, 2013). Instead she encourages people to change their perception of food and to start doing what feels right.

A lot of people ask for Faerber’s advice on how to follow LCHF. She describes the requests on her blog in the following:

“Those who write me are often those who can’t make it work. (…) It’s often about losing weight, I think. (…) Sometimes it’s about a wish for some kind of individual counselling

‘What should I do in my situation?’ (Questions) they might not feel able to answer” (App.

7: l. 474-487, Jane).

Based on these findings I conclude that bloggers can gain a powerful position within a food regime resistant to authorities. Bloggers are inspirational actors that become symbols of the collective of LCHF-followers, because they challenge institutionalised practice (Scaraboto &

Fischer, 2012). Even though Faerber strives not to become an authority, several perceive her as such within the LCHF food regime and go to her for guidance. It is important that the bloggers do not obtain too much obvious power, as LCHF-followers react towards too established bloggers.

The other blogger interviewed is aware of not being instructive towards her followers, as she mentions that people perceive some bloggers to have gained too much power:

“I think I’m a blogger that is rather (…) I’m like rather unpretentious compared to certain others. (…) Some (bloggers) can seem rather fanatic (…) I know I have some friends that for instance think madbanditten (Faerber’s blog) can be too fanatic with regard to ecology and things like that (…). Things like that can turn you off” (App. 8: l.

397-410, Xenia).

Both bloggers are focused on not being too authoritarian but can still be misinterpreted as alternative authorities, because this is the knowledge-structure consumers know from the traditional food regime. Therefore, LCHF-followers do not abandon authorities and create complete equality within the LCHF food regime. Instead they enable social inequality based on culinary capital (Johnston & Baumann, 2010), which is obtainable through knowledge of LCHF.

The trust LCHF-followers’ have in bloggers contradicts their dislike of authorities. The difference from the authorities in the traditional food regime is that the LCHF-followers feel they choose their authorities themselves. Thus, a coexistence of submission and free will seems to be at work in the LCHF food regime (Sandicki & Ger, 2009).