Claim #1: It is never healthy for anyone with a history of anorexia to attempt to lose weight.
Well, that's fucking stupid. Someone who has obtained the skills to overcome their disorder would clearly have an understanding of restraint. To use the alcoholism example they used, that ex-alcoholic got the help they needed and is now able to go to a bar and order one drink. To say she can't be active in her body image because she was chasing an extreme at one point in time is like saying "She shouldn't do this cause she fucked it up once and she'll fuck it up again." Super disrespectful to the progress she's made.
Claim #2: Media shouldn't depict eating disorder behaviours because it might encourage someone with an eating disorder. It's best to just pretend it doesn't exist.
Your summary of this claim is a misrepresentation. They are arguing that someone would watch the show and figure out ways to replicate it. They aren't saying to pretend it doesn't exist, they are saying to depict it less graphically.
This is where I think personal responsibility comes into play. Many argue that this show needs a detailed trigger warning beforehand, but I think it should be put in place at the creator's discretion. There's no question that the subject material could be triggering to some, but what a lot of people misunderstand about triggers is that if you acknowledge something as a trigger, you are developing ways to handle the stress it brings on. Some people having less coping skills than others should not result in censorship. Besides, it's not like this show will be in the kids section. People will know good and well what they are diving into. A brief warning beforehand would be understandable as long as it isn't intrusive.
The American ratings system needs to be revamped more than anything. Those are supposed to exist so trigger warning debates don't have to.
Claim #3: It is detrimental to cast someone in the part of a character with an eating disorder unless they can represent all affected populations at once. Otherwise, people might become confused that they have an eating disorder while someone different than them on TV has an eating disorder.
This claim is baseless because the show isn't fucking out yet. If anyone is stereotyping victims of eating disorders, it's the author of these claims.
Claim #4: It isn't right to cast a thin person as an anorexic character because it doesn't represent fuller figured people who have binge eating disorder or bulimia. (The diagnostic criteria for anorexia is an underweight BMI.)
My Claim #3 thoughts are still in place for this one. But ignoring that, let's say that the main character is an overweight person suffering from an eating disorder. Now we have thin people being underrepresented and the entire narrative being shifted. It's amazing how people forget that above all else, this is art and not an agenda. It's the story of someone with an eating disorder, not an educational pamphlet.
What do you think of her claims?
Misguided SJW bullshit that probably got surfaced on purpose to ride off of the 13 Reasons Why controversy. Huffington Post has been lazier and lazier about hiding their cash grab, Buzzfeed tier clickbait articles and I'm not surprised to see this from them. I will operate under the assumption that the therapist they are ripping this information from is well intentioned, as her credentials back it up, but skimming through this therapist's blog and I see no indication that she herself has suffered through this disorder. I'd like to think she has, sense she is so invested in this subject, but maybe these poor arguments are founded from an over abundance of sympathy and not enough of contextual empathy.
I also can't find mention of To the Bone on the therapist's blog.
EDIT: The article itself is written by her so no excuses there.