Case Description
Two Instagram users shared multiple images in their posts (which Meta terms a “photo carousel”) with captions during National Eating Disorder Awareness Week in 2023 and 2025, respectively.
The first photo carousel includes identifiable photos of the user. The caption shares a personal account of having experienced an eating disorder, a desire to educate people on such disorders and gratitude for support.
The second photo carousel involves several images with text, in which the user, who self-identifies as a mental health professional, provides advice on how to talk about the weight and size of people perceived to be skinny or underweight. It includes examples of inappropriate statements with alternative suggestions on how to address these issues more sensitively. The third image in the carousel advises people not to guess someone’s clothing size and to avoid commenting that people may be wasting away. Additionally, the post’s caption notes that while the user hasn’t personally experienced an eating disorder, people have made comments about their perceived low weight.
In late February 2025, the day after the second carousel was posted, Meta’s automated systems identified the carousel’s third image as potentially violating and sent it for at-scale review by a human moderator. Similarly, Meta’s automated systems identified the first post and sent it for human review in March 2025, more than two years after it was posted. The first post’s full photo carousel and only the third image of the second carousel were visible to the reviewers who determined both violated Meta’s Suicide, Self-Injury and Eating Disorders policy.
This policy prohibits people from “intentionally or unintentionally celebrat[ing] or promot[ing] suicide, self-injury or eating disorders,” but allows users to “share their experiences, raise awareness about these issues, and seek support from one another.” Meta differentiates between content that “encourages” eating disorders, either explicitly or through means such as providing instructions, and content that speaks “positively” about an eating disorder, without encouraging others. Both are subject to removal, with only the former resulting in a strike.
Meta removed the first post entirely, and the third image in the second post, leaving the rest of the second carousel on Instagram. The first user didn’t receive a strike as the human reviewer determined the post was shared in a “positive” promotional context. The second user received a severe strike and 30-day feature limit, preventing them from going live and posting ads as the human reviewer concluded the post was shared in an “encouraging” promotional context.
Both users appealed Meta’s decisions. During each review, a reviewer found the content non-violating, but a second reviewer was unable to complete the review of the entire carousel as images failed to load in internal tooling. Meta upheld its decisions to remove both posts.
Both users then appealed to the Board. In their statements, the users explained that they intended to raise awareness about eating disorders and recovery. The first user noted they shared a personal story without any graphic imagery, and the second user stated they contrasted harmful expressions with advice on how to communicate more sensitively.
When the Board selected these cases, Meta’s subject matter experts reviewed these posts again and concluded that both were shared in non-violating contexts. The company reversed its original decisions, restored both posts and reversed the strike on the second user’s account.
The Board selected these cases to assess how Meta’s policies and enforcement practices address awareness-raising content or support resources related to eating disorders and recovery. These cases fall within the Board’s Gender and Automated Enforcement of Policies and Curation of Content priorities.
The Board would appreciate public comments that address:
- Enforcement challenges in distinguishing between content promoting eating disorders and content raising awareness about eating disorders and discussing recovery and ways to address those challenges.
- Insights into how social media companies prevent or mitigate potential harms from content promoting eating disorders, besides removal.
- Studies on the effects of sharing or receiving information, resources or support on social media on people with or recovering from eating disorders, in particular young people.
- Meta’s enforcement of content comprising multiple parts, such as a carousel of several images, particularly the impact on freedom of expression of removing one image in a photo carousel.
- Meta’s approach to content moderation tools and practices when launching news features and content types.
- As part of its decisions, the Board can issue policy recommendations to Meta. While
recommendations are not binding, Meta must respond to them within 60 days. As such,
the Board welcomes public comments proposing recommendations that are relevant
to the issues raised in these cases.
Public Comments
If you or your organization feel you can contribute valuable perspectives that can help with reaching a decision on the cases announced today, you can submit your contributions using the button below. Please note that public comments can be provided anonymously. The public comment window is open for 14 days, closing at 23.59 Pacific Standard Time (PST) on Tuesday 29 July.
What’s Next
Over the next few weeks, Board Members will be deliberating these cases. Once they have reached their decision, we will post it on the Decisions page.
Comments
Please see the attached comment.
As the founder and director of Atzmi, a nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting the mental health of adolescent girls through Torah-aligned and empirically based programming, I appreciate the Oversight Board’s attention to the complexities of content moderation related to eating disorders.
1. Enforcement Challenges: Awareness vs. Promotion
We recognize that sharing details of an eating disorder can be dangerous—particularly for vulnerable individuals who may be actively seeking content to fuel or validate disordered behaviors. Graphic descriptions, weight or calorie metrics, or “before and after” imagery can inadvertently serve as triggers or encouragement, even when not intended as such.
That said, not all content that discusses eating disorders is harmful. Personal stories of struggle and recovery, shared responsibly, can be deeply healing, reduce stigma, and foster connection and hope—especially when shared by those with lived experience or clinical expertise.
Recommendation: Moderation must include both context and intent. Automated systems are ill-equipped to assess tone and nuance. Flagged content should be reviewed by trained professionals with mental health expertise. Platforms should also guide creators in responsibly sharing content that supports recovery without unintentionally glamorizing or detailing harmful behaviors.
2. Mitigating Harm Beyond Removal
Outright removal of content is not always the best—or most effective—response. In some cases, it can silence important awareness and recovery conversations and further isolate those struggling.
Alternative harm-reduction strategies might include:
Content advisories or sensitivity labels to alert users about potentially triggering content
Supportive pop-ups directing users to professional resources or crisis lines
Educational prompts that encourage users to frame their posts in recovery-affirming, non-triggering ways
Algorithmic de-prioritization of sensitive content instead of immediate removal
These approaches acknowledge the risks while preserving critical dialogue and connection.
3. Impact of Recovery-Oriented Content on Young People
From both research and experience at Atzmi, we know that responsible, recovery-focused content can be a lifeline. When adolescents see that healing is possible, when they hear that they are not alone, and when they gain tools for emotional resilience, they are more likely to seek help and less likely to suffer in silence.
We also know that poorly moderated platforms can become echo chambers for harmful ideologies and reinforce disordered thinking. The line is thin—and that’s why careful, context-based enforcement is essential.
Conclusion:
Meta has a responsibility to protect users—especially young people—from harm, while also supporting awareness, education, and recovery. To do this effectively, content moderation must:
Differentiate between harmful and healing content
Involve human review guided by clinical best practices
Provide creators with clearer guidelines for safe sharing
Offer meaningful alternatives to removal
We commend the Board for examining this issue so closely and urge continued investment in thoughtful, informed policy development.
Respectfully,
Dr. Marcy Forta
Founder & Director, Atzmi
www.atzmi.org
Hello and thank you for your time. This is my first time on this website and I was shocked to see a topic about eating disorders. Though we do currently live in a society that is more compassionate and knowledgeable when it comes to mental health, people suffering from EDA's do not usually get a ration of the relief that someone with other mental illnesses do. Actually, most people don't even know or understand that eating disorders are actually a mental illness, and have really nothing to do with food and everything to do with feeling helpless to change or control your own life. I have been diagnosed with several "obstacles"that I try my best to turn into "opportunities," including borderline personality disorder, severe adult ADHD, addiction,major depressive disorder and bulimia. if I had to pick which one of these mental health diagnoses has been the most painful to live with and the most difficult to navigate trying to be a functioning member of society with healthy relationships etc
(A GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE, A LIFE THAT FEELS LIKE WORTH LIVING WHENEVER YOU WAKE UP IN THE MORNING! ) It would without a doubt be tied between my addiction issues and my bulimia. Food is the one " trigger" you can't avoid. You can choose to not put yourself in situations where you are around drugs but you cannot choose to not be around food. Food is so ingrained into the social aspect of our society. Whether it's a first date at a restaurant or a family reunion at a holiday, if you want to have healthy interpersonal relationships- it is going to require you being around food.Not to mention the fact that you have to eat in order to be healthy and survive! I said all that to say this: those posts definitely should not have been taken down . Those with eating disorders need more representation, resources, stigma relief! They need community and acceptance just like other mental health communities ( I am in some wonderful Facebook BPD Support groups!) A post talking about eating disorders is not going to be a trigger for somebody with an eating disorder because they literally have food at their house, feet away from them. I understand the intention of trying to be sensitive to people's feelings when it has to deal with weight, but actually this is harmful to the Eda community. By walking on eggshells around issues of weight, society simply ignores those diagnosed with Anorexia, Bulimia, Binge Eating Disorder or AFRID altogether. I went to rehab for 6 months for drug abuse, full of different daily group therapies. I would constantly bring up my eating disorder because I had a feeling I wasn't the only woman there with that issue, and it was actually really deteriorating my physical and mental and emotional health just as much as doing drugs was. Other people began to share they were bulimic or AFRID as well, and that microcosm example of removing the EDA stigma desperately needs to be done at the societal macrocosm level! I think it's beautiful and brave whenever someone posts on social media about having an eating disorder and I really think the policies regarding this need to change! I have had to go to doctors and and admit many embarrassing,shameful things in my life but none of them were as hard as the first time I told a doctor that I was bulimic! Remove the policies that keep eating disorders a shameful secret in the dark and let us be welcomed into the light, even if some people will get " offended or hurt feelings" if some social interaction briefly breaks their delusional denial about if they are drastically under or over weight. The time for fearing political correctness blowback and choosing EGGSHELLS instead of GETTING WELL is over. Let people's spouses worry about what to say when someone in denial about being morbidly obese asks if they look fat or unhealthy in that outfit or post or whatever. Let the dangerously underweight anorexic persons parents or friends choose to playcate their body dysmorphia or seek hospitalization help to save their life. The majority of EDA people are not either of those polarized extremes. These days people in general want actual tangible results, a good quality of life and the occasional peaceful moment. If a few eggs are broken in that pursuit, so be it. Caring more about the person's reality instead of their feelings would actually do more to help them anyway. Tough love comes with tears at times, but Also creates space for opportunities like : lowering your BMI and chances of chronic weight related diseases in the future.
I struggled with an eating disorder for over 20 years. I wish I would have seen people posting about EDA honestly back then, maybe it would have changed the amount of time it took me to reach out and get help, if I didn't feel like I was alone.