Background  Drawing on the work of the late French philosophers Deleuze and Guattari, the objective of this paper is to demonstrate that the evidence-based movement in the health sciences is outrageously exclusionary and dangerously normative with regards to scientific knowledge. As such, we assert that the evidence-based movement in health sciences constitutes a good example of microfascism at play in the contemporary scientific arena. Objective  The philosophical work of Deleuze and Guattari proves to be useful in showing how health sciences are colonised (territorialised) by an all-encompassing scientific research paradigm - that of post-positivism - but also and foremost in showing the process by which a dominant ideology comes to exclude alternative forms of knowledge, therefore acting as a fascist structure. Conclusion  The Cochrane Group, among others, has created a hierarchy that has been endorsed by many academic institutions, and that serves to (re)produce the exclusion of certain forms of research. Because 'regimes of truth' such as the evidence-based movement currently enjoy a privileged status, scholars have not only a scientific duty, but also an ethical obligation to deconstruct these regimes of power.

No exit? Have we arrived at an impasse in the health sciences? Has the regime of 'evidence', coupled with corporate models of accountability and 'best-practices', led to an inexorable decline in innovation, scholarship, and actual health care? Would it be fair to speak of a 'methodological fundamentalism' from which there is no escape? In this article, we make an argument about intellectual integrity and good faith. We take this risk knowing full well that we do so in a hostile political climate in the health sciences, positioning ourselves against those who quietly but assiduously control the very terms by which the public faithfully understands 'integrity' and 'truth'. In doing so, we offer an honest critique of these definitions and of the systemic power that is reproduced and guarded by the gatekeepers of 'Good Science'.

This article focuses on the results of a study exploring young Shia Muslim Canadian women’s discursive constructions of physical activity in relation to Islam and the Hijab. The aims of the study were primarily informed by feminist poststructuralist and postcolonial theories. Poststructuralist discourse analysis was used to analyze the transcripts of conversations with 10 young Hijab-wearing Shia Muslim Canadian women. The results show that the participants discursively constructed physical activity in terms of being physically active (involved in fitness activities rather than sport), feeling good about themselves (i.e., being physically and mentally healthy), and losing weight or remaining “not fat.” The participants mentioned that they would choose Islam over physical activity if they had to make a choice between the two. Participants strongly resisted the Islamophobic discourse present in Canada, and appropriated an intersectional discourse that legitimates their refusal to choose between their right to religious freedom and their right to physical activity.

The recent construction of a so-called “obesity epidemic” has been fueled by epidemiologically-based studies recuperated by the media and suggestions of the rapid acceleration of obesity rates in the Western world. Studies linking obesity to ill-health have also exploded and greatly impacted our “physical” culture. In this article, I present a series of postcards to summarize the dominant obesity discourse and document the rhetorical terrain of the impending epidemic. I also offer counter-postcards to dispute the postcards’ objective postulations and contextualize the birth of what I call the “Obesity Clinic.” I then characterize this polymorphous clinic as an apparatus of capture sustained by biomedicalization, bioeconomics, and biocultural discourses and speak to its regulation and abjection of unruly (fat) bodies. I conclude with a few reflections about the territorializing nature of the Obesity Clinic as well as what it means for individuals and, more generally, for physical culture and its study.

The recent construction of an 'obesity epidemic' has been fueled by epidemiologically-based studies recuperated by the media and suggesting the rapid acceleration of obesity rates in the Western world. Studies linking obesity to ill-health have also exploded with more recipes on how to wage 'a war' on obesity and dispose of 'domestic terrorists.' In this paper, we assert that the fabrication of 'evidence' in obesity research constitutes a good example of micro-fascism at play in the contemporary scientific arena. Favoring a particular ideology and excluding alternative forms of knowledge, obesity scientists have established a dominant 'obesity discourse' within which obese and 'at-risk' bodies are constructed as lazy and expensive bodies that should be submitted to disciplinary technologies (for example, surveillance), expert investigation and regulation. Using a poststructuralist approach, we examine the politics of evidence in obesity science and explore the connections between obesity discourses and the ways in which health and the body are discursively constructed by Canadian youth. Social Theory & Health (2010) 8, 259-279. doi:10.1057/sth.2009 Keywords: body; obesity; health; youth; discourse analysis; poststructuralist theory Obesity and 'Evidence'Few North Americans will have escaped the avalanche of scientific and public comments about obesity in recent years. Escalating concerns over an 'obesity epidemic' have been fueled by the epidemiological, physiological and medical r