Actually, the general cultural attitudes are to castigate overweight individuals for some sort of moral failing. In reality, it is substantially harder for different people with different genes to maintain a lower weight. Disregarding that is purely callous and is equivalent to denying the existence of phenomena like addiction.
People are 100% accountable, but that doesn't mean we should ignore that it's harder for certain people to make the "right" choice. It also doesn't mean we shouldn't give them support and assistance to make the right choice.
I see both happening. I see major attitudes of helplessness or victim mentality. Or just ambivalence. Go to any mall. We all know this story.
But also, it then becomes a thing where those who do have their head in the right place to pursue health in a practical and beneficiary (edit: beneficial) manner, these folks often do turn around and moralize. It's too bad.
The real truth is, we need to forget about those types of things, for a little while at least, and concentrate purely on the facts. The consequences. What is actually occurring. Because in the end, it doesn't matter what peoples' intentions are, or motives, or desires, or anything else. What matters are consequences.
That said, of course it's incumbent upon anyone promoting health to offer a helping hand, only, and never anything else. Never any judgment. Because not one of us is "above it."
edit: You know there is probably a willpower / self worth feedback cycle too. If you give into temptation once you feel bad about yourself and are probably then more likely to to fall again.
As this article points out people who are trying to lose weight and following the advice of 'experts' may have been doing the wrong thing Staying hungry eating grain bread, pastas and fruit and not satiating themselves with enough fats or proteins. Jump in and join the discussion don't try and dismiss it with a disdainful wave of the hand.
Experts have never said "eat bread" or "eat pasta" to people dieting. Are you mistaking "expert advice" for "populist nonsense"? You wouldn't be alone. Every single HN thread about nutrition contains fucking awful pseudo-scientific nonsense supported by anecdote with no actual science anywhere.
Most importantly this idea is dangerous because it is used often in the PR campaigns of processed food manufacturers. "Drink the 1L soda bottle, it is ok, because then you can walk around the block to burn it off!" kind of idea.
"if you eat without consideration and control" the battle is you vs an entire army of PR people and biochemists focused on defeating you for profit. My betting money is on the army. The moral and ethical failure is creating a civilization designed to kill in exchange for a few making high profits, its not a moral or ethical failure for some wanna-be Rambo's getting wiped out by the combined arms attack of an entire army. Or, a "hate the game not the players" argument.
You are technically correct, except in the case of children who were raised with terrible eating habits and found themselves with the same habits and damage in adulthood. In my (terribly uninformed) opinion, I think this is more common than we give it credit, and the behavioral effects of several years or more of terrible eating is more powerful and controlling than we give it credit.
The statement "You are 100% accountable" is very good for empowering individuals to change, but it is commonly confused as something intended to shame.
Looking for places where to put blame is useless in situations where there isn't moral hazard, or where you are unable to punish the blamed. On those cases, you're left with the choice of accepting your part of the problem and correcting it, or keep suffering.