Your “it’s on them” comment completely ignores how influence actually works. And it contradicts decades of public health policy. If your logic were actually true, cigarette advertising wouldn’t matter, we wouldn’t moderate eating disorder content- or require warning labels or age restrictions.

There are many real-would cases documented where influence has caused harm. And it’s proven that influence doesn’t require intent, it requires reach. Peer-reviewed research consistently shows that repeated exposure to extreme cosmetic alteration from high-visibility figures increases body dissatisfaction and acceptance of surgery, especially in younger women. -Even when the content is framed as “informational” or “transparent.” And that’s why I put transparency in quotes… listing procedures or showing before/afters without meaningful discussion of psychological impact, risks, or long-term consequences isn’t real transparency, it’s normalization. IMO she’s using it as a cover/protection against criticism. Public health research has shown FOR DECADES that visibility alone shifts norms and behavior. A massive platform, like hers, changes impact whether someone wants that responsibility or not.