Importance: General exposure to different topics within psychiatry through high-impact publications, conference presentations, and trainings can have a profound downstream effect upon the knowledge and resources available for varied mental health concerns. When specific mental health concerns are labelled as “niche” topics and relegated to specialty journals, this practice can effectively cut off means of garnering support for enhancing high-quality research and clinical care for these issues. Observations: Eating disorders are frequently treated as specialized topics and, as a result, under-represented in high-impact, broad-interest journals, under-funded, and infrequently incorporated into psychiatric training. Yet, eating disorders are common, costly, and highly lethal. The practice of over-specialization of the eating disorder field has resulted in inadequate detection, knowledge, and treatment for these serious and often persistent disorders. Over-specialization may lead to similar inadequacies in research and clinical care in other subfields within psychiatry (e.g., personality disorders). Conclusions and Relevance: It is necessary for various parties (i.e., researchers, reviewers, administrators) both within and external to the eating disorder field to take meaningful steps towards reducing misperceptions that leave eating disorders siloed from other disciplines and, as a result, under-resourced. The outlined recommendations outlined can also support general dissemination of knowledge for other under-acknowledged, yet severe, psychiatric concerns.