Causes and Impact of Obesity
There has been a significant global growth in the number of people who are suffering from obesity in the recent past. Obesity primarily causes a significant increase in the weight of an individual. Obesity is based on the calculation of body mass index (BMI) which depends on the weight and height of the person. A person who has a BMI of 30 or more is deemed obese. Obesity may lead to several other non-communicable diseases like diabetes mellitus (type-2), cardiovascular diseases, cancers, osteoarthritis and chronic disabilities. The basic reason of obesity is that the energy expenditure of the body is less than the energy consumption which may happen because of consumption of high energy food, lack of physical activities, and mental disorders. There may be other biological reasons as well that are beyond an individual’s control like age, gender, genetics and hormones. Therefore it is observed that obesity can happen because of individual causes, socioeconomic conditions or even environmental factors. Obesity not only impacts the physical fitness of an individual but also hampers the overall quality of life affecting the self-esteem and mental health of the individual.
Health inequalities refer to the differences which are usually unfair and preventable with respect to the health of people across the whole population or among particular sections of populations. They are often created due to social circumstances and are usually beyond a single person’s control (McCartney et al. 2019). These then affect the chances of having a longer and healthier life in individuals. In United Kingdom the cases of obesity are evidently more in deprived areas as compared to the less deprived areas. The kids of deprived areas are two times more susceptible to obesity than kids of same age group from richer parts (Lockyer and Spiro 2019). This leads to embedding health inequalities from early age that may continue for the rest of their lives. The effects of this socioeconomic status create an imbalance in obesity cases in the United Kingdom. In 2018, about 63% of adult population of England was either overweight or obese (Yates et al. 2020). To tackle the problem of obesity and overweight, the UK government started a “Better Health” campaign which was started in July, 2020 and provided a no cost plan to manage and lose weight. This campaign was set with the goal to motivate people to change their eating habits and lifestyle but had several flaws as well. In this paper the “Better Health” campaign, its achievements and flaws are discussed along with the influence it had in overcoming or preventing obesity.
The campaign was started because it was evident that obesity was one of the crucial factors that caused number of non-communicable diseases which eventually lead to death. Also, as the world is going through a pandemic, there were numerous studies that suggested that obesity could increase the severity of Covid-19 infection (Gao et al. 2020). Thus, to inspire people to have a healthy lifestyle and diet in order to upgrade the overall quality of life, the UK Government started the “Better Health” campaign along with other policies to address obesity. Although the thought behind the initiative was a positive thought however, there are some flaws in the plan and certain chances of real change that were missed.
Health Inequalities and Obesity in the UK
The main aims of the campaign included several processes like providing weight management solutions, legislating the food businesses like eateries, cafes, restaurants and takeaway joints to provide calorie count on their products, restricting promotion and placement of high fat, sugar, salt food products at convenient locations so as to limit their purchase, also consulting with alcohol companies to provide calories intake on labels (Department of Health and Social Care, 2020). The Government has given these methods to reduce the burden of NHS. It is estimated that the cost of obesity related disorders will go up to £9.7 billion by 2050. The goals of this policy on paper look very promising in dealing with obesity and also appealing to the masses if handled correctly and adequately. However, these steps have certain flaws discussed later in the paper.
The campaign’s primary focus was to give people ideas to build life on better health choices such as losing weight, including physical exercises, abandon smoking. They advocated these ideas with a variety of approaches like formation of mobile applications (NHS Smokefree, Couch to 5K), providing virtual exercise videos and BMI calculators, organizing online support groups along with offers to provide weight loss plan in organizations that provide such services. As already mentioned this campaign was initiated when the world is going through Covid-19 pandemic and was started because of the studies that showed people who were obese were in all likelihood affected more severely by Covid-19 infections and therefore have more chances of being admitted to intensive care units thereby creating a greater burden on the healthcare system of the whole nation (Hussain et al. 2020). However, the general public has repeatedly faced problems during the pandemic to reduce or even maintain weight on the contrary there has been a significant increase in weight and alcohol consumption during this time (Bennett et al. 2021). Hence the campaign provided scope for people trying to reduce weight and increase activity.
The policy ‘Tackling Obesity’ gives an impression that, according to the National Health Services (NHS), obesity is the outcome of individual choices and not the deficiency of public health policies or any pathophysiological factor. These preconceived notions can lead individuals suffering from obesity to be blamed and fat shamed which may generate guilt and shame in people having obesity. The policy paper states that, if obesity can be tackled healthcare professionals including doctors and nurses would be able to provide their time for treatment of more serious and life-threatening diseases. From such choice of language it becomes evident that it allows patients with obesity to be blamed and shamed for their condition. Labeling obesity in this way would encourage people to adopt crash dieting and develop a detrimental relationship with food which would hamper the physical and mental health in the long run. Hence a step taken with a positive thinking may in fact cause adverse effects not just on the people suffering with obesity but on the society as a whole because people will start to condemn and shame people with obesity. This will hamper the mental and emotional health of obese as well as overweight individuals.
The Better Health Campaign
The paper also describes the processes that need to be considered for enhancement of health of affected individuals and other people as well. Steps such as advertisement of food that have high amounts of sugars, salts or fats shall be reduced, encouraging people to consume healthier and greener foods over packaged or takeout foods, improvement of labels on foods in eateries and grocery stores, and giving ample support to people who aim to lose weight. On the other hand this policy fails to understand that it is not always food or less activity that lead to obesity. The more fundamental causes of obesity were ignored like genetic susceptibility, socioeconomic status and environmental factors (Hobbs et al. 2018). Thus the general message of ‘eating less’ and ‘moving more’ is not sufficient to deal with obesity. Equating obesity to unhealthiness and/or laziness is not correct and needs to be stopped in order to protect the mental peace of obese individuals (Rathbone 2021). The society as a whole has to help obese people overcome obesity and that will not happen if the approach remains blaming and shaming them for the disorder.
The campaign’s main aim was to reduce calorie intake of individuals. This again is not the right or complete solution to improve health quality of an individual. In hindsight, education on balanced diet composition, its necessities, advantages need to be discussed and made available to all sections of the society. The idea that a wholesome meal should have a variety of vegetables, whole grains, proteins, healthy fats and an adequate amount of water will helps individuals to plan their meals accordingly. If only calorie restrictions are given without proper guidelines general public might not be able to understand what they need to consume. Calorie content itself does not guarantee the health quotient in a food item because different food items are processed differently in the human body. Also the satiation produced by different food items is different (Gibbons et al. 2019). For example, the consumption of a few hundred calories of ice cream is much easier than consuming same amount of broccoli or egg. Thus if 200 calories are the required amount in a meal, then two people who consume different food items will have different level of satiation. Therefore it is more important to focus on the food consumed than the calorie content of the food (Benson 2020). Few years back, the government of UK levied a tax on sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs). This caused a significant reduction in the sale of these soft drinks per capita after the tax became effective (Scheelbeek et al. 2019). The question therefore arises that is it not possible for the government to levy such amendments to other detrimental ingredients? Reduction in the prices of fresh produce like vegetables and fruits would also help people of all social strata to access them. Steps to reduce environmental factors that may lead to obesity can also be established throughout the population. Reducing the fast food outlets near places that are frequently visited like schools and work places, increasing accessibility to green spaces and promoting active commuting (travelling by foot or cycle) can be considered as starting steps to achieve an obesogenic free environment.
Achievements of the Better Health Campaign
Thus, for future works and campaigns targeting obesity or any eating disorder, they must follow certain points that will be helpful as understood from the paper. The policy should advocate complete well-being of an individual including their mental and emotional state and not just their physical being. Not addressing mental health leads to complications in some parts of the population (Payne et al. 2018). It should also address issues related to socioeconomic status of an individual like educational qualifications and financial conditions (Kahan, S. and Manson, J.E., 2019). Considering these issues will help reducing negative impact on the policy as significant issues will get addressed like the price and importance of balanced diets. An important aspect of any policy is the language and way of presentation of the policy to the public. If the policy starts to condemn the affected individuals and label them as the cause of problem, it will create negative impact on the patients (Sogg, Grupski & Dixon 2018). Also the campaign should involve the targeted audiences. The ‘Better Health’ campaign lacked these nuances and thus could not create the desired impact on the population as a whole (Theis and White 2021). The government therefore needs to focus on their failures and design policies accordingly.
From the above discussions it can be concluded that obesity is a cause of concern globally and therefore steps to prevent and protect individuals who are at risk of having obesity should be implemented. Obesity affects the overall quality of life, thereby hampering physical, social, emotional and mental health status of the person. Thus, the recognition and initiation of a health policy towards this disorder by the UK Government is commendable. ‘Better Health’ campaign is started with a pragmatic approach to solve the problem but lacks the basic understanding that obesity is not just an individual’s choices but also the effects of their genetic, social and environmental composition. Hence, promoting plans to lose weight or restricting calories cannot provide a permanent solution to obesity. As already stated calorie count is not the right way of promoting healthy diet because each food item gets digested in a different manner in the human body. Obesity needs to be tackled with care and empathy as the people suffering from obesity become emotionally and mentally vulnerable. The campaign however received mixed reactions from the people. Many people felt motivated to stay fit because of this campaign while others are of the opinion that the campaign lacked to address the mental health problems associated with obesity. As the campaign was started during the Covid-19 pandemic, a lack of consideration for mental health when most people were vulnerable raised questions on the campaign. Hence, the government needs to improve their policies in order to achieve success in reducing the cases of obesity.
References
Bennett, G., Young, E., Butler, I. and Coe, S., 2021. The impact of lockdown during the COVID-19 outbreak on dietary habits in various population groups: a scoping review. Frontiers in nutrition, 8, p.53.
Benson, D., 2020. How Much do Calories Matter?. Alternative Medicine, (51), pp.6-7.
Department of Health and Social Care, 2020. Tackling obesity: empowering adults and children to live healthier lives. [online] GOV.UK. Available at: <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tackling-obesity-government-strategy/tackling-obesity-empowering-adults-and-children-to-live-healthier-lives> [Accessed 14 March 2022].
Gibbons, C., Hopkins, M., Beaulieu, K., Oustric, P. and Blundell, J.E., 2019. Issues in measuring and interpreting human appetite (satiety/satiation) and its contribution to obesity. Current obesity reports, 8(2), pp.77-87.
Gao, F., Zheng, K.I., Wang, X.B., Sun, Q.F., Pan, K.H., Wang, T.Y., Chen, Y.P., Targher, G., Byrne, C.D., George, J. and Zheng, M.H., 2020. Obesity is a risk factor for greater COVID-19 severity. Diabetes care, 43(7), pp.e72-e74.
Hobbs, M., Griffiths, C., Green, M.A., Jordan, H., Saunders, J. and McKenna, J., 2018. Associations between the combined physical activity environment, socioeconomic status, and obesity: a cross-sectional study. Perspectives in public health, 138(3), pp.169-172.
Hussain, A., Mahawar, K., Xia, Z., Yang, W. and Shamsi, E.H., 2020. RETRACTED: Obesity and mortality of COVID-19. Meta-analysis. Obesity research & clinical practice, 14(4), pp.295-300.
Kahan, S. and Manson, J.E., 2019. Obesity treatment, beyond the guidelines: practical suggestions for clinical practice. Jama, 321(14), pp.1349-1350.
Lockyer, S. and Spiro, A., 2019. Socio?economic inequalities in childhood obesity: Can community level interventions help to reduce the gap?.
McCartney, G., Popham, F., McMaster, R. and Cumbers, A., 2019. Defining health and health inequalities. Public health, 172, pp.22-30.
Payne, M.E., Porter Starr, K.N., Orenduff, M., Mulder, H.S., McDonald, S.R., Spira, A.P., Pieper, C.F. and Bales, C.W., 2018. Quality of life and mental health in older adults with obesity and frailty: associations with a weight loss intervention. The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 22(10), pp.1259-1265.
Rathbone, J.A., 2021. Weight stigma and discrimination: Psychological and social determinants and the implications for behaviour and health.
Scheelbeek, P.F., Cornelsen, L., Marteau, T.M., Jebb, S.A. and Smith, R.D., 2019. Potential impact on prevalence of obesity in the UK of a 20% price increase in high sugar snacks: modelling study. bmj, 366.
Sogg, S., Grupski, A. and Dixon, J.B., 2018. Bad words: why language counts in our work with bariatric patients. Surgery for obesity and related diseases, 14(5), pp.682-692.
Theis, D.R. and White, M., 2021. Is obesity policy in England fit for purpose? Analysis of government strategies and policies, 1992–2020. The Milbank Quarterly, 99(1), pp.126-170.
Yates, T., Razieh, C., Zaccardi, F., Davies, M.J. and Khunti, K., 2020. Obesity and risk of COVID-19: analysis of UK biobank. Primary care diabetes, 14(5), pp.566-567.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
