Five-point plan to fight obesity rates

AS LUCY Collins reported, obesity rates in Scotland are worryingly high ("£200k for fridges to cut obesity", News, 28 February). Figures published in December 2009 revealed one in five children is overweight and one in ten of these is obese or severely obese.

People who are overweight have an increased risk of a wide range of serious life-threatening and chronic diseases. The most significant conditions being diabetes, cardiovascular disease, certain cancers (including colon, ovarian and endometrial tumours), osteoarthritis and gout.

We are in danger of raising a generation of children burdened with long-term chronic health conditions. Doctors have a role to play in supporting overweight patients but there is a limit to what they can do. The British Medical Association has been lobbying for some time for real action on this issue in order to achieve a real improvement in the future health of our children.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The BMA believes there are five areas where action is required: nutrition; exercise; advertising; labelling; and education.

There should be much more emphasis on food education and the acquisition of related skills in schools. Sport and recreation facilities must be accessible to encourage families to increase their physical activity. A ban on advertising of unhealthy foods before the 9pm watershed would significantly reduce their influence on children and accurate food labelling and clear information would encourage the public to make informed choices about their diet. In addition, a sustained and consistent public education campaign would improve parents' and children's understanding of the benefits of healthy living.

Prevention is much better than cure. It is better, healthier and safer if children are given the tools to manage their weight, eat healthily and take more exercise. It is crucial that society takes this opportunity to halt the rise of obesity, and the host of illnesses that come with it.

Dr Brian Keighley, chairman, Scottish Council of the BMA

DANI Garavelli, in accusing public health policy of having a middle-class bias (Insight, 28 February) has her own middle-class bias. Worse, she is wrong.

If you define eating as purely individual choices – like whether or not to eat sticky toffee pudding – you miss the whole industrial food chain that has created larger, more calorific, portions of food while often reducing nutrient content.

It is simple economics: some quite disgusting forms of food chemistry can increase tasty sugars, salts, fats and calories while lowering prices, so people sell and eat more junk. That holds for ciabattas as well as chips; both are getting worse. Likewise, the marginal cost of a larger portion is often lower than the extra price that can be charged, so portions increase. Look at colas' shift from cans to bottles – a bit more cola, a much higher price. That's why portions, calories, obesity and diabetes are increasing across rich countries.

Individual choices might just keep us healthy if we all bought groceries in the top stores with our personal nutritionists.

But back in reality, people who just want a good meal need some help confronting the corporations that determine what we can eat and what goes into it.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Governments, including the Scottish Government and allies as varied as the president of France and the mayor of New York, are right to try to balance the scales.

Dr Scott L Greer, assistant professor of health management, University of Michigan, and senior research fellow, LSE Health, London School of Economics

Related topics: