[Ed. Note: Posted on behalf of Sarah Fudin, who works in community relations for the George Washington University’s online Master of Public Health program, dubbed MPH@GW, which offers students the ability to earn their MPH online.]
The whole world knows that Americans are increasingly becoming obese, but solving the problem isn’t as easy as pointing it out. While the individual implications of obesity have been painfully clear for some time, there has been more discussion in recent years of how obesity impacts the economy. According to an infographic by MPH@GW, “The Cost of Obesity,” lowering the national obesity rate by just five percent could eliminate 13 percent of the federal deficit over the next 20 years. Re-framing the obesity epidemic in economic terms could be a way to persuade Americans to tackle obesity through public health legislation.
Support for Anti-Obesity Laws
Although the conventional wisdom in recent years has been that the American public resists public health laws, a recent study indicates that the public might actually be more welcoming of legislation than first thought. The study demonstrated that Americans tend to support non-intrusive public health legislation — bans on smoking in public places, for instance, but not bans on smoking in private residences. The key factor in rallying public support for a bill seems to be that the bill’s authors understand the public’s values, which may mean that it will be easier to pass public health laws as our national conversation about obesity evolves.
New York City’s Soda Ban
One of New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s most controversial policy initiatives has been to lead the charge to ban oversized sodas and other sugary drinks within city limits. The law would ban restaurants, cafes and bars from selling sodas over 16 ounces (but not alcoholic or milk-based drinks). Although a New York Times poll found that 60 percent of city residents opposed the bill, other cities have already begun exploring the possibility of passing similar laws. The state Supreme Court struck down the ban shortly before it would have been enacted, but Bloomberg has vowed to appeal their decision.
San Francisco’s Happy Meal Toy Ban
San Francisco recently passed a law preventing McDonald’s from giving away toys with its Happy Meals, the logic being that the toys created an additional incentive for children to eat unhealthy food. The logic of the ban is easy to understand in the same terms as laws that prevent cigarette companies from marketing their products to children. Parents who want their children to have the toys still have the option of buying them separately for 10 cents, making the link between the toy and the food a question, rather than something families take for granted.
Mississippi’s “Anti-Bloomberg” Bill
No one has opposed the regulation of food and beverage sales more staunchly than Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant, who recently signed a bill making it illegal for cities to regulate what people eat. Bryant has been criticized for failing to consider the economic impact of obesity, for which the state bears a degree of fiscal responsibility.
—
While individual public health laws may or may not stick, it’s clear that action will be required to curb the spread of obesity in this country. Whether that action is a ban on oversized sodas or fast food menus that inform customers about the nutritional content of their food matters less than that it happens soon. And one of the best ways to precipitate legislative action may be to promote more conversation between public health officials and citizens about the values at the foundation of such legislation. After all, we can probably all agree that the cost of obesity it too high.
