There is little debate that obesity presents a public
health issue in North
America -- obesity rates have more than doubled
over a generation in the United States, according to the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But the causes
of obesity -- and therefore, the solutions -- are not
as obvious, according to research presented this week
at a media workshop run by the Canadian Institutes of
Health Research.
The problem of obesity cannot be reduced simply to genetics,
the researchers said, and it also cannot be blamed solely
on our environments or learned behaviors. Media coverage,
they advised, should highlight that the obesity epidemic
is the result of a variety of factors, and that change
requires a comprehensive approach that tackles the problem
from all sides.
"Obesity's not rocket science," said Dr.
Diane Finegood, director of CIHR's Institute for Nutrition,
Metabolism and Diabetes. "It's a lot more complex."
Biological factors like genetics or diet play a key role.
Genetics help to determine where we gain weight, said
Dr. Jean-Pierre Despres, a professor at Universite
Laval in Quebec.
And where our genes tell our body to store fat -- whether
we're an apple shape that stores it on our stomachs
or a pear shape that stores it on our hips -- is an important
factor for determining our cardiovascular risk, he said.
Research done by Despres and others has shown that excess
fat around the stomach -- visceral fat -- carries a higher
risk for both diabetes and cardiovascular disease, no
matter what a person's body mass index is; as a result,
Despres advocates for the importance of waist circumference
as a vital health measurement to be used in conjunction
with more traditional indicators of cardiovascular risk
like blood pressure and blood cholesterol measurement.
Despres described an international study he was involved
with, where 6400 doctors in 63 countries were shown how
to properly measure waist circumference in their patients.
In looking at the waist measurements and health status
of 170,000 patients, the researchers found higher rates
of diabetes in those with the highest waist measurements,
whether or not their body mass index classified them as
overweight or obese. "This is really making the point
that private care physicians, when they are told and shown
how to measure waist circumference, are not measuring
noise," he said.
For someone who discovers that his or her waist is too
large, and wants to lose weight to reduce the measurement,
the solution would seem to be easy: eat less and move
more. "Obesity is the outcome of a positive energy
balance," said Dr. Angelo Trembley, a professor at
Universite
Laval. But research done by Trembley and others
has shown that it may not be that simple. A variety of
biological factors that wouldn't automatically occur
to us may also be contributing to the dramatic rise in
obesity rates, he said.
There is evidence suggesting that micronutrients -- vitamins
and minerals found in food -- may affect fat loss or gain,
Trembley said. For example, a study led by Trembley found
that female subjects in a placebo group couldn't achieve
significant weight loss, despite following a carefully
restricted diet, while those who took a calcium supplement
showed better weight loss results. It's possible that
as with glucose, the brain can recognize low levels of
micronutrients like calcium, Trembley said, and regulates
appetite control in order to correct them.
"We cannot exclude the possibility at this time
that some individuals might gain some weight due to deficiencies
in some vitamins and minerals," he said.
Poor sleep is another factor that may affect the body's
ability to control appetite, Trembley said. A lack of
sleep can increase ghrelin and decrease leptin, two hormones,
which results in increased hunger and appetite. The Quebec
Family Study showed that short-sleepers were more likely
to be heavier, he said, with more body fat and a larger
waist circumference.
"We are maybe not making optimal life choices,"
Trembley concluded. "Modernity is providing a new
way of living that is providing a positive energy balance."
Data collected by Dr. Gillian Booth, and other researchers
working with her at Toronto's
St. Michael's
Hospital, illustrated that it is not just our individual
lifestyle choices that are contributing to obesity, but
our environments, our cultures and our political landscapes
as well.
North America
is facing an epidemic of diabetes due to increases in
obesity rates, Booth said, and her report on diabetes
in Toronto for the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
showed that diabetes rates in the city of Toronto were
highest in areas of the city found to be less friendly
to healthy choices -- fewer sidewalks and bike paths,
less access to fresh fruits and vegetables, fewer parks
and recreational spaces, and fewer family physicians taking
new patients. Diabetes rates also showed strong correlations
to ethnicity -- many non-white ethnic groups have higher
diabetes rates than Caucasians -- and economics -- there
were higher diabetes rates in areas with lower average
incomes.
"It may be that the availability of resources and
where you live may be much more important for socially
disadvantaged groups," Booth said, "who are
already at a higher risk for diabetes."
If we know that genetics play a role, and lifestyle plays
a role, and environment plays a role, how do we fight
the obesity epidemic? By attacking it from all sides,
said Dr. Kim Raine, a researcher at the University
of Alberta in Edmonton.
We know that toxic environments that promote obesity don't
occur suddenly but develop over time, Raine said, and
that there needs to be social action at multiple levels
in order to promote healthy weight loss. "We do have
power in collective efforts."
For changes to make a difference in people's behavior,
and then in their health, they must be comprehensive,
addressing the physical, economic, sociocultural and political
environment people live in, Raine said -- comparable to
the public health campaign against tobacco use.
For example, research done at the University of Alberta
found that the city of Edmonton had 61 supermarkets, but
761 fast food outlets, many of which were concentrated
in poorer neighborhoods. There were 2.7 times the number
of fast food restaurants in poorer neighborhoods than
in middle-class or high-income neighborhoods, Raine said,
and a similar ratio has been found in research done in
the United States and Australia.
A promotional campaign encouraging people to eat fresh
fruits and vegetables will have a limited effect if people
cannot easily find those items near their homes.
Effective interventions do not have to be excessively
expensive, Raine pointed out. The Children's Lifestyle
and School Performance Study, a project of Dalhousie
University in Nova
Scotia, found that children in schools with a nutrition
program that included parents, teachers and their community
-- at a cost of only $100 per child annually -- had
obesity rates less than half those of children in schools
without the program. But children in schools with a more
basic nutrition program didn't show results much better
than those in schools with no program at all. The difference
illustrates why single moves like removing pop machines
from schools are a good first step, she said, but not
a total solution.
"It's the comprehensive nature of the intervention
that seems to make the difference," Raine said, "not
just little one-offs."