|
Researcher
Links Food,
Car Ads to Obesity Epidemic
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) -
Food and automobile companies are spending billions of dollars
in advertising to promote conveniences that, over time, may be
key factors in Americans' rising rates of obesity, according to
one Massachusetts researcher.
And obesity, he notes, puts people
at greater risk of developing type 2 diabetes, which is approaching
"epidemic proportions" in the US.
In 2001, nearly $25 billion
was spent on advertisements for relatively inexpensive, convenient
and high-calorie fast foods and other foods, sweets, and beverages,
as well as labor-saving automobiles, both of which help to reduce
many people's levels of habitual activity.
"We are experiencing epidemic rates
of obesity and related diseases such as type 2 diabetes in the
US and we need to look at this emerging problem with a new set
of eyes," Dr. Garry Welch of the Joslin Diabetes Center in Boston
told Reuters Health.
The rate of obesity among US adults
has increased by 74% since 1991, according to a recent report
from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Extremely obese people have a seven-fold greater risk of diabetes,
according to the CDC report, and are more likely to have high
blood pressure and arthritis than people with normal body weights.
In a letter to the editor published
in the February issue of Diabetes Care, Welch wrote that the amount
of advertising to promote "products that could be argued to directly
and indirectly promote obesity is alarming."
"If we look at the drivers of this
obesity/diabetes epidemic they come from our rapidly changing
US culture where our food and exercise habits are deteriorating
as our lives get more complicated and busy," he added in an E-mail
interview. "At the heart of these cultural changes are business
and political forces that are actively shaping our habits and
way of life."
Welch examined 2001 US spending
on brand advertising via print, television, radio and other media,
and found that advertising for fast foods amounted to $3.5
billion--for just nine different brands. In a separate analysis
of advertising for foods, confections and beverages, an additional
$5.8 billion was spent, including nearly $786 million
for the top five brands of soda.
Advertisements for automobiles
were even more costly, totaling $15.5 billion, he reports.
Yet the CDC's total administrative
budget barely topped $5 billion that year, according to the
researcher. The US Food and Drug Administration's budget was just
$1.3 billion.
In light of his findings, Welch
believes "there is a parallel with our historical smoking problem."
Just as nicotine addiction and lung cancer could be attributed
to "aggressive business practices" in the tobacco industry, he
said, "obesity and type 2 diabetes are toxic side effects in the
case of promotion of fast foods, cars, etc. to everyone."
"Only when we have a clear understanding
of the cultural problem we face regarding obesity and type 2 diabetes
and have educated the US public about this, much in the way we
went from ignorance to awareness regarding the cigarette industry,
will we have the platform to make meaningful changes in business
practices promoting obesity," he added.
Welch is not advocating that a
slew of lawsuits be brought against the fast food or automobile
industry, particularly since there are key differences between
these products and cigarettes. For example, "the tobacco industry
was cynically and knowingly hiding the dangers of its products
for decades to keep the cash cow alive," he said.
Rather, Welch argues that obesity-promoting
industries should contribute financially to obesity research,
"to help us understand the cultural problems we face and the development
of responsible and healthy food and exercise practices.
"We live in a society that strongly
shapes our daily eating and exercise habits and makes it very
difficult to keep lean and fit," Welch added. "It is time to start
looking at the business and political forces that create this
increasingly unhealthy society and to push back."
In response to Welch's letter and
comments, Gene Grabowski, a spokesman for the American Council
for Fitness and Nutrition (ACFN), said he agrees that more funding
is needed for obesity research.
The ACFN is a consortium of food,
beverage and consumer products companies, not-for-profit organizations
and trade associations whose stated mission is to promote research,
education and policies that encourage a healthy balance between
fitness and nutrition.
"We accept our responsibility,
but we need help," he said, explaining that the food industry
has been contributing millions of dollars for over a decade toward
obesity research and also is distributing nutrition information
via nutritionists and over Web sites.
In fact, Grabowski said, the three
main issues for the council include advocating for better nutrition
and fitness information for parents, getting physical education
back into schools and getting more federal funding for research
on obesity.
Further, Grabowski said that especially
in recent years, marketing and advertising for high fat foods
is "pretty balanced" with that for healthier fare. Much of prime
time advertising in particular has been aimed toward weight conscious
baby boomers, he said, so "no fat, low fat foods have been the
rage for the past five years."
While Grabowski acknowledges the
lack of data to support his claim that "better-for-you foods"
are advertised and marketed just as heavily as less healthy foods,
he said that there is also no data to support the idea that heavy
advertising may somehow be linked--indirectly or directly--to
rising rates of obesity and type 2 diabetes.
SOURCE: Diabetes Care 2003;26:546-547.
Reference
Source 89
For more information on how to prevent other diseases, use
PreventDisease.com's "Quick
Prevention Resources".
|
