Quoted Text

Rising Gasoline Prices Could Take A Bite Out Of America's Obesity Epidemic, Study Suggests
Science Daily — Just as rising gasoline prices are forcing many Americans to tighten their financial belts, new research suggests higher fuel costs may come with a related silver lining — trimmer waistlines.

"An additional $1 in real gasoline prices would reduce obesity in the U.S. by 15 percent after three years," suggests Charles Courtemanche, an economics researcher at Washington University in St. Louis.
Higher gas prices could result in trimmer waistlines, suggests a WUSTL researcher.
"In fact, about 13 percent of the rise in obesity between 1979 and 2004 can be attributed to falling real gas prices during the period."
Courtemanche's conclusions are based on a comparison of average state fuel prices with health behavior trends documented in government surveys covering two decades, 1984-2004. He provides evidences for two direct and causal links between gasoline prices and obesity.
"If the price of gas rises, the cost of driving also rises, which may affect body weight in two ways," Courtemanche explains.
"First, people may substitute from driving to walking, bicycling, or taking public transportation. Walking and bicycling are forms of exercise, which increase calories expended, decreasing weight.
"If a person uses public transportation, such as subways, buses, trolleys, or rail services, the need to move to and from the public transit stops is likely to result in additional walking, again decreasing weight.
"Second, since the opportunity cost of eating out at restaurants rises when the price of gas increases, people may substitute from eating out to preparing their own meals at home, which tend to be healthier. People may also eat out less in an effort to save money to pay for the increased cost of gas."
Titled "A Silver Lining: The Connection between Gas Prices and Obesity," Courtemanche's study touched off a lively debate in online economics groups this summer when findings from his working paper were cited in article published in The New York Times.
Some suggested that Courtemanche was politically incorrect to suggest a gasoline tax as a means of addressing a larger societal problem, such as an individual's obesity.
"I'm afraid my findings are being a bit misinterpreted," Courtemanche countered. "I did not intend to imply that additional gasoline taxes would be beneficial for society, just that additional gasoline taxes would reduce obesity."
Courtemanche points out that his current study makes no attempt to determine whether increased fuel costs would have a positive or negative net impact on social welfare. He sees this question as a possible direction for future research, but cautions that such studies must be careful to take into account all the consequences of increased fuel costs.
"Research shows that reducing people's incomes would worsen obesity, so any increase in the gasoline tax should be accompanied by mass transit subsidies, payroll tax reductions, or some other policy that replaces the lost income," he suggests.
Courtemanche, an economics doctoral student in Arts & Sciences, stands behind his numbers and their potential implications for policy decisions. As a health economist, he argues that such potential is too important to be overlooked.
According to his analysis, the reduction in obesity caused by a $1 increase in gasoline prices would save 16,000 lives and $17 billion a year.
While classical economic theory suggests that welfare is maximized by staying out of people's way, Courtemanche argues that some policy intervention may be necessary in dealing with the obesity epidemic, in part, because the problem falls into a special category known to economists as a "market failure."
"One of the most common market failures is an externality, which is where your action affects others," he explains. "This is why we have cigarette taxes — secondhand smoke creates a negative externality, so it is possible that government intervention would improve social welfare."
Despite the fact that eating and exercise are personal choices, intervention may be justified because an individual's obesity may have a negative impact on society, he argues.
"With obesity, the most obvious negative externality is medical expenses. Because of public insurance (Medicare and Medicaid), the medical expenses of obese people are often paid for by taxpayers. For people with private insurance, their medical expenses increase everyone's premiums.
"In short, then, the argument that weight is a personal choice and should not be interfered with breaks down because of our insurance system. Other market failures that may also apply to obesity are addiction and lack of perfect information, such as not knowing how many calories are in the food you eat at restaurants. Again, that doesn't necessarily mean the gas taxes are the best policy, just that SOME obesity-reducing policy may be appropriate."
Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by Washington University in St Louis.

Quoted Text

Charles Cummins
REPORT CARD ON EDUCATION
Study on childhood obesity ignored the influence of parents
Charles Cummins, Ed.D., is a retired school administrator. Send questions to him at: cacummins818@gmail.com.

    You probably saw the headline: “Study: Kids get less exercise as teens.” I hope you did, because it points up a continuing problem in America. The problem, in two words, is childhood obesity.
    However, there were several things about the study by Dr. Phillip R. Nader, University of California, San Diego, that bothered me.
    For one thing, it may have left the impression that the problem lies solely with kids getting too little exercise.
PART OF PROBLEM
    Exercise is an important factor in weight control. But anyone who has recently visited a shopping mall has seen overweight kids accompanied by severely overweight parents. Parents are, pardon the pun, a big part of the problem.
    Let’s put aside the myths about big bones, inherited fat genes and other excuses. Yes, some babies are born “chubby,” but they don’t stay that way without mom and dad’s help. Children are naturally curious and naturally active.
    The so-called terrible twos in childhood arise in part because 2-year-olds can get into (investigate) more things than they could when crawling on the floor or toddling about from one piece of furniture to the next.
    Get out of their way and they will burn as many calories during the day as they take in — and so will any parent trying to keep up with them. Just ask the harried mom or dad charged with watching one.
    This full-speed-ahead activity level continues into midchildhood. Dr. Nader and his team found that “9-year-olds regularly engage in three hours of physical activity every day, but that drops off dramatically to below the recommended level of exercise when children hit their teen years,” according to a report of the study in CTVglobalmedia (http://www.ctv.ca).
MEASURING ACTIVITY
    The Nader study measured and analyzed the physical activity of 1,000 children for one week each when they were 9, 11, 12 and 15 years of age. The children wore an accelerometer during each week of the study. This device measures minute-by-minute movement by the child.
    This information would certainly give you a measure of activity for that child for that week. One may understandably question whether this information, even when extrapolated over 1,000 children, gives you an accurate measure of children’s activity in general. I accept the researchers’ findings. I accept that valid conclusions may be drawn from statistical sampling of this sort.
    The nature of those conclusions is another matter. The researchers’ data show, for example, that “girls’ levels of physical activity decreased at an earlier age than boys.” That is what the data show. Deciding why that is so is a matter of interpretation.
    Interpretations derive as much from beliefs as from training and experience. In other words, what we are looking for can skew what we interpret from the data.
    According to one newspaper report, “Nader said he was ‘surprised by how dramatic the decline was’ and cited schools dropping recess and gym classes and kids’ increasing use of video games and computers as possible reasons.”
    That is too simplistic. Long before gym class was a regular part of the elementary school week, children got their school day exercise during recess or at lunch time. Outdoor recess was often eliminated entirely during some winter months because of the weather. Yet childhood obesity was not the problem then that it is today.
    I also object to the interpretation that increasing use of video games and computers explain teens’ inactivity. Past generations of teens had radios, phonographs, telephones, television, and let’s not forget movies to keep them indoors and inactive. But they were more active and less obese than today’s kids.
    Why did the researcher choose to blame teen’s inactivity on video games and computers?
    The researchers don’t know what children were doing when the accelerometer registered no activity. They could have been sitting on the couch reading a favorite book. They could have been building a model airplane. They could have been working on a Scout project or practicing on their trumpet.
    None of these “activities” would register much on the accelerometer they were wearing.
SIMPLISTIC ANSWERS
    For sure, too many of today’s youth do not get enough exercise. Computers are not necessarily to blame and schools cannot be expected to deal with the problem with longer gym classes. Those are simplistic answers. The obesity problem requires everyone’s attention.
    Above all else, parents must get involved. Parents must themselves become more active and then see that their kids join them. Parents must also see that their kids have nutritious meals and develop healthy eating habits.
    Obese kids become tomorrow’s obese adults, and we have enough of those.

Quoted from Sombody

Child hood obesisty is an epidemic -Childhood obesity involves significant risks to physical and emotional health- not to mention type 2 diabetes- and on and on and on

But in this great country our motto could be " I can be as fat as I want "

Quoted Text

Main Entry: 2sa·ti·ate  
Pronunciation: \ˈsā-shē-ˌāt\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): sa·ti·at·ed; sa·ti·at·ing
Etymology: Latin satiatus, past participle of satiare, from satis enough — more at sad
Date: 15th century
: to satisfy (as a need or desire) fully or to excess
— sa·ti·a·tion  \ˌsā-shē-ˈā-shən, ˌsā-sē-\ noun
synonyms satiate, sate, surfeit, cloy, pall, glut, gorge mean to fill to repletion. satiate and sate may sometimes imply only complete satisfaction but more often suggest repletion that has destroyed interest or desire . surfeit implies a nauseating repletion . cloy stresses the disgust or boredom resulting from such surfeiting . pall emphasizes the loss of ability to stimulate interest or appetite . glut implies excess in feeding or supplying . gorge suggests glutting to the point of bursting or choking <gorged themselves with chocolate