Home -> Law Blog Directory -> International Law Blogs -> The Co-co Banana

International Law

: The Co-co Banana

Obesity Debate

By jarvis666

Last night I was reading The Globe and Mail online. An article I was interested in was one about how schools are blamed for childhood obesity. When I went to the comments section, the trend was going back and forth as to who was truly to blame; parents, or schools. Indeed, childhood obesity (or probably obesity in general) is definitely a topic that pops up in both Canadian and American news media ever so often.

Now before I give my take on this whole subject, just a couple of notes.

First of all, I am not a dietitian, fitness instructor, doctor (obviously), nutritionist, or health specialist, although I probably know my fair share about physical fitness and nutrition. But nevertheless, I am not an expert on the subject.

Secondly, I must admit that I am a bit of a yo-yo dieter. While I have lost over 30 pounds since April, I sometimes tend to ?fall off the wagon,? and not work-out and eat unhealthily for various periods of time. I recently went back to healthy eating and the occasional gym running (although I don?t plan to hit the weights for quite some time just yet).
Finally, some people refer to the ?obesity epidemic? as a ?national health concern,? one that could be compared to the dangers of cigarette smoking, and that one is more likely to die from obesity-related diseases and illnesses than from diseases and illnesses correlated with tobacco smoke (i.e. easier to grab a bag of chips than a cigarette, and at a younger age too?). As to whether obesity truly is an ?epidemic national health concern,? is up to you to decide.
Anyway, with all that said, I shall now ramble.

The debate as to the blame for obesity is one that stems back and forth. People blame schools for their little emphasis on nutrition and physical education, as well as their little alternatives to healthy foods in their cafeterias. At the same time, people blame parents for not feeding their children properly, educating them about fitness and nutrition, and not putting them into extra-curricular activities to keep them active. People also have a tendency to blame video games and computers for ?making? children lazy. The blame goes further on to fast food places and their low-priced, quick-serving meals. Facilitating this perhaps is today?s working world. People sometimes say that because we are so busy all the time with school and work, we simply don?t have enough time in the run of a day to head to the gym, make a healthy meal, or simply skip the junk food. Plus, for some people (but obviously not everyone), their metabolism is not the greatest, and they pack on weight much easier than other people. These are all noteworthy points in my opinion.

At the end of the day though, I don?t try to emphasize one argument over the other. Definitely, all of these things need to be considered together. One thing I learned from my years of yo-yo dieting is that weight management and weight loss is a dual-approach in life, one of proper eating, and the other of proper exercise. You can burn hundreds of calories with a run, but if you are packing on thousands afterwards, well then basically, you?re standing still.

But as I was saying about not emphasizing one argument over the other, it is important to keep in mind that not everything works in a vacuum, and so many things can come together and contribute to the ?obesity concern? that hits the news every so often. Perhaps schools need better education on nutrition and physical activity, as well as providing healthier alternatives (or even banning junk food). Maybe parents need to feed their children better, teach them the importance of physical activity, and place them in fitness programs. Maybe we should ditch video games and computers. Conceivably, we might have too many fast food places in society that offer too many unhealthy foods. Work and school may be just demanding too much out of us that our health comes to pay for it (12 hour a day working lawyers?). It could also be the case where too many social events that we chose to attend (or have to) serve too many unhealthy snacks.

But alas, like anything, things go so much deeper here. People could blame schools, but some schools are poorly under-funded, and don?t have the resources to pay for these education programs and after-school extra-curricular activities, and with our emphasis on books and writing, some things end up taking a cut (doesn?t PAL stop around grade 10?). People could blame parents, but some parents may not be aware of the benefits of fitness and nutrition, or perhaps do not have enough money to put their children in sport programs (some sporting costs are very high). It?s possible that video games and computers do take up a lot of people?s time, preventing them from engaging in physical activity. There are also a lot of fast food places offering so much unhealthy food for such a little price (more ideal for someone on a tight budget). Employers could probably give more time off to allow employees to go work-out (healthy workers could mean less sick days, which could lead to higher productivity? You never know). Obviously, based on my reasoning (which I will admit is not statistically proven); it seems as if there is an economic barrier when it comes to trying to combat obesity (the question of who these economic barriers hurt the most is one you can think about).

However, if these are the economic barriers, perhaps there are also economic solutions. Jogging, walking, running, etc? is one that I can think of. Aside from a pair of running shoes and a good pair of sweatpants, a run, jog, walk, etc? is virtually a low-cost activity to do. If there?s a public track, go for it. If you have a local park, make the best of it with a jog through it. It might cost a lot to participate in organized sports, but running will cost you much less than a soccer camp will. But as well, maybe sporting equipment and programs do cost too much (gym memberships alone in this city are lot), and if fitness and physical activity are of such prime importance, then perhaps that should be the main incentive to reducing the prices to enable participation in physically active lifestyles. I am sure if you really play with your imagination, you can think of other low-cost activities (i.e. a basketball is cheaper than buying hockey equipment). As well, why not give tax breaks on gym memberships and fitness facilities? They?re probably healthier places to be than a downtown bar.

As for bad foods, I am personally for schools in banning junk food. If schools want to educate children about eating right, the first thing they can do is offer the right food. As for parents being unable to afford healthy foods, maybe they should look twice in the grocery store. Fruits and vegetables, whole grains, etc? can sometimes (although not always) be just as affordable as a bag of chips and those snack packages.

As for fast food places offering too many unhealthy choices, why not tax them? If you want to tax cigarettes because they are unhealthy, and tobacco corporations make so much money off people who smoke, then why not tax the fast- and junk-food corporations for making so much off of their products that contribute to unhealthy lives? Makes more sense to me, especially seeing how cigarettes are legalized for those over 19, but fast- and junk-food is for all ages (I will ignore how tobacco corporations market to those underage to get them to start smoking before legal age). Plus, how about a tax break for healthy foods and nutritional supplements? When I buy healthy foods or a keg of protein, I personally believe that there should be no tax on it, as opposed to something like a cake, bag of chips, case of pop, deep friend chicken, etc? If you want to create incentives for people to live healthy, this could be a start.

If it is true that obesity-related diseases and illnesses cost the health-care system lots of money to maintain, and if prevention is priority in addressing this, then why not make it more affordable to live a healthy lifestyle? I don?t know if making whatever sports more affordable to play would increase participation, but keeping the costs of it low is probably be a better way to get more people playing it than keeping it high.

Obviously, many people might point out that it is ultimately up to the person to choose how they live their life, and if they rather smoke, not work out, eat unhealthy foods, then they ?deserve? what they get. I don?t buy this argument (as I find it a form a victim-blaming, which I am strongly against). As Karl Marx once said: ?People make their own history, but not under conditions of their own choosing.? If you are not exposed to an environment that displays the benefits of physical fitness and nutrition, or if achieving these benefits is unaffordable, then you probably don?t have a ?true? choosing. If this ?obesity epidemic? is something that is a ?major concern? to society, then everyone needs to work together on it, and you can?t just blame one person or organization.

Finally, unlike that Nova Scotia political from a few years ago (I forgot his name), I am NOT in favor of some sort of ?waist measure? come tax time in order to qualify for a tax benefit. Such a process, in my opinion, is degrading, humiliating, utterly embarrassing, as well as costly. A tax on bad food and a tax incentive on fitness programs are just easier to implement.

Full post as published by The Co-co Banana on October 23, 2007 (boomark / email).