Childhood obesity 'epidemic' idea is hyped, concludes study

Key findings in England include that BMI trends have been broadly flat for both boys and girls aged under 16 years in the period 1995 – 2003, with very modest increases in average BMI of around 0.5 for boys and 0.6 for girls.

15/02/05 Beliefs that childhood obesity is at epidemic levels and is rising exponentially are no more than unsupported speculation, according to recent data from the annual Health Survey for England 2003, which was analysed by the Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC). Key findings include that BMI trends have been broadly flat for both boys and girls aged under 16 years in the period 1995 – 2003, with very modest increases in average BMI of around 0.5 for boys and 0.6 for girls.

“There is no evidence of an exponential rise in obesity, in children,” SIRC Research Director Peter Marsh told FoodIngredientsFirst. “Children are weighing about one kilo more than they were 10 years ago, but they are also taller of course,” he said. While he did not dispute the fact that obesity is clearly an issue, he says that the problem lies primarily among middle-aged people.

Marsh is hoping that the results will foster a national debate, which is not dominated by “lobbyists on a fat food quasi morale crusade”. “Look at the leading lobbyists,” Marsh said. “The International Obesity Task Force for example is all entirely funded by the pharmaceutical industry. We are not suggesting that they are not being honorable, but clearly their data may be accident prone to some distortions.”

According to Marsh, the analysis is simply based on taking the resources that are there from the Department of Health, which are perceived as the gold standard. “The story is a little different from what the government and lobbyists are trying to tell us,” he says. While the study is only based on figures from England, Marsh believes that this exponential rise is also non-existent in other European countries.

Other key findings from the new analysis concludes that:
• The UK National standard for assessing child obesity used by the Government's recent Public Health White Paper overstates the scale of the child obesity problem – 15.5% obese – compared the less arbitrary International Standard – 6.75% obese.
• Although the rates of increase of obesity under both measures are broadly similar (60-70%), the difference between the numbers of children defined as obese is likely to have a significant impact on the appropriateness and scale of the measures to tackle the problem of obesity.
• There is no indication of any significant change in the number of children with chronic illnesses, including type II diabetes, over the past 9 years. The absence of any evident deterioration in the health status of children supports the conclusion that children are not becoming fatter as fast as is widely believed.
• The prevalence of obesity is strongly related to age. The 16-24 year age group – both males and females – is substantially less at risk of becoming obese than older age groups, and the incidence of obesity for males in this age range has declined very slightly in recent years. Those aged between 25 and 34 have the second lowest rates of obesity. Middle aged people and those of retirement age are the most 'at-risk' groups.
• More young men and women in the 16-24 age group have a 'desirable' BMI of between 20 and 25 than any other BMI category. Men of this age are twice as likely to be underweight as they are to be obese.

SIRC's report concludes: "We do no service to the people at risk of obesity-related morbidities in our society by 'hyping' their plight, exaggerating their numbers or diverting limited educational, medical and financial resources away from where the problems really lie. Banning advertising of 'junk food' to children and similar measures may be popular in some quarters, but they are unlikely to impact much on the generation of people in their 50s and 60s – those with vastly higher rates of overweight and obesity than children and young people." "The Health Survey for England provides grounds for a serious re-think."