Health and economic burden of the projected obesity trends in the USA and the UK

Department of Health Policy and Management, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
The Lancet (Impact Factor: 45.22). 08/2011; 378(9793):815-25. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60814-3
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Rising prevalence of obesity is a worldwide health concern because excess weight gain within populations forecasts an increased burden from several diseases, most notably cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and cancers. In this report, we used a simulation model to project the probable health and economic consequences in the next two decades from a continued rise in obesity in two ageing populations--the USA and the UK. These trends project 65 million more obese adults in the USA and 11 million more obese adults in the UK by 2030, consequently accruing an additional 6-8·5 million cases of diabetes, 5·7-7·3 million cases of heart disease and stroke, 492,000-669,000 additional cases of cancer, and 26-55 million quality-adjusted life years forgone for USA and UK combined. The combined medical costs associated with treatment of these preventable diseases are estimated to increase by $48-66 billion/year in the USA and by £1·9-2 billion/year in the UK by 2030. Hence, effective policies to promote healthier weight also have economic benefits.

Download full-text


Available from: Tim Marsh, Jun 29, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to examine differences in total daily energy expenditure (TDEE), energy expenditure in various intensities, as well as total daily energy intake (TDEI) and diet quality in normal weight, overweight and obese men and women. Further, the association of energy expenditure and energy intake with body fatness was examined. The cross-sectional analysis included 430 adults (27.7±3.8 years; 49.3% male). Body weight and height were measured according to standard procedures and percent body fat (BF) was assessed via dual X-ray absorptiometry. Energy expenditure was determined via the SenseWear Armband. Energy intake and the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) were calculated based on multiple 24-h recalls. Weight adjusted TDEI and TDEE were significantly lower in overweight and obese adults compared to their normal weight peers (p<0.001) and obese women had a lower HEI (p=0.006). Overweight and obese adults further displayed a higher proportion of energy expenditure spent in sedentary and in light activities (p<0.001), while the proportion of energy expenditure in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) was lower compared to their normal weight peers (p<0.001). The inverse relationship between BMI or BF and MVPA was stronger than the positive association between BMI or BF and the proportion of energy expended in sedentary or light pursuits (rMPA=-0.45 to -0.67/rMVPA=-0.51 to -0.66 vs. rSedentary=0.33 to 0.52/rlight=0.36 to 0.47; p<0.001). These findings emphasise the importance of MPA and bouts of MVPA regarding the maintenance of a normal body weight. Copyright © 2015 Asian Oceanian Association for the Study of Obesity. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Obesity Research & Clinical Practice 04/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.orcp.2015.03.007 · 0.70 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is little evidence about genetic risk score (GRS)-diet interactions in order to provide personalized nutrition based on the genotype. The aim of the study was to assess the value of a GRS on obesity prediction and to further evaluate the interactions between the GRS and dietary intake on obesity. A total of 711 seekers of a Nutrigenetic Service were examined for anthropometric and body composition measurements and also for dietary habits and physical activity. Oral epithelial cells were collected for the identification of 16 SNPs (related with obesity or lipid metabolism) using DNA zip-coded beads. Genotypes were coded as 0, 1 or 2 according to the number of risk alleles, and the GRS was calculated by adding risk alleles with such a criterion. After being adjusted for gender, age, physical activity and energy intake, the GRS demonstrated that individuals carrying >7 risk alleles had in average 0.93 kg/m(2) of BMI, 1.69 % of body fat mass, 1.94 cm of waist circumference and 0.01 waist-to-height ratio more than the individuals with ≤7 risk alleles. Significant interactions for GRS and the consumption of energy, total protein, animal protein, vegetable protein, total fat, saturated fatty acids, polyunsaturated fatty acids, total carbohydrates, complex carbohydrates and fiber intake on adiposity traits were found after adjusted for confounders variables. The GRS confirmed that the high genetic risk group showed greater values of adiposity than the low risk group and demonstrated that macronutrient intake modifies the GRS association with adiposity traits.
    Genes & Nutrition 01/2015; 10(1):445. DOI:10.1007/s12263-014-0445-z · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is growing scientific evidence linking excess body weight to breast cancer risk. However, there is no common consensus on this relation due partly to methodologies used, populations studied and the cancer subtype. We report here a summary of the present state of knowledge on the role of overweight and obesity in pathogenesis of breast cancer and possible mechanisms through which excess body weight might influence the risk, focusing on the role of oxidative stress in breast cancer etiology. The findings demonstrate duality of excess body weight action in dependence on menopausal status: a statistically significant increased risk in postmenopausal overweight/ obese women and non-significant preventive effect among premenopausal women. Due to several gaps in the literature on this topic, additional studies are needed. Future research should address factors influencing the excess body weight - breast cancer relationship, such as race/ethnicity, tumor subtype, receptor status, the most appropriate measure of adiposity, reproductive characteristics, and lifestyle components.
    Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention: APJCP 12/2014; 15(22):9579-86. DOI:10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.22.9579 · 1.50 Impact Factor