[ad_1]
IIn 2015, scientists created the Lancet Commission on Obesity to determine how to end obesity, a health threat to 2 billion people worldwide. The results are now known, but the problem is not what we thought we were. It's much worse: Obesity is not an isolated problem but a problem in three interconnected global pandemics, which scientists call "global syndemy".
The trio refers to obesity, undernutrition and climate change, which pose a serious threat to human health in different ways but are all interdependent, says the 56-page report released Sunday. The lancet, a prestigious medical journal. Defining "global syndemy", it seems, is not limited to semantics. This is to rephrase the three pandemics into one super-problem to start thinking about how to kill three birds with a stone. The accusing finger squarely designates Big Food and the industries that support it.
They are both motivated by the same unhealthy and inequitable food systems.
"Until now, undernutrition and obesity were considered polar opposites consisting of too few or too many calories," he said. Boyd Swinburn, Ph.D., co-curator of the group and professor of global health at Auckland University. The Commission comprises 26 experts from 14 countries, led by Swinburne, as well as scientists from George Washington University and the World Obesity Federation.
"In reality, they are both inspired by the same unhealthy and inequitable food systems, supported by the same political economy focused on economic growth and ignoring negative health and equity effects," he said. declared.
It's a complicated report, but the new perspective it offers is important. Here's how obesity, undernutrition and climate change come together and why Big Food is to blame.
Pandemic 1: Obesity
According to the World Health Organization, worldwide obesity has tripled since 1975, and the worsening is only getting worse. Obesity accounts for more than 10% of the world's population and, as it increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes and some cancers, obesity is not just deadly for individuals – it also costs companies dearly: according to the report's estimate, costs of obesity $ 2 trillion every year because of health care and lost productivity.
Pandemic 2: Undernutrition
Until the beginning of the obesity epidemic, 40 years ago, malnutrition was the most common type of malnutrition in the world. Not having enough food causes children dieback, stunting and micronutrient deficiencies, which are still topical, but are giving way more and more to obesity. According to the report, the cost of malnutrition in Asia and Africa alone is about $ 3.5 trillion a year.
As Swinburn said, obesity may seem to be the opposite of undernutrition, but they are intimately linked biologically and socioeconomically. According to the Commission, children who do not eat enough when they are young are at risk of becoming obese later in life, and they tend to live in many low- and middle-income countries where food security is a problem. problem. Paradoxically, people living in places where food is light to moderate insecurity are actually at high risk of obesity.
Pandemic 3: Climate Change
And what is threatening food security? Climate change is a major factor. Climate change, especially in the less affluent countries, "leads to poor harvests, reduced food production, extreme weather events responsible for droughts and floods, a multiplication of foodborne infectious diseases and others and civil unrest, "writes the Commission.
And as countries grow, they head for urbanization and all activities that cause greenhouse gas emissions and cause obesity: driving cars, being sedentary and start eating more "ultra-processed food products, dairy drinks," which emit tons of greenhouse gases into the air. This is where we will see clearly how Big Food fits.
The role of great food
The Commission believes that in order to combat malnutrition in general, it is necessary to change global dietary habits to adopt a healthier, plant-based diet. This seems easy enough: it would alleviate obesity for obvious reasons and fight against undernutrition because these diets are healthier and more accessible. More importantly, it would limit climate change because growing plants emit far less greenhouse gases than meat, dairy products and processed foods.
The Commission has not forgotten that, for more than 30 years, the Member States of the World Health Assembly have endorsed policies to overcome obesity, but It has not happened. This is a matter of lame governments, inert civilians and the influence of Big Food.
"However, the efforts of many countries to include environmental sustainability principles in their dietary guidelines have failed because of pressure from powerful food pressure groups, including the beef, dairy, sugar and dairy sectors. ultra-processed foods, "write the authors.
It is no secret that transnational food companies hinder health policy. Until recently, Coca-Cola's role in the influence of Chinese health guidelines has been highlighted, and another one on the benefits of adding cheese and yogurt to the well-established (and historically dairy products) was emphasized. sponsored by the Australian Dairy Lobby. This influence feeds what the Commission calls "political inertia", namely the lack of urgency among citizens and governments to create change, even as the World Syndrome kills everyone and takes action. speed.
And now?
Dismantling Big Food's insidious influence on political inertia will be neither easy nor cheap, but as the researchers write, it could result in a "win-win-win" situation.
They call for three key actions: the end of the $ 5,000 billion of government subsidies allocated to companies in the food and fossil fuel sector, a global agreement to limit the influence of Big Food and a inciting civilians to end the political inertia that keeps Big Food in power.
We are run out of time.
They are also asking for a $ 1 billion fund to support advocacy for policy initiatives to mitigate the global syndemic syndrome. This is in addition to the $ 70 billion already requested by the World Bank to fight against undernutrition and the $ 100 billion claimed by the Green Climate Fund to combat climate change in low-income and low-income countries. intermediate.
Only time will tell if rich countries are going to spend money. But the sheer amount they are asking for to tackle the global syndicate should make people think: it is a very big problem.
"The only thing we can hope for is that a sense of urgency pervades," William Dietz, Ph.D., public health expert from George Washington University a co-author of the study, reports Reuters. "We are run out of time."
[ad_2]
Source link
