2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-789x.2007.00337.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Economic costs of obesity and the case for government intervention

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
60
0
3

Year Published

2010
2010
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 113 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
60
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, these estimates generally rely on contemporaneous comparisons of health care consumption and other costs, not costs over the lifetime of individuals. This has the predictable effect of exaggerating the social costs associated with smoking and obesity, since decreased life expectancy translates into reduced social spending on elderly benefit programs like Medicare and Social Security [12,13]. A recent Dutch study estimating the lifetime medical costs for different cohorts of individuals-an obese cohort, a smoker cohort, and a "healthy" cohort (nonsmokers with body mass index between 18.5 and 25)-found that lifetime costs were 12 percent higher among the healthy individuals than among the obese and 27 percent higher than among smokers [14].…”
Section: Negative Externalitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, these estimates generally rely on contemporaneous comparisons of health care consumption and other costs, not costs over the lifetime of individuals. This has the predictable effect of exaggerating the social costs associated with smoking and obesity, since decreased life expectancy translates into reduced social spending on elderly benefit programs like Medicare and Social Security [12,13]. A recent Dutch study estimating the lifetime medical costs for different cohorts of individuals-an obese cohort, a smoker cohort, and a "healthy" cohort (nonsmokers with body mass index between 18.5 and 25)-found that lifetime costs were 12 percent higher among the healthy individuals than among the obese and 27 percent higher than among smokers [14].…”
Section: Negative Externalitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While evidence regarding the effectiveness of obesity prevention initiatives is equivocal (4) , there have been calls from international organisations (5) , professional associations (6) , academic experts (7,8) and the community (9) for governments to take decisive action to mitigate the adverse impacts of obesity. Indeed, across the globe, governments have developed policy, set obesity prevalence targets (10) and are implementing obesity prevention initiatives (11) .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This may be because individuals have imperfect information about the risk and consequences of their dietary behaviour. Such information may include the calorie content of different forms of food items or the link between diet and weight gain (McCormick and Stone 2007). In some societies, food consumption is a marker of social status, an act of pleasure and convenience (DOH 2003), which do not necessarily relate to understanding nutrient values of a particular diet.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%