[blackwasp]

More than 4 billion people — or 45% of the world's population — could be overweight by 2050, with 1.5 billion — 16% — of them obese, if the current global dietary trend towards processed foods continues. This from a first-of-its-kind study from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.

Providing a long-term overview of changing global eating habits between 1965 and 2100, the researchers used an open-source model to forecast how food demand would respond to a variety of factors such as population growth, ageing, growing body masses, declining physical activity and increased food waste.
While trends vary between regions, global eating habits were moving away from plant- and starch-based diets to more "affluent diets high in sugar, fat, and animal-source foods, featuring highly-processed food products".

Now, global food demand would leap 50% by mid-century, pushing past Earth's capacity to sustain nature. Food production already uses up three-quarters of the world's fresh water and one-third of its land — and accounts for up to a third of greenhouse gas emissions.

Also, as a result of increasing inequality along with food waste and loss — food that is produced but not consumed due to lack of storage or overbuying — around half a billion people will still be undernourished by mid-century.

Source

[roy_libran]

As a species we have elected for having longer lifespans at a reduced level of health and fitness, as against our natural lifespans at optimal health and productivity levels.

In general, and with a certain privilege at play inherently, we survive far longer than what the natural design intends us to, bolstered by the holy grail of modern medical science. But that cumulative longer lifespan entails huge environmental costs which impact other species as also the lesser privileged sections of our species.

The key to a healthy species is not about longevity but it is about the vitality of the gene pool which comes about through greater reproduction rates thus increasing genetic diversity. Every other species on our planet follows this blueprint. The human situation is only going to worsen simply because we humans aren't designed to see ahead far enough, while having tools to affect the future far enough.

[Jeroen]

There is a big underlying problem here as well. In many societies around the world obesitas in more rampant in those with lower education and come from general lower parts of society.

When we lived in Kansas City this was very clear. In the wealthy suburbs there were no fat people. At least not living, if you saw an overweight person it was likely somebody on his/her way to clean somebodies house.

Drive from the suburbs to what was known “east of Troost” and you find yourself in the almost exclusive Black areas of town. Obesity was rampant!

This morning I read an article in my Dutch newspaper. Lots of research in all sorts of side effects of the Corona Crisis. Higher educated people are actually exercising more during the lock down, than people with lower education.

The explanation is pretty simple. Education correlates pretty well to disposable income. With the lock down simple, relatively cheap sports such as football have come to a complete standstill. It is the well educated that have the financial means to go and buy a nice sports bike, the gear to go with it etc.

Staying healthy in general, is a far more important topic for well educated people, than people with less education.

In many countries females have a higher rate and degree of obesity than males.

Overweight/Obesity is a huge social and economic problem.

I have set it many times; You want to make some changes into society, education is one of the key factors to succes. Accessible to all, irrespective of background, age, religion, gender etc.

There are a few countries/cultures in the world where obesity is considered to be a show of wealth and status!

You want to find out a bit more have a look here:

https://data.worldobesity.org/rankings/

[Kosfactor]

The two sides of Poverty - one there is not enough to eat an another is obesity - the second category is mostly confined to United States. Its an exception indeed among many other quirks of USA.

Obesity is more prevalent in wealthier countries (not necessarily per capita), because you need to be able to afford to eat more than you need.

Originally Posted by roy_libran

In general, and with a certain privilege at play inherently, we survive far longer than what the natural design intends us to, bolstered by the holy grail of modern medical science. But that cumulative longer lifespan entails huge environmental costs which impact other species as also the lesser privileged sections of our species.

The key to a healthy species is not about longevity but it is about the vitality of the gene pool which comes about through greater reproduction rates thus increasing genetic diversity. Every other species on our planet follows this blueprint. The human situation is only going to worsen simply because we humans aren't designed to see ahead far enough, while having tools to affect the future far enough.

As a civilization (not there with all species of animals) - we have a certain culture , faith , belief, practices etc which are essential and one of them is pertaining to sanctity of life, our commitment to preserve a fellow human`s life as well as a responsibility to ensure our Children has a bright future within that civilization (not easy), its easier to give bright future to one of two kids than a dozen, those who can afford to care for more Children should certainly be free to do that.

Environmental science can do a ton of things before throwing their hands in the air and blame humans collectively for destroying the earth, vast majority of them are just trying to make a living (within the civilization).

[am1m]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

When we lived in Kansas City this was very clear. In the wealthy suburbs there were no fat people. At least not living, if you saw an overweight person it was likely somebody on his/her way to clean somebodies house.

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

The two sides of Poverty - one there is not enough to eat an another is obesity - the second category is mostly confined to United States. Its an exception indeed among many other quirks of USA.

I remember reading that this is because in the US, it is actually cheaper to eat at a McDonalds or a KFC than it would be to cook at home. That, combined with the 'supersize' strategy to serving portions in those sorts of junk food places probably leads to this phenomenon.

At home here in India, I think it's still much cheaper to eat at home than it would be to eat at a fast food restaurant, even for a middle-class family. Though I'm certainly seeing a lot more kids with belly fat these days than there were while I was growing up.

Either way I'm still pretty shocked at the '50% of the world population on course to being overweight' headline, I would have thought we're still struggling with trying to see that everyone around the world has enough to eat in the first place.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

The two sides of Poverty - one there is not enough to eat an another is obesity - the second category is mostly confined to United States. Its an exception indeed among many other quirks of USA.

Obesity is more prevalent in wealthier countries (not necessarily per capita), because you need to be able to afford to eat more than you need.

Originally Posted by am1m

I remember reading that this is because in the US, it is actually cheaper to eat at a McDonalds or a KFC than it would be to cook at home. That, combined with the 'supersize' strategy to serving portions in those sorts of junk food places probably leads to this phenomenon.

.

No sorry, obesity is not confined to the USA, nor to wealthier countries! Nor is it correlated to the number of McDonalds and KFCs in the county.

Check the website in my earlier post for the top 50: USA in number 30!







Go to https://data.worldobesity.org/rankings/?age=a&sex=m and see the figures if you select to male. The numbers drop significantly. Although probably not a scientific conclusion, it is likely that is (partly) due to women across many parts of the world, getting less education than men.

It is down to education. Across nearly all these countries the red thread across obesity is that people with less education suffer from it more than those with good/higher education. Although sometimes it can be difficult to measure. Even so, in general there is a good correlation between general life style and education. For those interested to read some back ground material on some of the studies:

https://www.oecd.org/economy/growth/...%20obesity.pdf

Cutler and Lleras-Muney (2006) found that those with more years of schooling are less likely to smoke, drink a lot, to be overweight or obese or to use illegal drugs. Similarly, the better educated are more likely to exercise and to obtain preventive care such as flu shots, vaccines, mammograms, pap smears and colonoscopies. They also found the relationship between education and health appears to be non-linear for obesity, with increasing effects of additional years of schooling. A review by Grossman and Kaestner concluded that years of formal schooling is the most important correlate of good health (Grossman et al., 1997). Cross-sectional estimates from a study of twins conducted by Webbink et al. (2008), also confirms the negative relationship between education and the probability of being overweight. By looking at differences between the sexes within a study of socio-economic factors and obesity, Yoon et al. (2006) found that income, rather than education, had a greater effect on BMI and waist circumference in men, whereas higher levels of education for women resulted in lower BMI and waist circumference.
The correlation between education and health may reflect three possible types of relationships: a) a causal link running from increased education to improved health, b) a reverse causal link, indicating that better health leads to greater education; or c) an absence of a causal relationship between education and health, which appear to be correlated because of possible unobserved factors affecting both health (or obesity) and education in the same direction. The three pathways are not mutually exclusive, of course, and some combination of the three is likely to provide the most plausible explanation of the strong correlations consistently found across countries between education and health, or obesity. Cutler and Lleras-Muney (2006) argue that children in poor health obtain less schooling and because of this they are also more likely to be unhealthy adults. Similarly, evidence on longitudinal data shows that becoming overweight during the first four years in school is a significant risk factor for adverse school outcomes in girls (Datar and Sturm, 2006). Unobserved factors possibly contributing to the third pathway identified may include family background, genetic traits or other individual differences, such as ability to delay gratification. These factors may explain why the more educated are also healthier. Cutler and Lleras-Muney (2006) found that even controlling for some of these factors, the effect of education on health generally remains large and significant. Although there is evidence to support the hypothesis that the direction of causality is from more schooling to better health (Grossman, 2000), when overall health status or longevity are the outcomes of interest, there are few studies shedding light on the causal nature of the relationship between education and obesity specifically. Results from Lundborg (2008) suggest that a causal effect of education on health exists, but found no evidence that lifestyle factors such as smoking and obesity contribute to the health/education gradient. Natural experiments where policy changes are implemented that directly affect the number of years of mandatory schooling, can provide an indication of the causal nature of the link between education and obesity

Jeroen

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

No sorry, obesity is not confined to the USA,

Being in Poverty and obese is a USA phenomenon was my point, I don't think you disagree to that. It is also clear than more people are obese in wealthier countries by sheer numbers.

Would you consider 65% obesity in a population of 50,000 a bigger problem than ~ 40% Obesity in a population of 300 Million? Therefore United states.

How about India? We have a substantial population with obesity here. Consider 14% of 1.3 Billion. Consider 6% of 1.4 Billion in China. These are populations that have witnessed rapid economic growth and rising incomes over the last few decades.

[srini1785]

Could someone please define " Obese " in technical terms before getting into discussions on the click bait topic?.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by srini1785

Could someone please define " Obese " in technical terms before getting into discussions on the click bait topic?.

One definition now often used is a BMI of over 30 being moderately obese and a BMI of over 35 being severely obese. How effective is BMI and whether it caters to all body shapes and structures I do not know but doctors tend to use it a lot these days. The WHO defines international absolute poverty ie not enough to eat as $1.90 per day per person at PPP adjusted rates of 2011. Just between India, Pakistan & Bangladesh we have approximately 23 crores below that line versus 14 crores obese in just USA and Mexico!

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

How about India? We have a substantial population with obesity here. Consider 14% of 1.3 Billion. Consider 6% of 1.4 Billion in China. These are populations that have witnessed rapid economic growth and rising incomes over the last few decades.

Well, if you look at the link given by Jeroen, India has one of the lowest obesity, we are ranked at 187th for males and 194th for females out of 200 countries.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

One definition now often used is a BMI of over 30 being moderately obese and a BMI of over 35 being severely obese. How effective is BMI and whether it caters to all body shapes and structures I do not know but doctors tend to use it a lot these days.

BMI is a very loose metrics that doesn't consider fat vs muscle weight. It puts lots of very fit people into overweight or even obese category. It is ok for people who don't workout.

[lapis_lazuli]

Why does this sound like a "weight control" medicine is
around the corner, and just like turning a huge percentage of the global population into hypertensive or diabetic patients, overnight, the next being obesity pills to all and sundry...??? Just lower the threshold and voila: spurt in Metformin sales...silly me! Except this medication would be grossly misused given a generations obsession with looking "slim" and "fit" without the backing hard work??

[Sreesh1009]

Not surprised. With food being a tap away and being moderately cheap. I remember there being a thread about how people are quite unfit in our country as compared to other countries. Really wish people took fitness as seriously as they take dining out.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Well, if you look at the link given by Jeroen, India has one of the lowest obesity, we are ranked at 187th for males and 194th for females out of 200 countries.

The difference is % of population Vs actual numbers. If you have 80% obesity in a population on 100,000 - thats significant but 10% of 1.3 Billion is surely a whopping number. Therefore India. Here is a screen shot and link.

Numbers are staggering, out of the 650 Million obese globally, we have 135 Million, something to think about.



Link

[aargee]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Check the website in my earlier post for the top 50: USA in number 30!

Jeroen bhai any specific reason that you see why almost all the smaller Oceanic countries are topping the obesity list?

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

Numbers are staggering, out of the 650 Million obese globally, we have 135 Million, something to think about.

Numbers are staggering because of the thumb rule of BMI > 30 being considered obese. BMI is misleading, even according to experts. It doesn't take age or ethnicity into factor.