Obesity is costing the same as smoking but more than alcoholism worldwide Watch

Everglow
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
(Original post by BBC News)
The worldwide cost of obesity is about the same as smoking or armed conflict and greater than both alcoholism and climate change, research has suggested.

The McKinsey Global Institute said it cost £1.3tn, or 2.8% of annual economic activity - it cost the UK £47bn.

Some 2.1bn people - about 30% of the world's population - were overweight or obese, the researchers added.

They said measures that relied less on individual responsibility should be used to tackle the problem.

The report said there was a "steep economic toll", and the proportion could rise to almost half of the world's population by 2030.

The financial costs of obesity are growing - for health care and more widely in the economy. By causing illness, obesity results in working days and output lost.

The researchers argued that a range of ambitious policies needed to be considered and a systemic rather than piecemeal response was essential.

"These initiatives would need to draw on interventions that rely less on individual responsibility and more on changes to the environment," the report said.

If the right measures were taken there could be long-term savings of £760m a year for the UK's National Health Service, it added.

The initiatives assessed in the report include portion control for some packaged food and the reformulation of fast and processed food.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30122015

So what do we all think about this? Do you agree with the report suggesting obesity is more of a problem than alcoholism and is on par with smoking?
1
reply
Genocidal
Badges: 16
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
It's a tad exaggerated because smoking has declined significantly, so naturally it's cost us far less over the last ten years. But at the same time it's no real surprise. I heard in a study once that by 2050 half of all British people will be overweight or obese.

I don't think it's more of a problem than alcoholism, though. Alcoholics are a danger to those around them. A fat **** isn't.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
(Original post by Genocidal)
It's a tad exaggerated because smoking has declined significantly, so naturally it's cost us far less over the last ten years. But at the same time it's no real surprise. I heard in a study once that by 2050 half of all British people will be overweight or obese.

I don't think it's more of a problem than alcoholism, though. Alcoholics are a danger to those around them. A fat **** isn't.
The report emphasises it's a problem with an associated cost.

We've got to the stage where people who drink excessively are frowned on, but we make excuses for obesity.
1
reply
Genocidal
Badges: 16
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
The report emphasises it's a problem with an associated cost.

We've got to the stage where people who drink excessively are frowned on, but we make excuses for obesity.
Well the problems are entirely different. The issue is alcoholism and excessive drinking is associated with violent crime, whereas obesity isn't. Alcoholism is far worse for society than the costs of obesity.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
(Original post by Genocidal)
Well the problems are entirely different. The issue is alcoholism and excessive drinking is associated with violent crime, whereas obesity isn't. Alcoholism is far worse for society than the costs of obesity.
The effects of alcohol and smoking cost the taxpayer. They are however taxed to offset that cost.

The effects obesity cost the taxpayer. Junk food Nd fizzy drinks aren't taxed therefore the cost isn't recouped .
0
reply
Genocidal
Badges: 16
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
The effects of alcohol and smoking cost the taxpayer. They are however taxed to offset that cost.

The effects obesity cost the taxpayer. Junk food Nd fizzy drinks aren't taxed therefore the cost isn't recouped .
I'd rather it cost the taxpayer than risk getting my head taken off by some pisshead lumbering around in the evening.
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
there is significant overlap...

many obese people also indulge in smoking and drinking...

a Venn Diagram would help.
0
reply
Alfissti
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
The effects of alcohol and smoking cost the taxpayer. They are however taxed to offset that cost.

The effects obesity cost the taxpayer. Junk food Nd fizzy drinks aren't taxed therefore the cost isn't recouped .
The obese are the biggest scroungers in the country.

There is a scrounging ****er 9 doors away from my cottage, one big fat turd that lost everything and then decided to eat his way out to become a big fat **** then claim disability. Wife doesn't work because she can be paid to be his "carer" due to mobility problems. Not a bad life I suppose, 4 bedroom cottage, a car and their home isn't short of all modern conveniences including a recently bought 42" LED TV and a PS4 and a 27" iMac. Strange ****, mobility problems but somehow can be mobile enough to pop out 3 kids in the last 5 years.

Alas hoping for a UKIP win to solve **** like this wouldn't be a possibility.
1
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
Its ****ing stupid asking how much some activity "costs" without also asking how much enjoyment people get out of it.

No-one forces people to eat or smoke or drink. They choose to do so because the pleasure they receive from it vastly outweighs the cost to them of being a fat alcoholic with lung cancer, and as long as they pay their way, it is their right to choose what they want to do with their life, not mine, not yours, not anyone else's but there's.
0
reply
Schrödingers Cat
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by Alfissti)
The obese are the biggest scroungers in the country.

There is a scrounging ****er 9 doors away from my cottage, one big fat turd that lost everything and then decided to eat his way out to become a big fat **** then claim disability. Wife doesn't work because she can be paid to be his "carer" due to mobility problems. Not a bad life I suppose, 4 bedroom cottage, a car and their home isn't short of all modern conveniences including a recently bought 42" LED TV and a PS4 and a 27" iMac. Strange ****, mobility problems but somehow can be mobile enough to pop out 3 kids in the last 5 years.

Alas hoping for a UKIP win to solve **** like this wouldn't be a possibility.
Yes, yes and yes.

Except UKIP, UKIP are bad
0
reply
Everglow
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by cole-slaw)
Its ****ing stupid asking how much some activity "costs" without also asking how much enjoyment people get out of it.

No-one forces people to eat or smoke or drink. They choose to do so because the pleasure they receive from it vastly outweighs the cost to them of being a fat alcoholic with lung cancer, and as long as they pay their way, it is their right to choose what they want to do with their life, not mine, not yours, not anyone else's but there's.
I don't think that's the problem being raised by the article. It's not about how much these activities cost to the individual, it's about how much they cost to the tax payer and by extension the economy.

'The financial costs of obesity are growing - for health care and more widely in the economy. By causing illness, obesity results in working days and output lost.'


Healthcare is where obesity seems to pose the biggest problem, alongside smoking and, accordingly to a lesser extent, alcoholism.
0
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by Reluire)
I don't think that's the problem being raised by the article. It's not about how much these activities cost to the individual, it's about how much they cost to the tax payer and by extension the economy.

'The financial costs of obesity are growing - for health care and more widely in the economy. By causing illness, obesity results in working days and output lost.'


Healthcare is where obesity seems to pose the biggest problem, alongside smoking and, accordingly to a lesser extent, alcoholism.

But they don't cost ANYTHING to the taxpayer, because the taxes on alcohol and cigarettes vastly outweighs the cost to the NHS.

If people stopped drinking and smoking and hence paying the associated taxes, the NHS would go bankrupt. You should get down on your knees and thanks smokers and drinkers for paying for your health service.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by cole-slaw)
Its ****ing stupid asking how much some activity "costs" without also asking how much enjoyment people get out of it.

No-one forces people to eat or smoke or drink. They choose to do so because the pleasure they receive from it vastly outweighs the cost to them of being a fat alcoholic with lung cancer, and as long as they pay their way, it is their right to choose what they want to do with their life, not mine, not yours, not anyone else's but there's.
This is the issue though. Smokers and drinkers do pay their way through rather heavy taxation on the vices
So they're paying into the NHS to begin with.

You're average porker isn't as junk food isn't taxed and with obesity on the increase the problem will only get worse.
0
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
This is the issue though. Smokers and drinkers do pay their way through rather heavy taxation on the vices
So they're paying into the NHS to begin with.

You're average porker isn't as junk food isn't taxed and with obesity on the increase the problem will only get worse.
Agree with you in theory, but in practice its very difficult to isolate a particular product, ingredient or activity that could be taxed without being unfair to those not abusing it.

Do you tax high fat content foods? High calorie foods? High sugar content foods? Ready meals? Junk food? How on earth do you decide?

A lot of the problem is actually our sedentary lifestyles, so do you tax computer games and tv boxsets? Sofa companies?

We should definitely subsidise gyms and sports clubs, that would make a huge difference.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by cole-slaw)
Agree with you in theory, but in practice its very difficult to isolate a particular product, ingredient or activity that could be taxed without being unfair to those not abusing it.

Do you tax high fat content foods? High calorie foods? High sugar content foods? Ready meals? Junk food? How on earth do you decide?

A lot of the problem is actually our sedentary lifestyles, so do you tax computer games and tv boxsets? Sofa companies?

We should definitely subsidise gyms and sports clubs, that would make a huge difference.
I couldn't agree more. Merely reiterating the fact that obesity is going to be putting a huge strain on the NHS in the future and other 'vices' get taxed to buggery.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
Can't disagree with the article, the UK is failing in its war against obesity.

Firstly i think we need a culture change. Japan is a developed nation, it's obesity rate is 3%. In addition, Brits frankly do not do enough exercise.

We should explore options like limiting product weight (can only see certain goods as individual products or with a restriction of say 100g per packet - psychologically it makes people less likely to pick 20 cake packets than 1 super one so the net effect is people eat less of the undesirable stuff for their health). Another option is a production tax on all food and beverages containing certain amounts of sugar and salt, this makes it less likely that companies will bother to produce the product in the first place.
0
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
(Original post by Genocidal)
It's a tad exaggerated because smoking has declined significantly, so naturally it's cost us far less over the last ten years. But at the same time it's no real surprise. I heard in a study once that by 2050 half of all British people will be overweight or obese.

I don't think it's more of a problem than alcoholism, though. Alcoholics are a danger to those around them. A fat **** isn't.
Unless you call one of them a fat **** then they could be a danger. It's funny how we've gotten to this point but yet there's not been the same crusade against junk food like there has against cigarettes


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
mackemforever
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by Genocidal)
It's a tad exaggerated because smoking has declined significantly, so naturally it's cost us far less over the last ten years. But at the same time it's no real surprise. I heard in a study once that by 2050 half of all British people will be overweight or obese.

I don't think it's more of a problem than alcoholism, though. Alcoholics are a danger to those around them. A fat **** isn't.
Disagree.

Sure somebody who is fat or obese isn't going to bash somebodies face in because they annoyed them, but they're still more than capable of ruining lives.

What do you think happens when fat people have kids? Do they raise them on healthy food, proper cooked meals and teach them the value in eating a balanced diet or do they let them eat junk food all the time and survive on ready meals & takeaways?

Fat people may not be a danger to those around them but they sure as hell set their kids up for a **** life.
0
reply
Evening
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
Tell that to the Fat Acceptance Movement. A positive body image is a good outlook to take, but when it affects your health you shouldn't expect others to pick up the bill.
0
reply
Petapol
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
alcoholism is bigger problem, I think..
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (46)
65.71%
No I haven't decided yet (16)
22.86%
Yes but I might change my mind (8)
11.43%

Watched Threads

View All