Obesity in America: Obesity and Sexual Orientation

Obesity in America: Obesity and Sexual Orientation

This study examined the obesity risk for the sexual minority groups in the United States of America. The first part explains the obesity epidemic in the United States and its effects on the common man. It also describes the overall national medical expenditures that are attributable to obesity. In the second part, new approximations of obesity rates by sexual orientation have been presented using the data and information from two large representative surveys conducted in America. The first one is taken from the 2001 California Health Interview Survey that contained the information associated with self-reported sexual orientation. The second one is taken from the 1996-2002 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System that included information regarding the intra-household same-sex unmarried partnerships. Results suggested that gay men are less likely to be obese whereas lesbian women are more likely to be obese when compared with their heterosexual counterparts.

Introduction

Obesity is the condition that results from disproportionate and unnecessary storage of fat in the body. This condition is described "as a weight more than 20% above what is considered normal according to standard age, height, and weight tables, or by a complex formula known as the body mass index"1. According to estimation, about 30-35% of Americans are fat, overweight or obese1.

It is not an untold secret that obesity is a national health crisis in America. If the current trend continues, obesity will outdo smoking in the United States in next to no time. It is important to mention here that smoking is presently "the biggest single factor in early death, reduced quality of life and added health care costs"2 in the United States of America. According to a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, obesity is alone to be blamed for more than 160,000 "surplus" deaths in USA annually. The common obese person costs the social order more than $7,000 a year in lost productivity and extra health check-ups. Depending on race and sexual category, lifetime extra medicinal expenses single-handedly, for an individual, seventy pounds or more obese amount to as much as $30,000 2. Thus, obesity has turned out to be the number-one lifestyle-related health concern of the American nation. The current U.S. generation may have a shorter life expectancy than their parents if this obesity epidemic cannot be controlled. The health-costs impact the American economy drastically. According to a recent study3, "medical expenditures attributed to overweight and obesity accounted for 9.1% of total U.S. medical expenditures in 1998 and might have reached 78.5 billion U.S. dollars."

During the past few decades, the realizations of the advancements in economy, society and technology has consequently given rise to the obesity epidemic in the United States. Americans are blessed with inexpensive and sufficient food supply. The availability of edible foods with high caloric density in prepackaged varieties and in fast-food restaurants has also made it easier for Americans to grab whatever they want, wherever they are. The technologies have save them the pain of labor and consequently the amount of physical activity that was once a part of everyday life is also reduced. Last but not the least, the prevalent ease of using electronic devices at home, school and work has encouraged a deskbound lifestyle4.

The question is: Why is obesity a major public health concern in American society? The answer is simple. It is because obesity has predisposed the American citizens to a lot of disorders including "noninsulin-dependent diabetes, hypertension, stroke, and coronary artery disease"1. It is also linked with an increased occurrence of certain cancers especially "cancers of the colon, rectum, prostate, breast, uterus, and cervix"1. Why Is Obesity a Significant Health Problem in America?

The Americans of the twentieth century are benefitting from a standard of living that is ahead of any era in history. The American people are not only well-fed but they also reside in houses that are gorgeous, efficient and inexpensive. Clean water and milk, appropriate sewage systems are available to every American citizen. Not only this, they are free from the miseries that have an adverse effect on a large part of the rest of the world including illnesses, undernourishment and extreme poverty. In addition to this, Americans are cultured, erudite and are provided with the best means to live a comfortable and satisfied life. Nevertheless, they are not sound completely. Unfortunately, their living habits have carried along with them a new morbidity i.e. diseases. Comparable to other modern and developed countries, the Americans are now suffering from "high rates of heart disease, cancer, strokes, and obesity"5.

According to a latest study6 in the American Journal of Health Promotion, the amplification in corpulence costs the industries in U.S.A. An estimated $12.7 billion in health care, sick leave and insurance premiums. General Richard H. Carmona, a well-known U.S. surgeon, affirms that if "simply put, it's a lack of physical activity, a diet that is not well-balanced and sedentary workplace and lifestyle that has caused the obesity epidemic"6.

Out of every four Americans, one is a regular cigarette smoker. They usually acquire this habit in their teenage years. Moreover, most of the people dwell in cities. This is the reason why they couldn't easily walk to work or visit neighbors. In addition to this, thanks to the technologies that save labor, the American citizens have now discovered how to work without being concerned about sweating. Thus, at the end of the day, they reward themselves by consuming big meals and spend evenings watching television. Though, they are so enthusiastic about sports, they normally stay away from involving themselves in physical activities. A fourth of grown-up Americans have problems of high blood pressure or high blood cholesterol. Unfortunately, a majority of them don't realize it just because they are too busy to take some time to find out. On the other hand, though many of them do know, they are not willing or are incapable to take the obtainable medications5 (p4).

Unluckily, due to a lack of awareness, most of the Americans do not connect obesity to possible poor health. It is so important to realize and understand that obesity is, in fact, a chronic condition. It cannot be categorized along with AIDS or Cancer a sensitive, critical, and headline-grabbing disease. Due to this inability to understand, obesity receives less attention in American society. Obesity has sinister effects and complex origins that are not understood well. Though its treatment is not much encouraging, obesity can be prevented if the American people want it to be treated. It is exceedingly important for Americans to realize and understand that obesity is a major health problem and can lead to complications such as heart disease (that could begin in childhood but doesn't appear until one becomes an adult) 5 (p4). If one wants to understand why some people are healthy whereas others are not, it is necessary to first understand how childhood habits can affect one's health in the later life 5 (p5).

The research that has been conducted on sexual orientation and body weight in the previous times has relied for the most part on small expedient samples. In the following research, the data used has been derived from two great representative public health surveys so that the relationships between sexual orientation and body weight could be examined.

Primarily, new approximations of obesity rates by sexual orientation from two large representative surveys have been presented. The first one is taken from the 2001 California Health Interview Survey containing the information related to self-reported sexual orientation. The second one is taken from the 1996-2002 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System that includes information related to intra-household same-sex unmarried partnerships. The evidence crystal clearly states that men who are gay have a much less likeliness to become overweight relative to their heterosexual partners. On the other hand, evidence proves that lesbians have a great probability to become obese. The important thing to mention here is that it is not impossible to provide an easy explanation about such differences by other demographic characteristics. Moreover, no other evidence can be provided to explain that those differences are related to differences in physical doings or muscle strengthening activities. The other findings suggest that gay men who are obese are less likely to be in an affiliation or relationship comparative to their obese heterosexual guy equivalents, even after having power over the overall lower probability of partnership among gay men. Therefore, this becomes clear that minority sexual orientation may exacerbate the barriers associated with obesity7.

As already mentioned, the health concerns in sexual minority populations has been a hot subject for research especially throughout the past few decade. This increasing interest is due to the availability of across-the-board and all-encompassing health surveys that allow the recognition of gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals, also called GLB. The sexual minority populations have also been increasingly studied and researched due to the recent findings that highlight the fact that these particular individuals may possibly counter differential risks for a number of health conditions7 (p1). It is not an untold secret that gay men are influenced by the HIV and AIDS epidemic tremendously. However, research has also concluded that their sexual orientation is also impacted by smoking, drinking, cancer, and other similar conditions.

Moreover, a diminutive prose has been fashioned and documented that gives consideration to the relationships between sexual orientation, body weight, body image, and the risk of obesity. Though there has been no consensus, a good number of papers have acknowledged that lesbians have a more possibility to be obese as compared to other women. On the other hand, gay men have more chances of suffering from other body weight problems associated with body image and body dysmorphia. Nevertheless, there are many general limitations associated to such literary studies. Firstly, most of the research conducted in this area has given attention to the eating disorders like bulimia, anorexia nervosa, and binge eating. At the same time, it is also exceedingly important to find out if gay men and lesbians are at higher risk for heaviness more commonly7 (p2).

Secondly, the studies done pertaining to sexual orientation and obesity have characteristically being supported by small convenience samples. The lack of research in this area is mainly due to the lack of quality data sources. Moreover, previous work and research done regarding sexual orientation and obesity have not mainly considered the interaction of obesity and other socioeconomic variables for gay men and lesbians putting them side by side with heterosexuals. In this research, preliminary evidence about the level of interaction between obesity and sexual orientation in socioeconomic settings has been offered by using loaded data on sexual orientation, obesity, and partnership7 (p3).

A number of factors count when it comes to the systematic variation between body weight and sexual orientation. Firstly, there may purely be organically-based differences connected to sexual orientation that contribute to a risk for obesity. Regrettably, scientific understanding of the particular natural systems that support sexual orientation has not advanced and developed in an adequate manner so that excellent evidence on these potential pathways could be produced. In addition to the fundamental biological differences attributable to the straight effects of sexual orientation, there are other indirect mechanisms too that can activate differential body weight apprehensions. For instance, overeating can also cause obesity and is also associated with psychological problems like homophobia. What is more, it has also been found that by the researchers that gays and lesbians show signs of differences in other behaviors that may be related to body weight that includes smoking7 (p3). In addition to this, other studies demonstrate that the higher smoking rates in America are attributable to gay men and lesbians. They smoke to suppress their appetites and this is the reason why the large variations in smoking rates may interpret into dissimilarities in obesity rates too7 (p4).

Methodology (Data and Empirical Approach)

This study uses two large representative probability samples that consist of variables that allow the recognition of a respondent's sexual orientation. At first, data from the 1996-2002 waves of the Centers for Disease Control's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System is used. This survey permits the gay men and lesbian identification by using information on intra-household relationships. In particular, the sample of two-adult households is considered in which the respondent reports about the two same-sex adults. In 1996, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System stretched out its list of would-be answers to a question about the respondent's existing marital status so that the "member of an unmarried couple" could be included as well. This extension allows recognition of two-adult same-sex households in which the respondent affirms her status as the member of an unmarried couple. This research assumes that the two households have gay and lesbian couples as the members7 (p5).

The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System is consisted of a rich set of questions that are appropriate to body weight, body image, and obesity. Every year, the core survey has inquired the participants to state their height and weight.

This research has constructed the individual's body mass index (BMI) by using those responses. It uses standard definitions of malnourished and obese so that the individuals could be classified according to their body mass index (BMI). In addition to body mass index, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System has also inquired the respondents about their desired weight. When the responses regarding the desired weight and self-reported current weights were combined, a rough metric of body image and satisfaction was derived i.e. The degree was obtained to which current body weight could deviate from the preferred point. It is important to note here that the notion that desired body weight is always lesser than the existing body weight is not clear. For instance, an individual who wishes to acquire muscle mass probably has a pitiable body image interconnected to being too light. The respondents were also inquired, in various years, about their efforts to lose weight actively and in such case, if they exercise more and/or eat small quantities of food. Finally, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System also asked the respondents about a multitude of customary demographic characteristics that could be connected with body weight, for instance age, race, and academic qualification 7 (p5).

The second source of data for this research has been supported by off the record versions of the 2001 California Health Interview Survey (CHIS). The 2001 California Health Interview Survey was managed through making calls to just about 50,000 Californian households. The obtained data is full of information on self-reported sexual orientation. Each adult respondent was specifically asked about his/her sexual orientation. They were made sure that their responses of being a gay, lesbian or bisexual will not be disclosed. Approximately ninety nine percent of the adult individuals gave a straightforward response to this question. In addition to self-reported sexual orientation, the California Health Interview Survey core questionnaire for adults also asked them about their current height and weight. They were also inquired about their weight when they were 18. This question allowed the present research to produce a variable detaining weight gain since age 18.

This research also makes use of the information regarding the enthusiastic physical activity (formed into a "minutes per day" measure by the administrators of California Health Interview Survey). To be particular, vigorous activities can be described as those activities due to which heavy sweating or large increases in one's breathing or heart rate are caused. Last but not the least, this research will make use of the information related to muscle strengthening activities for instance weightlifting (constructed into a "times per week" variable). If the supposition of gay male body worship is considered as correct and factual, then discrepancies reports of such muscle strengthening activities by sexual orientation can be expected 7 (p6).

This research has excluded individuals about whom the data on sexual orientation was missing. Bisexuals have also been dropped out from the analysis so that a close comparison to the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data could be provided. This is done because bisexuals could understandably be involved in a same-sex partnership or a different-sex partnership. Therefore, it is not possible to find out with which faction they should be coded in the California Health Interview Survey. Unluckily, data regarding the sex composition of the households is not available on California Health Interview Survey 7 (p7).

Other than better-off questions about the life span weight history and physical activity, the California Health Interview Survey data provides a chief mechanical benefit over the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. In particular, the California Health Interview Survey data permits the recognition of gay and lesbian individuals with no partners. It is significant as one way due to which obesity may interrelate with sexual orientation is through the probability of being in a same-sex affiliation.

In an empirical way, this implies that the comparisons obtained by Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System may undergo prejudice persuaded by differential selection into partnership by keeping body weight as the center. For sure, if body weight has an effect on the possibility of sexual relationships for gay and straight men in the same way, this will not influence the results of Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. On the other hand, provided that the gay culture places an inconsistent importance on the outer looks, there is a chance that the mechanisms of selection show a discrepancy due to sexual orientation 7 (p8).

To begin with, the empirical work cleanly establishes baseline explanatory statistics concerning body weight and body image by sexual orientation. These signified differences that are founded on the basis of large representative samples will add to the indispensable science literature about whether gay men and lesbians experience risk of differential obesity.

This research has analyzed data obtained from California Health Interview Survey in order to recognize and comprehend if there is any interaction of body weight with sexual orientation in influencing the likelihood of partnership. In particular, the research has estimated multivariate deteriorations that envisage the likelihood the participant informs that she either has a matrimonial relationship (for heterosexuals) or living without wedlock with a partner. When separated by sex, the models took the following form:

" Pr (Partnered) = ?0 + ?1X + ?2(GAY/LESBIAN) + ?3(UNDERWT) + ?4(OVERWT) + ?5(OBESE) + ?6(GAY/LESBIAN*UNDERWT) + ?7(GAY/LESBIAN*OVERWT) + ?8(GAY/LESBIAN*OBESE) + ?Sexual Orientation and Body Weight" 7 (p8)

where,

Partnered represents a dichotomous variable equal to one for persons either spending their life with an associate or spouse.

X is a vector of representing recognizable uniqueness, "including age, education (5 categories), race (3 categories), a Hispanic dummy, an urbanicity dummy" 7 (p8).

Gay/Lesbian is a fake variable identical to one for folks who affirm a gay or lesbian sexual orientation.

UNDERWT, OVERWT, and OBESE indicate variables for a range of weight categories (with "recommended range" the debarred category).

5 and ?7, the interest coefficients, confine the comparative consequences "of non-normative body weight on the likelihood of partnership for sexual minorities compared to heterosexuals" 7 (p9).

This research also has also estimated other models that manage unswervingly for a linear measure of the respondent's body mass index and "interactions of the BMI with indicators for minority sexual orientation" 7 (p8). The model is thus represented as:

"Pr (Partnered) = ?0 + ?1X + ?2(GAY/LESBIAN) + ?3(BMI)+ ?4(BMI * GAY/LESBIAN) + ?"

BMI is the body mass index of the respondent. Here, ?4 is the significant coefficient of interest and indicates the interrelation of the body mass index with the minority sexual orientation. It should be kept in mind all the way through the study that an imperative uneasy issue with statistics on any minority population is that disgrace may stimulate underreporting of the most wanted distinguishing factor that is to be calculated.

With an empirical work perspective, one concern is that readiness and compliance to make one's sexual orientation known may be interrelated with disregarded characteristics that may be associated with risks of obesity for instance the accessibility to networks that could offer social support or other survival mechanisms. Additionally, there may be a disparity of eagerness among gay men and lesbians to make the information on intra-household composition and marital status available matched up to an undeviating reply about self-reported sexual orientation 7 (p9).

Results

Men in gay couples have a very analogous rate of being malnourished as compared to men in different-sex couples. Men in gay couples have lesser chances to become obese than either men in different-sex couples or men having a marital status. In simple words, they have a body mass index greater than 30). Lesbians in couples are 4-5% points more likely than heterosexual women in couples to be overweight.

It becomes crystal clear "that no simple story associated with a uniform effect of sexual orientation on body weight and obesity can explain the observed patterns since gay men in couples are less likely to be obese while lesbian women in couples are more likely to be obese than their heterosexual counterparts" 7 (p11). Individuals who are elder have a more likeliness to become fatter, similar to African-Americans and people with lower academic qualifications.