This essay argues that obesity in America is simultaneously a matter of personal responsibility and a public health crisis, and that the most effective solution lies between the extremes of heavy-handed government regulation and purely market-driven approaches. Drawing on scholars such as Warner, Zinczenko, and Balko, the paper examines the cultural causes and financial effects of obesity — including the roughly $100 billion annual cost of Type 2 Diabetes — and contends that shifting social norms around unhealthy eating, modeled on the successful campaign against cigarette smoking, offers the most practical path forward. The essay advocates for robust public health programs that promote informed personal choice across all socioeconomic classes.
Obesity is both a psychological and physical health epidemic in America, and it is driving skyrocketing healthcare costs and spending. What to do about the problem is a contentious political issue. One side of the argument pushes for government programs, policies, and interventions such as public service announcements or prohibitions on junk food in public schools. The other side decries government intervention, suggesting that market-driven economics will at least price low-income people with obesity out of the health insurance market and could motivate wealthier individuals to change their behaviors.
Between these two polarizing positions are various ideas that might help end the obesity and overeating epidemic in the United States. This middle ground is the most sensible place to stand on the spectrum of policy responses, because like most political issues, obesity is not black-and-white but many shades of gray. Obesity is both a matter of personal responsibility and a matter of public health, which is why fast food, processed food, and overeating should all become socially unacceptable. For this reason, the best solution to the obesity problem is public health programs that promote personal responsibility.
There are many reasons why obesity is a public health problem and must be treated as such. The ways in which obesity constitutes a health problem can be divided into two parts: its causes and its effects. Both are cultural, or public, health matters. First, contributing factors to obesity are embedded in American society — chief among them is eating too much of the wrong food. This is an indisputable fact about which there is no serious disagreement. People who are obese generally got that way because they made poor lifestyle choices that are reinforced by the broader community. There is little stigma against eating fast food, even though such food carries serious health consequences. In fact, there is widespread social support for eating fast food.
Advertising is only part of the problem. It is not just advertising that promotes fast food; it is an entire culture that supports a set of lifestyle habits, including eating fast food and not exercising. As Warner points out, Americans make these poor lifestyle choices because the culture is oriented toward unhealthy eating. Fast food culture in the United States has become so normalized that challenging it can feel almost countercultural.
Second, obesity is a public health problem because of its effects. Beyond the individual health consequences, the collectively poor health of large segments of the American population imposes a visible and measurable burden on society. The social costs of widespread obesity range from reduced productivity to diminished quality of life in communities where healthy options are scarce.
Another reason why the effects of obesity should be framed as a public health matter is more measurable and quantifiable: it is extremely expensive to maintain a country of obese people. Type 2 Diabetes is caused directly by lifestyle choices and obesity, and spending on Type 2 Diabetes runs around $100 billion per year, according to Zinczenko. Healthcare costs associated with preventable conditions like Type 2 Diabetes and other obesity-related illnesses are skyrocketing, in part because a growing appreciation for the need for universal healthcare is expanding the population covered by public programs.
This is no reason to oppose public spending on healthcare, however. Balko criticizes Obama-era healthcare initiatives like the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, yet these programs are not themselves the problem. It is a positive development that Americans are warming to the idea that healthcare is a human right. The problem is the sheer number of preventable, obesity-related conditions that must be subsidized. It is entirely possible to believe in universal healthcare as a human rights issue while also fighting obesity through the tools of public health administration. Providing health coverage to all Americans is essential; eliminating preventable problems like obesity and smoking-related illnesses through cultural change would make that coverage far more sustainable.
"Stigmatizing unhealthy food like cigarettes were stigmatized"
"Multi-pronged public campaigns can shift eating norms"
"Rebutting Balko's market-driven, anti-government argument"
"Access and accurate information must accompany norm change"
You’re 46% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 4 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.