AP–Obesity costs U.S. $168 billion, study finds

Nearly 17% of U.S. medical costs can be blamed on obesity, according to new research that suggests the nation’s weight problem may be having close to twice the impact on medical spending as previously estimated.
One expert acknowledged that past estimates likely underestimated the costs and said the new study ”” which places obesity-related medical costs at around $168 billion ”” probably is closer to the truth.

“I think these are the most recent and perhaps statistically sound estimates that have come out to date,” said Kenneth Thorpe, a health policy researcher at Emory University who has focused on the cost of health care.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, * Economics, Politics, * International News & Commentary, America/U.S.A., Consumer/consumer spending, Corporations/Corporate Life, Dieting/Food/Nutrition, Economy, Health & Medicine, Labor/Labor Unions/Labor Market

8 comments on “AP–Obesity costs U.S. $168 billion, study finds

  1. Sick & Tired of Nuance says:

    This does not matter. There is a financial “life ending asteroid” about to impact the earth that goes by the name of Derivatives. This is likely to cause $233 Trillion to simply vanish from the world economic system. I know, I know…I am like the loon with the sandwich board sign saying that “The End Is Near”…but it may truly be so. What to do? Buy heirloom seeds, bullets, medical supplies, silver/gold, and things to ease life and give comfort without electricity. We may be about to enter the long dark tea-time of the soul…

    Maranatha.

  2. Paula Loughlin says:

    The powers that be will continue to fund studies which conclude obesity is a problem. If you think that is about concern for health you would be wrong. It is about finding a way to justify even more governement inteference in peoples’ daily lives. It also means ways to get more money from businesses by claiming the necessity for an unhealthful foods tax or similar measures.

  3. Bart Hall (Kansas, USA) says:

    This morning I walked 250 metres each way out to our vegetable field in order to grab some fresh kale to sizzle up for breakfast. Yeah, kale. You go yuck. We love it.

    The point is, before breakfast I had walked almost three times as far as the average American walks in a [i]DAY[/i]. To understand obesity you have just seen one of the two key driving factors: people do not walk anywhere any more.

    The other driving factor is the depressingly low mineral content of most high-calorie foods. Beyond a certain point bodies hunger for minerals, not calories, so people eat and eat and eat in a futile attempt to ingest the minerals their bodies need.

    Kale OTOH is a great source of vitamins A and C, as well as calcium, iron, and anti-carcinogens. Apart from a bit of olive oil for the sizzle, all the calories came from a few starches and natural sugars. And I walked half a kilometre to go get it.

    That’s why I am the same weight and build that I was as an athlete 45 years ago. It quite simple, really. Not easy for most folks, but definitely simple.

  4. Cole says:

    Such a politically incorrect subject to deal with! No, government shouldn’t force people into a particular lifestyle, but maybe through incentives and education something can be done. I’m sorry, a libertarian view just doesn’t cut it here. There are so many people who need health care because of injuries, war wounds, genetically caused disease, etc, that maybe they should not be the ones who are rationed. Cost vs rationing is a problem under any kind of healthcare system. If the government is ever going to get the economy back on track, they need to encourage the population to act responsibly. Responsibility is what should be rewarded instead of just giving out entitlements that discourage the voters productivity and good health.

    I eat my work day lunch in a large hospital cafeteria. It is depressing to see how many of the outpatients are morbidly obese. It annoys me that an elevator designed for 12 people can only carry six, and that it is difficult to pass waddling people in what would otherwise be considered a wide hallway. I know some people can’t help it, but too many of them can. So how do we separate the people who deserve help from those who just don’t care? It is not an easy problem.

  5. Bill Matz says:

    We just returned from a 17-day trip to Germany for the Oberammergau Passion Play. (My grandmother attended in 1910 as a part of her sabbatical.) We travelled everywhere by train or foot, at least five miles per day walking. Despite generously sampling the famously rich cuisine, when I returned, I learned that I had lost one pound.

    As usual, Bart is right on target. Perhaps one thing we could do is focus on rebuilding public transit, so that more walking would be encouraged. German rail generally gets you within 1/2 mile of any destination, encouraging walking the rest.

    And STN, the cumulative figure for derivatives is meaningless, as so much is risk that is re-shared multiple times and can only be paid once. But there is a problem, no question.

  6. DavidBennett says:

    I am a libertarian and think the government’s anti-obesity programs are a joke (funding corn syrup and then trying to get kids to stop eating it makes little sense), but people are too fat. I think the better response is to make people with controllable disease risk (such as obesity, etc; I am not talking about uncontrollable factors) pay more in medical insurance premiums. A perhaps more friendly solution would be for companies to offer cash incentives to people who are at a healthy weight, eat right, etc. The current insurance situation is to simply throw more money at disease by raising premiums. I take my health very seriously by eating right, exercising a lot (16,000 steps yesterday, 10 mile run the day before), etc, but insurance offers me no incentive for this.

    The problem is that the majority of Americans are overweight now, and suggesting something like this, even though it is an actual solution, is looked down upon. However, a little toughness and hard work now could save us from continual double digit increases in insurance premiums each year.

  7. Capt. Father Warren says:

    Okay, let’s pretend the $168B figure is correct (where did their funding come from????). That’s about 6 weeks of deficit spending in Obama’s world. In other words, big deal.
    At the same time the Powers That Be howl about the problem of Obesity in Mississippi, another set of Powers That Be howl about the low utilization of food stamps and about how we need more after school feeding programs for all the malnourished children apparantly running around here.
    Folks, if you want/need/hope for more big Government solutions to all your problems, then you know how to vote on Nov 2.
    By the way, the rest of us hopefully know how to vote also.

  8. D S Hamilton says:

    It doesn’t cost $168 billion like we are burning money in a fire pit. That $168 represents jobs in healthcare and the manufacturing of medicines and medical devices. It is a growth industry just as our ability to live longer stresses the public coffers and creates economic opportunities for others. It just is. Now we might be happier thinner, but we would find somewhere else to spend money. The sky is not falling.