Public health agencies face considerable challenges trying to prevent overweight and obesity in society, primarily because a person’s own behavior is often the root cause of the disease. Individuals make personal choices about their diet, exercise, and lifestyle, so disease is often thought of as a matter of personal, not governmental, responsibility. This Commentary shows how law can be used as a tool to prevent overweight and obesity (see Table).
The tools discussed in this article include:
• Disclosure – e.g., labels and consumer information
• Tort liability – e.g., inadequate disclosure of risks, misleading advertisements, and targeting children
• Surveillance – e.g., reporting of glycosylated hemoglobin for diabetes management
• Targeting children and adolescents – e.g., restricting food advertising during children’s programs; counter advertising to promote good nutrition and physical activity; limiting the use of cartoon characters; and restricting web-based games and promotions
• Taxation of unhealthy food – e.g., “junk food,” “snack,” or “Twinkie” tax provides disincentive for purchasing calorie-dense, nutrient-poor foods; tax revenue could also be used to promote healthy nutrition
• School policies – e.g., require schools to adhere to dietary guidelines and portion size; increase opportunities for nutrition education and physical activities
• Built Environment – e.g., limit fast food restaurants, build recreational parks and bike paths, expand mass transportation, and provide lighting and playgrounds in housing developments
• Food Prohibitions – e.g., ban trans fat from restaurants
Despite the undoubted political risks, should public health agencies push for strong measures to control obesity, perhaps even banning hazardous foods? The justification lies with the epidemic rates of overweight and obesity, the preventable morbidity and mortality, and the stark health disparities based on race and socioeconomic status. Although the public dislikes paternalism, it is at least worth considering whether such an approach is ever justified to regulate harms that are apparently self-imposed, but which are deeply socially embedded and pervasively harmful to the public.
