|
AN "ECOLOGICAL"
APPROACH TO THE OBESITY PANDEMIC
by Prof Garry Egger, adjunct professor of health sciences, a Boyd Swinburn,
senior lecturer School of Human Movement, Deakin University, Melbourne,
Australia
Introduction
The increasing prevalence of obesity in many countries means that it should
now be considered a pandemic.(1) One estimate from
Australia suggests that over the past decade the average adult has been adding
1 gram a day to body weight.(2) This has occurred in the
face of increasing knowledge, awareness, and education about obesity,
nutrition, and exercise. It has been suggested that a paradigm shift is
necessary if future progress is to be made.(3)
Traditionally, weight gain was thought of as caused by eating too much or
exercising too little, or both (changes in weight-energy intake-energy
expenditure). This led to the search for small deficiencies in energy
metabolism such as a reduced thermic effect of food to explain obesity.(4) Treatment was dominated by calorie counting, and public
health messages extolled people to balance their intake and output. This
paradigm has changed with the increasing understanding of the dynamic relations
between energy stores, appetite mechanisms, and energy metabolism and of the
wider recognition of nutrient partitioning.(5 6) From
studies which have shown that fat balance is equivalent to energy balance,(7) the fat balance equation was developed (rate of change of
fat stores-rate of fat intake-rate of fat oxidation).(5)
This equation is more dynamic than the original static equation and reflects
energy balance under normal conditions of free access to foods. Because fat
intake and oxidation are not closely balanced,(8) this
approach does not need metabolic abnormalities or genetic mutations to explain
weight gain. Indeed, the differences in body fat between people living in the
same environment could be better described as normal physiological variation.
This paradigm is more helpful in explaining changes in body fat within an
individual over time, but it does not account for the wider influences within
and around individuals on obesity.
An ecological model
There are three main influences on equilibrium levels of body
fat-biological, behavioural, and environmental-mediated through energy intake
or energy expenditure, or both, but moderated by physiological adjustments
during periods of energy imbalance. The level of body fat is seen not as a
"set point" like a thermostat fixed on an exact temperature but as a
"settling point" that depends on the net effects of the other
components of the model and that changes as they change. This places obesity in
an ecological context which calls for more than simple education about risk
factors and needs a collaborative strategy with the multiple sectors which
impact on the problem.(9)
Summary points
- Current strategies are not containing the obesity pandemic
- A shift is needed away from the traditional view of obesity as a personal
disorder that requires treatment
- An ecological approach regards obesity as a normal response to an abnormal
environment, rather than vice versa
- This approach resembles the classical epidemiological triad used in
successfully controlling other epidemics
- Understanding, measuring, and altering the "obesogenic"
environment is critical to success
Mediators
The ecological model uses total energy as mediator; for most conditions of
human living it is interchangeable with fat energy. Fat intake is an important
determinant of total energy intake, and for output, total energy expenditure is
a major determinant of fat oxidation.
Energy intake - Dietary fat is very energy dense and has a limited
effect on suppressing appetite and enhancing fat oxidation.(10) This makes reducing dietary fat an obvious choice for
reducing total energy to treat or prevent obesity. A reduction in dietary fat
with an otherwise free choice of food promotes a modest weight loss which is
initially less than that from a conventional low energy diet.(11) However, the longer term results are similar,(12) and the reduced fat regimen seems easier to maintain.(13) All weight loss programmes suffer from rebound weight
gain, probably partly because of physiological defences against weight loss,(14) but ultimately weight loss is limited by the high
settling point of fat stores for people living in an environment that promotes
obesity. To keep fat stores below this point often requires considerable
effort, which is difficult to maintain in an unsupportive
"obesogenic" environment.
At a population level, it seems that dietary fat and energy intake have not
fallen as fast as energy output.(15) The result is a large
energy imbalance, leading to obesity. On the input side of the equation, the
strategy of reducing dietary fat within the diet (that is, changing the foods
eaten and the composition of meals) seems a more realistic approach than
reducing total energy (decreasing the size and frequency of meals). Large
reductions in the fat content of the modern diet seem unlikely, and they may
not be necessary for a population based approach, as small changes made by a
large percentage of the population often show up as greater improvements in a
population's disease index than do large shifts made by only a few people.(16)
Energy expenditure - The intensity of physical activity required for
optimal oxidation of fat is controversial. Relative fat utilisation is higher
during activity of moderate intensity such as walking, but absolute energy use
is higher during vigorous exercise such as running. It has thus been suggested
that vigorous exercise results in greater absolute fat oxidation.(17) This may be true for aerobically fit people, but unfit
people tend to oxidise less fat at all levels of intensity. Hence, vigorous
exercise-even if it could be carried out-is not likely to result in as much fat
oxidation in unfit people as activity of more moderate intensity which can be
comfortably sustained for longer periods. Obese people are usually unfit, and
so moderately intense physical activity should be recommended for them.
As with fat intake, population benefits are more likely to come from modest
increases in activity of low or moderate intensity in many people than from
increases in high intensity exercise in a few. Indeed, part of the secular
increase in obesity is probably attributable to modest, population-wide
reductions in physical activity of low to moderate intensity or to reduction in
"incidental movement" due to the introduction of labour saving
technology.(18)
Moderators
Physiological adjustment refers to the metabolic and, in some cases,
behavioural changes that follow a disequilibrium in energy balance and that
minimise large fluctuations in body weight. For example, in response to a
negative energy balance, initially appetite may increase or physical activity
may decrease(14); then, with weight loss, fat oxidation
and resting metabolic rate may decline until a new energy balance is
achieved.(19) Physiological adjustment may be more
vigorous in some people, as a result of biological factors such as sex, age, or
genetic makeup.(20)
One implication of this is that frequent plateaus, or slowing of weight
losses over time, are a normal physiological response to energy
disequilibrium.(14) Adjustments seem to be more vigorous
in response to weight loss than weight gain, especially in lean individuals,(21) and they may also be more vigorous after rapid, rather
than slow, changes. Hence the need to concentrate on long term loss of fat
rather than short term, and usually temporary, loss of weight. This questions
the ethics of programmes that advertise large weight losses in short periods.
Influences
Biological influences - Biological factors known to influence body
fat levels include age, sex, hormonal factors, and genetics,(22) all of which have been considered to be unalterable. The
identification of the ob gene and its product leptin in 1994 caused widespread
optimism about unlocking the cause of obesity and developing successful
treatments.(23) A greater understanding of appetite
control will undoubtedly come from research on leptin, but no major effect of
single gene defects has yet been identified, and it is likely that the genetic
influences on body fat levels are polygenic.
There are also important sex differences in fat storage.(24) The differences between the sexes are apparent early in
life, become greatest with the onset of menses, then tend to decrease with the
changes in hormone status in postmenopausal women.(25) Fat
loss and maintenance of lower equilibrium fat stores also becomes more
difficult with age.(26)Finally, there is increasing
evidence of racial influences on energy balance.(27) These
biological influences explain much of the variance in body fat in individuals
within a given environment, but they do not explain the large population
increases which represent the epidemic itself.
Behavioural influences - Behavioural factors typically thought to
influence obesity are "sloth" and "gluttony," which imply a
potential for willful control over the forces affecting body weight. Behaviours
are the result of complex psychological factors, including habits, emotions,
attitudes, beliefs, and cognitions developed through a background of learning
history. Biological and environmental influences also affect behaviour, and, in
turn, energy balance. Cognitive factors (willpower based on knowledge, for
example) may have only a minor effect on eventual behaviour, and this explains
the limitations of education in the treatment and prevention of obesity.
However, the causes and effects of behavioural factors do have to be
considered,(28) and interventions to deal with these
should be a part of any overall strategy.
Environmental influences - Environment can be broadly categorised
into "macro" (of the wider population) and "micro" (with
close proximity to the individual). In general, the macro-environment
determines the prevalence of obesity in a population and the micro-environment,
along with biological and behavioural influences, determines whether an
individual is obese. The environmental influences on the amount and type of
food eaten and the amount and type of physical activity taken are vast and
underrated; shows some examples. A close examination of specific
macro-environmental sectors (such as the fitness industry or the food service
industry) or micro-environmental settings (such as the local gym or the
workplace) will reveal many more interconnecting environmental influences than
those listed. For example, food safety regulations, policies of food
manufacturers, costs of cooking oils, and the availability of training
programmes for food caterers can affect the choice, price, and quality of food
at the work canteen.
Environmental influences represent the public health arm of the obesity
problem. If the macro-environment is obesogenic, obesity will become more
prevalent and programmes aimed at influencing individual behaviour can be
expected to have only a limited effect. Historically, epidemics have been
controlled only after environmental factors have been modified. Similarly,
reductions in population levels of obesity seem unlikely until the environments
which facilitate its development are modified. Yet this is often neglected in
obesity management (as it was initially with tobacco control). Environmental
change, such as regulation of the food industry or changes in building design,
is likely to be unpopular. Although some changes may be overt, others-such as
reductions of fat in the meat supply-may be more surreptitious.
Epidemiology of an ecological model
For obesity, "host" encompasses the biological and behavioural
influences, plus physiological adjustment. "Environment" is similar
in the two models, and "vehicle" is represented by energy intake
(food) and energy expenditure (physical activity).
Recent advances in obesity research (especially in molecular biology) may
have an impact on treatment at the individual level. It is clear, however, that
there is a major deficiency in research into the "obesogenic"
environment and potential interventions. Without a supportive environment,
treatment programmes are likely to be ineffectual and preventive programs will
be restricted to mass education strategies.
Conclusion
Obesity presents us with two challenges: to treat people who are currently
obese and to prevent obesity in people who are still lean. Neither of these
challenges is currently being met; hence it is important to re-examine the
paradigms on which treatment and prevention programmes are based. The model
presented here suggests that the driving force for the increasing prevalence of
obesity in populations is the increasingly obesogenic environment rather than
any "pathology" in metabolic defects or genetic mutations within
individuals. A paradigm shift to understanding obesity as "normal
physiology within a pathological environment" signposts the directions for
a wider public health approach to the obesity pandemic.
References
1. James WPT. Epidemiology of obesity.
Int J Obesity 1992;16(suppl 2):S23-6.
2. Magnus P, Bennett S. Trends in cardiovascular risk
factors in Australia. Med J Aust 1994;161:519-27.
3. Hawks SR, Richins P. Toward a new paradigm for the
management of obesity. J Health Educ 1994;25:147-53.
4. Ravussin E, Swinburn B. Energy metabolism in obesity. In:
Stunkard AJ, Wadden TA, eds. Obesity: theory and therapy. 2nd ed. New York:
Raven, 1992:97-124.
5. Swinburn B, Ravussin E. Energy balance or fat balance? Am
J Clin Nutr 1993;57(suppl):766-71S.
6. Stubbs RJ. Macronutrient effects on appetite. Int J
Obesity 1995;19(suppl 5):S11-9.
7. Flatt JP. Importance of nutrient balance in body weight
regulation. Diab Met Rev 1988;4:571-81.
8. Schutz Y, Flatt JP, Jequier E. Failure of dietary fat
intake to promote fat oxidation: a factor favouring the development of obesity.
Am J Clin Nutr 1989;50:307-14.
9. Kickbush I. Approaches to an ecological base for public
health. Health Promotion 1989;4:265-8.
10. Westrate JA. Fat and obesity. Int J Obesity
1995;19(suppl 5):S38-43.
11. Lissner L, Heitman BL. Dietary fat and obesity:
evidence from epidemiology. Eur J Clin Nutr 1995;49:79-90.
12. Prewitt TE, Schmeisser D, Bowen PE, Aye P, Dolecek TA,
Langenberg P, et al. Changes in body weight, body composition, and energy
intake in women fed high- and low-fat diets. Am J Clin Nutr 1991;54:304-10.
13. Lyon X-H, Di Vetta V, Milton H, Schutz Y. Compliance to
dietary advice directed towards increasing the carbohydrate to fat ratio of the
everyday diet. Int J Obesity 1995;19:260-9.
14. Prentice AM, Goldberg GR, Jebb SA, Black AE, Murgatroyd
PR. Physiological responses to slimming. Proc Nutr Soc 1991;50:441-58.
15. Prentice AM, Jebb SA. Obesity in Britain: gluttony or
sloth? BMJ 1995;311:437-9.
16. Rose G. The strategy of preventive medicine. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1992.
17. Glasser GA. Burning carbohydrate to lose fat. Sports
Med Digest 1995;March:5.
18. James WPT. A public health approach to the problem of
obesity. Int J Obesity 1995;19 (suppl 3):S37-46.
19. Liebel RL, Rosenbaum M, Hirsch J. Changes in energy
expenditure resulting from altered body weight. N Engl J Med
1995;332:621-8.
20. Heitmann BL, Lissner L, Sorensen TI, Bengtsson C.
Dietary fat intake and weight gain in women genetically predisposed for
obesity. Am J Clin Nutr 1995;61:1213-7.
21. Keys A, Brozek J, Kenschel A, Mickelsen O, Taylor HL.
The biology of human starvation. Vol 1, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press, 1950.
22. Katahn M, McMinn MR. Obesity: a biobehavioral point of
view. Ann NY Acad Sci 1990;602:189-204.
23. Zhang Y, Proenca R, Maffei M, Barone M, Leopold L,
Friedman JM. Positional cloning of the mouse obese gene and its human
homologue. Nature 1994;372:425-32.
24. Frisch RE. The right weight: body fat, menarche and
fertility. Proc Nutr Soc 1994;53:113-29.
25. Rebuffe-Scrive M, Enk L, Crona N, Lonnroth P,
Abrahamsson L, Smith U, et al. Fat cell metabolism in different regions in
women: effect of menstrual cycle, pregnancy and lactation. J Clin Invest
1985;75:1973-6.
26. Bourdin M, Pastene J, Germain M, Lacour JR. Influence
of training, sex, age and body mass on the energy costs of running. Eur J Appl
Physiol 1993;66:439-44.
27. Tuten C, Petosa R, Sargent R, Weston A. Biracial
differences in physical activity and body composition. Obesity Res
1995;3:313-8.
28. Brownell KD, Wadden TA. Etiology and treatment of
obesity: understanding a serious, prevalent, and refractory disorder. J Consult
Clin Psychol 1992;60:505-17.
29. Hadden W. Advances in the epidemiology of injuries as a
basis for public policy. Public Health Rep 1980;95:411-21.
|