RESUMO
Despite isolated areas of improvement, no country to date has reversed its obesity epidemic. Governments, together with a broad range of stakeholders, need to act urgently to decrease the prevalence of obesity. In this Series paper, we review several regulatory and non-regulatory actions taken around the world to address obesity and discuss some of the reasons for the scarce and fitful progress. Additionally, we preview the papers in this Lancet Series, which each identify high-priority actions on key obesity issues and challenge some of the entrenched dichotomies that dominate the thinking about obesity and its solutions. Although obesity is acknowledged as a complex issue, many debates about its causes and solutions are centred around overly simple dichotomies that present seemingly competing perspectives. Examples of such dichotomies explored in this Series include personal versus collective responsibilities for actions, supply versus demand-type explanations for consumption of unhealthy food, government regulation versus industry self-regulation, top-down versus bottom-up drivers for change, treatment versus prevention priorities, and a focus on undernutrition versus overnutrition. We also explore the dichotomy of individual versus environmental drivers of obesity and conclude that people bear some personal responsibility for their health, but environmental factors can readily support or undermine the ability of people to act in their own self-interest. We propose a reframing of obesity that emphasises the reciprocal nature of the interaction between the environment and the individual. Today's food environments exploit people's biological, psychological, social, and economic vulnerabilities, making it easier for them to eat unhealthy foods. This reinforces preferences and demands for foods of poor nutritional quality, furthering the unhealthy food environments. Regulatory actions from governments and increased efforts from industry and civil society will be necessary to break these vicious cycles.
Assuntos
Saúde Global , Política de Saúde , Prioridades em Saúde , Obesidade/prevenção & controle , Indústria Alimentícia , Rotulagem de Alimentos/legislação & jurisprudência , Preferências Alimentares , Serviços de Alimentação/legislação & jurisprudência , Promoção da Saúde , Humanos , Formulação de Políticas , Instituições AcadêmicasRESUMO
Public mobilisation is needed to enact obesity-prevention policies and to mitigate reaction against their implementation. However, approaches in public health focus mainly on dialogue between public health professionals and political leaders. Strategies to increase popular demand for obesity-prevention policies include refinement and streamlining of public information, identification of effective obesity frames for each population, strengthening of media advocacy, building of citizen protest and engagement, and development of a receptive political environment with change agents embedded across organisations and sectors. Long-term support and investment in collaboration between diverse stakeholders to create shared value is also important. Each actor in an expanded coalition for obesity prevention can make specific contributions to engaging, mobilising, and coalescing the public. The shift from a top-down to a combined and integrated bottom-up and top-down approach would need an overhaul of current strategies and reprioritisation of resources.
Assuntos
Promoção da Saúde/organização & administração , Obesidade/prevenção & controle , Redes Comunitárias , Participação da Comunidade , Informação de Saúde ao Consumidor , Política de Saúde , Humanos , Manobras Políticas , Meios de Comunicação de Massa , Saúde Pública , Opinião PúblicaRESUMO
Despite the recognized need for structural HIV prevention interventions, few scientific programs have integrated women's property and inheritance rights with HIV prevention and treatment. The current study focused on a community-led land and property rights intervention that was implemented in two rural areas of Western Kenya with high HIV prevalence rates (24-30%). The program was designed to respond to women's property rights violations in order to reduce HIV risk at the local level. Through in-depth interviews with twenty program leaders, we identified several facilitators to program implementation, including the leadership of home-based HIV caregivers and involvement of traditional leaders in mediating property rights disputes. We also identified the voluntary basis of the intervention and its lack of integration with the formal justice system as implementation barriers. Our findings can guide future research and design of structural HIV prevention strategies that integrate women's economic empowerment through property and inheritance rights.