Painful and Harsh Truths

These words are here to pick up some thoughts dropped a few days ago as “Harsh and Painful Truths,” of the kind that keep coming back to haunt us.

Some realities need to be accepted. One of them is: People resent paying for other people’s mistakes. The average American is generally okay with the idea that tax dollars will help a person who was pushed onto the subway tracks and suffered a leg amputation.

But if the issue is someone who has spent a lifetime becoming corpulent, when that misfortune could have been prevented, it’s a different matter. The idea of contributing to the kitty for a morbidly obese person’s medical expenses just might be considered objectionable.

In many people’s minds obesity is, always and only, a preventable situation. They feel no empathy for anyone who bought a packet of white powder and contracted a major addiction, on the grounds that the person should have known better. Viewed from the perspective of that same mindset, obesity is an almost identical situation. Whether objectively justifiable or not, it is the way a large number of people feel.

Meanwhile, someone with a generous and forgiving nature might hope to convince the hard-hearted to be less critical, and to spare the feelings of addicts who are now trying to change. Another response would be to use that energy in a different way, like by convincing people to not become addicts in the first place. Similarly, those who care about the obesity issue, and who don’t want to see obese people getting their feelings hurt, might choose to support issues connected with the prevention of that condition.

A heavy work

We will not go into the whole text here, but it could be useful to take a peek at a five-author article from Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy, with the cumbersome but usefully descriptive title, “Costs of obesity, obesity-related complications, and weight loss in the United States: A systematic literature review.”

The work’s abstract quite usefully states that last year, around 100 million American grownups were obese. (The point we are aiming at is one that should be obvious from the start. Surely, their hundreds of thousands of parents did not mean for that to happen. Those moms and dads never intended for their beloved offspring to become PwO, or People with Obesity!)

Of those hundred million obese American adults, 75% or three-quarters of them also suffer from complications related to that obese condition. Here is a direct quotation pertaining to their condition:

“Related medical spending exceeds $261 billion.”

Subsequent to that thought, we are told that the objective of this study was to summarize the estimates of the direct medical costs incurred by those PwO…

[…] by obesity severity and presence of obesity-related complications and to characterize the impact of weight loss on direct medical cost savings.

The methodology is then explained, and it translates to an understanding that this task involved a lot of complicated work. Before even starting, the individuals concerned were divided into groups (class I, II, or III) according to the severity of their obesity. Anyway, almost 10,000 related records were consulted, and the researchers identified 6.0 of them, or 32 studies, as being useful for their purposes.

Here was some unwelcome news. Obesity-related complications (such as hypertension and type 2 diabetes) do not wind up costing just a little bit more than plain old obesity, but a lot more. And yet, a relatively simple (for some individuals) weight loss of only 5% over a year could lead to “substantial savings.” Weight-loss medications were found to help, too.

Obviously, a lot more facts and figures were involved in deducing numerous conclusions, and not surprisingly,

[L]ongitudinal studies considering a wider range and overlap of obesity-related complications are needed to help document and quantify the current direct cost burden of obesity.

What is the point here? Glad you asked. Most people who read this blog have children, and hold many aspirations for those young lives. We hope to see our kids grow up to be champion athletes, or career-qualified musicians, or dedicated teachers, or farmers who care as much about preserving the land as they do about making profits.

This sort of future-gazing could go on and on, but there is a point. Not one of us, not a single parent among us, is sitting here thinking, “Gee, I hope my kid grows up to be a PwO — especially one with extra-disabling and super-costly complications!”

This suggestion is for anyone whose kids might be headed in an overweight direction: Please consider getting acquainted with a system called BrainWeighve, which could make an enormous difference in the lives of not only our own kids, but also their children — the next generation who are not even here yet.

We have the opportunity to shape and guide the fates of people far into the future. To guarantee that our present-day progeny will not grow up obese could make a difference that reverberates and resonates down through the years. And what have we got to lose by giving it a chance?

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “Costs of obesity, obesity-related complications, and weight loss in the United States: A systematic literature review,” Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy, July 2025
Image by jarmoluk/Pixabay

A Useful “Creator Toolkit” From Harvard

The full title of the work is “Unpacking Fatphobia, Weight Discrimination, and Their Deadly Repercussions.” When we see the word “useful,” the question that naturally comes to mind is, “Who can benefit from this information?”

The answer would include any parent, teacher, student, news columnist, speaker at a club or organization function, or really anyone who is interested in helping others understand what is going on with the societal attitude toward overweight and obese Americans. The document itself mentions what might, in this day and age, be the most useful aspect of knowing some things about this touchy subject: “to help content creators spread evidence-based health information on social media.”

In any such context, by the way, it is also useful to mention that the author of the post, article, or speech is offering educational information, which is not to be mistaken for actual medical advice. If needed, that aspect should of course be followed up on by consultation with an appropriate medical professional.

Especially for the family

A parent, for instance, might want to address some particular aspect of obesity, to help their child to understand why there is concern about that child’s own habits and inclinations.

Or — and we hope this never comes up, but it might — a mom or dad might overhear their child mocking some obese person, and find a non-confrontational way to gently help create understanding of the circumstances that could have led to that unfortunate person’s weight problem. This might also present an opportunity to make some points about how their own family can take responsibility for assuring that none of its members will, one day, be the butt of someone else’s humor, meanness, or scorn.

For those who are already convinced and don’t even need to hear any more details or reasons, but are anxious to get right to it, here is the address.

Down to it

The first section emphasizes how weight-based bias is actually a problem that affects everyone. But the main way in which it affects obese people is that it’s worse than wrong; it’s useless — because it does not help anyone become healthier. That’s right, criticism actually confers no health benefits, but actively worsens the health and wellbeing of its targets. Here is the succinct but definitive quotation on that topic:

Experiencing weight discrimination harms people’s physical and mental health, reduces their engagement in healthy activities, like exercising, and ironically increases the likelihood that they will gain weight.

The document goes on to explain what numerous studies have confirmed: that discrimination merely increases people’s stress levels and has an overall tendency to cause a decrease in the quality of their healthcare.

If the health of such an individual is a true concern, critics should be aware that “it is impossible to tell how ‘healthy’ someone is just from looking at them.” We are reminded that if our true wish is to deal only in respectful, supportive dialogue, we should remind our communities to “ask people what terminology they prefer and use their preferred language in conversations.”

Another section of the document contains the astonishing information that, in all but one American state (Michigan), it is actually legal to discriminate against a person based on his or her weight.

And so…

What sorts of actions can a conscientious individual take to improve the situation? Several are suggested. The compilers go on to discuss the topics of blame and shame, a pair of words that will by now be very familiar to readers of Childhood Obesity News. That section delves into quite a bit of detail about the many insidious ways in which harmful attitudes can affect people and relationships.

Additionally, there are all kinds of mental gymnastics and emotional traps involved in how different types of people address these topics. For instance,

Seeing others lose weight may bring up feelings of betrayal in people who see weight loss as a decision to abandon a political fight.

Once a person begins to seriously look into this matter, it becomes apparent that there is much more to it than meets the eye. The authors mention the need to examine and reflect upon “the complexity of how our weight and health are politicized.” It is also useful to examine how an ostensible concern about people’s weight may be inextricably entwined, in one way or another, with the ubiquitous factor known as the profit motive.

But wait, there is more…

Also on offer are some interesting statistics. If the mental health of the population is a concern, we can reflect on the increased risk of mood disorders and anxiety disorders experienced by people who are regarded as overweight. For those who feel targeted by it, weight discrimination can even lead to an earlier death than they would otherwise have experienced.

Reliance on the old but not yet replaced BMI standard can harm large numbers of people by causing them to be misclassified. And here is an interesting statistic:

18 out of the top 25 teen TV shows displayed characters being teased for their weight.

As attentive and sensitive to public opinion as entertainment media producers are known to be, it seems like this would be a relatively easy and potentially rewarding area in which to invest critical energy.

This guide also provides a handy starter list of media resources including documentary films, podcasts, brochures, websites and reports for further self-education, and ideas about how to help our entire society experience a much-needed shift in attitude.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “Unpacking Fatphobia, Weight Discrimination, and Their Deadly Repercussions,” Harvard.edu
Image: Used under the Pixabay Content License

New Childhood Obesity Definition Focuses on Health Beyond BMI

First came the updated childhood obesity prevention guidelines from the WHO. Next, a new international definition of clinical obesity is changing how researchers assess childhood health. It asks whether excess body fat is affecting the body’s ability to function or limiting everyday activities. For families, the distinction could help explain why a child’s BMI alone cannot tell the whole story.

What the new definition measures

Body Mass Index, or BMI, measures weight relative to height. In children and adolescents, clinicians interpret BMI in relation to age and sex. It remains a useful screening tool, but it does not directly measure body fat or establish whether excess fat is causing illness.

The framework developed by a commission convened by The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology distinguishes between clinical and preclinical obesity. Clinical obesity requires confirmed excess body fat together with evidence of related organ dysfunction or substantial limitations in daily activities. Preclinical obesity describes excess body fat with preserved organ function, although future health risks may still be elevated.

Examples of complications considered in clinical assessment include obesity-related breathing problems during sleep, impaired mobility, and metabolic abnormalities. Doctors must evaluate whether these problems are attributable to excess body fat; an isolated symptom does not establish a diagnosis.

Pediatrician Dr. Danielle Longmore said during an appearance on Fox & Friends:

BMI is really just measuring size… So it doesn’t really have a way of capturing whether somebody is well or unwell.

What the childhood obesity study found

Researchers led by Australia’s Murdoch Children’s Research Institute analyzed data from 786,557 participants across seven high-income countries. Published in eClinicalMedicine, the study examined clinical obesity from early childhood through older adulthood.

Among children and adolescents, 2.1% to 4.9% met the clinical obesity criteria used in the analysis, compared with 7% to 10.8% classified as having obesity using BMI criteria.

These figures describe a change in classification, rather than evidence that childhood obesity has declined. They also represent the populations studied, rather than a universal estimate for every country.

The pattern shifted with age. Clinical obesity became increasingly common through adulthood, reaching 52% among participants ages 65 to 74. However, comparisons across age groups do not predict what will happen to any individual child.

Why early prevention still matters

A child who does not meet the criteria for clinical obesity may still need monitoring and support. The commission recommends health counseling, ongoing assessment, and interventions appropriate to individual risk for people with preclinical obesity.

Dr. Longmore noted that some children classified as having obesity by BMI are active, sleep well, and participate fully in school and daily life. A broader evaluation helps clinicians understand their current health while considering potential problems over time.

For families, this supports conversations about growth, sleep, physical activity, and nutrition alongside any symptoms or test results. Decisions about care should reflect the child’s overall health and circumstances.

Questions that remain

The study has an important limitation: None of its cohorts included complete information on every diagnostic criterion in The Lancet framework. Further research is needed to establish prevalence more precisely and understand how these categories relate to future health.

The findings also leave unanswered questions about treatment. Longmore said the datasets reflect records from before widespread use of GLP-1 medications, so the analysis cannot establish their long-term effects under the new framework.

The proposed definition gives clinicians another way to identify when excess body fat is causing illness. Its value will depend on careful assessment, continued research, and early support for children whose health may be at risk.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “Childhood obesity less common under new global definition,” Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, 10/7/26
Source: “Definition and diagnostic criteria of clinical obesity,” The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, 2025
Source: “Prevalence of Overweight, Obesity, and Severe Obesity Among Children and Adolescents Ages 2-19 Years,” CDC, February 2026
Source: “Doctors may be getting childhood obesity wrong, new research suggests,” Fox News, 10/13/26
Image by Yan Krukau/Pexels

Financial Blame and Shame

In just about any place or time, one of the favorite excuses for blaming and shaming is money. It is considered rude and in very bad form to cost other people money, especially by making them pay for something that you did or caused to be done.

Many Americans are overweight, not because they are helplessly afflicted by incurable disease processes, but because of their personal inclinations and habits. And, right or wrong, other people who are presented with the bill feel resentful, disrespected, and used.

Because of amazing events in the field of pharmacology, a person can now take expensive weight-loss drugs, but few can afford the cost, so if they are going to be bought at all, that logically means that someone else has to pay for them.

If “the government” pays, those funds are extracted from other citizens — many of whom are not overweight, and many of whom believe their tax dollars could be better spent, perhaps to help patients suffering from conditions and injuries that were not self-caused.

Citizens of two minds

The ordinary taxpaying American wants to be kind and helpful, but in the considered opinion of many citizens, a problem caused by sitting around and eating high-calorie snacks all day simply does not qualify as an emergency that requires their sympathy, whether expressed through voluntary contributions or in the form of coercion known as taxation. And if ordinary, average citizens are so ambivalent, just imagine the grim mindset of the executives who run corporations, and the shareholders who hold them accountable.

In April of this year, a very large number of Chief Financial Officers were surveyed with regard to their company’s top five “operating expense concerns,” and about three-quarters of them said that healthcare is right up there. Roughly the same number stated that the cost of healthcare cannot be sustained without incurring “business impacts” which will necessarily include the need to reduce hiring, slow wage growth, or jack up prices to the consumers. In other words, someone will pay, and it will not be the shareholders.

This is nothing new

Meanwhile, for a large number of employees, the corporation might already be paying between 70% and 100% of their GLP-1 drug bill, which typically runs from $1,000 to $1,500 per month. Allegedly, a large corporation might be paying insurance premiums of $18,000 per year, per employee, already.  Even leaving anti-obesity drugs out of the equation, “employer-sponsored health insurance costs are projected to rise 6.7% in 2026, the highest increase in 15 years.”

Journalist Alexei Alexis reported that, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s reckoning, “Medicare spending on GLP-1 drugs reached about $27.5 billion in 2024, more than five times higher than in 2019…” Late in 2024 in the USA, it looked like Medicare/Medicaid might begin to pick up the cost of all GLP-1 drugs, but by spring of the following year this notion was off the table.

Around the same time, in a different piece of reportage, Alexis mentioned that, among companies with at least 500 employees, about half of those employers are currently picking up the tab for employees’ GLP-1 prescriptions. He interviewed Beth Umland, Director of Health Research at Mercer U.S., who said,

Those that currently provide this coverage are evaluating all methods for managing utilization, from eligibility controls that help ensure the medications are used by those who will benefit most, to requiring participation in a support program that will help ensure members who do use these medications are positioned to get the maximum benefits.

This reads like an endorsement of the notion that perhaps employees are being asked to take a little more personal responsibility, which can’t be a bad thing.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Image by Quince Creative/Pixabay