Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Obesity Reports
Published in: Current Obesity Reports 3/2013

01-09-2013 | Economy and Environment (T Andreyeva, Section Editor)

Obesity Prevention Policies in U.S. States and Localities: Lessons from the Field

Author: Jamie F. Chriqui

Published in: Current Obesity Reports | Issue 3/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Obesity is a complex problem requiring large-scale, population-based solutions. Public policy strategies have been identified as critical tools in obesity prevention efforts as they can benefit all who are exposed rather than simply changing individual behaviors one at a time. This paper reviews the peer-reviewed scientific U.S.-based literature published between January 2012 and March 2013 to examine the influence of state laws and local policies on changes to school and other environments, individual activity and nutrition-related behaviors, and obesity and weight outcomes. Virtually all recent studies have focused on policies directed at the school environment and, across-the board, the evidence was mixed. Most studies were cross-sectional, focused on policy implementation in schools and other settings rather than impacts on individual behaviors or obesity. Opportunities exist for impact studies focusing on a broader spectrum of policies as well as for continued policy actions at all levels of government.
Literature
1.
Katz DL. Childhood obesity trends in 2013: mind, matter, and message. Child Obes. 2013;9:1–2.PubMed
2.
3.
4.
Cawley J, Meyerhoefer C. The medical care costs of obesity: an instrumental variables approach. J Health Econ. 2012;31:219–30.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Wang YC, McPherson K, Marsh T, et al. Health and economic burden of the projected obesity trends in the USA and the UK. Lancet. 2011;378:815–25.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Trogdon JG, Finkelstein EA, Hylands T, et al. Indirect costs of obesity: a review of the current literature. Obes Rev. 2008;9:489–500.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Hammond RA, Levine R. The economic impact of obesity in the United States. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2010;3:285–95.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Huang TT, Drewnosksi A, Kumanyika S, et al. A systems-oriented multilevel framework for addressing obesity in the 21st century. Prev Chronic Dis. 2009;6:A82.PubMed
9.
10.
Institute of Medicine. Preventing childhood obesity: health in the balance. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press; 2005.
11.
Institute of Medicine. Local government actions to prevent childhood obesity. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press; 2009.
12.
Institute of Medicine Committee on Nutrition Standards for Foods in Schools. Nutrition standards for food in schools: leading the way toward healthier youth. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press; 2007.
13.
Institute of Medicine Committee on Nutrition Standards for National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs. School meals: building blocks for healthy children. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press; 2010.
14.
Institute of Medicine Committee to Accelerate Progress in Obesity Prevention. Accelerating progress in obesity prevention: solving the weight of the nation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2012.
15.
Institute of Medicine. Progress in preventing childhood obesity: how do we measure up? Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2006.
16.
17.
18.
Mozaffarian D, Afshin A, Benowitz NL, et al. Population approaches to improve diet, physical activity, and smoking habits: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2012;126:1514–63.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Gortmaker SL, Swinburn BA, Levy D, et al. Changing the future of obesity: science, policy, and action. Lancet. 2011;378:838–47.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Chaloupka FJ, Powell LM, Chriqui JF. Sugar-sweetened beverages and obesity: the potential impact of public policies. J Pol Anal Manag. 2011;30:645–55.CrossRef
21.
Institute of Medicine. Ending the tobacco problem: a blueprint for the nation. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press; 2007.
22.
Chriqui JF, Frosh MM, Brownson RC, et al. Measuring policy and legislative change. In: Stillman F, Clark PI, Trochim W, editors. Evaluating ASSIST: a blueprint for understanding state-level tobacco control. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2006.
23.
Shipan CR, Volden C. Bottom-up federalism: the diffusion of antismoking policies from U.S. cities to states. Am J Polit Sci. 2006;50:825–43.CrossRef
24.
Eyler A. Promoting physical activity through policy. Res Dig. 2011;12:1–9.
25.
Bassett DR, Fitzhugh EC, Heath GW, et al. Estimated energy expenditures for school-based policies and active living. Am J Prev Med. 2013;44:108–13.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Novak NL, Brownell KD. Taxation as prevention and as a treatment for obesity: the case of sugar-sweetened beverages. Curr Pharm Des. 2011;17:1218–22.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Novak NL, Brownell KD. Role of policy and government in the obesity epidemic. Circulation. 2012;126:2345–52.PubMedCrossRef
28.
• Schwartz MB. Environmental and policy strategies to improve eating, physical activity behaviors, and weight among adolescents. Adolesc Med State Art Rev. 2012;23:589–609. This paper provides a thorough review of obesity-related environmental and policy strategies.PubMed
29.
• Gearhardt AN, Bragg MA, Pearl RL, et al. Obesity and public policy. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2012;8:405–30. This review summarizes key prevention, treatment, and policy approaches for addressing obesity and discusses the role that federal, state and local governments can play in addressing the problem.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Lindholm R. Combating childhood obesity: a survey of laws affecting the built environments of low-income and minority children. Rev Environ Health. 2011;26:155–67.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Pomeranz JL. The wheels on the bus go "buy buy buy": school bus advertising laws. Am J Public Health. 2012;102:1638–43.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Pomeranz JL, Brownell KD. Portion sizes and beyond–government's legal authority to regulate food-industry practices. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1383–5.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Pomeranz JL. Advanced policy options to regulate sugar-sweetened beverages to support public health. J Public Health Policy. 2012;33:75–88.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Brennan L, Castro S, Brownson RC, et al. Accelerating evidence reviews and broadening evidence standards to identify effective, promising, and emerging policy and environmental strategies for prevention of childhood obesity. Annu Rev Public Health. 2011;32:199–223.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Kimmons J, Wood M, Villarante JC, et al. Adopting healthy and sustainable food service guidelines: emerging evidence from implementation at the United States Federal Government, New York City, Los Angeles County, and Kaiser Permanente. Adv Nutr. 2012;3:746–8.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Kraak VI, Story M, Wartella EA. Government and school progress to promote a healthful diet to American children and adolescents: a comprehensive review of the available evidence. Am J Prev Med. 2012;42:250–62.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Fenton M. Community design and policies for free-range children: creating environments that support routine physical activity. Child Obes. 2012;8:44–51.PubMed
38.
Amis JM, Wright PM, Dyson B, et al. Implementing childhood obesity policy in a new educational environment: the cases of Mississippi and Tennessee. Am J Public Health. 2012;102:1406–13.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Carlson JA, Sallis JF, Chriqui JF, et al. State policies about physical activity minutes in physical education or during school. J Sch Health. 2013;83:150–6.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Chriqui JF, Taber DR, Slater SJ, et al. The impact of state safe routes to school-related laws on active travel to school policies and practices in U.S. elementary schools. Health Place. 2012;18:8–15.PubMedCrossRef
41.
• Robertson-Wilson JE, Dargavel MD, Bryden PJ, et al. Physical activity policies and legislation in schools: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43:643–9. This is one of the few systematic reviews to examine the impact of school-based physical activity policies and suggests that such policies are particularly useful for increasing levels of physical activity.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Slater SJ, Nicholson L, Chriqui J, et al. The impact of state laws and district policies on physical education and recess practices in a nationally representative sample of US public elementary schools. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166:311–6.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Turner, L, Chriqui, J, Chaloupka, F. Walking school bus programs in U.S. public elementary schools. J Phys Act Health. 2012; Sep 18. [Epub ahead of print].
44.
Holt, E, Heelan, K, Bartee, T. Evaluation of a policy to integrate physical activity into the school day. J Phys Act Health. 2012; Jul 10. [Epub ahead of print].
45.
Perna FM, Oh A, Chriqui JF, et al. The association of state law to physical education time allocation in US public schools. Am J Public Health. 2012;102:1594–9.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Lafleur M, Strongin S, Cole BL, et al. Physical education and student activity: evaluating implementation of a new policy in Los Angeles public schools. Ann Behav Med. 2013;45 Suppl 1:122–30.CrossRef
47.
• Sanchez-Vaznaugh EV, Sanchez BN, Rosas LG, et al. Physical education policy compliance and children's physical fitness. Am J Prev Med. 2012;42:452–9. This is one of the first studies to demonstrate that district-level compliance with state physical education standards can increase student fitness levels.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Kim J. Are physical education-related state policies and schools' physical education requirement related to children's physical activity and obesity? J Sch Health. 2012;82:268–76.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Riis J, Grason H, Strobino D, et al. State school policies and youth obesity. Matern Child Health J. 2012;16 Suppl 1:S111–8.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Turner, L, Chaloupka, FJ, Sandoval, A. School policies and practices to improve health and prevent obesity: National elementary school survey results: school years 2006–07 through 2009–10, vol. 2. www.​bridgingthegapre​search.​org. Accessed 1 Mar. 2012.
51.
Han-Markey TL, Wang L, Schlotterbeck S, et al. A public school district's vending machine policy and changes over a 4-year period: implementation of a national wellness policy. Public Health. 2012;126:335–7.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Peart T, Kao J, Crawford PB, et al. Does competitive food and beverage legislation hurt meal participation or revenues in high schools? Child Obes. 2012;8:339–46.PubMed
53.
• Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Powell LM, et al. Banning all sugar-sweetened beverages in middle schools: reduction of in-school access and purchasing but not overall consumption. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166:256–62. This is the first nationwide longitudinal study to illustrate that soda-only bans do not reduce in-school consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages; in order to reduce such consumption, the policies must ban all sugar-sweetened beverages. However, sugar-sweetened beverage bans do not reduce overall consumption (in- and out-of-school).PubMedCrossRef
54.
•• Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Perna FM, et al. Weight status among adolescents in states that govern competitive food nutrition content. Pediatrics. 2012;130:437–44. This longitudinal study provides the first evidence that strong competitive food and beverage laws with specific standards and that are consistent across grade levels are associated with lower within-student body mass index change.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Wall R, Litchfield R, Carriquiry A, et al. Local wellness policy strength and perceived implementation of school nutrition standards across three states. Child Obes. 2012;8:331–8.PubMed
56.
Turner L, Chriqui JF, Chaloupka FJ. Food as a reward in the classroom: school district policies are associated with practices in US public elementary schools. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012;112:1436–42.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Turner L, Chriqui JF, Chaloupka FJ. Healthier fundraising in U. S. elementary schools: associations between policies at the state, district, and school levels. PLoS One. 2012;7:e49890.PubMedCrossRef
58.
• Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Chaloupka FJ. Differences in nutrient intake associated with state laws regarding fat, sugar, and caloric content of competitive foods. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166:452–8. This study illustrates that students living in California, a state with strong and specific competitive food standards, consumed, on average, 157.8 less calories per day than students living in states without competitive food and beverage laws.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Huang R, Kiesel K. Does limited access at school result in compensation at home? The effect of soft drink bans in schools on purchase patterns outside of schools. Eur Rev Agric Econ. 2012;39:797–820.CrossRef
60.
Polacsek M, O'Rourke K, O'Brien L, et al. Examining compliance with a statewide law banning junk food and beverage marketing in Maine schools. Public Health Rep. 2012;127:216–23.PubMed
61.
Schneider L, Chriqui J, Nicholson L, et al. Are farm-to-school programs more common in states with farm-to-school-related laws? J Sch Health. 2012;82:210–6.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Sandoval A, Turner L, Nicholson L, et al. The relationship among state laws, district policies, and elementary school-based measurement of children's body mass index. J Sch Health. 2012;82:239–45.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Schwartz MB, Henderson KE, Falbe J, et al. Strength and comprehensiveness of district school wellness policies predict policy implementation at the school level. J Sch Health. 2012;82:262–7.PubMedCrossRef
64.
•• Powell LM, Chriqui JF, Khan T, et al. Assessing the potential effectiveness of food and beverage taxes and subsidies for improving public health: a systematic review of prices, demand and body weight outcomes. Obes Rev. 2013;14:110–28. This systematic review provides the most up-to-date evidence for food prices, taxes, and subsidies on demand and weight outcomes.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Brownell KD, Farley T, Willett WC, et al. The public health and economic benefits of taxing sugar-sweetened beverages. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1599–605.PubMedCrossRef
66.
Shipan CR. The mechanisms of policy diffusion. Am J Pol Sci. 2008;52:840–57.CrossRef
67.
68.
US Department of Agriculture. National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: nutrition standards for all foods sold in school as required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010–Proposed Rule. Fed Regist. 2013;78:9530–67.
69.
US Department of Health and Human Services. 2008 physical activity guidelines for Americans. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; 2008.
70.
Promoting Healthy as Youth Skills in Classroom and Life Act, S. 392, Udall T, 2013.
71.
Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Act, S. 531, Harkin T, 2013.
Metadata
Title
Obesity Prevention Policies in U.S. States and Localities: Lessons from the Field
Author
Jamie F. Chriqui
Publication date
01-09-2013
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Obesity Reports / Issue 3/2013
Electronic ISSN: 2162-4968
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13679-013-0063-x

Other articles of this Issue 3/2013

Current Obesity Reports 3/2013 Go to the issue

Ergonomy (N Teasdale, Section Editor)

Recent Developments in Obesity Research: Linkages between Obesity, Disability, and Physical Functioning

Ergonomy (N Teasdale, Section Editor)

Obesity and Mobility in Advancing Age: Mechanisms and Interventions to Preserve Independent Mobility

Economy and Environment (T Andreyeva, Section Editor)

Reducing Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption: Evidence, Policies, and Economics

Ergonomy (N Teasdale, Section Editor)

Obesity and Low Back Pain: Is There a Weight of Evidence to Support a Positive Relationship?

Economy and Environment (T Andreyeva, Section Editor)

Cost-Effectiveness of Fiscal Policies to Prevent Obesity

Ergonomy (N Teasdale, Section Editor)

The Impact of Obesity on In Vivo Human Skeletal Muscle Function
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

Read more

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits