With the spotlight on childhood obesity, schools across the country are looking for ways to get kids to eat more fruits and vegetables. In New York, the Department of Health decided to do some research. How much, it wondered, would a school need to cut its prices for apples, oranges and bananas to increase sales by 5 percent over a year?
Brian Wansink was called in to play detective. But the director of Cornell’s Food and Brand Lab soon discovered he had been hired to answer the wrong question. Price wasn’t the problem. It was the presentation.

In the school cafeterias Wansink surveyed, whole fruits were displayed in steel bins in dimly lighted areas of the lunch line. Wansink went to discount store T.J. Maxx and bought a cheap wire fruit rack. He found an extra desk lamp, which he used to shine on the fruit. “Sales of fruit in one school went up 54 percent. Not in a semester: by the end of the second week,” Wansink said. “It would have gone up faster, but they kept running out of fruit.”

The debate about how to fix school lunch has, until now, focused largely on what is sold in schools: Public health advocates argue that french fries and cookies should be banned, and some schools have done just that. Food manufacturers and some parents retort that such deprivation will only encourage students to get their fix elsewhere. Now, researchers such as Wansink are turning their attention to how school food is sold and to whether marketing and incentives can help fight obesity, often at little or no cost.

Federal regulators, charged with improving the school lunch program on a tight budget, are paying attention. Cass Sunstein, a leading behavioral economist and a co-author of the seminal text “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness,” is the administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. In April, the U.S. Department of Agriculture held a two-day conference on how behavioral economics can improve federal food policy. This fall, the agency will award $2 million to fund more research in the field.

The attractions are clear. Such solutions — sometimes called “nudges” — can be low-cost. They also are flexible. Although most people think of school lunch as a monolithic federal program, lunchrooms across the more than 14,000 U.S. school districts vary, and most decisions about what and how students eat are made locally. Most important, implementing change doesn’t require a vote in Congress. Though Michelle Obama has made childhood obesity her signature issue, legislation that would increase funding for school lunch and boost nutrition standards remains stalled.

“These ideas offer a way to be more effective with the meals we are already serving,” said Joanne Guthrie, the USDA’s assistant deputy director for nutrition in food assistance and nutrition research. “There’s a lot of talk about putting more whole grains and dark green vegetables in the lunchroom. But it may not be the best way to improve health unless we are sure the kids will eat them.”

Wansink is a pioneer of food behavioral research. (His first book, “Mindless Eating: Why We Eat More Than We Think,” demonstrated how simple acts, such as eating from a smaller plate, can help reduce food consumption.) Wansink became interested in school food after a two-year stint in Washington working at the USDA’s Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion. The controlled environment of school cafeterias and their often-perverse incentives — at a time when one-third of American children are overweight or obese, USDA guidelines continue to mandate calorie minimums but not maximums — is a perfect research laboratory.

Take payment options. Most schools accept debit cards or PIN numbers, which help the lines move faster and make it impossible to tell which students receive a free or reduced-price lunch. In a yet-unpublished study, Wansink and Cornell lab co-director David Just found that students who pay with debit cards are more likely to buy desserts and junk food, while those who pay cash tend to choose milk, water, fruits and vegetables. The decision comes down to this: Would the student rather have a brownie or use the money later to buy music or movie tickets? “It introduces what we call a ‘pause point’ in what would otherwise be a mindless transaction,” Wansink said.

Wansink does not advocate an all-cash system. Instead, he says one solution might be to limit what students can buy with their debit cards. Parents might choose to follow recommendations, or they could set specific standards themselves: no peanuts, say, for a child with an allergy, or no desserts, period. Children who still want to buy a forbidden product would have to fork over the money themselves. Wansink calls the idea “cash for cookies.”

Researchers are also interested in the idea of incentives, many of them gobsmackingly simple. At a New York middle school, Wansink found that when the salad bar was moved to a prominent location near the cashiers, sales increased by between 200 and 300 percent.

David Just of Cornell and Joseph Price, a behavioral economist at Brigham Young University, offered rewards to students at 15 elementary schools in Utah who bought and ate fruit or vegetables with lunch. Sales jumped 40 percent where students were offered 25 cents and 22 percent where they were offered a nickel. When the reward was a raffle, delaying gratification, the impact was less dramatic.

Verbal prompts also have been found to be effective. In 2007, Marlene Schwartz, the deputy director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity at Yale University, created a study in which cafeteria workers at one school asked each student whether they would like to add fruit or fruit juice to their lunch. Ninety percent of students took the fruit or juice, and 70 percent consumed it. In the school with no verbal prompting, 60 percent of students took fruit or juice, and 40 percent consumed it.

Schwartz says she is confident that nudges can affect eating habits. But she also wants school food to become more healthful across the board. “It’s a very American thing to believe that everyone is entitled to as much choice as possible,” she said. “In reality, that’s not the best way to design a school lunch program. All the research suggests that people eat what’s in front of them, and if it’s not there, we don’t miss it.”

Ann Cooper, who calls herself the Renegade Lunch Lady and is the nutrition director for the Boulder Valley, Colo., public schools, puts it more bluntly: “I have never heard of a kid dying because they couldn’t have their chocolate milk.”

Still other researchers, such as the University of Pennsylvania’s Paul Rozin, say the problem is not what foods people consume but how much of them. Eaters have what he calls “unit bias,” which means they are inclined to eat one of something, whether it’s a package of chips, a cookie or a soda. If the package is smaller, they will eat that and be happy. They will do the same when the serving is much bigger. Schools, Rozin suggests, might order smaller packages of chips and cookies.

“We should just change the world of eating by making it a little more work to get the calorie-dense foods,” Rozin said.

Wansink agrees that such changes could help. But he’s far more fascinated by low-cost, easy tweaks at individual schools. This week, the Cornell lab is holding a training session on such initiatives for teachers, food service directors and parents from across the country. “Every lunchroom is unique,” he said. “Maybe the salad bar doesn’t have wheels. Or maybe they already have got rid of the chocolate milk. The goal is to give people the tools to innovate.”

Small changes steer kids toward smarter school lunch choices.

WASHINGTON — Maybe it should have just stuck with Snap, Crackle and Pop.

The Kellogg Company has agreed to advertising restrictions to resolve an investigation into its claims about the health benefits of its Rice Krispies cereal, the Federal Trade Commission said on Thursday.

The agreement expands on a settlement order that Kellogg agreed to last July over similar claims that another cereal, Frosted Mini-Wheats, was “clinically shown to improve kids’ attentiveness by nearly 20 percent.”

The commission acted against Kellogg as public health researchers and obesity opponents have intensified their challenges to the marketing of sugary foods.

“We expect more from a great American company than making dubious claims — not once, but twice — that its cereals improve children’s health,” Jon Leibowitz, the chairman of the F.T.C., said in a statement.

Marion Nestle, a nutrition professor at New York University, said it was unusual for the commission to act in a case involving health claims made for food products, an area traditionally handled by the Food and Drug Administration.

Last summer, Kellogg unveiled product packaging claiming that Rice Krispies “now helps support your child’s immunity” and that the cereal “has been improved to include antioxidants and nutrients that your family needs to help them stay healthy.”

In the order covering Frosted Mini-Wheats, Kellogg had agreed to stop making claims about benefits to “cognitive health, process or function provided by any cereal or any morning food or snack food” unless the claims were true and substantiated.

The new expanded order bars the company from making “claims about any health benefit of any food unless the claims are backed by scientific evidence and not misleading.”

In a statement, Kellogg, based in Battle Creek, Mich., said it had “a long history of responsible advertising,” but did not specifically address the latest accusations.

“We stand behind the validity of our product claims and research, so we agreed to an order that covers those claims,” the company said. “We believe that the revisions to the existing consent agreement satisfied any remaining concerns.”

Jennifer L. Harris, a psychologist who studies food marketing at the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale, said the agreement highlighted the need to tighten requirements so that all health-related claims on packaging are based on scientific evidence, which is not the case now.

“As parents become more health-conscious, these claims try to make high-sugar cereals healthier than they really are,” she said.

A study by the Rudd Center found that the least healthful cereals were the ones most heavily marketed to children, and that children were exposed to more advertising for highly sweetened cereals than for any other kind of packaged food.

via Kellogg to Restrict Ads to Settle U.S. Investigation – NYTimes.com.

The Guardian, Jo Tuckman, May 27, 2010

The Mexican government is to ban junk food and fry-ups in primary and secondary schools in an effort to combat one of the worst obesity problems in the world.

From the beginning of the next school year, school shops will no longer be allowed to stock fizzy drinks, sugar-stuffed fruit juices, processed snacks, or more local delights such as chilli soaked sweets. Nor will school kitchens offer traditional standards such as fried tacos.

“The kids are going to complain, of course,” the education minister Alonso Lujambio told W Radio today. “We are going to start a profound cultural change.”

The ban does not affect junk food vendors who congregate at school gates at home time, although Lujambio promised future efforts to encourage them to sell healthier products.

President Felipe Calderon launched an anti-obesity campaign in January. Public officials refer to Mexican children as the fattest in the world. While the comparative figures are questionable, one study concluded that 26% between the ages of five and 11 were overweight. The proportion of overweight adults is approaching that in the US.

The health minister Jose Angel Cordoba said consumption of fruits and vegetables in the last 15 years had fallen by 40% while consumption of sweetened drinks rose by 50% .

Dependence on junk foods is compounded by falling rates of exercise caused, in part, by chaotic urbanisation that eats up open spaces.Many Mexicans also have a genetic propensity to store fat, as well as to develop diabetes.

The stampede towards unhealthy eating is also visible in rural areas where a recent study in isolated indigenous villages found many cases of mothers who immediately bought their children junk food treats after picking up government anti-poverty hand outs.

The school ban comes after years of resistance from corporations such as Coca Cola and Pepsi. Lujambio praised their new “co-operative spirit” with reference to their diversification into healthier products, including bottled water which is hugely profitable in a country where few trust tap water. “Our hope is that children start demanding other kinds of products,” he said.

via Mexico bans junk foods in schools | World news | The Guardian.

Health ministers, alarmed at the growing number of obese children, agreed on Thursday to try to reduce children’s consumption of junk food and soft drinks by asking member states to restrict advertising and marketing.

Reuters, Stephani Nebehay, May 20, 2010

The global recommendations on marketing of foods and non-alcoholic beverages to children are guidelines to the 193 member states of the World Health Organization (WHO).

Diets containing large amounts of fat, sugar or salt contribute to chronic diseases such as diabetes, heart disease and cancers, which cause 60 percent of all deaths worldwide, the United Nations agency says.

“Childhood obesity is increasing globally now. The rate of increase in the developing world is greatest because of a rapid change in diet and physical activity patterns,” Timothy Armstrong of WHO’s department of chronic disease and health promotion told Reuters.

An estimated 42 million children under the age of five are overweight, 35 million of them in developing countries, according to the WHO. Overweight is one category below obese.

“The risks presented by unhealthy diets start in childhood and build up throughout life,” the WHO guidelines say.

Armstrong credited the United States with ringing the alarm bell. “The global attention to child obesity has changed significantly, with the new U.S. administration taking it on as a major issue.”

U.S. Surgeon-General Regina Benjamin endorsed the plan at the WHO’s annual ministerial meeting.

“The set of recommendations on marketing of food and non-alcoholic beverages to children should play a significant role in helping member states promote healthier patterns of eating as part of efforts to reduce the growing epidemic of childhood obesity,” Benjamin said in a speech.

“This is a priority for the Obama administration, in particular for the First Lady, who has raised awareness of childhood obesity and the importance of healthy eating.”

Michelle Obama this month unveiled a 70-point plan for reducing childhood obesity within a generation, including a call for marketing healthier food, but stopping short of recommending regulatory action or a federal tax on sugary sodas.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say two thirds of American adults and 15 percent of American children are overweight or obese.

“Since 1980, our obesity rates have doubled for adults and tripled for children,” Benjamin told a news briefing on Tuesday. “The problem is even worse for blacks, Hispanics and native American children.”

The WHO recommendations include limiting children’s exposure to television advertising and making schools and playgrounds free from all forms of marketing of junk food and sugary drinks.

WHO adopted a global strategy on diet and physical activity in 2004, a year after clinching a treaty controlling tobacco.

On Thursday, ministers also agreed to curb binge drinking and other growing forms of excessive alcohol use through higher taxes on alcoholic drinks and tighter marketing regulations.

WHO targets child obesity with food marketing curbs | Reuters .

Childhood obesity in the United States has tripled since 1980. A recent report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicates that 16% of children (9 million), ages 6-19 years old, are overweight or obese in the U.S. This startling statistic, when analyzed by age, reveals some very troubling trends. Over the past 30 years, obesity rates for preschool children (aged 2-5) and adolescents (aged 12-19) has doubled and for elementary children aged 6-11, have risen three-fold. These trends also have significant long-term impacts. Overweight adolescents have a 70% chance of becoming obese adults. If one or more parent is overweight or obese, that number jumps to 80%. If this trajectory is not changed, one in three children born today will develop Type 2 diabetes as well as other obesity related illnesses, and as a result, this generation of children may become the first that is less healthy than their parents.

Why has this happened? The answer lies in the American lifestyle and environment. While more than fifty genes have been identified linked to obesity, our genes have not changed over the past three decades, but our lifestyles have. The simple fact is that most Americans are consuming far too many calories and are not getting enough physical activity.

The number of calories consumed by Americans has increased over the past several decades, contributing to significant weight gain in the population. Behavioral and environmental changes in the American way of life as well as media influences and alterations in the diet of people are all factors that have contributed to the 25% increase in the average daily caloric intake (roughly 530 more calories) per person between 1970 and 2000 in the U.S. Increased calorie consumption has occurred partially as a result of the proliferation of “fast-food” eating venues as well as increases in portion sizes in the United States. Additionally, the food industry spends approximately $33 billion annually on advertising to market food products to the public. American children are especially vulnerable targets. Every year, children are exposed to over 40,000 advertisements, of which 72% are for candy, cereal, and fast foods.

The second major contributing factor to the spike in obesity rates is the decreased physical activity of Americans, in part, as a result of increased reliance upon technology such as cars, television and computers as well as reduced physical education in schools. Only 31% of children walk to school if the distance is one mile or less, and only 2.4% bicycle when the distance is less than two miles. Furthermore, children spend, on average, 7.5 hours daily using media including television, computers and video games. Recent studies have found that reducing television-viewing actually resulted in a lower body fat percentage in the children studied as a result of a combination of factors including increased participation in physical activity, decreased food intake because of reduced snacking and less exposure to food advertising.

If we don’t act now to prevent obesity, the costs associated with this condition will devastate the health of Americans, as well as our nation’s economy. In 2008, medical costs and those related to lost productivity associated with obesity were $147 billion, 9% of all medical spending. Fast forward 10 years where predictions are that 43% of the U.S. population will be obese with costs more than doubling to $344 billion or 21% of all medical expenditures.

That’s why recent actions taken by President Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama and Surgeon General Benjamin to promote health and prevent obesity are so important. A Presidential Memorandum issued in February, 2010 has mobilized all federal agencies in the fight against childhood obesity, by establishing the first ever Task Force on Childhood Obesity Prevention emphasizing “health in all policies” of government including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Department of Transportation, among others.

via Susan Blumenthal, M.D.: Weighing in on Childhood Obesity Prevention.

If there is any reason for hope among the data on national obesity rates in the U.S. (the numbers should be familiar by now: two-thirds of adults and nearly one-third of children are overweight or obese in the country), it is that they finally seem to be leveling off. According to the most recently published reports by epidemiologists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), long-term federal obesity data suggest that after decades of ballooning in size, American adults and children may have gotten about as fat as they’re ever going to get.

Of course that still means that the majority of Americans are currently overweight and at high risk of chronic health problems, such as heart disease, diabetes and certain cancers. These risks continue to propel several national campaigns aimed at preventing obesity, particularly in children, including those spearheaded by First Lady Michelle Obama and former President Bill Clinton. But some researchers say such programs, which involve school-age children, may begin too late to benefit all children.

Increasingly, evidence suggests that obesity-prevention measures need to be taken earlier, in infancy or even before birth. According to the CDC’s National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, rates of obesity in youngsters ages 2 to 5 have more than doubled since 1980, from 5.0% to 12.4%. And once a child sets down the road to an unhealthy weight, it becomes increasingly difficult for him to change course: according to one study, 80% of children who are overweight between ages 10 and 15 grow up to become obese 25-year-olds.

In November 2009, with funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) formed the Committee on Obesity Prevention Policies for Young Children, whose members will for the first time review evidence on obesity risk factors and health effects in children from birth to 5 years old and identify potential opportunities for intervention in this age group. The committee’s first report is expected in early 2011.

Early Warning Signs

In a recent study of more than 1,800 children, who were tracked from before birth to age 4, Harvard researchers identified several risk factors for obesity that began in pregnancy or early childhood. They included pre-pregnancy obesity; gestational diabetes; low birth weight and rapid weight gain in infancy; stopping breast-feeding early; introducing solid foods before 4 months; short sleep in infancy; TV in children’s bedrooms; and higher consumption of fast food and sugary beverages in childhood. In many cases, these early risk factors were more common in black or Hispanic families than in white families, regardless of income.

The findings, first published online on March 1 by the journal Pediatrics, help explain why minority children are at higher risk for obesity early on: 16.7% of Mexican-American children ages 2 to 5 are obese, compared with 14.9% of black children and 10.7% of white children, according to CDC data. The authors emphasize that obesity prevention must not only begin early, but also address cultural issues and include education targeted to specific groups. The good news, says study author Dr. Elsie Taveras, an assistant professor of pediatrics and prevention at Harvard Medical School and a member of the IOM obesity committee, is that many risk factors involve behaviors than can be modified and are not due only to socioeconomic inequalities. “As a pediatrician, it’s frustrating for me to think, How am I going to change this person’s household income? But what a hopeful message to know that it’s actually not that in many cases,” she says.

(See a slideshow about obesity rehab for teens.)

A Tipping Point for Obesity?

How early in life that prevention efforts need to target children is quickly becoming a central question to childhood-obesity research. One intriguing notion is that there exists an obesity threshold — or tipping point — in infancy, before which a chubby child may be safely steered away from a lifetime of obesity. A small study led by Dr. John Harrington, an associate professor of pediatrics at Eastern Virginia Medical School and Children’s Hospital of The King’s Daughters, analyzed childhood medical records of 111 obese children and adolescents — those with a body mass index (BMI) equal to or higher than 85% of their same-age peers — in order to determine the age at which children first became overweight

via Is There an Obesity Tipping Point in Infancy? – Overcoming Obesity – TIME.

In Norwood, Massachusetts, 14-year-old Maria Caprigno no longer wants to be one of those statistics.

Maria has been overweight since she was about 3 years old and as she got older, she just got heavier. She told CNN her eating habits were to blame.

“I’m a junk-food person and because I’m a couch potato I don’t like to get off the couch,” she said. “It’s also kind of just like my genes: Both my parents are heavy and that’s just the environment I was raised in.”

Maria said people have stared at her all her life because of her weight.

“The first thing that goes through their mind is, ‘Why is she so fat?’ And, ‘Oh my god, she’s so fat. Why doesn’t she just hop on a treadmill?’ And I think people don’t really understand that it’s not just exercising … it’s extremely hard.

See Maria growing up in pictures

“I get self-conscious,” she said. “I don’t like to go to crowded places — like if a mall’s crowded, I’ll sit in the car.”

The CDC says obesity rates for Maria’s age group, those 12 to 19 years old, have tripled since 1980. Maria pleaded with her mother to find a doctor who would perform weight-loss surgery on teenagers.

Dr. Evan Nadler, who started a program for adolescent surgery at National Children’s Hospital in Washington, said he felt “compelled” to help Maria.

“Her BMI [body mass index], which is a measurement we use to determine how obese someone is, put her in the highest risk category. Not just morbidly obese but two categories higher than that,” Nadler said. “So I felt that withholding a known therapy that works based on her age alone was really almost unethical.”

Between 2000 and 2003, some 800 teenagers went under the knife to lose weight, Nadler said.

Before she was approved for surgery, Maria had to meet with a nutritionist, a pediatric cardiologist and a psychologist. In the end, Maria was approved for an experimental procedure known as a “gastrectomy,” during which about 80 percent of the stomach is removed, including the part of the stomach that controls appetite.

Nadler said the procedure “basically restricts the amount of food that can come into the stomach at any one time and it really makes the patient have a sense of fullness or a lack of hunger.”

Maria had the “gastrectomy” last month and already has lost about 45 pounds. Today she weighs 400 pounds and is down to a size 32. Maria said she would like one day to be a size 12 but isn’t trying to reach a specific weight.

“It’s not about the numbers; I want to be at a healthy size,” she said.

“I want to be able to go into a normal store and buy something and be able to wear it. I want to be able to run. I haven’t been able to run since I was 5 years old. I want to be able wear a bathing suit without feeling embarrassed.

“I just want to be normal.”

via Obese teen credits surgery for weight loss – CNN.com.

The “tipping point” that sets children on the way to a lifetime of obesity often occurs before the age of two, say US researchers. A study of more than 100 obese children and teenagers found more than half were overweight by 24 months and 90% were overweight by the age of five.

A quarter were overweight before they were five months old, the researchers reported in Clinical Pediatrics. In the UK, around 27% of children are now overweight. The children in the study – who had an average age of 12 – were all overweight or obese by the age of 10.

Getting parents and children to change habits that have already taken hold is a monumental challenge fraught with road-blocks and disappointments

Although the reason for rapid weight gain in early life is not well understood, contributing factors are likely to be poor diet, early introduction of solid food, and not getting enough exercise, the researchers said.

They added that food preferences may be set by the age of two, so changing a child’s eating behaviour at a later stage may be difficult.

Study leader Dr John Harrington, an assistant professor at Eastern Virginia Medical School, said the results should be a “wake-up call for doctors”. He went on: “Too often, doctors wait until medical complications arise before they begin treatment.

“Getting parents and children to change habits that have already taken hold is a monumental challenge fraught with road-blocks and disappointments. ”This study indicates that we may need to discuss inappropriate weight gain early in infancy to effect meaningful changes in the current trend of obesity.”

A Department of Health spokesman said: “What happens in the first years of a baby’s life has a big effect on how healthy they are in the future. ”Despite recent encouraging statistics which show that childhood obesity may be levelling off, obesity levels are still too high and it is important we keep the momentum going.”

via BBC News – Obesity ‘often set before age of two’.

Young children who are regularly looked after by their grandparents have an increased risk of being overweight, an extensive British study has suggested.

Analysis of 12,000 three-year olds suggested the risk was 34% higher if grandparents cared for them full time. Children who went to nursery or had a childminder had no increased risk of weight problems, the International Journal of Obesity reported.

Nearly a quarter of preschool children in the UK are overweight or obese. The researchers said very little research had been done on the influence of childcare on weight. We know that obesity is a very complex issue with a wide range of factors involved

Yet childcare may have an effect on weight through diet and physical activity. The study used data from the Millennium Cohort Study, which looked at the health of children aged between nine months and three years old, who had been born in the UK between 2000 and 2001.

The results showed that those looked after by grandparents part-time had a 15% higher risk of being overweight for their age compared with those solely looked after by their parents. Those who were cared for by their grandparents full-time had a 34% increased risk of being overweight, the University College London team found.

Further analysis taking into account the child’s socio-economic background, found the increased risk was only apparent in children from the most advantaged groups – whose mothers had a managerial or professional job, had a degree, or lived with their partner.

There was also an increased risk of being overweight associated with other informal care provided by relatives or friends but only if that was full-time.

The researchers said it was well-recognised that parents value care provided by grandparents and consider it to be the best alternative to full-time parent care. They said the issue was about providing informal carers, such as grandparents, with better information and support around diet and exercise.

A recent announcement to provide grandparents with National Insurance credits for caring for grandchildren under the age of 13 years for at least 20 hours a week from 2011, “provides a potential opportunity for such health promotion”, they advised.

Study leader Professor Catherine Law said this study, which was backed by other work done in the US, did not look at why grandparent care was associated with being overweight but that indulgence of children and lack of physical exercise were two possible explanations.

“One of the ways forward would be to talk to small groups of grandparents to see the challenges they face. ”Some of the things that might help would be educating the population in general about healthy lifestyles but also things like avoiding food as a reward and suggestions for building activities into daily life.”

A Department of Health spokesman said: “We know that obesity is a very complex issue with a wide range of factors involved. ”The latest figures show that child obesity levels are the lowest reported since 2001. However, there’s no doubt that levels of obesity in this country, as in the rest of the developed world, are far too high.

“That’s why we’re investing time, energy and money into preventing people from becoming obese in the first place.”

via BBC News – Grandparents who care for children ‘boost obesity risk’.