Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families

This article discusses the issue of obesity in socioeconomically disadvantaged families in Australia. It covers the causes, effects, and recommendations for prevention, including government policies, family involvement, healthcare, and citizen empowerment. Challenges and policy development are also addressed.

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 1
Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families
Course Name
Professor
Name of the School
City
Date

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 2
Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families
The burden of chronic diseases in Australia is a result of unhealthy diets. The diseases
impose a heavy burden on the state and a huge amount goes out to cater for the victims of these
diseases. Prevention of obesity and other diet-related diseases has become a national priority.
Obesity is caused by the excess uptake of carbohydrates than the body can absorb. The excess
glucose is stored in the body awaiting assimilation. In simple terms, obesity is caused by
excessive positive energy balance. The government has made great efforts of investing in the
health cares and most importantly, the improvement of healthy diets to the citizens in the recent
years. However, regardless of the efforts, the focus of the different programs should involve
imparting knowledge to the citizens. This is because the basic problem revolves around
individual-level factors for example knowledge on nutrition, attitude, and behaviors that
influence food diet [1].
Actions and motives to address the problems of obesity to the people of Australia are
politically less sensitive and therefore it is easy to evaluate the impact of the programs. However,
the different programs tend to mostly benefit those facing physical and economic barriers, the
vulnerable communities as well as persons with minimal social barriers. The pitfall of such a
strategy is that it is not possible to address the steep social gradient as far as quality diets and
associated health outcomes are concerned [2]. This paper aims at addressing the current situation
as far as obesity and diet are concerned, articulate the need for a better public health strategy,
propose recommendations of the most preferable programs and strategies as well as discussing
how country’s policies are likely to oppose or hinder the implementation and development of the
strategies.

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 3
As far as diet quality is concerned, the health outcomes can easily be measured using
different indicators. People earning high incomes, immigrants and people from more advantaged
neighborhoods are bound to consuming on healthier and balanced diets and as a result, realize
better health outcomes. On the other hand, the aboriginals, people from minority groups,
individuals living with disabilities and those operating in remote and socioeconomically
disadvantaged regions have limited access to nutritious food and are therefore likely to become
obese [3]. To these groups of people, food is not only unaffordable but is uncertainly unavailable.
With time the individuals suffer from oral health and consequently develop other diseases like
the cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and chronic illnesses. It is evident that diet problems result
in a chain of negative outcomes to the disadvantaged groups. For this reason, there is the need
for a specially dedicated program that will act to attend to the diet/health requirements of people
from the disadvantaged groups [4]. Studies show that the aboriginals from colonial times have
been experiencing the greatest impact from diet-related illnesses, with obesity being the most
common disease. Obesity has caused a great form of health inequality in Australia and it is time
these inequalities are addressed.
The prevalence of overweight and obesity remain a health concern in the different parts
of the world. About 30% of the adolescent in Australia are obese while about 22-25% of
European adolescents are considered overweight based on the WHO standards. The same studies
indicate that more than a third of adults in these countries, and about 17% of children are obese
and at the risk of attracting chronic health problems. Obesity is directly related to socioeconomic
conditions which tend to offer a high degree of disadvantage among the resident of these places.
To make the matters even worse, studies show that supermarkets in the socioeconomically

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 4
disadvantaged regions pose a great shelf space of nutrient-poor foods as compared to
supermarkets in the in advantaged neighborhoods [5].
Adolescent, for example, needs the most prevention interventions to prevent the
development of other chronic diseases in the course of their lives. Why this paper is keen on
adolescents is because, this is the stage at which most social, biological and behavioral changes
occur. Adolescence, therefore, constitutes the building blocks for the future adult life and an
important stage for adopting a healthy lifestyle. Furthermore, the health at the youth age affects
that of the adult age. If the government and the ministry of health wish to work on the life
expectancy, then they have to focus on obesity from the very early stage [6]. Different from other
epidemics, obesity did not flash over the different nations like a wildfire but instead slowly
spread years after years making it hard to combat. It was not perceived as a national disaster at
first but with the growing consequences, most nations have flagged it as a priority. The complex
part about this epidemic is the fact that it’s intertwined into the social and environmental fabric
in our societies. It is therefore critical to initiate programs that will be dedicated to fighting this
epidemic.
As part of a recommendation, the primary ways of solving any problems start by
prevention and monitoring the causes. Indeed the wise men said that prevention is better than
cure. Such programs are up and running not only in Australia but also in other nations. However,
to realize real strides, all sectors and everybody need to align themselves with the environmental
factors that cause this disease. The government, society, businesses, individuals, families, and
non-profit making bodies need to initiate a positive change in the socioeconomic living
standards. Policies have to advocate for a healthy living by default [7].

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 5
To achieve this, the government should limit distribution of unhealthy foods to its
citizens in all parts of the country. These foods include and not limited to; refined grains,
processed meat, red meat, potatoes and sugary drinks which contains high levels of
carbohydrates. As mentioned above, this epidemic is caused by consumption of excess
carbohydrates. The world we are living in today can best be described as toxic because it makes
the selection of healthy foods a very complex option but rather very easy to choose unhealthy
foods [8]. The agricultural sector has for a long time been left out with the production of some
unhealthy food going largely unnoticed. Despite the fact that it offers a variety of products to the
consumers, the government needs to regulate or rather control what is distributed to its citizens.
On the same note, the government can as well provide supplementation to the citizens from all
corners in the country.
Secondly, families should change the key setting of early childcare. Every citizen should
aim at increasing the physical activities. The stored glucose in one’s body can be exhausted
through physical activities where individuals participate actively in weight reduction events.
These go hand in hand with limiting the time spent staring at the television and particularly by
the young generation. It is frustrating that young kids nowadays are at the risk of getting obesity
because of the lifestyle the parents are exposing them to. It hardly needs saying that parents need
to create a home where being active is a norm of the day. This includes simple activities like
walking, biking, planning for fun and outings to their children, reducing the time they spend on
screens as wells as encouraging their children to go out and play [9]. As far as foods are
concerned, parents should at all times limit the consumption of sugary and diet poor foods. In as
much as environment and socioeconomic status have a role in obesity development, families play
the primary role in enhancing a healthy living.

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 6
Healthcare units cannot be left behind when addressing obesity. Most people are the way
they are because of lack of knowledge and information. The role of doctors in influencing the
health choices to individuals cannot be overstated. With the emergence of very many forms of
medications and unregistered businesses, of importance to the casualty is clarity from the
multiple health messages that bombard them every day. To many people, it becomes hard to
know who to trust and what medication to adhere to [10]. The government working along with
the doctors have the sole responsibility of offering reliable and well-regarded source of
information to their clients, who in this case are the citizens. The source need not only be on
health information but should also consider inspirational messages to help make healthy and diet
changes. Hospitals and healthcare facilities can facilitate health changes by promoting healthy
environments to their patients. Patients trust doctors than anybody else and as such can influence
the consumption of fast foods and sugary drinks. As regards to children care, hospitals are
responsible for the prenatal and primary care and therefore offers the opportunity to educate the
mothers on the best ways to feed their kids as well as the selection of healthy foods. The
nutrition departments should at all times provide a detailed description to their client as well as
making follow-ups to assess the challenges they could be facing [11].
Last but not least, the government should empower its citizens to fight obesity. By
making them aware that being overweight is a disorder and rather not healthy, they are likely to
initiate the positive change of making healthy choices. Empowering them would also mean
taking the initiative to supply them with supplements and particularly the less advantaged
groups. Also, it should be a move by the government to create an environment that enhances and
supports physical well-being, healthy diets and an active lifestyle by the citizens. Such a move

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 7
will help reduce the risks of becoming overweight, developing obesity and consequently
developing chronic related diseases [12].
As far as the implementation of the above recommendations is concerned, challenges are
bound to emerge. Particularly because we are talking about addressing all the communities
within the country. Different communities impose boundaries on others while the same happens
from one region to the other. Political barriers are therefore likely to come forth with some
members demanding equal distribution of resources to all parts of the country regardless of the
socioeconomic backgrounds. In as much as this is fair, it is worth reevaluating the very
disadvantaged groups because most of the times, the rich are rarely in need of community-based
health programs [13].
As regards to policy development, the government is a bureaucratic institution and if care
is taken, implementation of the programs will occur in non-systematic and ad hoc ways. To
avoid such instances, the decision processes should be addressed in a more systematic way, need
to be evidenced-based as well as involving all the stakeholders [14]. This way, the policy actions
will be more comprehensive and cohesive. In empowering the citizens, every person should be
given the opportunity to acquire relevant knowledge regardless of their socioeconomic
backgrounds. Indeed, knowledge is power, and through the awareness about healthy living,
obesity is bound to be eradicated.
To help fight the political challenges, the government should establish a structure or a
framework to spearhead the implementation of the strategies. The unregistered health facilities
that are misleading the citizens ought to be closed down and this will help fight not only obesity
but also other diseases. Restricting production and distribution of unhealthy foods is likely to be
politicized as well as a hindrance to the realization of the program [15]. To curb this problem, the

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 8
government should insist on nutritional labeling on all foods and beverages in order to aid the
consumer on the contents of a specific product. Another strategy would be to impose taxes on
such foods to prevent their consumption. Additionally, there is the need for national campaigns
on the importance of healthy living and the possible dangers of consuming certain foods.
However, the fact that the government is keen on eradicating obesity gives the said
recommendations a better environment for their implementation [16].
References
1. Downs SM, Thow AM, Leeder SR. The effectiveness of policies for reducing dietary
trans fat: a systematic review of the evidence. Bulletin of the World Health Organization.
2013 Apr; 91(4):262-9h.
2. Hawkes C, Lobstein T, Polmark Consortium. Regulating the commercial promotion of
food to children: a survey of actions worldwide. International Journal of Pediatric
Obesity. 2011 Apr; 6(2):83-94.
3. Leigh A. Battlers and billionaires: The story of inequality in Australia. Black Inc.; 2013
Jun 26.
4. Bihan H, Mejean C, Castetbon K, Faure H, Ducros V, Sedeaud A, Galan P, Le Clésiau H,
Péneau S, Hercberg S. Impact of fruit and vegetable vouchers and dietary advice on fruit
and vegetable intake in a low-income population. European journal of clinical nutrition.
2012 Mar; 66(3):369.
5. Escobar MA, Veerman JL, Tollman SM, Bertram MY, Hofman KJ. Evidence that a tax
on sugar sweetened beverages reduces the obesity rate: a meta-analysis. BMC public
health. 2013 Dec; 13(1):1072.

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 9
6. Andreyeva T, Luedicke J. Federal food package revisions: effects on purchases of whole-
grain products. American journal of preventive medicine. 2013 Oct 1; 45(4):422-9.
7. Beddoes Z. Growing inequality is one of the biggest social, economic and political
challenges of our time. The Economist. 2012.
8. Campos S, Doxey J, Hammond D. Nutrition labels on pre-packaged foods: a systematic
review. Public health nutrition. 2011 Aug; 14(8):1496-506.
9. Bambra C. Health inequalities and welfare state regimes: theoretical insights on a public
health ‘puzzle’. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 2011 Jan 1: jech-2011.
10. Gleeson D, Friel S. Emerging threats to public health from regional trade agreements.
The Lancet. 2013 Apr 27; 381(9876):1507-9.
11. Haby MM, Doherty R, Welch N, Mason V. Community-based interventions for obesity
prevention: lessons learned by Australian policy-makers. BMC research notes. 2012 Dec;
5(1):20.
12. Gore D, Kothari A. Social determinants of health in Canada: Are healthy living initiatives
there yet? A policy analysis. International journal for equity in health. 2012 Dec;
11(1):41.
13. Alston JM, Mullally CC, Sumner DA, Townsend M, Vosti SA. Likely effects on obesity
from proposed changes to the US food stamp program. Food Policy. 2009 Apr 1;
34(2):176-84.
14. Sylvan L. State of preventive health 2013. Australian National Preventive Health Agency
(ANPHA). 2013; 1(1):1-230.

Obesity Prevention in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Families 10
15. Black AP, Vally H, Morris P, Daniel M, Esterman A, Karschimkus CS, O'Dea K.
Nutritional impacts of a fruit and vegetable subsidy programme for disadvantaged
Australian Aboriginal children. British Journal of Nutrition. 2013 Dec; 110(12):2309-17.
16. Galbraith‐Emami S, Lobstein T. The impact of initiatives to limit the advertising of food
and beverage products to children: a systematic review. Obesity Reviews. 2013 Dec 1;
14(12):960-74.