Why are we fat? Discussions on the socioeconomic dimensions and responses to obesity

This paper draws together contributions to a scientific table discussion on obesity at the European Science Open Forum 2008 which took place in Barcelona, Spain. Socioeconomic dimensions of global obesity, including those factors promoting it, those surrounding the social perceptions of obesity and those related to integral public health solutions, are discussed. It argues that although scientific accounts of obesity point to large-scale changes in dietary and physical environments, media representations of obesity, which context public policy, pre-eminently follow individualistic models of explanation. While the debate at the forum brought together a diversity of views, all the contributors agreed that this was a global issue requiring an equally global response. Furthermore, an integrated ecological model of obesity proposes that to be effective, policy will need to address not only human health but also planetary health, and that therefore, public health and environmental policies coincide.

Patterns of Impact Resulting from a 'Sit Less, Move More' Web-Based Program in Sedentary Office Employees

Purpose Encouraging office workers to 'sit less and move more' encompasses two public health priorities. However, there is little evidence on the effectiveness of workplace interventions for reducing sitting, even less about the longer term effects of such interventions and still less on dual-focused interventions. This study assessed the short and mid-term impacts of a workplace web-based intervention (Walk@WorkSpain, W@WS; 2010-11) on self-reported sitting time, step counts and physical risk factors (waist circumference, BMI, blood pressure) for chronic disease. Methods Employees at six Spanish university campuses (n=264; 42 +/- 10 years; 171 female) were randomly assigned by worksite and campus to an Intervention (used W@WS; n=129; 87 female) or a Comparison group (maintained normal behavior; n=135; 84 female). This phased, 19-week program aimed to decrease occupational sitting time through increased incidental movement and short walks. A linear mixed model assessed changes in outcome measures between the baseline, ramping (8 weeks), maintenance (11 weeks) and follow-up (two months) phases for Intervention versus Comparison groups. Results A significant 2 (group) x 2 (program phases) interaction was found for self-reported occupational sitting (F[3]=7.97, p=0.046), daily step counts (F[3]=15.68, p=0.0013) and waist circumference (F[3]=11.67, p=0.0086). The Intervention group decreased minutes of daily occupational sitting while also increasing step counts from baseline (446 +/- 126; 8,862 +/- 2,475) through ramping (+425 +/- 120; 9,345 +/- 2,435), maintenance (+422 +/- 123; 9,638 +/- 3,131) and follow-up (+414 +/- 129; 9,786 +/- 3,205). In the Comparison group, compared to baseline (404 +/- 106), sitting time remained unchanged through ramping and maintenance, but decreased at follow-up (-388 +/- 120), while step counts diminished across all phases. The Intervention group significantly reduced waist circumference by 2.1cms from baseline to follow-up while the Comparison group reduced waist circumference by 1.3cms over the same period. Conclusions W@WSis a feasible and effective evidence-based intervention that can be successfully deployed with sedentary employees to elicit sustained changes on "sitting less and moving more".