Fat Tax

They have been discussed, but thus far seldom implemented. I'm talking about Fat Taxes. Although there are many proposed forms, from taxing high caloric foods to high fat foods, Denmark looks to be the first to tax foods with saturated fat. Denmark taxes fatty products - Telegraph

Starting from this Saturday, Danes will pay an extra 30p on each pack of butter, 8p on a pack of crisps, and an extra 13p on a pound of mince, as a result of the tax. The tax is expected to raise about 2.2bn Danish Krone (£140m), and cut consumption of saturated fat by close to 10pc, and butter consumption by 15pc. "It's the first ever fat-tax," said Mike Rayner, Director of Oxford University's Health Promotion Research Group, who has long campaigned for taxes on unhealthy foods. "It's very interesting. We haven't had any practical examples before. Now we will be able to see the effects for real." The tax will be levied at 2.5 per Kg of saturated fat and will be levied at the point of sale from wholesalers to retailers.

Apparently Hungary already has a version of the fat tax where they tax "unhealthy" levels of certain things.

Hungary at the start of this month imposed a tax is on all packaged foods containing unhealthy levels of sugar, salt, and carbohydrates, as well as products containing more than 20 milligrams of caffeine per 100 milliliters of the product.

Nudge

Order matters. Whether it is the order on a ballot. The order of choices in a survey, or the order of options on a menu.

“Very small but cumulated decreases in food intake may be sufficient to have significant effects, even erasing obesity over a period of years” (Rozin et al., 2011). In two studies, one a lab study and the other a real-world study, we examine the effect of manipulating the position of different foods on a restaurant menu. Items placed at the beginning or the end of the list of their category options were up to twice as popular as when they were placed in the center of the list. Given this effect, placing healthier menu items at the top or bottom of item lists and less healthy ones in their center (e.g., sugared drinks vs. calorie-free drinks) should result in some increase in favor of healthier food choices. [Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 6, No. 4, June 2011, pp. 333–342]

In the case of voting:

And so it is with voting. Candidates listed first on the ballot get about two percentage points more votes on average than they would have if they had been listed later (flipping a 49 to 51 defeat into a 51 to 49 victory). In fact, in about half the races I have studied, the advantage of first place is even bigger — certainly big enough to win some elections these days.

Order bias in surveys can stem from the order of the questions in the survey or the order of the answer choice within a question. For example early questions can prejudice the answers to later questions through a priming effect. In the context of categorical answers provided, if they are inherently unordered, their order might affect respondents choice over them.

Modern software allows you to randomize both if you anticipate a large problem.


There is also an order bias when it comes to evaluating people, be it for a job or a contest. I imagine this will be tested with American Idol data at some point. But it is better to be first or last, not in the middle.

Twins

The Problem with Twin Studies.

And here is Richard A.:

The Body-Mass Index of Twins Who Have Been Reared Apart

We conclude that genetic influences on body-mass index are substantial, whereas the childhood environment has little or no influence. These findings corroborate and extend the results of earlier studies of twins and adoptees. (N Engl J Med 1990; 322:1483–7.)

IOWs, the reason why white kids of today are much fatter than white kids of the 50s and 60s is due to genetic influences and environment has little or no influence

This shows that the twin studies are flawed.

Because genetic changes are far less than can explain the changes in weight.

But remember that the changes in weight are a result of small changes in behavior 10 lbs of steady state weight comes from just 150 calories extra per day. Thats 10 minutes walking. 3 oreos, one coke? Seems small too, and maybe a small drift on a single gene can achieve that end?

For the average american male every 1 point of BMI is about 3.2 kg, or about 7 pounds. Since 1970 we have probably added about 3 points to our average BMI, but maybe less for the median. So we are trying to explain 21 lbs.

Obesity: Who Pays?

In the latest issue of JEP:

Who Pays for Obesity? Jay Bhattacharya and Neeraj Sood

Adult obesity is a growing problem. From 1962 to 2006, obesity prevalence nearly tripled to 35.1 percent of adults. The rising prevalence of obesity is not limited to a particular socioeconomic group and is not unique to the United States. Should this widespread obesity epidemic be a cause for alarm? From a personal health perspective, the answer is an emphatic "yes." But when it comes to justifications of public policy for reducing obesity, the analysis becomes more complex. A common starting point is the assertion that those who are obese impose higher health costs on the rest of the population—a statement which is then taken to justify public policy interventions. But the question of who pays for obesity is an empirical one, and it involves analysis of how obese people fare in labor markets and health insurance markets. We will argue that the existing literature on these topics suggests that obese people on average do bear the costs and benefits of their eating and exercise habits. We begin by estimating the lifetime costs of obesity. We then discuss the extent to which private health insurance pools together obese and thin, whether health insurance causes obesity, and whether being fat might actually cause positive externalities for those who are not obese. If public policy to reduce obesity is not justified on the grounds of external costs imposed on others, then the remaining potential justification would need to be on the basis of helping people to address problems of ignorance or self-control that lead to obesity. In the conclusion, we offer a few thoughts about some complexities of such a justification.

Food

Here is a tortured but interesting discussion of the USDA's new nutrition guidelines. In particular he paints a good picture of the conflicting goals of the USDA. Promote agriculture, but reduce obesity. Eat more, Weigh less? Sounds like the book Run less, Run faster. However, Eat more, Weigh less is only possible if eat more is not measured in calories, but volume. That would require a movement towards lower calorie higher volume fruits and vegetables and away from the more dense higher calories lower volume, meat, poultry and dairy.

Global Rise in Obesity

Check out this interactive chart. It plots changes in average BMI across the globe. A few things to note about changes in the average BMIs. They have been increasing almost universally, though the variance in the rates of increase are large. They have been increasing disproportionately among women*.

* After playing through the data, hover over one of the bubbles to see the "trails" of the countries. Notice that most of the trails have a slope which is steeper than the 45 degree line, ie steeper than 1.

Calories In - Calories Out

Its that simple. I once lost 10 pounds eating only McDonalds. Take that Morgan Spurlock. Here a nutrition professor tries twinkies. He seems shocked that he lost weight. Really? As a first approximation economists have known this for a long time.

Health Links

The AP covers the Health care proposals.

The food pyramid and the food subsidy pyramid.

CNN Reports

Fed Up: America's Killer Diet.

Health Care Links

1. Uninsured do not use the Emergency Department for less emergent reasons than the insured.

2. P4P is a blunt instrument. It alters behavior, but not always for the better.

3. The workout pill.

4. China watch out, here comes the FDA to the rescue.

5. Technology, cost saving or cost increasing?

Obesity Tax?

From CNN:

With obesity levels higher than in any other state except Mississippi, Alabama's insurance board chief William Ashmore and his staff of workplace wellness advocates decided it was time for a change.

"Over 10 percent of the people we screen are at risk for one of the factors we're screening for, and the vast majority had no earthly idea they were at risk," Ashmore said.

But the plan, which encourages state workers to have health screenings and to see a doctor if a problem is found, is angering some employees.

"It's penalizing people for being genetically who they are," says E-K. Daufin, a college professor at Alabama State University. "I have a lovely sexy body mass index of 44 right now," a number that would put Daufin in the group that would have to pay. That is, unless she decided to see a doctor about the issue.

I love the fact that E-K invokes the genetics defense. It brings up an important question: Are we liable for our genes? Are our parents responsible? Don't forget that genes are not exactly deterministic, environmental factors can turn them on and off.

The Upside to Higher Oil Prices

Among them is lower obesity rates.

Here are the rest.

1. The mass transit boom

2. Lower obesity rates

What’s happening: Rising gas prices and smaller belt sizes go together, according to Charles Courtemanche of Washington University in St. Louis. His research found that, for every dollar increase in the average real price of gas, overweight and obesity levels in the United States would decline by 16 percent after seven years. His study also attributes the outward expansion of American waistlines between 1979 and 2004 in part to falling prices. Similar research published in the European Journal of Public Health found that European countries with higher gasoline prices tend to have lower rates of obesity.

Why it’s happening: One word: exercise. Bike shops across the United States are reporting record sales, and Britain is even promoting a national “Bike Week” to encourage commuters to ride, not drive, to the office. Not only is two-wheeling a cheaper way to travel, it’s also healthier. Courtemanche’s results show that “the average person walks or bicycles an average of 0.5 times more per week if the price of gas rises by $1.” Another factor he identifies is that cost-conscious Americans are choosing to eat at restaurants less frequently. Indeed, a virtuous cycle could be at work: A study published in The Engineering Economist found that Americans today use nearly a billion additional gallons of gasoline each year, compared with 1960, solely because they weigh more.

3. Fewer accidents

4. Shorter commutes

5. The biofuels craze

Calories In, Calories Out

Not according to this guy. While I believe there is more to our complicated engine, in fact most of the concernes are of second order to calories in calories out. it is one of the few things that can explain the vast difference in obesity between the US, France, Belgium, Germany, etc. Which can hardly be accounted for in terms of carbohydrates, or genetics.

'The natural question is, "What regulates fat accumulation?"' he begins, swivelling gently in his office chair. 'That was actually worked out 50 years ago. We know that the hormone insulin is what puts fat in fat tissue. Raise insulin levels and you accumulate fat; lower insulin levels and you lose fat. And we secrete insulin as a response to carbohydrates in the diet.'We have screwed up the causality of obesity,' he continues. 'Fat people are predisposed to be fat. Genetics determines how we respond to the carbohydrates. Healthy people exercise more than unhealthy people, and we know that lean people exercise more than heavy people - but that doesn't tell us that exercise will make a heavy person lean or an unhealthy person healthy.'

Taubes's defence of a high-fat, low-carb regime sounds suspiciously like the Atkins diet, which proposed that a hefty slab of steak followed by cheese was less fattening than a bagel or a bowl of pasta. The Atkins diet still has many fans, but recently seemed to have been consigned to the reject bin among health warnings and heart-attack alerts (and the news that when Dr Atkins died in 2003 he was a hefty 18½ stone). But in his book Taubes puts forward a compelling case for avoiding a high-carb, low-fat diet. 'I have this problem when I talk to physicians and biologists, ' he says. ' They will say, "OK, I can see that obesity is a disorder of fat accumulation. I acknowledge insulin makes us store fat." Then I say, "Well, that implicates carbohydrates," and they go, "Oh, that's that Atkins crap. It's old news." They shut down and that's the end of the discussion.' In fact, he says there are many respected scientists who do agree with him, but who are reluctant to support him openly.

Fast Food

Fast food doesn't make you fat, its the quantity of food you eat that makes you fat. And according to this post:

Matsa and Anderson next looked at data on individual eating habits from a survey conducted between 1994 and 1996. When eating out, people reported consuming about 35 percent more calories on average than when they ate at home. But importantly, respondents reduced their caloric intake at home on days they ate out (that's not to say that people were watching their weight, since respondents who reported consuming more at home also tended to eat more when going out). Overall, eating out increased daily caloric intake by only 24 calories. The results for urban and suburban consumers were similar.

Fast food can only be blamed for increasing caloric intake at most 24 calories at day. Since 140 calories extra a day will increase your steady state weight by about 10 lbs, at most this means 1.5 lbs.

Time to look elsewhere for a scapegoat. How about the mirror?

Skin

Skin, apparently seeing it is offensive to some people. I can't say as I really get it. Marty Klein points to this absurd FCC fine:

The Federal Communications Commission’s five members—all college-educated adults over 40—continued exposing their obsession with sex and women’s bodies yesterday, fining ABC TV stations $1.4 million for showing 2.5 seconds of a woman’s bare butt.

You can view the offending butt-clip here. It’s a rear view of a woman taking off her robe to shower. A kid accidentally walks in on her, and they’re both embarrassed. She covers up her boobies and woo-woo with her hands, and the kid retreats as fast as he can. It’s charming, it’s real, and it has nothing to do with sex.

And then I hear this on the news on the way home.

Last weekend, a Beach police officer at Lynnhaven Mall gave Abercrombie & Fitch thousands - maybe millions - of dollars worth of publicity by seizing two sexy posters and slapping an obscenity charge on the hapless store manager.

The offending posters were those arty black-and-white photos for which the clothing chain is famous. One showed shirtless males, one flashing a little bit of buttocks. The other featured a female showing not quite as much as Virtus.

Abercrombie & Fitch got free advertising. Virginia Beach got a free kick in the derriere.

By Monday afternoon, after police brass learned that the obscenity story was burning up the news and the blogosphere, Beach officials acted - b ut not before readers of The Drudge Report were exposed to the lunacy and the story was one of the most popular on Yahoo.

It was decided that the obscenity charge should be dropped and the posters returned.

One detail remains. Even after the matter is dismissed by the court, an innocent store manager will have an obscenity offense on his record.

"We would take the lead in getting the courts to expunge that," Deputy police Chief Jim Cervera assured me.

Officials did the right thing in mopping up this mess. But it raises questions about the procedure. Seems to me, cops ought to consult the city or commonwealth's attorney before lodging obscenity charges against a business.

That didn't happen, Cervera said.

According to news reports, an officer had asked the store manager to remove the posters last week. When he didn't comply, the place was raided.

One question: Since when are police in charge of mall decorations?

Every cop should know it's devilishly hard to make obscenity charges stick. There's that pesky matter of the First Amendment. Unless materials show private parts, it's almost impossible to get a conviction. These photographs aren't even close.

Eat Breakfast

Another reminder of the adage that breakfast calories are near free. This is a back door verification of something that has been found in other studies.

One of the major determinants of childhood obesity is the number of meals they eat. Missing breakfast and eating fewer meals, according to the authors, “may lead to higher concentrations of 24 hour insulin, which, in turn, can lead to increased fat deposition and higher body weight.” Children of working mothers eat fewer meals and having fewer meals significantly increases obesity.

Maybe breakfast is the most important meal of the day.