Issues Surrounding Obesity as a National Agenda Identified in Healthy People 2010 - Case Study Example

Running Head: Health Campaign – Part II Healthy People and Issues on Obesity: A Public Health Concern – Part II The main objective of this paper is to further expound and proffer the relevant issues surrounding obesity, as a national agenda specifically identified in Healthy People 2010, with the following specifically defined goals, to wit: (1) to provide a summary of Part I in a single paragraph as part of the introduction to create the context for Part II; (2) to describe how the target population is defined at the national level and compare how these data may differ in the defined community, relating to the nationally identified objective specific to the issue you identified in Part I; (3) to describe the target population’s incidence, prevalence, and mortality differences between the national and state level; (4) to explain the community-based response to the issue, including community-based planning, needs assessments, and selection of locally identified objectives; (5) to compare institutional and community leadership roles in responding to these targeted health objectives; (6) to describe any economic factors and funding intervention strategies that will address the issue; and (7) to describe the role of social marketing in promoting public health related to the issue of obesity. Introduction The issue of addressing obesity has been specifically identified as a national agenda in Healthy People 2010. Its relevance and priority to focus on this chronic illness and to seek ways to address it are possible through epidemiology surveillance systems and tools implemented both in the local and state levels. Several local agencies working in conjunction with national health organizations have outlined strategies and measurements to prevent obesity in their specific areas. When collated, the data form part of the national statistics which inform the public of the updates on this chronic illness. The numerous local and state agencies within the country give authoritative data, facts, and statistics; as well as goals, projected outcomes, and recommendations to assist the public afflicted with obesity. Likewise, professionals, both in local and state agencies, are ready to assist individuals in ensuring that an effective successful long term weight loss is achieved. In this regard, this essay is written to further expound and proffer the relevant issues surrounding obesity, as a national agenda specifically identified in Healthy People 2010, with the following specifically defined goals, to wit: (1) to describe how the target population is defined at the national level and compare how these data may differ in the defined community, relating to the nationally identified objective specific to the issue on obesity identified in Part I; (2) to describe the target population’s incidence, prevalence, and mortality differences between the national and state level; (3) to explain the community-based response to the issue, including community-based planning, needs assessments, and selection of locally identified objectives; (4) to compare institutional and community leadership roles in responding to these targeted health objectives; (5) to describe any economic factors and funding intervention strategies that will address the issue; and (6) to describe the role of social marketing in promoting public health related to the issue of obesity. Target Population Defined at the National Level To reiterate, the nationally identified objectives specific to the issue of obesity are quoted, to wit: “the program goal is to prevent and control obesity and other chronic diseases through healthful eating and physical activity. The goal will be achieved through strategic public health efforts aimed at the following program objectives: (1) decrease prevalence of obesity; (2) increase physical activity; and (3) improve dietary behaviors related to population burden of obesity and chronic diseases.” (CDC, 2009, 1) In this regard, the target population defined at the national level is composed of the general public from 25 funded states: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisonsin (CDC: Funded States, 2009, 1). The CDC (2009, 1) likewise reported that the states of Hawaii and New Mexico were added in 2009 as identified target population. Based on surveillance and epidemiologic research, the CDC in partnership with local communities monitors and updates trends on obesity and determines the population requiring immediate action. The data collected by the local communities are gathered and collated and form the basis for updated figures and data on a national scale. Incidence, Prevalence and Mortality Differences According to CDC’s report on Estimated County-Level Prevalence of Diabetes and Obesity --- United States, 2007, “although existing chronic disease surveillance systems function well at the national or state level, few provide data at the local level, where many policies and interventions ultimately are implemented. To overcome this limitation, Bayesian multilevel models have been applied to reliably estimate disease prevalence at the local level.” (CDC: Estimated, 2009, 1) National findings indicated high prevalence rates for obesity “(≥30.9%) in West Virginia, the Appalachian counties of Tennessee and Kentucky, much of the Mississippi Delta, and a southern belt extending across Louisiana, Mississippi, middle Alabama, south Georgia, and the coastal regions of the Carolinas.” (CDC: Estimated, 2009, 1) Further, the report indicated that “current surveillance systems (e.g. the National Health Interview Survey and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System [BRFSS]) have characterized these conditions at the national and state level but cannot provide data at local levels, where many policies and interventions ultimately are designed and implemented.” (CDC: Estimated, 2009, 1) The deviations from results on incidence, prevalence and mortality, could be due to factors such as reporting underestimated figures (weight and height), samples generated from BRFSS were generated from those households with landlines, and factors inputted accounted only for age and neglected other factors such as income, race, and geographic area. Community Based Response to the Issue Due to the impending threats that this chronic illness gives to the population of America in general, both state and community organizations work together to achieve the specifically defined goals enumerated above. Through the combined efforts of authors Khan, Sobush, Keener, Goodman, Lowry, Kakietek, & Zaro, (2009, 1), they have identified strategies that communities can implement as a response to address obesity. Accordingly, Khan, et.al. averred that “the 24 strategies are divided into six categories: 1) strategies to promote the availability of affordable healthy food and beverages), 2) strategies to support healthy food and beverage choices, 3) a strategy to encourage breastfeeding, 4) strategies to encourage physical activity or limit sedentary activity among children and youth, 5) strategies to create safe communities that support physical activity, and 6) a strategy to encourage communities to organize for change.” (1) These community based strategies are being implemented within the jurisdiction of CDC’s Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention Project. The specific strategies that communities plan to implement as a means of addressing and preventing obesity within their localities are as follows: “1. Communities Should Increase Availability of Healthier Food and Beverage Choices in Public Service Venues; 2. Communities Should Improve Availability of Affordable Healthier Food and Beverage Choices in Public Service Venues; 3. Communities Should Improve Geographic Availability of Supermarkets in Underserved Areas; 4. Communities Should Provide Incentives to Food Retailers to Locate in and/or Offer Healthier Food and Beverage Choices in Underserved Areas; 5. Communities Should Improve Availability of Mechanisms for Purchasing Foods from Farms; 6. Communities Should Provide Incentives for the Production, Distribution, and Procurement of Foods from Local Farms; 7. Communities Should Restrict Availability of Less Healthy Foods and Beverages in Public Service Venues; 8. Communities Should Institute Smaller Portion Size Options in Public Service Venues; 9. Communities Should Limit Advertisements of Less Healthy Foods and Beverages; 10. Communities Should Discourage Consumption of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages;” among others. (Khan, et.al. 2009) Institutional and Community Leadership Roles Leadership is perceived and described as any or a combination of the following elements: an act or behavior, an effect of interaction, the exercise of influence, a form of persuasion, the art of inducing compliance, a power relation, a focus of group processes, an instrument of goal achievement, the initiation of structure, a differentiated rate, personality and its effects and an attribute of a position. (Martires, 2004. 255) As such, institutional leaders have the responsibility to accomplish the goals of their institutions – as compared to community leaders, who have greater scope of duties encompassing objectives for the benefit of the local community. As such, community leaders are expected to have greater accountability for addressing the goals enumerated by the national organizations in terms of preventing obesity and promoting a healthy lifestyle. Institutional leaders’ roles are confined to what their specific institutions’ resources can do towards the achievement of nationally defined goals on addressing obesity issues. Economic Factors and Funding Intervention Strategies Cheryl D. Hayes, the Executive Director of the Finance Project outlined five financing strategies supporting federal and community based programs to prevent obesity and to encourage a healthy lifestyle, briefly summed as follows: (1) make better use of existing resources; (2) maximize state and federal revenue; (3) create flexibility in existing funding; (4) build private and public partnerships; and (5) devise new ways for revenue streams (Finance Project, 2004, 13 – 14) The federal funding sources identified to support the strategies come in the following types: “formula/block grants which provide states with a fixed allocation of funds based on a formula prescribed by law or legislation to address particular issues or problems of national significance; entitlements guarantee that individuals who meet a program’s eligibility criteria are served; discretionary/project grants target a particular federal effort, such as obesity prevention, and are awarded for a specific period of time; and cooperative agreements are similar to project grants except that the project objectives are very prescriptive.” (Finance Project, 2004, 15 – 16). Other local communities create joint undertakings with either public or private organizations or foundations who donate certain amounts to promote healthy living and prevent obesity. Further, there are various food and nutrition service programs around the country supported by federal grants or solicit funds from private and public institutions whose mission is to support programs for the prevention of obesity. For example, Pennsylvania uses Women Infants and Children’s funds to develop a series of obesity prevention modules including “increasing physical activity/reducing TV viewing; teaching children positive attitudes toward food; choosing healthy snacks; limiting juice intake; choosing fast foods wisely; increasing fruits and vegetables; and reducing fat intake.” (Finance Project, 2004, 40) The Role of Social Marketing in Promoting Public Health in Relation to Obesity The Business Dictionary (2009) defines social marketing as an “application of commercial marketing concepts, knowledge, and techniques to non-commercial ends (such as campaigns against obesity) for the societys welfare.” According to Brown, Alfonso & Bryant (2004, 5), “social marketing is a popular and effective behavior change strategy that offers an innovative approach to tackling these problems – an approach that starts and ends with understanding the consumer.” Social marketing enhances awareness on obesity issues to the public through the utilization of basic marketing concepts such as promotions, advertisements, campaigns, among others. The 4Ps of marketing are usually the framework used as the basis for models to be imparted to the public in addressing obesity. These are effective tools to promote public awareness and encourage them to participate in national and local programs to support goals towards the prevention of obesity. By starting with understanding the profile of the consumer who are obese or who have problems on obesity, social marketing professionals would address these problems using marketing tools as their framework. The social marketing model identifies the problem, the target market, what are we asking them to do, determine the factors that must be addressed, and the effective marketing strategies for addressing the problem. (Brown, et.al. 2004, 6) Conclusion Obesity has been regarded as one of the leading health indicators that need constant surveillance, monitoring, updating of trends, and addressing through strategies and programs to minimize its incidence and prevalence. Through closely regulated health campaigns from the national and local agencies, coordinated and concerted efforts would greatly assist in the immediate accomplishment of well defined national objectives on obesity related issues. The roles of leaders in communities and institutions, as well as funding and social marketing contribute to the promotion of a healthy lifestyle and in enforcing strategies to ultimately prevent obesity. References Brown, K.M., Alfonso, M.L. & Bryant, C.A. (2004). Obesity Prevention Coordinators’ Social Marketing Guidebook. Retrieved 12 Dec. 2009. < http://health.usf.edu/NR/rdonlyres/1F6E6B64-967D-45D1-8BC1-357EC9B3BC30/24125/ObesityPreventionCoordinatorsSocialMarketingG.pdf Business Dictionary. Definition of Social Marketing. Retrieved 12 Dec. 2009. < http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/social-marketing.html> Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP). (2009). Estimated County-Level Prevalence of Diabetes and Obesity --- United States, 2007. Retrieved 12 Dec. 2009. < http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5845a2.htm?s_cid=mm5845a2_e> Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP). (2009). Funded States. Retrieved 12 Dec. 2009. < http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/stateprograms/fundedstates.html> ----------------------------. (2009). Overweight and Obesity. Retrieved 12 Dec. 2009. < http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/stateprograms/index.html> Finance Project. (2004). Financing Childhood Obesity Prevention Programs: FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES AND OTHER STRATEGIES. Retrieved 13 Dec. 2009. < http://www.financeproject.org/Publications/obesityprevention.pdf> Khan, L.K., Sobush, K., Keener, D., Goodman, K., Lowry, A., Kakietec, J. & Zaro, S. (2009). “Recommended Community Strategies and Measurements to Prevent Obesity in the United States.” CDC. MMWR Recommendations and Reports. July 24, 2009 / 58(RR07); 1-26. Print. Martires, C. (2004). Human Behavior in Organizations. National Bookstore. Philippines. Read More