Home | Childhood Obesity News

WHO’s New Global Guideline for Healthier School Meals

Tatyana Meshcheryakova February 4, 2026 No Comments

Children spend a large portion of their day at school — learning, eating, growing, and forming lifelong habits. That’s why what they eat in school isn’t just fuel for the day; it’s an investment in future health. The World Health Organization (WHO) recently released a landmark global guideline recommending evidence-based policies to create healthier school food environments, with the goal of shaping healthier generations who thrive both physically and academically.

As we’ve written over and over, across the world, children are facing a “double burden” of malnutrition: rising rates of overweight and obesity, alongside persistent undernutrition. In 2025, an estimated 188 million school-aged children and adolescents — about 1 in 10 — were living with obesity, a figure that now surpasses the number of children who are underweight globally. These trends have long-term implications, increasing the risk of chronic diseases like diabetes and heart disease later in life.

Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General, emphasizes the stakes:

The food children eat at school, and the environments that shape what they eat, can have a profound impact on their learning, and lifelong consequences for their health and well-being.

Healthy eating habits begin early — and schools are uniquely positioned to foster them. With an estimated 466 million children receiving school meals globally, schools influence not just nutrition intake but also social norms around food. Yet, until now, there has been limited global guidance on how to ensure these meals truly support healthy diets.

WHO’s whole-school approach

For the first time, the WHO is urging countries to adopt a whole-school approach, ensuring that all foods and beverages provided in schools and available throughout the broader school food environment are nutritious and support healthy dietary habits.

The new guideline highlights actionable recommendations:

Establish Healthy Food Standards (Strong Recommendation). Schools should set standards or rules that increase the availability, purchase, and consumption of healthy foods and beverages, such as fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and water. Unhealthy options high in sugar, salt, and unhealthy fats would be limited.

Use “Nudging” Strategies (Conditional Recommendation). Encourage healthier choices through subtle changes like adjusting the placement and presentation of foods (e.g., putting fruit at eye level) and changing pricing to make healthier options more attractive. These recommendations tap into behavior science to make the healthy choice the easy choice.

Policy is only the first step

Guidelines and standards are essential, but policies must be backed by effective monitoring and enforcement. According to the WHO Global database on the Implementation of Food and Nutrition Action (GIFNA), as of October 2025, 104 member states had policies on healthy school food, and nearly three-quarters included mandatory criteria on school food composition. Only 48 countries had policies restricting the marketing of foods high in sugar, salt, or unhealthy fats.

To develop this guideline, the WHO brought together international experts from diverse disciplines through a transparent, evidence-based process. It now serves as a cornerstone for WHO’s broader initiatives, including efforts to stop the global rise in obesity and promote nutrition-friendly schools. The guideline is designed to be flexible: useful for national ministries of health and education, as well as subnational and city authorities responsible for school food programs.

According to the WHO, it is committed to helping countries translate these recommendations into real change. This includes technical assistance, knowledge-sharing, and collaborations with governments and partners.

To mark the launch, the WHO hosted a global webinar last January, bringing together stakeholders to discuss how to put the guideline into action (you can watch the recording here).

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “WHO urges schools worldwide to promote healthy eating for children,” WHO.com, 1/27/26
Source: “From lunch tray to lifelong health: WHO sets global standards for school meals,” UN.org, 1/27/26
Image by Antoni Shkraba Studio/Pexels

Parents As Overweight Awareness Monitors

Pat Hartman February 3, 2026 No Comments

Yes, of course parents are legitimate observers and recorders of their offsprings’ weight. However, this does not give them license to make a child’s life miserable by harping on the subject, or to blab about it to friends or strangers.

In a best-case scenario, a mom or dad is reasonable, tactful, sensitive, and several other adjectives that imply sanity, about how and when to weigh the child with a problem. If dangerous amounts of lard are obviously accumulating, what kind of reminder might be effective, and not make matters worse? It would be smart to seek advice from a qualified pro.

For instance, controversy might be avoided by designating a certain day once a month to check in with the scale and make a note on a chart. Although a parent has the authority to be an Overweight Awareness Monitor, and maybe even the ability to intervene reasonably, this is by no means an opportunity for sarcasm, shaming, threats, or any other brand of intimidation.

Parents need to have their stuff together

Just a few years back in Britain, a long-term study of 19,000 families concentrated on the emotional stability of new parents. The mothers and fathers of babies both have concerns, though not necessarily the same ones. The dads might worry more about making enough money to feed everybody and keep a roof over their heads. The moms might be more anxious about the new baby’s birth weight and their ability to figure out how to breastfeed successfully.

In any case, if parents feel shaky about their social, mental health, and economic situations, that can spell difficulty for the new family member. Researchers noticed a subtle difference between dads and moms:

The analysis found that fathers’ distress reported in infancy, but not during toddlerhood, was associated with steeper increases in BMI and excess body fat for both girls and boys. However, mothers’ distress reported in both infancy and toddlerhood was associated with steeper increases in BMI and excess body fat in only girls.

Every time a new subtlety or wrinkle is found in an aspect of parenting that is under the microscope, legions of graduate students rediscover the passion that brought them to the field in the first place, and renewed impetus to figure out exactly what is going on. Here is another quotation regarding this same University College London study, and others like it:

Distress experienced by mothers and fathers in the first few years of a child’s life, particularly during infancy, is linked with accelerated weight and excess fat gain from age 5 to 14 years, according to new research being presented at the European Congress on Obesity (ECO) held online this year.

Next steps

When a child is on the verge of sliding over into the overweight segment of the population, it seems obvious that their parents ought to take an active part in keeping track of the stats, and to qualify themselves as capable of determining when some sort of professional intervention appears to be called for. But as we have seen, their best intentions and efforts may be impeded by problems they could use knowledgeable health with. And sometimes…

There are two words that experts especially regret having to apply to parents: “neglectful” and “authoritarian” — otherwise known as “not caring” and “caring too much” — because in either case, their children just might turn out overweight. And while these parenting styles may seem at first glance to be opposites, they have been determined by highly placed academics to spring from the same source: a lack of emotional warmth.

This was learned by observing the families of 10,000 children. Usually, such reluctance to accept interference is founded in a very basic belief that goes something like,

This is how my parents raised me, and I turned out fine.

Parents can be so defensive that many professionals, even those from such prestigious institutions as Imperial College’s Centre for Health Economics & Policy Innovation, tend to regard the subject as taboo. Naturally, Childhood Obesity News is eager to take a closer look at this thorny problem.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “Emotional distress in fathers and mothers linked to heightened risk of overweight in their children,” 05/19/21, EurekAlert.org
Source: “Children whose parents lack warmth more likely to grow up obese, study finds,” TheGuardian.com, 10/18/22
Image by flaviopantera7/Pixabay

Overweight Awareness Monitors

Pat Hartman January 29, 2026 No Comments

Anyone whose idea of a good time is to catalog the cost (to the individual and to society as a whole) of obesity will never run out of opportunities for that sort of fun. By the time you are done looking at one aspect, another facet of the overall emergency that you just summed up a few months ago will be ripe for reevaluation and rife with news that is — surprise! — mostly discouraging.

There is, on the part of society as a whole, an attitude problem that manifests in public places. It’s as if certain folks believe they have been designated as Overweight Awareness Monitors. At a fraught moment in the past, this individual was mystically appointed (or anointed) by some unseen power to

1. Be aware of the body weight of everyone they encounter
2. Fulfill the duty of making that person aware of their disapproving reaction

Types of monitors

Some monitors operate from an advanced level of intellectual awareness. The information they really want to convey (“You are too fat”) might be snuck into conversation disguised as concern about the SNAP program, which is unable to feed as many people as need feeding. The Overweight Awareness Monitor who operates from this sophisticated level will do something like point out a news article stating that in the USA, 40% of adults and 21% of children are obese. Making a connection between those informational items is somehow more important than the undernourished kids.

For instance, the O.A. Monitor might mention that while it is sad that children go hungry, an annual study showed disturbing facts — like one quoted in 2023 regarding how almost a quarter of SNAP funds were being spent on “sugary drinks, desserts, salty snacks, candy, and sugar.”

To be fair, at the time, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s advisory Food Pyramid, which is supposed to be a desirable example, “featured six to 11 servings of bread, cereal, rice, and pasta, but just a small two to three servings of meat, fish, beans, eggs, and nuts.” So maybe the blame should have been spread around a bit.

At any rate, starting this year, several states have made a whole slew of rules about what can and cannot be purchased with these funds. Then every once in a while, the zealous O.A. Monitor is lucky enough to grab onto a really alarming headline, like one containing the words “trillion dollar disease” that graced a Global Pediatrics article a couple of years back. That piece of journalism included the words “very expensive morbidity,” and the fact that it is often paired with malnutrition not only among the same populations but within the same individuals, and the dire statistical warning that “up to 82% of obese adolescents become obese adults.”

Advanced level monitors

The dedicated O.A. Monitor enjoys sharing such facts with people whose waistlines are expanding, and also gets a kick out of bringing parents of teenagers up to date with the latest information on adolescent obesity trends. A major 2024 report from WHO/Europe revealed “alarming disparities” in the health of teens from 44 surveyed countries. Fewer than half of them ate fruits or vegetables daily, while one in four self-reported “daily consumption of sweets or chocolate.” While boys counted for a lot of the statistics, girls seemed absolutely devoted to devouring more sugary foods and soft drinks than boys.

The examples of literature to draw from are multitudinous, and passing along such sad information is one of the ways that obesity-shaming busybodies have of reminding friends, relatives, and associates that their burgeoning waistlines are being noticed.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “The Hidden Cost of Our Huge Problem with Obesity,” CATO.org, 07/03/23
Source: “Food Stamps Will Stop Covering Soda, Chips and Candy in 18 States by 2026,” WhenInYourState.com, 12/13/25
Source: “Obesity a triple pandemic, the trillion dollar disease: Prevention is imperative,” Global Pediatrics, March 2024
Image by poli_/Pixabay

Family Values and Trust Shape Decisions About GLP-1 Meds for Kids

Tatyana Meshcheryakova January 28, 2026 No Comments

When it comes to treating childhood obesity, medical decisions rarely happen in a vacuum. For families facing food insecurity, choices about care are shaped not just by medical advice, but by lived experience, cultural values, and trust in the healthcare system.

A recent study published in JAMA Network Open explored how caregivers make decisions about using GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), a newer class of medications increasingly discussed as a treatment option for pediatric obesity. Researchers found that caregiver experiences, trust, and family values play a central role in whether medication is considered, accepted, or declined.

As outlined by Contemporary Pediatrics, their findings point to three key areas that matter most in shared decision-making: Understanding barriers to lifestyle change, building trust and knowledge about treatment options, and aligning care with family values.

Why this study matters

Lifestyle changes, such as healthier eating and increased physical activity, have long been the first recommendation for managing childhood obesity. But for many families, especially those with limited access to affordable, healthy foods, these changes can be difficult to maintain and may not lead to significant weight improvement.

GLP-1 medications have gained attention as a possible tool to help bridge that gap. These medications work by affecting appetite and blood sugar regulation, and they’ve shown promise in supporting weight loss. However, families experiencing food insecurity may have unique concerns, priorities, and barriers that influence whether this option feels right.

As the study authors noted:

As new pediatric clinical practices surrounding the use of GLP-1 RAs take shape, it is essential to incorporate the voices of families affected by food insecurity.

How the study was conducted

Researchers interviewed 20 caregivers of children with obesity who were also at moderate to high risk for household food insecurity. All children had already participated in at least two months of physician-recommended dietary changes.

The interviews lasted about 45 minutes and explored knowledge about treatment options, access to healthy foods, motivation and challenges related to lifestyle change, and beliefs about medication use in children.

Most caregivers faced significant structural challenges:

90% were born outside the U.S.
75% used a language other than English for medical care
70% had low health literacy
80% of children were insured through Medicaid

These factors are important because they influence how medical information is received, understood, and trusted.

Three themes that shaped decisions

One was past experiences with lifestyle changes. Caregivers who saw noticeable improvements from dietary and activity changes often felt proud and motivated to continue without medication. For these families, lifestyle change felt like the “right” and most natural path.

But for others, months — or even years — of effort brought little visible progress. In those cases, GLP-1 medications seemed like a hopeful next step.

At the same time, many caregivers described serious barriers to maintaining healthy routines, including:

High cost of fresh foods
Time-intensive meal planning
Emotional stress around food and weight
Family conflict and pressure during mealtimes

Some caregivers described using emotional appeals or strict approaches to motivate their children, which sometimes increased stress across the household.

Trust — or lack of it — also played a huge role. Many caregivers had safety concerns about GLP-1 medications, especially because they are relatively new and frequently discussed in the media. Questions about long-term effects and side effects were common.

Personal experiences mattered as well. One caregiver shared hesitancy due to a past negative experience with weight-related medication. Others were more open if they had seen medications help friends or family members. Trust was mainly shaped by personal or secondhand experiences, cultural beliefs about medication use in children, and clarity (or confusion) in how doctors explained options.

The third item was beliefs about what “good care” looked like. Caregivers differed in how they defined the best way to care for their child. Some prioritized physical health above all, believing lifestyle change was the most responsible and safest path. For them, medication felt like a last resort.

Others placed strong emphasis on their child’s emotional well-being and the overall stress on the family. These caregivers sometimes saw medication as a way to reduce conflict around food, ease emotional strain, and relieve financial and time pressures.

What this means for families and providers

The study highlights that decisions about GLP-1 medications aren’t just medical — they’re deeply personal.

Researchers concluded:

A shared decision-making model and clinical education tools that honor these complexities are essential for delivering care that is both effective and equitable and should be the focus of future research.

For healthcare providers, this means:

Taking time to understand a family’s lived experience
Asking about food access and daily challenges
Exploring concerns about medication openly
Respecting cultural and personal values

For families, it’s a reminder that:

It’s okay to ask questions about safety and long-term effects
Your experiences and priorities matter in treatment decisions
There is no one-size-fits-all answer

So, the study clearly shows that for children with obesity in families facing food insecurity, treatment decisions are shaped by far more than a prescription pad. Past struggles, financial realities, emotional stress, cultural beliefs, and trust in medicine all come into play.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “Themes identified for using GLP-1 RAs to manage obesity in food-insecure children,” Contemporary Pediatrics, 1/21/26
Source: “Perceptions of GLP-1 RA Use for Children With Obesity Among Caregivers With Food Insecurity,” JAMA Network, 1/7/26
Source: “We Need a New Approach to Prevent Obesity in Low-Income Minority Populations,” Pediatrics, 6/1/19
Image by Safari Consoler/Pexels

Obesity Costs Come in Many Guises

Pat Hartman January 27, 2026 No Comments

One aspect of human life that seems stubbornly unchangeable is the close relationship between obesity and poverty. Also, in some countries, people from certain racial backgrounds tend to be more financially stressed, so minority status becomes an element of the equation. Of course, other factors might intervene too, like the COVID-19 pandemic, which was also inextricably linked to race, poverty, and obesity.

Describing the relationship between obesity and the pandemic, the authors of a scholarly paper specified these as the most common (but not only) forces tending to increase obesity during the period:

[…] sociodemographic factors, physical inactivity, sedentary lifestyles, reduced sleep quality, increased technology utilization, harmful substance abuse, unhealthy food consumption, and psychological problems…

Since then, numerous studies in several countries have made a stab at reckoning the collective weight gain of their respective populations during those years. “Lingering” is a poetic word, but it loses all its charm when applied to the retroactive effects of a worldwide health crisis. The results are still with us, due to a chillingly basic fact: Once it moves into a child’s body, unpacks, redecorates, and arranges the furniture, obesity is a very difficult tenant to evict.

Full employment for math nerds

The globe currently supports a dismaying number of children and teens who, in an alternative universe timeline, would have weighed 70 pounds today but actually weigh 95, and equally impressive hordes of others who in that imaginary universe would have weighed 120, but actually clock in at 145.

If they haven’t already done so, creative statisticians could make a pretty close guess regarding the total amount of weight collectively gained by humans in various demographic categories. We can only hope they will also devote significant energy to figuring out how to reverse the trend.

Hot off the presses

A brand new cross-sectional, multi-site study of Long COVID (also known as LC) shows that it prefers to strike obese rather than healthy-weight individuals. Whether or not their disease lasts for an abnormal length of time, obese patients “tend to suffer worse physical and mental health outcomes.” Many in the medical field are convinced that there will be another pandemic, and are eager to prepare, but are not finding the backup this would require from governmental and other institutions.

The eternal two-way street

Even five years ago, an association was being noticed between the pandemic and the amount of obesity, and since then, there has been plenty of opportunity for researchers to make meaningful connections. About 70% of Americans were overweight or obese then, and the Mayo Clinic’s Dr. Donald Hensrud told the press,

During the pandemic, fitness centers have been shut down, our activity may be decreasing, or we may be working from home and not moving as much. In addition, our diet has changed. We may be eating more comfort food or eating what happens to be around the house rather than getting something that is healthier.

Poverty and/or obesity led to more COVID-19 cases, which then contributed to more obesity, which was difficult for families to manage. Massive disruption of the national economy forced many working parents to change jobs, work fewer hours, pay more for child care, or in some other way have their financial situation negatively impacted. When life becomes chaotic, there is not only less money to spend, but people get careless and neglect little details like making an effort to “eat healthy.”

An article by Jeff Krasno, published only a few days ago, noted that COVID-19 has been listed as the cause of death for more than 1.2 million Americans, but there are solid reasons to believe that number should really be much higher. He adds,

Obesity, vaccination, and COVID mortality are not independent variables. They’re downstream of deeper forces, including long-standing health behaviors, trust in institutions, access to healthcare, socioeconomic stress, political identity, and media ecosystems…

How did a wealthy nation with extraordinary medical resources end up in such a sorry state?

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on obesity and its risk factors: a systematic review,” NIH.gov, May 2023
Source: “Obesity and Long COVID: intersecting epidemics?,” Springer.com, 01/22/26
Source: “How the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted issues of obesity,” MayoClinic.org, 01/19/21
Source: “The Political Fault Line: Politics, Obesity, & COVID,” Substack.com, 01/24/26
Image by jarmoluk/Pixabay

Global Damage and Expense

Pat Hartman January 22, 2026 No Comments

Over much of the planet, a large part of the economy is devoted to producing things called “food,” which, as Childhood Obesity News never tires of pointing out, would baffle interplanetary visitors. The explorers would be tapping on their translation devices, which would seem to be out of order, and sending them back to the technicians for recalibration.

The Earthlings seem to be pretty smart about some matters, but how do so many substances become itemized as “food” that not only lack any trace of nutritional value, but actually contain ingredients that do measurable harm?

Alien historians might search through the records of earlier times on Earth, when humans lived in small and isolated groups. In those simpler, more innocent days, in diverse eras and locations, many societies agreed on certain basic tenets. It is quite likely that a stranger wandering into the settlement would be offered, at the very least, water — and probably food, too.

Later, there would be time for the inhabitants and the newcomers to discover their points of philosophical disagreement and start to become suspicious of each other. Yet and still, an initial sharing of sustenance was very likely to be the first move.

Progress?

As society became more crowded and complicated, food would play a major role in gatherings and celebrations of every kind. For a joyous occasion like a wedding, immense efforts would be made to not only serve up nutritious substances, but to commemorate these significant occasions by offering special treats. The sharing of rare delicacies has become a matter of pride, and often of barely-concealed competitiveness, as hosts vie to be admired for their exceptional generosity.

Of course, there are still many places where food is scarce and limited to a few basic items, so that today’s menu of rice and fish will tomorrow be replaced by fish and rice. But marketing embraces almost the entire globe to the point where even the most remote locations receive shipments of modern, processed stuff called “food,” available to anyone who can afford it. And yet, basic nutrition is affected not positively, but negatively.

Those curious alien scientists would be hard-pressed to find a human population anywhere on Earth not affected by phthalates, which get into food by way of packaging, and have some connection with obesity, in addition to numerous other known and unknown negative effects on the human system.

An ugly example

Then, there is Bisphenol A (BPA for short), which also migrates from food packaging into the consumers of that food, and appears to be connected with not only obesity but several other undesirable consequences in the human body. For instance, as previously mentioned, when a high level of it shows up in the urine of a preteen girl, she is twice as likely to be obese as her friend whose lab results indicate a lower amount of it.

In the USA, the stuff was banned a while back from being used in any object that a baby might make oral contact with. But it is in everything, including bottles and the linings of metal cans that food is packaged in. More recently, it was found to be a frequent invader of the gut microbiome, a realm which we earnestly do not want invaded by nasty chemicals. No one who has been paying attention is surprised to find that its presence in that inner sanctum is associated with childhood obesity.

But although linkage has been noted over and over again by various researchers in different countries, apparently it is difficult to make the case for causation. So, for the time being, we must wait patiently to learn the amount of physical and financial havoc it has caused, specifically in the child and adult obesity realms.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Image by bahonya/Pixabay

Inside UCLA’s Fit for Health Program

Tatyana Meshcheryakova January 21, 2026 No Comments

As we’ve written time and time again, childhood obesity is a complex condition shaped by far more than diet and exercise alone. At UCLA Health’s Fit for Health Program, clinicians are embracing a comprehensive model that treats obesity as a medical, emotional and social condition — one that requires coordinated, compassionate care. Let’s take a quick look at what works in the current environment and what the challenges are.

Founded nearly 15 years ago by Dr. Wendelin Slusser, a UCLA Health physician specializing in clinical care, medical training and obesity research, the program has long focused on improving outcomes for children and adolescents. Since 2024, however, the clinic has expanded its reach and scope under new leadership.

Dr. Vibha Singhal, who took over the program last year, said she broadened its approach by integrating new therapies, obesity medications and bariatric surgeries related to weight loss. Beyond treatment, the clinic also serves as a learning environment, with undergraduates, medical students, residents, and fellows contributing to patient care.

Research is a central pillar of the program’s mission, Dr. Singhal said, noting:

I have my own lab where we have studies primarily around obesity and obesity treatments… Addressing food insecurity, how we can build that into our program, evaluating for potential eating disorders, evaluating the newer medications and the risks of infertility effects on the next generation.

Addressing food insecurity and eating disorders

For many families, access to healthy food remains a barrier to care. The program currently uses a small food bank grant to help clinicians address food insecurity among patients, Dr. Singhal said.

Eating disorders are another common challenge. Many patients struggle with binge eating and related conditions, according to Dr. Singhal. To meet these needs, the clinic relies on a multidisciplinary care team that includes psychologists, nutritionists and social workers who collaborate closely.

Dr. Natacha Emerson, the program’s psychologist, said:

We are sort of a one-stop shop… Unlike going to a doctor’s visit, where they just refer you to a psychologist or a dietitian, all three of those providers are actively working together to focus on shared goals to make sure that we are helping patients the way that they want to be helped.

Rapid growth brings new challenges

The demand for this integrated model of care has surged. Since October 2024, the clinic’s patient volume has doubled, Dr. Singhal said. To keep up, the program added two new physicians and expanded availability for nutritionists and psychologists.

Still, growth has brought strain. Dr. Singhal said:

We doubled the volume, but we didn’t double all our resources… It adds a lot of work on the team… It’s getting hard to keep up.

Insurance coverage remains a significant hurdle as well. Many obesity treatments are not covered, and Dr. Singhal said she anticipates further medication cuts at both the state and federal levels starting in January.

Serving vulnerable families

The clinic often serves families who are underinsured or undocumented, which can make accessing care difficult. Dr. Emerson noted that fear and uncertainty around immigration status can discourage families from seeking medical help. She said:

In the last year, we have had a lot of our patients who want to be healthier and have healthier bodies, but some of our families also have parents that are undocumented, and that has made seeking health care scary in this certain climate.

Telehealth has helped bridge that gap. According to Dr. Singhal, the clinic’s no-show rate has dropped as families increasingly return for care, including through video visits. Dr. Emerson offered:

Thankfully, we’re able to keep patients via video visit, which is sometimes a good way to make people feel more secure, especially when there are transportation and other barriers to getting to the clinic.

Integrating mental and physical health

A defining feature of the Fit for Health Program is its commitment to addressing mental health alongside physical health. Dr. Emerson said part of her role is identifying mental illnesses that may be influencing a child’s weight, allowing the team to intervene early and appropriately.

Dr. Singhal also shared a long-term vision for the clinic: creating a structured program specifically for patients with developmental disabilities, including autism, Down syndrome and genetic disorders.

Meanwhile, the program’s social worker, Bobby Verdugo, leads a mindfulness initiative that helps families navigate complex social and behavioral challenges. He said:

We tailor the (mindfulness) curriculum to the family… Some families may want to work a lot on portions, some want to work more on what they’re eating too fast and others on physical activity. We really adjust it to the family and I think that’s pretty unique — the ability to provide this intervention, to customize it to the family and then to continue to work with families in this kind of holistic, multidisciplinary way.

Redefining success beyond the scale

For many young patients, emotional well-being is just as important as physical health. Dr. Emerson said children often arrive with negative body image and pressure to be thinner rather than healthier — an expectation the clinic works to gently reshape.

At UCLA’s Fit for Health Program, progress is measured not just in pounds lost, but in confidence gained, barriers reduced and families supported, which we believe is an approach that reflects the true complexity of childhood obesity.

Speaking of UCLA…

Dr. Pretlow, the creator of BrainWeighve, a weight loss app for overweight and obese children, is conducting a BrainWeighve clinical trial at UCLA. The trial has expanded to include 10 subjects currently taking GLP-1 medications. This addition aims to help researchers understand how lifestyle and behavioral tools enhance medication or possibly even reduce the need for medication over time.

The program is designed for obese teens and uses a self-directed, physician-supervised approach to tackle overeating one “problem food” at a time. By helping participants rechannel emotional urges into healthier coping mechanisms, BrainWeighve aims to support sustainable weight loss — and reduce dependence on willpower alone.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “UCLA Fit for Health Program adopts holistic approach to childhood obesity,” Daily Bruin, 1/14/25
Source: “Fit for Health Program,” UCLA.org, undated
Image by Los Muertos Crew/Pexels

More on Obesity’s Price Tag

Pat Hartman January 20, 2026 No Comments

There are plenty of places to buy food, ranging from a little taco-vending operation on wheels to a machine in the courthouse basement, to some enormous marketplace as big as an entire town might be in a different geographical area.

In much of America, the consumption of all this food is not just a thing we must do to support life, but an entertainment to alleviate boredom; a perverse sport; a status symbol; a “branding” activity meant to convey to onlookers some essential fact about oneself; an emotional bandage; a defiant gesture aimed at the parents and other authority figures who no longer hold power over us…

This list could be greatly expanded. Humans have a lot of reasons for doing a lot of things, including recreational eating, an activity that has, essentially, nothing to do with nourishment to keep the body functioning.

Through other eyes

Confronted with common grocery store items, visiting space aliens would be hard-pressed to identify many of them as having any connection with the function of supporting life. In fact, a scholar from another planet might be totally mystified by some products that are categorized as food. Even a starving human from a different sector of Earth might bypass certain alleged foodstuffs because they are not recognized as edible.

Sure, trading money for things is the entire basis of any national economy. People need to buy commodities and services. Companies need to sell them because otherwise, they must lay off all their workers, which creates another subgroup of Americans who can’t afford to buy anything. All of this is just the way things are supposed to work, under the system we have agreed to live by.

A slight problem

But how useful is a functioning system of commerce, when enormous fortunes are spent on things that make people unhealthy, and on patching up the damage done by those unwise purchases? Where wide varieties of food products are concerned, their main common characteristic is the tendency to cause obesity.

By strange coincidence, obesity is the very thing that keeps other companies in business. To those interplanetary visitors, humans would appear to be cartoon figures, handing out money from one pocket to buy things that make them fat, and dispensing money from another pocket to pay for substances, objects, and activities that they hope will prevent them from being fat.

Speaking of cartoons…

Research has shown statistically several ways in which obesity and poverty are linked. Remember that study released a few years back, whose headline proclaimed that “obesity is linked to higher rates of bankruptcy”?

How crazy is that? Sure, let the scholars relate going legally broke to alcoholism or drug addiction. That concept makes sense, not to mention a reasonable basis for the plot of the occasional dramatic film. Those are tragedies we can wrap our heads around. But for an individual or a family to face ruin on account of being too fat? Could that plot line support anything other than a comedy?

Economics professor Masanori Kuroki wrote,

Given the extent of the obesity epidemic facing the United States, the economic costs of obesity have been one of the most important topics in public health.

In 2008, the Centers for Disease Control reckoned that yearly American obesity-related medical costs added up to an estimated $147 billion (or around 220 billion today). According to an associated statistic, “There is a 70 percent chance that children who experience obesity will remain overweight or obese in adulthood.”

Another level

An additional factor here is that a whole major subcategory of philosophy is devoted to the error of conflating correlation with causation. Obviously, in this instance, any attempt to grasp the entire subject could easily lead to getting bogged down for a while.

We are taught that in the past, and even today in some places, to have a fat wife would earn a man status and respect, because her girth demonstrates to the world that he can afford to feed her above sustenance level. Another aspect could also foster a lengthy digression: the demonstrable fact that poverty and obesity are almost inevitably linked, and the price tag is enormous.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “Obesity is linked to higher rates of bankruptcy, according to a new study,” TheLadders.com, 09/13/20
Image by agence-jaweb/Pixabay

Obesity’s Price Tag

Pat Hartman January 15, 2026 No Comments

These items relate to a subject often mentioned here: the societal cost of obesity. Every so often, along comes a news story that points out another example of how the system does not work as well as our society actually needs for it to work.

For instance, within the past year, India has been mentioned as a place where bariatric surgery has really caught on in a big way. Leaving all other factors aside for the sake of discussion, it is possible to question the benefit to society as a whole. It can’t be considered good for a society to have a large proportion of its members absorbed by the overwhelmingly intense preparation agenda for this sort of operation.

However much of a blessing it may be in a particular case, and in the long run, bariatric surgery is a very life-consuming project in terms of burning up time, energy, goodwill, money, and other resources.

But wait, there is more

Then, after the actual procedure, there is a similarly unproductive spell, as the patient is, to a greater or lesser degree, disabled for a considerable period of time. Even barring any unexpected side effects, there are new routines to learn and new norms to become accustomed to, on every side.

There will be medical self-care chores, and record-keeping, and check-up visits. Maybe time will be set aside for meditation. The patient actively participating in their recovery is unable to do very much else, at least for a while, if the newly required lifestyle is to “stick.”

To complete their usual work, or family caregiving, or volunteer activities in the community — effective participation in even one of those categories could prove to be too much to expect, and for quite some time. Somewhere along the line, a price is extracted from — and paid by — society as a whole.

A bit of history

By 2018, 60% of Americans — in other words, more than half of us, over 180 million people — were overweight or obese. That statistic was responsible for “$480.7 billion in direct health care costs in the U.S., with an additional $1.24 trillion in indirect costs due to lost economic productivity.”

The total amount of around $1.72 trillion was equivalent to almost one-tenth of the total Gross Domestic Product. As a risk factor, obesity accounted for close to half of the accumulated cost of chronic diseases in the USA. It should be, and is, possible to acknowledge this reality in a tactful, frank, non-judgmental way, not involving cruelty or injustice.

These words are worth repeating:

Whether or not it is their fault, and whether or not others spitefully blame them, and regardless of whether it is fair — in one way or another, obese people constitute an expense to society.

We also discussed whether poverty causes obesity, or obesity causes poverty, and concluded that both propositions are sadly and eternally true.

And another sad-but-true thing

If fat-shaming and fat-blaming have not been able to revolutionize the situation in all these years, those techniques are unlikely to bring about change in the future.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “America’s Obesity Crisis: The Health and Economic Costs of Excess Weight,” MilkenInstitute.org,” 10/26/18
Image by bergy59/Pixabay

Inside America’s New Dietary Guidelines

Tatyana Meshcheryakova January 14, 2026 No Comments

The federal government has unveiled a sweeping overhaul of the nation’s dietary advice, signaling a sharp departure from decades of nutrition policy. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced new dietary guidelines last week that emphasize whole foods, protein, and healthy fats — while calling for a significant pullback from highly processed foods.

At a press conference, the administration introduced a newly redesigned food pyramid, one that looks nothing like its predecessors. In the new visual, red meat, cheese, vegetables, and fruits appear at the top, symbolizing foods Americans are encouraged to prioritize.

Kennedy framed the update as a historic turning point. He described the guidelines as the most significant reset of U.S. nutrition policy to date, arguing that past recommendations steered Americans toward foods that ultimately harmed public health.

“Protein and healthy fats are essential and were wrongly discouraged in prior dietary guidelines,” Kennedy said. “We are ending the war on saturated fats.”

Turning the pyramid upside down

The original food pyramid, introduced in the early 1990s, placed grains at its wide base, encouraging heavy consumption, while fats and oils sat at the narrow top. That model was retired in 2011, replaced by the “MyPlate” graphic championed by then–First Lady Michelle Obama. Now, the pyramid is back — but flipped on its head.

In an introduction to the new guidelines, Kennedy and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins wrote,

We are reclaiming the food pyramid and returning it to its true purpose of educating and nourishing all Americans.

They also highlighted the health crisis driving the change, noting that more than 70% of American adults are overweight or obese. According to Kennedy and Rollins, the problem stems from a diet that has “become reliant on highly processed foods and coupled with a sedentary lifestyle.”

The guidelines call for a “dramatic reduction” in foods described as “highly processed foods laden with refined carbohydrates, added sugars, excess sodium, unhealthy fats, and chemical additives.” At the same time, they encourage diets that include meat and dairy and set limits on added sugar.

Pushback from nutrition experts

Not everyone is on board with the new approach. Some nutrition scientists argue that elevating red meat and saturated fat contradicts decades of research.

Christopher Gardner, a nutrition expert at Stanford University and a former member of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, stated:

I’m very disappointed in the new pyramid that features red meat and saturated fat sources at the very top, as if that’s something to prioritize. It does go against decades and decades of evidence and research.

Gardner favors shifting protein intake toward plant-based sources like beans rather than emphasizing animal protein.

Both the American Heart Association and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics also point to evidence linking excess saturated fat to heart disease.

According to NBC News, the American Heart Association said in a statement that it “commends” including several important science-based recommendations in the new guidance, including eating more fruits, vegetables and whole grains, while cutting back on added sugars and processed foods.

However, it continued,

We are concerned that recommendations regarding salt seasoning and red meat consumption could inadvertently lead consumers to exceed recommended limits for sodium and saturated fats, which are primary drivers of cardiovascular disease.

The American Medical Association (AMA) applauded the new guidance for spotlighting ultra-processed foods, added sugars and sodium, which it says fuel chronic diseases, including heart disease, diabetes and obesity.

Dr. Bobby Mukkamala, president of the AMA, said in a statement,

The Guidelines affirm that food is medicine and offer clear direction patients and physicians can use to improve health.

Marion Nestle, professor emerita of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, said that the advice to limit highly processed foods is a major improvement but that “everything else is weaker or has no scientific justification.” The new guidelines still retain a long-standing recommendation to limit saturated fat to 10% of daily calories. NBC News quoted Nestle’s email that states that the focus on protein…

[…] makes no sense (Americans eat plenty) other than as an excuse to advise more meat and dairy, full fat, which will make it impossible to keep saturated fat to 10% of calories or less.

Dairy takes center stage

One of the most notable changes is the elevation of cheese and other dairy products to the top of the pyramid. This shift opens the door for full-fat milk and dairy products to be offered in school meals, an idea once considered controversial.

Dariush Mozaffarian, a cardiologist, public health scientist, and director of the Food is Medicine Institute at Tufts University, said:

There’s growing evidence, based on nutrition science, that dairy foods can be beneficial… It’s pretty clear that overall milk and cheese and yogurt can be part of a healthy diet… Both low-fat and whole-fat dairy versions of milk, cheese and yogurt have been linked to lower cardiovascular risk… What’s quite interesting is that the fat content doesn’t seem to make a big difference.

Whole grains still matter, but not the refined ones

Although whole grains appear at the smallest point at the bottom of the new pyramid, the guidelines still instruct Americans to “prioritize fiber-rich whole grains.” The key difference is a sharper line drawn between whole grains and refined grains. The recommendations call for two to four servings per day of whole grains while significantly reducing refined carbohydrates such as white bread and many packaged or ready-to-eat foods.

Mozaffarian supports this part of the guidance, especially the focus on food processing. He said,

Highly processed foods are clearly harmful for a range of diseases, so to have the U.S. government recommend that a wide class of foods be eaten less because of their processing is a big deal and I think a very positive move for public health.

While the guidelines avoid the term “ultra-processed,” they repeatedly emphasize eating “real food that nourishes the body.” They also recommend no added sugar at all for children under the age of 10.

New guidance on alcohol

The updated guidelines also revise long-standing alcohol recommendations. Instead of specifying daily limits (previously up to one drink per day for women and two for men) the guidance now simply states: “Consume less alcohol for better health.”

The guidelines also clearly identify groups who should avoid alcohol entirely, including pregnant women, people recovering from alcohol use disorder, those who cannot control how much they drink, and individuals taking medications or managing medical conditions that interact with alcohol.

Although many Americans may never read the dietary guidelines themselves, their impact is far-reaching. These recommendations shape what’s served in school cafeterias, on military bases, and through federal nutrition programs for mothers and infants by setting standards for calories and nutrients.

As debate continues among scientists and health organizations, one thing is clear: The new dietary guidelines mark a bold and controversial shift in how the federal government defines healthy eating in America.

Your responses and feedback are welcome!

Source: “RFK Jr.’s new dietary guidelines go all in on meat and dairy,” NPR, 1/8/26
Source: “RFK Jr. rolls out new dietary guidelines backing more protein and full-fat dairy,” NBC News, 1/7/26
Image courtesy of USDA, used under Fair Use: Commentary

WHO’s whole-school approach

Policy is only the first step

Parents need to have their stuff together

Next steps

Types of monitors

Advanced level monitors

Why this study matters

How the study was conducted

Three themes that shaped decisions

What this means for families and providers

Full employment for math nerds

Hot off the presses

The eternal two-way street

Progress?

An ugly example

Addressing food insecurity and eating disorders

Rapid growth brings new challenges

Serving vulnerable families

Integrating mental and physical health

Redefining success beyond the scale

Speaking of UCLA…

Through other eyes

A slight problem

Speaking of cartoons…

Another level

But wait, there is more

A bit of history

And another sad-but-true thing

Turning the pyramid upside down

Pushback from nutrition experts

Dairy takes center stage

Whole grains still matter, but not the refined ones

New guidance on alcohol

Profiles: Kids Struggling with Weight

The Book

About Dr. Robert A. Pretlow

Presentations