Sætur dauði - ódýr dauði?

Í dag heyrði ég útundan mér í Reykjavík Síðdegis, ég greindi að þar var landlæknir í viðtali; umræðuefnið offituvandinn. Ég ætlaði mér að hlusta á upptöku af viðtalinu á vefnum hjá Bylgjunni en það var eitthvað í messi hjá þeim hlekkurinn á viðtalið (hljóðbútarnir voru frá 5. feb.), en ég sá þá í lýsingu að viðtalið var í framhaldi af Kompásþáttar í gærkvöldi. Kompás er nú eiginlega á skyldu áhorfslistanum mínum (Fréttir, Mannamál, Silfrið og Kompás) en hann fór framhjá mér í gær, þannig að ég var að ljúka við að horfa á hann á VefTV Vísis rétt í þessu.

Í fréttskýringu sem kumpánarnir á kompásnum gáfu nafnið „Sætur dauði!” kemur ýmislegt fram um þá vá sem offita er og þeim vanda sem við stöndum frami vegna ótrúlegrar aukningar offitu á meðal þjóðarinnar.

Þátturinn var svona sæmilegur, vond þóttu mér komment eins og frá Davíð Kristinssyni (lífstíls og næringarþerapisti menntaður í henni Ameríku) sem sagði m.a. „því meira sem vara er auglýst því verri er hún fyrir þig, þá greinilega þarf að auglýsa hana...” ái og æi. En margt annað kom fram bæði frá Davíð og öðrum sem var gott - heilt yfir var þarna um þarfa hugvekju að ræða.  

Í gær bloggaði ég um báknið burt með hjálp grænnar stjórnsýslu (a.k.a hátæknivæðingu), í niðurlagi þess pistils minnist ég á Heilbrigðisráðuneytið og gef þar í skyn að ég kunni að búa yfir einhverjum patent lausnum til þess að auka á gæði og lækka kostnað í rekstri heilbrigðiskerfisins.

Þetta var ekki tómt grín hjá mér þarna í blogginu; ég hef um nokkurt skeið verið að dunda mér við þróun hugmyndar sem ég tel að, ef af veruleika verður, geti haft mikið að segja í baráttu okkar (þjóðfélagsins) við það sem kallað er lífstíls- og velmegunarsjúkdómar auk þess snertir hugmyndin aðra þætti vellíðunar og öryggis (ungra sem aldina).

Í ljósi þessa alls er eftirfarandi frétt frá AP svo sjokker. Offita er ódýr! Það kostar minna að sinna feitum en þeim sem lifa heilsusamlega og því lengur. Vitaskuld er þetta ekki alveg svona einfalt, en lesið fréttina hér að neðan. (Pælingar mínar hafa svo sem svar við þessu líka og bíð ég því enn eftir að heyra frá ráðuneytinu)  

Fat People Cheaper to Treat, Study Says

By MARIA CHENG

AP Medical Writer
Feb 5. 2007

 

 

LONDON (AP) -- Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it doesn't save money, researchers reported Monday. It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.

 

"It was a small surprise," said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the Netherlands' National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, who led the study. "But it also makes sense. If you live longer, then you cost the health system more."

 

In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either fat people or smokers.

 

Van Baal and colleagues created a model to simulate lifetime health costs for three groups of 1,000 people: the "healthy-living" group (thin and non-smoking), obese people, and smokers. The model relied on "cost of illness" data and disease prevalence in the Netherlands in 2003.

 

The researchers found that from age 20 to 56, obese people racked up the most expensive health costs. But because both the smokers and the obese people died sooner than the healthy group, it cost less to treat them in the long run.

 

On average, healthy people lived 84 years. Smokers lived about 77 years, and obese people lived about 80 years. Smokers and obese people tended to have more heart disease than the healthy people.

 

Cancer incidence, except for lung cancer, was the same in all three groups. Obese people had the most diabetes, and healthy people had the most strokes. Ultimately, the thin and healthy group cost the most, about $417,000, from age 20 on.

 

The cost of care for obese people was $371,000, and for smokers, about $326,000.

The results counter the common perception that preventing obesity will save health systems worldwide millions of dollars.

 

"This throws a bucket of cold water onto the idea that obesity is going to cost trillions of dollars," said Patrick Basham, a professor of health politics at Johns Hopkins University who was unconnected to the study. He said that government projections about obesity costs are frequently based on guesswork, political agendas, and changing science.

 

"If we're going to worry about the future of obesity, we should stop worrying about its financial impact," he said.

 

Obesity experts said that fighting the epidemic is about more than just saving money.

"The benefits of obesity prevention may not be seen immediately in terms of cost savings in tomorrow's budget, but there are long-term gains," said Neville Rigby, spokesman for the International Association for the Study of Obesity. "These are often immeasurable when it comes to people living longer and healthier lives."

 

Van Baal described the paper as "a book-keeping exercise," and said that governments should recognize that successful smoking and obesity prevention programs mean that people will have a higher chance of dying of something more expensive later in life.

 

"Lung cancer is a cheap disease to treat because people don't survive very long," van Baal said. "But if they are old enough to get Alzheimer's one day, they may survive longer and cost more."

 

The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.

 

"We are not recommending that governments stop trying to prevent obesity," van Baal said. "But they should do it for the right reasons."

 

---

Meira um þetta hér: http://medicine.plosjournals.org