Assessing Laws and Legal Authorities for Obesity Prevention and Control

Abstract

Law is an essential tool for public health practice, and the use of a systematic legal framework can assist with preventing chronic diseases and addressing the growing epidemic of obesity.The action options available to government at the federal, state, local, and tribal levels and its partners can help make the population healthier by preventing obesity and decreasing the growing burden of associated chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease and Type 2 diabetes. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) uses the four-part systematic legal framework commonly referred to as “public health legal preparedness” to demonstrate the essential role law can play for any public health issue. This paper uses the “laws and legal authorities” component of the framework and should be considered in combination with the competencies, coordination, and information-best practices components of the framework.

Obesity Prevention Practices of Elementary School Nurses in Minnesota

“…Findings from this study indicate that LSNs provide a variety of obesity prevention services; however, these efforts are not usually coordinated within a school or across a district, and resources to support prevention services are often limited. As school-based obesity programs including BMI screening are becoming more accepted and common (Gostin, Pomeranz, Jacobson, & Gottfried, 2009), school nurses will need to coordinate obesity prevention services and collaborate with school personnel and community professionals for more integrated obesity prevention care. Additionally, LSNs should be prepared to educate administrators, parents, and the community regarding obesity, current practices in the district, the needs of the students, and the barriers and opportunities related to obesity prevention.…”

Adoption and diffusion of zoning bylaws banning fast food drive-through services across Canadian municipalities

“…Third, the intent of each adopter’s bylaw was identified and assessed for alignment with bylaw intentions identified in the literature. Bylaw intentions identified in the literature included, in order of prevalence, related to: obesity and chronic disease [ 4 , 5 , 8 – 16 ]; protection of community aesthetics and character [ 4 , 5 , 10 – 12 , 17 – 19 ]; traffic concerns [ 17 – 22 ]; safety [ 5 , 10 , 19 , 20 , 22 ]; reducing physical inactivity and sedentary behaviour [ 5 , 8 , 14 , 28 ]; protecting local economy [ 4 , 5 , 23 ]; improving community nutrition [ 5 , 9 , 13 ]; air pollution, idling, and environmental concerns [ 5 , 18 ]; decreasing inequalities by decreasing the density of fast food drive-through in low-income neighbourhoods [ 5 , 29 ]; noise concerns from intercoms [ 19 , 30 ]; and, improving community walkability [ 5 ].…”

“…While a number of jurisdictions have done so with the goal of fostering healthier food environments, in many cases, the rationale for policy adoption extends beyond health. The most commonly proposed reasons for such policies included: promoting health [ 4 , 5 , 8 – 16 ]; maintaining visual appeal of the community [ 4 , 5 , 10 – 12 , 17 – 19 ]; addressing noise, safety and traffic concerns [ 17 – 22 ]; protecting local economy [ 4 , 5 , 23 ]; environmental considerations [ 5 , 18 ]; addressing noise concerns; and enhancing community walkability [ 5 ]. As an example, in 1981, the Town of Concord, Massachusetts, in the United States banned fast food restaurants and drive-in services as a means to reduce traffic congestion, as well as to preserve and enhance the natural quality of the community [ 3 ].…”

Assessing Coordination of Legal-Based Efforts across Jurisdictions and Sectors for Obesity Prevention and Control

“…As it is, the economically and socially disadvantaged in our society, who live in communities with more fast food, fewer supermarkets, the lowest employment and highest crime rates, suffer a disproportionate burden of obesity-related diseases. 4 Long and healthy lives are tied to where people live, to income, wealth, education, race/ethnicity, immigration status, and to the degree of inequality in society, as well as other physical and social determinants of health. 5 If the income and other social disparities between African Americans and whites were eliminated, it is estimated that over 886,000 premature deaths in African American communities over the past decade would have been avoided.…”