Dousing our inflammatory environment(s): is personal carbon trading an option for reducing obesity – and climate change?

Abstract

Obesity and climate change are two problems currently challenging humanity. Although apparently unrelated, an epidemiological approach to both shows a similar environmental aetiology, based in modern human lifestyles and their driving economic forces. One way of analysing this is through inflammation (defined as '. . . a disturbance of function following insult or injury') of both the internal (biological) and external (ecological) environments. Chronic, low-grade, systemic inflammation has recently been shown to accompany obesity, as well as a range of biological pathologies associated with obesity (diabetes, heart disease, some cancers, etc.). This is influenced by the body's inability to soak up excess glucose as a result of insulin resistance. In a broader sense, inflammation is a metaphor for ecological 'pathologies', manifest particularly in unnatural disturbances like climate change, ocean acidity, rising temperatures and species extinction, associated with the inability of the world's environmental 'sinks' to soak up carbon dioxide ('carbon resistance'?). The use of such a metaphorical analysis opens the possibilities for dealing with two interdisciplinary problems simultaneously. Strategies for managing climate change, including personal carbon trading, could provide a 'stealth intervention' for reducing population levels of obesity by increasing personal energy expenditure and decreasing energy-dense food intake, as well as reducing the carbon emissions causing climate change.

Is the UK preparing for “war”? Military metaphors, personal carbon allowances, and consumption rationing in historical perspective

“…Popular understanding of the complex science surrounding climate change has been extensively shaped over the past two decades by a variety of metaphors including hothouses, boiled frogs, coalmine canaries, heat-trapping blankets, sinks, sponges, and conveyor belts (Schneider 1989(Schneider , 2010Wiman 1995;Gelbspan 1998;Brüning and Lohmann 1999;Leggett 2001;Dessler and Parson 2006;Somerville 2006;PenningRowsell et al 2006;Judge 2007;Bostrom 2008;Egger 2008;Cojanu 2008;Hamblyn 2009). One influential line of critique focuses on the generally low salience of these symbolic images-especially in contrast to the illustrative power of an "ozone hole"-and holds that slow progress on a substantive international agreement is at least partly due to this weakness (Ungar 2000(Ungar , 2003.…”

“…Indeed, a new opportunity to reinvigorate the debate came about with the appointment of his brother, Ed, as head of the government's newly established Department of Energy and Climate Change (Stratton 2008; Wintour and Stratton 2008;Lawson 2008). Meanwhile, the academic community used the interregnum to expand its understanding of the programmatic dimensions of managing carbon at the individual level (Druckman and Jackson 2008), to link to other prominent issue-areas like public health and obesity (Egger 2007(Egger , 2008Chatterton et al 2009), and to identify the governance implications of personal carbon regulation (Seyfang and Paavola 2008;Howell 2009). …”

Is a healthy diet an environmentally sustainable diet?

“…Overconsumption and obesity could be viewed as a form of food waste in terms of consuming more food than required thereby placing more demand on food production (high GHGE), with consequences for global food security. Various authors have suggested that in addition to contributing to GHGE through excessive food consumption, obesity can impact indirectly through the increased physical mass of overweight or obese individuals (35)(36)(37) . Some studies have estimated additional fuel costs in terms of GHGE of transporting heavier people by motorised transportation (38) , others have estimated the savings global weight loss could have in terms of respired CO 2 (the amount of respired CO 2 is proportional to body mass) (35) .…”

Influences on intentions to use a personal carbon trading system (NICHE - The Norfolk Island Carbon Health Evaluation Project)

“…A common causality for both has been previously proposed in human behaviours e.g. personal inactivity through the use of carbon emitting fossilfuel powered transport, consumption of energydense, carbon intensive processed foods etc 5,6 although this common link has not been widely canvassed in the literature. Given the relationship of causality it is reasonable to propose that a single intervention targeting behaviour change that reduces GHG emissions may prove beneficial to addressing both GHG emissions and obesity by encouraging more active transport and consumption of a healthier diet with less processed food.…”