In varied problems that afflict Americans today, the basic facts are beyond dispute. Between 1980 and 2000, for example, obesity rates doubled among adults. About 60 million adults, or 30% of the adult population, are now obese. Similarly, since 1980, the number of overweight children has doubled; among adolescents, the rate has tripled. Thus, the exposure to the health risks of obesity has increased for the past thirty years. Even a cursory investigation uncovers dire consequences of these trends, the upshot of which is that the current generation is likely to experience a drop in life expectancy, not to mention any more general fulfillment of 'the pursuit of happiness,' that is the purported birthright of Americans.
While an observer might discern multiple, and often complex, patterns of causation in the manifestation of these trends, the harmful impact of television and fast food on our often grotesquely overweight populace is likewise indubitable. Among the vast amount of data that demonstrates this, a reality check would consider the following:
* Fast-food meals often give as much as or more than 100 percent of the recommended daily intake of fat, cholesterol, salt, and sugar.
* A recent study showed that children who drink sugar-laced drinks increase their risk of obesity by as much as 60 percent with each additional beverage that they consume each day.
* Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, the world's two largest soft drink companies, are the thirteenth and twentieth largest advertisers in the world; together, they spent $2.4 billion on ads in 2001.
* One estimate found that up to 40 percent of children's meals come from fast-food chains, convenience stores, or restaurants.
* At least 13 percent of the nation's schools have on-site fast food outlets, in addition to the ubiquitous vending machines also present there. The American Journal of Public Health (2005;95: 1575-81) found that significantly greater numbers of fast-food restaurants clustered within 1.5 kilometer of schools than would result from a random distribution pattern. The average distance between any school and the nearest fast-food restaurant, about 600 meters, is easily walkable in under ten minutes. Thirty-five percent of schools had at least one fast-food restaurant within 400 meters (a 5-minute walk), and 80% had at least one fast food restaurant within 800 meters (a 10-minute walk). Such patterns are all but certainly intentional.
Given how obvious these contemporary proclivities are, the only underlying issue is pretty straightforward. What do the majority of people in this society intend to do about the elevation of property rights and corporate hunger for maximum profit over the health and welfare of the people who are the actual fabric of society? Far too often, the answer that the Democratic Party gives in such matters is a 'let's not be too hasty' kind of approach. We can see the same deference to big money--in the form of insurance and pharmaceutical conglomerates--in the arguments over health care reform.
I have the answer to the Republicans' and 'moderate' Democrats' argument that healthcare reform would be too expensive, yada, yada, yada. Who should pay for healthcare? Those who are making us fat, that's who: corporate food manufacturers; soft drink companies, fast food restaurants, and all the other Fortune 500 fat cats that peddle fattening and unhealthy foodstuffs. Almost every health problem today—diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease among them—result directly from obesity. But every single health disparity has the common source of poverty versus wealth, of corporate free speech versus a disempowered majority.
Until we address these fundamental underlying difficulties, all of the 'reform' in the world will be nothing more than another trick to fatten the coffers of those who already have all of the cash. A majority has to be ready to eliminate the preference for the super-rich that has come to characterize America, or progress will be impossible. I'm not sure that the Democratic Party is capable of this assignment. But one thing that I am sure of is this: if the Democrats aren't up to the job, something has got to give. The 'wing-nuts' will have their way if we don't live up to our supposed bias for the underdog, if we don't find a way to make 'the art of the politically possible' include fundamental reform away from the predominance of the moneyed interests.