Review of Articles on Healthcare Economics on Obesity
- Details
- Hits: 5305
Abstract
Obesity harms one’s health in several ways. It raises the risk of development of conditions like type 2 diabetes and heart diseases while reducing a person’s life span. Excessive weight also comes with real economic costs. The estimated costs of healthcare costs of obesity-related diseases are a whopping 190.2 billion dollars annually, equivalent to 20 percent of health expenditure in the United States. Obesity in childhood alone accounts for over 14 billion dollars in direct health costs. Obesity-associated health costs generally are expected to increase substantially, especially due to the increase in the rate at which the overweight turn into obese individuals. This paper explores the actual estimated cost and compares it with that of providing health to a normal population. Results show savings for health expenditures would be 550 billion dollars over the next twenty years if obesity rates remained at 2014 levels.
Synthesis Matrix of Articles
|
Article #1 Cawley & Meyerhoefer (2010) |
Article #2 Colagiuri, et al (2010) |
Introductory statement of each article |
Obesity can be said to be a BMI or body mass index greater than 30. In the U. S., its prevalence has seen a steady rise for the last 50 years and has almost doubled in the past 30 years (Cawley & Meyerhoefer, 2010). |
In Australia, overweight and obesity prevalence has been reported to rise fast (Colagiuri, Lee, Magliano, & Shaw, 2010). |
Brief description of each article |
Obesity has an adverse effect on the cost of health care, both in the developed and developing world. Due to the association of obesity with many disorders, the cost of checking the former has almost doubled in the past 30 years. The emphasis is on determining the percentage of the national income used to treat health conditions associated with obesity, not to advocate for allocation of more resource towards management of obesity-related disorders
|
The economic cost of managing the health of normal, overweight and obese individuals is compared. Though an individual’s genetic composition may play a role, one’s lifestyle is the major factor that has been implicated in causing excessive weight. Overweight and obese individuals use drugs that come at high costs, and may require costly exercise equipment. Others may require enrolling in weight cut extremely expensive programs. In addition, obese people may not execute their duties in their places of work as would be expected. This poses an undesirable impact on a country’s economic development, whether first world or third world.
|
Similarities the articles have |
These authors have pointed out obesity as a major cause of obesity associated illnesses, adding that such conditions require expensive drugs to treat because the drugs and weight reduction programs are expensive.
|
In this article, the cost of treating obesity-related morbidities is also emphasized. The economic burden imposed on families that require weight reduction equipment for their members has also been given emphasis, citing the high rates of taxation associated with the importation of some of this equipment. |
Differences between the two articles
|
The author only notes the direct impact the cost of weight reduction programs and drugs for treating obesity-related disorders has on a country’s economy. |
Apart from the cost of weight reduction programs and drugs for treating obesity and overweight related diseases, the authors account also for the indirect burden obesity has on a country’s economy. They observe that the obesity-associated morbidities reduce a country’s workforce because people with ill health are not able to work effectively, or may not be able to work at all.
|
Article analysis
The first article, by Cawley and Meyerhoefer (2010), is more convincing than the one by Colagiuri, et al (2010) for numerous reasons. For instance, Cawley and Meyerhoefer have provided sufficient statistical evidence on the compare costs wherever applicable. In addition, Cawley and Meyerhoefer’s review of literature is quite elaborate. Rather than just referring to previous studies on the same topic, the authors have gone further to outline briefly the outcome of each study and the reasons why that study has gaps (Medeiros-Neto, Halpern, & Bouchard, 2003). This also has served to show why their research work was still relevant despite the existence of many other studies in the same area. The use of mathematical models is also impressive. Scientists who are well conversant with such models can easily use them to apply the principles advocated for in the paper, even without the intervention of the authors. Of importance is the breakdown of the article into numerous headings and subheadings that make it easy to refer to specific portions of the article. All these factors work to make the article not only appealing but also more convincing than Colagiuri’s. Colagiuri, et al have also used statistical data as much as they can, but one still feels that more such evidence would have made their article more convincing (Wunderlich, 2010). However, several figures and tables have been included in the article, not much explanation has been provided below each of these figures, and thereby not much knowledge can be got from such tables. The review of literature has also been done in passing, and one feels the authors could have considered discussing each of the works to which they refer. Overall, both articles are quite informative and well written, but that by far more elaborate and convincing than Colagiuri.
Much can be learned from these two articles, and such knowledge would find a lot of practicality in healthcare. The huge economic burden of obesity on health care is deteriorating. Money that the government could set aside for developmental purposes is diverted to treat preventable medical conditions (Sassi, 2010). If massive awareness on the economic impact of obesity were provided, such costs would become easy to contain.
Conclusion
As evident from both articles, the economic burden of obesity is becoming a major concern in both the developed and developing nations. An unprecedented rate of morbidity and mortality has contributed because reduction in a country workforce directly affects adversely on the economy of that country