Health Education Research Advance Access originally published online on August 24, 2004
Health Education Research 2005 20(2):259-265; doi:10.1093/her/cyg116
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Health Education Research Vol.20 no.2, © Oxford University Press 2005; All rights reserved
Point of View |
Prevention of child obesity: ‘First, do no harm’
1 University of Sydney, Faculty of Education, Building A35, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
2 Correspondence to: J. A. O'Dea; E-mail: j.o'dea@edfac.usyd.edu.au
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
 |
Introduction |
|---|
The prevalence of child obesity has steadily increased in Western and developing countries over the last two decades, and child obesity prevention is now firmly on the agendas of nearly all major governments. We are now confronted with the challenge of what to do about the problem, and the general consensus among various academics, researchers, practitioners and administrators worldwide is that prevention needs to begin. Before governments and other agencies leap into actions that they assume to be beneficial in the battle against child obesity, we must remember to employ one of the most important principles of modern medicine and prevention science, ‘First, do no harm’.
An examination of potentially unhelpful or dangerous outcomes of child obesity prevention efforts is required before prevention activities begin. There are many examples of perfectly reasonable and well-intentioned health messages being partially misconstrued or misunderstood by members of the general public, resulting in the
|
Prevention versus treatment |
|---|
|
Inadvertent suggestion of dieting and other weight loss techniques |
|---|
|
Avoid further stigmatization, prejudice and discrimination |
|---|
|
Transference and misinformation |
|---|
|
Undesirable outcomes of unplanned approaches |
|---|
|
Avoidance of health services and preventive screening tests |
|---|
|
Further promoting the avoidance of physical activity |
|---|
|
Blaming the victim |
|---|
|
Further marginalizing people of low socioeconomic status (SES) |
|---|
|
Obesity as a ‘sick role’ |
|---|
|
The need for a new paradigm |
|---|
|
Use of sound health education theory |
|---|
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. B. Schwartz, S. A. Novak, and S. S. Fiore The Impact of Removing Snacks of Low Nutritional Value From Middle Schools Health Educ Behav, December 1, 2009; 36(6): 999 - 1011. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. A. Carter and C. M. Bulik Childhood Obesity Prevention Programs: How Do They Affect Eating Pathology and Other Psychological Measures? Psychosom Med, April 1, 2008; 70(3): 363 - 371. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. W. Lowry, B. J. Sallinen, and D. M. Janicke The Effects of Weight Management Programs on Self-Esteem in Pediatric Overweight Populations J. Pediatr. Psychol., November 1, 2007; 32(10): 1179 - 1195. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. P. Ikeda, P. B. Crawford, and G. Woodward-Lopez BMI screening in schools: helpful or harmful Health Educ. Res., December 1, 2006; 21(6): 761 - 769. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Minerva BMJ, June 11, 2005; 330(7504): E361 - E361. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minerva BMJ, April 2, 2005; 330(7494): 798 - 798. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|