Dissecting Obesogenic Environments: The Development and Application of a Framework for Identifying and Prioritizing Environmental Interventions for Obesity

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The "obesogenicity" of modern environments is fueling the obesity pandemic. We describe a framework, known as ANGELO (analysis grid for environments linked to obesity), which is a conceptual model for understanding the obesogenicity of environments and a practical tool for prioritizing environmental elements for research and intervention. Development of the ANGELO framework. The basic framework is a 2 x 4 grid which dissects the environment into environmental size (micro and macro) by type: physical (what is available), economic (what are the costs), political (what are the "rules"), and sociocultural (what are the attitudes and beliefs). Within this grid, the elements which influence food intake and physical activity are characterized as obesogenic or "leptogenic" (promoting leanness). Application of the ANGELO framework. The ANGELO framework has been piloted at the population level (island communities) to prioritize the settings/sectors for intervention and at the setting level (fast food outlets) to prioritize research needs and interventions. Environmental elements were prioritized by rating their validity (evidence of impact), relevance (to the local context), and potential changeability. The ANGELO framework appears to be a flexible and robust instrument for the needs analysis and problem identification stages of reducing the obesogenicity of modern environments. Copyright 1999 American Health Foundation and Academic Press.

Related collections

Most cited references 40

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

An Ecological Perspective on Health Promotion Programs

K R McLeroy, D Bibeau, A Steckler … (1988)

During the past 20 years there has been a dramatic increase in societal interest in preventing disability and death in the United States by changing individual behaviors linked to the risk of contracting chronic diseases. This renewed interest in health promotion and disease prevention has not been without its critics. Some critics have accused proponents of life-style interventions of promoting a victim-blaming ideology by neglecting the importance of social influences on health and disease. This article proposes an ecological model for health promotion which focuses attention on both individual and social environmental factors as targets for health promotion interventions. It addresses the importance of interventions directed at changing interpersonal, organizational, community, and public policy, factors which support and maintain unhealthy behaviors. The model assumes that appropriate changes in the social environment will produce changes in individuals, and that the support of individuals in the population is essential for implementing environmental changes.

0 comments Cited 845 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

An "ecological" approach to the obesity pandemic

G Egger, B Swinburn (1997)

0 comments Cited 115 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The response to long-term overfeeding in identical twins.

Claude Bouchard, Angelo Tremblay, Jean-Pierre Després … (1990)

We undertook this study to determine whether there are differences in the responses of different persons to long-term overfeeding and to assess the possibility that genotypes are involved in such differences. After a two-week base-line period, 12 pairs of young adult male monozygotic twins were overfed by 4.2 MJ (1000 kcal) per day, 6 days a week, for a total of 84 days during a 100-day period. The total excess amount each man consumed was 353 MJ (84,000 kcal). During overfeeding, individual changes in body composition and topography of fat deposition varied considerably. The mean weight gain was 8.1 kg, but the range was 4.3 to 13.3 kg. The similarity within each pair in the response to overfeeding was significant (P less than 0.05) with respect to body weight, percentage of fat, fat mass, and estimated subcutaneous fat, with about three times more variance among pairs than within pairs (r approximately 0.5). After adjustment for the gains in fat mass, the within-pair similarity was particularly evident with respect to the changes in regional fat distribution and amount of abdominal visceral fat (P less than 0.01), with about six times as much variance among pairs as within pairs (r approximately 0.7). We conclude that the most likely explanation for the intrapair similarity in the adaptation to long-term overfeeding and for the variations in weight gain and fat distribution among the pairs of twins is that genetic factors are involved. These may govern the tendency to store energy as either fat or lean tissue and the various determinants of the resting expenditure of energy.