http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/03/recognizing_an.html

and

http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/07/the_genius_of_m.html

The “situationist” frame is critical, because otherwise people who want to cut funding for health care are likely to say the obese are violating the “duty to be healthy:”

http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/05/three_critiques.html

We’ve a real problem with obesity.

In fact I recently blogged about this exact thing here: http://tinyurl.com/38zvkm

In short: In May of 2002, the World Health Organization announced a rise in obesity, diabetes and heart disease. Remarkably, this occurred not only in affluent developed nations – but also among developing nations in Africa, the Middle East, Latin America and the Caribbean, where malnutrition was once the major dietary issue.

Obesity in the developing world can be seen as a result of a series of changes in diet, physical activity, health and nutrition, collectively known as the ‘nutrition transition.’ As poor countries become more prosperous, they acquire some of the benefits along with some of the problems of industrialized nations. These include obesity.

Since urban areas are much further along in the transition than rural ones, they experience higher rates of obesity. Cities offer a greater range of food choices, generally at lower prices. Urban work often demands less physical exertion than rural work. And as more and more women work away from home, they may be too busy to shop for, prepare and cook healthy meals at home. The fact that more people are moving to the city compounds the problem. In 1900, just 10 percent of the world population inhabited cities. Today, that figure is nearly 50 percent.

Read more here: http://tinyurl.com/2scnhk