Childhood obesity rates soared in the U.K. during COVID-19

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

 

Researchers from the University of Southampton showed that obesity rates for British preschoolers in 2020 and 2021 skyrocketed more than 45% compared to 2019 and 2020.

 

The authors said this is the largest single-year increase in overweight and obesity prevalence in recent UK history, and will result in an additional £800 million ($1 billion US) in [lifetime] healthcare costs for now-overweight children who will likely suffer chronic diseases.

 

The study was based on publicly available annual body mass index (BMI) data from 2006 through 2022. Two age-groups were studied, kids ages 4 to 6 years old and 10 to 11.

...

While weight for children ages 4 and 5 rebounded to healthy BMIs by 2022, obesity in children ages 10 to 11 persisted and was 4 percentage points higher than expected, representing almost 56,000 additional children who were now clinically overweight.

 

(more)

 

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/childhood-obesity-rates-soared-uk-during-covid-19

 

"During the first year of the pandemic, school closures dramatically altered the routines of young children. Cancellation of organized sports, disrupted sleep schedules, more screen time, and deterioration of healthy eating habits likely contributed to the largest single-year increase in overweight and obesity prevalence seen in children in decades."

 

https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1031662

 

Edited January 26 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Child obesity in pandemic could have lifelong effects, study says

...

"Between 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, the proportion of overweight and obese Year 6 primary school children, aged between 10 and 11, went from 35.2% to 40.9%, with people from deprived areas disproportionately affected.

 

Researchers used BMI data from the government's National Child Measurement Programme, which weighs and measures about one million Year 6 pupils annually in England.

 

The number of overweight and obese pupils of that age decreased the following year, but it was still higher than before the Covid lockdowns.

 

This increase represents a cohort of an additional 56,000 children, researchers from the NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre and University of Southampton say - based on this snapshot.

 

(more)

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-68068199

 

Edited January 26 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[CG1 Blue]

One of the many serious consequences of over the top measures taken during the pandemic. 

Nobody in authority seemed to weigh up the dangers of COVID 19 versus the dangers of locking the world down. The 'slow burn' effects of lockdowns etc. will take at least a decade to heal. And sadly the resultant death numbers will probably dwarf C19 deaths. 

 

In the UK the government were pushed into strict measures by the mainstream press and political opposition. They should've stuck to their guns. 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

21 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

One of the many serious consequences of over the top measures taken during the pandemic. 

 

 

I don't see any assessment in the subject study of what the alternate results would have been if the U.K. government had not responded to COVID as it did, in terms of increased illness/hospitalizations and deaths from COVID, not only among children but among everyone.

 

That would be an interesting subject to plumb, if there were legitimate means to make those kinds of comparisons.

 

Earlier lockdown could have saved lives of 30,000, Hancock tells Covid inquiry

 

Tens of thousands of lives could have been saved if the UK had locked down three weeks earlier, Matt Hancock has told the Covid inquiry, as he described the operation of Boris Johnson’s Downing Street as undermined by a “culture of fear”.

...

Hancock argued that in retrospect the ideal date for a first lockdown would have been three weeks earlier than the eventual date of 23 March 2020, saying this could have prevented about 90% of the death toll in the first Covid wave, or more than 30,000 lives.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/30/hancock-tells-covid-inquiry-of-toxic-culture-in-johnson-government

 

 

'In normal circumstances, scientists would wait for the research to be peer-reviewed and published in a scientific journal to read the final word from the authors. But the latest headline-grabbing version, “Did lockdowns work?” has come out as a book – a “revised and extended” version of the May working paper. Its publisher is the neoliberal thinktank, the Institute of Economic Affairs, credited with coming up with many of Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng’s free market policies.

 

The book maintains that lockdowns – as defined by the authors – prevented 3.2% of US and EU deaths in the first wave of the pandemic. But it notes that based on nine specific NPIs, lockdowns in Europe and the US reduced mortality by 10.7% in the spring of 2020 – about 23,000 in Europe and 16,000 in the US."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/05/revised-report-on-impact-of-covid-lockdowns-leaves-unanswered-questions

 

In short, I think I'm pointing out, people can recover from childhood obesity. But once you're dead from COVID, there's no coming back.

 

 

Edited January 26 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[CG1 Blue]

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I don't see any assessment in the subject study of what the alternate results would have been if the U.K. government had not responded to COVID as it did, in terms of increased illness/hospitalizations and deaths from COVID, not only among children but among everyone.

 

That would be an interesting subject to plumb, if there were legitimate means to make those kinds of comparisons.

 

Earlier lockdown could have saved lives of 30,000, Hancock tells Covid inquiry

 

Tens of thousands of lives could have been saved if the UK had locked down three weeks earlier, Matt Hancock has told the Covid inquiry, as he described the operation of Boris Johnson’s Downing Street as undermined by a “culture of fear”.

...

Hancock argued that in retrospect the ideal date for a first lockdown would have been three weeks earlier than the eventual date of 23 March 2020, saying this could have prevented about 90% of the death toll in the first Covid wave, or more than 30,000 lives.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/30/hancock-tells-covid-inquiry-of-toxic-culture-in-johnson-government

 

 

'In normal circumstances, scientists would wait for the research to be peer-reviewed and published in a scientific journal to read the final word from the authors. But the latest headline-grabbing version, “Did lockdowns work?” has come out as a book – a “revised and extended” version of the May working paper. Its publisher is the neoliberal thinktank, the Institute of Economic Affairs, credited with coming up with many of Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng’s free market policies.

 

The book maintains that lockdowns – as defined by the authors – prevented 3.2% of US and EU deaths in the first wave of the pandemic. But it notes that based on nine specific NPIs, lockdowns in Europe and the US reduced mortality by 10.7% in the spring of 2020 – about 23,000 in Europe and 16,000 in the US."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/05/revised-report-on-impact-of-covid-lockdowns-leaves-unanswered-questions

 

In short, I think I'm pointing out, people can recover from childhood obesity. But once you're dead from COVID, there's no coming back.

 

 

This is the trouble. It's very easy to find statistics on lives saved from lockdowns. But we'll probably never be told how many lives have / will be lost due to the impact of lockdowns. 

 

"people can recover from childhood obesity" I'm sure you know full well it's not that simple.