An evaluation of the impact of obesity related legislation

In attempt to address the adult obesity epidemic in the U.S., several state legislatures have enacted laws to curtail rates of adult obesity (Stein & Colditz, 2004). Recent enacted policies include: menu labeling laws, snack taxes, and Complete Streets policy (Robert Wood Johnson, 2009). The aim of this dissertation was to evaluate the effectiveness of existing legislative efforts to limit rates of growth of adult obesity. I examined if anti-obesity legislation effectively reduces rates of adult obesity and if anti-obesity policies differ in their ability to diminish adult obesity. Several panel data sets were constructed using reported data for each state and the District of Columbia from 1995 to 2011 via the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis and the U.S. Census Bureau. Time series regression analysis was completed to assess the impact of these three policies at a state, group and individual level. At the state level, all three policies are associated with a decrease in adult obesity rates although, the magnitude is small and statistical significance varies by empirical model. At the individual level, all three policies are associated with a decrease in BMI, however, the magnitude is small and the only policy with statistical significance is menu labeling. At the group level, the policies vary in their effect on BMI by race, age, income, education and gender. Only menu labeling and snack tax policy are statistically significant at the group level. Although the magnitude of effect seen with these policies is small, any sign of a reversal in the growing obesity trend, a trend that has been unaltered for the past decade, could be seen as a sign of improvement from a public health perspective. The results of this study highlight how a one size fits all approach will not be effective in combating the obesity epidemic, rather an assortment of legislative policies are necessary