In the end everything comes together. Obesity is a major problem in the UK. Britain has the highest rate in Europe, one of the few areas where it leads the other EU countries, although it is a very dubious distinction indeed. Britain is the only country where rates of obesity approach those seen in the US. The health problems obesity can bring in its train are formidable. They include increased risk of diabetes 2, heart disease and respiratory diseases. In some states in the US there is real worry that diabetes alone might swamp the health service in a few years time if nothing happens to alter current trends.
Fatness used to be a sign of affluence. Now it is the opposite: the more affluent you are, the more chance you will be slim and active, while the reverse applies to poorer groups. Poverty is no longer accompanied by hunger in the rich countries - overeating has been democratised. Not too long ago, infectious diseases were the main source of mortality. Today, the most lethal diseases are life-style related, a major turn-around from the past.
Now consider the military, an institution itself undergoing great changes. A few decades ago, before the ending of the Cold War, the main concern of the armed forces was the possibility of large-scale territorial war. Conscription still existed, bulking out the forces, even though with personnel who were not full professionals. In current times all has changed. Conscription has disappeared. The armed forces are smaller, but staffed on a full-time basis. Post 1989, the very nature of war has altered. Worry about invasion from other nations has more or less disappeared. The main problem in the world is weak states rather than strong ones. The British military is deployed in places far removed from the UK, ranging from Iraq and Afghanistan to Sierra Leone. It is feeling the strain in more ways than one.
A report that just came out from the National Audit Office says that the armed forces are understaffed and under-funded, with sever shortages of manpower in some areas. The military today is no longer employed in its traditional defence role. It is engaged in local wars and in peacekeeping in varied parts of the world - especially, of course, Iraq and Afghanistan. Many are leaving the forces early because of the pressures they are under and because of difficulties affecting family life. Less than 20% of soldiers are getting the time off between operations that the MOD says they need. In the navy, ships are sailing with crews smaller than those deemed necessary to operate their vessels properly.
And why is recruitment not making up the difference? Well, one main reason is obesity. The military recruits disproportionately from men and women from lower class backgrounds; and obesity is most frequent among such groups. The army has a body mass index that it applies to all recruits to screen out those who are not suitable for the rigours of forces life. According to a recent study, only a third of potential recruits would pass this test.
It is not just army recruitment that is threatened by the increasing levels of obesity. The 25% of children who are obese or significantly over-weight are hardly likely to distinguish themselves on the sports-field. Britain is a sporting nation with an impressive past record. But the pool of talented sportspeople will be a quarter less than it used to be, for we have to assume that the obese children will include many who have sporting talent.
Obesity, therefore, is not just a health problem, but impinges upon other capacities of society too. It is a prime example of some fundamental changes that have major implications for future policy. We used to live in a society of scarcity, but now some of our core problems come from abundance, or rather from the problems of managing abundance. They are problems to do with life-style and solving them means encouraging life-style change. Besides obesity, I would include in this category habits such as smoking, traffic behaviour, binge drinking - and the variety of behaviour traits that contribute to climate change. Managing these, and steering a way between state authority and individual freedom will colour most future political debates.
How should we approach such issues? The example of smoking is one we can generalise from. Like the much larger question of climate change, whether smoking was really risky was for many years subject to debate. In both cases large corporate interests connived to discredit independent research revealing the dangers. Increased taxes on tobacco, plus health warnings, have helped lower rates of smoking. Importantly (as is now happening with climate change) a consensus that the habit is a major health risk was achieved. However, more draconian policy is still needed - witness the fact that so many countries are now banning smoking in public places.
Virtually all of this applies to obesity, and the same policy mix should be applied. Under mounting pressure, the food industry is starting to introduce changes, such as reducing the proportion of harmful fats in its products. But the key question is making people properly aware of the health hazards and using a mixture of incentives and sanctions to get people to modify their habits.
Is physical flabbiness a consequence of a moral flabbiness that has overtaken the nation? After all, lack of moral discipline could be the main factor linking obesity with the problems of the military. I don't believe so, though. The connection rather is the changing nature of our society and the wider world. The armed forces have different responsibilities from the past. On the one hand, life in the military is now less about defending the homeland and more about participating in international missions elsewhere. On the other, health has come to be defined much more by life style related illnesses and afflictions than by infectious disease. These trends meet up in the recruiter's office.
