Promoting healthy populations as a pandemic preparedness strategy: a simulation study from Mexico.
BMI
COVID-19
Epidemic response plan
Obesity
Pandemic preparedness
Population health
Journal
Lancet regional health. Americas
ISSN: 2667-193X
Titre abrégé: Lancet Reg Health Am
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9918232503006676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2024
Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
30
07
2023
revised:
09
01
2024
accepted:
15
01
2024
medline:
9
2
2024
pubmed:
9
2
2024
entrez:
9
2
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The underlying health status of populations was a major determinant of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly obesity prevalence. Mexico was one of the most severely affected countries during the COVID-19 pandemic and its obesity prevalence is among the highest in the world. It is unknown by how much the COVID-19 burden could have been reduced if systemic actions had been implemented to reduce excess weight in Mexico before the onset of the pandemic. Using a dynamic epidemic model based on nationwide data, we compare actual deaths with those under hypothetical scenarios assuming a lower body mass index in the Mexican population, as observed historically. We also model the number of deaths that would have been averted due to earlier implementation of front-of-pack warning labels or due to increases in taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages and non-essential high-energy foods in Mexico. We estimate that 52.5% (95% prediction interval (PI) 43.2, 61.6%) of COVID-19 deaths were attributable to obesity for adults aged 20-64 and 23.8% (95% PI 18.7, 29.1%) for those aged 65 and over. Had the population BMI distribution remained as it was in 2000, 2006, or 2012, COVID-19 deaths would have been reduced by an expected 20.6% (95% PI 16.9, 24.6%), 9.9% (95% PI 7.3, 12.9%), or 6.9% (95% PI 4.5, 9.5%), respectively. If the food-labelling intervention introduced in 2020 had been introduced in 2018, an expected 6.2% (95% PI 5.2, 7.3%) of COVID-19 deaths would have been averted. If taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages and high-energy foods had been doubled, trebled, or quadrupled in 2018, COVID-19 deaths would have been reduced by an expected 4.1% (95% PI 2.5, 5.7%), 7.9% (95% PI 4.9, 11.0%), or 11.6% (95% PI 7.3, 15.8%), respectively. Public health interventions targeting underlying population health, including non-communicable chronic diseases, is a promising line of action for pandemic preparedness that should be included in all pandemic plans. This study received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, awarded to Juan A. Rivera from the National Institute of Public Health; Community Jameel, the UK Medical Research Council (MRC), Kenneth C Griffin, and the World Health Organization.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
The underlying health status of populations was a major determinant of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly obesity prevalence. Mexico was one of the most severely affected countries during the COVID-19 pandemic and its obesity prevalence is among the highest in the world. It is unknown by how much the COVID-19 burden could have been reduced if systemic actions had been implemented to reduce excess weight in Mexico before the onset of the pandemic.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Using a dynamic epidemic model based on nationwide data, we compare actual deaths with those under hypothetical scenarios assuming a lower body mass index in the Mexican population, as observed historically. We also model the number of deaths that would have been averted due to earlier implementation of front-of-pack warning labels or due to increases in taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages and non-essential high-energy foods in Mexico.
Findings
UNASSIGNED
We estimate that 52.5% (95% prediction interval (PI) 43.2, 61.6%) of COVID-19 deaths were attributable to obesity for adults aged 20-64 and 23.8% (95% PI 18.7, 29.1%) for those aged 65 and over. Had the population BMI distribution remained as it was in 2000, 2006, or 2012, COVID-19 deaths would have been reduced by an expected 20.6% (95% PI 16.9, 24.6%), 9.9% (95% PI 7.3, 12.9%), or 6.9% (95% PI 4.5, 9.5%), respectively. If the food-labelling intervention introduced in 2020 had been introduced in 2018, an expected 6.2% (95% PI 5.2, 7.3%) of COVID-19 deaths would have been averted. If taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages and high-energy foods had been doubled, trebled, or quadrupled in 2018, COVID-19 deaths would have been reduced by an expected 4.1% (95% PI 2.5, 5.7%), 7.9% (95% PI 4.9, 11.0%), or 11.6% (95% PI 7.3, 15.8%), respectively.
Interpretation
UNASSIGNED
Public health interventions targeting underlying population health, including non-communicable chronic diseases, is a promising line of action for pandemic preparedness that should be included in all pandemic plans.
Funding
UNASSIGNED
This study received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, awarded to Juan A. Rivera from the National Institute of Public Health; Community Jameel, the UK Medical Research Council (MRC), Kenneth C Griffin, and the World Health Organization.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38332937
doi: 10.1016/j.lana.2024.100682
pii: S2667-193X(24)00009-7
pmc: PMC10850772
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100682Informations de copyright
© 2024 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
KDH declares receipt of personal fees from WHO, Pfizer and GSK for work unrelated to this study, Payments for expert testimony by Infected Blood Inquiry (UK) and stocks from Astra Zeneca. GF declares receipt of personal fees from WHO and Imperial College London for consultancies. RJ and PD declare receipt of personal fees from WHO for consultancies on pandemic vulnerabilities and integrated epidemiological—economic modelling, respectively.