The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Obesity as a Disease: A White Paper on Evidence and Arguments Commissioned by the Council of The Obesity Society
Open accessAbstract
The Obesity Society (TOS) commissioned a panel of experts from among its members to undertake a review of the issue of labeling obesity a disease and to examine pertinent evidence and arguments. The panel unanimously and strongly stated that obesity is a complex condition with many causal contributors, including many factors that are largely beyond individuals' control; that obesity causes much suffering; that obesity causally contributes to ill health, functional impairment, reduced quality of life, serious disease, and greater mortality; that successful treatment, although difficult to achieve, produces many benefits; that obese persons are subject to enormous societal stigma and discrimination; and that obese persons deserve better. Whether obesity should be declared a disease is controversial, and thoughtful arguments have been made on both sides of the issue. The panel recognized that there is a clear majority view among the general public as well as among authoritative bodies that it is reasonable to call obesity a disease. The panel reviewed three broad classes of argument as to whether obesity is rightly classified as a disease. The first, the scientific approach, proceeds in two conceptually simple steps: i) identify the characteristics that entities must have to be considered diseases and ii) examine empirical evidence to determine whether obesity possesses those characteristics. The scientific approach would be well suited to answering the question “is obesity a disease?” rather than “should we consider obesity a disease?,” were the former question answerable. However, after much deliberation, the panel concluded that the former question is ill posed and does not admit an answer. This is not because of a lack of agreement or understanding about obesity but rather because of a lack of a clear, specific, widely accepted, and scientifically applicable definition of “disease” that allows one to objectively and empirically determine whether specific conditions are diseases. The second type of argument, the forensic approach, entailed looking to the public statements of authoritative bodies as evidence of whether obesity is a disease or should be considered a disease. A nearly exhaustive search for and consideration of the statements made by ostensibly authoritative bodies made apparent that there is a clear and strong majority leaning—although not complete consensus—toward obesity being a disease. However, although some authoritative bodies have offered statements that obesity is (or is not) a disease, very few of them have published a thorough and rigorous argument or evidential basis in support of the statement. Moreover, and far more importantly, the panel held that the opinions of authoritative bodies tell us—at most—what is lawful, consistent with mainstream opinions, or likely to be supported by others. Such opinions are insufficient to tell us what is true or what is right. The panel strongly endorsed the position that there can be no higher authority than reason. Hence, the forensic approach was judged to be inadequate to help us determine either whether obesity is a disease or whether it should be considered a disease. The third approach to this question we termed the utilitarian approach. Recognizing that there is no clear agreed-on definition of disease with precise, assessable criteria that can be articulated, it seems that conditions that produce adverse health outcomes come to be considered diseases as the result of a social process when it is assessed to be beneficial to the greater good that they be so judged. Such judgments about likely benefit to the greater good are utilitarian judgments that may take empirical input but must also assume certain values. We considered the likely outcomes of considering obesity to be a disease to address the question “should obesity be declared a disease?” (as opposed to “is obesity a disease?”). Necessarily, our utilitarian analysis was speculative. The disease label tends to confer certain benefits, obligations, motivations, and legal considerations in our society. The panel concluded that considering obesity a disease is likely to have far more positive than negative consequences and to benefit the greater good by soliciting more resources into prevention, treatment, and research of obesity; encouraging more high-quality caring professionals to view treating the obese patient as a vocation worthy of effort and respect; and reducing the stigma and discrimination heaped on many obese persons. The panel felt that this utilitarian analysis was a legitimate approach to addressing the topic, as well as the approach used for many other conditions labeled diseases, even if not explicitly so. Thus, although one cannot scientifically prove either that obesity is a disease or that it is not a disease, a utilitarian approach supports the position that obesity should be declared a disease. The prevalence of obesity has been increasing for over a century (1) and
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin
(2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa012512 · Cited by 19,011
Effects of Bariatric Surgery on Mortality in Swedish Obese Subjects
Sjöström, L., Narbro, K., Sjöström, C. D., Karason, K., Larsson, B., Wedel, H., Lystig, T., Sullivan, M., Bouchard, C., Carlsson, B., et al. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa066254 · Cited by 4,668
Poirier, P., Giles, T. D., Bray, G. A., Hong, Y., Stern, J. S., Pi-Sunyer, F. X., & Eckel, R. H. (2006) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.171016 · Cited by 3,165
Self-citationLong-term mortality after gastric bypass surgery
Adams, T. D., Gress, R. E., Smith, S. C., Halverson, R. C., Simper, S. C., Rosamond, W. D., LaMonte, M. J., Stroup, A. M., & Hunt, S. C. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa066603 · Cited by 2,572
Putative contributors to the secular increase in obesity: exploring the roads less traveled
Keith, S. W., Redden, D. T., Katzmarzyk, P. T., Boggiano, M. M., Hanlon, E. C., Benca, R. M., Ruden, D., Pietrobelli, A., Barger, J. L., Fontaine, K. R., et al. (2006) · International Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803326 · Cited by 659
Self-citationFailure of adipocyte differentiation causes type II diabetes mellitus?
Danforth, E. (2000) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/79111 · Cited by 487
AGA technical review on obesity
Klein, S., Wadden, T., & Sugerman, H. J. (2002) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/gast.2002.35514 · Cited by 274
Allison, D., Gallagher, D., Heo, M., Pi-Sunyer, F., & Heymsfield, S. (1997) · International Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0800423 · Cited by 188
Self-citationFinkelstein, E. A., Linnan, L. A., Tate, D. F., & Birken, B. E. (2007) · Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine · doi:10.1097/jom.0b013e31813c6dcb · Cited by 149
Self-citation
Cited by
Bray, G. A., Kim, K. K., Wilding, J. P. H., & on behalf of the World Obesity Federation (2017) · Obesity Reviews · doi:10.1111/obr.12551 · Cited by 1,612
Self-citationPharmacological Management of Obesity: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline
Apovian, C. M., Aronne, L. J., Bessesen, D. H., McDonnell, M. E., Murad, M. H., Pagotto, U., Ryan, D. H., & Still, C. D. (2015) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2014-3415 · Cited by 1,347
Pi-Sunyer, X. (2009) · Postgraduate Medicine · doi:10.3810/pgm.2009.11.2074 · Cited by 1,025
Allison, D. B., Gadde, K. M., Garvey, W. T., Peterson, C. A., Schwiers, M. L., Najarian, T., Tam, P. Y., Troupin, B., & Day, W. W. (2012) · Obesity · doi:10.1038/oby.2011.330 · Cited by 711
Self-citationObesity as a Disease: The Obesity Society 2018 Position Statement
Jastreboff, A. M., Kotz, C. M., Kahan, S., Kelly, A. S., & Heymsfield, S. B. (2019) · Obesity · doi:10.1002/oby.22378 · Cited by 457
Advance in peptide-based drug development: delivery platforms, therapeutics and vaccines
Xiao, W., Jiang, W., Chen, Z., Huang, Y., Mao, J., Zheng, W., Hu, Y., & Shi, J. (2025) · Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy · doi:10.1038/s41392-024-02107-5 · Cited by 449
Regarding Obesity as a Disease
Kyle, T. K., Dhurandhar, E. J., & Allison, D. B. (2016) · Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.ecl.2016.04.004 · Cited by 333
Self-citationFrühbeck, G., Busetto, L., Dicker, D., Yumuk, V., Goossens, G. H., Hebebrand, J., Halford, J. G. C., Farpour-Lambert, N. J., Blaak, E. E., Woodward, E., et al. (2019) · Obesity Facts · doi:10.1159/000497124 · Cited by 311
Mensinger, J. L., Tylka, T. L., & Calamari, M. E. (2018) · Body Image · doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2018.03.001 · Cited by 283
Gaps to bridge: Misalignment between perception, reality and actions in obesity
Caterson, I. D., Alfadda, A. A., Auerbach, P., Coutinho, W., Cuevas, A., Dicker, D., Hughes, C., Iwabu, M., Kang, J., Nawar, R., et al. (2019) · Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism · doi:10.1111/dom.13752 · Cited by 210
English, W. J., & Williams, D. B. (2018) · Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.pcad.2018.06.003 · Cited by 82
Redefining obesity: Beyond the numbers
Sharma, A. M., & Campbell‐Scherer, D. L. (2017) · Obesity · doi:10.1002/oby.21801 · Cited by 71
Assessment of obesity beyond body mass index to determine benefit of treatment
Aasheim, E. T., Aylwin, S. J. B., Radhakrishnan, S. T., Sood, A. S., Jovanovic, A., Olbers, T., & le Roux, C. W. (2011) · Clinical Obesity · doi:10.1111/j.1758-8111.2011.00017.x · Cited by 67
Is Obesity A Disease or A Behavior Abnormality? Did the AMA Get It Right?
(2014) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 46
Ciciurkaite, G., Moloney, M. E., & Brown, R. L. (2019) · Public Health Reports · doi:10.1177/0033354918813102 · Cited by 40
Valencia, W. M., Stoutenberg, M., & Florez, H. (2014) · Current Diabetes Reports · doi:10.1007/s11892-014-0539-4 · Cited by 37
Metadata
- Authors
- TOS Obesity as a Disease Writing Group, Allison, D. B., Downey, M., Atkinson, R. L., Billington, C. J., Bray, G. A., Eckel, R. H., Finkelstein, E. A., Jensen, M. D., & Tremblay, A.
- Venue
- Obesity
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1161-1177
- ISSN
- 1930-7381 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-739X
- OpenAlex
- W2069685969
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 43.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.