That is, the average person weighs more but there is an approximately constant distribution around the mean. This is wrong.
Check the following figure from a discussion of obesity trends by the Center for Disease Control:
Obesity has almost tripled since the early 1960s (13% to 35%). Extreme obesity has risen by more than a factor of 6 (0.9% to 6.2%). Yet mere overweight status, a BMI between 25 and 30, has remained stable at about 32% of the population. The action is in the tails!
For a more complete view of the distributions for 1976-80 and 2005-6, look at the density figure on page 2 of this data brief.
To me it looks like BMI is distributed log-normally and the sigma parameter has increased. I don't see how this would be predicted by either the biological or economic explanations discussed in my last post. Two ideas occur to me: First there is heterogeneity in the response parameter. As fat becomes cheaper, many are unaffected but some respond a great deal. Second, there are multiple equilibria. Given the opportunity to get fat people take it only when their neighbors do.
No comments:
Post a Comment