
Rates of obesity are soaring worldwide. Have we been misunderstanding the problem?
Obesity affects more than 1 billion people worldwide yet there isn't really a conclusive definition of the condition.
A Lancet Commission argue that obesity should not just be seen as a risk factor for other diseases – but in some cases, should be seen as a disease itself.
In the first of this two-part Spotlight series, we break down the debate around the issue, and its implications for health policy.
In 1990, just 2% of all young people around the world aged 5 to 24 were living with obesity. By 2021, this figure had more than tripled to over 6%.
This is according to a recent study, which relied on Body Mass Index (BMI) data from 180 countries and territories around the world. It estimates that the rise in obesity among children and young people will only continue in the coming decades.
South Africa certainly isn't immune to the crisis. A survey conducted in 2021/2022 found that 16% of all children aged 6 to 18 were 'severely overweight'. Meanwhile, World Health Organization (WHO) data suggests that about 30% of all adults in South Africa are living with obesity, meaning a BMI of over 30, which is almost double the global level.
BMI, which simply looks at a person's weight in relation to their height, is a crude measure of obesity. For instance, a person may have a high BMI simply because they have a lot of muscle rather than fat. But while it is agreed that BMI is a flawed indicator at the individual level, many experts recommend using it as a rough proxy for ' health risk at a population level '.
For instance, a study which collected data on nearly three million people found that those who had very high BMI levels were, on average, more likely to die at an early age. The study also found that this was true of people with very low BMI levels (those who were underweight). In this context, the above figures paint a concerning picture.
Given the rising rates, experts argue that we need health systems to be able to track and respond to obesity urgently. But, according to a Lancet Commission published in January, health systems around the world may struggle to do this, because of a failure to accurately conceptualise and measure what obesity actually is.
READ | SA plastic surgery trends: From lip fillers to facelifts, what each generation wants done
The Lancet commission was developed by 58 experts from different medical specialties and though it has been the subject of debate, it has since been widely endorsed as a new way to understand obesity. Spotlight takes a look at what it concluded.
Delaying treatment for no reason
Obesity is often regarded as a risk factor for other diseases, for instance, type 2 diabetes. But according to the commission, there are certain cases in which obesity is not just a risk factor, but a disease itself – one that should be immediately treated.
One of the reasons for this is that obesity not only contributes to the emergence of other conditions but sometimes leads to clinical symptoms directly. For example, the cartilage that protects the joints in a person's knees can sometimes become eroded when adults carry too much weight. In this case, a person could suffer from joint pain, stiffness and reduced mobility where obesity is clearly the cause.
Take another example. If fat deposits build up in the abdomen, this may limit how much the lungs can expand, causing breathlessness. Similarly, a build-up of fat around the neck can narrow a person's upper airways, which can cause sleep apnoea.
Thus, obesity is not simply something which increases the risk of developing a separate disease in the future - but something which can directly (and presently) affect the functioning of organs.
More broadly, the commission argues that by hindering a person's 'mobility, balance and range of motion' obesity can in certain cases 'restrict routine activities of daily living'. In these instances, obesity is a disease by definition, according to the commission. This is given that it defines disease as a 'harmful deviation from the normal structural or functional state of an organism, associated with specific signs and symptoms and limitations of daily activities'.
But why does this conceptual debate matter?
Because at present, people often have to wait for other diseases to crop up before insurers or public health systems cover them for weight loss drugs or bariatric surgery - a procedure to help with weight loss and improve obesity-related health conditions. And when they do cover these services, it is often only after severe delay. Because obesity is only considered to be a risk factor, it isn't typically treated with the same urgency as life-threatening diseases, according to the authors of the commission.
Professor Frances Rubino, the lead author of the commission, details how this problem manifests in the healthcare system.
'I've been doing bariatric surgery for 25 years in four different countries; in America, Italy, France and the UK,' he tells Spotlight, 'In all of those countries, to meet the criteria for surgery people very often have to undergo six to 12 months of weight monitoring before their surgery is covered. So systematically you delay treatment'.
He continues: 'Someone who has clinical obesity and has heart failure as a result of it is waiting for a year for what reason? That condition will only worsen and if the patient is still alive, the treatment [is] going to cost the same amount to the payer but it's going to be less effective.'
Can't people just diet?
One of the reasons that some academics have historically been reluctant to classify obesity as a disease is because of a fear that this may reduce people's agency - instead of taking proactive steps to diet and exercise, people with obesity may simply view themselves as afflicted by a disease.
The belief that people with obesity can simply diet their way out of their situation is in fact partially why Rubino's patients were forced to wait long periods of time before receiving bariatric surgery.
Rubino explains: 'In America, many private payers [i.e. medical insurance schemes] have required weight monitoring programmes, where patients do nothing else other than see a dietician for 12 months, and if they skip one appointment, they have to start all over again. I think that in some cases, this has been misguided by the idea that you want to see if obesity can be reversed by somebody going on a diet.'
This, according to him, is a 'misconception', arguing that if someone faces such severe levels of obesity that they require surgery, diet is unlikely to offer a solution.
Indeed, research has shown that it's very rare for people with obesity to lose large amounts of weight quickly without surgery or medication. For instance, a study on over 176 000 patients in the UK found that among men with 'simply obesity' or a BMI of 30-34.9, only 1 in 210 were able to achieve a 'normal' weight level within a year. Among men with morbid obesity or BMI of 35 or more, the chance was less than 1 than in 1 000. Chances for women were roughly twice as good as men's - so still exceedingly small.
READ | Closed doors, open hearts: The activists filling the gaps in Southern African sexual healthcare
Thus, if someone is severely obese and their excess weight is causing life-threatening symptoms, putting them on a diet for a year is unlikely to result in the urgent changes that may be required for them to get better. In fact, Rubino argues that they may simply die of their condition in the interim.
Taking a medical approach more quickly is easier now than ever before due to the regulatory approval of GLP-1 agonists like semaglutide and tirzepatide – Spotlight previously reported on the availability of these new diabetes and weight loss medicines in South Africa. An article by WHO officials from December states that because of the approval of these medicines '[h]ealth systems across the globe now may be able to offer a treatment response integrated with lifestyle changes that opens the possibility of an end to the obesity pandemic'.
Not all people with obesity are ill
There is a more scientific argument against categorising obesity as a disease. This is that while obesity can sometimes result in the negative health symptoms discussed above (like respiratory issues or reduced mobility) it doesn't always do this.
In fact, the commission acknowledges that some people with obesity 'appear to be able to live a relatively healthy life for many years, or even a lifetime'. One of the reasons for this is that excess fat may be stored in areas that don't surround vital organs. For instance, if fat is stored in the limbs, hips, or buttocks, then this may cause less harm than if it is stored in the stomach.
Since obesity doesn't always cause health problems, it isn't always a disease. In order to deal with this conceptual hurdle, the commission classifies obesity into two categories - clinical and preclinical obesity.
If a person has pre-clinical obesity, this means they have a lot of excess fat, but no obvious health problems that have emerged as a result. In this case, obesity is not classified as a disease, though it may still increase the chance of future health problems (depending on a range of factors, like family history).
For a person to have clinical obesity, they must have a lot of excess fat as well as health problems that have already been directly caused by this. It is this that the commission defines as a disease.
This classification system, according to Rubino, ensures not only that we urgently treat people living with clinical obesity, but also that we don't overtreat people - since if a person falls into the pre-clinically obese group, then they may not need treatment.
But if we're going to treat clinical obesity as a disease, we'll need clear methods of diagnosing people. Since BMI is deeply flawed and provides little information about whether a person is ill at the individual level, health systems will need something else. In part 2 of this Spotlight special series, we'll discuss the options offered by the commission, and how this all relates to the situation in South Africa.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Middle East & Africa Point-of-Care Diagnostics Market Analysis Report 2025-2032 - Telemedicine and POC Convergence Unlock New Opportunities
The Middle East and Africa point-of-care diagnostics market is set for transformative growth, driven by rising demand for rapid and accurate diagnostic solutions. Valued at US$ 3.18 billion in 2025, it's projected to reach US$ 6.9 billion by 2032 with a CAGR of 11.67%. Modernization of healthcare systems, increasing investments in rural areas, and technological advancements such as AI integration propel this growth, with Saudi Arabia and UAE leading. Despite challenges like limited healthcare spending in some regions, initiatives in telemedicine and AI-based solutions offer significant opportunities. Notable market players include QIAGEN, Danaher, and Abbott. Dublin, June 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The "Middle East & Africa Point-of-Care Diagnostics Market - Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends, and Forecast 2032 - By Product, Technology, Grade, Application, End-user, Region: (Middle East & Africa)" report has been added to Middle East and Africa (MEA) point-of-care diagnostics market is undergoing a significant transformation, driven by increasing demand for rapid, accessible, and reliable diagnostic solutions. As healthcare systems across the region continue to modernize, the market is expected to grow from an estimated US$ 3.18 billion in 2025 to US$ 6.9 billion by 2032, registering a robust compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11.67% during the forecast point-of-care (POC) diagnostics market in MEA is gaining traction, supported by growing awareness of early disease detection, rising healthcare spending in key nations, and the integration of innovative technologies. Countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are at the forefront of this growth, with government initiatives driving the adoption of modern healthcare technologies, including POC limited access to centralized diagnostic laboratories and high healthcare costs posed challenges to market expansion. However, recent advancements in portable diagnostic devices, along with rising healthcare awareness and increased mobile health adoption, have enabled POC solutions to become more widespread, especially in underserved and remote Market DriversPrevalence of Infectious and Chronic DiseasesThe MEA region continues to grapple with a high burden of infectious diseases like HIV, tuberculosis, and influenza, along with a sharp increase in non-communicable diseases such as diabetes and cardiovascular conditions. POC diagnostics have emerged as a vital tool in enabling timely and accurate diagnosis, helping healthcare providers address these challenges more for Rapid and Accurate Diagnostic ToolsThe increasing need for fast diagnostic results, especially in rural and resource-constrained environments, is fueling the adoption of POC technologies. These tools help in faster decision-making, efficient patient management, and improved treatment outcomes, especially during health emergencies and disease Digitalization and AI IntegrationTechnological advancements, including the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning in diagnostics, are enhancing the accuracy and speed of POC testing. These innovations allow for real-time data analysis and personalized diagnostic support, making diagnostics more precise and OpportunitiesTelemedicine and Mobile Health ExpansionThe convergence of POC diagnostics with telemedicine and mobile health applications is creating new avenues for growth. With the widespread use of smartphones and internet connectivity across MEA, healthcare delivery is becoming increasingly digitized, allowing patients in remote areas to access timely diagnostic services without visiting a in Rural and Underserved RegionsGovernments and non-governmental organizations are actively investing in healthcare infrastructure across rural regions. POC diagnostics are particularly beneficial in these areas, eliminating the need for long-distance travel to centralized labs and ensuring faster treatment initiation. These investments are likely to further unlock the market's growth of AI-Based POC SolutionsAI-powered diagnostic tools are revolutionizing how diseases are detected and managed at the point of care. Their integration with wearable devices and mobile platforms will enable real-time monitoring and predictive analytics, enhancing the overall value proposition of POC diagnostics. Market RestraintsDespite the promising growth outlook, the MEA point-of-care diagnostics market faces certain challenges. Limited healthcare spending in some African nations restricts access to advanced diagnostic technologies. The high initial cost and maintenance requirements of POC devices further hinder their adoption. Additionally, insufficient reimbursement frameworks and lack of trained professionals remain concerns in achieving broader market AnalysisSaudi Arabia remains the dominant player in the Middle East and Africa point-of-care diagnostics market. The country's healthcare modernization efforts, supported by strategic government policies, are leading to an increased demand for rapid and efficient diagnostics. The UAE also demonstrates a strong growth trajectory, driven by rising healthcare awareness and private sector contrast, several regions within Africa are still hampered by low healthcare spending and limited access to diagnostic tools. However, the growing focus on universal healthcare and global support for improving healthcare systems in these regions are expected to catalyze growth in the long AnalysisThe competitive Analysis of the MEA point-of-care diagnostics market is marked by both global healthcare leaders and emerging regional players. Companies are increasingly focusing on strategic partnerships, mergers, and investments in innovative diagnostic technologies to expand their market players operating in the region include: QIAGEN Danaher Corporation F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd BD (Becton Dickinson) Abbott BIOMERIEUX Nova Biomedical Werfen Trividia Health, Inc. Siemens Healthcare Private Limited Market Segmentation By Product: Infectious Disease Glucose Monitoring Hepatitis C HIV Testing Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Influenza Respiratory Infection Tropical Disease Healthcare-Associated Infection (HAI) Pregnancy and Fertility Tumor/Cancer Marker Cardiometabolic Cholesterol Coagulation Hematology Urinalysis Other Infectious Diseases By Prescription Mode: Prescription-based Over-the-counter (OTC) By Type: Consumables and Kits Software and Services Devices Accessories By End User: Hospitals Ambulatory Care Settings Home Care Research Laboratories Others By Country: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates South Africa Rest of Gulf Cooperation Council Rest of Middle East and Africa For more information about this report visit About is the world's leading source for international market research reports and market data. We provide you with the latest data on international and regional markets, key industries, the top companies, new products and the latest trends. CONTACT: CONTACT: Laura Wood,Senior Press Manager press@ For E.S.T Office Hours Call 1-917-300-0470 For U.S./ CAN Toll Free Call 1-800-526-8630 For GMT Office Hours Call +353-1-416-8900


Medscape
3 hours ago
- Medscape
Hand vs Hand: The Strange World of Alien Limb
A 55-year-old patient who was right-handed consulted a neurologist for episodes of inter-manual conflict due to uncontrolled movements of his left hand, marked by involuntary movements of his left hand that interfered with the right hand. Each time he reached for a door handle with his right hand, his left hand counteracted the movement. He reported similar interference during other manual tasks. The patient was anxious and feared the persistence of these movements. A brain MRI prescribed by the neurologist allowed the diagnosis of infarction of the corpus callosum. This rare case of alien hand syndrome reported by Léonard Kouamé Kouassi, MD, and colleagues at Félix Houphouët-Boigny University in Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire, recommends brain imaging in case of unusual clinical manifestation or prompt referral of the patient to a neurologist. The Patient and His History The right-handed patient had episodes of uncontrolled movements of his left hand. According to him, this phenomenon had been developing for 8 days, preceded by a numbness sensation in his left upper limb 6 days earlier. He is right-handed. Whenever he moves his right hand to perform an activity, his left hand interferes. He has the impression that his left hand is being controlled by someone else, preventing him from performing his activities. These symptoms made him anxious, and he kept asking the neurologist if this hand behaviour would ever stop. His medical history included high blood pressure and type 2 diabetes for at least 5 years. There was no history of alcohol or tobacco use and no family history of hypertension or diabetes. Findings and Diagnosis On admission, neurologic examination was normal, blood pressure was 160/100 mm Hg, temperature was 37.2 °C, pulse was 84 beats/min and was regular, weight was 93 kg, and height was 1.76 m. A scheduled neuropsychological evaluation could not be performed. Complete blood cell count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, urea, and creatinine levels were within the reference range. Only low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was elevated at 1.37 g/dL. The retroviral serology results were negative. The immunological and thrombophilia test results were normal. Cerebral MRI showed well-systematised signal anomalies within the corpus callosum splenium, extending anteriorly to its trunk, with a discrete mass effect on the corpus callosum body. These anomalies appeared in hyposignal on the T1 sequence, hypersignal on the T2 sequences, and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery in diffusion 1000, without restriction on the apparent diffusion coefficient and without haemorrhagic stigmata in gradient echo, corresponding to images of a relatively recent corpus callosum ischaemic stroke in the territories of the left pericallosal and posterior cerebral arteries. An old punctuated vascular lesion of the left caudate nucleus and acquired leukoencephalopathy of old vascular origin were also noted. ECG showed sinus tachycardia associated with an incomplete right branch block with a V5-V6 late S-wave. A Holter ECG could not be performed. Transthoracic echocardiography showed concentric hypertrophy of the left ventricular walls and no intracavity thrombus. Transoesophageal echocardiography was non-specific. Doppler ultrasound of supra-aortic trunks showed marked bilateral atheromatosis, with the presence of a non-stenotic heterogeneous plaque at the ostium of the right internal carotid artery. On the basis of these findings, the patient was diagnosed with alien hand syndrome. The management was that of ischaemic stroke. Medications prescribed to the patient included an antidiabetic by a diabetologist, an antihypertensive (perindopril arginine/amlodipine besylate), a statin (Rosuvastatin EG), an antiplatelet aggregator (aspirin), and an anxiolytic (prazepam). Around 21 days after the onset of the stroke, the patient noted a significant improvement in the behaviour of his left hand, which became less and less troublesome, with the disappearance of the inter-manual conflict. However, the patient reported difficulties in deciding which of the two opposite actions to initiate. Discussion Alien hand syndrome is a rare manifestation of stroke. The diagnostic workup followed standard stroke protocols. There is no approved or recommended therapy, and its management is based on anecdotal reports of pharmacological interventions using botulinum toxin and clonazepam, as well as behavioural interventions. In this case, in addition to the usual treatment of cerebral infarction, prazepam is an anxiolytic. Clonazepam and prazepam belong to the same therapeutic group and have similar actions, which may explain the improvement seen in our patient. 'We hope, by updating this syndrome, to attract the attention of physicians to avoid diagnostic delays. In addition, this case report could contribute to enriching data on alien hand syndrome in sub-Saharan Africa,' the authors wrote.


News24
4 hours ago
- News24
Rates of obesity are soaring worldwide. Have we been misunderstanding the problem?
Obesity affects more than 1 billion people worldwide yet there isn't really a conclusive definition of the condition. A Lancet Commission argue that obesity should not just be seen as a risk factor for other diseases – but in some cases, should be seen as a disease itself. In the first of this two-part Spotlight series, we break down the debate around the issue, and its implications for health policy. In 1990, just 2% of all young people around the world aged 5 to 24 were living with obesity. By 2021, this figure had more than tripled to over 6%. This is according to a recent study, which relied on Body Mass Index (BMI) data from 180 countries and territories around the world. It estimates that the rise in obesity among children and young people will only continue in the coming decades. South Africa certainly isn't immune to the crisis. A survey conducted in 2021/2022 found that 16% of all children aged 6 to 18 were 'severely overweight'. Meanwhile, World Health Organization (WHO) data suggests that about 30% of all adults in South Africa are living with obesity, meaning a BMI of over 30, which is almost double the global level. BMI, which simply looks at a person's weight in relation to their height, is a crude measure of obesity. For instance, a person may have a high BMI simply because they have a lot of muscle rather than fat. But while it is agreed that BMI is a flawed indicator at the individual level, many experts recommend using it as a rough proxy for ' health risk at a population level '. For instance, a study which collected data on nearly three million people found that those who had very high BMI levels were, on average, more likely to die at an early age. The study also found that this was true of people with very low BMI levels (those who were underweight). In this context, the above figures paint a concerning picture. Given the rising rates, experts argue that we need health systems to be able to track and respond to obesity urgently. But, according to a Lancet Commission published in January, health systems around the world may struggle to do this, because of a failure to accurately conceptualise and measure what obesity actually is. READ | SA plastic surgery trends: From lip fillers to facelifts, what each generation wants done The Lancet commission was developed by 58 experts from different medical specialties and though it has been the subject of debate, it has since been widely endorsed as a new way to understand obesity. Spotlight takes a look at what it concluded. Delaying treatment for no reason Obesity is often regarded as a risk factor for other diseases, for instance, type 2 diabetes. But according to the commission, there are certain cases in which obesity is not just a risk factor, but a disease itself – one that should be immediately treated. One of the reasons for this is that obesity not only contributes to the emergence of other conditions but sometimes leads to clinical symptoms directly. For example, the cartilage that protects the joints in a person's knees can sometimes become eroded when adults carry too much weight. In this case, a person could suffer from joint pain, stiffness and reduced mobility where obesity is clearly the cause. Take another example. If fat deposits build up in the abdomen, this may limit how much the lungs can expand, causing breathlessness. Similarly, a build-up of fat around the neck can narrow a person's upper airways, which can cause sleep apnoea. Thus, obesity is not simply something which increases the risk of developing a separate disease in the future - but something which can directly (and presently) affect the functioning of organs. More broadly, the commission argues that by hindering a person's 'mobility, balance and range of motion' obesity can in certain cases 'restrict routine activities of daily living'. In these instances, obesity is a disease by definition, according to the commission. This is given that it defines disease as a 'harmful deviation from the normal structural or functional state of an organism, associated with specific signs and symptoms and limitations of daily activities'. But why does this conceptual debate matter? Because at present, people often have to wait for other diseases to crop up before insurers or public health systems cover them for weight loss drugs or bariatric surgery - a procedure to help with weight loss and improve obesity-related health conditions. And when they do cover these services, it is often only after severe delay. Because obesity is only considered to be a risk factor, it isn't typically treated with the same urgency as life-threatening diseases, according to the authors of the commission. Professor Frances Rubino, the lead author of the commission, details how this problem manifests in the healthcare system. 'I've been doing bariatric surgery for 25 years in four different countries; in America, Italy, France and the UK,' he tells Spotlight, 'In all of those countries, to meet the criteria for surgery people very often have to undergo six to 12 months of weight monitoring before their surgery is covered. So systematically you delay treatment'. He continues: 'Someone who has clinical obesity and has heart failure as a result of it is waiting for a year for what reason? That condition will only worsen and if the patient is still alive, the treatment [is] going to cost the same amount to the payer but it's going to be less effective.' Can't people just diet? One of the reasons that some academics have historically been reluctant to classify obesity as a disease is because of a fear that this may reduce people's agency - instead of taking proactive steps to diet and exercise, people with obesity may simply view themselves as afflicted by a disease. The belief that people with obesity can simply diet their way out of their situation is in fact partially why Rubino's patients were forced to wait long periods of time before receiving bariatric surgery. Rubino explains: 'In America, many private payers [i.e. medical insurance schemes] have required weight monitoring programmes, where patients do nothing else other than see a dietician for 12 months, and if they skip one appointment, they have to start all over again. I think that in some cases, this has been misguided by the idea that you want to see if obesity can be reversed by somebody going on a diet.' This, according to him, is a 'misconception', arguing that if someone faces such severe levels of obesity that they require surgery, diet is unlikely to offer a solution. Indeed, research has shown that it's very rare for people with obesity to lose large amounts of weight quickly without surgery or medication. For instance, a study on over 176 000 patients in the UK found that among men with 'simply obesity' or a BMI of 30-34.9, only 1 in 210 were able to achieve a 'normal' weight level within a year. Among men with morbid obesity or BMI of 35 or more, the chance was less than 1 than in 1 000. Chances for women were roughly twice as good as men's - so still exceedingly small. READ | Closed doors, open hearts: The activists filling the gaps in Southern African sexual healthcare Thus, if someone is severely obese and their excess weight is causing life-threatening symptoms, putting them on a diet for a year is unlikely to result in the urgent changes that may be required for them to get better. In fact, Rubino argues that they may simply die of their condition in the interim. Taking a medical approach more quickly is easier now than ever before due to the regulatory approval of GLP-1 agonists like semaglutide and tirzepatide – Spotlight previously reported on the availability of these new diabetes and weight loss medicines in South Africa. An article by WHO officials from December states that because of the approval of these medicines '[h]ealth systems across the globe now may be able to offer a treatment response integrated with lifestyle changes that opens the possibility of an end to the obesity pandemic'. Not all people with obesity are ill There is a more scientific argument against categorising obesity as a disease. This is that while obesity can sometimes result in the negative health symptoms discussed above (like respiratory issues or reduced mobility) it doesn't always do this. In fact, the commission acknowledges that some people with obesity 'appear to be able to live a relatively healthy life for many years, or even a lifetime'. One of the reasons for this is that excess fat may be stored in areas that don't surround vital organs. For instance, if fat is stored in the limbs, hips, or buttocks, then this may cause less harm than if it is stored in the stomach. Since obesity doesn't always cause health problems, it isn't always a disease. In order to deal with this conceptual hurdle, the commission classifies obesity into two categories - clinical and preclinical obesity. If a person has pre-clinical obesity, this means they have a lot of excess fat, but no obvious health problems that have emerged as a result. In this case, obesity is not classified as a disease, though it may still increase the chance of future health problems (depending on a range of factors, like family history). For a person to have clinical obesity, they must have a lot of excess fat as well as health problems that have already been directly caused by this. It is this that the commission defines as a disease. This classification system, according to Rubino, ensures not only that we urgently treat people living with clinical obesity, but also that we don't overtreat people - since if a person falls into the pre-clinically obese group, then they may not need treatment. But if we're going to treat clinical obesity as a disease, we'll need clear methods of diagnosing people. Since BMI is deeply flawed and provides little information about whether a person is ill at the individual level, health systems will need something else. In part 2 of this Spotlight special series, we'll discuss the options offered by the commission, and how this all relates to the situation in South Africa.