25 October, 2007
ATLANTA - Drunks swimming in gin, smokers in body bags and dopers living with their parents deep into adulthood. Those are among the public service ads shown in the past. But the government's new batch of obesity spots declines even to show a fat person, let alone wag a finger for gluttony or sloth.
"It's so namby-pamby I think people will shrug it off," said Michael Jacobson of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a Washington-based advocacy organization.
The three new spots are the latest in a series created by the Ad Council and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which try to tackle the nation's obesity problem with ads that encourage healthy snacking and taking the stairs.
Creators of the "Small Steps" campaign, funded by the government at more than $1.5 million a year, cite survey data for 467 adults which showed those who saw the ads did more walking and adopted some other healthy habits than those who didn't see the ads.
But critics say such a survey is hardly proof of success, and the nation's fat problem is clearly getting worse — more than one in three U.S. children are overweight or obese, and two in three adults are.
"I think 'Small Steps' is a euphemism for small vision," said Kelly Brownell, director of Yale University's Center for Eating and Weight Disorders.
The "Small Steps" campaign began in 2004. It was created for free by McCann Erickson New York, the ad agency that created the MasterCard "Priceless" campaign. Six TV spots have aired so far, all professionally produced and humorous, highlighting tips to healthier living.
This month, three more spots joined the rotation, along with a multimedia campaign focusing on exercise. The new anti-obesity TV spots show trim or slightly pudgy people noticing blobs of fat on a hotel room floor or in a theater. They comment that someone must have lost it by eating healthy snacks.
The spots' creators say they learned in focus groups that many people are intimidated — hopeless, even — about the sustained changes needed to slim down.
"So many people, when they think about losing weight, see it as a Sisyphean task — 'I have to lose weight but I can't fit it into my busy schedule,'" said Peggy Conlon, president of the Ad Council.
The ads offer easily achievable tips that empower people to make positive changes, she added.
The ads targeting smoking aren't as tame. A recent one by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene shows smokers' decayed and tumored bodies.
Young viewers pay more attention to ads that evoke feelings of personal loss, sadness, anger, disgust or fear, according to an analysis by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Kids also tend to remember such ads longer.
That drama is lacking in the obesity spots — for example, none have offered a surgeon's view of fat, or dramatized a death from Type 2 diabetes, or shown a person complaining about how a fat neighbor's medical bills are costing taxpayers.
In the past, the vegan advocacy group, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, has taken a somewhat confrontational approach.
In 2005, the group put out a spot in which doctors yank a pizza and jumbo-sized soda away from an intently eating fat boy and toss him an apple. They put out another in which the same doctors haul away fatty foods from a restaurant called Chubby's.
The group has no data on whether the ads are working, but the government ads "don't address the obesity problem in a vivid enough way to get people's attention," said Patrick Sullivan, the group's communications director.
That raises a second complaint with the government's campaign: It sidesteps what some feel are the real causes of the obesity epidemic, the abundance of cheap and large portions of sugary and high-calorie foods.
"The U.S. government doesn't have the guts to go after junk food producers," Jacobson said.
Tied in with the "Small Steps" campaign, the Ad Council and federal health department are part of the "Coalition for Healthy Children," whose members include Coca Cola, PepsiCo, the Hershey Co. and the National Confectioners Association. Critics say the partnership suggests a conflict of interest that might dissuade efforts to discourage soft drinks or candy bars.
Food and soda companies did not alter what was said in spots, said Ellyn Fisher, an Ad Council spokeswoman. The content was shaped by advertising research, which concluded the spots were humorous and motivating, she said.
25 October, 2007
ATLANTA - Drunks swimming in gin, smokers in body bags and dopers living with their parents deep into adulthood. Those are among the public service ads shown in the past. But the government's new batch of obesity spots declines even to show a fat person, let alone wag a finger for gluttony or sloth.
"It's so namby-pamby I think people will shrug it off," said Michael Jacobson of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a Washington-based advocacy organization.
The three new spots are the latest in a series created by the Ad Council and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which try to tackle the nation's obesity problem with ads that encourage healthy snacking and taking the stairs.
Creators of the "Small Steps" campaign, funded by the government at more than $1.5 million a year, cite survey data for 467 adults which showed those who saw the ads did more walking and adopted some other healthy habits than those who didn't see the ads.
But critics say such a survey is hardly proof of success, and the nation's fat problem is clearly getting worse — more than one in three U.S. children are overweight or obese, and two in three adults are.
"I think 'Small Steps' is a euphemism for small vision," said Kelly Brownell, director of Yale University's Center for Eating and Weight Disorders.
The "Small Steps" campaign began in 2004. It was created for free by McCann Erickson New York, the ad agency that created the MasterCard "Priceless" campaign. Six TV spots have aired so far, all professionally produced and humorous, highlighting tips to healthier living.
This month, three more spots joined the rotation, along with a multimedia campaign focusing on exercise. The new anti-obesity TV spots show trim or slightly pudgy people noticing blobs of fat on a hotel room floor or in a theater. They comment that someone must have lost it by eating healthy snacks.
The spots' creators say they learned in focus groups that many people are intimidated — hopeless, even — about the sustained changes needed to slim down.
"So many people, when they think about losing weight, see it as a Sisyphean task — 'I have to lose weight but I can't fit it into my busy schedule,'" said Peggy Conlon, president of the Ad Council.
The ads offer easily achievable tips that empower people to make positive changes, she added.
The ads targeting smoking aren't as tame. A recent one by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene shows smokers' decayed and tumored bodies.
Young viewers pay more attention to ads that evoke feelings of personal loss, sadness, anger, disgust or fear, according to an analysis by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Kids also tend to remember such ads longer.
That drama is lacking in the obesity spots — for example, none have offered a surgeon's view of fat, or dramatized a death from Type 2 diabetes, or shown a person complaining about how a fat neighbor's medical bills are costing taxpayers.
In the past, the vegan advocacy group, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, has taken a somewhat confrontational approach.
In 2005, the group put out a spot in which doctors yank a pizza and jumbo-sized soda away from an intently eating fat boy and toss him an apple. They put out another in which the same doctors haul away fatty foods from a restaurant called Chubby's.
The group has no data on whether the ads are working, but the government ads "don't address the obesity problem in a vivid enough way to get people's attention," said Patrick Sullivan, the group's communications director.
That raises a second complaint with the government's campaign: It sidesteps what some feel are the real causes of the obesity epidemic, the abundance of cheap and large portions of sugary and high-calorie foods.
"The U.S. government doesn't have the guts to go after junk food producers," Jacobson said.
Tied in with the "Small Steps" campaign, the Ad Council and federal health department are part of the "Coalition for Healthy Children," whose members include Coca Cola, PepsiCo, the Hershey Co. and the National Confectioners Association. Critics say the partnership suggests a conflict of interest that might dissuade efforts to discourage soft drinks or candy bars.
Food and soda companies did not alter what was said in spots, said Ellyn Fisher, an Ad Council spokeswoman. The content was shaped by advertising research, which concluded the spots were humorous and motivating, she said.
11 October, 2007
When searching for a retirement community, it's hard not to focus all of your attentions on the fun amenities. Is there a pool or a spa? Do they serve five-star cuisine? But what matters more than tee times and tennis is whether the retirement community that you're eyeing is safe and sanitary, and can cater to your health care needs — now as well as in the future.
One would think most retirement communities would fit the bill. Think again. In the past year, there have been news reports of a fire that broke out at the Providence Retirement Home in New Albany, Ind. (eight residents were treated for smoke inhalation and two were sent to the hospital), of staff members spotted two deer running in the halls of an Adams County retirement home in Pennsylvania before they exited on their own will, and of unsanitary conditions (including maggots in a resident's leg wound) at the Armed Forces Retirement Home in Washington, D.C., surfaced during an investigation of 1,400 veteran's facilities nationwide.hot tool
Before you choose your new residence, make sure to visit it at least once, and be prepared to do some detective work. Here are some tips on what to look for when shopping around for a retirement community.
Health Services
Even if you're in good health, consider choosing a retirement community that has an on-staff nurse or a visiting practitioner, as well as health care services such as bathing assistance and medication reminders. Also, take a stroll around the health care facilities and pay particular attention to cleanliness, how the staff interacts with the residents, and odd smells — especially a lingering smell of urine, which is usually just one of many signs of unsanitary conditions, according to Barth Holohan, president of Continuum, a health care company based in St. Louis, that provides health and supportive services to seniors.
Continuing care retirement communities are probably the best prepared to deal with healthcare issues that arise as one gets further on in their golden years. This type of community hosts independent living quarters, assisted living facilities and nursing homes. That way, if a resident's health deteriorates, he or she could get the proper treatment without changing facilities. "There will come a day when [a patient] will need [in-house, health] services," says Holohan. "You don't want...to change homes three or four times."
The average cost of living in a not-for-profit continuing care retirement community is $2,672 per month or $32,064 annually, according to American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging's (AAHSA) 2005 Continuing Care Retirement Community Profile. To avoid being slammed with excessive fees down the road, make sure to assess your healthcare needs before you choose a particular package, says Holohan. Otherwise, if you ever need additional services like 24-hour-awake care — having a nurse's aid or a certified nursing assistant who's awake at all time — could cost you around $3,000 more a week, he says.
If you have fallen in love with a certain retirement community and they don't offer health services, be prepared to dole out a lot of extra cash. One of your few options should you get sick or require regular assistance is to contact an outside health care company, which will likely charge a monthly or per hour fee for private care. Setting up a resident's medicines, for example, costs around $100 per week or $18 per hour for a minimum of four hours with Continuum.
Complaints
Even if a retirement community, assisted living facility, or nursing home appears well-run, it's important to do some extra digging. You can start out by eating at least one meal at the facility, and when you speak with residents ask them if they are happy living there. But don't stop there. Before you start loading the moving truck, contact the Better Business Bureau or Elder Care Locator. They can inform you of deficiencies, complaints, or legal actions that have been filed against a specific facility. In addition, Medicare's Nursing Home Compare offers information on nursing home quality measures, inspection results, and staff. Another option is to contact your state health care or licensing agency or ombudsman or you can ask the facility for its most recent state inspection, says David Kyllo, executive director at the National Center for Assisted Living (NCAL).
The Fine Print
Incoming residents often have to sign a binding contract with their retirement community before moving in. Ask an attorney specializing in elder care to review the terms of the contract, a service that typically costs $300 to $500, before you sign on the dotted line, says Debra Speyer, an elder care attorney with offices in Florida and Pennsylvania. Each retirement community and contract is different from the next one, so it's important to read the fine print, she says. Make sure you understand what services the base price includes, and if fixed costs are set to increase annually, then the contract should state the percentage at which the increases will be calculated.
"Keep in mind, that most of these contracts are a take it or leave it," says Speyer. If there's room to negotiate, have your attorney request that an exit clause be included in the contract, she says. That way, if you leave the community — say, because you just weren't comfortable there — then you'll be protected from any large financial damages, such as losing your entire deposit — a cost that can range from $60,000 to $120,000, according to AAHSA's 2005 profile. Negotiating this clause costs around $100 to $400 an hour, depending on where you live, says Speyer.
Staff
Chances are your monthly payments to your retirement community are, in part, determined by staffing levels. A retirement community that charges $3,000 per month might have a resident-to-staff ratio of eight-to-one, while a community that charges $2,000 might have a ratio of twenty-to-one, says Holohan. The extra money could be worth it if residents receive better care, he says.
Also, get a feel for the staff turnover rate. "If they've been there for two months, you're in trouble," says John Hehn, executive director of Florida Presbyterian Homes, a continuing care retirement community in Lakeland, Florida. "The longer they...know the residents, the better their care will be." To get an even more realistic sense of what life in the community is like, visit at night when there's less staff, says Holohan.
Security
Sadly, security is a very big concern at retirement communities. Make sure to inquire about the number of security personnel that are on patrol 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Look for locks on all of the windows, barriers, like metal bars, on first-floor windows and an alarm system. Equally important is the interior security, says Dr. James Wood, clinical assistant professor of medicine at the University of Rochester. He suggests asking if call bells are easily accessible or if the facility has a Personal Emergency Response System (PERS) that outfits residents with bracelets or necklaces that can alert staff of falls or other emergencies. These aren't required, he says, "but it's something I'd expect of any facility where I place someone I love."