If healthy eating, exercise and overall wellness messages are omnipresent in today's society, why then are Americans' waistlines continuing to expand? The availability of information regarding healthy food choices is extensive, and the same can be said about how certain choices affect our health. But still, as reported by the Trust for America's Health in its July 2009 "F as in Fat" report, obesity has increased in 23 states and has not declined in a single state. Obviously, all those messages are just not enough!

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has even classified our society as "obesogenic," a term used to describe environments that promote an increased food intake, nonhealthful foods and a sedentary lifestyle.

A recent study by the Urban Institute proposes a federal tax on "more fattening" foods -- which, by the way, is ridiculous. "Reducing Obesity: Policy Strategies From the Tobacco Wars" evaluates the current evidence regarding the obesity epidemic and likens it to the fight against Big Tobacco. The study discusses various obesity-related statistics and facts, including the shocking fact that for the first time since the Civil War, Americans may see a decline in average life expectancy.

We know that over one in three adults and one in six children are obese, and it's not news that obesity is associated with over 20 different diseases, costing the United States over $147 billion per year.

The Urban Institute proposes that in order to change these statistics, improve quality of life, and break America's "obesogenic" classification, a tax on certain foods is necessary. Foods considered to be more fattening and less healthy based on the Ranyer model, a food rating system used by the British government, would be taxed a modest 10 percent. It's a "modest" tax as compared with other organizations like the World Health Organization, which proposed a tax of 66-75 percent, or the USDA's estimate of a 10-30 percent tax. Based on the average American's intake, 33 percent (also a modest estimate) of the foods we eat are considered "more fattening" and thus would be taxed. In 10 years, this could add up to $500 billion.

Will taxing "more fattening" foods become the next piece of weaponry in the obesity arsenal? I certainly hope not. The solution isn't about taxing, which hasn't worked on alcohol, tobacco or gas. What makes us think it will work on "fat"? What we need is a sit-down with the major manufacturers, leading health professional and retailers with one objective in mind: To make healthy, tasty foods more affordable and available.

photo: stockbyte/getty images