Obesity does not cause the loss of productivity. Is that true?

In the current pandemic of obesity and obesity related metabolic diseases, when the governments of countries are looking for a quick solution to prevent the collapse of health care, some people seem to believe that obesity is not a problem. 

I have discussed this topic in several of my articles, of which one can be found here. In that article I pointed at several aspects of obesity, independently of the metabolic disorders, that directly affect people's health and wellbeing and one does not have to be a scholar to understand that it also can cost the society a lot of money. 

However, Dr Lustig believes that obesity is not a problem. He said so in a panel talk at 31 minute of the video and also that it is diabetes where the money goes. He specifically said that 

"Obesity does not cause the loss of productivity." 

Really? 

I remember reading a story in the papers a couple of years ago. It was about a woman who was on benefits, because she was too fat to be able to work. And her daughter was the same! Check the Mail Online article about the cost of the obesity to the society. On Youtube you can also find plenty of videos of extremely obese people how they need a constant care because they are bed bound or immobile, they are often in a constant pain due to excess body weight and all they can do is remain at home and get support. 

Now tell me that the obesity does not lead to absenteeism or the loss of productivity, whether on the side of the affected individual, or the employer or the whole society. Just because there is more money going into research of diabetes or cancer, and not to the research of obesity, it does not mean that obesity does not cause a loss of productivity or that it is not a burden to the society. 

Of course the obesity causes the loss of productivity, in addition to the tremendous health care costs! 

If you do not believe my description, check the official figures: 

"The cost to the UK economy of overweight and obesity was estimated at £15.8 billion per year in 2007, including £4.2 billion in costs to the NHS."

Too little? Well, in 2014 it was £47 billion, according to The Guardian, referring to the McKinsey Global Institute. The NHS costs have also jumped up to £9 billion a year, which means it more than doubled since 2007, which was not that long ago, what do you think? 

And these were just in the UK. I can predict that the U.S. will have even worse figures. In fact, read this: 

"About 37% of the obese population in the U.S. is in the two highest grades of obesity -- a body mass index (BMI) of 35 to 39 and a BMI of 40 or more. But these two groups are responsible for 61% of the costs resulting from excess weight, Finkelstein and colleagues calculate."

Or another source:

"Loss of productivity due to obesity costs as much as medical expenditures for the condition, according to a new study that pegs the cost of obesity among full-time workers in the United States at $73.1 billion per year.

Obesity's hidden costs, the researchers said, stem from the fact that obese people tend to be less productive than normal-weight people while at work — simply accounting for the extra sick days they take misses a big part of the picture. “

The following diagram shows the trends in the rise of bariatric surgeries - the quick-fix of the stubborn obesity among people who could not lose weight the natural way. Why would they be doing it if it had no impact on their life? 

For comparison, below is the table illustrating the cost of both types of diabetes to the NHS in 2012: 

There you see that only little more money was spent for treatment of the type 2 diabetes  than those £9 billion for the obesity mentioned earlier, can you see? Yet Dr Lustig claims that it is diabetes where all the money goes and that the obesity means nothing because people do not die from it:

In addition, the newer version of the 'good old' video: Sugar: The bitter truth from 2011, starts with Dr Lustig saying how the "obesity is chewing through our healthcare dollars like nothing ever before..." Has he changed his opinion in three years? It seem he did because back then he presented this information to the audience: 

There you have it: $65 billion reduction in work productivity... In addition, he also explicitly said, when quoting another professional at 1:07:29 of the 2011 video that "if they recoup that $150 billion they would resolve the healthcare problem".

In the UK, the constantly increasing prevalence of obesity and the threat that the NHS would collapse by 2020 because of it was also a reason why the public policies focused on obese people, not only on those that are metabolically sick. Only one campaign Change4Life which was run with the main aim to PREVENT obesity had a budget of £73 million over 3 years. Only one campaign and it was not even designed to reduce the obesity but to prevent it. It is well established that once the obesity develops, it is difficult to ged rid of and it comes with other diseases as well. The prevention is better than cure. 

So why the governments and other non-governmental organisations would focus on obesity if it was not a problem and if it did not lead to the loss of productivity? That is my question.