MARCH 8 — A few days ago, the Federal Territory Ministry announced an 80 per cent reduction in gym licence fees from RM50 to RM10 per square metre.
This was ostensibly to tackle obesity. KL has an overweight/obesity rate of 40.6 per cent the highest in a country where our belts are already dangerously bursting at the seams.
According to 2025 data, 60 per cent of adults in Malaysia are overweight or obese; we’re like #1 in Asean.
Will reduced gym fees help tackle this problem? The research stats are not optimistic.
In the US, free or subsidised gym access often increases gym visits, attendance, and moderate physical activity levels, but benefits are usually short-term or limited to specific groups like hypertensive adults from minority communities.
School-based interventions to increase physical activity were more effective, not least in curbing childhood obesity. Likewise, university rebate programmes boosted gym visits by ~20 per cent short-term.
Interestingly enough, in the UK schemes providing free leisure facility access increased gym attendances by 64 per cent in a certain locality.
In Australia, nutrition labelling, junk food advertising bans, and improved food quality in public institutions are the most popular obesity policies, while exercise incentives are among the least popular.
Hence, unfortunately, cheaper gym access has little if at all impact on national obesity rates.
Sure, most studies show increases in activity or gym use, but these are not consistent, large-scale reductions in obesity prevalence or BMI at population level.
Effects on weight are often small, short-term, or seen only in subgroups (e.g., those with hypertension or already somewhat active).
Even exercise referral schemes (doctor referrals to subsidised exercise programmes, common in the UK) find weak evidence for sustained physical activity increases and inconsistent effects on fitness/health indicators like weight.
Then again, did we really need official research to tell us that Malaysia’s obesity problem isn’t going to be even marginally improved by cheaper gym fees (even assuming the gym operators reduce their fees in the first place!)?
In at least two of the previous companies where I worked at, the office buildings had a free gym. I recall out of more than a thousand employees, barely three were regular gym goers.
Think about your few close friends who have weight issues. Are they that way because they cannot afford the RM200-ish a month at the gym? How many would be excited if we gave them a year’s membership FOC?
Speaking of zero-cost exercise, everyone knows there are parks, jogging trails, hills, etc. Ergo, it isn’t fitness-centre costs that are holding back the battle on Malaysian obesity.
The same research which tells us subsidising gym sessions isn’t going to shift the national shirt size from XXXL to M also gives some ideas which actually help.
Taxing unhealthy (especially sugary) products is one. All those chips, buns, chocolate bars, processed meats, 8-teaspoons-of-sugar drinks, biscuits, donuts, candies and what-not need to be priced for the dangerous goods they are.
Problem is, right now the stuff is way too cheap. The government should also clamp down on companies advertising tasty but crappy meals, although good luck going up against the big boys like KFC and McDonald’s.
Likewise, lowering the price of healthy food (eg, vegetables, fruits, lean fresh meats, sugar- and salt-free snacks, etc) ought to help, especially if these are coupled with health promotion/marketing programmes (not least in schools).
Needless, like charity, fitness begins at home. As parents, how are we modelling health and vigour to our kids? Do we encourage our children to work out and eat well and in moderation, and to have an active lifestyle the way we push them to study and have good manners?
Or are we usually sedentary, scrolling our phones non-stop and stuffing ourselves with karipap all day?
* This is the personal opinion of the columnist.
