{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019849418206707735, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0027378507871321013, 'mean_word_length': 5.585585585585585, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Survey finds public support for legal interventions directed at health behavior to fight noncommunicable disease.

The high prevalence of chronic diseases in the United States with lifestyle-related risk factors, such as obesity and tobacco use, has sparked interest in legal strategies to influence health behavior. However, little is known about the public's willingness to accept these policies as legitimate, which in turn may affect compliance. We present results from a national survey of 1,817 US adults concerning the acceptability of different public health legal interventions that address noncommunicable, or chronic, diseases. We found that support for these new interventions is high overall; substantially greater among African Americans and Hispanics than among whites; and tied to perceptions of democratic representation in policy making. There was much support for strategies that enable people to exercise healthful choices--for example, menu labeling and improving access to nicotine patches--but considerably less for more coercive measures, such as insurance premium surcharges. These findings suggest that the least coercive path will be the smoothest and that support for interventions may be widespread among different social groups. In addition, the findings underscore the need for policy makers to involve the public in decision making, understand the public's values, and communicate how policy decisions reflect this understanding.