|
Originally Posted by IAmCosmo
(Post 9412252)
True, nobody is forcing anything down anyone's throat. However, many people eat things that they think are safe for them but aren't. They do so unknowingly because the information about what's in their food is not made available.
I am fat because I ate like crap growing up. I realize that. However, trying to feed my daughters now and keep them safe causes a whole new set of problems. We try to eat as natural as possible, but as everyone knows that is expensive and unfortunately I can't always afford to make food from scratch with all natural ingredients. So there are times when I have to feed them store-bought food. I hate feeding my children genetically engineered food, but stuff like that is so hard to avoid that it's not always possible when on a limited budget.
Originally Posted by Mr IGH
(Post 9412758)
Does anyone see the parallel between the tobacco use and being overweight? IMHO, being overweight is a choice, just like smoking.
Just like tobacco use, there's no doubt about the link between being overweight and long term health issues. Heart, diabities, etc, etc. Just like smoking, being overweight cost lots of $$. It's not just health care (although there's no doubt the extra health care cost are very high with both habits). The food people eat to get fat is very expensive, just like tobacco use. Quitting tobacco saves money, so does quitting food that makes you fat. Smoking is considered anti-social, it effects the entire family. So does being overweight. If a spouse is overweight, they limit the activites of the entire family. They can't go on family hikes, sight seeing walks, etc. Ever see a skinny spouse pushing a fat spouse in a wheel chair? personal history: I was fat because I ate like crap and didn't exercise (6'3" and 270lbs). I decided I had to kick the fat habit just like a smoker kicks the tobacco habit. Now we eat really well, I did have to force my family to give up bad food (just like quiting smoking, you gotta make the spouse/family do it too). We save lots of money (no take out, just good meat, frozen veggies, salad, Costco). Also, I started exercising 5-7 days per week, mostly biking 70~100 miles per week or walking 18 holes of golf (no health club fees). Since last Xmas, I've lost 50lbs. It doesn't cost extra $$ to lose weight and get healthy. I never counted a single calorie or denied myself nourishment. I did deny myself ice cream, cookies, take out food, beer, etc (that stuff cost $$$). I have a good friend who grows some of his own veggies, buys organic whenever possible, and only eats processed foods when he has to; it's him and his new wife, and what they spend for the two of them, multiplied by four (eight of us in my house) would make Al Gore choke on his $20K electric bill! We have to eat a lot of rice, canned beans, hot dogs, and white bread because we have to make every penny count; sometimes bulk, and the resultant fuller belly, is all we can do. Obesity isn't always a choice; some folks are predisposed to carrying more weight/body fat, and have 10x harder time getting rid of it. My own weight has stabilized @ about 225-230, and has been there for over a decade. I'm considered 'overweight', but my cholesterol is low, resting heart rate is scary low for my age, and my B/P is the envy of most teens. That said, a lot of obesity IS lifestyle choices, mainly taking in more than you burn up. I really get discouraged when I see 20-y-o's sporting dunlaps like the Michelin Man. There is no one answer -- but there ARE answerS! |
Originally Posted by mtclifford
(Post 9409157)
(over 95% of sleep apnea sufferers are obese)
Where on earth did you get this statistic? There are a number of factors that contribute to sleep apnea. Obesity is one of them, a very significant one, but nowhere near 95% of all cases. If it were true you would see a lot more people being treated for sleep apnea by surgery instead of CPAP, but you don't. The reason you don't is because extra throat tissue is not the near sole cause of the condition, which your post would imply with the claim of 95% |
Originally Posted by IAmCosmo
(Post 9414752)
The cattle industry is one of the industries that the government makes the most money off of. They also have the most powerful lobbyists (even more powerful than the tobacco lobbyists). The government does whatever the cattle industry wants them to do.But, I guess I just need to wear a tin foil hat or something...
Again, it's all about the business - producers increasing profits.... be it cattle, chicken ranchers, fast food, tobacco, soft drink, pharmaceuticals, autos, oil, financial services................. |
Lots of denial here. Low on $$ therefore I'm fat. Canned veggies and frozen veggies are bad for me, so I eat ice cream and chips instead. I'm fat 'cause the government is manipulating food additives...sounds just like smokers.
I'd love to go through some of these food budgets. The idea that frozen veggies from Costco are bad, the only healthy veggies are fresh is silly. The frozen veggies may not be the best choice, they are 99% of fresh. It's not the fat in meat that made me fat. It was the fat in ice cream, chips and snacks that made me fat. Exercise and proper diet are the key to health. Nothing there about "perfect" diet and exercise, the word is "proper" more personal history: After 6 months of my new lifestyle, wifey is finally on board, she wants some of this healthy mojo. I told her I wanted to enjoy our years together after the kids are gone. I don't want to be the healthy spouse pushing the fat, wheelchair bound spouse. I don't care about the weight, I care about the heart, the knee/hip joints, diabities. She went to a nutrituionalist and changed our diet even more toward healthy. I built her up a nice "old lady" bike and she's riding 15~20 miles 4~5 days per week. That's the benefit of being an example, when other final join in, things get even better. I can't wait to see the Doc and have my weight taken and blood tested, I am so much more healthy compared to six months ago! And I don't care if the government taxes overweight people or tobacco users, I don't belong to either group. |
Originally Posted by dlester
(Post 9415787)
And 78% of all statistics are made up.
Where on earth did you get this statistic? There are a number of factors that contribute to sleep apnea. Obesity is one of them, a very significant one, but nowhere near 95% of all cases. If it were true you would see a lot more people being treated for sleep apnea by surgery instead of CPAP, but you don't. The reason you don't is because extra throat tissue is not the near sole cause of the condition, which your post would imply with the claim of 95% What I find ironic is the OP claims to be healthy and overweight at the same time, but within the recently posted that he gone to a sleep clinic and been diagnosed with apnea. I would hardly call that healthy. I have to agree with MR. IGH, lots of denial going on around here. |
So let me follow the logic.
"Fat people made themselves fat and are in denial. Fat people are sick. Sick people cost money. Tax the fat people." Ergo: "Icky fat slobs need to be taxed to change their behavior." P.S. I am waiting for your check for $100 for each pound overweight for your "obesity tax offset". I'll spend it well. Promise.-Uncle Sam P.P.S. ALL OF US are overweight on this forum. |
My father is obese. I hate it! I will NOT be like him and I will be able to enjoy my retirement and actually do things with my wife besides sit around the house.
I honestly don’t care what the government does to get people to eat right. I feel the same way about smoking and doing drugs. I’m sure it’s an emotional opinion based solely on my experiences with my father and his issues with food, but I can live with that. Taking care of the ONLY body you will ever have is a good thing, period. |
Originally Posted by spikedog123
(Post 9416849)
So let me follow the logic.
"Fat people made themselves fat and are in denial. Fat people are sick. Sick people cost money. Tax the fat people." Ergo: "Icky fat slobs need to be taxed to change their behavior." P.S. I am waiting for your check for $100 for each pound overweight for your "obesity tax credit". I'll spend it well. Promise.-Uncle Sam P.P.S. ALL OF US are overweight on this forum. BTW, your P. P. S. is false. Bautieri isn't overweight. |
Originally Posted by spikedog123
(Post 9416849)
So let me follow the logic....P.P.S. ALL OF US are overweight on this forum.
P.S. I am waiting for your check for $100 for each pound overweight for your "obesity tax credit". I'll spend it well. Promise.-Uncle Sam |
Being obese is not good for you, regardless of your activity level. Nobody became obese eating the right foods and exercising.
Bodyfat is not just excess weight. It's a living thing. A hormone-secreting, health affecting thing. Thin people who eat lousy diets and don't exercise are still much less likely to develop diabetes. We tax other "sin" products HEAVILY. Cigarettes and booze are taxed at a high level. It doesn't seem to bother smokers and drinkers. I think all junk food and soda should have a tax applied, absolutely. Perhaps if junk food is taxed heavily, people will make better food choices. |
I really don't understand this ardent defense of living unhealthy. I am obese. I'm less obese than I was three months ago. I'm more obese than I will be in three months from now.
You can't force someone to decide to do something about their own health, they have to be self-committed to it. I wasn't ready when I joined this forum, though I did start riding my bike more. And I did start doing more healthy things. Now I'm fully onboard with a healthy lifestyle. The fact is, it is unhealthy to be fat. Being fat costs more money in health-care costs. Regardless of if we go to centralized health care or continue with employer semi-funded health care, people who are voluntarily obese should not be subsidized financially by those who stay at a healthy weight. I can argue with the methods, but I'll support any measure intended to prod people in this country to get and stay healthy. (Even if it means negative consequences for me in the short term, as I now weigh 246 pounds on a 6'0.5" frame — or 67ish pounds overweight.) |
Originally Posted by spikedog123
(Post 9416849)
So let me follow the logic.
"Fat people made themselves fat and are in denial. Fat people are sick. Sick people cost money. Tax the fat people." Ergo: "Icky fat slobs need to be taxed to change their behavior." P.S. I am waiting for your check for $100 for each pound overweight for your "obesity tax offset". I'll spend it well. Promise.-Uncle Sam P.P.S. ALL OF US are overweight on this forum.
Originally Posted by Schwinnrider
(Post 9418122)
<snip>
We tax other "sin" products HEAVILY. Cigarettes and booze are taxed at a high level. It doesn't seem to bother smokers and drinkers. I think all junk food and soda should have a tax applied, absolutely. Perhaps if junk food is taxed heavily, people will make better food choices. I was just thinking - what are the obesity rates of countries that have mandatory military service for 18-20yr olds? Back to health care costs, things would be better without all the price gouging. Too many people have their hands in the pot. Thats the reform I would like to see. I think I read something about the new reforms encouraging hospitals and doctors to treat patients so that they are less likely to need future care. Treat the cause not the symptom. |
Originally Posted by Ghoulardi
(Post 9418601)
The fact is, it is unhealthy to be fat. Being fat costs more money in health-care costs. Regardless of if we go to centralized health care or continue with employer semi-funded health care, people who are voluntarily obese should not be subsidized financially by those who stay at a healthy weight.
I can argue with the methods, but I'll support any measure intended to prod people in this country to get and stay healthy. (Even if it means negative consequences for me in the short term, as I now weigh 246 pounds on a 6'0.5" frame — or 67ish pounds overweight.) I'll pay sin tax on my snack foods without argument. Back a while ago when I smoked, it wasn't the taxes which finally got me to quit. Similarly, taxing a sack of Ruffles isn't going to stop me from buying them once in a while. Overall heath needs to be a comprehensive examination of multiple factors, not just a relationship between 2 numbers (height and weight; whether it be the ratio charts of old, or the newer BMI horsepucky.) Who's healthier? 6'6", 240 pounds, 19.8% bodyfat and 27.7 BMI, low 50s RHR and great cholesterol levels and blood pressure... or 6'3", 175 pounds, sub 12% bodyfat and 22 BMI, with a 285 cholesterol count, 90/147 blood pressure, and a midday RHR over 80? |
Originally Posted by CliftonGK1
(Post 9418866)
You mention "healthy weight". What about those rare individuals who have a high BMI, are slightly overweight, but have vital stats which would turn a collegiate marathoner green with envy? I'm not saying it's everyone, but I refuse to pay for being an "unhealthy weight".
I'll pay sin tax on my snack foods without argument. Back a while ago when I smoked, it wasn't the taxes which finally got me to quit. Similarly, taxing a sack of Ruffles isn't going to stop me from buying them once in a while. Overall heath needs to be a comprehensive examination of multiple factors, not just a relationship between 2 numbers (height and weight; whether it be the ratio charts of old, or the newer BMI horsepucky.) Who's healthier? 6'6", 240 pounds, 19.8% bodyfat and 27.7 BMI, low 50s RHR and great cholesterol levels and blood pressure... or 6'3", 175 pounds, sub 12% bodyfat and 22 BMI, with a 285 cholesterol count, 90/147 blood pressure, and a midday RHR over 80? |
Originally Posted by CliftonGK1
(Post 9418866)
You mention "healthy weight". What about those rare individuals who have a high BMI, are slightly overweight, but have vital stats which would turn a collegiate marathoner green with envy? I'm not saying it's everyone, but I refuse to pay for being an "unhealthy weight".
I'll pay sin tax on my snack foods without argument. Back a while ago when I smoked, it wasn't the taxes which finally got me to quit. Similarly, taxing a sack of Ruffles isn't going to stop me from buying them once in a while. Overall heath needs to be a comprehensive examination of multiple factors, not just a relationship between 2 numbers (height and weight; whether it be the ratio charts of old, or the newer BMI horsepucky.) Who's healthier? 6'6", 240 pounds, 19.8% bodyfat and 27.7 BMI, low 50s RHR and great cholesterol levels and blood pressure... or 6'3", 175 pounds, sub 12% bodyfat and 22 BMI, with a 285 cholesterol count, 90/147 blood pressure, and a midday RHR over 80? I'm sure an exemption with a doctor's note saying you meet additional qualifications would suffice. All that said, I don't know what the exemption would be from, as I don't believe taxing those people would solve any problems. I just think it's ridiculous to argue that people who take care of themselves should have to carry the burden cost-wise for people who don't. |
Originally Posted by Snapperhead
(Post 9416874)
I honestly don’t care what the government does to get people to eat right. I feel the same way about smoking and doing drugs.
Really? Round up the fat people and put them in fat camps? Shoot them? You don't care what kind of freedoms are in society as long as it doesn't affect you? Much of the "Tax the Fatso" argument is a thinly veiled, morality argument- equating fatness with "moral turpitude". NOT ONE poster has made the argument FOR OBESITY nor has said that obesity is without health risks. What kind of world do you want to live in? Some people prefer fascism. Some prefer freedom. Nevertheless, the TRUE BELIEVERS will continue to preach against Fat People as the source of evil and spiraling healthcare costs. Do I hear the hoofbeats of trial lawyers in the distance? |
Originally Posted by spikedog123
(Post 9419485)
Much of the "Tax the Fatso" argument is a thinly veiled, morality argument- equating fatness with moral turpitude".
But if you want to get into the area of moral turpitude, we could turn to the Bible. Proverbs 23:2 clearly states: "Put a knife to your throat if you are given to gluttony." Pretty blunt.
Originally Posted by spikedog123
(Post 9419485)
What kind of world do you want to live in? Some people prefer fascism. Some prefer freedom.
"Freedom" should have limitations — when it intersects with other people's freedom. Just like a noise ordinance prohibits people from hosting an outdoor rock concert in an urban backyard, it preserves the freedom of the next door neighbor to enjoy relative peace on their property. If insurance stopped covering obesity related problems, it preserves the freedom of non-obese people not to have to overpay for their own health care. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm an obese person. Considering 95 percent of people who lose weight gain it back, it's possible I'll be an obese person for the rest of my life. But I see the rationale of this argument. I agree with it.
Originally Posted by spikedog123
(Post 9419485)
Nevertheless, the TRUE BELIEVERS will continue to preach against Fat People as the source of evil and spiraling healthcare costs.
|
Originally Posted by spikedog123
(Post 9419485)
...Round up the fat people and put them in fat camps? Shoot them? You don't care what kind of freedoms are in society as long as it doesn't affect you?....Do I hear the hoofbeats of trial lawyers in the distance?
|
Originally Posted by spikedog123
(Post 9419485)
Much of the "Tax the Fatso" argument is a thinly veiled, morality argument- equating fatness with "moral turpitude".
|
I am sorry but anyone who equates a junk food tax with fascism has no clue what true fascism is, and is just making themselves seems like a shrill nutcase, they are sure as heck no helping their argument out. As I have said time and time again it is just about people owning up to their own actions.
|
Originally Posted by CliftonGK1
(Post 9418866)
You mention "healthy weight". What about those rare individuals who have a high BMI, are slightly overweight, but have vital stats which would turn a collegiate marathoner green with envy? I'm not saying it's everyone, but I refuse to pay for being an "unhealthy weight".
I'll pay sin tax on my snack foods without argument. Back a while ago when I smoked, it wasn't the taxes which finally got me to quit. Similarly, taxing a sack of Ruffles isn't going to stop me from buying them once in a while. Overall heath needs to be a comprehensive examination of multiple factors, not just a relationship between 2 numbers (height and weight; whether it be the ratio charts of old, or the newer BMI horsepucky.) Who's healthier? 6'6", 240 pounds, 19.8% bodyfat and 27.7 BMI, low 50s RHR and great cholesterol levels and blood pressure... or 6'3", 175 pounds, sub 12% bodyfat and 22 BMI, with a 285 cholesterol count, 90/147 blood pressure, and a midday RHR over 80? Bodyfat, in excess, is an unhealthy thing to have. |
I've heard it all being a fat bike rider. I will admit I am no day at the beach but I would like to see those politicians follow me on a rode ride. My bicycle keeps me awayfrom food and my Harley brings me to the restourant. This year I have more miles on My bicycle. Ed
|
It comes down to the fact that it IS cheaper to eat crap rather than healthy food..
That if and when you start looking into the contents of food you will just become all sorts of shocked at what and how much there is in the prepackaged food that as labeled as heart smart or "healthy".. what causes that obesity problem Part of it is economics ...part is ignorance....part of it is convenience..(how much easier is it to swing by mcd's or wendy's etc. than it is to make a healthy lunch ahead of time or find a place to eat healthy at) I think that it really takes a note tied to a brick and thrown at the head of most people to get there attention ...An example would be our experience .. we thought we were eating healthy till a swollen ankle that would not go away force us to the doctors office and then we were told that the sodium intake was way too high ...Now this is were we and most anybody else says "we dont put salt on hardly anything" Surprise!! Its already in there..... So fast forward to now and we read labels and watch portions ..... It is also the plan and simple fact that obesity like any other sickness is more profitable to treat the sickness than cure the sickness .....look at all the weight loss products on the market ...pills books ads drinks powders ......So that also plays a role if you owned a company that was making millions from a sickness would you want it to disappear NO you would express concern and "treat" the after effects .......And unlike other resources that may disappear there are plenty of fat people ... It's a conspiracy man |
Originally Posted by Schwinnrider
(Post 9420469)
The guy with the lower bodyfat. But 19.8% bodyfat isn't obese. It's not lean but it's not obese.
Bodyfat, in excess, is an unhealthy thing to have. The one with the cholesterol, BP and RHR that put him on the short list for a heart attack... Seriously? By what medical reasoning other than excess bodyfat is unhealthy? |
Originally Posted by dlester
(Post 9415787)
And 78% of all statistics are made up.
Where on earth did you get this statistic? There are a number of factors that contribute to sleep apnea. Obesity is one of them, a very significant one, but nowhere near 95% of all cases. If it were true you would see a lot more people being treated for sleep apnea by surgery instead of CPAP, but you don't. The reason you don't is because extra throat tissue is not the near sole cause of the condition, which your post would imply with the claim of 95% |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:11 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.