....................2nd hand fat http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/30/us-obesity-idUSBRE83T0C820120430?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=76 when the bottom line is affected, shit gets done!
This used to be handled the old fashioned way - obese people were ridiculed and shunned. It hurt feelings, sure, but what was the bottom line? It was better for society and the individuals. It simply wasn't acceptable to be sloppy fat, there were standards. Not sure what the answer is. I think people should be able to live the way they want, but I also think they should be responsible for their choices. Higher premiums for fat people makes the most sense. And not by weight either, otherwise people with higher muscle mass would be penalized. A revamped BMI scale, where body fat was factored in.
agreed ^ Especially in a country such as Canada, with a public health system. We all pay for the bad choices of the masses. If you still want to habe bad habits / behaviors, fine. But accept the global consequences.
Not quite sure I agree with the cause and effect chain you propose there! I think it's rather more a case of our becoming a much more sedentary society (a trait that started with the invention of children's programming on TV, and was accelerated by media-fueled fear of letting children outside or out of sight), that has caused our precipitous increase in waist sizes, combined with marketing giving us increasing plate sizes and calorie counts, and processed "ready to heat/ready to eat" prepared meals for those who are too "busy", but not in a way that burns calories. I really don't think societal approbation or disapproval have anything to do with this one way or the other. Insurance might be okay, but if you are already overweight, it's entirely too late to really do anything. Michel Obama is catching flak from the "freedom to choose our (and our children's) way" crowd, for addressing the root cause of the problem in schools. The trick is to stop folks from ever becoming obese in the first place, since once you become obese, all attempts to become non-obese end in the usual endless cycle of yo-yo ups and downs that are actually worse for one than a sustained level of overweight. I think, rather than increasing rates on obese people, one should add tariffs to junk food, fried food, and red meat, which will be used to subsidize lower prices for all things vegetable, and put parking meters in the front areas of all parking lots, to make cheapskate folks walk further, while offering sweepstakes entries to all folks who park their bicycle in (provided bicycle rack parking - my pet peeve with all stores in my area) said parking lots. Rather than social disapproval of fat folks (which I honestly don't think has dissipated in any way) we have to change all those things that are BAKED IN to the very way modern American Society behaves.
^^^ Agreed. It was an oversimplification, absolutely. But setting boundaries and enforcing them does help. The same would apply to our pitiful academic standards, and a whole host of other societal problems. The "anything goes" mentality has gone too far. But yeah, according to a generic BMI score I'd probably have to pay higher premiums too. But when you factor is muscle mass suddenly I drop off the list.
american sports and fat sports idols dont help much either those new durham school buses arent to protect the kids, they were redesigned because the kids are getting bigger.
And you can bet your ass that tarrifs are on their way. The trend has become to tax a thing out of exsistence or at least make it so expensive to indulge in those vices that coffers get filled. Look at tobacco. There are tons of tarrifs, taxes and disincentives attatched to every tobacco product. Those funds enter the general funds of states and federal accounts with no garanty of actually being used for the bolstering of the publicly funded healthcare dollar that the passage of the taxes promissed. Tobacco set a precidence and look for fattening foods, convenience foods, junk foods, alcohol and sweets to follow suit. While I think that using outrageously high tarrifs on unhealthy foods to fund subsidies on healthy foods to make them affordable is the only real sollution. I hate to say it, but every tarrif dollar will get lost in the general funds and end up probably paying for more earmarks and pork than anything else. We're doomed to an obese societal problem that will only get worse. BTW: BMI=23, this I attribute to not partaking in processed foods, MSG, alcohol, sweets or junk foods, and eating lots of homegrown veggies and lean meats like chicken and fish. Anyone else see the movie: Wall-E?
It is true that my off-the-cuff remark on tariffs wouldn't work for just those reasons. It's endless entertainment here in Illinois, watching all the infighting over funds. Heh! Imagine having modern-day bootleggers running potato chips across borders!
I beat the tobacco thing by growing my own. People would just start growing their own chips and baking their own twinkies. The problem won't change until it's more cool to go fishing than sit and text and until people simply can not afford to hire someone else to mow their lawns or pay other people to do things they, themselves, are more than capable of doing. As affluence fades in this nation, some of the obesity will diminish. But as addictions to idle bodies and fat foods continues, the problems will come back. The next generation is primed and ready to get huge asses and fat middles. Just watch and count youngsters at the mall, near high schools, or anywhere teens are walking around and/or chilling. Eyes are glued to cell phone screens. Munchies are in a plastic bag from a vending machine, or a BK/MD/DQ bag. The next gen will be a lot more prone to fattness.
LOL! I thought about that yesterday. Or people smuggling in 2-4XL shirts because they are no longer legal to sell. :lol:
Ironically, prophetically, back when Missouri legislators were voting on what to do with the big tobacco lawsuits, a gentleman from Cape Girardeau said, "If we go after Phillip Morris today, who are we going to go after tomorrow, Cadbury's?"
as someone who has been on both sides of the fence ....significantly at times.... 120 lbs at 5'6", not even anorexic, i had decent muscle mass, then on the other end of the spectrum within about a year i hit 200 or so.... kept my muscle, packed jiggly shit over it. shit's fucked up. i packed on a crapton of weight due to eating the same amount when i was ridiculously active, then got laid off and did not a whole lot...
I'm doing my part... I joined this gym yesterday! http://www.hardexerciseworks.com/ One of the girls in the class has lost 50lbs since January!
She's still around 200, at least. But hey, she is still coming and still losing the weight. Nov 2010, I decided to start working out and eating healthy. I wanted to put on 10lbs of muscle and get from 155 to 165 (I'm 6ft). February when I sprained my ankle, I was at 145lbs... I put on muscle, but lost the fat way quicker. I'm just finally getting back into working out. Maybe this should be a split off thread?
Yeah, a thread would be awesome. I'm getting ready to head down the low-carb road again myself, maybe ramp up my workout a bit. I do a total of an hour of cardio every week, have for almost 9 years now. But some additional calorie burning wouldn't be a bad idea for me at all.
