I figured out how to cure the "Obesity Epidemic"

Californian wrote:

Actually, your calorie tax will probably cost the people on this message board more than it will cost a lot of overweight people. A lot of competitive runners are eating over 4,000 calories a day. People can become overweight eating 2,500 a day if they do not exercise. So you will actually be hurt more than the lazy fat couch potato you are trying to punish.

Thats where the exercise rebate would come in. The reason why they can't enforce a tax like this currently is measuring exercise correctly. This is what is needed. A Fat Tax.

An exercise rebate??? What are you going to do, attach a camera on a person so that the government can verify that they actually exercised?

I believe it was already mentioned but I'll say it again. Another very important factor in the fight against obesity is education. A lot of people who believe what society tells them, as Cali mentioned, do not have the knowledge or resources to do anything about it.

They may not have the resources, but a lot of them do not have the motivation either. I think that the ultimate motivator, $$$, would force them to change, not only saving their wallets, but their lives as well.

I understand where most arguments are coming from on this thread, but the one that I can't get past is the person who said high mileage runners are a drain on the healthcare system. A lot of runners, not all, engage in a healthy lifestyle along with their training. Until a study is done that says runners have a higher mortality rate than the general population, I'm with Miles and Miles on banning stretch pants and cheeseburgers.

No, I would get tested by a doctor and attach the results to my tax return form. Exercising would give better test results wouldn't it. Exercise = Health rebate one in the same.The point is that you know it's needed and you too are recognizing the difficulties of enforcing the tax effectively. Your pessimistic approach is very much like the fatties approach.

Californian wrote:

An exercise rebate??? What are you going to do, attach a camera on a person so that the government can verify that they actually exercised?

Everything is labeled a "disease" or a "disorder" these days. Nobody is actually responsible for themselves anymore...it's all out of their control since they have these "afflictions".

I used to be moderately obese as a kid. I didn't realize it for years. Then I decided to do something about it. I started running, I enforced some self-control. I dropped 40 pounds over a year and a half and my 2 mile time went from 27 to 13 minutes.

I have a naturally low metabolism (I can gain weight fast on less than 1500 cal/day if I'm not actively training) so I still must work to control my weight; only over 90 mpw can I stop watching what I eat.

My wife works in an emergency room, and I can tell you why health care is expensive and it isn't the drug companies. It's people who a) refuse to take any responsibility for themselves or use common sense in their diet or healthcare, and b) abuse the system by drug-seeking and using it for things that it wasn't intended.

My wife sees 30+ patients per day in the ER. Only 1-4 of them typically have a legitimate reason to be in the ER; this includes those that are ok but had a legitimate reason to believe something might be wrong. Most of these people aren't even insured, so THE REST OF US pick up their tab.

Last night she had three patients making up symptoms trying to get narcotics. Another made up symptoms just to try and get a bed and meal for the night. I suppose these poor souls suffer from some "disorder" or "addictions" for which we should spend even more money to "help them"...Personally I think we as a society should form a little more of a spine in dealing with such people and let some rot out on the cold street. Sounds bad but throwing money at them isn't helping either.

Ulysses S. Grant wrote:

2) might bear a hint of truth, but none of these conclusions follow logically from the study findings, even if the leeway to grossly oversimplify the data therein is granted. I take it you're not a researcher by profession.

Did you really mean for that to sound as arrogant as it did?

So if I'm not a researcher, it's not possible for me to be right?

Please explain how my logic is wrong. I'm always interested in learning.

Diet and excersize can cure obesity whether it's caused from laziness and gluttony or a chemical imbalance, as long as the person is willing to put in the work.

it's simple wrote:

Diet and excersize can cure obesity whether it's caused from laziness and gluttony or a chemical imbalance, as long as the person is willing to put in the work.

you couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

Dynamite! wrote:

Until a study is done that says runners have a higher mortality rate than the general population, I'm with Miles and Miles on banning stretch pants and cheeseburgers.

Hell, the mortality rate is the same for you skinny forks as it is for the fat forks -- 100%, you dumb ass.

Had to "weigh" in on this one.

Californian, it is good to see a very concerned and thoughtful view of the situation. It is amazing how food has an affect on the mind, and we all know the effect the mind has on the body. The body is truly a complex and amazing machine with very much still to be discovered.

A few things to consider. I'm not sure what went on in the clinic in OK, but if they were not exercising an hour a day everyday ("do you see a break on the schedule?") then it is a joke and it will never work. If they lost weight at the center left and gained it back this MIGHT be a part of the problem. I think my biggest problem with the obestity problem is its link with incativity. Yes, I know this is dangerous territory to venture since 99% of the people on this board are active. However, it is well documented that FITNESS, does correlate well to health, independent of weight. So the problem I think is more important, though closely linked to obesity, is exercise.

the problem with the original post is that double cheeseburgers are awesome

Miles,

Had you seen this? (and I apologize if it's been posted elsewhere, this thread is long).

http://www.gazettetimes.com/articles/2004/12/17/news/the_west/friwes02.txt

Wayne B wrote:

Miles,

Had you seen this? (and I apologize if it's been posted elsewhere, this thread is long).

http://www.gazettetimes.com/articles/2004/12/17/news/the_west/friwes02.txt

No I didn't see that until now. But I wasn't really involved in the taxing arguments. I just said to outlaw any stretchable clothing and double cheeseburgers.

im not sure why you all care so much, the fatter people get the more ladies come my way because i happen to not have bitch tits. i say let them eat eat eat eat eat.

The risk is greater for each person's respective problems, but the relative risk for developing a chronic illness from an unhealthy lifestyle is far greater than that of developing an injury that warrents medical attention from running.

To Californian: Why are you so supportive of obese people? I work in the health care field, and help overweight people on a daily basis. I've seen hundreds of people turn their lives around and attempt to improve themselves.

Your argument is that some people have no control over their actions. Pure and simple. That is true but...

That's f***in' ridiculous you argue against increased insurance rates for people with a higher risk of health problems. It was mentioned earlier that obesity rates have increased dramatically in the past 20 years. There is no way in hell that that increase is due to everyone beings stressed out, having too much cortisol in their system, or developing a food addiction. Again, ridiculous.

I agree with the person who said that the cost of a stress fracture is a fraction of that of a CABG surgery, heart attack, diabetes treatment, kidney dialysis, etc. Physical activity, IF DONE PROPERLY, can significantly reduce the risk of chronic diseases.

Stop facilitating fatness.

"To Californian: Why are you so supportive of obese people? I work in the health care field, and help overweight people on a daily basis. I've seen hundreds of people turn their lives around and attempt to improve themselves.

Your argument is that some people have no control over their actions. Pure and simple. That is true but...

That's f***in' ridiculous you argue against increased insurance rates for people with a higher risk of health problems. It was mentioned earlier that obesity rates have increased dramatically in the past 20 years. There is no way in hell that that increase is due to everyone beings stressed out, having too much cortisol in their system, or developing a food addiction. Again, ridiculous."

Your first question completely misses the point of what I've been saying. I don't support obease people. What I think that people on this board fail to realize is that all fat people are not lazy and lacking self-discipline and self-control. Some people are fat because they have a food addiction. Some people are fat because of certain diseases they have (thyroid disease). Some people are fat because they are on medication fot other diseases (medicine for manic-depressive people slows down there metabolisms and can cause tremendous weight gain). Some people are fat because something tramatic happened to them, and they have using food as a coping mechanism to mask the pain because they haven't properly dealt with the tragety yet.

I agree that many are people are fat because they lack discipline, lack self-control or are too lazy. But many people are not in these three camps. As a health care professional, you may have helped some people turn their lives around by losing weight. But I guarantee you, you didn't really help all the people you think you helped. Some of them are overweight for reasons that require psychological treatment to deal with. Soemone who has been eating for 10 years to comfort themselves after the death of their husband might lose 100 pounds under your tutelage, but they will probably gain it all back because they haven't dealt with what caused their weight gain- coping with a traumatic event, not lack of self-control.

The funny thing is that everyone talks about all of the health costs of obesity. No one mentions the tremendous health costs associated with anorexia. Anorexic people have higher incidence of heart failure than do obease people. And there are a lot more anorexic people around you than you realize. Why is it that everyone wants to attack and berate obease people, when overly skinny people actually cause more of an expense to society?

And before the typical poster comes on here and tells me that I'm just defending obease people because I am fat myself, think again. I am 5'10, 144 pounds, 24 years old. I've never been fat, and I love running enough to keep doing until I'm at least 60. Thus, I will probably never become overwieght. I'm lucky that I love doing an activity that keeps my body in good form. But many people don't enjoy running or swimming or cycling or other such aerobic activities. Some people work 80 hours a week to support a family and make ends meet. They are too tired to exercise or don't have the time to do so. So before you typical posters come out and say, "just go run 10 miles and you won't have a weight problem," think again. Its not that easy.

Obesity is a complicated problem, a point that many of you miss on this message board. The answer isn't always, eat less or run more or be more disciplined. Rather than bitching about having to pay a little bit more each month on your health premiums, be thankful that you are fortunate enough to be free of uncontrolable problems that can lead to obesity.

by that logic... wrote:

here's a ranking of the "obesity and overwieght" rates by state...

People in the South are shameless f***ing slobs no matter what party they align themselves with. The close relationships between religious ardor, gluttony, and lack of education have spelled the irreversible decay of a huge portion of the U.S., not that the South was ever anything to be proud of in the first place. At least some Southern cities (notably Atlanta and Charlotte) have begun to enjoy sufficient Northeastern influence to keep them from sinking into the mire altogether.

Californian wrote:

The funny thing is that everyone talks about all of the health costs of obesity. No one mentions the tremendous health costs associated with anorexia. Anorexic people have higher incidence of heart failure than do obease people. And there are a lot more anorexic people around you than you realize. Why is it that everyone wants to attack and berate obease people, when overly skinny people actually cause more of an expense to society?

You've managed to f*** up what might otherwise be considered a coherent position by detonating a few carefully placed claymores deep within your own arguments. Are you aware how much higher the incidence and prevalance of obesity is in this country than the incidence and prevalance of anorexia? You might as well be arguing that testicular cancer is more costly to American society than is atherosclerotic heart disease because individual costs of treating carcinoma are higher than a prescription for Mevacor or a bypass graft. Are you understanding this? It's all about math. Take a biostats/epidemiology course and your head is bound to come flying out of your ass before you even know it.

no they can't wrote:

it's simple wrote:

Diet and excersize can cure obesity whether it's caused from laziness and gluttony or a chemical imbalance, as long as the person is willing to put in the work.

you couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

How is that wrong? Look at the show The Biggest Loser. They took 16 of the fattest f***s they could find, put them to work every day, changed their diets, and some of these people have lost like 60 pounds in 12 weeks!