Lets debate fat people

[Lao Tzu]

Someone argue with me, i want to hear some good counterarguments. Show me the way.

Alot of the arguments against fat people here involve things like laziness and increased medical costs. However these are not the case.

True fat people use up more healthcare costs, but they die earlier saving money on medicaid and social security. Who will eat up more medicaid and social security money, an obese person who dies at 68 or a thin, fit person who dies at 84? The answer seems obvious but i can't dig up stats to prove it right now. Besides, extending the lifespan of humans is the most expensive medical procedure we are working on right now. The longer people live the more money they will suck up. Why not protest outside a scientific lab working on a treatment for cardiovascular disease instead of yelling at fat people to lose weight? the end result is all the same, more money is spent because people live longer lives.

As far as laziness, the human body, as far as i know, isn't designed to lose weight and keep it off. Fat is emergency fuel and you will have to trick and manipulate your body until you die in order to maintain a less than 'normal' bodyweight (depending on how your biochemistry defines normal bodyweight & bodyfat percentage). Until people gain the self discipline and drive and/or pharmacology and surgery advance enough to make maintenance doable for most of the population the current methods will only offer temporary solutions and the majority of the population will still be obese. Obesity is becoming a major problem, there are now more overweight people on earth than starving people and it will only continute to get worse. And diet and exercise will help, but they are not cures.

Speaking of 'diet and exercise', these are not 'cures' for obesity, merely lifestyle changes that decrease the odds of contracting this disease (i dont like using the word disease to describe obesity, but it fits this metaphor). Take SARS for instance. When a quarantine was established nobody said 'ok, we cured SARS, lets go home'. All they did was enforce an unnatural lifestyle change that lessened the degree and intensity of that disease. They are sitll working on true cures for it but right now all we have are lifestyle changes. That is how it is with many diseases and illnesses, before a real cure can be found lifestyle changes are treated as the best way to slow the progression of the disease. Sanitation, Isolation and quarantines are good ways to slow the spread of the Black Plague, but only anti-biotics can cure it. Same with obesity. Diet and exercise will help alot of people become less fat, but it will not cure obesity, Just cut its rates and that is assuming people will even do it in the first place, Which they wont. Obesity will not truly be 'cured' until people can eat all they want, never exercise and not get fat. That won't happen until drugs that safely stop lipogenesis are created. Unlike AIDS, where all you have to do is wear a condom, the lifestyle changes for obesity involve going against millions of years of evolution. People aren't designed to get off on burning more calories than they use. We'd all be dead if we did that. Then again we aren't designed to get off on injecting ourselves with needles (which in the wild would probably cause sepsis), but we do that all the time. So maybe that point is moot.

And who said laziness is a bad thing? Laziness and a desire to get something for nothing is what fuels innovation and technology. If people weren't to lazy to walk we wouldn't have bikes. if people weren't too lazy to bike we wouldn't have cars. if people weren't too lazy to drive we wouldn't have planes.

Also there is alot of ragging on fat people for wanting a 'magic pill'. EF is the home of magic pills which help you lose weight (at least more weight than you'd lose with diet & exercise alone). T3, DNP, an endless assortment of alpha and beta agonists and antagonists, herbs, Type II diabetes drugs, etc. If a working weight loss drug is ever discovered people on EF will be using it before the ink dries on the scientific report. When the FDA is doing stage II trials on the drug people on EF will be buying it from industrial chemistry suppliers in Tiawan and capping it in their basements. People here take the same shortcuts everyone else does.

 

[BrandonXJ]

Cancer is a disease. Autism is a disease.

Obesity is not a disease. It's a by-product of lifestyle choices. Granted some people are genetically prone to have a higher bf% than others, but no one is genetically coded to be 30% bf or greater. Darwin would turn over in his grave.

 

[Lao Tzu]

Cancer is a disease. Autism is a disease.

Obesity is not a disease. It's a by-product of lifestyle choices. Granted some people are genetically prone to have a higher bf% than others, but no one is genetically coded to be 30% bf or greater. Darwin would turn over in his grave.

No, obesity is just as much a mixture of genetics & lifestyle as anything else. Cancer is due to poor lifestyle choices too. Most diseases are partly due to decisions or indecisions made by the sufferer.

I don't know if i agree that 30% is the cut off point. I have seen fat parents who had fat kids, all of whom had bf% in the 50-60% range.

Even though obesity is 100% treatable in 98% of people most of them will not do what it takes to lose weight and keep it off. People can get mad about taht all they want, that is the case. Thats like getting mad that people won't stop fighting war or that people won't stop believing in god. Reality goes its own route.

 

[d3track]

ewww

60% bf


thats just nasty

 

[Lao Tzu]

ewww

60% bf


thats just nasty

300 lbs is about 60% fat for a woman.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Obesity alone is not a problem for anyone but the obese person. Until all of these ideas that people should bear the costs of how others treat their body disappear, ludicrous arguments on both sides will reign.

The fact that you debate on those terms demonstrates

1. You are a socialist

That's all you've established. You have several thousand posts here, we knew all that though.


As to your other "point":

Laziness is not the reason for improved technology; desire to increase wealth and standard of living is.

The desire of EF-ers to be thin / fit at all chemical costs is a red herring.


In conclusion:

You or someone else want to be fat? Be fat. Just don't come looking to me to pay your bills when you get sick at a young age.

 

[Lao Tzu]

Obesity alone is not a problem for anyone but the obese person. Until all of these ideas that people should bear the costs of how others treat their body disappear, ludicrous arguments on both sides will reign.

The fact that you debate on those terms demonstrates

1. You are a socialist

That's all you've established. You have several thousand posts here, we knew all that though.

As to your other "point":

Laziness is not the reason for improved technology; desire to increase wealth and standard of living is.

The desire of EF-ers to be thin / fit at all chemical costs is a red herring.

In conclusion:

You or someone else want to be fat? Be fat. Just don't come looking to me to pay your bills when you get sick at a young age.

Yeah im a socialist. So is pretty much everyone in the developed world to one degree or another. Sucks to be rich huh? You're paying people's bills no matter what. Thin, healthy people have bills just as high as fat unhealthy people. It just takes longer to collect.

Laziness is the same thing as a higher standard of living. People want more for less, this is what laziness is.

 

[d3track]

300 lbs is about 60% fat for a woman.

yup
icky

 

[JKurz1]

Cancer is due to poor lifestyle choices too.

A completely idiotic statement...........moron

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Yeah im a socialist. So is pretty much everyone in the developed world to one degree or another. Sucks to be rich huh? You're paying people's bills no matter what. Thin, healthy people have bills just as high as fat unhealthy people. It just takes longer to collect.

Laziness is the same thing as a higher standard of living. People want more for less, this is what laziness is.

Laziness is not wanting more for less. Laziness is being unwilling to make an effort to do something. The wanting vs. doing discrepancy is . perhaps the heart of why your statement is nonsense.

The idea of paying other people's bills is indeed socialism and yep, people embrace it. Having said that I am equally opposed to paying fo a skinny guy's medical problems.

 

[biteme]

A completely idiotic statement...........moron

Take it back. He's not a moron, actually he's very intelligent. And that statement is correct in many cases. Cigarette smoking for example.

 

[JKurz1]

Take it back. He's not a moron, actually he's very intelligent. And that statement is correct in many cases. Cigarette smoking for example.

Tell that to my father-in-law who was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer 6 months ago, told he has 9 months to live, and was in better shape than 90% of the bros on this board.......a true picture pf perfect health.

You know, my mistake, he's not a moron......but that statement was completely moronic.

 

[biteme]

Tell that to my father-in-law who was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer 6 months ago, told he has 9 months to live, and was in better shape than 90% of the bros on this board.......a true picture pf perfect health.

You know, my mistake, he's not a moron......but that statement was completely moronic.

Very sorry to hear that.

On a side note, the more I open my mouth, the more likely it is that I'm going to say something moronic, so I simply don't talk that much in real life.

 

[JKurz1]

Very sorry to hear that.

On a side note, the more I open my mouth, the more likely it is that I'm going to say something moronic, so I simply don't talk that much in real life.

nah man, it's not your fault...I'm the same way, so I usually keep quiet. I shouldnt have named called, but it was out of instinct....touched home, I guess....again, my apologies........just wish people would think before they offend, or in this case, offend and be completely incorrect........

 

[juve]

On a side note, the more I open my mouth, the more likely it is that I'm going to say something moronic, so I simply don't talk that much in real life.

This should be a mandatory civil virtue

 

[L_Seven]

This should be a mandatory civil virtue

This oughta be interesting....

 

[Lao Tzu]

A completely idiotic statement...........moron

No its not. Lifestyle is a major contributor to cancer. Being obese, bad diet, no exercise, exposure to toxins, not getting screened propertly, etc.

http://www.hbns.org/news/cancer10-16-03.cfm

moron.

(PS: sincerely sorry about your father. I lost a grandmother to breast cancer)

 

[JKurz1]

boy o boy.........after that post, I'd love to meet you out........

 

[Lao Tzu]

boy o boy.........after that post, I'd love to meet you out........

wtf? i showed i was right and terminal cancer is, to a large degree, avoidable with proper screening, good diet and a good lifestyle (most of which most people avoid). So is obesity. What is yoru problem?

 

[d3track]

ewwwwww
can we stop talking about fat people, i'm startin to feel nacious

 

[biteme]

Can't we all just get along? Rodney King you will go down in history for that statement.

There's too much fighting in the world. The nature of the beast, I guess. I'll take a ticket to heaven please. I'm tired.

 

[Lao Tzu]

Alright i'll quit. But the point is and was that cancer rates, like obesity rates, can be controlled by the individual within reason.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Alright i'll quit. But the point is and was that cancer rates, like obesity rates, can be controlled by the individual within reason.

So then the issue is not so much the condition (cancer, obesity etc) but the expectation of other people to meet the needs of one's medical costs.

Isn't that the core issue here?

 

[Lao Tzu]

So then the issue is not so much the condition (cancer, obesity etc) but the expectation of other people to meet the needs of one's medical costs.

Isn't that the core issue here?

my point was that most people on here who condemn obesity condemn it because under a socialist system they have to pay for the costs. However

1. obese people use up less medicaid and social security money, evening out the costs of hypertension, type II diabetes, etc.
2. pretty much all medical treatments that make people healthy and expand lifespan will cost taxpayers money in a socialistic system.

I was also addressing BrandonXJ's post taht cancer is a disease, while obesity is controllabe. Cancer, like obesity, can be avoided to a large degree with proper lifestyle but most people choose not to follow that lifestyle. The only difference is obese people are condemned for their decisions.

 

[d3track]

i condemn obesity cause i dont like to look at it

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

my point was that most people on here who condemn obesity condemn it because under a socialist system they have to pay for the costs. However

1. obese people use up less medicaid and social security money, evening out the costs of hypertension, type II diabetes, etc.
2. pretty much all medical treatments that make people healthy and expand lifespan will cost taxpayers money in a socialistic system.

So the real issue is the wrong-ness or socialism of the system then, and the condition and its origins are less relevant. Cancer, obesity, whatever, <insert disease here> the outcome is all the same.

I was also addressing BrandonXJ's post taht cancer is a disease, while obesity is controllabe. Cancer, like obesity, can be avoided to a large degree with proper lifestyle but most people choose not to follow that lifestyle. The only difference is obese people are condemned for their decisions.

That may be a secondary issue, or a red herring, depending on how you wish to treat it. If you wish to treat it as a red herring, you will continue to piss people off like jkurz etc without achieving any debate-related outcome. That's what red herrings do; inflame emotions and distract people without impacting an outcome.

If you wish to treat the similarities as a secondary issue, you must admit that the origins and treatments of cancer are far less well understood then that of obesity. If you remain uncertain, do your research, but I will tell you as a medical publisher who deals often with oncology that the banner of "cancer" encompasses hundreds of conditions, all with their own origins and treatments, whereas the roots of obesity and treatments for it are far better understood.

Even as a secondary issue your points aren;t very strong.

 

[Lao Tzu]

That may be a secondary issue, or a red herring, depending on how you wish to treat it. If you wish to treat it as a red herring, you will continue to piss people off like jkurz etc without achieving any debate-related outcome. That's what red herrings do; inflame emotions and distract people without impacting an outcome.

If you wish to treat the similarities as a secondary issue, you must admit that the origins and treatments of cancer are far less well understood then that of obesity. If you remain uncertain, do your research, but I will tell you as a medical publisher who deals often with oncology that the banner of "cancer" encompasses hundreds of conditions, all with their own origins and treatments, whereas the roots of obesity and treatments for it are far better understood.

Even as a secondary issue your points aren;t very strong.

This is a red herring more than anything. you are trying to turn this into a pro/anti socialism argument.

As far as cancer, that article i posted up showed that cancer could, to a large degree, be avoided with lifestyle changes. However people with cancer are treated with more dignity than fat people. However both medical conditions are (within reason) controllable by the individual. Both can choose to live heathy and exercise. The obese person can choose to learn about safe diets and diet drugs while the pre-cancerous person can choose to learn about screenings. But neither do. However only the obese person is condemned as lazy for it.

 

[Lao Tzu]

Excellent point, "Nordie"

Is that good or bad? A good deal of medical problems are avoidable with lifestyle changes but only the obese are treated like shit for not following those lifestyle changes. AIDS victims, cancer victims, etc are all treated with dignity. Check your email.

 

[Tweakle]

Ok so let me get this right, the fat people I know aren't fat because they cram their faces with krispy kremes and sit on thier asses all day - it's because they have a disease. But, for an example, my moms cancer was caused by her lifestyle (no alcohol, no cigarettes, lots of exercise and a good diet)?

My personal feelings are that if fatties have to pay increasingly higher medicare coverage the fatter they get then it's all good. I could care less about them or their excuses for why they ate themselves into adiposity.

 

[Lao Tzu]

Ok so let me get this right, the fat people I know aren't fat because they cram their faces with krispy kremes and sit on thier asses all day - it's because they have a disease. But, for an example, my moms cancer was caused by her lifestyle (no alcohol, no cigarettes, lots of exercise and a good diet)?

My personal feelings are that if fatties have to pay increasingly higher medicare coverage the fatter they get then it's all good. I could care less about them or their excuses for why they ate themselves into adiposity.

Fat people are not treated the same way other illnesses that are partially controllable are. People with AIDS or hepatitis C who don't use condoms and clean needles are treated differently than fat people who don't diet and exercise. Cancer victims who get their cancer from not dieting, exercising, and getting proper screenings are treated different than fat people who don't diet and exercise properly.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

This is a red herring more than anything. you are trying to turn this into a pro/anti socialism argument.

As far as cancer, that article i posted up showed that cancer could, to a large degree, be avoided with lifestyle changes. However people with cancer are treated with more dignity than fat people. However both medical conditions are (within reason) controllable by the individual. Both can choose to live heathy and exercise. The obese person can choose to learn about safe diets and diet drugs while the pre-cancerous person can choose to learn about screenings. But neither do. However only the obese person is condemned as lazy for it.

Jeezus. In your very first post you talked about cost issues. You introduced it, not me. I just refined your spattering of words that you called an argument into a series of addressable points. You could have saved me the work by being concise upfront.

Regardless, you used the cost issue in Post #1 and you have systematically ducked responses to it. Instead, you chose to compare the costliness of diseases as if it matters. The concept itself is flawed.


As to your post above, I addressed it already by saying that the scientific knowledge base and treatments available for cancer and for obesity are not comparable. You've reduced two conditions to the most general of terms, when any oncologist or medical person can tell you that cancer is an umbrella under which numerous diseases reside, all with different levels of treatability and foreseeability, while obesity is a single condition. A biology 101 student gets this.

I told you that three posts ago, you ignored it because your argument's validity evaporates when one goes deeper than the most general terms.

If you want to stick with your beliefs after they are demonstrated to be uninformed, your business.

 

[Lao Tzu]

Jeezus. In your very first post you talked about cost issues. You introduced it, not me. I just refined your spattering of words that you called an argument into a series of addressable points. You could have saved me the work by being concise upfront.

Regardless, you used the cost issue in Post #1 and you have systematically ducked responses to it. Instead, you chose to compare the costliness of diseases as if it matters. The concept itself is flawed.

As to your post above, I addressed it already by saying that the scientific knowledge base and treatments available for cancer and for obesity are not comparable. You've reduced two conditions to the most general of terms, when any oncologist or medical person can tell you that cancer is an umbrella under which numerous diseases reside, all with different levels of treatability and foreseeability, while obesity is a single condition. A biology 101 student gets this.

I told you that three posts ago, you ignored it because your argument's validity evaporates when one goes deeper than the most general terms.

If you want to stick with your beliefs after they are demonstrated to be uninformed, your business.

You didn't destroy anything as far as i can tell. Having an entrepreneur role in medical publishing doesn't make you a Ph.D./MD doing research at Yale.

Cancer is 100+ diseases yes. But i am not debating the complexity of cancer vs. obesity. I am debating this:

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_3_1x_Link_Between_Lifestyle_and_CancerMarch03.asp

Evidence suggests that one third of the 550,000 cancer deaths that occur in the United States each year are due to unhealthy diet and insufficient physical activity.
--------

Those stats may not even factor in tobacco, which would raise it to closer to 2/3, which is what the earlier article showed.

People complain about how they will pay for obesity problems. However they will end up paying no matter what. Yes, if you get rid of socialized medical care and probably health insurance then people would not pay for other people's problems and illnesses. However i am not addressing that. I am saying that other medical procedures that also increase costs from social security and medicaid are not treated with the same disdain given to obesity. Expanding lifespan costs more money in a socialistic system more than obesity i would bet yet people don't condemn the former.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

You didn't destroy anything as far as i can tell. Having an entrepreneur role in medical publishing doesn't make you a Ph.D./MD doing research at Yale.

No, it makes me their boss. Woo hoo!

All that aside, I am pretty plugged in to the treatment side of cancer, at least on the drug side.

And I have less of an agenda.

Cancer is 100+ diseases yes. But i am not debating the complexity of cancer vs. obesity. I am debating this:

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_3_1x_Link_Between_Lifestyle_and_CancerMarch03.asp

Evidence suggests that one third of the 550,000 cancer deaths that occur in the United States each year are due to unhealthy diet and insufficient physical activity.
--------

Those stats may not even factor in tobacco, which would raise it to closer to 2/3, which is what the earlier article showed.

People complain about how they will pay for obesity problems. However they will end up paying no matter what. Yes, if you get rid of socialized medical care and probably health insurance then people would not pay for other people's problems and illnesses. However i am not addressing that. I am saying that other medical procedures that also increase costs from social security and medicaid are not treated with the same disdain given to obesity. Expanding lifespan costs more money in a socialistic system more than obesity i would bet yet people don't condemn the former.

Compromising between 1/3 and 2/3 of cancer deaths from inactivity etc., we can agree that 1/2 (midpoint) of the 550,000 cancer deaths are due to unhealthy diet and insufficient activity.

That also means 50% are NOT due to this, whereas with obesity, 100% of the cases are caused (or exacerbated) by the aforementioned.

Hence the harsher treatment for obesity-related illness.

 

[tiger88]

As far as laziness, the human body, as far as i know, isn't designed to lose weight and keep it off. Fat is emergency fuel and you will have to trick and manipulate
ntific report. When the FDA is doing stage II trials on the drug people on EF will be buying it from industrial chemistry suppliers in Tiawan and capping it in their basements. People here take the same shortcuts everyone else does.

man...with fat ppl there are lest chics for me to fuck




also any one notice fat ppl drive big cars or SUV track it seems like

 

[Buddy_Christ]

As far as cancer, that article i posted up showed that cancer could, to a large degree, be avoided with lifestyle changes.

sometimes, yes, but not all the time. for the sake of arguement, lets say that 50% of the time it could be avoided.

However people with cancer are treated with more dignity than fat people. However both medical conditions are (within reason) controllable by the individual.

yes and no on the dignity part. if someone smoked for 40 years and then developed cancer because of it, they are given sympathy, because they could have prevented it. however, a lot of times, things such as lung cancer are used as an example to young people - "don't smoke or you'll end up like your uncle Joe, getting lung cancer and having to live off your final days with a breathing tube shoved down your throat!"

or take my stance on skin cancer - if you're dumb enough to be out in the sun tanning all the time and develop cancer as a result, i'll feel somewhat sorry for you, but not completely.

sympathy towards fat people, however, just doesn't happen most of the time, at least not right off the bat. some women will have kids, and they gain weight as a result, and have a hard time losing it afterwards. if they're making an effort to get thinner, then you can extend some sympathy. or lets say someone gets injured. they weren't in great shape before hand, but weren't obese, we'll say 20% BF. they're stuck laying around for months with an injury, not able to work or do any physcial activity, while they could moniter what they eat, do you really think you're going to? you're going to be depressed enough as it is w/out having to tell yourself "i can't eat that...i'll get fat." i knew a guy that landed himself in a similar situation, tore his shoulder out of the socket on the job. he blimped up afterwards. a few years later, he got sick of looking at himself in the mirror, and made a change. it happens though. my workout partner had the same situation when he separated his shoulder. gained about 20lbs over 6 months. sympathy towards plumpers is on a case-by-case basis really.

i DO, however, feel sorry for fat children. their parents obviously don't give a shit about nutrition and will feed them whatever they want to eat. it's not really the kid's fault, i mean, come on, how many kids are going to turn down sweets? i make my kids eat healthy or else they don't get the "junk" food. i actually hate holidays because of all the candy, cookies, and crap involved. family members give it to us, and since i was raised with a waste not want not mentality, it's got to get eaten. i hate wasting food, even if it was given to me.

Both can choose to live heathy and exercise. The obese person can choose to learn about safe diets and diet drugs while the pre-cancerous person can choose to learn about screenings. But neither do. However only the obese person is condemned as lazy for it.

yes, you're correct, both can choose to live a healthy lifestyle. the person tha does live a healthy or moderately healthy lifestyle, however, feels that they're at less of a risk to develop cancer, heart disease, diabetes, or whatever. why? because they eat sensibly and maintain a decent lifestyle. that doesn't excuse them from getting regular check-ups with the doctor, but it gives a sense of security, whether it be real or false.

the fat person, however, needs to learn to put the donut down. the next fat fucker that tries to sue mcdonalds or any other fast food chain because they got fat should be locked in a room and given nothing but vitamins and water until they are no longer obese. then they should be let out of the room and be expected to say "thank you" to all the fast food companies for paying for the room to have them locked in and the doctors to check up on them.

it's not that hard to moniter what you eat and get some exercise. it's easier to do this than it is to keep yourself cancer free (with the exception of cigarette smokers).

and what really pisses me off is when a fat person thinks they look good. nothing wrong with having a positive self image, but when a fat chick thinks she's sexy, who is she kidding? it's disgusting. however, you will hear people say "why do these fat women wear skin tight clothing and reveal their rolls?! don't they know how disgusting that is?!" well, to be honest, i think some of them don't have a choice because they can't find clothes big enough for them.

medically, i'm not going to argue the cost of who pays more because i havn't seen figures, so if i tried to argue it, it would be a waste of my time.

my grandfather was obese. i saw pictures of him when he was in the army. he went into the army in 1941 weighing 135lbs. he got out in 1944 and weighed 131lbs. his weight stayed low for years afterwards, but once he started getting older, he started getting heavier. in his defense, the average joe didn't know as much about nutrition back when he was getting bigger. however, he should've learned to put the food down on occasion.

by the early 80s, i believe he was over 240lbs. he was only 5'7". he had a nervous breakdown in the late 70s or early 80s, lots of financial problems and problems with the job he had worked at for over 35 years. this only caused him to gain more weight. by the early 90s, he was between 295-301lbs. there were times he had made it down into the low 280s, but he'd slip up somewhere and then completely forget his diet. for his weight, however, he was healthy. he had high blood pressure and high chloresterol, and he did alter his eating because of both of them. his eating wasn't out of control in the last few years of his life either. he ate reasonably. cakes, cookies, ice cream, candy....he didn't over indulge in any of them. but the man could eat. food was his "passion."

but as far as health problems, he didn't have many at all because of his weight. he lived to be 71 and died of heart failure. so from your arguement of fat people or old people costing the health care system a lot of money, he did neither.

 

[Lao Tzu]

dude im so drunk i can't even read. Suffice it to say you are wrong. i will work out the detalis when the whiskey wears off. I love you.
Sincerely,
Nordstron

 

[JKurz1]

I'm feel 10x more stupid after subjecting myself to read this thread and your ridiculous comments...I'm finished...........

 

[MAX 300]

Fat people, smokers and drug addicts piss me off because I have to pay for their bloody healthcare. I believe people should be held responsible for their own life style choices.

I do have one friend who has been very fat, but I respect him because he has been doing something about it and been losing weight for a long time.

 

[atlantabiolab]

The secondary benefit of socialism to public officials is that it perpetuates their career. By forcing the public to pay for the "ills" of society, it ensures that the official has a whole slew of topics that he can address that are "urgent" for government to correct.

The present system perpetuates the animosity towards fat people, 1) by placing the burden of their decisions on that of the public, and 2) by displacing said monetary burdens, thereby decreasing the incentive to change their habits.

There have been numerous "ideas" on how to penalize bad behaviour in order to re-distribute the costs back onto the person who should be responsible, such as higher insurance premiums, Medicare costs, etc. for those who fit in "X" catagory, but never addressing the most obvious answer. What is more "fair" than letting the individual pay for his/her problems? What penalty is greater than having to personally deal with all of the problems "you" have created?

 

[ChefWide]

Let's debate fat people? Ok, Lardstrom, I'll debate you. What topic?

 

[Lao Tzu]

Let's debate fat people? Ok, Lardstrom, I'll debate you. What topic?

how about 'how not to hurt peoples feelings'. lets debate that

 

[JKurz1]

how about 'how not to hurt peoples feelings'. lets debate that

then chapter 2 would be 'thinking before you speak.........'

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

The issues are really

1-Socialized medicine yes or no?
2-Individual choice yes or no?
3-Preventability of some types of cancer.

Since few of us are oncologists or cancer researchers, #3 is beyond most of us.

That leaves the issues as 1 and 2 above.

 

[ChefWide]

how about 'how not to hurt peoples feelings'. lets debate that

Best post ever, Shamu.

 

[milo hobgoblin]

We need to stop giving medical treatment to those who cant afford it.

Its a service.. you cant buy it.. you dont get it.

If you're 84 and you dont have insurance... no medical care. Period.

If you're obese and you cant afford insurance to pay for your diabetes medication.. or whatever else you need .. too bad.

We need to start letting Darwin do his job.

 

[Robert Jan]

We need to stop giving medical treatment to those who cant afford it.

Its a service.. you cant buy it.. you dont get it.

If you're 84 and you dont have insurance... no medical care. Period.

If you're obese and you cant afford insurance to pay for your diabetes medication.. or whatever else you need .. too bad.

We need to start letting Darwin do his job.

Maybe we need to lure all the welfare people to come to the food stamp places and deport them to a concentration camp and gas them in showerchambers.

 

[UA_Iron]

And who said laziness is a bad thing? Laziness and a desire to get something for nothing is what fuels innovation and technology. If people weren't to lazy to walk we wouldn't have bikes. if people weren't too lazy to bike we wouldn't have cars. if people weren't too lazy to drive we wouldn't have planes.

I would say its the other way around...innovation and technology fueled from hard work led to more leisure time, hence more laziness.

Fat people to me are ineffective in the way that they cannot keep up with the number one concern in their life, their health. Ineffective people have always irritated me.

 

[broley]

Shit and i thought you wanted to raid one of those "I'm Fat and Proud" Boards and debate them.

 

[Lord_Suston]

wtf? i showed i was right and terminal cancer is, to a large degree, avoidable with proper screening, good diet and a good lifestyle (most of which most people avoid). So is obesity. What is yoru problem?

Some is due to lifestyle Nordstrom, but the mutation that occurs within the cells can be due to a genetic predepostition, that is why screening is recommend more with family that have a history of cancer. Yes it could be a common social factor but if lifestyle was the only contributing factor than all smoker would have cancer, which we know isn;t true. So basically you need to look at suceptibily of DNA to be mutated and take out intrisic factors as normal mutation rate and lokk hereditary and social factor in an objective study.

Jkurz I am sorry about you father.

Obesity is not a disease IMO unless you are clinically diagnosed with hypothryoidism. because you have choice to lose weight or not. Lifetstyle is the major cause of fat gain in people, this could be either diet or excercise. So have a predispostion to store fats easily but the still have the choice to lose weight, it is just harder and takes more effort, it is not they will be obese no matteer what they do

 

[milo hobgoblin]

Hey if people knew that if they have children and cant afford medical care for themm.. maybe they wouldnt have had kids in the first place..

as it is now.. all they have to do is show up and they are treated at everyone elses expense.

If people dont take care of themseleves when they are young and cant afford insurance to make up for a shitty lifestyle when they are older... too bad. Its a CHOICE.

Society should NOT be forced to pay for peoples bad choices.