• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

The obesity epidemic-should it be a higher priority issue ?


cyberianpan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
16,625
Website
www.google.com
More evidence is clearly coming about about the bad effects of obesity:


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the Guardian, March 18th
Moderate obesity shortens lives by three years and the seriously obese will die 10 years before they should, according to a definitive study by Oxford University researchers....

MSNBC, March 13th

Childhood obesity reaches epidemic proportions. It's a condition which increases the risk of some deadly diseases - including

Telegraph, March 17th
Family who are 'too fat to work' say £22,000 worth of benefits is not enough


Telegraph, March 13th
Chocolate should be taxed in the same way as alcohol to control Britain's obesity epidemic, a medical conference has heard.
But a motion calling for the introduction of a chocolate tax was defeated by only two votes by doctors at the British Medical Association (BMA) conference.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Currently given our social welfare & socialised medicine it is clear that obesity is a public policy issue. Yet it is perhaps only recently that it is starting to attract serious, concerted attention.


  1. Should we tax obesity ?
  2. We run gruesome dangerous driving ads on TV, should we run similar dangerous eating ads ?
  3. Should we have a minister for obesity control ?
  4. Would shedding a few fatties dig us out of the recession ?
  5. Should exercise be prescribed by doctors ?
  6. etc

cYp
 


20000miles

Active member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
257
Website
www.irishliberty.wordpress.com
IMHO, fatties are becoming the new flavour of the month for policy makers. First, it was smokers who paved the way for massive government intervention in the market and the further dismantling of property rights.

No doubt, fatties will provide the impitus for more wide ranging legislation. All in the name of "public safety" and the "public good". Cyp correctly notes that it is only becuase we have socialised medicine that this is a public issue. In the end, this is an intervention to solve an intervention.

I've already gone through this elsewhere.

The most commonly cited arguments for a system of taxing fatty foods or subsidising exercise is that the poor health of the obese will impact negatively on others, that is, we all have to pay for their treatment. This however is a sham reason, and is not a genuine “externality”. If the nationalised healthcare system currently in place in the UK were removed the “externality” disappears, along with the moral hazard.

The new scheme provides an incentive for fat people to lose weight, however few of us realise such incentives already exist in the free market. The government can only supress them.

It’s worthy to note that it was Ludwig von Mises who first realised that government interventions in the economy do not solve market distortions, but rather distort the market further. The government can either repeal its policy or try to intervene more. It most often chooses the latter.

The frightening thing about government healthcare is not the inefficiencies and the poor quality and the fact it just doesn't work. The scary thing is that it permits the State to dictate both how we are treated and how we live our lives.

Currently given our social welfare & socialised medicine it is clear that obesity is a public policy issue. Yet it is perhaps only recently that it is starting to attract serious, concerted attention.


  1. Should we tax obesity ?
  2. We run gruesome dangerous driving ads on TV, should we run similar dangerous eating ads ?
  3. Should we have a minister for obesity control ?
  4. Would shedding a few fatties dig us out of the recession ?
  5. Should exercise be prescribed by doctors ?
  6. etc
cYp
So, in order:
1. No. And how would this be done? Who decides the cut-off points?
2. No, but this is the only logical conclusion of such policies. The government does it with cigarettes and driving, fatty foods are next.
3. We already have a Health Commisar.
4. That's one way to solve world hunger.
5. It probably already is.

But here's another one:

Q: Should obese people who require 2 seats on an aircraft pay for one seat or two?
 
Last edited:

cyberianpan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
16,625
Website
www.google.com
This issue is becoming more topical with 2 Sunday times stories today


High-fat diet puts children at risk

Irish youngsters are eating 50% more than their recommended saturated fat intake, increasing the possibility of heart disease

Irish people have far too much saturated fat in their diets, with 94% of children, 89% of teenagers and 79% of adults eating more than the recommended daily intake, new research shows.

Brenda Power: Sorry but being fat is a choice, not a disability

Bernadette Treanor is claiming discrimination against an insurer who loaded her premium because she was obese
[see thread on this here: Equality Authority protects its obese employee against Eagle Star]
cYp
 
Last edited:

FutureTaoiseach

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
7,991
Website
greatdearleader.blogspot.com
My personal experience is that I have to practically starve myself of food before I can get to a situation where I am not overweight. The last time I was not overweight was January 2008 when I was 12 st. I am current 14 stone. Since 2006, I have only been able to return to normal weight via Lipotrim, which costs €85 a week and is available as a food-replacement from the chemist. The problem is that when you go on it, your metabolic rate drops dramatically as the body thinks its being starved (wrongly) and tries to conserve available energy as fat. Somehow, I managed to stay on it in 2006 for 4.5 months and lose 7 stone, but because of the lower metabolic rate, I put back on around 2 stone afterwards. Since then, I have been back on it 3 more times - and it always works. The problem is what happens afterwards. I have no patience and am not really prepared to attempt something slower. Slow diets tend to collapse under the weight of my frustration of not being free to binge on Pringles, Doritos, Wine Gums etc.

On the substantive issue of your thread, here are my answers:

Currently given our social welfare & socialised medicine it is clear that obesity is a public policy issue. Yet it is perhaps only recently that it is starting to attract serious, concerted attention.

Should we tax obesity?


No. That would be unfair to those who have a genetic predisposition to obesity. I recall a report on BBC some years ago about someone from the Six Counties who ate very little but was becoming ever more obese because of a medical-condition.

We run gruesome dangerous driving ads on TV, should we run similar dangerous eating ads ?

Containing what exactly? It might not be a bad idea to illustrate how obesity can lead to heart-disease by showing arteries blocked by cholesterol I suppose. Might help some of us in terms of self-control of appetite.

Should we have a minister for obesity control ?

No. It would just be jobs for the boys and as with most Junior Ministers they would get a fortune for doing nothing other than appearing on Morning Ireland or Q+A. What is need are actions, not more personalities.

Would shedding a few fatties dig us out of the recession ?

Meaning what exactly?

Should exercise be prescribed by doctors?

I don't accept that exercise is the answer. The underlying determinant of the direction your weight goes is calories in vs calories out, and I did almost no exercise in my previous Lipotrim diets where I lost up to 7 stone.
 

Ah Well

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
1,235
Personally I would be very slow to attack those who are "obese" so flippantly ..... as someone pointed out medical conditions have a part to play ..... for example I know (not being precise) someone who has developed Alzheimers and they've gone from a "stick" to very heavy in 12 months, another person who is epileptic and the drugs have made them very heavy indeed.

Plus people have different metabolic rates ... some can eat like pigs and look like fashion models.. others can't look relatively trim even when trying very hard to do so.

This is an area which has attracted too much focus for action ... there are a lot of people who through no fault of their own in their circumstances are considered "obese" .. pursue other areas firstly before hitting this one to the detriment of a considerable amount of the populace
 

Gruffalo

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
498
But here's another one:

Q: Should obese people who require 2 seats on an aircraft pay for one seat or two?
A few years back I worked for a multinational. One of my colleagues had the job of booking flights for the executives. One of the executives was so big that she did actually have to book and pay for 2 seats for him.

As a junk food lover and someone who is overweight, I do think that there should be junk food tax. It would not stop me eating junk food but it would contribute extra money for the health system. As my eating habits increase my chances of needing medical help it is only fair that I contribute more.

On a side note I do think that it has become socially acceptable to abuse fat people. One example, I was walking past a pub one evening last year, with a bottle of fanta in my hand. There were a group of lads sitting outside the pub, and one of them yelled at me "Is that diet" and starting laughing. So I poured the drink over him and said "you tell me".

My point is that it is fair to tax unhealthy foods to ensure that does who knowingly do harm to their own health pay more toward the medical treatment they are likely to require. It is a polluter pays policy. However, it is not fair to ridicule, abuse or single out people because they are fat. Fit, healthy and corrupt developers, bankers, politicians etc., have done more harm to this country than fat people ever will.
 

atlantic

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
649

cyberianpan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
16,625
Website
www.google.com
The obesity epidemic is worse than had been imagined

One in five hospital patients has diabetes - Telegraph
One in five hospital patients now suffers from diabetes, according to a national audit which reveals the devastating impact of changes in British lifestyles.

By Laura Donnelly, Health Correspondent
Published: 8:50PM GMT 23 Jan 2010
Soaring obesity levels have triggered record levels of the condition, which increases the risks of heart and kidney failure, and can result in blindness, nerve damage and amputations.
The first ever diabetes audit of NHS hospitals has found that 20 per cent of patients on hospital wards are now suffering from the disease – twice the proportion previously estimated.

Doctors said the figures, which will be published officially later this year, showed the "terrifying burden" the epidemic is placing on Britain's population and the crippling effect it is having on NHS resources.
Is Mary Harney credible as Minister for Health ?

cYp
 

FutureTaoiseach

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
7,991
Website
greatdearleader.blogspot.com
Speaking as someone with a BMI of 29.1:
Should we tax obesity ?
No. We should outlaw trans-fats like in California. We need to tackle the problem at manufacture, by compelling restrictions on calorie content.
We run gruesome dangerous driving ads on TV, should we run similar dangerous eating ads ?
Yes I think so. Show us fatties what all these calories are doing to our hearts.
Should we have a minister for obesity control ?
Not as a new portfolio. Incorporate it into the portfolio of an existing Junior Minister.
Would shedding a few fatties dig us out of the recession ?
No.
 

gnasher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
1,178
Speaking as someone with a BMI of 29.1:No. We should outlaw trans-fats like in California. We need to tackle the problem at manufacture, by compelling restrictions on calorie content.Yes I think so. Show us fatties what all these calories are doing to our hearts.Not as a new portfolio. Incorporate it into the portfolio of an existing Junior Minister.No.
So you see fatness as a matter for goverenmental involvement? And how the f*ck are you going to limit the calorie content of butter or cheese or cream cakes? Why should non-fat people be discrimated against because of a lack of restraint on the part of overeaters?

Sounds like the kind of big government nanny-statism that you would be deplore if it was for somebody else's benefit. Gamblers, for example. As usual, you may not have thought this through. Consistency and logic are not your strong points.
 

FutureTaoiseach

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
7,991
Website
greatdearleader.blogspot.com
Just because I don't want big government doesn't mean I want no government, gnasher. Entirely consistent. It's not discriminatory to protect the health of all by restricting calorie-content in foods. On the contrary, it meets the 1916 benchmark of 'cherishing all the children of the nation equally.
 

gnasher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
1,178
Just because I don't want big government doesn't mean I want no government, gnasher. Entirely consistent. It's not discriminatory to protect the health of all by restricting calorie-content in foods. On the contrary, it meets the 1916 benchmark of 'cherishing all the children of the nation equally.

So just because you and others can't exercise restraint at mealtimes means that EVERYBODY in Ireland gets their dietary choices restricted? In accordance with the wishes of the men of 1916? Cop on, FutureTaoiseach, this is pure idiocy.

Why should a normal person who understands moderation and the concept of a balanced diet be denied the pleasure of butter, cheese, biscuits, cakes, beer, wine, fried chicken, McDonald's or any damned thing they want to eat because of your gluttony?

Yet again, this a half-baked idea that you haven't thought about for a second. You howled about the nanny-state when people raised objections to casinos, yet you're telling me that the Government should restrict MY diet because of YOUR lack of self-control. Why don't you take a bit of personal responsibility and stop bloody whining?
 

sarahj

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
1,185
More evidence is clearly coming about about the bad effects of obesity:


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the Guardian, March 18th
Moderate obesity shortens lives by three years and the seriously obese will die 10 years before they should, according to a definitive study by Oxford University researchers....

MSNBC, March 13th

Childhood obesity reaches epidemic proportions. It's a condition which increases the risk of some deadly diseases - including

Telegraph, March 17th
Family who are 'too fat to work' say £22,000 worth of benefits is not enough


Telegraph, March 13th
Chocolate should be taxed in the same way as alcohol to control Britain's obesity epidemic, a medical conference has heard.
But a motion calling for the introduction of a chocolate tax was defeated by only two votes by doctors at the British Medical Association (BMA) conference.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Currently given our social welfare & socialised medicine it is clear that obesity is a public policy issue. Yet it is perhaps only recently that it is starting to attract serious, concerted attention.


  1. Should we tax obesity ?
  2. We run gruesome dangerous driving ads on TV, should we run similar dangerous eating ads ?
  3. Should we have a minister for obesity control ?
  4. Would shedding a few fatties dig us out of the recession ?
  5. Should exercise be prescribed by doctors ?
  6. etc

cYp
Research also shows that those of a lower socioeconomic status and many minority groups are more likely to be obese regardless of exercise and diet. Perhaps social inclusion and more equitable distribution of wealth and services would put paid to some of it and be a better solution than "shedding fatties"?
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
32,993
Research also shows that those of a lower socioeconomic status and many minority groups are more likely to be obese regardless of exercise and diet. Perhaps social inclusion and more equitable distribution of wealth and services would put paid to some of it and be a better solution than "shedding fatties"?
People in these groups are also less educated. Distribution of wealth (ie socilaism) makes us all equally miserable.
 

cyberianpan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
16,625
Website
www.google.com
Research also shows that those of a lower socioeconomic status and many minority groups are more likely to be obese regardless of exercise and diet. Perhaps social inclusion and more equitable distribution of wealth and services would put paid to some of it and be a better solution than "shedding fatties"?
What research shows that ?

cYp
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
9,797
Research also shows that those of a lower socioeconomic status and many minority groups are more likely to be obese regardless of exercise and diet. Perhaps social inclusion and more equitable distribution of wealth and services would put paid to some of it and be a better solution than "shedding fatties"?
No offense Sarah but that is just stupid. The body doesn't care whether somebody is rich or not - you'd be laughed out of a medical discussion with that nonsense. I've lost about 6lbs since I got back from holidays, is that because I got richer or I've been working out??hmmm....... tough one.

People from those groups are more overweight, however this is mostly because they are ignorant of nutrition, and many are a bit stupid in the first place (hence why poor).

Add to this, that they drink too much and are the welfare class are lazy (hence burn up less calories) and the puzzle is solved.

Weight is simple, how many calories do you eat vs how much exercise you do.
 

sarahj

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
1,185
No offense Sarah but that is just stupid. The body doesn't care whether somebody is rich or not - you'd be laughed out of a medical discussion with that nonsense. I've lost about 6lbs since I got back from holidays, is that because I got richer or I've been working out??hmmm....... tough one.

People from those groups are more overweight, however this is mostly because they are ignorant of nutrition, and many are a bit stupid in the first place (hence why poor).

Add to this, that they drink too much and are the welfare class are lazy (hence burn up less calories) and the puzzle is solved.

Weight is simple, how many calories do you eat vs how much exercise you do.
No offence toughbutfair but perhaps you need to educate yourself further - psychoneuroimmunology is a well respected area of work. Many studies have proven links between many emotions escalated by relative deprivation and their stressing effects on the body. The biological pathways are many and varied but chronically elevated levels of stress hormones have has been linked with obesity and many other diseases. These chronic levels of high stress are a key feature of the lives of those who are deprived. Add to that the grip that large fast food outlets have on the lower price bracket (unless you have the knowledge, eating well on a low budget is nigh on impossible) and it's no surprise that the lower classes are obese.

Calories and exercise is but the start of the obesity picture, not the be all and end all - for example, it is well known that the type of calories affect your health as much as the amount.

However, it seems to suit people like you to either ignore the problem or when you do address it, make it an issue of personal responsibility and blame it on their "stupidity". If you have nothing more to add to work towards a solution, why not keep your opinions to yourself? This discussion on blame is achieving nothing - present a solution or don't. Keep your resentment and your superiority regarding the lower classes out of it.
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top