100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Obesity, where does your state rank? | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
rara777
on
Mon 07/11/11 12:03 AM
|
|
I`m from Ohio and I have dunlap disease.
My belly dunlapped over my belt. When I was in my early 20`s, I weighed a estimated 500 lbs.I had an intestional bypass operation in 1974 to help me loose weight. I`m 59 and I weigh around 240 lbs. So I guess that you can say that I`m half the man that I used to be.  But by some peoples definition, I`m close to being obese. Oh by the way, I don`t have diabetes or heart problems. Those are hereditary diseases in most peoples families. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just want to know why people care about obesity if it ain't them being obese? Shall we start with death at a lower age or much higher medical costs to society? The list goes on and on. It effects all of us, not just the obese person. Smoking, alcohol, drug abuse and obesity all are lifestyle problems that effect our society. Why should one group be exempt from scrutiny? So do you want to live in a free country or not? If we start limiting folks diets then we have to go to limit all other "risky" activity which could mean driving even. There is no other reason to "scrutinize" unless you plan to limit their freedoms unless one wants to prejudiciously scrutinize with no other purpose than to talk down to and about others. * Freedom to kill ones self. * Freedom to emotionally harm friends and loved ones because of health issues and death. * Freedom to over tax the medical and insurance industries. Comparing excessive overeating to driving are hardly comparing apples to apples though it may sound good on OPRAH. People may have the right to eat themselves into an early grave but what about their friends and family. I guess that's ok with you, right? People have the right to overload the medical, insurance and government welfare programs. I assume that's ok with you to, right? If I had a 10 year old car but want to get a newer one just run it off of the road and get the insurance, right? We are worshiping our rights to destroy ourselves and our society, but that's ok with you, right? This is abuse of the system and is leading to it's downfall. Believe it or not, we are fast following Rome's example. But that's our right, even if it destroys our nation for our kids, correct? When do their rights to have a chance come into play? We are a very selfish generation of people only interested in OUR rights. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just want to know why people care about obesity if it ain't them being obese? Shall we start with death at a lower age or much higher medical costs to society? The list goes on and on. It effects all of us, not just the obese person. Smoking, alcohol, drug abuse and obesity all are lifestyle problems that effect our society. Why should one group be exempt from scrutiny? So do you want to live in a free country or not? If we start limiting folks diets then we have to go to limit all other "risky" activity which could mean driving even. There is no other reason to "scrutinize" unless you plan to limit their freedoms unless one wants to prejudiciously scrutinize with no other purpose than to talk down to and about others. * Freedom to kill ones self. * Freedom to emotionally harm friends and loved ones because of health issues and death. * Freedom to over tax the medical and insurance industries. Comparing excessive overeating to driving are hardly comparing apples to apples though it may sound good on OPRAH. People may have the right to eat themselves into an early grave but what about their friends and family. I guess that's ok with you, right? People have the right to overload the medical, insurance and government welfare programs. I assume that's ok with you to, right? If I had a 10 year old car but want to get a newer one just run it off of the road and get the insurance, right? We are worshiping our rights to destroy ourselves and our society, but that's ok with you, right? This is abuse of the system and is leading to it's downfall. Believe it or not, we are fast following Rome's example. But that's our right, even if it destroys our nation for our kids, correct? When do their rights to have a chance come into play? We are a very selfish generation of people only interested in OUR rights. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just want to know why people care about obesity if it ain't them being obese? Shall we start with death at a lower age or much higher medical costs to society? The list goes on and on. It effects all of us, not just the obese person. Smoking, alcohol, drug abuse and obesity all are lifestyle problems that effect our society. Why should one group be exempt from scrutiny? So do you want to live in a free country or not? If we start limiting folks diets then we have to go to limit all other "risky" activity which could mean driving even. There is no other reason to "scrutinize" unless you plan to limit their freedoms unless one wants to prejudiciously scrutinize with no other purpose than to talk down to and about others. * Freedom to kill ones self. * Freedom to emotionally harm friends and loved ones because of health issues and death. * Freedom to over tax the medical and insurance industries. Comparing excessive overeating to driving are hardly comparing apples to apples though it may sound good on OPRAH. People may have the right to eat themselves into an early grave but what about their friends and family. I guess that's ok with you, right? People have the right to overload the medical, insurance and government welfare programs. I assume that's ok with you to, right? If I had a 10 year old car but want to get a newer one just run it off of the road and get the insurance, right? We are worshiping our rights to destroy ourselves and our society, but that's ok with you, right? This is abuse of the system and is leading to it's downfall. Believe it or not, we are fast following Rome's example. But that's our right, even if it destroys our nation for our kids, correct? When do their rights to have a chance come into play? We are a very selfish generation of people only interested in OUR rights. Exposing not only the desire to limit others activities but the prejudicious attitude about them ALL. LOL Well you have the right to wish to limit others if you wish. I can say there are those who do not and would not because they realize that the limits may hinder their freedoms too one day. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just want to know why people care about obesity if it ain't them being obese? Shall we start with death at a lower age or much higher medical costs to society? The list goes on and on. It effects all of us, not just the obese person. Smoking, alcohol, drug abuse and obesity all are lifestyle problems that effect our society. Why should one group be exempt from scrutiny? So do you want to live in a free country or not? If we start limiting folks diets then we have to go to limit all other "risky" activity which could mean driving even. There is no other reason to "scrutinize" unless you plan to limit their freedoms unless one wants to prejudiciously scrutinize with no other purpose than to talk down to and about others. * Freedom to kill ones self. * Freedom to emotionally harm friends and loved ones because of health issues and death. * Freedom to over tax the medical and insurance industries. Comparing excessive overeating to driving are hardly comparing apples to apples though it may sound good on OPRAH. People may have the right to eat themselves into an early grave but what about their friends and family. I guess that's ok with you, right? People have the right to overload the medical, insurance and government welfare programs. I assume that's ok with you to, right? If I had a 10 year old car but want to get a newer one just run it off of the road and get the insurance, right? We are worshiping our rights to destroy ourselves and our society, but that's ok with you, right? This is abuse of the system and is leading to it's downfall. Believe it or not, we are fast following Rome's example. But that's our right, even if it destroys our nation for our kids, correct? When do their rights to have a chance come into play? We are a very selfish generation of people only interested in OUR rights. Exposing not only the desire to limit others activities but the prejudicious attitude about them ALL. LOL Well you have the right to wish to limit others if you wish. I can say there are those who do not and would not because they realize that the limits may hinder their freedoms too one day. The Roman's recipe for ultimate anarchy! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Freedom to kill ones self. * Freedom to emotionally harm friends and loved ones because of health issues and death. * Freedom to over tax the medical and insurance industries. Comparing excessive overeating to driving are hardly comparing apples to apples though it may sound good on OPRAH. People may have the right to eat themselves into an early grave but what about their friends and family. I guess that's ok with you, right? People have the right to overload the medical, insurance and government welfare programs. I assume that's ok with you to, right? If I had a 10 year old car but want to get a newer one just run it off of the road and get the insurance, right? We are worshiping our rights to destroy ourselves and our society, but that's ok with you, right? This is abuse of the system and is leading to it's downfall. Believe it or not, we are fast following Rome's example. But that's our right, even if it destroys our nation for our kids, correct? When do their rights to have a chance come into play? We are a very selfish generation of people only interested in OUR rights. What are you going off on? That people can eat what they want to eat? Hey, guess what! The Government doesn't have the authority to pay for our medical care! This means that if somebody wants to eat themselves to death, it's their business. So you want to grow the government into giving us healthcare and then use that as an excuse for the Government to control what we eat. Then what? Obviously, too many people are injured by guns and if those were made illegal, it would reduce our healthcare costs. So let's control everyone's diets, make guns illegal, force everyone to exercise and put an end to skydiving, diving, surfing, boxing, fencing, basketball, etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Freedom to kill ones self. * Freedom to emotionally harm friends and loved ones because of health issues and death. * Freedom to over tax the medical and insurance industries. Comparing excessive overeating to driving are hardly comparing apples to apples though it may sound good on OPRAH. People may have the right to eat themselves into an early grave but what about their friends and family. I guess that's ok with you, right? People have the right to overload the medical, insurance and government welfare programs. I assume that's ok with you to, right? If I had a 10 year old car but want to get a newer one just run it off of the road and get the insurance, right? We are worshiping our rights to destroy ourselves and our society, but that's ok with you, right? This is abuse of the system and is leading to it's downfall. Believe it or not, we are fast following Rome's example. But that's our right, even if it destroys our nation for our kids, correct? When do their rights to have a chance come into play? We are a very selfish generation of people only interested in OUR rights. What are you going off on? That people can eat what they want to eat? Hey, guess what! The Government doesn't have the authority to pay for our medical care! This means that if somebody wants to eat themselves to death, it's their business. So you want to grow the government into giving us healthcare and then use that as an excuse for the Government to control what we eat. Then what? Obviously, too many people are injured by guns and if those were made illegal, it would reduce our healthcare costs. So let's control everyone's diets, make guns illegal, force everyone to exercise and put an end to skydiving, diving, surfing, boxing, fencing, basketball, etc. I think you misread what I wrote. People have every right to be obese if they want. This is a life style choice. However, this choice causes major health issues and their inflated medical bills are cpayed for by the rest of societies insurance pockets. When this happens it becomes our right to have a say in it. If it only affected them: no problem. When the rest of us have to subsidise their poor life style choices it qualifies us a voice in the matter. If I have to help pay for someones bariatric surgery, diabetes medicine, knee and hip replacement surgeries, etc, because they refuse to control food intake I feel I have a say in the matter. I have never and still do not support socialised medicine other than for those who cannot obtain insurance. There are two extremes that societies struggle with: the good of society and the right of the individual. For the last 40 years our society began to sacrifice the good of society for an individuals rights. Even in the face of devistating the economy and our legal system. Our nation needs to balance this out instead of being a nation of "I want what I want no matter how it effects the rest of you". There needs to be a balance in the middle somewhere. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Freedom to kill ones self. * Freedom to emotionally harm friends and loved ones because of health issues and death. * Freedom to over tax the medical and insurance industries. Comparing excessive overeating to driving are hardly comparing apples to apples though it may sound good on OPRAH. People may have the right to eat themselves into an early grave but what about their friends and family. I guess that's ok with you, right? People have the right to overload the medical, insurance and government welfare programs. I assume that's ok with you to, right? If I had a 10 year old car but want to get a newer one just run it off of the road and get the insurance, right? We are worshiping our rights to destroy ourselves and our society, but that's ok with you, right? This is abuse of the system and is leading to it's downfall. Believe it or not, we are fast following Rome's example. But that's our right, even if it destroys our nation for our kids, correct? When do their rights to have a chance come into play? We are a very selfish generation of people only interested in OUR rights. What are you going off on? That people can eat what they want to eat? Hey, guess what! The Government doesn't have the authority to pay for our medical care! This means that if somebody wants to eat themselves to death, it's their business. So you want to grow the government into giving us healthcare and then use that as an excuse for the Government to control what we eat. Then what? Obviously, too many people are injured by guns and if those were made illegal, it would reduce our healthcare costs. So let's control everyone's diets, make guns illegal, force everyone to exercise and put an end to skydiving, diving, surfing, boxing, fencing, basketball, etc. I think you misread what I wrote. People have every right to be obese if they want. This is a life style choice. However, this choice causes major health issues and their inflated medical bills are cpayed for by the rest of societies insurance pockets. When this happens it becomes our right to have a say in it. If it only affected them: no problem. When the rest of us have to subsidise their poor life style choices it qualifies us a voice in the matter. If I have to help pay for someones bariatric surgery, diabetes medicine, knee and hip replacement surgeries, etc, because they refuse to control food intake I feel I have a say in the matter. I have never and still do not support socialised medicine other than for those who cannot obtain insurance. There are two extremes that societies struggle with: the good of society and the right of the individual. For the last 40 years our society began to sacrifice the good of society for an individuals rights. Even in the face of devistating the economy and our legal system. Our nation needs to balance this out instead of being a nation of "I want what I want no matter how it effects the rest of you". There needs to be a balance in the middle somewhere. Here we go again okay so if we limit those who make medical bills then we have to do smoking anything, bicycle riding, motorcycles, skydiving, horseback riding, skateboarding, skiing, tennis, running, driving, air travel, cruising, child birth, vasectomies, tubal ligations, birth control pills, etc... I know I am forgetting a lot that make medical bills.... Or are we saying that we only want to pay for that which we choose is a "worthy" bill? Worthy bill to who? I don't trust you to get to pick which bill is worthy and who has to be limited so we are at an impasse on this. Better to let people live freely and just accept that they have the right to die how they wish. Cause I and others will surely find something in your lifestyle that needs to be limited also, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Spidercmb
on
Wed 07/13/11 02:02 PM
|
|
I think you misread what I wrote. People have every right to be obese if they want. This is a life style choice. However, this choice causes major health issues and their inflated medical bills are cpayed for by the rest of societies insurance pockets. When this happens it becomes our right to have a say in it. If it only affected them: no problem. When the rest of us have to subsidise their poor life style choices it qualifies us a voice in the matter. If I have to help pay for someones bariatric surgery, diabetes medicine, knee and hip replacement surgeries, etc, because they refuse to control food intake I feel I have a say in the matter. I have never and still do not support socialised medicine other than for those who cannot obtain insurance. There are two extremes that societies struggle with: the good of society and the right of the individual. For the last 40 years our society began to sacrifice the good of society for an individuals rights. Even in the face of devistating the economy and our legal system. Our nation needs to balance this out instead of being a nation of "I want what I want no matter how it effects the rest of you". There needs to be a balance in the middle somewhere. While I don't approve of self destructive behaviors, I feel that it's none of my business. Unfortunately, leftists in government have seen to it that we all suffer because of this behavior. The fix isn't to control what people eat, the fix is to make people responsible for their own healthcare. Your healthcare costs shouldn't be effected by the people who are more sick than you. That's another problem created by our Government. I don't have a problem with the US Government providing basic healthcare to those who can't afford it (so long as it's passed as an Amendment), but please note I said "Basic healthcare". Basic healthcare shouldn't cover bariatric surgery. The US Government also needs to change their dietary guidelines to match actual science, not the Pritikin diet. Whole grains are terrible for humans, but we are told to eat them. Carbs are almost completely unnecessary for human existence, but we are told to eat 400 grams a day of them. (I live quite well at 30 grams of carbs a day). I don't think our Government should be giving dietary advice in the first place, but if they are, it should at least be accurate. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you misread what I wrote. People have every right to be obese if they want. This is a life style choice. However, this choice causes major health issues and their inflated medical bills are cpayed for by the rest of societies insurance pockets. When this happens it becomes our right to have a say in it. If it only affected them: no problem. When the rest of us have to subsidise their poor life style choices it qualifies us a voice in the matter. If I have to help pay for someones bariatric surgery, diabetes medicine, knee and hip replacement surgeries, etc, because they refuse to control food intake I feel I have a say in the matter. I have never and still do not support socialised medicine other than for those who cannot obtain insurance. There are two extremes that societies struggle with: the good of society and the right of the individual. For the last 40 years our society began to sacrifice the good of society for an individuals rights. Even in the face of devistating the economy and our legal system. Our nation needs to balance this out instead of being a nation of "I want what I want no matter how it effects the rest of you". There needs to be a balance in the middle somewhere. While I don't approve of self destructive behaviors, I feel that it's none of my business. Unfortunately, leftists in government have seen to it that we all suffer because of this behavior. The fix isn't to control what people eat, the fix is to make people responsible for their own healthcare. Your healthcare costs shouldn't be effected by the people who are more sick than you. That's another problem created by our Government. I don't have a problem with the US Government providing basic healthcare to those who can't afford it (so long as it's passed as an Amendment), but please note I said "Basic healthcare". Basic healthcare shouldn't cover bariatric surgery. The US Government also needs to change their dietary guidelines to match actual science, not the Pritikin diet. Whole grains are terrible for humans, but we are told to eat them. Carbs are almost completely unnecessary for human existence, but we are told to eat 400 grams a day of them. (I live quite well at 30 grams of carbs a day). I don't think our Government should be giving dietary advice in the first place, but if they are, it should at least be accurate. Since the government is there to help people, health coverage should be a given no matter your lifestyle. Also their suggested healthy diet is an "average" type deal. If you get more exercise than others you need more carbs, if you are sedentary less. People need to try to be healthier for their own quality of life and they need to judge what that quality is. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since the government is there to help people, health coverage should be a given no matter your lifestyle. The Government isn't there to help people. In a free society, the Government should work to minimize coercion while the maximum opportunity for members of a society to pursue their separate interests. I can see that the societies good is well served by basic health coverage, but I don't consider it a right, the Government's fundamental role and it certainly shouldn't cover elective surgeries. Also their suggested healthy diet is an "average" type deal. If you get more exercise than others you need more carbs, if you are sedentary less. People need to try to be healthier for their own quality of life and they need to judge what that quality is. Carbs are sugar. The human body only needs about 30 grams of carbs a day, regardless of activity. Carb heavy foods are also light in nutrition. 3 french fries has the same amount of carbs as 1.5 cups of broccoli. Which do you think is better for you? A slice of wheat bread has more glucose than 28 grams of sugar and isn't much more nutritious. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
indianadave4
on
Wed 07/13/11 05:24 PM
|
|
I think you misread what I wrote. People have every right to be obese if they want. This is a life style choice. However, this choice causes major health issues and their inflated medical bills are cpayed for by the rest of societies insurance pockets. When this happens it becomes our right to have a say in it. If it only affected them: no problem. When the rest of us have to subsidise their poor life style choices it qualifies us a voice in the matter. If I have to help pay for someones bariatric surgery, diabetes medicine, knee and hip replacement surgeries, etc, because they refuse to control food intake I feel I have a say in the matter. I have never and still do not support socialised medicine other than for those who cannot obtain insurance. There are two extremes that societies struggle with: the good of society and the right of the individual. For the last 40 years our society began to sacrifice the good of society for an individuals rights. Even in the face of devistating the economy and our legal system. Our nation needs to balance this out instead of being a nation of "I want what I want no matter how it effects the rest of you". There needs to be a balance in the middle somewhere. While I don't approve of self destructive behaviors, I feel that it's none of my business. Unfortunately, leftists in government have seen to it that we all suffer because of this behavior. The fix isn't to control what people eat, the fix is to make people responsible for their own healthcare. Your healthcare costs shouldn't be effected by the people who are more sick than you. That's another problem created by our Government. I don't have a problem with the US Government providing basic healthcare to those who can't afford it (so long as it's passed as an Amendment), but please note I said "Basic healthcare". Basic healthcare shouldn't cover bariatric surgery. The US Government also needs to change their dietary guidelines to match actual science, not the Pritikin diet. Whole grains are terrible for humans, but we are told to eat them. Carbs are almost completely unnecessary for human existence, but we are told to eat 400 grams a day of them. (I live quite well at 30 grams of carbs a day). I don't think our Government should be giving dietary advice in the first place, but if they are, it should at least be accurate. Please compare apples to apples. Comparing obesity to bicycling is not apples to apples. Please explain to me why a person should have the right to abuse their body and then expect society to pay for it? It's one thing for someone to contraxt cancer or heart disease through no fault of their own. It is quite a different matter when someone, knowingly, abuses their health. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Wed 07/13/11 05:53 PM
|
|
Please compare apples to apples. Comparing obesity to bicycling is not apples to apples. Please explain to me why a person should have the right to abuse their body and then expect society to pay for it? It's one thing for someone to contraxt cancer or heart disease through no fault of their own. It is quite a different matter when someone, knowingly, abuses their health. Since you quoted the wrong person I will address it anyway. The reason being, I may think that you biking will cause too big of a bill when that car hits you so no biking for you if it is going to cause a medical bill. That is why it is none of your business what others do because you want to ride your bike freely.  There are no avid bike riders who have not had an accident or two. It is the same with most sporting activity. People even die doing them and they know it is a possibility when they do it and they still do it  Go figure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please explain to me why a person should have the right to abuse their body and then expect society to pay for it? They shouldn't, society shouldn't pay for it. But the fact that our society has decided to be benevolent and provide free healthcare, that doesn't mean that our society has the authority to say what the citizens can eat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is the true purpose of this thread to single out and pick on obese people?? ...Not cool.
I guess the next target will be smokers...tisk tisk tisk |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please compare apples to apples. Comparing obesity to bicycling is not apples to apples. Please explain to me why a person should have the right to abuse their body and then expect society to pay for it? It's one thing for someone to contraxt cancer or heart disease through no fault of their own. It is quite a different matter when someone, knowingly, abuses their health. Since you quoted the wrong person I will address it anyway. The reason being, I may think that you biking will cause too big of a bill when that car hits you so no biking for you if it is going to cause a medical bill. That is why it is none of your business what others do because you want to ride your bike freely. There are no avid bike riders who have not had an accident or two. It is the same with most sporting activity. People even die doing them and they know it is a possibility when they do it and they still do it Go figure 1/3 of Americans ARE obese, presently, and it is only getting worse. The medical field considers this an epidemic. Why does an epidemic have rights to propagate itself? If some kind of motivation isn't generated soon 1/2 of Americans will be in this condition. Along this same line the medical community is saying life expectancy will soon begin to drop if this isn't changed and the cost will be astronomical. This doesn't concern you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/3 of Americans ARE obese, presently, and it is only getting worse. The medical field considers this an epidemic. Why does an epidemic have rights to propagate itself? If some kind of motivation isn't generated soon 1/2 of Americans will be in this condition. Along this same line the medical community is saying life expectancy will soon begin to drop if this isn't changed and the cost will be astronomical. This doesn't concern you? The numbers are inflated by using BMI instead of Fat%. Bodybuilders and athletes who are muscular (not wiry) will seem to be obese by using BMI. Some minorities will also trend to obese, regardless of their fitness level.  Use BMI to punish "obese" people by forcing them to eat the diet you approve of and football is just going to be a bunch of skinny, flabby guys in ill-fitting uniforms, walking back and forth because they are too tired to run. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is the true purpose of this thread to single out and pick on obese people?? ...Not cool. I guess the next target will be smokers...tisk tisk tisk It's not that I'm trying to be mean but something has to stop this trend and money is a big motivator. Read my above post. Are we going to start condoning drug abuse because they have the right to kill themselves? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is the true purpose of this thread to single out and pick on obese people?? ...Not cool. I guess the next target will be smokers...tisk tisk tisk It's not that I'm trying to be mean but something has to stop this trend and money is a big motivator. Read my above post. Are we going to start condoning drug abuse because they have the right to kill themselves? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not that I'm trying to be mean but something has to stop this trend and money is a big motivator. Read my above post. Are we going to start condoning drug abuse because they have the right to kill themselves? WHY NOT? You can offer somebody free healthcare and then use that "free" healthcare to control every aspect of their lives. It's not free, if they become the Government's slave when they accept it. |
|
|
|
|
