It's Not Weightism. You're Just Obese.

[Carlos_E]

While the Democrats publicly grapple with their own faux liberalism -- who's a "lucky" black man and what's a "typical" white person -- researchers at Yale university would have you believe there is another, insidious "ism" that is even more widespread than racism, sexism and age bias.

They call it Weightism.

Let's call it discrimination against, oh, Plus Sized-Americans.

According to the researchers whose report is published in the International Journal of Obesity (and, yeah, there really is such a thing) apparently Weightism is so prevalent because, unlike other isms "there are no federal laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of weight, and only Michigan has such a law."

Sorry, but it's a little...no, actually it's a whole lot insulting to equate girth with race, gender, age or sexual orientation; aspects of ourselves with which we were born and over which -- except, apparently, for Jimmy Kimmel -- we have no control.

I can't change my race or my gender. Despite my best efforts and millions of dollars spent trying to locate the fountain of youth, I just keep getting older. Yet, same as millions of Americans I can moderate the number of Big Macs I shove in my pie-hole.

But in the Everybody-Give-Me-A-Hug victim culture in which we live, the obese want a spot at the table along with those who face discrimination based on the way that God or Nature or our Intelligent Designer created us.

For the vast majority of those who are obese -- those with a Body Mass Index over 30 -- their size is their choice. They choose to take in more calories than they burn. They choose to take in high fat calories over low-fat ones. They choose to fad diet, if they choose to diet at all. They choose to go back to their poor eating habits when those diets failed rather than get down to the hard chore of eating right and exercising.

That's not meant to abase the obese. I don't advocate ridicule (mostly). Obesity in America is a serious issue. The affects of which, like smokers with secondhand smoke, are felt beyond the individual offender. According to the Center for Disease Control "a study of national costs attributed to both overweight (BMI 25-29.9) and obesity (BMI greater than 30) medical expenses accounted for 9.1 percent of total U.S. medical expenditures in 1998 and may have reached as high as $78.5 billion ($92.6 billion in 2002 dollars)."

The heavy get heavier, and you and I pay for it.

But if they choose to get big, if they choose to bilk us, why in the world would we choose to mollycoddle with laws which encourage the obese to continue to both live an unhealthy lifestyle and stick us with the bill?

There is no reason.

And there is no need.

For those whose obesity is the result of some actual medical condition, should they find themselves discriminated against they can seek redress under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

A lawyer familiar with the ADA told me that "despite the absence of any laws specifically addressing obesity as a disability, courts can interpret the ADA to include obesity, since it defines "disability" broadly and doesn't enumerate any specific disabilities it covers."

Such individuals deserve protection, and they've got it. But let's not water down the fight against real bigotry and prejudice by adding unhealthy lifestyles to the mix.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-r...j_b_95341.html

[kfrost06]

I have no problem with fat people, some of my best friends are fat.

[shifty_git]

I have no problem with fat people, some of my best friends are fat.

your not one of these people that has a token fat friend are ya fella?

[Act of God]

I thought I read somewhere that fat people are less of a strain on the health care system than fit people who live longer and require longer periods of extended care because they JUST WON'T DIE!!!!

In all seriousness, way too many fatties and now we can't even ridicule them into at least attempting to get into shape? Shenanigans!

[Lexed]

im not fat im just big boned

[WEBB]

Great post Carlos....

is gettin effin ridiculous the shit they are coming up with...maxim radio is calling it the PUSSification of America...takin games like tag and hide and seek away cause they are violent, but they are the only excersise some kids get...they are makin a fat ***** as world for our children and i am glad i wont be around when it comes to that.....

[Carlos_E]

Great post Carlos....

is gettin effin ridiculous the shit they are coming up with...maxim radio is calling it the PUSSification of America...takin games like tag and hide and seek away cause they are violent, but they are the only excersise some kids get...they are makin a fat ***** as world for our children and i am glad i wont be around when it comes to that.....

It's on purpose. Fat lazy kids grow up to be fat lazy adults. More money spent on health care.

[novastepp]

when i was younger, i would get grounded and have to come inside. now if a kid gets in trouble they are sent outside. totally mind ****s them into thinking exercising is bad. i still love sports and play them as often as i can. some of it is the parents of these kids. none of the guys i grew up with are fat. none of them. and some of them have developed a higher bf% due to boozing, but still, i see them on the court or at the field when we play. it is so ridiculous that one of my younger cousins loves baseball and is pretty good too, but they literally had to cancel more than half of their pee-wee games because there weren't enough willing kids to play ball. THAT is just ****ing sick.

[Act of God]

It's on purpose. Fat lazy kids grow up to be fat lazy adults. More money spent on health care.

Originally Posted by Associated Press
LONDON - Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it doesn't save money, researchers reported Monday. It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.

"It was a small surprise," said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the Netherlands' National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, who led the study. "But it also makes sense. If you live longer, then you cost the health system more."

In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either fat people or smokers.

Van Baal and colleagues created a model to simulate lifetime health costs for three groups of 1,000 people: the "healthy-living" group (thin and non-smoking), obese people, and smokers. The model relied on "cost of illness" data and disease prevalence in the Netherlands in 2003.

The researchers found that from age 20 to 56, obese people racked up the most expensive health costs. But because both the smokers and the obese people died sooner than the healthy group, it cost less to treat them in the long run.

On average, healthy people lived 84 years. Smokers lived about 77 years, and obese people lived about 80 years. Smokers and obese people tended to have more heart disease than the healthy people.

Cancer incidence, except for lung cancer, was the same in all three groups. Obese people had the most diabetes, and healthy people had the most strokes. Ultimately, the thin and healthy group cost the most, about $417,000, from age 20 on.

The cost of care for obese people was $371,000, and for smokers, about $326,000.

The results counter the common perception that preventing obesity will save health systems worldwide millions of dollars.

"This throws a bucket of cold water onto the idea that obesity is going to cost trillions of dollars," said Patrick Basham, a professor of health politics at Johns Hopkins University who was unconnected to the study. He said that government projections about obesity costs are frequently based on guesswork, political agendas, and changing science.

"If we're going to worry about the future of obesity, we should stop worrying about its financial impact," he said.

Obesity experts said that fighting the epidemic is about more than just saving money.

"The benefits of obesity prevention may not be seen immediately in terms of cost savings in tomorrow's budget, but there are long-term gains," said Neville Rigby, spokesman for the International Association for the Study of Obesity. "These are often immeasurable when it comes to people living longer and healthier lives."

Van Baal described the paper as "a book-keeping exercise," and said that governments should recognize that successful smoking and obesity prevention programs mean that people will have a higher chance of dying of something more expensive later in life.

"Lung cancer is a cheap disease to treat because people don't survive very long," van Baal said. "But if they are old enough to get Alzheimer's one day, they may survive longer and cost more."

The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.

"We are not recommending that governments stop trying to prevent obesity," van Baal said. "But they should do it for the right reasons."

[Schmidty]

Originally Posted by Associated Press
LONDON - Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it doesn't save money, researchers reported Monday. It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.

"It was a small surprise," said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the Netherlands' National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, who led the study. "But it also makes sense. If you live longer, then you cost the health system more."

In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either fat people or smokers.

Van Baal and colleagues created a model to simulate lifetime health costs for three groups of 1,000 people: the "healthy-living" group (thin and non-smoking), obese people, and smokers. The model relied on "cost of illness" data and disease prevalence in the Netherlands in 2003.

The researchers found that from age 20 to 56, obese people racked up the most expensive health costs. But because both the smokers and the obese people died sooner than the healthy group, it cost less to treat them in the long run.

On average, healthy people lived 84 years. Smokers lived about 77 years, and obese people lived about 80 years. Smokers and obese people tended to have more heart disease than the healthy people.

Cancer incidence, except for lung cancer, was the same in all three groups. Obese people had the most diabetes, and healthy people had the most strokes. Ultimately, the thin and healthy group cost the most, about $417,000, from age 20 on.

The cost of care for obese people was $371,000, and for smokers, about $326,000.

The results counter the common perception that preventing obesity will save health systems worldwide millions of dollars.

"This throws a bucket of cold water onto the idea that obesity is going to cost trillions of dollars," said Patrick Basham, a professor of health politics at Johns Hopkins University who was unconnected to the study. He said that government projections about obesity costs are frequently based on guesswork, political agendas, and changing science.

"If we're going to worry about the future of obesity, we should stop worrying about its financial impact," he said.

Obesity experts said that fighting the epidemic is about more than just saving money.

"The benefits of obesity prevention may not be seen immediately in terms of cost savings in tomorrow's budget, but there are long-term gains," said Neville Rigby, spokesman for the International Association for the Study of Obesity. "These are often immeasurable when it comes to people living longer and healthier lives."

Van Baal described the paper as "a book-keeping exercise," and said that governments should recognize that successful smoking and obesity prevention programs mean that people will have a higher chance of dying of something more expensive later in life.

"Lung cancer is a cheap disease to treat because people don't survive very long," van Baal said. "But if they are old enough to get Alzheimer's one day, they may survive longer and cost more."

The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs.

"We are not recommending that governments stop trying to prevent obesity," van Baal said. "But they should do it for the right reasons."

Wow!!!

[wilson9d]

Now you understand why I say that the food companies and the medical system propagate obesity for profit.

[Tock]

Not fat. Just short for your weight.

[FallenWyvern]

Now you understand why I say that the food companies and the medical system propagate obesity for profit.

And why would this be bad. Companies do things that help themselves make money. By law they shouldn't do things that make themselves lose money.

They aren't churches, get over it.