Have you guys heard of the "Fat Acceptance" movement?

[IronReload04]

Show me one study where steroids are used to improve health for normal healthy people. You know they are illegal for a reason and I think you missed my point about costing society as a whole with all the indirect consequences such as law enforcement, legal expenses, prison cost, and not to mention all the public attention generated leading to congressional hearings. Tell me there is not a price to this game…

But you know denial is not just a river in Egypt…

WHAT-A-CROCK-OF-****ING-SHIT

HRT buddy.....birth control buddy....both of those are steroids.....responsible steroid use can involve a dose not to far off from HRT.....Have you ever seen the HBO special....their was a study in there.....with the highest doses ever for subjects "their appears to be no life threatening side effects" and more



back to the crock of shit.......the FDA and DEA both advised against making gear illegal in the first place....it was your pain killer and alcohol abusing politicians who are jealous and uneasy about people having chemical muscle mass, WITH NO FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE, AND NO CONCEPT OF PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY, made an uneducated decision to criminalize




shut the **** up about costing society........thats the most ignorant thing i have heard in months......to even think, to even think, that steroid users cost society 1/100000 that the fat ****s of america do, and alcohol abusers, and nicotine abusers makes you out of your freaken mind

[frignugs]

Time to bring out the "Fat tax." shouldn't they pay or "invest" in thier future problems? i say yes

[Amorphic]

WHAT-A-CROCK-OF-****ING-SHIT

HRT buddy.....birth control buddy....both of those are steroids.....responsible steroid use can involve a dose not to far off from HRT.....Have you ever seen the HBO special....their was a study in there.....with the highest doses ever for subjects "their appears to be no life threatening side effects" and more



back to the crock of shit.......the FDA and DEA both advised against making gear illegal in the first place....it was your pain killer and alcohol abusing politicians who are jealous and uneasy about people having chemical muscle mass, WITH NO FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE, AND NO CONCEPT OF PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY, made an uneducated decision to criminalize




shut the **** up about costing society........thats the most ignorant thing i have heard in months......to even think, to even think, that steroid users cost society 1/100000 that the fat ****s of america do, and alcohol abusers, and nicotine abusers makes you out of your freaken mind

damn straight

[thegodfather]

Ok...I was trying to be nice, and objective, but now you have just pissed me off. I presented a powerpoint for a class on the true side effects of anabolic steroid use, particularly supraphysiologic doses. Trying to compare anabolic steroid use, which is started and stopped, in a planned regimented cycle, where all health precautions are a priority................TO....morbid obesity being something which should be accepted, and not viewed as a serious health&medical issue.....is well.....ridiculous, retarded, naive, and most of all IGNORANT. I could see where someone with little education, and a strong personal agenda or motives would make such statements. But I fail to see where rational minded human beings who are well educated, particularly in the sciences, could ever come to accept a serious health issue such as obesity.

ABSTRACT-
Background Athletes often take androgenic steroids in an attempt to increase their strength. The efficacy of these substances for this purpose is unsubstantiated, however.

Methods We randomly assigned 43 normal men to one of four groups: placebo with no exercise, testosterone with no exercise, placebo plus exercise, and testosterone plus exercise. The men received injections of 600 mg of testosterone enanthate or placebo weekly for 10 weeks. The men in the exercise groups performed standardized weight-lifting exercises three times weekly. Before and after the treatment period, fat-free mass was determined by underwater wei***ng, muscle size was measured by magnetic resonance imaging, and the strength of the arms and legs was assessed by bench-press and squatting exercises, respectively.

Results Among the men in the no-exercise groups, those given testosterone had greater increases than those given placebo in muscle size in their arms (mean [±SE] change in triceps area, 424±104 vs. -81±109 mm2; P<0.05) and legs (change in quadriceps area, 607±123 vs. -131±111 mm2; P<0.05) and greater increases in strength in the bench-press (9±4 vs. -1±1 kg, P<0.05) and squatting exercises (16±4 vs. 3±1 kg, P<0.05). The men assigned to testosterone and exercise had greater increases in fat-free mass (6.1±0.6 kg) and muscle size (triceps area, 501±104 mm2; quadriceps area, 1174±91 mm2) than those assigned to either no-exercise group, and greater increases in muscle strength (bench-press strength, 22±2 kg; squatting-exercise capacity, 38±4 kg) than either no-exercise group. Neither mood nor behavior was altered in any group.
Conclusions Supraphysiologic doses of testosterone, especially when combined with strength training, increase fat-free mass and muscle size and strength in normal men.

I've actually examined the full-text article, and the research is sound, the research was done with a very reputable government grant, which means that this research was done objectively and served no hidden agendas.

__________________________________________
The primary prevention of adult obesity requires combined efforts by stakeholders at various societal levels, based on the knowledge from multiple disciplines. The goal of the present study was, therefore, to analyze current preventive approaches and delineate implications for future prevention research and practice by integrating knowledge from genetics, law, economics, psychology, and social ethics (Figure 1).Inconclusive evidence on the etiology of obesity, a complex, multifactorial condition, likely complicates prevention, contributing to a lack of specificity regarding target groups, focus, and techniques of prevention. Given the urgency and significance of the "obesity problem" that requires immediate and effective solutions, it is recommended that the various existing and developing prevention programs are evaluated to ensure orientation at current risk factor research. Results from genetic risk factor research can be used as a rationale to increase specificity of preventive measures regarding identification of high-risk groups, timing, and goals of prevention. Further, it is important to evaluate prevention programs for systematic application of behavior modification techniques and consideration of individual risk factors and resources to ensure promotion of long-term behavior change that leads to weight maintenance and a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults (Figure 3). Although the primary prevention of childhood obesity may lead to a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults, high rates of adult-onset obesity and the related medical and psychosocial sequelae in adulthood underscore the necessity of preventive efforts for adults.Concerning the environmental basis of obesity prevention, in many countries, the institutional and legal framework of preventive approaches requires further examination in order to improve funding, coordination between multiple stakeholders, and implementation of prevention in the health-care system. Evidence on risk factors for obesity is also crucial to inform network approaches and to justify restrictive legal options for the purpose of prevention. Here, self-defeating sanctions of the relevant industries may be a viable first step toward obesity prevention. As taxes or subsidies are limited in feasibility (Figure 2), relevant industries could be involved in the design and promotion of "healthy" products, stimulatingArbeitsgreater request of such products. Network approaches appear suited to involve companies and other relevant stakeholders of prevention efforts on adult obesity. Yet these approaches require greater societal conscience about the severity of the obesity problem in adults and its multifactorial etiology. Recognizing the multifactorial etiology of obesity and acknowledging that weight regulation is only somewhat within personal responsibility may therefore lead to destigmatize obese individuals as the focus is shifted away from blaming them toward a more realistic understanding of this condition. Responsibility for the development of obesity and the prevention of weight gain is in multiple areas: law, policy, industry, health-care institutions, medical professions, and the individual - all should contribute to obesity prevention.Overall, the current analysis shows that an interdisciplinary perspective furthers understanding of the complexity of this condition and can inform public-health strategies on the prevention of adult obesity.

__________________________________________________ ___

[SIZE="5"]Objective: Cardiometabolic risk factors such as overweight/obesity, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and hypertension are prone to cluster together in the same individual and result in an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality. The purpose of this study was to examine and quantify the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters independent of heart disease on productivity in a nationally representative sample of US adults. Methods: The current study estimated the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters on missed work days and bed days, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, and smoking status in a nationally representative, pooled 2000 and 2002 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey sample. Cardiometabolic risk factor clusters included BMI >/= 25 and two of the following three: diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and/or hypertension. All estimates were expressedin $US 2005. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the impact of varying assumptions on the results. Results: After controlling for differences in sociodemographics, smoking and comorbidity, individuals with cardiometabolic risk factor clusters missed 179% more work days and spent 147% more days in bed (in addition to lost work days) than those without. Lost work days and bed days resulted in $17.3 billion annually in lost productivity attributable to cardiometabolic risk factor clusters in the United States. Sensitivity analyses resulted in a range of annual lost productivity costs from $3.2 to $23.1 billion. Conclusions: Common cardiometabolic risk factor clusters have a significant deleterious impact on the US economy, resulting in $17.3 billion in lost productivity.[/SIZE]




Tell me Obesity doesn't cost us anything?

[IronReload04]

thanks.......I usually dont cuss a storm, and argue like that when debating

but this shit just really chaps my ass and i am really worked up over this right now...

[Amorphic]

godfather, you are the man, seriously.

[CAT1]

thank you godfather , we have this arguement at work all the time . i printed out your reply and posted it!!!!

[IronReload04]

you really are the Godfather my man!!! i am gonnna definately print this out also

[MuscleScience]

Ok...I was trying to be nice, and objective, but now you have just pissed me off. I presented a powerpoint for a class on the true side effects of anabolic steroid use, particularly supraphysiologic doses. Trying to compare anabolic steroid use, which is started and stopped, in a planned regimented cycle, where all health precautions are a priority................TO....morbid obesity being something which should be accepted, and not viewed as a serious health&medical issue.....is well.....ridiculous, retarded, naive, and most of all IGNORANT. I could see where someone with little education, and a strong personal agenda or motives would make such statements. But I fail to see where rational minded human beings who are well educated, particularly in the sciences, could ever come to accept a serious health issue such as obesity.

ABSTRACT-
Background Athletes often take androgenic steroids in an attempt to increase their strength. The efficacy of these substances for this purpose is unsubstantiated, however.

Methods We randomly assigned 43 normal men to one of four groups: placebo with no exercise, testosterone with no exercise, placebo plus exercise, and testosterone plus exercise. The men received injections of 600 mg of testosterone enanthate or placebo weekly for 10 weeks. The men in the exercise groups performed standardized weight-lifting exercises three times weekly. Before and after the treatment period, fat-free mass was determined by underwater wei***ng, muscle size was measured by magnetic resonance imaging, and the strength of the arms and legs was assessed by bench-press and squatting exercises, respectively.

Results Among the men in the no-exercise groups, those given testosterone had greater increases than those given placebo in muscle size in their arms (mean [±SE] change in triceps area, 424±104 vs. -81±109 mm2; P<0.05) and legs (change in quadriceps area, 607±123 vs. -131±111 mm2; P<0.05) and greater increases in strength in the bench-press (9±4 vs. -1±1 kg, P<0.05) and squatting exercises (16±4 vs. 3±1 kg, P<0.05). The men assigned to testosterone and exercise had greater increases in fat-free mass (6.1±0.6 kg) and muscle size (triceps area, 501±104 mm2; quadriceps area, 1174±91 mm2) than those assigned to either no-exercise group, and greater increases in muscle strength (bench-press strength, 22±2 kg; squatting-exercise capacity, 38±4 kg) than either no-exercise group. Neither mood nor behavior was altered in any group.
Conclusions Supraphysiologic doses of testosterone, especially when combined with strength training, increase fat-free mass and muscle size and strength in normal men.

I've actually examined the full-text article, and the research is sound, the research was done with a very reputable government grant, which means that this research was done objectively and served no hidden agendas.

__________________________________________
The primary prevention of adult obesity requires combined efforts by stakeholders at various societal levels, based on the knowledge from multiple disciplines. The goal of the present study was, therefore, to analyze current preventive approaches and delineate implications for future prevention research and practice by integrating knowledge from genetics, law, economics, psychology, and social ethics (Figure 1).Inconclusive evidence on the etiology of obesity, a complex, multifactorial condition, likely complicates prevention, contributing to a lack of specificity regarding target groups, focus, and techniques of prevention. Given the urgency and significance of the "obesity problem" that requires immediate and effective solutions, it is recommended that the various existing and developing prevention programs are evaluated to ensure orientation at current risk factor research. Results from genetic risk factor research can be used as a rationale to increase specificity of preventive measures regarding identification of high-risk groups, timing, and goals of prevention. Further, it is important to evaluate prevention programs for systematic application of behavior modification techniques and consideration of individual risk factors and resources to ensure promotion of long-term behavior change that leads to weight maintenance and a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults (Figure 3). Although the primary prevention of childhood obesity may lead to a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults, high rates of adult-onset obesity and the related medical and psychosocial sequelae in adulthood underscore the necessity of preventive efforts for adults.Concerning the environmental basis of obesity prevention, in many countries, the institutional and legal framework of preventive approaches requires further examination in order to improve funding, coordination between multiple stakeholders, and implementation of prevention in the health-care system. Evidence on risk factors for obesity is also crucial to inform network approaches and to justify restrictive legal options for the purpose of prevention. Here, self-defeating sanctions of the relevant industries may be a viable first step toward obesity prevention. As taxes or subsidies are limited in feasibility (Figure 2), relevant industries could be involved in the design and promotion of "healthy" products, stimulatingArbeitsgreater request of such products. Network approaches appear suited to involve companies and other relevant stakeholders of prevention efforts on adult obesity. Yet these approaches require greater societal conscience about the severity of the obesity problem in adults and its multifactorial etiology. Recognizing the multifactorial etiology of obesity and acknowledging that weight regulation is only somewhat within personal responsibility may therefore lead to destigmatize obese individuals as the focus is shifted away from blaming them toward a more realistic understanding of this condition. Responsibility for the development of obesity and the prevention of weight gain is in multiple areas: law, policy, industry, health-care institutions, medical professions, and the individual - all should contribute to obesity prevention.Overall, the current analysis shows that an interdisciplinary perspective furthers understanding of the complexity of this condition and can inform public-health strategies on the prevention of adult obesity.

__________________________________________________ ___

[SIZE="5"]Objective: Cardiometabolic risk factors such as overweight/obesity, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and hypertension are prone to cluster together in the same individual and result in an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality. The purpose of this study was to examine and quantify the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters independent of heart disease on productivity in a nationally representative sample of US adults. Methods: The current study estimated the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters on missed work days and bed days, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, and smoking status in a nationally representative, pooled 2000 and 2002 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey sample. Cardiometabolic risk factor clusters included BMI >/= 25 and two of the following three: diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and/or hypertension. All estimates were expressedin $US 2005. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the impact of varying assumptions on the results. Results: After controlling for differences in sociodemographics, smoking and comorbidity, individuals with cardiometabolic risk factor clusters missed 179% more work days and spent 147% more days in bed (in addition to lost work days) than those without. Lost work days and bed days resulted in $17.3 billion annually in lost productivity attributable to cardiometabolic risk factor clusters in the United States. Sensitivity analyses resulted in a range of annual lost productivity costs from $3.2 to $23.1 billion. Conclusions: Common cardiometabolic risk factor clusters have a significant deleterious impact on the US economy, resulting in $17.3 billion in lost productivity.[/SIZE]




Tell me Obesity doesn't cost us anything?

Wow someone got owned!!!!!!!

I read that paper and a bunch of the papers it referenced not a bad piece of work at all. If this is the paper I remember.

[IronReload04]

WHAT-A-CROCK-OF-****ING-SHIT

HRT buddy.....birth control buddy....both of those are steroids.....responsible steroid use can involve a dose not to far off from HRT.....Have you ever seen the HBO special....their was a study in there.....with the highest doses ever for subjects "their appears to be no life threatening side effects" and more



back to the crock of shit.......the FDA and DEA both advised against making gear illegal in the first place....it was your pain killer and alcohol abusing politicians who are jealous and uneasy about people having chemical muscle mass, WITH NO FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE, AND NO CONCEPT OF PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY, made an uneducated decision to criminalize




shut the **** up about costing society........thats the most ignorant thing i have heard in months......to even think, to even think, that steroid users cost society 1/100000 that the fat ****s of america do, and alcohol abusers, and nicotine abusers makes you out of your freaken mind

just wanted to add.......as far as money costs from making busts and bullshit, THATS NOT OUR ****ING FAULT........being obese, THAT IS YOUR ****ING FAULT.

everything would be fine and dandy if their were no busts........but the goddamn media, with no factual knowledge whatsover (they just say whatever the hell the feel like saying), or concept of personal accountability,

has wrongly convinced, and scared the general public about its evils, which ultimately lead to some bullshit idea about making busts, when that money could HAVE BETTER BEEN USED FIGHTING COCAINE, HEROINE, EXCTASY etc. you know, drugs that are more than victim crimes, WHICH STEROIDS ARE VICTIMLESS CRIMES

[RuhlFreak55]

godfather, you are the man, seriously.

go godfather go!!!!!!

[RuhlFreak55]

hmmm 17.3 billion lost as a result of obesity????? why haven't we thrown them in the ocean then.....

[IronReload04]

hmmm 17.3 billion lost as a result of obesity????? why haven't we thrown them in the ocean then.....

here's the solution....lets go bust some ****en steroid dealers across seas

[RuhlFreak55]

here's the solution....lets go bust some ****en steroid dealers across seas

rofl......great solution US government simply fabulous

[Kratos]

hmmm 17.3 billion lost as a result of obesity????? why haven't we thrown them in the ocean then.....

because they would enjoy it, fat people love to be suspended in water.

[RuhlFreak55]

because they would enjoy it, fat people love to be suspended in water.

frack...totally forgot fatties float

[Panzerfaust]

Ok...I was trying to be nice, and objective, but now you have just pissed me off. I presented a powerpoint for a class on the true side effects of anabolic steroid use, particularly supraphysiologic doses. Trying to compare anabolic steroid use, which is started and stopped, in a planned regimented cycle, where all health precautions are a priority................TO....morbid obesity being something which should be accepted, and not viewed as a serious health&medical issue.....is well.....ridiculous, retarded, naive, and most of all IGNORANT. I could see where someone with little education, and a strong personal agenda or motives would make such statements. But I fail to see where rational minded human beings who are well educated, particularly in the sciences, could ever come to accept a serious health issue such as obesity.

ABSTRACT-
Background Athletes often take androgenic steroids in an attempt to increase their strength. The efficacy of these substances for this purpose is unsubstantiated, however.

Methods We randomly assigned 43 normal men to one of four groups: placebo with no exercise, testosterone with no exercise, placebo plus exercise, and testosterone plus exercise. The men received injections of 600 mg of testosterone enanthate or placebo weekly for 10 weeks. The men in the exercise groups performed standardized weight-lifting exercises three times weekly. Before and after the treatment period, fat-free mass was determined by underwater wei***ng, muscle size was measured by magnetic resonance imaging, and the strength of the arms and legs was assessed by bench-press and squatting exercises, respectively.

Results Among the men in the no-exercise groups, those given testosterone had greater increases than those given placebo in muscle size in their arms (mean [±SE] change in triceps area, 424±104 vs. -81±109 mm2; P<0.05) and legs (change in quadriceps area, 607±123 vs. -131±111 mm2; P<0.05) and greater increases in strength in the bench-press (9±4 vs. -1±1 kg, P<0.05) and squatting exercises (16±4 vs. 3±1 kg, P<0.05). The men assigned to testosterone and exercise had greater increases in fat-free mass (6.1±0.6 kg) and muscle size (triceps area, 501±104 mm2; quadriceps area, 1174±91 mm2) than those assigned to either no-exercise group, and greater increases in muscle strength (bench-press strength, 22±2 kg; squatting-exercise capacity, 38±4 kg) than either no-exercise group. Neither mood nor behavior was altered in any group.
Conclusions Supraphysiologic doses of testosterone, especially when combined with strength training, increase fat-free mass and muscle size and strength in normal men.

I've actually examined the full-text article, and the research is sound, the research was done with a very reputable government grant, which means that this research was done objectively and served no hidden agendas.

__________________________________________
The primary prevention of adult obesity requires combined efforts by stakeholders at various societal levels, based on the knowledge from multiple disciplines. The goal of the present study was, therefore, to analyze current preventive approaches and delineate implications for future prevention research and practice by integrating knowledge from genetics, law, economics, psychology, and social ethics (Figure 1).Inconclusive evidence on the etiology of obesity, a complex, multifactorial condition, likely complicates prevention, contributing to a lack of specificity regarding target groups, focus, and techniques of prevention. Given the urgency and significance of the "obesity problem" that requires immediate and effective solutions, it is recommended that the various existing and developing prevention programs are evaluated to ensure orientation at current risk factor research. Results from genetic risk factor research can be used as a rationale to increase specificity of preventive measures regarding identification of high-risk groups, timing, and goals of prevention. Further, it is important to evaluate prevention programs for systematic application of behavior modification techniques and consideration of individual risk factors and resources to ensure promotion of long-term behavior change that leads to weight maintenance and a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults (Figure 3). Although the primary prevention of childhood obesity may lead to a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults, high rates of adult-onset obesity and the related medical and psychosocial sequelae in adulthood underscore the necessity of preventive efforts for adults.Concerning the environmental basis of obesity prevention, in many countries, the institutional and legal framework of preventive approaches requires further examination in order to improve funding, coordination between multiple stakeholders, and implementation of prevention in the health-care system. Evidence on risk factors for obesity is also crucial to inform network approaches and to justify restrictive legal options for the purpose of prevention. Here, self-defeating sanctions of the relevant industries may be a viable first step toward obesity prevention. As taxes or subsidies are limited in feasibility (Figure 2), relevant industries could be involved in the design and promotion of "healthy" products, stimulatingArbeitsgreater request of such products. Network approaches appear suited to involve companies and other relevant stakeholders of prevention efforts on adult obesity. Yet these approaches require greater societal conscience about the severity of the obesity problem in adults and its multifactorial etiology. Recognizing the multifactorial etiology of obesity and acknowledging that weight regulation is only somewhat within personal responsibility may therefore lead to destigmatize obese individuals as the focus is shifted away from blaming them toward a more realistic understanding of this condition. Responsibility for the development of obesity and the prevention of weight gain is in multiple areas: law, policy, industry, health-care institutions, medical professions, and the individual - all should contribute to obesity prevention.Overall, the current analysis shows that an interdisciplinary perspective furthers understanding of the complexity of this condition and can inform public-health strategies on the prevention of adult obesity.

__________________________________________________ ___

[SIZE="5"]Objective: Cardiometabolic risk factors such as overweight/obesity, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and hypertension are prone to cluster together in the same individual and result in an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality. The purpose of this study was to examine and quantify the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters independent of heart disease on productivity in a nationally representative sample of US adults. Methods: The current study estimated the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters on missed work days and bed days, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, and smoking status in a nationally representative, pooled 2000 and 2002 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey sample. Cardiometabolic risk factor clusters included BMI >/= 25 and two of the following three: diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and/or hypertension. All estimates were expressedin $US 2005. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the impact of varying assumptions on the results. Results: After controlling for differences in sociodemographics, smoking and comorbidity, individuals with cardiometabolic risk factor clusters missed 179% more work days and spent 147% more days in bed (in addition to lost work days) than those without. Lost work days and bed days resulted in $17.3 billion annually in lost productivity attributable to cardiometabolic risk factor clusters in the United States. Sensitivity analyses resulted in a range of annual lost productivity costs from $3.2 to $23.1 billion. Conclusions: Common cardiometabolic risk factor clusters have a significant deleterious impact on the US economy, resulting in $17.3 billion in lost productivity.[/SIZE]




Tell me Obesity doesn't cost us anything?

OUCH! That's gonna leave a mark.

[thegodfather]

OUCH! That's gonna leave a mark.

Yea...just waiting for "FatGuy" to refute my argument...

To FatGuy, I really wanted to be nice and objectionable with my first post in this thread. I do respect your RIGHT to live and be any size that you wish, since we're really only talking about body composition here. But then you had to go and attack steroids, and the general lifestyle of the members of this board, without ever providing me with any scientific data to back up your claims. So there, while myself and my "juicehead" buddies might be costing the American tax payer a few million here and there with all the effort put into the recent "busts," you and your cronies are costing us 17.4 Billion.......... Have a nice ****ing day...

[AandF6969]

Not to mention we look better than the land whales parading for the fat acceptance movement...

[the.muscled.lawyer]

Don't forget that most of us on this site are more motivated than the normal human ..... but:

I STILL HATE THE FAT BASTARDS

what do you mean ?

You dont like fat people ?

[B.E.N.]

Good stuff through this post...add my name to the fatty hater list.

I don't think this is news to anyone on this board but it goes to show how our (America's) government, society, and healthcare system makes ALLOWANCES for these obese people as opposed to countries like England. I love my country but we are becoming VERY complacent and to forgiving. Way I see it is...YA BROUGHT THAT SHIT ON YA SELF.

http://news.independent.co.uk/health/article328780.ece

http://www.nationalcenter.org/2005/1...s-to-some.html

[frignugs]

Ok...I was trying to be nice, and objective, but now you have just pissed me off. I presented a powerpoint for a class on the true side effects of anabolic steroid use, particularly supraphysiologic doses. Trying to compare anabolic steroid use, which is started and stopped, in a planned regimented cycle, where all health precautions are a priority................TO....morbid obesity being something which should be accepted, and not viewed as a serious health&medical issue.....is well.....ridiculous, retarded, naive, and most of all IGNORANT. I could see where someone with little education, and a strong personal agenda or motives would make such statements. But I fail to see where rational minded human beings who are well educated, particularly in the sciences, could ever come to accept a serious health issue such as obesity.

ABSTRACT-
Background Athletes often take androgenic steroids in an attempt to increase their strength. The efficacy of these substances for this purpose is unsubstantiated, however.

Methods We randomly assigned 43 normal men to one of four groups: placebo with no exercise, testosterone with no exercise, placebo plus exercise, and testosterone plus exercise. The men received injections of 600 mg of testosterone enanthate or placebo weekly for 10 weeks. The men in the exercise groups performed standardized weight-lifting exercises three times weekly. Before and after the treatment period, fat-free mass was determined by underwater wei***ng, muscle size was measured by magnetic resonance imaging, and the strength of the arms and legs was assessed by bench-press and squatting exercises, respectively.

Results Among the men in the no-exercise groups, those given testosterone had greater increases than those given placebo in muscle size in their arms (mean [±SE] change in triceps area, 424±104 vs. -81±109 mm2; P<0.05) and legs (change in quadriceps area, 607±123 vs. -131±111 mm2; P<0.05) and greater increases in strength in the bench-press (9±4 vs. -1±1 kg, P<0.05) and squatting exercises (16±4 vs. 3±1 kg, P<0.05). The men assigned to testosterone and exercise had greater increases in fat-free mass (6.1±0.6 kg) and muscle size (triceps area, 501±104 mm2; quadriceps area, 1174±91 mm2) than those assigned to either no-exercise group, and greater increases in muscle strength (bench-press strength, 22±2 kg; squatting-exercise capacity, 38±4 kg) than either no-exercise group. Neither mood nor behavior was altered in any group.
Conclusions Supraphysiologic doses of testosterone, especially when combined with strength training, increase fat-free mass and muscle size and strength in normal men.

I've actually examined the full-text article, and the research is sound, the research was done with a very reputable government grant, which means that this research was done objectively and served no hidden agendas.

__________________________________________
The primary prevention of adult obesity requires combined efforts by stakeholders at various societal levels, based on the knowledge from multiple disciplines. The goal of the present study was, therefore, to analyze current preventive approaches and delineate implications for future prevention research and practice by integrating knowledge from genetics, law, economics, psychology, and social ethics (Figure 1).Inconclusive evidence on the etiology of obesity, a complex, multifactorial condition, likely complicates prevention, contributing to a lack of specificity regarding target groups, focus, and techniques of prevention. Given the urgency and significance of the "obesity problem" that requires immediate and effective solutions, it is recommended that the various existing and developing prevention programs are evaluated to ensure orientation at current risk factor research. Results from genetic risk factor research can be used as a rationale to increase specificity of preventive measures regarding identification of high-risk groups, timing, and goals of prevention. Further, it is important to evaluate prevention programs for systematic application of behavior modification techniques and consideration of individual risk factors and resources to ensure promotion of long-term behavior change that leads to weight maintenance and a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults (Figure 3). Although the primary prevention of childhood obesity may lead to a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults, high rates of adult-onset obesity and the related medical and psychosocial sequelae in adulthood underscore the necessity of preventive efforts for adults.Concerning the environmental basis of obesity prevention, in many countries, the institutional and legal framework of preventive approaches requires further examination in order to improve funding, coordination between multiple stakeholders, and implementation of prevention in the health-care system. Evidence on risk factors for obesity is also crucial to inform network approaches and to justify restrictive legal options for the purpose of prevention. Here, self-defeating sanctions of the relevant industries may be a viable first step toward obesity prevention. As taxes or subsidies are limited in feasibility (Figure 2), relevant industries could be involved in the design and promotion of "healthy" products, stimulatingArbeitsgreater request of such products. Network approaches appear suited to involve companies and other relevant stakeholders of prevention efforts on adult obesity. Yet these approaches require greater societal conscience about the severity of the obesity problem in adults and its multifactorial etiology. Recognizing the multifactorial etiology of obesity and acknowledging that weight regulation is only somewhat within personal responsibility may therefore lead to destigmatize obese individuals as the focus is shifted away from blaming them toward a more realistic understanding of this condition. Responsibility for the development of obesity and the prevention of weight gain is in multiple areas: law, policy, industry, health-care institutions, medical professions, and the individual - all should contribute to obesity prevention.Overall, the current analysis shows that an interdisciplinary perspective furthers understanding of the complexity of this condition and can inform public-health strategies on the prevention of adult obesity.

__________________________________________________ ___

[SIZE="5"]Objective: Cardiometabolic risk factors such as overweight/obesity, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and hypertension are prone to cluster together in the same individual and result in an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality. The purpose of this study was to examine and quantify the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters independent of heart disease on productivity in a nationally representative sample of US adults. Methods: The current study estimated the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters on missed work days and bed days, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, and smoking status in a nationally representative, pooled 2000 and 2002 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey sample. Cardiometabolic risk factor clusters included BMI >/= 25 and two of the following three: diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and/or hypertension. All estimates were expressedin $US 2005. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the impact of varying assumptions on the results. Results: After controlling for differences in sociodemographics, smoking and comorbidity, individuals with cardiometabolic risk factor clusters missed 179% more work days and spent 147% more days in bed (in addition to lost work days) than those without. Lost work days and bed days resulted in $17.3 billion annually in lost productivity attributable to cardiometabolic risk factor clusters in the United States. Sensitivity analyses resulted in a range of annual lost productivity costs from $3.2 to $23.1 billion. Conclusions: Common cardiometabolic risk factor clusters have a significant deleterious impact on the US economy, resulting in $17.3 billion in lost productivity.[/SIZE]




Tell me Obesity doesn't cost us anything?

exactly, incomparable!

[thegodfather]

I dont hate anyone for their size...I am of the opinion however that it is a very unhealthy way of life, and aesthetically it is not im my opinion a pleasing way to look. I believe that it shows that you take care of your body poorly. We were given the ability to do amazing things and the potential to achieve amazing things with our bodies. I do not believe that whomever/whatever created us did so with the intention for us to be 25%> body fat composition, with significant health problems, and barely able to move.

You have to realize that your "lifestyle" is only even made possible in todays current society. A person 2,000 years ago would soon find themselves dead and over with if they were so large that they were not able to move easily or fend for themselves. Not to mention, you are only able and capable of consuming the amount of food that you do, and being gluttenous, because of hard working people who man the farms, and stock the supermarket shelves that you rely on, it is almost certain that none of them are morbidly obese as they would not be able to function.

[AandF6969]

I think it affects people in more ways than health... relationships, self esteem, career advancement, personal hygeine (how do they wipe their ass?)... Maybe I'm just extremely biased but when someone is in the professional world and they're a fat slob, it makes me feel like they're less responsible than someone who is in good shape.

If you can't manage something as simple as your weight and health, what CAN you manage? A company? Thousands of people? Millions of dollars?

[football2007]

Good stuff through this post...add my name to the fatty hater list.

I don't think this is news to anyone on this board but it goes to show how our (America's) government, society, and healthcare system makes ALLOWANCES for these obese people as opposed to countries like England. I love my country but we are becoming VERY complacent and to forgiving. Way I see it is...YA BROUGHT THAT SHIT ON YA SELF.

http://news.independent.co.uk/health/article328780.ece

http://www.nationalcenter.org/2005/1...s-to-some.html

"People need to take much more responsibility for trying to look after their health, in partnership with their doctor. If a patient starts to develop symptoms, the first thing they need to think about is how to reduce weight rather than waiting until you are immobile. It may be that their symptoms will diminish and they won't need the operation, which after all is not without risk."

"Earlier this week, a poll suggested that more than a third of people believe people who smoke, drink or are obese should be charged for medical treatment. Of 2,000 people questioned by private health provider Bupa, eight per cent said these people should be refused treatment altogether. "

Exactly! I'm moving to England.

It seems like in the U.S. they aren't really putting much urgency on the obesity issue. Sure, they say it is an epidemic etc...but no real steps have been made to improve health overall. That being said, one's individual health is THEIR OWN responsibility. Eating fast food 3x a day is a CHOICE.

I always hear people using the term "big". As in..."She is a big woman" Fvck that. Just say it. She is fat. She is obese. I'm tired of people using the term "big" in place of where "fat" or "obese" or "fvcking disgusting" should be used instead

On another note, even though Godfather's post was brilliant, can people stop quoting it, kinna annoying to scroll down each time, I read it, I don't need to again

[frignugs]

It seems like in the U.S. they aren't really putting much urgency on the obesity issue. Sure, they say it is an epidemic etc...but no real steps have been made to improve health overall. That being said, one's individual health is THEIR OWN responsibility. Eating fast food 3x a day is a CHOICE.

.

Cause like you said, its up for the individual to change, it can be out of reach for health care workers or politics. Large steps have been made. Look at our health care concepts. Health care is shifting from (as it has been the only concept used in the past) a medical model view (where we see whats wrong and treat the physical symptoms) to a health promotion model (where we educate, advocate, empower etc. the patients with thier health). This has had dramtic impact on health care; workers responsiblities, views, planning, assesments, interventions and so on have changed for the better. Although, at the rate that obesity has exploded recently, it is hard to catch up with the problem. But i am optimistic, it will change in the future. We just have to reinforce and strengthen our health promotion concepts, we all need to chime in on this one...and it starts with your familiy.
Therefore, we have taken steps, now its up to the the obese to take those steps with the rest of us.

[Fat Guy]

WHAT-A-CROCK-OF-****ING-SHIT

HRT buddy.....birth control buddy....both of those are steroids.....responsible steroid use can involve a dose not to far off from HRT.....Have you ever seen the HBO special....their was a study in there.....with the highest doses ever for subjects "their appears to be no life threatening side effects" and more



back to the crock of shit.......the FDA and DEA both advised against making gear illegal in the first place....it was your pain killer and alcohol abusing politicians who are jealous and uneasy about people having chemical muscle mass, WITH NO FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE, AND NO CONCEPT OF PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY, made an uneducated decision to criminalize




shut the **** up about costing society........thats the most ignorant thing i have heard in months......to even think, to even think, that steroid users cost society 1/100000 that the fat ****s of america do, and alcohol abusers, and nicotine abusers makes you out of your freaken mind

Ironrelaod04:
Doesn’t HRT stand for Hormone Replacement Therapy and is usually prescribed for older people with naturally low testosterone levels which are not normal healthy people.

I hate to break it to you, but there is a reason steroids are illegal in most countries and it is not a political play but more of a public health concern… (I know that is hard to hear for you).

And to you last point… (Once again I hate to break it to you and I know it is hard to hear for you and the other users of the sauce) steroids have a negative impact / cost on society just like obesity does… It does not matter who the greater evil, they are both bad. It’s like saying alcohol is worse than cigarettes but they are still both bad.

Sorry you took so much offense, but I am just being honest and sometimes it is hard to hear.

[Fat Guy]

Ok...I was trying to be nice, and objective, but now you have just pissed me off. I presented a powerpoint for a class on the true side effects of anabolic steroid use, particularly supraphysiologic doses. Trying to compare anabolic steroid use, which is started and stopped, in a planned regimented cycle, where all health precautions are a priority................TO....morbid obesity being something which should be accepted, and not viewed as a serious health&medical issue.....is well.....ridiculous, retarded, naive, and most of all IGNORANT. I could see where someone with little education, and a strong personal agenda or motives would make such statements. But I fail to see where rational minded human beings who are well educated, particularly in the sciences, could ever come to accept a serious health issue such as obesity.

ABSTRACT-
Background Athletes often take androgenic steroids in an attempt to increase their strength. The efficacy of these substances for this purpose is unsubstantiated, however.

Methods We randomly assigned 43 normal men to one of four groups: placebo with no exercise, testosterone with no exercise, placebo plus exercise, and testosterone plus exercise. The men received injections of 600 mg of testosterone enanthate or placebo weekly for 10 weeks. The men in the exercise groups performed standardized weight-lifting exercises three times weekly. Before and after the treatment period, fat-free mass was determined by underwater wei***ng, muscle size was measured by magnetic resonance imaging, and the strength of the arms and legs was assessed by bench-press and squatting exercises, respectively.

Results Among the men in the no-exercise groups, those given testosterone had greater increases than those given placebo in muscle size in their arms (mean [±SE] change in triceps area, 424±104 vs. -81±109 mm2; P<0.05) and legs (change in quadriceps area, 607±123 vs. -131±111 mm2; P<0.05) and greater increases in strength in the bench-press (9±4 vs. -1±1 kg, P<0.05) and squatting exercises (16±4 vs. 3±1 kg, P<0.05). The men assigned to testosterone and exercise had greater increases in fat-free mass (6.1±0.6 kg) and muscle size (triceps area, 501±104 mm2; quadriceps area, 1174±91 mm2) than those assigned to either no-exercise group, and greater increases in muscle strength (bench-press strength, 22±2 kg; squatting-exercise capacity, 38±4 kg) than either no-exercise group. Neither mood nor behavior was altered in any group.
Conclusions Supraphysiologic doses of testosterone, especially when combined with strength training, increase fat-free mass and muscle size and strength in normal men.

I've actually examined the full-text article, and the research is sound, the research was done with a very reputable government grant, which means that this research was done objectively and served no hidden agendas.

__________________________________________
The primary prevention of adult obesity requires combined efforts by stakeholders at various societal levels, based on the knowledge from multiple disciplines. The goal of the present study was, therefore, to analyze current preventive approaches and delineate implications for future prevention research and practice by integrating knowledge from genetics, law, economics, psychology, and social ethics (Figure 1).Inconclusive evidence on the etiology of obesity, a complex, multifactorial condition, likely complicates prevention, contributing to a lack of specificity regarding target groups, focus, and techniques of prevention. Given the urgency and significance of the "obesity problem" that requires immediate and effective solutions, it is recommended that the various existing and developing prevention programs are evaluated to ensure orientation at current risk factor research. Results from genetic risk factor research can be used as a rationale to increase specificity of preventive measures regarding identification of high-risk groups, timing, and goals of prevention. Further, it is important to evaluate prevention programs for systematic application of behavior modification techniques and consideration of individual risk factors and resources to ensure promotion of long-term behavior change that leads to weight maintenance and a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults (Figure 3). Although the primary prevention of childhood obesity may lead to a reduction of incidence rates of obesity in adults, high rates of adult-onset obesity and the related medical and psychosocial sequelae in adulthood underscore the necessity of preventive efforts for adults.Concerning the environmental basis of obesity prevention, in many countries, the institutional and legal framework of preventive approaches requires further examination in order to improve funding, coordination between multiple stakeholders, and implementation of prevention in the health-care system. Evidence on risk factors for obesity is also crucial to inform network approaches and to justify restrictive legal options for the purpose of prevention. Here, self-defeating sanctions of the relevant industries may be a viable first step toward obesity prevention. As taxes or subsidies are limited in feasibility (Figure 2), relevant industries could be involved in the design and promotion of "healthy" products, stimulatingArbeitsgreater request of such products. Network approaches appear suited to involve companies and other relevant stakeholders of prevention efforts on adult obesity. Yet these approaches require greater societal conscience about the severity of the obesity problem in adults and its multifactorial etiology. Recognizing the multifactorial etiology of obesity and acknowledging that weight regulation is only somewhat within personal responsibility may therefore lead to destigmatize obese individuals as the focus is shifted away from blaming them toward a more realistic understanding of this condition. Responsibility for the development of obesity and the prevention of weight gain is in multiple areas: law, policy, industry, health-care institutions, medical professions, and the individual - all should contribute to obesity prevention.Overall, the current analysis shows that an interdisciplinary perspective furthers understanding of the complexity of this condition and can inform public-health strategies on the prevention of adult obesity.

__________________________________________________ ___

[SIZE="5"]Objective: Cardiometabolic risk factors such as overweight/obesity, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and hypertension are prone to cluster together in the same individual and result in an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality. The purpose of this study was to examine and quantify the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters independent of heart disease on productivity in a nationally representative sample of US adults. Methods: The current study estimated the impact of cardiometabolic risk factor clusters on missed work days and bed days, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, and smoking status in a nationally representative, pooled 2000 and 2002 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey sample. Cardiometabolic risk factor clusters included BMI >/= 25 and two of the following three: diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and/or hypertension. All estimates were expressedin $US 2005. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the impact of varying assumptions on the results. Results: After controlling for differences in sociodemographics, smoking and comorbidity, individuals with cardiometabolic risk factor clusters missed 179% more work days and spent 147% more days in bed (in addition to lost work days) than those without. Lost work days and bed days resulted in $17.3 billion annually in lost productivity attributable to cardiometabolic risk factor clusters in the United States. Sensitivity analyses resulted in a range of annual lost productivity costs from $3.2 to $23.1 billion. Conclusions: Common cardiometabolic risk factor clusters have a significant deleterious impact on the US economy, resulting in $17.3 billion in lost productivity.[/SIZE]

theGodfather:
Wow…! Your 2 studies completely state the obvious.
The 1st stating steroids increase muscle mass and the 2nd stating obesity has a negative cost impact on society. Congratulations for figuring those two facts out.

Did you even read my post or my points that I made?

Again, I will make it simple for you:

1. People need to be more accepting of each other.
2. Steroid use, like obesity, has societal cost and for one group to be negative toward the other group is the epitome of hypocrisy.

Both are Bad... MMMMKaaayyyy?!?!?!

[Fat Guy]

Here the condensed remedial version of my points for those who don’t read…
1. People need to be more accepting of each other and discrimination is wrong.
2. Steroid use, like obesity, has negative impacts on society and for one group of people to talk shit to another is hypocrisy.

I am not arguing that obesity does not have negative impacts and if you read my original post (for the nonreaders) my argument was that people do what people want to do either way so we have to try our best to understand them so we can all get along better in this fishbowl of a world. (I think that point fell on many deaf ears.)

I think it is simple enough and I know that what I say causes much discontent amongst many of you because I categorize both behaviors in a negative light. I am guilty of both behaviors, not at the same time, but in my honest opinion they both have negative cost and I am not in denial about that. For me it is a simple choice of “I do what I like to do” and I don’t deny the consequences either way but it is my choice and experience. However, I am not going to sit on a pedestal and pretend I am better than everyone else who does not do as I do. That is hypocrisy, arrogance and ignorance and I choose not to engage in those characteristics because once again it is my personal choice.


I think there is a lot of bandwagon mentality here so I am done with this tread because as I stated previously people do or believe in what they want to believe and I am not going to change that fact so I accept them and their limited perceptions and move on with my life. However, I do appreciate the all the interactions/ bantering / quibbling that has been generated by this thread it has been fun. Thank you And6969

and one more thing I luv that like guys in a fat friendly sort of way.

[Fat Guy]

Wow someone got owned!!!!!!!

OUCH! That's gonna leave a mark.

Gentlemen I now own this thread… Have a nice day.

[Fat Guy]

And as the Fat Guy would say:

Peace & Lard & Chicken Grease!
I’m OUTA HERE…. You fatty haters...

[goose]

Good for you fat guy.I dont see why these yanks have taken a hard stance with you.In all my life I have never seen the amount of fat people in the world like the states,its the norm,from what I have seen on my trips.

[RuhlFreak55]

Ironrelaod04:
Doesn’t HRT stand for Hormone Replacement Therapy and is usually prescribed for older people with naturally low testosterone levels which are not normal healthy people.

I hate to break it to you, but there is a reason steroids are illegal in most countries and it is not a political play but more of a public health concern… (I know that is hard to hear for you).

And to you last point… (Once again I hate to break it to you and I know it is hard to hear for you and the other users of the sauce) steroids have a negative impact / cost on society just like obesity does… It does not matter who the greater evil, they are both bad. It’s like saying alcohol is worse than cigarettes but they are still both bad.

Sorry you took so much offense, but I am just being honest and sometimes it is hard to hear.

can we just have him banned please? thanks

[Panzerfaust]

Good for you fat guy.I dont see why these yanks have taken a hard stance with you.In all my life I have never seen the amount of fat people in the world like the states,its the norm,from what I have seen on my trips.

Damn right, no need to go on an African Safari anymore to see Elephants and hurds of Rhino's. Simply book a flight to America and you can watch FatGuy and his fat ****s trample the streets in "Fat Acceptance" parades.

And it is cheaper too!

[frignugs]

Gentlemen I now own this thread… Have a nice day.

You own nothing besides rolls man... Your points were heard, but your preaching to the wrong crowd man. This "please accept me" bs?? common.. Yes, we too are not "accepted," and we dont like that, however, we as a community strongly beleive that you can lead a perfectly healthy lifestyle using steroids responsibly. Of course you have your dangerous users, those who dont use sterile techniques and abuse dosages, and thats because they are not educated well enough (and thats why boards like this exist to help). On the other hand, obesity is obesity, and the numbers speak for themselves with respect to health problems and chronic conditoins they lead too. There are societal costs due to political/legal issues that come with steroids, but do we have a choice in the matter?? No, Do those who are obese? yes. I know you think that because they both add to costs and that it doesnt matter how, that they should both be looked upon the same, but thats just wrong man, were not buying it. I guess it all boils down to how you were raised, morals, values and beleives but your preaching to the wrong crowd. Of course you are going to get (as you say) "bandwagon mentalitiy," you are on a steroid form. get real.

Nugs

[AandF6969]

How do morbidly obese people wipe their ass? Maybe they just don't...

[B.E.N.]

This whole fat/obese thing boils down to laziness and excuses in my opinion.

You have the fat people unwilling to educate themselves about their own bodies...their own transportation through life. They want to try to make excuses and say 'I am big boned' or 'My family is full of big people.'

We have doctors feeding these excuses saying there is a fat gene. WE ALL HAVE A FAT GENE AS A SURVIVAL MECHANISM. It kept our ancestors alive when food was scarce. These doctor then try to focus on the micro (small parts) of peoples diet...saying 'Eat this at this time...', 'Stay away from this carb...', 'Eat only high protein...', blah, blah.

These fat people can't even get the macro of their diets right. You eat 4000 calories and only burn 1200 a day...guess what STUPID you are going to put on weight. Do that every day for a year and you are a fat slob.

Simple math...calorie in minus calorie burned equals either a deficit or surplus of calories. Granted SOME might have genetic issues or problems and need help with the micro parts of their diets. Most are just to lazy to monitor what they put into their own faces.

[goose]

Damn right, no need to go on an African Safari anymore to see Elephants and hurds of Rhino's. Simply book a flight to America and you can watch FatGuy and his fat ****s trample the streets in "Fat Acceptance" parades.

And it is cheaper too!

You like belly play?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-ZPw7zhQzY

[AandF6969]

You like belly play?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-ZPw7zhQzY

I was expecting her to dive and surface while blowing water from her blowhole.

[goose]

Dont worry England is getting this way too.You go to sweden,norway,Demark ETC.No fat people,like Japan.